At this point, I think it is just a plot to keep cases in courts to forestall any other acronym agency from swooping in on them. If the IRS were to pounce now that would be screaming about how they were harmed and not getting a fair day in court, so keep filing fluff, rely on appeals taking years to be ruled on, while the money stays in limbo not existing while keeping their lifestyles afloat.
It is sad to see how quickly courts threw citizens to these wolves, but now we have to make sure the wolves actually ate the citizens we threw to them.
We busily built a case against some guy in Poland because his actions, we are told, harmed hollywood. Meanwhile police officers are still shooting people & not having to file reports with us as required by law.
Part of it is probably the thinking of we can't change the release windows we have set. The other part might be the fear that because they haven't ramped up to cover those areas yet people will end up with more server lagging and anger over the game not working right.
Consumers are not very rational, and if they could get their hands on the game they expect it to work. Given how rapidly the game took the worlds attention span online, one would hope they are scrambling to get worldwide up and running ASAP rather than trying to stay the course and keep issuing takedowns that won't accomplish much.
So in other words this is a bill to make the RightsCorp model profitable.
You will send our threat letters disguised as DMCA notices or you will pay us 15K each time. You will turn over names so we can harass them easier, and try to leverage you being required to help to remove having to pay you for doing the lookups.
$150K is scary, but it is laughable... but $15K can represent more than half of someones income. Nothing like destroying people on nothing more than a snapshot of an ip address.
We can get discovery by burying the panel in BS, then troll through all of their data and if we can find anything (our or not) we can say they must be guilty and have it stick.
There is no right to getting your costs established yet, so we don't have to do our typical cut and run case management. We can keep this going for as long as we like, and bother you until you decide its cheaper to pay us instead of a lawyer.
I can see 3 amendments I'd like to see... 1 - fixing the damages for bad DMCA notices & more penalties for repeating the behavior.
2 - capping the award of "damages" in these cases at 2x retail. $15k for a shitty movie you can buy on Amazon for $1 seems like a windfall for those holding the rights to craptastic films, especially if there is no cap to the number of times they can get cash. The filmed for $50K flop, makes $500 at retail yet gets $300K in settlements in the first year.
3 - if they are involved in a honey pot scheme (looking at the 14 names for a single German company behind 99% of copyright cases) the copyright gets cancelled & any money taken in has to be returned with interest. Creating the incidents to profit from has/can/will be done as long as there is no downside.
Removing the ability to get windfalls, might encourage them to service the market better rather than cling to a zombie business model they keep alive with stupid laws.
Re: How can it be orphaned if others want to make it?
The disease was orphaned by the drug industry. The total income would never recoup the advertising budget & development, so they don't bother looking.
So now a company went searching for one of those diseases to get their best seller approved to treat (something they never looked at until their billions might stop flowing) and then make moves to lock up 7 more years of being the only game in town. The R&D and the advertising budget was recouped long ago, and they have made huge profits... that they couldn't be bothered to use to find a treatment for a disease, they just want to cling to this one for as long as possible.
"Worse, some of Islam's swatting efforts and cyberstalking occurred while he was "cooperating" with federal prosecutors"
And how quickly were they made ex-prosecutors? Unable to supervise an asset, allowing more crime to happen, ignoring the actions....
Unless this doxing idiot knew where Bin Laden was, what could he have possibly offered to make looking away as he kept dicking around worth it? Or perhaps he used his made skillz to convince them he had super good intel to share, and they didn;t bother to check if he was full of shit or not.
I don't have the will to look but can someone please find quotes where she says we should block Muslims & other speech from the internet? You know shes done it, its just way more fun to highlight the hypocrisy.
It becomes an amazing Catch 21 that officials will use how they see fit.
If you delete the CP, you are in trouble for hiding a crime. If you report the CP, they troll through your life & trash your name.
We've seen people nearly convicted because some system detected a thumbnail of an image believed to be CP, in the cache of the browser that was in an ad that was on a site that the accused might not have even seen. No evidence he was looking for CP, but it was on the HD so he was a scumbag... rather than someone who got screwed.
So a package can be sent by anyone with a fake name to someone and that creates an event where a warrant can be issued.
I've seen tons of packages get delivered, and not everyone checks the name on the package. UPS drivers rarely announce this package is for so and so, they say I have a package sign here if it needs a signature.
And this is why we need Judges who have some knowledge of the subjects. While each side can put on experts, it seems that Judges go with the offical narrative even as everyone else is staring at them going WTF are you saying you moron.
This is another case where it appears the ends, busting CP weirdos, justified the means, deploying malware - violating rights - lying in court.
Everyone wants those who traffic in CP to end up away from children before bad things happen, but if we keep turning a blind eye to them being screwed over the odds of it happening to a 'Good Person (tm)' tick up to 100%.
The mindset of the moment that seems to have gripped the world... it is a zero sum game. There is only 1 finite pot of money, and if someone else has more they took it from me.
This might be born out of the same insane thinking that record labels always make the same amount of money, because music is eternal. Even when they have great years, they bemoan the drop in 8 track sales. They think someone listening to a stream should pay them as much as someone who bought it on vinyl. They have made their cash from selling physical items, that they can't figure out why people want to pay them less for 1's & 0's that cost them so much less to deliver.
Of course they don't discuss how much of their losses are from investing in snake oil salesmen, who promised they could stop all the piracy and usher in a golden age of profits... and it does nothing but make the labels look more out of touch & stupid. But they keep paying for the snake oil, because this time it is going to work... because if they stop, in their minds, they will have surrendered to the pirates... when reversing the course and embracing new technology & knocking down barriers that make no sense in a digital age would increase profits.
But Google is the whipping boy, it can't be a bunch of old men listening to horror stories late at night cowering under the covers to stay safe from the boogeymen of their own imaginations. It can't be that treating a digital file like a physical object makes no sense to anyone but them.
So the fact that Sam Niel doesn't exist, was still enough to get a warrant to search Phillips Thompson's residence?
Some bad person could have arranged to send him a package to get him into trouble.
The chain of custody of this material was broken, and in the interest of justice it should be suppressed. Someone who was not a sworn government agent opened and tampered with the contents. Perhaps she had an axe to grind with the customer?
Her intentions were made clear when she tampered with something she was told not to. Basing a case off of that evidence shows a bold disregard for the law.
The courts allowing it to stand because the target of an investigation into him only exists because allegedly a 3rd party went to send something to a named 3rd party (they believe doesn't exist) and used that to gain entry into the accused home. We send him the meth so when he got it, we could burst in and arrest him for having meth.
Sure hold it back, that'll be fine. Since you won't be using that spectrum you acquired we can reassign it to some upstart with a system better than yours. I'm sure that a windfall to a competitor who will honor net neutrality will leave them as handicapped as you claim it will leave you so it'll work out as being fair.
I think he is trying to imply that no one is upset anymore so why bring it up... but then there is this DMCA notice all about him, with supporting documents that he know NOTHING about because he is far to busy being super lawyer to have sent such a silly document in an attempt to try and move himself away from such bad search results on the googles.