Slashdot Mirror


IsoHunt Settles With MPAA, Will Shut Down And Pay Up to $110 Million

hypnosec writes "The MPAA and Gary Fung, owner of IsoHunt.com, have settled their case out of court, with the torrent indexing site closing as part of the deal. The judge presiding over the MPAA vs. IsoHunt.com case, Jacqueline Chooljian, canceled the hearing which was planned after she was informed that both the parties have settled outside court. 'The website isoHunt.com today agreed to halt all operations worldwide in connection with a settlement of the major movie studios' landmark copyright lawsuit against the site and its operator Gary Fung' reads the press release." Only a few days after the MPAA was accosted by the judge for seeking damages several times the total worth of isoHunt: "But if you strip him of all his assets — and you’re suggesting that a much lesser number of copyright infringements would accomplish that, where is the deterrence by telling the world that you took someone’s resources away because of illegal conduct entirely or 50 times over?" Still, the settlement seems unfair: The MPAA has asked the court for $110 million, when the MPAA itself admitted that isoHunt only has $5 or $6 million. So much for the optimism for isoHunt's successor.

27 of 245 comments (clear)

  1. The more you tighten your grip by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The more will slip through your fingers.

  2. Fortunately we still have Google. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    The best torrent search engine ever will never bow to this kind of bullying crap. Long live Google!

    1. Re:Fortunately we still have Google. by SuricouRaven · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The takedowns mostly consist of links to forums that link to filelocker sites which have also been DMCAed, so they are of limited use in finding infringing files. Sure, a determined pirate can use them to follow a trail, but it's a lot of work.

      Oh, pirates. Request for you. Those NFO files? Include hashes. File size, ed2k, aich, btih, sha1 and tth. That covers all the major hash-search-capable p2p networks. That way even if all the filelocker links are down, people can still try to use the hashes to aid in their quest.

    2. Re:Fortunately we still have Google. by JWW · · Score: 5, Interesting

      That's the reason for the $110 million settlement.

      That number is orders of magnitude greater than what ISOHunt can pay.

      The reason the settlement number is so large is that the MPAA is looking for how much they want to charge google for enabling people to search the internet.

    3. Re:Fortunately we still have Google. by SuricouRaven · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Freenet already has the locations of all users hidden. It's possible for a listener to determine you are using freenet, but not what you inserted or what you are retrieving. Likewise, no takedown capability.

      Pirates do use freenet, but not much. That's because all that privacy comes with a performance penalty: Freenet is *slow*. Same applies to Tor.

  3. Distributed architecture, anyone? by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And that is why you go for fully decentralized services, kids.

    --
    Ezekiel 23:20
    1. Re:Distributed architecture, anyone? by Joining+Yet+Again · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yup, and this is why I'm a ham fighting to keep shortwave clear of RFI.

      And why I would encourage all hams to experiment with UHF, with a view to taking back centralised private ownership of the modern popular internetwork.

    2. Re:Distributed architecture, anyone? by Kjella · · Score: 3, Interesting

      As opposed to the general BitTorrent world?

      Yes. Did you ever stop to wonder why people left KaZaA, eDonkey, Gnutella and so on for Suprnova and The Pirate Bay? We tried it 10-15 years ago and it was vastly inferior to torrent sites, what's new? Except that torrent sites have now gone torrentless and trackerless to mostly carry magnet links.

      How exactly would a decentralized searched engine have to cope with worse problems than the traditional ones struggle with?

      Statistics. Google has tons and tons of statistics on what links are actually relevant to the search terms, your decentralized crawler will find some random shit and return it as a hit. Search any of the networks above and you get tons of crap. Perhaps you get better results with a decentralized search engine on the web, but only because you rely on sites like TPB and other popular torrent sites to weed out most of the crap. Searching a fairly centralized resource in a decentralized way isn't exactly being decentralized.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  4. Dysfunctional legal system. by NettiWelho · · Score: 5, Insightful

    MPAA demanding money for imaginary damage done to imaginery property? Pay them with monopoly money.

    1. Re:Dysfunctional legal system. by NettiWelho · · Score: 3, Informative
      imaginary

      adjective 1. existing only in the imagination or fancy; not real; fancied: an imaginary illness; the imaginary animals in the stories of Dr. Seuss.

    2. Re:Dysfunctional legal system. by Capt.DrumkenBum · · Score: 4, Funny

      Not a bad plan.
      A standard Monopoly game has $15,140.
      Best price for a Monopoly game I could find was $17
      110 million would take the cash from 7266 games.
      At a total cost of $123,522

      Look at that, A plan with no flaws. :)

      --
      If I were God, wouldn't I protect my churches from acts of me?
    3. Re:Dysfunctional legal system. by NettiWelho · · Score: 3, Insightful

      About as fair as a gourmet restaurant owner suing every grocery store in town out of existance for poaching his 'customers'.

      Punchline: Even with all the grocery stores gone the people still cannot afford to dine in the restaurant, and some cant even enter because 'we dont serve people living in your neighborhood'.

