Legal trouble! I received a DMCA notice, what should I do? Do not download movies!!!

[musicpyrite]

MikeLaRiviere's advice has had most impact on me so far. I am really not too concerned about getting sued at this time. I have talked to a few people and my dad's attorney friend and they told me that I shouldn't have admitted, but the sworn statement didn't include enough to get me into any trouble. Also, the link to the foreign torrent no longer shows up in the FindTorrent program.
If they sue me, it won't be too bad either, I have enough under my belt and good community support. So I think I will be moving on from this discussion. Thx for your support people and no thanks to you "others".

Good for you, hope you don't get into too much trouble, if any at all.

MikeLaRiviere -- do you have anyting to backup what you said? I bet other people are curious (myself included) as to where you get your info and how to deal with these types of situations. You never know....

 

[Horrortaxi]

Thx for your support people and no thanks to you "others".

When in doubt, always ignore the bad stuff that could happen to you--because it probably won't. Drive really fast, clean loaded guns, download illegal content from the internet. Bad things only happen to other people.

 

[Sol]

Three simple words...

Duff-Man says....at least get your story straight - in your first post you say: and then later you say so....did you d/l the movie or the trailer....I suspect your first post is the right one - it was the movie.....oh yeah!

Hey Duff-Man, in the forum thread titled 'Simpsons' Will Out a Gay Character' someone posted that YOU are gay. What do you say to that?

 

[MikeLaRiviere]

Musicpyrite, what I've said thus far is based on information that all of us have read at some point. I myself haven't been sued nor contacted by my ISP for any reason, but I'll expound on the points I made. I welcome people to challenge my logic, as the discussion should benefit many of us.

The first point I made was that the RIAA earlier offered an amnesty program, wherein it would agree not to sue those who signed the document. Now, this is an admission of guilt, and while the RIAA can no longer sue, other parties with standing may sue. This might include the artist or another interested party. Essentially it is a bad idea to sign simply because it opens the door to a lawsuit, albeit one not from the RIAA.

The second point I made was that switching ISPs might be a good idea. From what I've read, some ISPs are more loyal to their customers' privacy, and others are quick to give up their customers to the RIAA/MPAA. Verizon, for instance, fought over this in court for a bit. Further, switching ISPs would ensure that he receive a new (clean) IP address.

The third point I made was that he was not going to court. Thus far, he has received electronic notice from his ISP. The fact that the notice is electronic is the first "green flag," indicating that it is not of such great importance that it warrants a paper (snail mail) warning. Because he has not received any notification from the RIAA/MPAA or from a court, there is no reason to think he is going to court.

The fourth point I made was that he does not need a lawyer. This point ties into the third, in that he shouldn't actually spend money on a lawyer until he has reason to believe he is going to court. What he did, which was talk to attorney friends of his, was a good idea. Unless someone has pending litigation against him or her, there is no reason to spend money on a lawyer.

The fifth point I made was that the RIAA/MPAA would never allow him to go to a jury trial. First among the reasons why is that there is no precedent for a jury trial (or any trial, for that matter) against a file-sharer. They all settle out of court for substantially less than they took. And bear in mind that those whom the RIAA has sued were users who offered up massive amounts of files. The "problem" with the BitTorrent protocol is, of course, that all downloaders are forced to upload files; no freeloaders exist on the network (theoretically). Therefore, with regard to downloading a seventy or seven hundred megabyte file, and sharing that one file, there is simply no precedent for suing based on such a small offense. Granted, I realize the RIAA is going after smaller offenders, but this offense is far too small to warrant legal action. In addition, I stress that a jury trial would never occur because the RIAA realizes that too many people download files - the result of a trial by jury of the file-sharer's peers (no pun intended) would result in a disastrous precedent for the RIAA/MPAA.

Finally, it is important to realize that the only way one can be caught by the RIAA/MPAA is by sharing (i.e., offering) files to others. Although they are disliked by users of peer-to-peer networks, freeloaders (who only download and won't upload) can't be caught. As long as their library is not shared nor visible, there is no way for them to be caught. The BitTorrent protocol requires uploading (although upload speed can be set to zero kbps), so its users are more vulnerable to being caught.

Of course, the only way to be sure to avoid problems is to follow US law (even if you don't live in the US).

Mike LaRiviere

 

[musicpyrite]

Musicpyrite, what I've said thus far is based on information that all of us have read at some point. I myself haven't been sued nor contacted by my ISP for any reason, but I'll expound on the points I made. I welcome people to challenge my logic, as the discussion should benefit many of us.

Thanks for clearing that up Mike, I'll keep that in mind just in case I get into any trouble. And I wasn't challenging you logic, I just wanted to know more on the subject.

 

[superbovine]

Musicpyrite, what I've said thus far is based on information that all of us have read at some point. I myself haven't been sued nor contacted by my ISP for any reason, but I'll expound on the points I made. I welcome people to challenge my logic, as the discussion should benefit many of us.

The first point I made was that the RIAA earlier offered an amnesty program, wherein it would agree not to sue those who signed the document. Now, this is an admission of guilt, and while the RIAA can no longer sue, other parties with standing may sue. This might include the artist or another interested party. Essentially it is a bad idea to sign simply because it opens the door to a lawsuit, albeit one not from the RIAA.

The second point I made was that switching ISPs might be a good idea. From what I've read, some ISPs are more loyal to their customers' privacy, and others are quick to give up their customers to the RIAA/MPAA. Verizon, for instance, fought over this in court for a bit. Further, switching ISPs would ensure that he receive a new (clean) IP address.

The third point I made was that he was not going to court. Thus far, he has received electronic notice from his ISP. The fact that the notice is electronic is the first "green flag," indicating that it is not of such great importance that it warrants a paper (snail mail) warning. Because he has not received any notification from the RIAA/MPAA or from a court, there is no reason to think he is going to court.

I am with you on the switch ISP things. Also he should get a broadrouter, which has cloneable MAC address. They block his Mac via is Mac address, that is why his PC isn't being redirected towards the legal page. With a router if that ever happens all he has to do is call them up and say he bought a new router and would like to register to the MAC address and just cloneable another number.

As to the "green flag" i am with you on that as well, but I would like him to post the message he actually got. I don't think he is fully conveying the message in the statement. I am interested because it is cableone's stance would might point out their legal departments strategy for not getting sued.

 

[MikeLaRiviere]

Thanks for clearing up how they blocked his one computer, SuperBovine. I couldn't figure out how they'd take care of one specific computer, especially if his router was using DHCP, which most do use by default. MAC address must be it. Is there not a way to change the MAC address of a computer from within the router software?

Mike LaRiviere

 

[janey]

Thanks for clearing up how they blocked his one computer, SuperBovine. I couldn't figure out how they'd take care of one specific computer, especially if his router was using DHCP, which most do use by default. MAC address must be it. Is there not a way to change the MAC address of a computer from within the router software?

Mike LaRiviere

you can change it on most computers, not with router software, but built in software (ie ifconfig)

 

[iNetwork]

lol. I don't dl movies. Once in a while i will dl a torrent but not all the time. I just wanted to know what site are being monitored. I figured it was suprnova. I don't know why the gov wastes it's time monitoring sites like this. If they do manage to close a website, another 5 will open up.

The gov doesn't monitor these. Private Corporations like Columbia/Tristar and all of the other major ones do it as well. With torrents, it doesn't matter what site you get the .torrent from, you can still get caught. These major labels basically have started port scanning all of the popular high-speed internet ISP's IP address ranges. If a torrent port is open, you can query the port to see what is available. All of this can be scripted to occur automatically and ip addresses are logged and what each IP was sharing!

If you're sharing something that happens to be in their database then they contact your isp (and sometimes threaten them) and your isp then contacts you. If you do not quit sharing said file(s) the label can then get a court document to subpeona your account information which is normally protected by your isp. They then proceed to sue you. So unless your records have been subpeoned then you don't have to worry yet...

Make sure you write a letter explaining the situation to your ISP ONLY and that you will never do it again. Don't either. Do not directly contact the DMCA or the Label as they will definately come after you as soon as you expose yourself. Your ISP is a buffer between you and jail--beleive it or not. As I said earlier they must get court approval (which costs time and money) to get your personal info from the ISP.

BTW on Linksys routers you can change the mac addy of the router and get a new IP from your ISP...Just make something up, that's what I did lol...

 

[SolidGun]

Thank you all for giving me advices. I know that at one point or another we commit illicit actions, and yes there should be punishment if you get caught. I have realized that I am getting too old to be participating in those activities and I am ready to get my hands clean of it.
Thanks again everyone.

 

[mainstreetmark]

Doesn't all this mess point to the fact that there simply is no alternative for digital movie distribution? Sure, I can order a DVD on Amazon and it'll be here in 5 days, but I'd rather download it in 5 hours, which I can currently do with torrents.

If there were a reliable iTunes-Music-Store-esque service out there for movies that doesn't suck, I'd be a customer.

 

[King Cobra]

Dial-up users, such as myself, would have to pull overnighters on full DVD downloads for 5 weeks...lucky us. I think I'll just check out the used DVD section at Amazon.com instead.

 

[jared_kipe]

I have found BT to be the WORST offended when it comes to putting you out in the open for people to find you. Countless people on my college network have gotten these notices.

Basically, alot of people have stopped using BT for movies and music, you just don't want to put your name out there like that.

BEN

You mean people actually use their real name and location for that stuff? I specifically have a fake email and name for use with things like that.

 

[billwest9999]

get a friend who lives in canada or europe to dl movies for u and then send it to u. this way u wont't get caught.

 

[Shaun.P]

18?

Someone asked the question 'are you under 18?'. Does the law change if the person downloading movies etc, is under 18? How so?

 

[edesignuk]

This is why I only get torrents from "special" private trackers

 

[slughead]

What you do is get a lawyer. Now.

In case you needed a 2nd opinion:

Get a Lawyer. Now.

I have been charged with a computer crime before. What you do is turn your computer off, call a lawyer, and go over EVERYTHING HONESTLY with him.

The next step might be to have convenient "hard drive error" caused by a "virus" which means you have to zero your hard drive 8 times.

Then, you only reinstall those pieces of software for which you have a license that is readily available. Even if you own the software, do not reinstall it unless you have proof that you have a license. MS does this with a little holographic serial number sticker, Adobe (I think) just requires the CD.

A lot of you don't feel any sympathy for this guy but believe me, what could happen to him in this case is really messed up. And all over a $15 movie.

 

[MikeLaRiviere]

Slughead, what were you charged with?

Mike LaRiviere

 

[zyuzin4]

I was charged with Computer Fraudulent Use. Luckily I was only 17, the charges were dropped and probation was all that came out of it.

 

[Rabidjade]

I've got a letter from Microsoft directly and haven't done public P2P since. FTP baby!

 

[cb911]

The next step might be to have convenient "hard drive error" caused by a "virus" which means you have to zero your hard drive 8 times.

he he. i like that step, but only in extreme circumstances. after you zero a drive you can't use it again can you? i'd either have to be really scared or really sure before i did that...

about only getting in trouble for UL'ing (distributing, sharing) files.. that is not true! you can get into legal trouble for having any copyrighted material on your HD. so it doesn't matter whether it's there because you've DL'd it or because you're UL'ing it, you can still get in trouble.

the difference in age... if you're below 18 you won't get in trouble, it's you parents that will. so don't think you're off the hook just because you're underage.

FTP may be a more secure solution, but not if the server logs IP's. they may be ordered to had over the server logs, then they'd have all the IP's just as if they'd been watching P2P networks. more secure would be to use a site/server that doesn't log IP's, then they're not there to hand over.

i think the only completely anonymous way to get files is through Freenet, but i haven't found out how to properly get around that yet... but it does sound good. you publish a 'freepage' (the same as a webpage, but in Freenet) and then it's encoded and stored on the Freenet network, which is hosted on peers computers all over the world. because it's encoded no single file is hosted on any one computer, so no way to shut down a particular site.

or you could also use a proxy with BT or whatever file sharing app, but that would be ssoooo sloowww, and there's backdoors built into most (if not all) of those proxy apps anyway.

if you're addicted to DL'ing massive amounts of data (like me ) and worried about getting in legal trouble because of it, i'd say it's best to stick to legal BitTorrent sites. yes there are legal BT sites, i know of quite a bit one where you can legally DL music from. just search for it, not too hard to find.

and remember - security through obscurity.

 

[iostream.h]

Proxies are your friend.

 

[Horrortaxi]

Someone asked the question 'are you under 18?'. Does the law change if the person downloading movies etc, is under 18? How so?

The law doesn't change if you're a minor, but your parents are sued instead of you.

 

[Rabidjade]

he he. i like that step, but only in extreme circumstances. after you zero a drive you can't use it again can you?

Thats what a low level format is, and yes the drive is usable after that. I do it once a year on a server I have.

FTP may be a more secure solution, but not if the server logs IP's. they may be ordered to had over the server logs, then they'd have all the IP's just as if they'd been watching P2P networks. more secure would be to use a site/server that doesn't log IP's, then they're not there to hand over.

99.9% of servers that deal with any type of traffic log IP's. If they don't then they are short term servers that get moved alot or server operators who don't care about security.

you could also use a proxy with BT or whatever file sharing app, but that would be ssoooo sloowww, and there's backdoors built into most (if not all) of those proxy apps anyway.

"using proxies" is a myth anymore. Most public proxies are either so abused they quit operating, or are unknowningly opened up and soon discovered and closed. You IP sticks with you no matter how much you try to mask it at your home site. Some public proxies still operate, but at dialup speeds.

if you're addicted to DL'ing massive amounts of data (like me ) and worried about getting in legal trouble because of it, i'd say it's best to stick to legal BitTorrent sites. yes there are legal BT sites, i know of quite a bit one where you can legally DL music from. just search for it, not too hard to find.

If it cost something somewhere, then it is illegal, period. There isn't any "legal" sites that you can openly download pirated media and software from. Laws differe from country to country and this is just for the USA.

 

[James L]

For the amount of time and energy exhausted on this thread people could have just gone out and watched / bought the movie! It is waaayyyy cheaper in the long run than stealing it.

Now, my super secret plan to rule the world on the other hand...