AfterDawn: Tech news

20,000 sued for alleged illegal movie downloading

Written by Andre Yoskowitz (Google+) @ 01 Apr 2010 22:59 User comments (15)

20,000 sued for alleged illegal movie downloading The Hollywood Reporter is saying today that over 20,000 individuals have been sued for alleged illegal downloading of movies by the under-the-radar US Copyright Group, a firm based in the nation's capital.
Making the suits different from those in the past is that these suits are over small independent films, for example the films "Steam Experiment," "Far Cry," "Uncross the Stars," "Gray Man" and "Call of the Wild 3D."

All of the users were "caught" downloading the films from torrent trackers.

The Group says there are up to 30,000 more suits coming, for five different films.

The users were caught thanks to new German technology dubbed Guardaley IT, which "allows for real-time monitoring of movie downloads on torrents." The software captures IP addresses when a user begins downloading, and then back checks the files to make sure it is the correct copyright protected movie.

We will certainly keep you updated.

More news

Previous Next

Related news

 

15 user comments

11.4.2010 23:26

isn't that the same software that group of cronies lawers in the UK used and wrongfully threaten a bunch of people of sharing gay porn.

23.4.2010 19:49
llongtheD
Inactive

The only viewer ship these films would have probably had were through the torrents. Another crooked firm conducting shady business practices through corporate passed laws.

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 03 Apr 2010 @ 19:52

39.4.2010 21:27

Downloading or uploading, i.e. continuing to share the movies after they had the whole thing, aka seeding???

I would love to know, because AFAIK noone has ever been sued for downloading before......

411.4.2010 22:56

OK, I guess I'll talk to myself. All other references to the original THR article seem to include the idea from above that "The software captures IP addresses when a user begins downloading". I would LOVE to hear this explained in more detail!

The user is downloading, not uploading.
The user hasn't completed downloading.
To me, this is like buying a pirate video from some guy off the street, and being sued at a point before I've actually received the video into my hands: I don't have the item 100% in my possession, I am not selling it or making any profit, and since I don't own the movie (not 100% of it yet anyway), I can't watch it and see the 'No unauthorized reproduction etc. etc.' message at the end of it, so what crime can I be accused of????

512.4.2010 2:24

Yeah. We need more info please.

612.4.2010 9:01

...oh, and I've been to USCG's website and - guess what - they don't explain it either. Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?

712.4.2010 14:58

Bueller? Bueller? Has anyone seen Bueller?

812.4.2010 15:13

OK, AfterDawnies, just in case you hadn't realised, this is a shout out to you. You've posted a news story that makes about as much sense as a chocolate fireguard and we're asking you to step in and use your technical expertise to shed some light.

912.4.2010 17:03
Stynkfysh
Unverified new user

Originally posted by simonf444:
Downloading or uploading, i.e. continuing to share the movies after they had the whole thing, aka seeding???

I would love to know, because AFAIK noone has ever been sued for downloading before......
Funny you should say that... I have noticed that throughout the history of the lawsuits the headlines and article have frequently emphasized that the downloaders are being sued but really it is the sharers/uploaders. I believe that many of the articles are viral-intended press releases from the entertainment companies to scare downloaders.

1012.4.2010 18:32

Originally posted by Stynkfysh:
Originally posted by simonf444:
Downloading or uploading, i.e. continuing to share the movies after they had the whole thing, aka seeding???

I would love to know, because AFAIK noone has ever been sued for downloading before......
Funny you should say that... I have noticed that throughout the history of the lawsuits the headlines and article have frequently emphasized that the downloaders are being sued but really it is the sharers/uploaders. I believe that many of the articles are viral-intended press releases from the entertainment companies to scare downloaders.
Yep.

1113.4.2010 11:26

Want to see how the movie industry really works...? Go to

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article...m-credit-abuse-

and see how the poor, abused movie industry really operates...

1216.4.2010 11:15

TechDirt link actually has the original documentation from this case and downloaders ARE being sued and treated as uploaders on the (IMHO spurious) understanding of how BitTorrent works. To me, this makes this a landmark development in the world of downloading, on a par with the first lawsuits against Napster users many years ago.

So why is this story still buried in a few news sites and not drawing more attention? Is everyone asleep? or too busy watching pirated movies?

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 16 Apr 2010 @ 11:17

1316.10.2010 11:56

I got this letter in the mail from cable vision now my girls aunt is flipping out saying there gonna terminate the cable and she has to write a letter of explanation...... wtf. no one seems to give me the right info, can i still download movies and say f*ck you to the cable company.

145.11.2010 14:06

There is a lot of talk about people downloading and sharing through P2P networks or torrent downloaders (seeding/leeching) etc...Has there ever been a case of somebody being sued for downloading movies from sites like MegaUpload, FileDump, etc...?
As far as I can tell, the only way for these people to track, catch, sue, fine, etc..is to track them through the actual file sharing networks (P2P & Torrents) and that a direct download saved to the hard drive is almost never talked about.

If this is the case, is it because its almost impossible to track heavy offenders that download direct and don't share or because the settlements for these would be way lower due to the nature of infringement(i.e. Thousands of dollars for downloading and sharing a movie, but they could really only argue the cost of a DVD for just downloading it)

155.11.2010 14:10

Originally posted by slimjim27:
I got this letter in the mail from cable vision now my girls aunt is flipping out saying there gonna terminate the cable and she has to write a letter of explanation...... wtf. no one seems to give me the right info, can i still download movies and say f*ck you to the cable company.
I receieved similar letters when I had a roommate that was downloading tagged torrents that originated with Pirate Bay. Just don't download torrents or use P2P networks to download movies because these are regularly tracked.

Comments have been disabled for this article.

News archive