  5. Re:Is anybody surprised? by lgw · · Score: 4, Interesting

    TOR is a poor choice for media sharing as it's not P2P. Freenet was written as secure P2P from the ground up, and has had plenty of security review. While I don't trust anything to be safe from the NSA, the known attacks require far more resources than the *AA will ever use.

    I doubt it's any faster than TOR, but being P2P if people actually started using it instead of open torrents, it would be.

    The problem of course is "network effect". There's no content because no one uses it and vice versa. But it is the correct technical solution, with years in the field and years of security review.

    --
    Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  6. Proportionality by girlintraining · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Still, the settlement seems unfair: The MPAA has asked the court for $110 million, when the MPAA itself admitted that isoHunt only has $5 or $6 million.

    The legal system does not hand out punishment on the basis of whether or not the defendant can pay for it; It hands it out on the basis of how much harm was done. If you run someone over and they're a cripple for the rest of their life, the Judge doesn't say "Well, you only got $20 and a cracker... so give me the $20 and we're even." You are fined and jailed on the basis of how much pain and suffering that person endured.

    Unfortunately, the law says that every time you share an MP3, god kills $150,000 worth of kittens. Statutory damages don't allow for any discretion on the part of the judge. Thank Congress for that.

    And the argument can also be made that proportional damages levied against very wealthy individuals or corporations is good practice, though it doesn't often happen. Fining people for dumping millions of gallons of toxic waste into the ocean the maximum $50,000 per infraction means they just video tape the whole thing, send in the tape and a check for $50,000 because it's cheaper than going to court, and much, much cheaper than disposing of the waste properly. But alas, that is not how the law is written.

    The system is totally broken, but let's endeavor to be specific in our criticism of it... rather than simply saying "Oh that's unfair!" ... Fairness is relative. Justice shouldn't be.

    --
    #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    1. Re:Proportionality by jedidiah · · Score: 5, Informative

      > It hands it out on the basis of how much harm was done. ...and there was none done here.

      On the other hand, there have been a lot of limits placed on civil judgments lately. A lot of hapless tort reform astroturfers have caused a large number of tort reforms to be enacted in various places.

      Chances are that if YOU personally are injured that you will never see anything close to an equitable judgement.

      These absurd COPYRIGHT verdicts are due to statutory damages laws that have no relation whatsoever to any actual real damages. They are in fact a blatant short cut around proving actual damages. They have little in common with some prole being crippled. A crippled prole has to show real damages.

      Crime and punishment for the poor, tort reform for the rich.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  7. Re:another solution, proven to work by compro01 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That might kind of work. Another method that's proven to work is called "Netflix", aka "Amazon Prime". You want them to spend a few million dollars making something cool for you to watch, you pony up ninety-nine cents. You get what you want, the costs are covered and everyone is happy.

    Except for the little detail that the most popular stuff that gets torrented is point blank not available from those sources.

    --
    upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
  8. Re:another solution, proven to work by geekoid · · Score: 3, Funny

    Do you think people who use an antenna are also free loading scumbags?
    and then there is this:
    http://theoatmeal.com/comics/game_of_thrones

    99 cents per episode for a tv series is outrages.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  9. ISOhunt had 5-6 million dollars?!? by Maow · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ISOhunt had 5-6 million dollars - presumably from hosting ads along with links?

    That makes the "we weren't hosting any infringing content ourselves" defense, which I've always been sympathetic toward, somewhat inconsequential.

    The fact that the site (owners) profited to the tune of multiple millions of dollars by facilitating copyright infringement kind of rubs me the wrong way. Had they done it for not much more than hosting fees I'd be more aligned with them receiving a "shut down, now" penalty.

    And before I'm called a corporate shill, I fight the mess that copyright laws have become by boycotting the big content producers. They haven't made one single cent from me in many years, nor have I pirated any of their content. I've learned that I just don't need what they're selling.

    1. Re:ISOhunt had 5-6 million dollars?!? by RichMan · · Score: 4, Interesting

      ISOhunt provided the index. From the index they made a profit.

      The "Yellow Pages" is a profitable form for finding things. The makers of the yellow pages make money, yet they provide none of the services they index.

  10. Discretion by Theaetetus · · Score: 4, Informative

    Unfortunately, the law says that every time you share an MP3, god kills $150,000 worth of kittens. Statutory damages don't allow for any discretion on the part of the judge. Thank Congress for that.

    Not true. 17 USC 504(c):

    Statutory Damages.—
    (1) ... [T]he copyright owner may elect, at any time before final judgment is rendered, to recover, instead of actual damages and profits, an award of statutory damages for all infringements involved in the action, with respect to any one work, for which any one infringer is liable individually, or for which any two or more infringers are liable jointly and severally, in a sum of not less than $750 or more than $30,000 as the court considers just...
    (2) In a case where the copyright owner sustains the burden of proving, and the court finds, that infringement was committed willfully, the court in its discretion may increase the award of statutory damages to a sum of not more than $150,000. In a case where the infringer sustains the burden of proving, and the court finds, that such infringer was not aware and had no reason to believe that his or her acts constituted an infringement of copyright, the court in its discretion may reduce the award of statutory damages to a sum of not less than $200....

