Any lawyers out there?

B

brykster

#1
#1
I received a letter from my Internet service provider with an attached order compelling them to release information to CP Productions, a company that produces an Internet pornography paysite. Apparently, they got my IP while I was downloading some of their content using a bit torrent. The letter says I have until this Monday to provide my Internet service provider with a motion to quash or they will have to produce "certain records in its possession relating to the services you receive from" the Internet service provider. Any advice here?

I did an Internet search of the case and apparently there have been several of these filed recently. One website indicates that once the company gets your personal information, they send you a letter with an offer to settle out of court for a few thousand dollars per film. Otherwise,they threaten to make public your viewing habits or pursue other legal remedies for far greater sums of money.

For anyone particularly motivated, the caption of the case is

"CP Productions, Inc v. Does 1-300" The law firm representing the plaintiff is the

Steele Law Firm, LLC out of Chicago Illinois.

I'm sure this is something that can affect several users of this forum and is of interest to anyone using bit torrents.

Thanks in advance for any assistance.
 
W

Waru

#2
#2
Whatever you do....

DO NOT COMPLY with any of those requests. Those little shysters are trying to scare you into volunteering information they have no right to. DO NOT REPLY, and if you do...tell 'em to go fuck themselves!!
 
billyS

billyS

Reign of Terror
#3
#3
What is a bit torrent and why are they against you using it? Is it because you are 'stealing' from them?
I would think your IP provider would automatically protect you.
 
B

brykster

#4
#4
Hey Billy,

a torrent is a peer to peer file sharing instrument. Technically, it is stealing. However, there is no way to know something is copywritten until after it is downloaded and with porn, there is so much amateur content out there that it is plausible to think the content might not be registered.

as for the isp, they were court ordered to release the info and Cablevision has shown themselves in the past to have no reservations when it comes to selling out their clients.
 
J

justme

homo economicus
#5
#5
IANAL (of course)

You might want to contact the EFF for advice, but you should probably start reserving some money for associated expenses...
 
Last edited:
H

h4c

#6
#6
brykster said:
I received a letter from my Internet service provider with an attached order compelling them to release information to CP Productions, a company that produces an Internet pornography paysite. Apparently, they got my IP while I was downloading some of their content using a bit torrent. The letter says I have until this Monday to provide my Internet service provider with a motion to quash or they will have to produce "certain records in its possession relating to the services you receive from" the Internet service provider. Any advice here?

I did an Internet search of the case and apparently there have been several of these filed recently. One website indicates that once the company gets your personal information, they send you a letter with an offer to settle out of court for a few thousand dollars per film. Otherwise,they threaten to make public your viewing habits or pursue other legal remedies for far greater sums of money.

For anyone particularly motivated, the caption of the case is

"CP Productions, Inc v. Does 1-300" The law firm representing the plaintiff is the

Steele Law Firm, LLC out of Chicago Illinois.

I'm sure this is something that can affect several users of this forum and is of interest to anyone using bit torrents.

Thanks in advance for any assistance.
Click to expand...
I'm not a lawyer and dont pretend to even want to be one, but you should never ignore any legalese papers you get (as tempting as it may be)

Go do some research and get a lawyer. Not sure how they could embarass you, but if they get a judgement against you, its very enforceable.
 
Last edited:
paulbunyon

paulbunyon

#7
#7
Bryk its easy for me to say but I kind of agree with waru that they are just trying to scare you into making some sort of a settlement. I mean by "making your viewing habits public" what the hell are they going to do, run a commercial with your name on the Super Bowl or do an ad in a major newspaper. I'd bet highly against that, dont fall for it.

(But still do as much research as possible, with your case I keep thinking of those people prosecuted for music file-sharing but have never heard of it with porn.)
 
fairemily

fairemily

#8
#8
paulbunyon said:
Bryk its easy for me to say but I kind of agree with waru that they are just trying to scare you into making some sort of a settlement. I mean by "making your viewing habits public" what the hell are they going to do, run a commercial with your name on the Super Bowl or do an ad in a major newspaper. I'd bet highly against that, dont fall for it.

(But still do as much research as possible, with your case I keep thinking of those people prosecuted for music file-sharing but have never heard of it with porn.)
Click to expand...
Exactly, what are they going to do and if they actually did expose that you view pornography who out there would care.
 
fairemily

fairemily

#10
#10
whereitat said:
I don't know what his profession is, but depending on what he does for a living could make people care alot.
Click to expand...
I suppose but how will they prove it. He could say his computer and credit cards were stolen or hacked to frame him in an extortion attempt. Unless they have hard evidence he actually did view these sites it's all speculation. We live in an age where it's all about what you can prove without reasonable doubt.
 
Last edited:
J

justlooking

#11
#11
I'd say it's just the opposite, Emily. I'd say we live in an age where information diffusion is so fast and widespread that people can say things about you that could have an effect before you can even try to disprove it.

