BitTorrent Pirate Ordered to Pay $1.5 Million Damages For Sharing 10 Movies
-
Glups
![😕](https://community.gaytorrent.ru/assets/plugins/nodebb-plugin-emoji/emoji/apple/1f615.png?v=hvqg2qn0nb4 ":-\")
hXXp://torrentfreak.com/bittorrent-pirate-ordered-to-pay-1-5-million-damages-for-sharing-10-movies-121101/
A federal court in Illinois has handed down the largest ever damages award in a BitTorrent case. In a default judgment defendant Kywan Fisher from Hampton, Virginia is ordered to pay $1,500,000 to adult entertainment company Flava Works for sharing 10 of their movies on BitTorrent. The huge total was reached through penalties of $150,000 per movie, the maximum possible statutory damages under U.S. copyright law. It’s expected that the verdict will be used to motivate other BitTorrent defendants to settle their cases.
Since early 2010, hundreds of thousands of people in the U.S. have been sued for downloading and sharing copyrighted content on BitTorrent.Nearly all of these cases end up dismissed or settled, but one involving Kywan Fisher from Hampton, Virginia, has turned into a financial disaster.
In 2011 Fisher and several other defendants were sued by adult entertainment company Flava Works. The case in question differs from the so-called “John Doe” lawsuits as the copyright holder had detailed information on the defendants who had paid accounts on the company’s movie portal.
For Fisher the trouble started when instead of just viewing the films for personal entertainment, he allegedly went on to share copies on BitTorrent. These illicit copies were traced directly back to his account through a code embedded in the videos.
“Plaintiff has proprietary software that assigns a unique encrypted code to each member of Plaintiff’s paid websites. In this case, every time the Defendant downloaded a copy of a copyrighted video from Plaintiff’s website, it inserts an encrypted code that is only assigned to Defendant. In this case, the encrypted code for Defendant is: ‘xvyynuxl’,” Flava informed the court.
Copying films was expressly forbidden in the user agreement Fisher signed with the video portal, allowing Flava to claim willful copyright infringement for 10 titles.
According to Flava the copies uploaded to BitTorrent by Fisher went on to be downloaded thousands of times.
“Defendant’s conduct was willful to the extent that he copied or distributed Flava Works, Inc.’ intellectual property at least 10 times and caused the videos to be infringed or downloaded at least 3,449 times.”
Because Fisher failed to defend himself Judge John Lee had little choice but to find Fisher guilty.
This week the Judge handed down the largest ever damages award in a BitTorrent case, 10 times the maximum statutory damages for willful infringement, totaling $1,500,000.
“Given the materials submitted by Plaintiff in support of its motion and in light of the absence of any objection by Defendant, Plaintiff’s motion for entry of default against defendant 11 is granted. Judgment is entered in favor of the Plaintiff Flava Works, Inc., and against the Defendant Kywan Fisher in the amount of One Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000.00),” the judgment reads.
The verdict will be welcomed by Flava and the many other copyright holders involved in BitTorrent lawsuits in the United States. DieTrollDie, a close follower and critic of these cases, points out that it will be widely cited in settlement letters to other defendants, but that the case itself is notably different.
“This was not the normal Copyright Troll case – there was some actual evidence beyond a public IP address. Not a smoking gun by far, but certainly enough to show a preponderance of evidence,” DTD writes.
Fisher has a few options to respond according to attorney Blair Chintella.
“The most common way is the “collaterally” attack the judgment by arguing that there was some jurisdictional defect in the lawsuit. For example, that service of process was improper or that the Court lacked personal jurisdiction,” Chintella told TorrentFreak.
While the guilty verdict is no surprise considering the failure of Fisher to appear before court, the $150,000 in damages per movie, which translates to $435 per alleged download, definitely raises eyebrows.
-
This is but one reason for our banned list here at GT.ru ~ litigious Studios. Members can expect our Banned Studios list to have new Studios added at any time and it is critical that all uploaders check this list regularly.
-
I agree that it's perhaps best to play it safe, as much as is possible – but is there such a possibility of using an obfuscator to remove the personally identifiably information on the uploaded content?
It's completely possible in regards to EPUBs and MOBI files (the standard fare at Bibliotik, a tracker I'm heavily involved with).
Are there no tools readily available for video containers' DRM removal?We can not allow discussions about DRM removal for legal reasons ~ :google:
-
hXXp://torrentfreak.com/verizon-will-reduce-speeds-of-repeated-bittorrent-pirates-121115/
At the end of this month the controversial “six-strikes” anti-piracy system will kick off in the U.S., and today two of the participating Internet providers have been discussing what measures they will take against repeated BitTorrent pirates. Verizon plans to notify alleged pirates via email and voice-mail, and will throttle the connection speeds of repeated infringers. Time Warner Cable will warn subscribers through popups and restrict users’ Internet browsing by directing them to a landing page.
Last year the MPAA and RIAA teamed up with five major Internet providers in the United States to launch the Center for Copyright Information (CCI).
The parties agreed on a system through which subscribers are warned that their copyright infringements have been observed by rightsholders. After several warnings ISPs may then take a variety of repressive measures to punish the alleged infringers.
From leaked AT&T training documents we learned that the company will block users’ access to popular websites until they complete a copyright education course. However, none of the participating Internet providers have publicly commented on the measures they plan to take, until now.
No live links allowed ~ leatherbear
-
:thx: for this update rinsito
-
I apologize if I've missed something, but this is an illicit file sharing website. How does the discussion of DRM removal infringe on the law any further than the content we are sharing?
This is a private tracker, last time I checked.
-
@GuitarMan –- the two issues are not equivalent and are not as simplistic as your question suggests. Staff determine the appropriateness of content and have explicit reasons for doing so that do not require further review.
-
More bad news
:cry2:hXXp://torrentfreak.com/u-s-and-russia-announce-online-piracy-crackdown-agreement-121222/
The United States and Russia have announced an agreement to crack down on online piracy. The countries have agreed to disrupt sites that facilitate infringement and take action against their operators. As a result, uncertain times may lie ahead for the many BitTorrent and other file-sharing sites hosted in Russia.The agreement also allows for the improved takedown of infringing content and discussions on allowing Russian rightsholders to use the United States’ “six strikes” system.
-
very sad hearing this news
hope the best will come to pirate bay
