Comcast User Hit With 112 DMCA Notices in 48 Hours


Recommended Posts

Comcast User Hit With 112 DMCA Notices in 48 Hours
By Andy on October 2, 2015

According to a lawsuit filed in Pennsylvania this week, a Comcast user was sent a staggering 112 DMCA notices in just 48 hours after downloading and sharing a single torrent. The unlucky user was targeted for sharing the discography of Dog Fashion Disco, a long defunct metal band previously known as Hug the Retard.

Every day, DMCA-style notices are sent to regular Internet users who use BitTorrent to share copyrighted material. These notices are delivered to users' Internet service providers who pass them on in the hope that customers correct their behavior.

The most well-known notice system in operation in the United States is the so-called "six strikes" scheme, in which the leading recording labels and movie studios send educational warning notices to presumed pirates. Not surprisingly, six-strikes refers to users receiving a maximum of six notices. However, content providers outside the scheme are not bound by its rules – sometimes to the extreme.

According to a lawsuit filed this week in the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania (pdf), one unlucky Comcast user was subjected not only to a barrage of copyright notices on an unprecedented scale, but during one of the narrowest time frames yet.

The complaint comes from Rotten Records who state that the account holder behind a single Comcast IP address used BitTorrent to share the discography of Dog Fashion Disco, a long-since defunct metal band previously known as Hug the Retard.

"Defendant distributed all of the pieces of the Infringing Files allowing others to assemble them into a playable audio file," Rotten Records' attorney Flynn Wirkus Young explain.

Considering Rotten Records have been working with Rightscorp on other cases this year, it will come as no surprise that the anti-piracy outfit is also involved in this one. And boy have they been busy tracking this particular user. In a single 48 hour period, Rightscorp hammered the Comcast subscriber with more than two DMCA notices every hour over a single torrent.

"Rightscorp sent Defendant 112 notices via Defendant's ISP Comcast from June 15, 2015 to June 17, 2015 demanding that Defendant stop illegally distributing Plaintiff's work," the lawsuit reads.

 

Read Further,
https://torrentfreak.com/comcast-user-hit-with-112-dmca-notices-in-48-hours-151002/

sounds like how assnine disney is and they send these notices to everyone.... all the while they make it hard as ###### to legally watch thier ###### online.... they make services liek MGO and Vudu exempt disney movies from any kind of promo, have a 4 month rent blackout window to where the only option is to purchase for 20 dollars to watch on both services, and they are the most expensive of the titles even compared to MGO's "same day as theaters" releases! I can stream a "same day as theaters" release at the same cost as a 1 year out of theaters disney film!!! I boycott disney and fobid even anyone in my house from accessing any disney related websites and if you stream a disney movie you get your access cut off I hate them so much for that ######.

So the copyright trolls hammer this person for sharing a obscure, defunct band. I guess the record label has to try and recoup their investment into the (failed) band somehow.

The thing I don't get is, in order to "see" the IP of "violators" you must also be in the swarm (downloading/uploading), so the copyright trolls should be charged too IMO.

Your ISP wants your money every month, they don't want to lose that revenue and a customer unless you get as many in a short time as the person in the article.

You really should be using a VPN when using public swarms for sensitive content. That or limit yourself to closed swarms ("private trackers") where cease and desists are not an issue. 

The thing I don't get is, in order to "see" the IP of "violators" you must also be in the swarm (downloading/uploading), so the copyright trolls should be charged too IMO.

They have permission from the owner/rights holder to do this, so no violation is occurring. 

So they legally have permission to share a file illegally, kinda sounds like entrapment.

Well I'm no lawyer, but I don't think entrapment would apply because the downloader is already violating copyright. In this case the owner/rights holder didn't do anything to cause the user to break the law.

So they legally have permission to share a file illegally, kinda sounds like entrapment.

 


entrapment is a practice whereby a law enforcement agent induces a person to commit a criminal offense that the person would have otherwise been unlikely to commit. -- Wikipedia


Not quite, but certainly an interesting way to be looking at it. 

