IP-Addresses of First Hurt Locker Victims Revealed

Source

More Source

Some more source!

"Little more than a week ago the makers of The Hurt Locker filed a complaint against the first 5,000 'unidentified' BitTorrent users. Helped by the U.S. Copyright Group (USCG), the film makers are requesting the personal details connected to the IP-addresses that allegedly shared the film on BitTorrent.

The D.C District Court will now have to decide whether or not the ISPs of the alleged infringers will be ordered to hand over the personal information of the users associated with the IP-addresses. If this happens, the customers who are identified will receive a settlement offer of $2,500. Through this scheme, the USCG and Hurt Lockers' makers hope to collect millions of dollars in revenue, beating their box office earnings."

I lol'd. :o

I hope your IP adress is not on there! :P

[Removed lol]

Discuss :P

Thank god for Time Warner/Road Runner

STOP ADMITTING TO PIRATING YOU GET MODDED FOR THAT ****

Lol, who actually uses Bit.Torrent? Silly pirates.

Source

More Source

Some more source!

"Little more than a week ago the makers of The Hurt Locker filed a complaint against the first 5,000 'unidentified' BitTorrent users. Helped by the U.S. Copyright Group (USCG), the film makers are requesting the personal details connected to the IP-addresses that allegedly shared the film on BitTorrent.

The D.C District Court will now have to decide whether or not the ISPs of the alleged infringers will be ordered to hand over the personal information of the users associated with the IP-addresses. If this happens, the customers who are identified will receive a settlement offer of $2,500. Through this scheme, the USCG and Hurt Lockers' makers hope to collect millions of dollars in revenue, beating their box office earnings."

I lol'd. :o

I hope your IP adress is not on there! :P

"Awww man we could have gotten like 32million dollars if it wern't for PIRATES AWW MAN SUE SUE SUE SUE SUE SUE MORE MORE $$$$$$$$$$"

Stupid fat greedy men make me sick

Discuss :P

Thank god for Time Warner/Road Runner

MrLions

You're ignorant. You don't deserve to have media for free when the people providing it to you are spending countless hours and dollars so you will enjoy it.

I thought they stopped doing this a long time ago?

EDIT: What does it mean by BitTorrent users? Just that software is getting caught or something?

"Victims"? Is that what we're calling thieves these days?xaos

Didn't make the list.

That only includes that movie..... right?GHlegend77

Stupid fat greedy men make me sick

Discuss :P

Thank god for Time Warner/Road Runner

[QUOTE="xaos"]"Victims"? Is that what we're calling thieves these days?MrLions

[QUOTE="MrLions"][QUOTE="xaos"]"Victims"? Is that what we're calling thieves these days?xaos

Haha I hope they dont get me!

You don't deserve to have media for free when the people providing it to you are spending countless hours and dollars so you will enjoy it.Elephant_Couple

[QUOTE="MrLions"][QUOTE="xaos"]"Victims"? Is that what we're calling thieves these days?xaos

Personally, although I'm ambivalent on the issue of piracy, I hate the whole "stealing a candy bar" analogy, because if you steal a candy bar then something material is now gone that the store owner can no longer sell to a customer, whereas someone who pirates a movie has not caused material loss and has not prevented you from selling what he stole to someone else. The damage claims in these suits always tend to amount to the assertion that every single person who downloaded a pirated copy of the movie would have paid money for it had they not done so, which has always struck me as a debatable claim at best.

"Victims"? Is that what we're calling thieves these days?xaos

How selfish of them. How could they actually believe that they deserve money for their hard work and time? :x harashawn

They deserve it.....LJS9502_basic

[QUOTE="xaos"][QUOTE="MrLions"] Well, would you charge someone $2500 for stealing a candy bar? stanleycup98

You can charge multiple people with the same murder if it's unclear exactly which one did it. Somewhat similarly, it's unclear exactly how many people each of these thieves shared the movie with. $2500 is going pretty easy I think.

