SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Submitted via IRC for TheMightyBuzzard
Court Rules on Merits of IP Address Identification in Open WiFi Case:
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals was presented with a case about open WiFi and the responsibility of the owner of the network when someone commits copyright infringement on the IP address. Thomas Gonzalez was sued by the makers of the Adam Sandler movie, The Cobbler. He had won his initial day in court, but the copyright owners appealed the decision. In the new ruling (pdf), Judge Margaret McKeown had this to say, "In this copyright action, we consider whether a bare allegation that a defendant is the registered subscriber of an Internet Protocol ('IP') address associated with infringing activity is sufficient to state a claim for direct or contributory infringement." She then states, "We conclude that it is not."
From the ruling:
The district court properly dismissed Cobbler Nevada's claims. The direct infringement claim fails because Gonzales's status as the registered subscriber of an infringing IP address, standing alone, does not create a reasonable inference that he is also the infringer. Because multiple devices and individuals may be able to connect via an IP address, simply identifying the IP subscriber solves only part of the puzzle. A plaintiff must allege something more to create a reasonable inference that a subscriber is also an infringer. Nor can Cobbler Nevada succeed on a contributory infringement theory because, without allegations of intentional encouragement or inducement of infringement, an individual's failure to take affirmative steps to police his internet connection is insufficient to state a claim.
(Score: 3, Funny) by rigrig on Friday August 31 2018, @01:37PM (4 children)
Somehow this reminded me of the Nethack punishment for pudding farming.
No one remembers the singer.
(Score: 4, Funny) by takyon on Friday August 31 2018, @01:43PM (1 child)
"A cobbler, bored of his everyday life, stumbles upon a magical heirloom that allows him to become other people and see the world in a different way."
"A pirate, tired of living, stumbles upon an Adam Sandler movie and regrets it."
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Friday August 31 2018, @02:15PM
Maybe Adam Sandler movies and Justin Bieber music were designed for use in prisons? Through clerical error, they accidentally fell into the hands of Hollywood executives which made it inevitable they would be released upon an unsuspecting public?
The lower I set my standards the more accomplishments I have.
(Score: 3, Funny) by DannyB on Friday August 31 2018, @02:11PM
It reminded me of: you failed to understand your agreements in advance of your interaction.
(when talking about getting mugged, beaten and robbed in a lawless anarchy)
Should an innocent person unknowingly starting to watch an Adam Sandler movie have a reasonable claim of being assaulted if the movie did not provide adequate warning before the audiovisual assault commenced? Or if that warning were drowned out in the noise of FIB warnings, Homeland Security warnings, You Must Be A Pirate!! warnings, in multiple languages, followed by unskippable commercials.
(Homeland Security warnings, on a movie, seriously? Am I supposed to believe it is serious and not some kind of colossal government endorsed joke that everyone is laughing about? Or is this serious crime of letting someone else watch a movie on a par with terrorists?)
The lower I set my standards the more accomplishments I have.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 31 2018, @02:38PM
My what a good way to get someone lost for hours in a nethack wikiwalk