Bill for downloading porn

:lol::lol::lol:

Counldn't help laughing at this BBC report today:

Newsbeat's found out that people across the UK have been accused of using file-sharing networks to get hold of dozens of adult titles without paying for them.
A German company called DigiProtect claims the users are breaking copyright law and is demanding £500 to settle out of court.
A 20-page legal letter lists the name of the film involved along with the time and date of the alleged download.
Lawyers say they have been contacted by hundreds of worried individuals over the past few weeks.
Many deny copying the movies and say they have no idea why they were identified in the first place.

:lol: No, of course you didn't, it's a mistake! :lol:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gav

:lol::lol::lol:

Counldn't help laughing at this BBC report today:

Newsbeat's found out that people across the UK have been accused of using file-sharing networks to get hold of dozens of adult titles without paying for them.
A German company called DigiProtect claims the users are breaking copyright law and is demanding £500 to settle out of court.
A 20-page legal letter lists the name of the film involved along with the time and date of the alleged download.
Lawyers say they have been contacted by hundreds of worried individuals over the past few weeks.
Many deny copying the movies and say they have no idea why they were identified in the first place.

:lol: No, of course you didn't, it's a mistake! :lol:

---

Cause of course the lawyers are never wrong and IP addresses (which are the most likely way they used to identify people) can never be faked:rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pmjd

Cause of course the lawyers are never wrong and IP addresses (which are the most likely way they used to identify people) can never be faked:rolleyes:

---

that's your excuse and your sticking to it! :wink::D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lory

that's your excuse and your sticking to it! :wink::D

---

Actually, it does look like it's a mistake, at least in many cases.

Or, possibly, a scam...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pmjd

Cause of course the lawyers are never wrong and IP addresses (which are the most likely way they used to identify people) can never be faked:rolleyes:

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Bailey

Actually, it does look like it's a mistake, at least in many cases.

Or, possibly, a scam...

---

So, you're not paying then? :wink:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gav

So, you're not paying then? :wink:

---

Christ no, I've given them your name :na:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lory

that's your excuse and your sticking to it! :wink::D

---

I'm still waiting for my letter:innocent:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Bailey

Actually, it does look like it's a mistake, at least in many cases.

Or, possibly, a scam...

---

Mmmm send out a letter demanding money or they threaten to tell the world about something potentially embarassing....:eyebrow:

The same law firm, Davenport Lyons that are representing have used a similar tactic before on behalf of Atari but the case was dismissed after Which intervened. Later Atari dropped the law firm altogether.

It's also funny to read further on in the article that the porn company's boss doesn't seem to agree with the demands of £500 either, though £50 is ok:lol:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Bailey

Christ no, I've given them your name :na:

---

my guess is they will already have double troubles :whistle:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pmjd

The same law firm, Davenport Lyons that are representing have used a similar tactic before on behalf of Atari but the case was dismissed after Which intervened. Later Atari dropped the law firm altogether.

---

Actually, it's worse than that. My "Scam" comment appears to be more accurate than I thought.

From here:

Quote:

---

....Here’s how it works. Evil Angel, also known as “The Evil Empire” and John Stagliano Inc, are a California based company making porn films, founded by John Allen Stagliano, a porn movie actor. Evil Angel contracted with German company DigiProtect for DigiProtect to upload 800 of their films onto P2P networks, including eDonkey, Kazaa and BitTorrent. (A list of titles is here; and translated into English here.)

So far, so legal — it’s perfectly legal for a copyright holder to copy and distribute their works. However, if you read the contract (available here) it’s more sinister than that. Here’s the first two paragraphs:

1. Object of the agreement
LICENSOR is a film maker and a proprietor of the rights of use and enjoymrent and exploitation of pornographic movies. Licensor suffers economic damageas as a result of the illegal exploitation of the movies on so-called peer-2-peer networds. The object of the agreement is the appointment of DigiProtect by licensor to implement suitable measurres to prevent the economic disadvantage licensor is suffereing.

