|
i am interested in how this goes down on appeal
the court ruled against torrentspy becuase they mpaa argued they were destroying evidence and therefore had to be guilty.
The problem is destroying evidence was the act of blocking access from the states.
The purpose of which was to not have the information they were required to give up.
the arguement can be made by blocking access they not only not have the infromation but they reduced the number of potential infringers to zero. Since the purpose of the court order was to obtain information about infringement and not to deliberately violate the privacy rights of non infringing/ non jurisdictional use, that act was a legitimate method of complying with the order (just like microsoft giving a broken version of windows 98, to comply with the doj court order-- as was established on appeal)
__________________
“When crimes occur through the mail, you don’t shut the post office down,” Steve Wozniak
|