Sources Contact Advanced Search Tutorials

An Interest In:

Web News this Week

Search Archive

Some of Our Sources

View All Sources

Help Webnuz

Referal links:

October 30, 2019 01:30 am

US Court Shields Internet Subscribers From Futile Piracy Complaints

A New Jersey district court has issued a devastating order against Strike 3 Holdings, the most active filer of piracy lawsuits in the US. In four separate cases, the court denied a request to obtain identities of alleged BitTorrent pirates. The court argues that the underlying complaints are futile. Even if they held up, other issues such as the privacy of the accused and Strike 3's failure to use other enforcement tools, would warrant a denial. TorrentFreak reports: Last week, New Jersey District Court Magistrate Judge Joel Schneider denied Strike 3 expedited discovery in four cases. This means that it's not allowed to subpoena ISPs for the personal details of account holders whose IP-addresses were used to share pirated videos via BitTorrent. In a very detailed 47-page opinion, the Judge takes apart various aspects of Strike 3's enforcement efforts. He makes it clear that these cases should not be allowed to go forward, as the complaints are futile. "The most fundamental basis of the Court's decision is its conclusion that, as pleaded, Strike 3's complaints are futile. The Court denies Strike 3 the right to bootstrap discovery based on a complaint that does not pass muster," Judge Schneider writes. The futility lies in the fact that the complaints themselves include very few facts. The only thing that the company really knows is that an IP address is associated with downloading copyrighted works. Strike 3 doesn't know whether the subscriber is involved in the actual infringements. Courts have previously ruled both in favor and against allowing discovery to expose the account holders in these situations, but the New Jersey Court clearly sides with the latter. "The Court sided with the cases that hold it is not sufficient to merely allege in a pleading that the defendant is a subscriber of an IP address traced to infringing activity. Consequently, the Court will not authorize Strike 3 to take discovery premised on a futile John Doe complaint." The decision is partly based on the aforementioned "Cobbler" ruling of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. However, the Court makes it clear that even if there was a properly pleaded infringement claim, the requests for expedited discovery would still be denied. In the opinion, Judge Schneider sums up the other issues as follows: (1) Strike 3 bases its complaints on unequivocal affirmative representations of alleged facts that it does not know to be true.(2) Strike 3's subpoenas are misleading and create too great of an opportunity for misidentification.(3) The linchpin of Strike 3's good cause argument, that expedited discovery is the only way to stop infringement of its works, is wrong.(4) Strike 3 has other available means to stop infringement besides suingindividual subscribers in thousands of John Doe complaints.(5) The deterrent effect of Strike 3's lawsuits is questionable.(6) Substantial prejudice may inure to subscribers who are misidentified.(7) Strike 3 underestimates the substantial interest subscribers have in the constitutionally protected privacy of their subscription information.

Slashdot

Slashdot was originally created in September of 1997 by Rob "CmdrTaco" Malda. Today it is owned by Geeknet, Inc..

More About this Source Visit Slashdot