Slashdot Mirror
MPAA Spying Case To Be Appealed
esocid writes "Back in 2005, the MPAA hired Robert Anderson, a former associate of TorrentSpy's owner, to illegally obtain internal emails and trade secrets. He did so by routing the email from the internal server to his own Gmail account. He subsequently sold 34 pages of stolen information for $15,000 to the MPAA. TorrentSpy owner Justin Bunnel sued them for spying, but lost the case due to a ruling that stated it was not illegal since the information was not intercepted under the Wiretap Act. The EFF called this decision a 'dangerous attempt to circumvent privacy laws,' since it implies that the unauthorized interception of anyone's personal email is legal. The appeal could have ramifications for MPAA president Dan Glickman, as the decision is expected around the time of his contract renewal."
Yes, indeed it would be very ironic. Thanks for clarifying that one, I don't know where the world would be without Captain Obvious!
So, let me get this straight. It's not illegal to break your employer's confidence and send a full dump of sensitive emails automatically to your private email account where you sell them to an interested third party?
That's on of the advantages of the new Geniune Advantage Privacy Act.
diegoT
The real irony here is that the MPAA is paying someone who did NOT create the content for the use of that content (the emails and the information therein), which to anyone with common sense is plainly a crime. I am quite confident Anderson will distribute his earnings to the content creators in a manner consistent with that in which the MPAA distributes their earnings to their artists.
It's not a lie. It's the truth with lossy compression.
No, cause books and paintings are tangible.
Now, if you were able to reach into someone's brain and steal the synapses that recorded how to create that book or painting, then yeah, that'd be theft of intellectual property.