  11. Re:Trolled by schnell · · Score: 4, Informative

    Correct me if I'm wrong but settlements outside of court cannot be converted to wage garnishments, right?

    Not true. But hopefully IsoHunt was a corporation, not an individual proprietorship or partnership. Part of the purpose of a corporation's "legal personhood" is that wrongdoing on the part of the corporation cannot be transferred to the people who worked there or owned it. Of course, a corporation won't stop individuals for being charged with crimes, but a lawsuit settlement that bankrupts a company should not then bankrupt the individuals behind that corporation assuming they set things up properly.

    This corporate protection from individual liability works for the bad guys, it works for good guys, it works for everyone.

    --
    "95% of all Slashdot .sig quotes are incorrect or completely fabricated." -Benjamin Franklin
  12. Re:another solution, proven to work by Kielistic · · Score: 4, Informative

    I'd happily pay 99 cents for an unencumbered 720p or 1080p mkv file for a great many shows. Unfortunately (for them) I can't.

  13. Re:another solution, proven to work by CanHasDIY · · Score: 3, Informative

    99 cents per episode for a tv series is outrages.

    Especially if you consider that [monthly cable bill / ({# of channels * 24} / amount of hours show X is on per month)] is a helluva lot less than $0.99.

    Assuming a $60/mo cable bill with 80 channels, the value to the subscriber for an hour-long show that runs once a week would be about 12.5 cents... presuming I didn't bork the math, which is quite probable.

    --
    An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
  14. Re:another solution, proven to work by Grishnakh · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Actually, Netflix and Amazon Prime don't really work that well, because they only have a limited selection. If the program you want to watch is on there, then great; Netflix is only $8/month for unlimited online viewing. But if the program you want isn't on there and requires you to get both a cable subcription and an HBO subscription, well, Torrenting is the only feasible and affordable alternative. And, MythTV doesn't work for shows like that, because of the cable+HBO deal, but also because last I heard, MythTV doesn't work for premium cable channels, so you have to spend even more money for some shitty cableco-provided DVR box that doesn't work right.

    If the content companies just put all their stuff on Netflix and Amazon Prime, we wouldn't be having this discussion at all, and not many people would bother with torrenting.

  15. Re:let's look and see by HybridST · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They may work in the US but try in my country and you don't get to even see that they exist.

    --
    Ever notice that Cobra Commander sounds an awful lot like Star scream?
  16. Re:let's look and see by QuasiSteve · · Score: 4, Interesting

    http://movies.netflix.com/WiMovie/Grosse_Pointe_Blank/1153034?locale=en-US

    That just takes me to the home page. Perhaps because Netflix detects I'm in .nl, realizes that it's not part of their offer in .nl, and so just dumps me to the main page.

    The other two work fine, but I think you took 'most popular' a bit too literal, and perhaps a bit too narrow.

    Since Netflix doesn't seem to actually allow you to see their full library unless you log in (I can see a small selection - this alone is a good reason to give Netflix a thumbs down over torrents), perhaps we could give the 'Top 10 this week' from torrentfreak a try through http://www.flicksery.com/ ?
    http://torrentfreak.com/top-10-most-pirated-movies-of-the-week-131014/
    1-10. no.

    Or, if you want to stay on the legal avenue, the top 10 of 2012 according to imdb, rather than just the #1 slot?
    http://www.imdb.com/year/2012/
    1. Avengers - yes
    2. Pitch Perfect - no
    3. The Hunger Games - yes
    4. The Dark Knight Rises - no
    5. The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey - no
    6. Argo - no
    7. Django Unchained - no
    8. The Place Beyond the Pines - no
    9. Spring Breakers - no
    10. The Motel Life - no

    2013, according to box office*, then?
    ( * because new releases are heavily skewed toward high scores on imdb, and via box office we get to the same #1 for 2013 so far, Iron Man 3 )
    http://www.imdb.com/search/title?at=0&sort=boxoffice_gross_us&title_type=feature&year=2013,2013
    1. Iron Man 3 - no? Weird - though after some googling, perhaps it's only available from Netflix in DVD form, rather than streaming - canistream.it seems to suggests so as well? Perhaps you could clarify that one.
    2-10. - no

    Don't get me wrong, Netflix is a wonderful service and people who just want to watch whatever movies or TV shows will find more material there than they can watch in a year. But it's not all going to be material they want to watch, the material they want to watch may not be on there, and overall it's just a poor comparison - gets even worse when you're in .nl ;)

  17. Re:Trolled by M.+Baranczak · · Score: 4, Funny

    a corporation won't stop individuals for being charged with crimes

    Unless it's a really big corporation.