nsane.forums Posted September 27, 2012 Share Posted September 27, 2012 Hoping to curb the ever-increasing piracy figures in Portugal, local anti-piracy outfit ACAPOR reported the IP-addresses of 2,000 alleged file-sharers to the Attorney General last year. This week the Portuguese prosecutor came back with a ruling and decided not to go after the individuals connected to the IP-addresses. According to the prosecutor it is not against the law to share copyrighted works for personal use, and an IP-address is not enough evidence to identify a person. Wearing T-shirts with the slogan “Piracy is Illegal”, the movie industry sponsored anti-piracy group ACAPOR delivered several boxes full of IP-addresses of alleged ‘illegal’ file-sharers to the Attorney General’s Office last year. The “evidence” was handed over in two batches and the group demanded the authorities act against 2,000 alleged pirates. “We are doing anything we can to alert the government to the very serious situation in the entertainment industry,” ACAPOR commented at the time, adding that “1000 complaints a month should be enough to embarrass the judiciary system.” However, a year later it turns out that ACAPOR’s actions have backfired and the anti-piracy group is now facing the embarrassment. ACAPOR delivering the complaints The Department of Investigation and Penal Action (DIAP) looked into the complaints and the prosecutor came back with his order this week. Contrary to what the anti-piracy group had hoped for, the 2,000 IP-addresses will not be taken to court. Worse for ACAPOR, the prosecutor goes even further by ruling that file-sharing for personal use is not against the law. “From a legal point of view, while taking into account that users are both uploaders and downloaders in these file-sharing networks, we see this conduct as lawful, even when it’s considered that the users continue to share once the download is finished.” The prosecutor adds that the right to education, culture, and freedom of expression on the Internet should not be restricted in cases where the copyright infringements are clearly non-commercial. In addition, the order notes that an IP-address is not a person. The ruling explains that the person connected to the IP-address “is not necessarily the user at the moment the infringement takes place, or the user that makes available the copyrighted work, but rather the individual who has the service registered in his name, independent of whether this person using it or not” This means that the account holders connected to these 2,000 IPs are not necessarily all copyright infringers, similar to orders we’ve seen in the United States previously. Finally, the prosecutor ruled that even if file-sharing for personal use would be seen as illegal, the artists themselves should explicitly declare that there are not authorizing copying for personal use. ACAPOR boss Nuno Pereira is disappointed with the decision and he accuses the prosecutor of dropping the case because it’s the easy way out. “Personally I think the prosecutors just found a way to adapt the law to their interest – and their interest is not having to send 2,000 letters, hear 2,000 people and investigate 2,000 computers,” Pereira says. Another way to frame it is that the prosecutor adapted the law in the interest of the public at large, which is generally speaking not a bad idea. While the decision is hopeful for Portuguese file-sharers, it is still a matter of how the law is interpreted. For now, however, it is save to assume that Portugal is spared from the mass-BitTorrent lawsuits we’ve seen in the United States, Germany and the UK. View: Original Article Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ganxxta Posted September 27, 2012 Share Posted September 27, 2012 Haha :troll: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myidisbb Posted September 27, 2012 Share Posted September 27, 2012 finaly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
House_maniac Posted September 28, 2012 Share Posted September 28, 2012 this sound like great news :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted September 28, 2012 Share Posted September 28, 2012 DNS addresses / ipv4 addresses may be an idea? Or is that unreliable as it's local?I don't really get why they make sooo much effort over a minor offence it' kinda depressing :/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myidisbb Posted September 28, 2012 Share Posted September 28, 2012 DNS addresses / ipv4 addresses may be an idea? Or is that unreliable as it's local? I don't really get why they make sooo much effort over a minor offence it' kinda depressing :/ to help you understand. you have to see that for over 100+ years gogin back to the british version of the usa congress they argue and this one man sit the standard that fair use of a copyrighted material would make piratecy less likely. which it did. it was the world standard. then an evil leftwing communist called walt disney had been sued for copying a mouse. he won but later he pushed for what is called the mickey mouse protection act to protect his crap. thats when it all started. today we have what is called Compliance Department employees. they go around making sure your grass isnt too tall. the BTK killer was one of those creeps. he would even measure the grass blades with a ruler stick. with the help of liberial elitest news media most in the usa think that downloading is illegal. which it still is legal. it is the uploading that is illegal. they get confused and argue a lot when you point that out. you also have groups who's business model is to sue others for money. then you got the likes of apple and LG suing sammy to kill sammy. these kinds of peoplel like to abuse the court system and sue you to death until you have nothing left be it money or will power. another example is Patrick Stewart and his fight with his cable company. syaing it sap "his will to live". they do it because they can. they are evil immoral little dicks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pedrito Posted September 30, 2012 Share Posted September 30, 2012 Gotta love this corrupted rotten country! :tooth: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted September 30, 2012 Share Posted September 30, 2012 @myidisbb from the UK... It's not legal here but who gives a crap :/They only bother going after uploaders cos taking downloaders would cost they waaay too much!! But it's not legal, btw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myidisbb Posted September 30, 2012 Share Posted September 30, 2012 is there but like i said the mdeia will report downloading when its actually shring as in uploading Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted September 30, 2012 Share Posted September 30, 2012 I don't know what you're talking about. But like I said, they wouldn't bother taking the case to court if the person was just downloading, and even uploading unless it was quite a huge amount or an unusual amount ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myidisbb Posted September 30, 2012 Share Posted September 30, 2012 your british so different country Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted October 2, 2012 Share Posted October 2, 2012 Same in the USA, right? Or where aree you from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myidisbb Posted October 2, 2012 Share Posted October 2, 2012 no in the usa uploading as in sharing as in p2p is illegal. but downloading is legal. the problem is the media reports in the news downloaders are being sued when that is a false statement. they are being sued for uploading. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.