Court Tells TorrentSpy It Needs To Spy On Users
from the but-why? dept
Popular BitTorrent search engine TorrentSpy was told by a federal judge on May 29th that it needed to keep log files of user activity on its site, even if there was no business reason for it. TorrentSpy is nothing more than a specialized search engine, but the entertainment industry wants to paint it as something worse. This latest ruling comes out of a lawsuit between TorrentSpy and the MPAA over the legality of TorrentSpy's search engine. However, the ruling really is extraordinary in many ways. Rather than asking a company to hand over previous records, the court is actually asking TorrentSpy to purposely create new records that it has no need for and hand them over to a private party (the MPAA). What's worse is that this directly contradicts TorrentSpy's own privacy policy -- so obeying the court order would open them up additional legal trouble. TorrentSpy hasn't started spying on users and is appealing the ruling instead (and its lawyer suggests the site would sooner shut down than follow the court order). Hopefully, the appeals court will recognize that requiring a site to specifically create new records (in violation of its own policies) and then handing them over to another entity in an ongoing trial is not a good idea.
Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
The ruling by Ric on Jun 11th, 2007 @ 7:10am
Well, at worst they shut down before the judge can rule against them. Correct me if I am wrong, but can't you dissolve a business during a lawsuit if there isn't a dollar value attached to the suit?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Idiotic lawyers... by Shawn on Jun 11th, 2007 @ 7:10am
It is plain to see that the judges and lawyers in this case are just as idiotic as the person posting as "me" above...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
The judge is an idiot by Anonymous Coward on Jun 11th, 2007 @ 7:20am
She's considering RAM as stored memory and therefore constitutes as evidence and needs to be handed over as a report.
Chaos will ensue if this holds. Requiring a company to keep record of their RAM is retarded.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
BS by nutjob on Jun 11th, 2007 @ 7:35am
Wait a minute, didn't Bush get assailed over doing the same thing? Apparently, Terrorists have more freedom then citizens.Someone needs to make up their mind; do we monitor peoples activity or not. A bit of equality would be nice.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Story by The infamous Joe on Jun 11th, 2007 @ 7:45am
RIAA: Judge, we don't have the evidence we need to win the case. By the way, we found a new car lying about, we left it in your driveway.
Judge: Hmm.. well, the only logical thing for me to do is have TorrentSpy gather evidence for you, to help you win your case. I shall decree it!
RIAA: The keys are in the visor.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
No Story Here by DontpileonMe on Jun 11th, 2007 @ 8:13am
Quote from Mike
"However, the ruling really is extraordinary in many ways. Rather than asking a company to hand over previous records, the court is actually asking TorrentSpy to purposely create new records that it has no need for and hand them over to a private party (the MPAA). What's worse is that this directly contradicts TorrentSpy's own privacy policy -- so obeying the court order would open them up additional legal trouble."
Mike you are seriously limited in your knowledge of the law. This is not extraordinary- it is called and investigation or discovery. And all the time information is handed over to a "private party". All the time the courts compel me as an employer to divulge confidential payroll information about my employees for lawsuits like divorces, car crashes and lost wages, etc (all private parties). A judge can ask for old info and also require future info to be tracked and reported that I don't currently track. Heck, a judge can even supeona me and not pay me as an expert witness to testify about things like "likelyhood of continuing and ongoing employment".
