GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum - View Single Post - legitimacy of torrent lawsuits by porn companies

Jamie Gardner · 05-07-2012, 10:56 AM

I have been reading about Judge Gary Brown getting in the way of porn company lawsuits against people who download torrents of their movies. The judge is claiming that an IP address, by itself, is not sufficient to prove that a person downloaded a porn movie from a torrent. Brown says there is the possibility that other family members or visiters could have downloaded movies rather then the person who owns the IP address. If you go by his logic, should many cases of possession of child pornography be thrown out?

When child pornography is found on a computer, it is assumed that it's there because of the owner of the computer. On the TV show TO CATCH A PREDATOR, text messages were used as evidence that a person coming to a house intended to have sex with someone underage. According to the show, the crime already was committed whether the person shows up at the house or not. There was no video camera footage showing people typing and sending the messages. There were no witnesses to the messages being written. Most of the time, Chris Hansen was able to get people to confess to writing the messages. What if a person continued to deny writing the messages, despite the persistance of Chris Hansen?

Another thing that Judge Gary Brown's decision reminds me of is video cameras at red lights. The video cameras take pictures of the license plates of the cars. How do we know the owner of the car was driving it? It is possible that someone else could have borrowed the car, possibly without the owner's knowledge. A number of years ago, the big concern with the video cameras was that the timing of the lights was changed so that
more people would not get through before it turned red.

05-07-2012, 10:56 AM
Jamie Gardner Registered User Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2011 Posts: 33	legitimacy of torrent lawsuits by porn companies I have been reading about Judge Gary Brown getting in the way of porn company lawsuits against people who download torrents of their movies. The judge is claiming that an IP address, by itself, is not sufficient to prove that a person downloaded a porn movie from a torrent. Brown says there is the possibility that other family members or visiters could have downloaded movies rather then the person who owns the IP address. If you go by his logic, should many cases of possession of child pornography be thrown out? When child pornography is found on a computer, it is assumed that it's there because of the owner of the computer. On the TV show TO CATCH A PREDATOR, text messages were used as evidence that a person coming to a house intended to have sex with someone underage. According to the show, the crime already was committed whether the person shows up at the house or not. There was no video camera footage showing people typing and sending the messages. There were no witnesses to the messages being written. Most of the time, Chris Hansen was able to get people to confess to writing the messages. What if a person continued to deny writing the messages, despite the persistance of Chris Hansen? Another thing that Judge Gary Brown's decision reminds me of is video cameras at red lights. The video cameras take pictures of the license plates of the cars. How do we know the owner of the car was driving it? It is possible that someone else could have borrowed the car, possibly without the owner's knowledge. A number of years ago, the big concern with the video cameras was that the timing of the lights was changed so that more people would not get through before it turned red.