Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Stompy
Don't worry about it, if it's even true.
Downloading the item isn't something you'd get in trouble for - it's sharing it.
Besides, just because they claim to sue for $50k doesn't mean you will owe that amount. Most likely it'll get tossed out.
They have to also prove that you actually downloaded it.
If I were you, I'd go out and buy a wireless router. Leave it open and unsecured. Claim it wasn't you, that someone got into your network.
They also have to take your computer and inspect it to prove you downloaded it. IP address alone doesn't prove jack shit. You can't just randomly sue someone for $50k because you feel like it.
If you do all of the above, there's no way they can prove it was you and you have not a single thing to worry about.
There's so many ways to get out of this type of thing  |
All of these suggestions will secure a finding
against you.
Keep in mind, everyone, that this is not a criminal trial. The rules as most people know them do not apply.
First of all, they don't have to "prove" something in the traditional sense. They only have to demonstrate it's more likely than not. That means, they say you did it, have some records indicating your computer was the culprit, and then the onus is on you to demonstrate, with evidence, how your computer wasn't used. How do you propose to do that? It can't just be on your word. You
might be able to argue that someone else spoofed your IP, but you have to demontrate it in a civil court. This isn't about convincing a jury that your explanation is reasonable (like a criminal trial). You would have to actually show some factual basis that your IP was stolen. Something like a police report or an actual paper trail form the network administrators at your ISP (the university; unlikely since they've already indicated you are on your own. You can subpoena records, but you aren't going to find what you are looking for because you know you did it and that someone didn't spoof your IP).
Regardless of whether you can demonstrate with evidence that your computer wasn't used in the transgression, you are tempted to argue you didn't do it. I'm sad to inform you that in a civil trial that doesn't particularly matter. This isn't a "crime." You don't need
mens rea to commit a civil offense. The trial court will determine
liability, not guilt. Think of it this way, if you park your car on a hill, but don't pull the brake hard enough (or worse, you actually do but the brake fails), you are still liable for the damages incurred from your vehicle rolling down the hill and smacking into someone's van. You might be able to sue the manufacturer of the brake and vehicle if you can demonstrate you used it correctly and it failed. BUT, the analogy would be that your argument would hinge on whether your router is inherently insecure and there was no possible way for you to prevent someone else from using it. Even then, I suspect you would be liable for using equipment that was insecure. Going back to the vehicle analogy, you can't just hop out of your car and hope it doesn't roll back because it doesn't have a brake. You have an obligation to not park on a hill. The router: you would have an obligation to not connect it to the internet.
Civil court is where the adults play, the rules are not in your favor by any stretch of the imagination. Law is an interesting phenomenon in that the long-shotters (those who use it everyday and are most experienced with it) have the advantage...knowing the ins and outs of a particular legal argument. How much experience do you have with these laws? These types of arguments?
You should be afraid...be very afraid.