Secondly, if TorrentSpy has a privacy agreement that says if will never divulge any future or past info to the courts than it is an illegal agreement and cannot be enforced. And furthermore, if a court orders me or TorrentSpy to do something like this there is no further liability to me from following the court order.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by Anonymous Coward on Jun 11th, 2007 @ 8:17am
It should also be noted that Torrentspy is based in the Netherland, so like in the Spamhaus case, the US has no real jurisdiction over them. Why Torrentspy even allowed this suit to go forward in a US court is something I still don't understand (perhaps someone can explain). As far as I can tel, the best I think the court could do in this case is threatened to have them blocked in the US (and Torrentspy would likely just block US site rather than shut down totally) or perhaps try to get ICANN to revoke their domain name (and they'd just move and set up shop on another domain), and then hope they could find a Netherland or EU court sympathetic to the MPAA cause to help enforce the edict.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
not likely by dutch one on Jun 11th, 2007 @ 8:26am
I know that the dutch court isn't filled with the most capable people when you look at technology. But i do know that the MPAA or the RIAA won't have a chance here to get those files.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by deefish on Jun 11th, 2007 @ 8:31am
OMG! Those silly clowns at the RIAA/MPAA. They only want the Log Files so they can congratulate all the users.
Congrats!! Your being sued!
(Click here for BuyOut Option: $1500, Paypall accepted)
Respectfully, RIAA/MPAA
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: No Story Here by anotherperson on Jun 11th, 2007 @ 8:38am
HAHA! You just contradicted yourself in the second paragraph. I agree with the person that posted below you, also, it isn't being handed over to the courts, the courts are ordering it be handed over to another private party, which is perfectly within the bounds of the law to have in their privacy poilcy. I think you probably just work for the MPAA and are trying to get everyone on your side...and failing miserably.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Big Brother by Can you say communism? on Jun 11th, 2007 @ 8:45am
The court is "asking" a company to break its own policies, so the goverment can "spy" even more on its own citizens. Is this part of the patriot act? Think about this quote everytime an amendment is attached to the constitution or the constitution is changed, "A Great Civilization is destroyed from within, not from without".
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
It's worse. by The infamous Joe on Jun 11th, 2007 @ 9:01am
The court is "asking" a company to break its own policies, so the goverment[sic] can "spy" even more on its own citizens.
No, the court is doing it so a *private entity* can spy on US citizens. That's *far* worse.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Then maybe... by Sanguine Dream on Jun 11th, 2007 @ 9:08am
This sounds like an attempt to go on a fishing expedition.
The court is "asking" a company to break its own policies, so the goverment can "spy" even more on its own citizens.
What really scares me is that the court isn't doing this so the government (that is scary enough) can spy TorrentSpy users, the court is doing this so that a non-government organiztion can spy on TorrentSpy users. And just what do you think the RIAA will do once they find out about this?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Stop buying movies and cd's by Larry Cuttill on Jun 11th, 2007 @ 9:09am
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Stop buying movies and cd's by Larry Cuttill on Jun 11th, 2007 @ 9:21am
Americans don't ban together and boycott so until we
do can't complain. I will NOT buy any movie or music cd
Both industries knew about the technology upcomming
neither did anything to protect their interests. They just
holler for new laws and lawsuits. They need to spend their money finding ways to protect their interests be responsible
to their clients. Stop making new laws and stop run around suing kids.
This is not the same America I grew up in
Its been bought and paid for by all these large fucking corporations and war mungers.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Stop buying movies and cd's by Larry Cuttill on Jun 11th, 2007 @ 9:21am
Americans don't ban together and boycott so until we
do can't complain. I will NOT buy any movie or music cd
Both industries knew about the technology upcomming
neither did anything to protect their interests. They just
holler for new laws and lawsuits. They need to spend their money finding ways to protect their interests be responsible
to their clients. Stop making new laws and stop run around suing kids.
This is not the same America I grew up in
Its been bought and paid for by all these large fucking corporations and war mungers.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: No Story Here by ReallyEvilCanine on Jun 11th, 2007 @ 9:40am
All the time the courts compel me as an employer to divulge confidential payroll information about my employees for lawsuits like divorces, car crashes and lost wages, etc (all private parties). A judge can ask for old info and also require future info to be tracked and reported that I don't currently track. Heck, a judge can even supeona me and not pay me as an expert witness to testify about things like "likelyhood of continuing and ongoing employment".
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: No Story Here by ReallyEvilCanine on Jun 11th, 2007 @ 9:49am
Mike you are seriously limited in your knowledge of the law.