[QUOTE="xaos"][QUOTE="MrLions"] Well, would you charge someone $2500 for stealing a candy bar? GabuEx

Personally, although I'm ambivalent on the issue of piracy, I hate the whole "stealing a candy bar" analogy, because if you steal a candy bar then something material is now gone that you can no longer sell to a customer, whereas someone who pirates a movie has not caused material loss and has not prevented you from selling what he stole to someone else. The damage claims in these suits always tend to amount to the assertion that every single person who downloaded a pirated copy of the movie would have paid money for it had they not done so, which has always struck me as a debatable claim at best.

Personally, although I'm ambivalent on the issue of piracy, I hate the whole "stealing a candy bar" analogy, because if you steal a candy bar then something material is now gone that you can no longer sell to a customer, whereas someone who pirates a movie has not caused material loss and has not prevented you from selling what he stole to someone else. The damage claims in these suits always tend to amount to the assertion that every single person who downloaded a pirated copy of the movie would have paid money for it had they not done so, which has always struck me as a debatable claim at best.

GabuEx

[QUOTE="xaos"][QUOTE="MrLions"] Well, would you charge someone $2500 for stealing a candy bar? GabuEx

Personally, although I'm ambivalent on the issue of piracy, I hate the whole "stealing a candy bar" analogy, because if you steal a candy bar then something material is now gone that you can no longer sell to a customer, whereas someone who pirates a movie has not caused material loss and has not prevented you from selling what he stole to someone else. The damage claims in these suits always tend to amount to the assertion that every single person who downloaded a pirated copy of the movie would have paid money for it had they not done so, which has always struck me as a debatable claim at best.

The material loss is the income they would have made if the thieves had not been able to download the movie for free.

It's not like a IP address reveals identity alone.

Haha, yeah right. Good luck to them with that.

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

[QUOTE="xaos"] No, but I wouldn't fault a shop owner who had hundreds of thousands of candy bars stolen from him for asking for that in punitive damages. At all.Elephant_Couple

Personally, although I'm ambivalent on the issue of piracy, I hate the whole "stealing a candy bar" analogy, because if you steal a candy bar then something material is now gone that you can no longer sell to a customer, whereas someone who pirates a movie has not caused material loss and has not prevented you from selling what he stole to someone else. The damage claims in these suits always tend to amount to the assertion that every single person who downloaded a pirated copy of the movie would have paid money for it had they not done so, which has always struck me as a debatable claim at best.

The material loss is the income they would have made if the thieves had not been able to download the movie for free.

You can't claim losses from people who weren't customers in the first place.

[QUOTE="Elephant_Couple"]

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

Personally, although I'm ambivalent on the issue of piracy, I hate the whole "stealing a candy bar" analogy, because if you steal a candy bar then something material is now gone that you can no longer sell to a customer, whereas someone who pirates a movie has not caused material loss and has not prevented you from selling what he stole to someone else. The damage claims in these suits always tend to amount to the assertion that every single person who downloaded a pirated copy of the movie would have paid money for it had they not done so, which has always struck me as a debatable claim at best.

QuistisTrepe_

The material loss is the income they would have made if the thieves had not been able to download the movie for free.

You can't claim losses from people who weren't customers in the first place.

Are they only getting people who used BitTorrent? What about the other programs like Utorrent or Vuze? They could get more people that wayFrenzyd109

They're basically one in the same. They're going after people who torrented the movie with any program, not just the people who used the Bit Torrent program.

D'awwww the poor thieves :(

I'm actually celebrating a bit inside.

[QUOTE="Elephant_Couple"]

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

Personally, although I'm ambivalent on the issue of piracy, I hate the whole "stealing a candy bar" analogy, because if you steal a candy bar then something material is now gone that you can no longer sell to a customer, whereas someone who pirates a movie has not caused material loss and has not prevented you from selling what he stole to someone else. The damage claims in these suits always tend to amount to the assertion that every single person who downloaded a pirated copy of the movie would have paid money for it had they not done so, which has always struck me as a debatable claim at best.

QuistisTrepe_

The material loss is the income they would have made if the thieves had not been able to download the movie for free.

You can't claim losses from people who weren't customers in the first place.

