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

    • In addition to the "sidebar app list" and "Collections" features, Microsoft will also deprecate the "Drop" feature. Before you publish this news and credit another site, here is the original source: https://x.com/i/status/2067838711870439583 .
    • Looks like the 7.1 is fake effects, can it at least do real 5.1? It says 'virtual 7.1' in all descriptions.
    • You can't, if you didn't notice, it doesn't support surround at all, it's right in the spec list.
    • Hi — I’m always interested in soundcards. Like displays, I just want to know I’m getting as much clean “sonic juice” into my brain as possible as the years take their toll. I’m not entirely sure what to take away from this review, though. It doesn’t really tell me whether the AE‑X is a good product or who it’s actually for. Most of what I’m getting is: there’s a driver to install, here’s what it looks like, and here’s what’s in the box. There’s a lot of emphasis on the SPDIF input. When you mention not needing to switch headphones between console and PC — does that mean the PC has to be powered on just to pass audio through? That seems like a fairly big waste of energy. Is this more something a streamer would use alongside a capture card? How are you testing the sound? (Also, you might want to clarify that you’re using the headphones in wired mode when you mention they’re wireless.) You mention the lack of EMI shielding — how much real‑world difference does that make compared with typical motherboard audio? On multi‑channel: what exactly isn’t supported? Does this mean Windows spatial audio (Dolby Atmos for Headphones, DTS Headphone:X, etc.) won’t work, or just that the card itself doesn’t decode surround formats? And are there any true multi‑driver “surround” headphones left that would even use that? You also highlight support for high‑impedance headphones — but what does that translate to in practice? How does it compare to driving the same headphones from a normal device, and does it make any difference for everyday, lower‑impedance models? In short, who is this card actually targeted at?
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      Almohandis earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Dedicated
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      DrWankel earned a badge
      First Post
    • Reacting Well
      DrWankel earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • Week One Done
      Supreme Spray LV earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      504
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      177
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      89
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      76
    5. 5
      Michael Scrip
      74
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!