View Single Post
Old 18-10-2007, 18:31   #26
Mr Angry
Inactive
 
Mr Angry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Belfast
Posts: 4,785
Mr Angry has a pair of shiny starsMr Angry has a pair of shiny starsMr Angry has a pair of shiny starsMr Angry has a pair of shiny stars
Mr Angry has a pair of shiny starsMr Angry has a pair of shiny starsMr Angry has a pair of shiny starsMr Angry has a pair of shiny starsMr Angry has a pair of shiny starsMr Angry has a pair of shiny stars
Re: RIAA targets Usenet/Newsgroup Provider

Juror Michael Hegg stated "The jury was convinced that Thomas was a pirate after hearing evidence that the Kazaa account RIAA investigators were monitoring matched Thomas' internet protocol and modem addresses."

It's a good thing cloning modems is impossible, or something.

---------- Post added at 19:31 ---------- Previous post was at 19:23 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by danielf View Post
Perhaps there was no evidence of her sharing the files?
If there were no evidence of her sharing the files then they would not have been submitted as such.

Quote:
Originally Posted by danielf View Post
I would presume the files need to be downloaded by the person filing the claim in order to prove they were distributed.
No, "Making available" is sufficient. The actual act of distribution is largely irrelevant. Think of it as "intent to supply" - it does not actually have to take place to be an offence.

Quote:
Originally Posted by danielf View Post
I can create an mp3 of white noise and put it on p2p naming it after a popular song by a popular band. I wouldn't be breaking any laws in doing so.
Actually, you would.
Mr Angry is offline   Reply With Quote