...and a close eye on your mailbox. Apparently the finance company for "The Hurt Locker" is looking to recoup some of the revenue it didn't get in theaters. Seems they're looking to jam up about 50,000 people who downloaded it. I would sure hate to be on of those to get sued over that piece of crap, it wasn't even worth the admission to the theater, much less the thousands they're demanding for settlement.

In some cases that is the only way they will make any money, by suits.

Eventually we will have it like the Canadians, where a part of their taxes on 'electronic storage devices' go to the media industries directly and they won't have to make a good movie/song/etc again.

Let me see if I follow. They notated the IP of any computer that downloaded it? Then they subpoena all of those users private information from the users ISP? Then they are filing suit on each of those account holders?

I am not sure if the story is even true, as no source was listed, but there are TONS of issues I see with that.

1. ISP being wimps to any type of request.
2. Proxy servers.
3. Proof of revenue lost. I would think if it was after the DVD release the most revenue they could have lost would be a rental fee.
4. That movie wasn't even that good. Just a side note.

tracking internet traffic is not to tough. especially if it was planned ahead of time.
yes - proxy's are a great internet condom. and, some ISPs do respect the rules of unreasoanble search & seizure.
but - overall - if they had this in mind early enough, they can have a HUGE sampling of people to drag to court.

Apparently 75% of the ISPs subpoenaed complied without any argument, including Comcast. Some are resisting, but will probably ultimately cave. I'm not sure of this since I don't know but so much about bit torrents and the way they work, but my guess they focused on the people who were seeding the files, since that's probably a lot easier to prove than if or how much a person might have downloaded. Plus I would think the damage from seeders is a lot greater than from a single person downloading. But that's purely a guess on my part.

quote Originally posted by Taijiguy: Apparently 75% of the ISPs subpoenaed complied without any argument, including Comcast.

This is why I don't have Comcast. They are in bed with many of the production companies and are notorious for handing out customer information to whomever asks. Not to mention every time I've dealt with them it has been a MASSIVE hassle.

~ Derek

[This message has been edited by Derek_85GT (edited 05-14-2010).]

I use a proxy when ever i download anything.

I think the people who made "The Hurt Locker" actually could have "seeded it themselves" figuring they could then sue the people who downloaded it.

quote Originally posted by User00013170: Eventually we will have it like the Canadians, where a part of their taxes on 'electronic storage devices' go to the media industries directly and they won't have to make a good movie/song/etc again.

Wait, they are still making good movies and songs? Where can I find these? All I have found over the last 6 years or so sucked.

quote Originally posted by Taijiguy: Apparently 75% of the ISPs subpoenaed complied without any argument, including Comcast. Some are resisting, but will probably ultimately cave.

I'd be willing to bet Comcast told the movie industry, sent letters, made phone calls and got this ball rolling. Comcast is the Satan of isp's and will do anything to make their users suffer.

Proxy up, but if you have Comcast I wouldn't sneeze without covering my mouth.

Brad

I have Comcast but I don't download crap ..... I meant, bad movies

Encryption + private trackers = success*





*for now

quote Originally posted by ls3mach: Let me see if I follow. They notated the IP of any computer that downloaded it? Then they subpoena all of those users private information from the users ISP? Then they are filing suit on each of those account holders? I am not sure if the story is even true, as no source was listed, but there are TONS of issues I see with that. 1. ISP being wimps to any type of request. 2. Proxy servers. 3. Proof of revenue lost. I would think if it was after the DVD release the most revenue they could have lost would be a rental fee. 4. That movie wasn't even that good. Just a side note.

ISPs have a history of caving.
Most people don't use a proxy.
if you are following the RIAA cases, they don't need proof of loss.

most settle out of court anyway.

The answer are things like FreeNet.

[This message has been edited by User00013170 (edited 05-14-2010).]

And how does this affect peer net like torrents where you get files from multiple sources?

quote Originally posted by Uaana: And how does this affect peer net like torrents where you get files from multiple sources?

If they can watch the tracker ( or setup a fake one they host themselves ). if you take any piece of the file, they can pretty much show in court you intended to get the entire file.

quote Originally posted by User00013170: In some cases that is the only way they will make any money, by suits. Eventually we will have it like the Canadians, where a part of their taxes on 'electronic storage devices' go to the media industries directly and they won't have to make a good movie/song/etc again.

Huh? How would this cause a difference in the quality of the product?

quote Originally posted by newf: Huh? How would this cause a difference in the quality of the product?

If you could get paid just to exist, where is the incentive to do something constructive?

quote Originally posted by User00013170: If they can watch the tracker ( or setup a fake one they host themselves ).

That would be entrapment wouldn't it ???

quote Originally posted by newf: Huh? How would this cause a difference in the quality of the product?

If it's a totally awesome movie such as The Hurt Locker it'd pretty much have to be a test pattern before someone noticed it sucking more.

Brad

quote Originally posted by California Kid: That would be entrapment wouldn't it ???

Not entrapment if you came to them "asking" for the file. Really its no different then the cops that pick up hookers if the girl walks to the car on her own and offers.

Now if they went out and solicited people to download the file, perhaps...

Netflix is cheap enough that I don't care to d/l anything anymore. I can only watch so many movies in a week/month anyway. Not to mention most movies/mp3's have rootkits with them now.

quote Originally posted by InTheLead: Netflix is cheap enough that I don't care to d/l anything anymore. I can only watch so many movies in a week/month anyway. Not to mention most movies/mp3's have rootkits with them now.

That is why you scan every file you get, and you dont double click what you think is a data file.. open it via the application instead.

[This message has been edited by User00013170 (edited 05-14-2010).]

quote Originally posted by California Kid: That would be entrapment wouldn't it ???

No. I can say, "I've got these movies." but you have to ask to download them. As soon as you ask, it's on you.

quote Originally posted by Zeb: No. I can say, "I've got these movies." but you have to ask to download them. As soon as you ask, it's on you.

Coming up to me totally unprovoked and saying "i have these movies" with the implication of sharing would be entrapment. In this case its more like me waking up to them and saying "hey, you got these movies that i can get a piece of?"

I can understand why the producers of the film are so upset, the p2p bit file sharing users swindled them from their revenue. An Oscar winning movie with only $15M in sales but with over 10 million folks sharing the movie illegally, yeah that's lot of lost revenue. Why are you mad at the ISP's for? Do you really expect them to condone illegal file sharing when faced with a suppoena? Just saying....

quote Originally posted by User00013170: Coming up to me totally unprovoked and saying "i have these movies" with the implication of sharing would be entrapment. In this case its more like me waking up to them and saying "hey, you got these movies that i can get a piece of?"

If the media companies host a tracker, or purposely plant a seed, that IS saying "I have these movies."

I did, maybe ...but I was on wi-fi, via proxy, at a coffee shop withe free wireless, on a computer I dont own anymore.

I dunno, I'm not a lawyer, but it seems to me they are pissing upwards, AND into the wind........

quote Originally posted by aaronkoch: If the media companies host a tracker, or purposely plant a seed, that IS saying "I have these movies."

Considering you have to actively go looking for them, i disagree its entrapment. Intent was still on you.

( Note, i'm *not* tossing stones here or making moral judgments, i just don't agree that its entrapment in the slightest. )

quote Originally posted by User00013170: The bad part is if someone breaks your wifi, guess who gets drug into court to prove it wasn't them...

Laws are a little different in Canada....they have to prove you did it (we are based on English common law, and "innocent until proven guilty" holds--except for quebec. They are Napoleanic law, and once accused you have to prove yourself innocent. Which is why I generally dont go to quebec)