US Judge says IP addresses don't identify pirates

Sounds to me like his decision was legal-speak for "the law requires me to give you what you want here, but personally I think you're giant flaming jackasses and I would like nothing better than to dismiss your complaint with the prejudice it deserves."

Presumably it will actually get dismissed at some later step. It's hard to say; there's a detailed description of the legal nastygram but nothing really about why he's allowing them to proceed.

See how well that holds up...

...for pirates and hackers when they confiscate your PCs.

Smacks of the old scam

where iffy companies used to advertise something by mail order in the back of magazines, didn't deliver, and then when pressed for a refund the cheque was made out by 'Arse-Intruding Dildos Limited' or similar. People lost their money because they were embarrassed to be associated with 'Arse-Intruding Dildos Limited' and didn't cash the cheque.

These are another version of the collection agencies who don't know or care if there's a valid debt or not. That is a successful business model that has served a number of such scoundrels well, and it is past time they were served as they deserve.

Kids these days

This is why I have toild my kids that they will be in serious trouble if they illegally download 'educational' films from the internet*.

*without sharing them with me.

“Upon receipt of the Complaint, I reached out to Plaintiff and spoke to a self-described “Negotiator” in an effort to see if I could prove to them … that I had nothing to do with the alleged copyright infringements,” one defendant said. “The Negotiator was offered unfettered access to my computer, my employment records, and any other discovery they may need to show that I was not the culpable party. Instead, the Negotiator refused and was only willing to settle the Complaint for thousands of dollars.” The Negotiator later failed to return voice mails.

Doesn't that just say exactly what they're after?

Not justice, just money.

I used to be an interloper until I took an arrow to the face

The judge will eventually be overruled.

While it is true that the IP address does not specifically identify you, the IP address is definitively linked to the alleged illegal act. Therefore the next chain in legal discovery is that the ISP has to reveal the owner of the IP address at the time of the alleged infringement. Once that is established it is still incumbent on the complaintant to prove the defendant engaged in the infringement.

Now as to the abusive nature of the tugs trying to do the collecting, that might be sufficient grounds for dismissal with prejudice.

On the other hand, the lady with the unsecured router might just consider herself lucky they didn't up the charges to acting as a distributor for pirated materials.

The only chance defendants have on this one is that the thugs don't have clever lawyers. Not a bet I'd take.

"her wireless router was not secured"

I agree with the Judge but on this one specific defence, I'm not so sure. Isn't it sensible to stipulate that people are responsible for taking reasonable care to secure their internet access points? Otherwise we set legal precedent for a real criminal to deliberately use an unsecured router and get away with anything they want.

Off to prison

IP addresses are only one source of I.D. used to send pirates and hackers to prison.

Here's hoping

Someone points our set of fucking idiots in the direction of this judge.