Print
No, this isn't a rehashing of news from last year. Voltage Pictures, the maker of the Oscar-winning Hurt Locker, has filed a new lawsuit targeting 20,000 more alleged BitTorrent users. The anonymous defendants are accused of pirating the film over the p2p protocol. This brings the total number of users sued by Voltage Pictures to 24,583.
The lawsuit seeks to force ISPs to reveal the personal details of the users behind those 20,000 IP addresses. It is a tactic several studios have used in the last year, and the whole thing was kicked off by Voltage Pictures' original suit. A judge must decide if the ISPs will be forced to hand over the information. Though, we should point out that the judge on the case, Beryl Howell, is a former RIAA lobbyist. If Voltage gets the details on a user, they will send out a settlement offer. The goal is not to go to court, but to intimidate users into paying up.
Several ISPs have worked out deals wherein they will work through a certain number of the subpoenas each month. For some ISPs, that could take years. Comcast has the most horses in the race (over 10,000), but has not worked out an agreement. Verizon for instance has agreed to do 100 per month. It would take them more than five years to get through all 5,239 users. We also wonder how long the ISPs are supposed to be keeping our data anyway. How do you think this is going to pan out?
Comments are closed on this article
Wingzero_x
May 25, 2011 at 8:08am
So what if they own the actual DVD of Hurt Locker? Doesn't the DMCA allow users to have a back-up? Does it specify that the back up has to come from the media the user purchased, or can they obtain backups elsewhere?
Seriously thinking it's about time we start taking the warning labels off everything and let stupidity work itself out of the gene pool.
Sediket
May 26, 2011 at 8:59pm
Well, let's think about that logically... the only logical way to back-up the physical DVD that you own would be to copy it, not download it from another location, call me crazy but that seemed to be a STUPID question.
Cy-Kill
May 25, 2011 at 7:38am
This:
'Though, we should point out that the judge on the case, Beryl Howell, is a former RIAA lobbyist.'
Is definately a conflict of interest, the judge should recluse himself from the case!
schmag
May 25, 2011 at 6:20am
I need to start a business.
I am going to hire nothing but lawyers. and like 1 creative person. then I am going to sue the pants off my target audience.
anyone with some venture capital? it seems to be working out well for businesses.
Sediket
May 26, 2011 at 9:01pm
think about this then: If everyone bought your product like you intended then you would have no one to sue... duh...
ShyLinuxGuy
May 24, 2011 at 7:45pm
Don't they know an IP address doesn't mean much in the context of guilt? Besides, I heard from multiple sources that the movie they are suing for was so bad it wasn't even worth downloading. That must suck for some of these downloaders.
@AntonioGarrison, Yeah, I agree, pretty much everyone, even the lawyers themselves, would fall into this category of being litigated against if every "illegal" download of a wallpaper, ringtone, ebook, app, etc. was pursued. I use Bittorrent occasionally to snag a bunch of wallpapers, so I guess I should be expecting a $2000 settlement letter from the copyright trolls later on down the road.
titan8813
May 24, 2011 at 7:36pm
100 per month=1,200 per year=4.37 years for Verizon to get through each of the 5,239 subpoenas, not "over 5 years" as stated in the article. Still a long time, but I expect excellent math from the MaxPC gang.
AntonioGarrison
May 24, 2011 at 5:43pm
These people are effin ridiculous. Another gimmick to get more money, most likely cause they don't have enough as it is. If all the places went after everyone who downloaded a song, a movie, a game, a wallpaper, a ringtone, an app or just digital media in general, I'm positive everyone who owns a computer would get screwed.
So to Voltage studio's I say this, You're some cheap skate people who want to scrounge every Penny out of anything, anyway you can get it. For this I salute you for being greedy, you rich morons.
RaptorJohnson
May 24, 2011 at 5:39pm
How can this possibly be going on? I checked on a few other websites and, indeed, a former copyright lobbyist seems to be judging this.
I know that the people who are getting sued are most likely guilty, but still. This type of thing is unsettling.
CaptainFabulous
May 24, 2011 at 4:02pm
Courts have been smacking down these John Doe extortion suits left and right. I really doubt this is going to get very far despite the likely sympathy of the judge.
TimDawg
May 24, 2011 at 4:54pm
Not with this judge. Former RIAA lobbyist?? Come on, this is going all the way.
nsvander
May 24, 2011 at 3:55pm
What a waste of resources, so 25K people downloaded your movie, you are now wasting way more then the $20 per copy that would it would have cost to buy the movie with all this crap. By the time all this is over it will cost us tax payers 100x the $20 in court and other fees.
TimDawg
May 24, 2011 at 4:53pm
No it actually works out heavily in their favor. If they can extort $2500 (the going rate these days) out of those 25,000 people they'll pull in $62MM. Figure some of those won't be able to pay so you knock off 20% leaving you with $50MM then the greedy lawyer's get their cut and the company is left with $33MM which is more than what they earned originally (or so I've been told). Any way you look at it, this is a good racket for them. They should be prosecuted under R.I.C.O. This is extortion. The "evidence" they use to prosecute these people is far from solid and would hardly stand up to any real scrutiny but the victims here aren’t knowledgeable in this regard. Fact is, they'll scare the pants off these 25,000 victims who will do what they can to scrounge up $2500 and pay off the extortion rather than try to go to trial and fight it which would likely cost them much more in lawyer's fees alone. It's a lose - lose for the people here.
Fecal Face
May 24, 2011 at 3:21pm
Hey Voltage Pictures, just finished torrenting Hurt Locker
Come at me bro(s).
whathuhitwasntme
May 24, 2011 at 3:17pm
wouldnt the statute of limitations apply after a few YEARS? Will be interesting to see how sincere they are about agressively going after people that probably don't have any money to take in the first place