There's no "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard to gossip and rumors. People can believe whatever they want to believe -- and they can act on it. Nobody has to "prove" anything.

Of course, in this case, there's the inconvenient fact that this would be the truth. Sure, brykster could deny it -- but it's still true. You seem to think that people are stupid: that you could say any lie you want, and they'll believe it. My experience with juries has been the opposite.
 
Last edited:
J

justlooking

#12
#12
To brykster -- it sounds to me like they're trying to blackmail people into settlements, too. You're sort of damned if you do and damned if you don't, in that if you make a motion to quash you'll go public yourself, thus creating the very publicity you're trying to avoid. I'll bet that if you sit back and do nothing, nothing will happen. But it depends on what your risk tolerance is.
 
F

fortydog

#13
#13
If they go public and intentionally defame you personally (IANAL), couldn't you turn the tables. How would they prove that you with out a doubt personally downloaded whatever it is they are talking about. An open access point on your network or a hacker could set it up to look like you but in fact isn't.

I would ignore the request.
 
Last edited:
fairemily

fairemily

#14
#14
justlooking said:
I'd say it's just the opposite, Emily. I'd say we live in an age where information diffusion is so fast and widespread that people can say things about you that could have an effect before you can even try to disprove it.

There's no "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard to gossip and rumors. People can believe whatever they want to believe -- and they can act on it. Nobody has to "prove" anything.

Of course, in this case, there's the inconvenient fact that this would be the truth. Sure, brykster could deny it -- but it's still true. You seem to think that people are stupid: that you could say any lie you want, and they'll believe it. My experience with juries has been the opposite.
Click to expand...
I don't think people are stupid but I think the law does not always favor the just. I have myself been in situations where I was truthful and others lie and they were the ones believed and it taught me a lesson to not be so fucking honest all the time. If you are being accused without legitimate merit and ignoring does not work you will have to fight for your rights. I don't condone lying if you are guilty but if you are being put in some ridiculous lawsuit so a scam artist can make easy money then get yourself out of it by any means possible. We live in a world where people are getting desperate and being honest and upright is noble but will not save your ass.

In most laws you need hard evidence and eyewitness testimonies. I will give you an example. There was a cat who lived in a store I passed everyday for years. One day the store was shut down and the cat was in the lot next door. I knew they threw her out and tried to get charges pressed against them. I was told unless I actually witnessed them throwing her out I had no proof. I took her in and found her a home but that asshole got away with it because there were no eye witnesses and I would not lie. I will give you another example, this nut job attacked me in the hallway of my building and when I called the cops he denied it. I was told unless I has a eye witness of the assault I could not press charges. The law is not always fair to the honest and it is mostly what you can prove and not what really happened.
 
Last edited:
J

justlooking

#15
#15
But Emily, this has nothing to do with the law.

They are threatening to publicize (somehow) the fact that brykster downloaded a porn torrent. There's no burden of proof there: they just have to (somehow) publicize it. The damage is done. Any attempt to deny it will only give their assertion further publicity.

Do I believe they will? No. But as I said, it's a question of how much risk brykster is willing to incur.
 
J

justme

homo economicus
#16
#16
brykster said:
Technically, it is stealing. However, there is no way to know something is copywritten until after it is downloaded and with porn, there is so much amateur content out there that it is plausible to think the content might not be registered.
Click to expand...
You're attempting to make a legal argument in your own head in order to assuage your own fears. Very few people have gone the distance with these cases, but those that do don't succeed 100% of the time. Many of the failures have what they thought was a bulletproof defense. The costs involved, fines and legal fees, are potentially ruinous if you aren't a millionaire.

You really should contact the Electronic Freedom Foundation. They likely can refer you to a lawyer who has expertise in precisely this kind of suit.

You need to act immediately.
 
fairemily

fairemily

#17
#17
justlooking said:
But Emily, this has nothing to do with the law.

They are threatening to publicize (somehow) the fact that brykster downloaded a porn torrent. There's no burden of proof there: they just have to (somehow) publicize it. The damage is done. Any attempt to deny it will only give their assertion further publicity.

Do I believe they will? No. But as I said, it's a question of how much risk brykster is willing to incur.
Click to expand...
Did I misread but was the letter not from a Law Firm in Chicago?
 
J

justme

homo economicus
#18
#18
justlooking said:
But Emily, this has nothing to do with the law.

They are threatening to publicize (somehow) the fact that brykster downloaded a porn torrent. There's no burden of proof there: they just have to (somehow) publicize it. The damage is done. Any attempt to deny it will only give their assertion further publicity.

Do I believe they will? No. But as I said, it's a question of how much risk brykster is willing to incur.
Click to expand...
I really hope that the shame of being exposed as a, gasp, porn watcher isn't the first concern that brykster has right now.

The fines for downloading copyrighted material are terrible and multiply with the number of files downloaded.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitol_v._Thomas

$2 million for 24 songs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top