2. Granting of rights
To achieve the purpose outlined in clause 1, LICENSOR grants DIGIPROTECT the exclusive right to make the movies listed in Appendix 1 worldwide available to the public via remote computer networks, so-called peer-2-peer and internet file sharing networks such as e-Donkey Kazaa BitTorrent etc. for the duration of this agreement. The parties agree that additional movies can be added to Appendix 1 with a written supplemental agrreement.

So DigiProtect get the films and put them on P2P networks, harvesting the IP addresses of everyone who downloads them. Then they pass on the IP addresses to Davenport Lyons, a UK-based law firm. Davenport Lyons then send threatening letters to members of the public, accusing them of illegal downloading and threatening to sue them unless they pay £500. Davenport Lyons then share the proceeds with DigiProtect.

---

I must admit, I was wondering how all these films got onto the P2P network - now we know, they were put up there deliberately by the producers with the intention of charging people via threatening letters later.

Interesting. This forum is carrying postings accusing a firm of lawyers of fraud. Hmmm ...

reaches for mod button...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bigdjiver

Interesting. This forum is carrying postings accusing a firm of lawyers of fraud. Hmmm ... .

---

No, it links to and quotes a blog, is all.

But OK, OK, blimey, I'll edit it...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by David Bailey

I must admit, I was wondering how all these films got onto the P2P network - now we know, they were put up there deliberately by the producers with the intention of charging people via threatening letters later.

---

Clever, really. Surprising that Sony or Warner haven't tried it.

As for Evil Angel - given the Bush clamp-down on the porn industry - maybe it seemed an attractive alternative to making more films, and no danger of STDs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by martingold

my guess is they will already have double troubles :whistle:

---

Oh no, they won't have my name..!

My attitude towards porn is very much the same as my attitude towards food - why pay for someone else to make it when your home made productions are so much better.:na:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Barry Shnikov

no danger of STDs.

---

Sexually Traumatised David's?

The problem with all this is :

You can harvest IP addresses from a p2p download, but it may be a fake IP address. (The ip address registered with the seed and the actual address being downloaded to can differ)

And even if it is not faked, it doesnt mean you are actually downloading anything, just that that IP initially connected to the seed.

Then we get to the level of whether an IP address actually represents who the ISP thinks it does. In the past ISP have got this wrong as its rare to get a static IP per person. Most people with braodband will have the same IP for some time, but simply switching the modem off will cause it to ask the ISP for a new IP. So for a specific time period with caching as a consideration - the ISP record of who has leased the IP can be wrong.

Then even if it IS your IP, it doesnt mean you are guilty - who else has access to your network ? A lot of people still use no wireless security or WEP, which can be cracked in seconds.

Then even if you HAVE downloaded it, it doesnt mean YOU did, a trojan or other dodgy program could have installed itself on your machine.

What these companies seem to be doing, to use an analogy, is - they see a letter saying "Dear Prime Minister. I'm going to kill you. muhahaha", it has a return address written on it, they do everything in their power to hound the person at this return address for threatening The RH MR.Brown without any actual attempt to find out who the actual source of the threat is. Hardly seems like "innocent until proven guilty" especially when it would be extremely rare for anyone to have more than one broadband connection to their household - do you just pay in case little bobby did it and it would go to court ?

also the company behind this scam use this fabulous argument...

"it is the responsibility of broadband users to ensure they will not allow others to use their internet connections for unlawful purposes like illegal file-sharing. "

is it really? you can use unsecured wireless if that is easier for you (and it is a lot less hassle), just as you can leave your key in the glove compartment of your car, and not bother locking your car if that is easier for you. Of course the police will raise an eyebrow or two and your insurance company will not be willing to compensate if your car is stolen, but you will NOT get jailed if the car is used in a garage robbery without an investigation and other evidence. Can you imagine : "Your car was used in a garage robbery - please pay this £4000 fine (£170.12 taken in robbery + costs + fine (dont do it again))". Justice would be so simple :). And to make this analogy even better, lets asssume it was a false number plate the robbers used and it wasn't even your car at all :rolleyes: