Quote:
Originally Posted by GatorB
Um this talks about DANISH cases. How does that have anything to do with the US Supreme Court. Here's an idea, how about a fucking link? Maybe that can expalin it better than you. Oh an innocnet until proven guilty applies to CRIMINAL caes. Not CIVIL ones. And even in CRIMINAL cases most of the time is the "innocent" defendant usually not already in jail BEFORE trial? If he's INNOCENT why is he in jail?
|
sorry i hit contol v on the paste i guess i didn't copy the link properly the first time.
http://torrentfreak.com/supreme-cour...ensive-110325/
your right that it a danish court case, but it still a precedent since it based on the fundamental valdity of an ip address (that can be spoofed/hacked etc) as proof.
Just like the jurisdictional issue that you guys discounted with "it not american so it doesn't matter" arguement (until the same ruling happened in america)
it won't be long until this ruling appears in america too.
Thank god, shoddy evidence should never be allowed to convict people, especially when the only excuse is that it "too expensive" to do the investigation properly.