Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CDfreaks)   Not news: MPAA sues man for downloading a movie. News: man decides to fight the MPAA in court. Fark.com: man is millionaire software CEO   (cdfreaks.com) divider line
    More: Hero  
•       •       •

32129 clicks; posted to Main » on 26 Jul 2006 at 9:30 AM (12 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



490 Comments     (+0 »)
 


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2006-07-26 12:46:59 AM  
You know they were trying their damndest to avoid this kind of person.
 
2006-07-26 12:53:12 AM  
<nazareth>Now you're messin' with...</nazareth>
 
2006-07-26 12:56:15 AM  
"Hi. We think you downloaded a movie....you're what? Not a 14 year old? Oh.sh**!"
 
2006-07-26 12:58:37 AM  
"You don't wanna leave? Now you can't leave."
 
2006-07-26 01:07:03 AM  
Further proof that the MPAA is using underhanded methods to get money.
 
2006-07-26 01:07:08 AM  
They'll probably do what they did to that mom who fought back... After dragging her into the legal system for a while, they just suddenly dropped the suit. She got legal fees, but they don't have to stop their shenanigans.
 
2006-07-26 01:09:06 AM  
Well, did he download it or not? The article is surprisingly scarce on that little detail.
 
2006-07-26 01:09:42 AM  
Can we sue the RIAA for the crap they've been releasing the last few years?
 
2006-07-26 01:13:54 AM  
etoof: Can we sue the RIAA for the crap they've been releasing the last few years?

Maybe you could if the RIAA had any freakin' thing to do with releasing music.
 
2006-07-26 01:17:12 AM  
Pocket Ninja: Well, did he download it or not?

According to an article I read earlier today, he says no.
 
2006-07-26 01:19:12 AM  
This would be more inspiring if the movie weren't Meet the Fockers.
 
2006-07-26 01:21:13 AM  
Fnord: According to an article I read earlier today, he says no.

Lots of people say "no" when asked if they committed a crime.

I'm asking if he did it.

If he did, fark him. He's a worthless thief and should be punished regardless of how many millions he has.
 
2006-07-26 01:27:04 AM  
Pocket Ninja: If he did, fark him. He's a worthless thief and should be punished regardless of how many millions he has.

Although, if he owns it already, and is downloading a copy for his PC, is that illegal? He does have a license, and it is for personal use after all.

/Jus' sayin'.
 
2006-07-26 01:27:21 AM  
Logically, Pocket Ninja, since he's a software maker that has millions AND the DVD of said movie on top of that, if he were to have a digital non-DVD copy of it, he would most likely just rip it.

With that, I want to ask a question to someone with better google-ing abilities than I(or if someone knows): Is this the first time someone with above a mil has been targeted by the MPAA?
 
2006-07-26 01:30:35 AM  
Pocket Ninja: I'm asking if he did it.

Who knows?

If he did, fark him.

Yes, but RIAA should still be expected to offer more proof than a printout saying his IP downloaded a file.

Here, look:

Username // Crime
-------------------
Pocket Ninja // Downloaded goat porn from goatporn.com on 3 Nov 2005.

Haha, you're going to jail!
 
2006-07-26 01:35:54 AM  
Fnord: Yes, but RIAA should still be expected to offer more proof than a printout saying his IP downloaded a file.

Sure, they should have more proof. Which is why I was asking for more substance to this story than that ridiculous article.
 
2006-07-26 02:21:20 AM  
Ha ha....You go dude! I guess the MPAA didn't cross-reference his IP with the Grandmother's Registry, the Amish White Pages, or a pre-school yearbook!
 
2006-07-26 02:40:35 AM  
they were suing him for downloading Meet the Fockers over BitTorrent.

Proving once again that money can't buy taste.
 