Why, yes...yes you can. Intellectual property is very explicitly protected by United States law. They're customers who didn't pay for the product they took and used.

[QUOTE="Elephant_Couple"]

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

Personally, although I'm ambivalent on the issue of piracy, I hate the whole "stealing a candy bar" analogy, because if you steal a candy bar then something material is now gone that you can no longer sell to a customer, whereas someone who pirates a movie has not caused material loss and has not prevented you from selling what he stole to someone else. The damage claims in these suits always tend to amount to the assertion that every single person who downloaded a pirated copy of the movie would have paid money for it had they not done so, which has always struck me as a debatable claim at best.

QuistisTrepe_

The material loss is the income they would have made if the thieves had not been able to download the movie for free.

You can't claim losses from people who weren't customers in the first place.

Why should they need to prove they would have paid to watch/listen/play it? They have enjoyed the entertainment which does have a price attached.

LJS9502_basic

Legally speaking, that is irrelevant. What one needs to prove in court is that a person's actions caused you to lose X dollars in revenue, and therefore they should have to reimburse you that amount. The problem that I see is that no one really has any clue whatsoever how much revenue piracy actually deprives distributors of. The assertion is usually leveled that every single person who downloaded a movie/song/whatever would have paid money for it had they not been able to download it, but I really doubt that this is the case, and I really wish serious studies were done to attempt to establish how much distributors actually lose in revenue due to piracy so we can be realistic about it instead of blindly accepting what is obviously the absolute maximum possible loss.

Yeah, I think I am driven more by moral outrage. To me, it is stupefying that I've seen game pirates justify illegally downloading games because "I wouldn't pay for it". I understand that legally, actual damages are generally the primary concern, but I still regard this absolutely as theft and ethically repugnant. Edit: That was why I mentioned "punitive" above xaos

Oh, I'm annoyed too by pirates who try to justify illegally downloading stuff (especially if they try to turn it into some grand moral crusade...). I'm just saying that I'm concerned at the apparent unwillingness to actually seriously consider the question of how much revenue piracy actually deprives distributors of, as it seems to me to be a rather dangerous precedent to just accept at face value the absolute maximum possible loss a distributor could possibly incur just because the distributor says so.

The material loss is the income they would have made if the thieves had not been able to download the movie for free.

Elephant_Couple

Of course, but I am skeptical that we have actually established what that amount is.

Anyway they are going to need hard evidence that these people pirated the movie. An IP address nor evidence of downloading the movie is enough to prove anything. They are going to have to do individual investigations.

[QUOTE="GabuEx"]

[QUOTE="xaos"] No, but I wouldn't fault a shop owner who had hundreds of thousands of candy bars stolen from him for asking for that in punitive damages. At all.Elephant_Couple

Personally, although I'm ambivalent on the issue of piracy, I hate the whole "stealing a candy bar" analogy, because if you steal a candy bar then something material is now gone that you can no longer sell to a customer, whereas someone who pirates a movie has not caused material loss and has not prevented you from selling what he stole to someone else. The damage claims in these suits always tend to amount to the assertion that every single person who downloaded a pirated copy of the movie would have paid money for it had they not done so, which has always struck me as a debatable claim at best.

The material loss is the income they would have made if the thieves had not been able to download the movie for free.

Anyway they are going to need hard evidence that these people pirated the movie.

UbiquitousAeon

The article states that they don't really expect to collect from the people who want to challenge it, they just expect to collect from the people who are willing to settle for $2500...which a lot of people will probably do.

It's a somewhat sleazy move on their part. The letters basically say "settle for $2500 or go to court and risk losing a lot more than that".

[QUOTE="UbiquitousAeon"]

Anyway they are going to need hard evidence that these people pirated the movie.

JML897

The article states that they don't really expect to collect from the people who want to challenge it, they just expect to collect from the people who are willing to settle for $2500...which a lot of people will probably do.

[QUOTE="UbiquitousAeon"]

Anyway they are going to need hard evidence that these people pirated the movie.

JML897

The article states that they don't really expect to collect from the people who want to challenge it, they just expect to collect from the people who are willing to settle for $2500...which a lot of people will probably do.