Comment on ISP to Supreme Court: We shouldn’t have to disconnect users accused of piracy
fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works 4 weeks agoI remember getting a scary letter because I was torrenting. I thought it so funny because I had to the only person in the world only torrenting freeaoftwarr and public domain works.
LodeMike@lemmy.today 4 weeks ago
Wait then what was it for?
barsquid@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
They don’t give a shit about targeting accusations only towards people torrenting copyrighted stuff. Why would they? They have no consequences for being incorrect.
They are doing this automatically. They just grab all the magnet links they can find and target any IP they connect to, regardless of the content.
A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
Which is why the DMCA shit is also bullshit.
Tryptaminev@lemm.ee 4 weeks ago
Add increasing penalties to that.
person420@lemmynsfw.com 4 weeks ago
That’s not how it would work for us. We’d receive a report from the MPAA/RIAA that showed the torrent they were downloading, the IP address involved, if they were seeding or leeching and an affidavit saying that all the information was correct to the best of their knowledge.
The letter we sent basically was a notification that we received that letter (with a copy) and that if we received two more for the same IP (three in total) we would have to release their information to the reporting body and that they could be open to legal action. It also included some information on how to secure their network and check for viruses in case that was the cause.
In my 15 years working there, we never once released information about a client. Because this was business accounts, most clients had multiple IPs (at least a /29) and would cycle what IPs they showed up as on the public Internet to keep them from getting multiple notices on the same IP. The music venue I mentioned had an entire /24.