Slashdot Mirror
Music Publishers Sue Cox Communications Over Piracy
wabrandsma (2551008) writes with this excerpt from Ars Technica:
BMG Rights Management and Round Hill Music have sued Cox Communications for copyright infringement, arguing that the Internet service provider doesn't do enough to punish those who download music illegally.
Both BMG and Round Hill are clients of Rightscorp, a copyright enforcement agent whose business is based on threatening ISPs with a high-stakes lawsuit if they don't forward settlement notices to users that Rightscorp believes are "repeat infringers" of copyright. In their complaint (PDF), the music publishers also decided to publicly post IP addresses.
They're doing this because Rightscorp's current "threaten to pay with no proof" business model has become too risky - they've heard the rumblings about class action suits. Of course, since Cox isn't hosting the files in question, their liability is the same as the phone company's when someone calls someone else to make a death threat. Common Carrier.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
ISPs are required under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act ("DMCA") to implement and maintain a policy that provides for the termination of subscribers and account holders that are repeat copyright infnngers in order to maintain the safe harbor protection afforded by the DMCA from copyright infringement claims that the ISPs otherwise would enjoy.
This is just plain false. The DMCA contains no language calling for ISPs to "terminate" their subscribers over copyright claims. It's a lie.
Perhaps that's why Rightscorp is going bankrupt. Judges don't like to be lied to. A good defense attorney (and my guess is they have one) will tear that to shreds.
They also say, in point 4:
Despite these notices and its actual knowledge of repeat infringements...
How do they know Cox "has actual knowledge"? Because they notified Cox? That's not "actual knowledge", that's just an allegation. A very different thing.
All in all, I think I see why Rightscorp and its clients have not been very successful at these suits. Hell, *I* could probably rip them to shreds in court... if it weren't for the fact that IANAL and so I don't know proper court procedure.
Torrents are an accepted distribution practice
Not only that, torrents are the technically superior distribution method for large files.
.: Semper Absurda
My guess is that this is a last-gasp effort to make some money before it goes under.
...using pages straight from the SCO playbook.....
The DMCA contains no language calling for ISPs to "terminate" their subscribers over copyright claims. It's a lie.
I don't know if you're reading the same DMCA I'm reading, but 17 USC 512(i)(1)(A) applies the safe harbor only to service providers with "a policy that provides for the termination in appropriate circumstances of subscribers and account holders of the service provider's system or network who are repeat infringers".
I know the lawyers have a legal term for this kind of bad faith, but I've no idea what it is right now.
I think you're probably thinking of barratry, although strictly speaking what Rightscorp is doing seems more along the lines of simple extortion.
Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas