Supreme Court Ruling Makes Chasing File-Sharers Hugely Expensive
 

about fucking time, it realy stupid that infringement cases have been won based on a potential amount of infringement that may or maynot have happened.

good that we are getting back to the innocent until PROVEN guilty standard that the law is supposed to follow.

Is there any type of illegal file sharing or is it all justified and legitimate to you?

:thumbsup

That's not true, it's PROVEN they shared the files, it's not PROVEN how much damage they have done.

Besides in Denmark it have always been the case you have to provide proof of loss to seek damages so the danish system can't really set precedent...

This doesn't stop default judgements or settlements out of court.

No it isn't. Currently, it is proven someone using, or spoofing, an IP address has possibly downloaded something that proclaims itself to be a copyrighted file.

Nice to see America realising proof is needed.

if the big corporations can steal, then so can i...

survival of the fittest bitches.... :thumbsup





.

Um this talks about DANISH cases. How does that have anything to do with the US Supreme Court. Here's an idea, how about a fucking link? Maybe that can expalin it better than you. Oh an innocnet until proven guilty applies to CRIMINAL caes. Not CIVIL ones. And even in CRIMINAL cases most of the time is the "innocent" defendant usually not already in jail BEFORE trial? If he's INNOCENT why is he in jail?

When will you people understand. Stopping piracy 100% will have very little to no effect on your earnings.

Sites like Pornhub have so much money they can afford to buy all the cheap videos they need to load legally on their sites and keep their traffic. Plus "user upload" is legal.

So what if Pornhub only have 5,000 videos. That's 4,500 more than most sites. Numbers to illustrate the point and can be adjusted.

sorry i hit contol v on the paste i guess i didn't copy the link properly the first time.

http://torrentfreak.com/supreme-cour...ensive-110325/


your right that it a danish court case, but it still a precedent since it based on the fundamental valdity of an ip address (that can be spoofed/hacked etc) as proof.

Just like the jurisdictional issue that you guys discounted with "it not american so it doesn't matter" arguement (until the same ruling happened in america)

it won't be long until this ruling appears in america too.

Thank god, shoddy evidence should never be allowed to convict people, especially when the only excuse is that it "too expensive" to do the investigation properly.

Can you please post the source article?

link is in the precious post