Dirty Tricks: Anti-Piracy Group Caught Planting Evidence In Usenet Case
from the that-doesn't-seem-right dept
TorrentFreak has some disturbing news coming out of the legal fight in the Netherlands between anti-piracy group BREIN and Usenet community provider FTD. Apparently BREIN had somewhere around 15 “investigators” acting as FTD members — and they may be using the actions of at least one to prove their legal point. FTD has argued, reasonably, that its members are not uploading content, but merely pointing out where it is available. BREIN argued, in response, that it was often the same users who would upload and point it out. Their evidence? A user who uploaded and pointed out the same movie. The problem? The guy who did that… works for BREIN. That sounds like planting evidence, a tactic law enforcement is sometimes seen to employ — but BREIN is a private organization. Apparently, BRIEN is so closely tied to Dutch law enforcement that they seem to think they’re part of it — even going so far as to copy some law enforcement abuses.
Filed Under: netherlands, planting evidence, uploads, usenet
Companies: brein, ftd
Comments on “Dirty Tricks: Anti-Piracy Group Caught Planting Evidence In Usenet Case”
Subject
BREIN can suck it.
Sue
So, is the person that did that being sued?
Talk about corporate espionage!!!
Wait, what?
“That sounds like planting evidence, a tactic law enforcement is sometimes seen to employ — but BREIN is a private organization.”
That sentence is profoundly disturbing.
Re: Wait, what?
The accusation that that BREIN plants evidence (assuming they did) because it is a technique it learned from close association with corrupt law enforcement is a familiar Masnick ruse to promote controversy and publicity.
He would never make such a bold and unsubstantiated accusation about an American police force because in that case he might actually have to face some consequences.
Re: Re: Wait, what?
a) please link to other posts employing this “familiar” ruse
b) what consequences exactly?
Re: Re: Wait, what?
Your comment is laughably stupid. People in the US constantly accuse law enforcement of corruption and are rarely punished for it.
This is a familiar Anonymous Coward ruse to promote controversy and publicity.
Re: Re: Re: Wait, what?
“…rarely punished for it.”
we live in a country where citizens are tracked via GPS because of comments on social networks – you really haven’t been paying attention have you ?
Re: Re: Wait, what?
So , what are you going to do Mr. FBI? Find Mike and put a GPS tracker on him? Revoke his citizenship? Shoot his dog?
Fuck your consequences. Go back to the pig sty you came from.
Planting evidence?
That sounds like it should be illegal or something.
Re: Re:
Planting evidence?
That sounds like it should be illegal or something.
If it was a “little person”, it probably would be. But probably not for big corporations.
Step 1. Upload your music to a site.
Step 2. Sue the site for infringing your copyright.
Step 3. Prove in court that you uploaded your music to the site.
Step 4. ???
Step 5. Profit!
You’re right. They are one underpants gnome away from being gazillionaires.
Growth
So if you plant evidence, do you need to fertilize it? Probably with a load of bull—-.
one thing bothers me Mike are you saying it is perfectly OK for police and courts to plant evedence??
the question also needs to be asked did the law firm get distribution rights rhen offer a free download on a P2P service in which there should be no case to answear as they legally gave it away. I the law firm did not have distribution rights then they are as guilty as hell themselves and should be in the dock.
Re: Re:
In no way does it state that it’s perfectly OK to plant evidence.
He was drawing parallels to the (hopefully) infrequent illegal planting of evidence by some police to enhance their cases.
If you don’t think this has ever happened, i have this bridge in san francisco for sale.. cheap.
Re: Re:
one thing bothers me Mike are you saying it is perfectly OK for police and courts to plant evedence??
Oh, no way. I most certainly was not saying that at all. I was just noting that the issue of “planting evidence” is almost universally reserved for law enforcement, so I’m not sure how it’s dealt with concerning private entities.
Re: Re: Re:
Planting evidence is not a practice reserved for anyone (person or organization) – what point are you trying to make ?
Re: Re: Re: Re:
He’s trying to make the point that the corrupt will do anything in order to further their agenda.
Re:
@Mike- Would depend exactly on how much money the corporation had and how many politicians they had in their back pockets.
actually, a commenter had it right. If the firm that put the content up had the rights to do so, then there is NO case. The BRIEN has the rights to place it on the internet, and therefore, all downloaders of that particular file had a legit download, because the uploader had the rights to place it on the internet.
Re: Re:
actually, a commenter had it right. If the firm that put the content up had the rights to do so, then there is NO case. The BRIEN has the rights to place it on the internet, and therefore, all downloaders of that particular file had a legit download, because the uploader had the rights to place it on the internet.
That’s not necessarily how the law works. All it takes is for an industry-friendly judge to make one of those famous Alice-In-Wonderland judgments that it was legal for BRIEN to put it up but at the same time illegal for people to download it. I suspect that is what will actually happen.
Welcome to the real legal system.