As are you, DontpileonMe.
All the time the courts compel me as an employer to divulge confidential payroll information about my employees for lawsuits like divorces, car crashes and lost wages, etc.
Because as the employer, you're party to the dispute in that you employ a person and can verify such confidential information. You could also send a secretary or HR person on your behalf as long as that person also has routine access to that information.
A judge can ask for old info and also require future info to be tracked and reported that I don't currently track.
He can ask but he'll have a hard time compelling you to do so simply at whim.
Heck, a judge can even supeona me and not pay me as an expert witness to testify about things like "likelyhood of continuing and ongoing employment".
Only if you're party to the case at hand. Otherwise Stallman and Lessing and a load of others would spend every waking moment testifying in courts around the US under subpoena.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by Anonymous Coward on Jun 11th, 2007 @ 9:52am
The USA is a big country with nukes. The Netherlands is a little country. When push comes to shove, Hitler ran over the Netherlands like a hot knife through butter. When a US federal judge hands down a diktat then you'd better snap to attention and cooperate.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: No Story Here by Sokol on Jun 11th, 2007 @ 9:55am
Your argument is flawed, and I suggest re-reading the post. You do payroll and already collect the data. This is a case of no data being collected. To put it in terms for you, imagine the government coming to you and asking for detailed information on the shopping habbits of your employee's, or information on what they spend their pay on. Again information you would not keep track of.
~Sokol
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by Anonymous Coward on Jun 11th, 2007 @ 9:55am
What Torrent Spy should do is conform to the judges order. Since the data in RAM is the information that's wanted then the RAM memory should be the only thing provided.
No additional "logs" should be created that make this information human readable. Since it has been declared that the information is in the memory "for about six hours" then perhaps Torret Spy only needs to copy the existing RAM as it is once every 3 to 4 hours with no formatting or filtering since the data in RAM isn't formatted or filtered. A straight memcopy should suffice.
If you have to comply with insane orders like this then you should comply to the fullest letter of the order.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: No Story Here by Anonymous Coward on Jun 11th, 2007 @ 9:56am
Too bad the user's aren't TorrentSpy's employee's. And depending on the contracts and laws of that state, an employer might not have to divulge that information. A company doesn't have to track their customer's and a judge shouldn't be allowed to make them do so.
Beyond that, telling someone that they need to keep a record of their RAM is purely ridiculous.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Hahaha. by The infamous Joe on Jun 11th, 2007 @ 10:18am
Hitler ran over the Netherlands like a hot knife through butter.
I less than three mixed metaphors.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by Da Truff on Jun 11th, 2007 @ 10:28am
Dowloading music is American as mom and apple pie. The only conceivable reason why the RIAA would want to stop this American pastime is because the RIAA is actually an al qaeda front operation.
I think a little water boarding of key RIAA execs in Gitmo would reveal the truth.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Big nukes, LOL by reed on Jun 11th, 2007 @ 10:31am
"The USA is a big country with nukes. The Netherlands is a little country. When push comes to shove, Hitler ran over the Netherlands like a hot knife through butter. "
I can see it now, MPA and the RIAA along with the DMCA will force our hand and make us start World War 3. Kill em all before they can copy our music and media!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: by LawL on Jun 11th, 2007 @ 10:51am
yeah right... the US is gonna nuke them down... till they hand out their records...
