Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Record Labels to Ask Potential Jurors: Have You Ever Read or Visited Ars Technica or TorrentFreak?

posted by martyb on Tuesday February 04 2020, @06:33AM   Printer-friendly
from the Have-you-ever-read-a-book,-magazine,-or-newspaper?-Which-ones? dept.

Phoenix666 writes:

Ars Technica:

Music-industry lawyers plan to ask potential jurors in a piracy case whether they read Ars Technica.

"Have you ever read or visited Ars Technica or TorrentFreak?" is one of 40 voir dire questions that plaintiffs propose to ask prospective jurors in their case against Grande Communications, an Internet service provider accused of aiding its customers' piracy, according to a court filing on Friday.

[...] Record-label attorneys also want to ask potential jurors if they "know what a peer-to-peer network is," have "ever downloaded content from any BitTorrent website" such as The Pirate Bay and KickassTorrents, obtained music or video from "any stream-ripping service," been "accused of infringing a copyright," or "ever been a member, contributor or supporter of the Electronic Frontier Foundation."

The full list of questions by each party were made available by TorrentFreak as pdfs:

Have you now, or ever been, a member of the Pirate Party?

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Record Labels to Ask Potential Jurors: Have You Ever Read or Visited Ars Technica or TorrentFreak? | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 110 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by exaeta on Tuesday February 04 2020, @06:30PM (5 children)

    by exaeta (6957) on Tuesday February 04 2020, @06:30PM (#953682) Homepage Journal
    Nope. Viacom has uploaded their own content under 'pirate' looking accounts to promo their own stuff. See Viacom v. YouTube/Google. It was so convincingly 'pirate', they even accidentally sent a takedown on their own content, then went "oops" and backtracked. So you can't tell, just because something *looks* suspicious that it's actually illegal and not secretly uploaded by the content provider. I wish I was joking, because this sounds absurd, but this really happens on a regular basis and Viacom isn't the only company that has been caught uploading their own content to 'pirate' sites.
    --
    The Government is a Bird
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Interesting=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  
    Total Score:   3  

  • (Score: 1, Troll) by barbara hudson on Tuesday February 04 2020, @06:59PM (4 children)

    by barbara hudson (6443) <barbara.Jane.hudson@icloud.com> on Tuesday February 04 2020, @06:59PM (#953689) Journal
    Sure you can tell - go to their regular legal distribution channels.
    --
    SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.

    • (Score: 2) by exaeta on Wednesday February 05 2020, @09:56PM (3 children)

      by exaeta (6957) on Wednesday February 05 2020, @09:56PM (#954433) Homepage Journal
      They literally uploaded their own stuff to youtube under a fake 'pirate account'. It's legal since they are the copyright holders, therefore gave permission to youtube to display it. Because viacom did this, youtude could not tell which 'pirate' videos were real pirates and which were viacom. Any 'pirate' site could be operated by media corps, for the purpose of promotion, but they don't want you to know they operate them so you feel guilty and buy the 'official' version if you can afford it. They really don't want you to know they do this, since they are the uploader it means it's a totally legal way to watch the videos free of charge. They'd much rather you think it's illegal, feel guilty, and pay up. In short, they want to have their cake (free promotion 'piracy') and eat it too (get people to pay who have the money to do so).
      --
      The Government is a Bird

      • (Score: 1, Troll) by barbara hudson on Wednesday February 05 2020, @10:48PM (2 children)

        by barbara hudson (6443) <barbara.Jane.hudson@icloud.com> on Wednesday February 05 2020, @10:48PM (#954461) Journal
        So what? You didn't pay for it. Was there a copyright notice in the trailer? Then tough shit. It's not entrapment because they're not law enforcement.

        Same as if I leave my bicycle outside unlocked and you take it - you're still a thief. Same as if someone leaves their car unlocked with the keys inside - you take it, you're a thief.

        --
        SoylentNews is social media. Says so right in the slogan. Soylentnews is people, not tech.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 05 2020, @11:13PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday February 05 2020, @11:13PM (#954478)

          I'm sure he will give the video back if he gets caught.

        • (Score: 2) by exaeta on Thursday February 06 2020, @05:22PM

          by exaeta (6957) on Thursday February 06 2020, @05:22PM (#954791) Homepage Journal
          That's not how it works. The law prohibits distributing media in violation of copyright, not receiving it. Viacom was legally able to distribute their own stuff. Thus it is not "pirated" and not even close to entrapment. Entrapment requires someone to trick you to do something illegal. Since copyright only concerns the distributor, not the receiver, the exchange is completely legal.
          --
          The Government is a Bird