2006-07-26 09:03:11 AM  
shawn hogan: "i'm not a hero" (click pic for his blog, click i'm not a hero on that page for his comments about the suit)

[image from ly.lygo.com too old to be available]
 
2006-07-26 09:21:17 AM  
Heheheh. Whoopsie. Looks like the vultures bit off more than they can chew, this time.
 
2006-07-26 09:33:13 AM  
All of this will change not a damn thing.
 
2006-07-26 09:34:03 AM  
Was'nt there a case where the RIAAsstards sued a woman, she sued back AND won?

also -

why the fark would a millionare be torrenting anyway?
 
2006-07-26 09:34:08 AM  
The MPAA still has more money and better lawyers than this guy.

I hope he doesn't mind being penniless.
 
2006-07-26 09:34:27 AM  
whether he wins or not, this won't change a thing. the MPAA muppets will probably back down and it will be settled out of court with a non-disclosure agreement. then it will be back business as usual on the internets.
 
2006-07-26 09:35:12 AM  
Go Hogan! Go Hogan! Itsya birfday! Go Hogan!

What's the MPAA gonna do when Shawnamania runs wild on you?!
 
2006-07-26 09:35:13 AM  
How can this cost him $100k+? If he didn't download it, or even if he did but already owns the DVD (and thus the right own a copy), then what's the drawn-out court battle for?
 
2006-07-26 09:35:29 AM  
Although, if he owns it already, and is downloading a copy for his PC, is that illegal? He does have a license, and it is for personal use after all.


Does that still make downloading it legal? Not being sarcastic, just curious. Besides, why can't this assclown just rip the DVD he already has instead of downloading another. Oh yea, $100k is not going to be nearly enough to beat the MPAA.
 
2006-07-26 09:36:29 AM  
Please join me in boycotting Dustin Hoffman movies.
 
2006-07-26 09:36:39 AM  
How can this cost him $100k+? If he didn't download it, or even if he did but already owns the DVD (and thus the right own a copy), then what's the drawn-out court battle for?


Because he's trying to be a badass and make a big deal out of it. I hope he loses his ass.
 
2006-07-26 09:37:12 AM  
the MPAA muppets will probably back down and it will be settled out of court with a non-disclosure agreement.

Not if he doesn't let them settle. They can drop it -- and he can sue. Depends on how far he wants to take it.
 
2006-07-26 09:37:40 AM  
why the fark would a millionare be torrenting anyway?


He must be the cheapest bastard alive.
 
2006-07-26 09:37:49 AM  
"they were suing him for downloading Meet the Fockers over BitTorrent. Hogan was baffled. Not only does he deny the accusation, he says he already owned the film on DVD."

Well, he says he didn't do it and I believe him...

/believes in Santa also..
//Ok, not really..
 
2006-07-26 09:38:14 AM  
Pocket Ninja: Lots of people say "no" when asked if they committed a crime.

I'm asking if he did it.

If he did, fark him. He's a worthless thief and should be punished regardless of how many millions he has.


Even if he owns the DVD? I'd be more sympathetic to the MPAA/RIAA if they provided a way to buy replacement media for movies/music.
 
2006-07-26 09:38:31 AM  
Awesome. What's the fun of making money if you can't spend it?
 
2006-07-26 09:39:47 AM  
brings up a question:

assuming someone has "allegedly" downloaded a song or two, but they already own the CD. Do they own the rights to listen to that song or not?
for that matter, what if the person has bought that song on LP, cassette or 8-track?
 
2006-07-26 09:39:54 AM  
how about when the mpaa catches you downloading a movie, you pay the price of theater admission instead of like $2000?

and if you were gonna get a small popcorn and soda, you can mail the $12.50 to the movie theater?

/always thinkin'
 
2006-07-26 09:40:11 AM  
awachtel

Because he's trying to be a badass and make a big deal out of it. I hope he loses his ass.

Do you work for the RIAA or MPAA by chance? Seems to me that you condone their tactics.
 
2006-07-26 09:40:12 AM  
Wise_Guy: "You don't wanna leave? Now you can't leave."