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: No Story Here by Anonymous Coward on Jun 11th, 2007 @ 11:32am
It would be more like if you ran a hotel and a judge ordered you to install video cameras in all the rooms and to start spying on all your customers.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by Anonymous Coward on Jun 11th, 2007 @ 11:32am
someone needs to tell the judge that information isn't "stored" in RAM the same way information is stored on a hard drive. Tell her to go back to elementary school when you learn about homonyms. Just because they both use the word "store" doesn't mean they mean the exact same thing.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: by Anonymous Coward on Jun 11th, 2007 @ 11:34am
Hah. US law applies everywhere.(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: by Anonymous Coward on Jun 11th, 2007 @ 11:45am
They don't hafta nuke 'em. They just tell a few well placed Netherlands govt. officials "Gee, you know it'd be a real shame if you was to somehow disappear. By the way, have you heard the talk about our CIA having some kind of secret global prison system?"(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by Paul on Jun 11th, 2007 @ 11:52am
the judge should be bitch slapped with an engineering degree
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by Anonymous Coward on Jun 11th, 2007 @ 12:23pm
the judge should be bitch slapped with an engineering degree
True dat.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: No Story Here by ehrichweiss on Jun 11th, 2007 @ 12:30pm
"It would be more like if you ran a hotel and a judge ordered you to install video cameras in all the rooms and to start spying on all your customers."
And we have a WINNER!!!. Very good way of looking at this mess. Thanks.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: It's worse. by GoblinJuice on Jun 11th, 2007 @ 12:56pm
I fear little brother more than big brother, to be honest.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Its all pointless anyways by ryan on Jun 11th, 2007 @ 1:00pm
TorrentSpy isnt doing anything wrong in the first place, because its not against any law to index a site in a search system.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: by Anonymous Coward on Jun 11th, 2007 @ 2:36pm
I have an engineering degree. I wish I'd gone to law school instead.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: No Story Here by discojohnson on Jun 11th, 2007 @ 3:07pm
that would only work if it weren't illegal to put the cameras in there in the first place.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: Re: No Story Here by Anonymous Coward on Jun 11th, 2007 @ 3:37pm
Illegal? The law means whatever the judge says it means.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: Re: Re: Re: No Story Here by Anonymous Coward on Jun 11th, 2007 @ 4:50pm
Law is what comes out of the barrel of a gun.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by Anonymous Coward on Jun 11th, 2007 @ 5:47pm
I doubt that a US court could compel a Netherlands based
company to break Netherlands law or contracts without
some help from the Netherlands legal system.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
by |333173|3|_||3 on Jun 11th, 2007 @ 10:40pm
Forget an engineering degree or the the TorrentSpy privacy policy, she should have a lerge tome of EU law dropped on her head from a great hieght. TorrentSpy logs are under Dutch juristiction, and so EU law applies. I very much doubt that TorrentSpy is allowed to hand over thier RAM logs, or any otehr user data, to the US courts, and they are certainly not allowed to violate their privacy policy to hand over data to an US corporation. Hell, under EU law the restrictions on handing data over to a US arm of that same company are very restricitve, for privacy reasons.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
this seems odd?? by confused power on Jun 18th, 2007 @ 6:39am
ok first of all ram is random allocated memory how the hell can you report on something that is (correct me if im wrong) temp???? and will peeps in england be effected to the rule??
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
U.S.Court ruling on TorrentSpy by Estufa1 on Aug 27th, 2007 @ 3:45am
I cannot believe that in this "free" country our government is trying to support private industry by taking away one of our most precious freedoms; that of using the airways to freely surf the internet. What are they thinking? Our legislature screams Freedoms of our Forefathers, yet at every turn, hits us with blatant theft of our basic freedoms. It wasn't bad enough they took away our freedom to spend our own hard earned money in our chosen ways by prohibiting offshore internet gambling, now they want to have us spied on by our own chosen search engines. Time to STOP this blatantly communistic activity. Let's bring back our government of, by, and for the people!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Question by Alfredo on Sep 11th, 2007 @ 2:31pm
I am scared. I used Torrentspy to download about 40-50 movies (most of them adult movies, I recognize it, although a few Holywood titles too). I was so careless that I used my own DSL conection with my own IP address. I live in New York.
Can anyone tell me if I am or will be in trouble?
Thanks for your help!!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: No Story Here by Captain Nemo on Dec 18th, 2007 @ 7:11pm
The agreement is not to gather it. If the agreement was to gather it but not hand it to courts, that would be illegal, sure. But that's not what they said at all.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Add Your Comment