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Hasleo Disk Clone 5.8.2.1 by Razvan Serea Hasleo Disk Clone is a free and all-in-one disk cloning software for Windows 11/10/8/7/Vista and Windows Server that can help you migrate Windows OS to another disk, clone one disk to another disk or clone one partition to another location quickly and efficiently. Completely Free Windows Migration and Disk/Partition Cloning Software Migrate Windows from one disk to another without reinstalling Windows, apps. Clone one disk to another and makes the data on 2 disks are exactly the same. Clone a partition to another location without losing any data. Easily adjust the size and location of the destination partition. Convert MBR to GPT or convert GPT to MBR by cloning. Creation of Windows PE emergency disk. Extremely fast cloning speed and multi-language support. Supported OS: Windows Vista/Server 2008 or later, fully compatible with GPT and UEFI. Hasleo Disk Clone 5.8.2.1 changelog: Fixed an issue that caused disk enumeration to fail Fixed an issue where WinPE created under Windows ARM64 26H1 did not work properly Download: Hasleo Disk Clone 5.8.2.1 | 32.3 MB (Freeware) Link: Hasleo Disk Clone Home Page | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • This got me thinking, would you rather a self driving car prioritise protecting its passengers or everyone else? I'd choose the one that keeps me and my kids safest. At some point, these cars have to make those choices already, don't they? Wonder if we have a way to find out what way they lean.
    • The proportion (or number of iterations) has nothing to with this aspect of Copyright I am describing. In short, it doesn't matter how many times the manager tells you to change something or how. Your work product is always YOURS until and unless you then assign that to the person representing the client/company, usually for financial compensation -- either in salary or as a subcontract work for hire payment. if iterations determined copyright, then businesses would have learned to just keep making changes until they could claim they owned the copyright, without having to compensate the artist for their work. And that would be BAD. The only place where the amount of changes does have a role is in how much does a human modify a previous public domain work (from any source) before it is considered fair use or their own work, etc. For example, if a human makes substantial changes to a public domain (re: AI, by definition) work, then they can then claim that derivative work as their own...but NEVER the original version, of course. That's why anyone can make a movie about Dracula, for example, as long as it is based on the public domain novel, but not if they take new ideas from copyrighted movies made afterwards. As one of the people who personally advised the US Copyright Office on their recent ruling on these very issues, be assured that I specifically used the terminology precisely -- though I made it simple enough for laymen to understand it. If I made this confusing by doing so, I apologize. But, to be clear regarding your assumption that I would agree to your second statement that I quoted above -- the answer is NO. If AI does the work, no matter how much "direction" you give it, it cannot be copyrighted. All AI generated content is in the Public Domain and therefore the copyright cannot be assigned to ANYONE, even you -- until and unless substantial modifications are made to it BY A HUMAN BEING (yourself or a contracted artist/writer/etc.) and then that copyright on the derivative work is legally (in writing) transferred to you. This is a critical distinction. And it is important that people, especially AI sloppers, understand this. For example, YouTube is not paying AI slop generators for the copyright, etc. of their AI slop. What YouTube is doing is sharing AD REVENUE for permission to publish your AI slop. Copyright/ownership/rights never come into it. Importantly, that means that anyone can copy any AI slopware on YouTube, etc. and rehost it anywhere they want, even back on YouTube, and there is nothing legal that YouTube can do about it with regards to copyright protections, ownership, DMCA, etc. Anyone is legally free to use any AI slopware in any way they want. When this ruling was pending, I warned Disney legal of all of this before they did their OpenAI deal -- that it would literally dilute their entire IP portfolio forever. They ignored that warning for the PR and stock bump. But that is why, when the ruling came down last year, Disney quickly extricated themselves from that OpenAI deal, even eating the initial upfront fees -- followed closely by OpenAI ending their entire AI video generating business model. They adjusted their PR release dates to make this less obvious to shareholders, of course. Phew. I hope that this clears up the key distinctions for you and anyone reading. If you have any additional questions or even hypotheticals about AI and Copyright, please feel free to ask.
    • Each of the devices displayed on this page now has a little volume meter next to it to show if there is audio actively playing. About time.
    • Owing to the nature of Windows feature enablement updates, it was distributed over Windows Update services as a complete system upgrade rather than as an ordinary cumulative update
  • Recent Achievements

    • Collaborator
      ryansurfer98 went up a rank
      Collaborator
    • Week One Done
      Eurosoft10 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Eurosoft10 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Year In
      Skeet Campbell earned a badge
      One Year In
    • One Month Later
      Sharbel earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      558
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      188
    3. 3
      Michael Scrip
      78
    4. 4
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      74
    5. 5
      neufuse
      71
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!