Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Piracy Your Rights Online

Filmmakers Request Identities of Reddit Users To Aid Piracy Lawsuit (torrentfreak.com) 41

Posted by msmash from the how-about-that dept.
An anonymous reader writes: Filmmakers have obtained a subpoena to reveal the identities of Redditors who commented on piracy-related topics. The comments can provide relevant evidence in support of a repeat infringer lawsuit against ISP RCN, the companies argue. Reddit disagrees and frames the effort as a fishing expedition that is at odds with the right to anonymous speech.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Filmmakers Request Identities of Reddit Users To Aid Piracy Lawsuit More

Filmmakers Request Identities of Reddit Users To Aid Piracy Lawsuit

Comments Filter:

  • Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Monday February 20, 2023 @02:08PM (#63309065)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • Re:If there's law enforcement involved .... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by saloomy ( 2817221 ) on Monday February 20, 2023 @02:14PM (#63309081)
      No. The first amendment precludes the government from stopping you from performing speech. It does not preclude a private entity from suing you for said speech in civil court. The government is compelling Reddit to identify the users. Arguably, that might be a violation of Reddit's first amendment rights, but Reddit being a corporation, agrees to certain conditions in order to be granted a business license. So, it is probably fine.

      • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

        by account_deleted ( 4530225 )
        Comment removed based on user account deletion

      • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

        by Berkyjay ( 1225604 )

        Yeah, people seem to either forget or are unaware that we have no explicit right to privacy in the US constitution. Gilbert v. Minnesota set a precedent of the first amendment protecting privacy of the home. But I'm not sure I want to rely on precedent in today's Federal courts.

        • Why do you think you have a right to privacy when the EULA of the service you are using reserves the right to capture your requests to that service? You effectively give up some of your rights to use the service. Besides, right to privacy from the government maybe. But right to privacy from a party you actively engage with voluntarily under the terms of a voluntary license agreement? Really?

          • Why do you think you have a right to privacy

            That's not what I said at all. I even said so in my first sentence. But then I stated facts about how we do have privacy rights via a SCOTUS court ruling, which established a precedent that interprets the 1st amendment as providing privacy rights in the home. So if you are someone who believes that precedent would hold up to court challenges in 2023, then the Reddit users would indeed have protections of the 1st amendment against a court ordered release of their identities.

            • Thatâ(TM)s not a right to privacy, it is a right to free speech. The first amendment is absolute, the court merely ruled that the government cannot police your speech even if it is in your home.

              An absolute right to privacy would be very dangerous, it would allow for murder in the privacy of your own home or wherever you happen to be that you can reasonably consider private.

              • I already said that there is no explicit right to privacy in the constitution. But the courts have established an implicit right to privacy within the constitution.

                https://www.mtsu.edu/first-ame... [mtsu.edu]

                This isn't a simple case of "It's not explicitly stated so it doesn't exist". There IS precedent.....as I said.

                • Re: (Score:2)

                  by guruevi ( 827432 )

                  All that was shot down last year. Perhaps you may have heard, the constitution does not protect privacy, it protects the things you need to obtain privacy (speech, guns, prevent government intrusions etc)

      • " It does not preclude a private entity from suing you for said speech in civil court. "

        See the supreme court ruling Hustler Magazine v. Falwell

  • Does Reddit Even Have Anyone's Identity? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by beforewisdom ( 729725 ) on Monday February 20, 2023 @02:51PM (#63309183)
    Reddit has the email addresses, IP addresses, and browser fingerprints of their users. Is that enough for investigators to come up with the real identities of users? I'm guessing the answer is "yes".

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      browsers can fake the fingerprint and an IP address is not personal info (doesn't say who used it)

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by EvilSS ( 557649 )
      You can at least get the home address and ISP billing info from the IP. Provided the user didn't use a VPN 100% of the time they logged into reddit, and one that actually (vs saying they don't) doesn't log anything, then they can use the IP to compel (via a court order) the ISP to give them the customer account info associated with the account that was using that IP at the time they logged into reddit. We know their ISP keeps those logs as the user already said they received DMCA notices sent to them via th
    • The bigger question is "can the court compel reddit to spend its own money to use that info to identify users"?

      My half informed guess is "no". Compel them to turn over the identifying info, almost certainly. But using it would be up to the plaintiff. Further, as a half informed guess, the reasoning behind the request seems shaky at best. There does not seem to be any real evidence commenters could provide in this case.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

        The bigger question is "can the court compel reddit to spend its own money to use that info to identify users"?

        My half informed guess is "no". Compel them to turn over the identifying info, almost certainly. But using it would be up to the plaintiff. Further, as a half informed guess, the reasoning behind the request seems shaky at best. There does not seem to be any real evidence commenters could provide in this case.

        Well, at the very least, Reddit would have to send a lawyer to the court to say why they c

  • Clyde Stale, Anna Logwatch and Anna Littlical are the usual suspects.

    Hopefully they used a VPN.

  • These evil, evil copyright violators might have bought mediocre coffee to go - why not get all customer data from Starbucks, while you are at it?

    Also, Why not get a whole bunch of pirate themed sock puppet accounts that just comment on threads like that in the future with âoebestest download ever!!! I will upload 4eva!!â.

    • Also, Why not get a whole bunch of pirate themed sock puppet accounts that just comment on threads like that in the future with "bestest download ever!!! I will upload 4eva!!".

      I'm all for a poison the well approach. Everybody needs to say that they've received multiple DMCA notices from their ISPs. Personally, I like to print 'em out on 24k gold leaf (as a proper pirate should) and put them on the windshields of cars at the local Walmart, but I realize everyone has their own budget.

  • A subpoena (Score:4, Insightful)

    by 93 Escort Wagon ( 326346 ) on Monday February 20, 2023 @03:32PM (#63309319)

    Is not a "request".

  • Rules 1 and 2 people (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    This is why you don't talk about fight club!

  • Think it has a lot to do with, or this is just one of the victims of this.

    She was claiming to destroy that damn Denuvo DRM in 10 days, and since then all her crap and anything related to it has been banded/deleted/etc.

    DRM and our current copyright laws need to die

Slashdot Top Deals

Don't tell me how hard you work. Tell me how much you get done. -- James J. Ling

Close