backtop


Print E-mail del.icio.us 121 comment(s) - last by rcc.. on Dec 26 at 5:53 PM


TorrentSpy claims to have indexed over 1.4 million torrents, with an additional average of 1,000-10,000 torrents added per day.  (Source: Wikipedia)
Courts claim that Torrentspy destroyed evidence, then lied about it

The current round of TorrentSpy’s legal battle with the MPAA has drawn to a close, with a Los Angeles judge ending the case in favor of the MPAA.

U.S. District Judge Florence-Marie Cooper called the conduct of defendants Justin Bunnell, Forrest Parker, Wes Parker, and parent company Valence Media “obstreperous,” claiming that they destroyed server logs that were requested as evidence to be used against them. “A substantial number of items of evidence have been destroyed,” wrote Cooper, adding that the defendants “were on notice that this information would be of importance to the case.”

In the lawsuit, Cooper found that TorrentSpy ignored a judicial order to retain server logs which contained the IP addresses of its users; the MPAA claimed that TorrentSpy witheld evidence since at least June of this year. Defendants claimed the logs were protected from being turned over by Dutch law as their servers are currently hosted in the Netherlands.

In response, Cooper asked for information stored in the servers' RAM, which the defendants claimed was temporary in nature and therefore impossible to retain.

Understandably frustrated, Cooper entered a default ruling against TorrentSpy and its parent company of which the amount of damages has not been set. TorrentSpy is expected to appeal on grounds that RAM should not be considered a physical log, but only a logical and unpreservable cache.

The MPAA originally filed suit against TorrentSpy in February 2006 along with a flurry of complaints against a variety of different BitTorrent trackers including Isohunt.com and BTHub.com

TorrentSpy filed a countersuit against the MPAA in May 2006, claiming that the MPAA violated the federal Wiretap Act by purchasing a cache of private e-mail pilfered by an ex-associate that had fallen out with the site. Judge Cooper tossed the case out, ruling that the MPAA did not expose itself to vicarious liability under the Wiretap Act – as TorrentSpy claimed – by purchasing the e-mails from a third party; coincidentally TorrentSpy agreed not to sue the ex-associate in exchange for his cooperation in the countersuit.

In June, TorrentSpy began blocking all American users from its site, in a move that would soon be followed by similar gestures from other trackers, including Isohunt and the late Demonoid.com. TorrentSpy claimed it instituted the practice to protect users' privacy due to an “uncertain legal climate;” it could be inferred that they moved to protect US-based users from discovery in its MPAA lawsuit.

The MPAA said its legal triumph was a “significant victory for the major Hollywood studios.”

“The sole purpose of TorrentSpy and sites like it is to facilitate and promote the unlawful dissemination of copyrighted content,” said the MPAA’s director of worldwide anti-piracy and executive vice president John Malcolm. “The court's decision is a significant victory for MPAA member companies and sends a potent message to future defendants that this egregious behavior will not be tolerated by the judicial system.”



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Sometimes I wonder...
By neothe0ne on 12/21/2007 1:14:20 AM , Rating: 5
if judges, lawyers, and juries are actually competent enough to be able to judge in cases about computers.




RE: Sometimes I wonder...
By ThePooBurner on 12/21/2007 1:42:48 AM , Rating: 5
I agree. Anyone who asks for the contents of RAM to be brought as evidence in court has no idea how a computer runs, or works, and probably has a computer full of spyware. I also don't agree with his ruling against them. Lack of evidence and frustraition because you are computer illiterate doesn't justify a default ruling in the other side's favor. Sometimes Judges are really dumb.


RE: Sometimes I wonder...
By SiliconAddict on 12/21/2007 2:26:57 AM , Rating: 5
Depends on the competence of of the defendants. You could do a RAM dump but $10 says the judge would have slapped them for giving them random garbage that no one could use. This is why we need to have judges who have a damn clue about tech. Judges, and congresscritters. We are in a world of computers with people who are putting laws into place who have no damn idea how a computer even works.