Incredible movie scene... Nice execution on your part. I give it a 10.
 
2006-07-26 09:40:20 AM  
donutmaker

I will not, but i will support you by boycotting Ben stiller movies. I'll also throw in a jack black, to be safe.


Relative to the article. If he committed a crime, he should be punished. If he didn't, he shouldn't. But doesn't this whole concept seem odd? If I took something of yours without persmisson, would you have me arrested or sue me?
 
2006-07-26 09:40:58 AM  
Wise_Guy: "You don't wanna leave? Now you can't leave."


Golf clap for you sir.
 
2006-07-26 09:41:29 AM  
Boo and Yah! This is what I've been waiting for for years to happen! What cracks me up is that they claim he was downloading Meet the Fockers... What makes me laugh out loud is that he actually admits to OWNING the DVD... Ugh.

God almighty I hope he wipes the floor with them, and that they have to pay for his legal fees, and that this case is covered by all the major news networks and cable outlets.
 
2006-07-26 09:41:48 AM  
Do you work for the RIAA or MPAA by chance? Seems to me that you condone their tactics.

What tactics? Suing people downloading things illegally? If he didnt do it, then nothing should happen; if he did, he needs to STFU and pay the fine.
 
2006-07-26 09:42:37 AM  
This has left several controversies unresolved, including...whether it's possible to definitively tie a person to an IP address in the age of Wi-Fi.

My husband opened his laptop one night in our kitchen to find he was on someone's network. We live in a townhouse so it could have been any of about 20 homes. Although we have high-speed from Verizon, we didn't have a router, so he used their wi-fi for months until one night he booted up and their server was called "NOT FREE ANYMORE."

They could be liable for anything he downloaded at all. I really hope this guy fights tooth & nail, especially because as a computer geek he knows way more about this stuff than the MPAA and their lawyers do.
 
2006-07-26 09:43:00 AM  
Usually people's excuse for illegally downloading movies is that they can't afford to pay for them...what's this guys excuse? Laziness?

WRJ
 
2006-07-26 09:43:04 AM  
If he didn't do it, then sure fight it.

But how can Farkers argue that downloading a movie is not stealing? The studios paid millions of dollars to make the product. Don't they have the right to distribute it as they see fit and prosucute people who steal it?
 
2006-07-26 09:43:24 AM  
Sadly, even if he wins, this won't stop the MPAA. They'll have a record of what -- 25,000 wins to 2 losses? The game still works in their favor, and they will continue to play it.
 
2006-07-26 09:43:30 AM  
Wise_Guy - "You don't wanna leave? Now you can't leave."

Oh, well played. Damn, I haven't seen that movie in ages.
 
2006-07-26 09:43:57 AM  
Release movies worth paying for, and people will pay for them.
 
2006-07-26 09:44:24 AM  
puckhead: assuming someone has "allegedly" downloaded a song or two, but they already own the CD. Do they own the rights to listen to that song or not?
for that matter, what if the person has bought that song on LP, cassette or 8-track?


There have been CDs I downloaded or copied from friends after damaging my own. I certainly didn't do anything "wrong". I have no idea if it was illegal though (and really don't care).
 
2006-07-26 09:45:17 AM  
PUCKHEAD:
"brings up a question:

assuming someone has "allegedly" downloaded a song or two, but they already own the CD. Do they own the rights to listen to that song or not?
for that matter, what if the person has bought that song on LP, cassette or 8-track?"

I think what they claim is that if you already own it and just downlaod it, that's no big deal.. But if you use Bittorrent or something that allows OTHERS to download it from you, then you're distributing. That's a big no-no.

What gets me is the randomness of their accusations... Grandparents without computers getting accused of downloading a gangsta flick or Eminem tracks... They must just go down the phone books and point a finger and then randomly choose what the alleged perp stole.
 
Displayed 50 of 490 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Newest | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter




In Other Media
Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report