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: 2) by bzipitidoo on Friday August 31 2018, @12:58PM (5 children)
These copyright trolls want to turn everyone into copyright police. It's like the East German Stasi, which encouraged members of the public to rat eat other out.
A car analogy might be "failure to report that another vehicle is speeding", should you witness such rule breaking.
Oh, and do Adam Sandler movies even qualify as art?
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 31 2018, @01:28PM (1 child)
> A car analogy might be "failure to report that another vehicle is speeding", should you witness such rule breaking.
Bad analogy. You can at least know that a vehicle is speeding, but there is no place to check if someone has a license to download (or upload) something. The only one who has that information is the copyright holder, so there is literally no way for any other person, corporation, service, or institution, to be certain that someone is infringing. You can suspect it, but you can't prove it.
(Score: 2) by bzipitidoo on Friday August 31 2018, @02:14PM
Yes, you're right, just determining whether copyright infringement has occurred requires info that must be current and may well not be, whereas speeding is easily determined with a simple measurement of speed and knowledge of the speed limit. Because copyright does eventually expire, an action that is copyright infringement yesterday might not be infringing today. Speeding is a far more dangerous and consequential offense, and it doesn't expire.
Maybe a better analogy is "failure to observe cars passing by your residence, recording all their license plate numbers, and reporting to the authorities those that have more than 30k miles since their last tuneup."
(Score: 4, Interesting) by DannyB on Friday August 31 2018, @02:02PM (2 children)
The problem. What is infringement? (Pilate to Jesus: What is truth?)
Even the copyright owners can't get it right. Their enforcement arm DMCAs their promotion arm. (eg, left hand doesn't know what the right hand is masturbating.) Further, is it infringement, or is it fair use? Does it qualify under the established fair use factors, written into the law? Sometimes even courts have a difficult time deciding, so how are you or I supposed to decide who we must be obligated to rat out?
Why do we have DMCA super powers? Because evil commie terrorist pirates can crank out automated infringement on such a massive scale that we need magical super powers to turn off the internet anytime, anywhere! Waaaaaaaaa! (sniff) Whhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!
So, if there is a $150,000 statutory penalty for infringement, I propose an equal sized penalty for a defective DMCA notice. It seems fair. After all, evil commie terrorists copyright trolls can crank out defective DMCA notices on such a massive scale that we need a super deterrent severe enough to prevent this abuse. By defective DMCA notice I mean: (a) it is not filed by the copyright owner or registered agent, (b) it fails to even state a copyright infringement claim, what work is infringed, who infringed it, basic facts, etc, (c) it is OBVIOUSLY not infringement, like someone's original nature recording that is being claimed as infringement of a musical "art".
Half the population employed to spy on the other half.
Does Justin Bieber music even qualify as music?
For that matter, does most modern music qualify as music?
Today: take modem noise, add heavy drums and a short repetitive bass line, and *poof*, like magic, you've got music!
If you eat an entire cake without cutting it, you technically only had one piece.
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Friday August 31 2018, @05:10PM (1 child)
Well, not liking something doesn't mean it's not art or music. The problem is there's no acceptable definition. Picasso occasionally practiced "junk art". Klaus Oldfield sculpted an ashtray full of realistic cigarette butts. Andy Warhol is reputed to have kept a cabinet full of unopened tomato soup cans that he would sign for people he liked.
I'm not familiar with current art or music, because I *don't* like it, but this wouldn't keep me from being willing to call it art and music.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Friday August 31 2018, @06:58PM
My last three words were "you've got music". So I would lump the modem noise in with music in the sense of categorization.
Not in the sense that such art and music engages my brain in any meaningful way.
Now there is art and music which I don't like that I would gladly (not grudgingly) recognize as art and music. I may not like the sound of some rap artist, but I recognize that they do communicate and engage their listener. It's not random and it's not line noise. It is a deliberate creative act, even if I don't care to listen to it.
Similarly with art. Even if I don't like it, it is art if it is a creative act in some sense. Although that definition can be stretched to absurdity.
If you eat an entire cake without cutting it, you technically only had one piece.