Ever since the entertainment industry started on their brain-dead, own-foot-shooting campaign of suing their own customers, we've wondered how they can get away with suing people who obviously didn't do the crime, such as parents or grandparents. While the industry would have you believe that it's whoever owns the connection that's guilty, the law would certainly suggest otherwise. Earlier this year, we noted that some parents are finally fighting back and the courts seem sympathetic. However, the entertainment industry still hasn't gotten the message. They also still don't recognize the terrible PR they get with headlines about how they're suing a grandfather who doesn't even like movies for $600,000. In this case, the grandson was responsible -- even if he downloaded movies that he already owned on DVD (3 out of the 4). Also, the article, once again, claims that he's being sued for downloading -- but every lawsuit we've seen hasn't been for downloading, but for uploading by offering to share it -- something that some courts are even questioning as well by noting that just leaving a file open to be shared is not the same thing as actively distributing it. So, to review, we have someone who wasn't involved at all being sued by the movie industry for something he didn't do for possibly distributing some movies, when the evidence doesn't even support whether or not he really did share the movies.
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- Feds To FISC: Of Course We Don't Have To Share Our Full Legal Filings With Companies Suing Us Over NSA Transparency
- Kansas City Cops Tell Man They'll Kill His Dogs And Destroy His Home If Forced To Obtain A Search Warrant
- Most Big Internet Companies Speak Out For Major Surveillance Reform
- Witness In No Fly List Trial, Who Was Blocked From Flying To The Trial, Shows That DOJ Flat Out Lied In Court
- Feds Insist It Must Be Kept Secret Whether Or Not Plaintiff In No Fly List Trial Is Actually On The No Fly List