Live data from Hacker News

Uploading Pirated Books via BitTorrent Qualifies as Fair Use, Meta Argues

torrentfreak.com

81–90 of 289 posts

Re: Uploading Pirated Books via BitTorrent Qualifies as Fair Use, Meta Argues

#81
post #12
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't believe that no one has ever tried that one before... So do we now roll back all of the previous copyright cases where downloading music with bittorrent has been prosecuted?

From my understanding, Meta's use of the pirated book was accepted as fair use and the plaintiffs admitted to no harm. In the case of pirated music and films, neither of those points are made. Copyright holders assume people who pirate would have bought the content, usually even assuming that one download is one lost sale. And I am not aware of a single case where watching or listening to pirated content was accepted…

The use of the pirated book is a totally separate action than acquiring the pirated book.

Re: Uploading Pirated Books via BitTorrent Qualifies as Fair Use, Meta Argues

#82
post #7

> Anyone who uses BitTorrent to transfer files automatically uploads content to other people, as it is inherent to the protocol. In other words, the uploading wasn’t a choice, it was simply how the technology works. What an argument to make in court. It can be proved false in minutes by the plaintiffs.

This. You can set upload speed to zero, and download entire dataset without uploading anything. Slower but doable.

As far as I know, setting upload speed to zero disables the limit. You can set it to be very low but not zero.

Re: Uploading Pirated Books via BitTorrent Qualifies as Fair Use, Meta Argues

#83
post #7

> Anyone who uses BitTorrent to transfer files automatically uploads content to other people, as it is inherent to the protocol. In other words, the uploading wasn’t a choice, it was simply how the technology works. What an argument to make in court. It can be proved false in minutes by the plaintiffs.

Not exactly automatically. Seeding is opt-out, not opt-in… but it is usually a default that has to actively manually overridden. Most users never touch those settings. The average pirate downloading a torrent is seeding whether they know it or not. The protocol absolutely does not enforce seeding. A client can lie to the tracker, cap upload to 0k. BitTorrent has no mechanism to compel one to share. Leeching a file, d…

seeding is not the only way you actually upload

you're uploading before seeding, and i'm willing to bet Meta weren't seeding but, as they correctly stated in that regard, they're sharing even when they try their best not to because of the way the protocol works as zero-upload is typically impractical for any significant size files

some trackers will additionally penalise you for not sharing file parts, but this depends on the tracker

Re: Uploading Pirated Books via BitTorrent Qualifies as Fair Use, Meta Argues

#84
post #39
post #35

Some of us are old enough to remember when the RIAA sued children for downloading Metallica albums on filesharing networks. They sued for $100,000 per song, an absurd amount when you consider that even stealing a physical album would amount only to around $1 per song. What was bizarre was that courts took the figure seriously, even if they typically settled cases for around $3,000, still around 30x actual damages. Th…

Children can commit crimes too. It's funny, because now in the age of AI, many of the people that support piracy are now trying to stop AI companies from doing the same thing.

Children are afforded more lenience in sane societies (before the law and in social contexts) because they are still developing and not as well socialized/experienced as adults. I assume most pro-piracy people support personal use and not commercial use of content.

Re: Uploading Pirated Books via BitTorrent Qualifies as Fair Use, Meta Argues

#85
post #46
post #2

The world has become so strange. In my pirate youth, I would have never imagined the big companies to argue in courts like this, basically pro piracy. And the activists are now against it, because the big guys are doing it.

If Meta wins this, does it mean that pirating becomes legal again?

Probably only if you are giving "back to Humanity" or something like that? :-D

Re: Uploading Pirated Books via BitTorrent Qualifies as Fair Use, Meta Argues

#87
post #35

Some of us are old enough to remember when the RIAA sued children for downloading Metallica albums on filesharing networks. They sued for $100,000 per song, an absurd amount when you consider that even stealing a physical album would amount only to around $1 per song. What was bizarre was that courts took the figure seriously, even if they typically settled cases for around $3,000, still around 30x actual damages. Th…

You are off a bit on the numbers. First, though, the RIAA suits were not for downloading. The suits were for distribution.

Here is how their enforcement actions generally went.

1. They would initially send a letter asking for around $3 per song that was being shared, threatening to sue if not paid. This typically came to a total in the $2-3k range. There were a few where the initial request was for much more such as when the person was accused of an unusually high volume of intentional distribution. But for the vast majority of people who were running file sharing apps in order to get more music for themselves rather than because they wanted to distribute music it averaged in that $2-3k range.

2. If they could not come to an agreement and actually filed a lawsuit they would pick maybe 10-25 songs out of the list of songs the person was sharing (typically around a thousand) to actually sue over. The range of possible damages in such a suit is $750-30000 per work infringed, with the court (judge and jury) picking the amount [1].

NOTE: it is per "work infringed", not per infringement. The number of infringements will be one of the factors the court will consider when deciding where in that $750-30000 range to go.

3. There would be more settlement offers before the lawsuit actually went to trial. These would almost always be in the $200-300 per song range, which since the lawsuit was only over maybe a dozen or two of the thousand+ songs the person had been sharing usually came out to the same ballpark as the settlement offers before the suit was filed.

Almost everyone settled at that point, because they realized that (1) they had no realistic chance of winning, (2) they had no realistic chance of proving they were were an "innocent infringer", (3) minimal statutory damages then of $750/song x 10-15 songs was more than the settlement offer, and (4) on top of that they would have not only their attorney fees but in copyright suits the loser often has to pay the winner's attorney fees.

4. Less than a dozen cases actually reached trial, and most of those settled during the trial for the same reasons in the above paragraph that most people settled before trial. Those were in the $3-15k range with most being around $5k.

[1] If the defendant can prove they are in "innocent infringer", meaning they didn't know they were infringing and had no reason to know that, then the low end is lowered to $200. If the plaintiff can prove that the infringement was "willful", meaning the defendant knew it was infringement and deliberately did it, the high end is raised to $150k.

Re: Uploading Pirated Books via BitTorrent Qualifies as Fair Use, Meta Argues

#88

Feeling very conflicted right now. On the other hand, it'd be absolutely hilarious if they succeeded with this argument. VPN vendors would not find that as hilarious I bet. And on another the hypocrisy is mindboggling. I guess you can't blame the lawyers from going after every angle, but this is quite creative. But really I do just want to find out if money continues to buy justice. I sincerely hope Facebook loses an…

It's a win-win situation. Either pirates win or Meta loses.

Re: Uploading Pirated Books via BitTorrent Qualifies as Fair Use, Meta Argues

#89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Remember that Metallica band members played an active driving role in those lawsuits against their own underage fans. It wasn't just the RIAA / record company organizations behaving cruelly, it was Metallica themselves. Fuck Metallica.

how they were able to recover from that is beyond me.

They didn't. I haven't bought a Metallica album since the black album. That was a decade earlier, because everything since sucked, but as I got older I thought about maybe expanding my tastes. I avoided Metallica specifically for their disrespect of their fans.

Re: Uploading Pirated Books via BitTorrent Qualifies as Fair Use, Meta Argues

#90
post #50
post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Way to leave out context! By no means were they suing for downloading alone. They were suing for sharing while downloading, and seeding after, and as "early seeders" they helped thousands obtain copies. Right or wrong, it was absolutely not about just downloading. It wasn't about taking one copy. In their eyes, it was about copyng then handing out tens of thousands of copies for free. Again, not saying it was right.…

Did you even read the title of the article? This is exactly what they are claiming is fair use.

They are replying to what a comment said about past file sharing cases.
Post reply on HN