RE: Sometimes I wonder...
By othercents on 12/21/2007 10:25:08 AM , Rating: 5
Well really the only thing that torrentspy needed to do was produce the ram that was in the machines and let the judge know that the data was on the ram before removing them from the server.


RE: Sometimes I wonder...
By CvP on 12/21/2007 12:57:15 PM , Rating: 5
rofl...... quote of the day !!!!!!!!!!!


RE: Sometimes I wonder...
By JoshuaBuss on 12/21/07, Rating: 0
RE: Sometimes I wonder...
By omnicronx on 12/21/2007 8:43:15 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
they didn't really NEED the logs to prove that torrent spy was involved in illegal hosting.. it simply made things look even worse for them
That probably was not the point of the logs, from what I understand the owners did not want to release logs so that the MPAA could not go after its users.

And being located in Netherlands puts it in a grey area, one of the reasons we will probably see appeal after appeal.


RE: Sometimes I wonder...
By Polynikes on 12/21/2007 10:12:40 AM , Rating: 2
Since when is it illegal to host .torrent files?


RE: Sometimes I wonder...
By Spivonious on 12/21/2007 10:41:46 AM , Rating: 2
I believe knowingly hosting illegal files is illegal. So TorrentSpy would have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they had no idea that pirated movies were being transferred through their service.


RE: Sometimes I wonder...
By afkrotch on 12/21/2007 11:19:58 AM , Rating: 4
And that's just it, no illegal files are touching TorrentSpy's networks. They just hold onto torrent files.

Think of TorrentSpy as the a librarian. They know where you need to go to find information on books (data). They point you to the Dewey Decimal System cards (torrent trackers). The trackers also don't touch any of the data in question. They simply tell you where you need to go to get it. The shelves containing the books would be the seeders and the person getting the book would be the peers.

It's like knowing a guy, that knows a guy, that knows a hitman. It's not illegal to know a guy, who knows a guy, who knows a hitman. You know the hitman kills ppl.


RE: Sometimes I wonder...
By Samus on 12/21/2007 11:31:50 AM , Rating: 1
All your RAM are belong to us!!!!11


RE: Sometimes I wonder...
By rcc on 12/26/2007 5:53:12 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Think of TorrentSpy as the a librarian


Or perhaps a pimp or panderer.


RE: Sometimes I wonder...
By cochy on 12/21/2007 11:09:54 AM , Rating: 2
As far as I know you would be facilitating the proliferation of the illegal content in question, which is illegal, in the US.


RE: Sometimes I wonder...
By Christopher1 on 12/24/2007 8:11:45 PM , Rating: 3
Actually, no, it isn't. The courts have already ruled in other cases (which were hushed up) that hosting .torrent files in itself is NOT illegal.... it's only illegal to host the files THEMSELVES on the server that also has the .torrent files on it.


RE: Sometimes I wonder...
By darkfoon on 12/21/07, Rating: 0
RE: Sometimes I wonder...
By mindless1 on 12/21/2007 4:48:05 AM , Rating: 2
Courts that don't even understand the difficulties in showing ram contents aren't about to jump onto yet unproven theory (that it could be a reliable indicator of data up to the standards of proof). The industry itself doesn't even accept this is actually possible in practice, moreso than just *hints* of what the data used to be if it were in a steady state long enough, which it wouldn't be on a tracker.


RE: Sometimes I wonder...
By RW on 12/21/07, Rating: 0
RE: Sometimes I wonder...
By Spivonious on 12/21/2007 11:20:18 AM , Rating: 5
So you're saying that if you were an actor you would rather give your work away than get paid for it? Good luck with that. I'll try to throw some change in your hat if I see you.

Laws are made by the government. The government is elected by the people. Therefore, all laws are made by the people.

The MPAA and RIAA are trying to not have their products stolen. To expect everything to be given away for free is not practical unless you're living in a true Communist society (which has never worked in anything bigger than a small village).


RE: Sometimes I wonder...
By onwisconsin on 12/21/2007 12:07:14 PM , Rating: 2
...even though most politicians in the past 30 years have made promises, got elected, and only support bills supported by their party and campaign donors?

Just a question.