Court quashes subpoena for names of users who talked torrenting in 2011 thread.

Reddit beats film industry, won’t have to identify users who admitted torrenting::Court quashes subpoena for names of users who talked torrenting in 2011 thread.

  • @Takumidesh@lemmy.worldEnglish
    -6•11 months ago

    It’s actually more like walking into a gun shop, telling the owner you plan on committing murder with the gun they sell you, and he continues to sell it to you.

    The key difference being that the provider knew that your intention was illegal, and they continued to allow it to happen.

    The ethics of this are debatable of course, but in general, it seems that facilitating a crime is generally seen by most governments as ‘aiding and abbetting’ and is considered a crime itself.

    • @Boinketh@lemm.eeEnglish
      7•11 months ago

      You don’t tell your ISP that you want to do something illegal. Your computer tells your ISP’s computers to connect it to an IP address. If the ISP checks on your activity, they might see that you’re torrenting things. Should the postal service also crack open all of your packages to see what’s inside, lest they be held accountable for what you’re shipping or receiving?

      Torrenting is not inherently illegal. You can torrent something that isn’t copyrighted if you really want to. The ISP does not know for sure whether or not you’re doing something illegal unless you’re using unencrypted communication like a dumbass.

      If you own a bar that the mafia sometimes uses as a meeting place without your explicit knowledge, did you facilitate their crimes? If so, how? If not, why should ISPs be treated any differently?

      Holding ISPs accountable for piracy opens them up to being held accountable for other crimes committed by their users. In the famous Dominion v. Fox case in the US, should the ISPs that served Fox’s website or the cable companies that enabled their show to be sent to viewers be held accountable for Fox’s defamatory statements?