U.S. ISP ordered to identify BitTorrent users

A court in the United States has ordered an Internet Service Provider to produce personal details of account holders linked to IP addresses allegedly used to pirate music using BitTorrent software.

Cox Communications must identify the account holders behind the "Top 250" IP addresses from a total of more than 150,000 IP addresses. BMG and Round Hill Music sued Cox last year claiming that the ISP had forfeited protection under the DMCA's safe harbor provisions by failing to disconnect repeat infringers.

See Also: Court tells woman to remove BitTorrent, P2P software
See Also: 'Netflix for Pirates': More Popcorn Time blocks ordered by court

Out of 150,000 alleged piracy-linked IP addresses, BMG and Round Hill initially requested the identification of account holders linked to 500. Cox refused, citing the Cable Privacy Act preventing it from disclosing information of its subscribers.

Last week, a U.S. court ordered that Cox provide information on the "Top 250" accounts, including name, address, account number and the bandwidth speed associated with each account.

More information on the case, and a list of IP addresses, is available at TorrentFreak

Written by: James Delahunty @ 24 May 2015 17:14

Estuansis

Yeah that can't be legal. A company shouldn't be forced to give up private information when no crime can be proven. They just say the "top 250" or "top 500" but they don't name any names. That means they don't have enough evidence to put a name to a crime, and should not be able to force Cox to do anything. This is a scummy bully tactic, and it won't be met well. If my ISP ever did this,they would lose my business instantly. Thankfully, they have told me personally that my privacy takes precedence over anything. I hope I can believe that.

AMD Phenom II X6 1100T 4GHz(20 x 200) 1.5v 3000NB 2000HT, Corsair Hydro H110 w/ 4 x 140mm 1500RPM fans Push/Pull, Gigabyte GA-990FXA-UD5, 8GB(2 x 4GB) G.Skill RipJaws DDR3-1600 @ 1600MHz CL9 1.55v, Gigabyte GTX760 OC 4GB(1170/1700), Corsair 750HX
Detailed PC Specs: http://my.afterdawn.com/estuansis/blog_entry.cfm/11388

25.5.2015 02:41 #1

ChappyTTV

Hi Estuansis

Originally posted by Estuansis: They just say the "top 250" or "top 500" but they don't name any names. That means they don't have enough evidence to put a name to a crime, and should not be able to force Cox to do anything. Not disagreeing here at all, but this is why Cox is being subpoenaed in the 1st place, to find the names associated with the IP's accounts. The legal precedent here is that your IP (static anyway) is considered as unique as a name. I'm sure the ISP's have logs that could be used to show what account was assigned what IP dynamically as well. Originally posted by Estuansis: This is a scummy bully tactic, and it won't be met well. If my ISP ever did this,they would lose my business instantly Hehheh...somehow I think your account would most likely be closed anyway once they've received a subpoena for infringement.

Originally posted by Estuansis: Thankfully, they have told me personally that my privacy takes precedence over anything. I hope I can believe that.
I have a bridge for sale in Brooklyn my friend, real cheap ;) Cheers Estuansis!

25.5.2015 03:48 #2

EEE31

People should learn 3 simple letters... VPN.

25.5.2015 10:56 #3

DXR88

Microshaft's going to take it a step farther, they'll have your name, your address, your email details and they'll know if you're using a bit torrent client. only thing missing is Cort.... i mean the cops

25.5.2015 14:38 #4

hearme0

Originally posted by Estuansis: Yeah that can't be legal. A company shouldn't be forced to give up private information when no crime can be proven. They just say the "top 250" or "top 500" but they don't name any names. That means they don't have enough evidence to put a name to a crime, and should not be able to force Cox to do anything. This is a scummy bully tactic, and it won't be met well. If my ISP ever did this,they would lose my business instantly. Thankfully, they have told me personally that my privacy takes precedence over anything. I hope I can believe that.

Whatevs man!

This is totally legit, totally legal and rightfully so!!!!!

The "top offenders" are brutal, rampant, leeching and criminalistic downloaders that are responsible for the bulk of pirating. They're relentless! I'm all about jacking illicit stuff...but I believe in commerce and buying stuff too so my collections are decent.

Don't make excuses for these people unless you're one of them of course.

In this case the legitimacy is bolstered by the fact that 150K have ACTUALLY BEEN IDENTIFIED TO DOWNLOADING and the first 250 most leechy are S.O.L. The others are lucky so technically schlomo....the legal system is cutting most peeps a break.

Check your head!

On another note, I use Peerblock with 2.35 billion proactively blocked IP addresses. I removed immediately after downloading. Never been busted.

26.5.2015 01:19 #5

Menion

Here we go again, history repeating itself... Did we not learn anything from the RIAA's Attempts..

28.5.2015 02:30 #6

Estuansis

LOL hearme0 you are hypocritical to say that you download but these people somehow deserve to be screwed more than you. And Peerblock really does nothing. I've been busted with and without it. My privacy has been preserved in all cases.

Also, you're applying descriptors like brutal, rampant, and relentless to a benign and simple act like downloading. Something which you've admitted doing yourself. That's just sensationalism, and doesn't actually prove any points. None of your justifications make any sense or difference to the law, and you would be considered an equal opportunity target.

28.5.2015 02:57 #7

poiu477

I may or may not be associated with more than one of the listed ip's. I got a copy of the court order and subpoena (with the ip's highlighted) by fedex express. someone who isnt I may have downloaded 18 torrents in the time i was leased those ip's. real relentless bub

28.5.2015 13:00 #8

hearme0

Originally posted by Estuansis: LOL hearme0 you are hypocritical to say that you download but these people somehow deserve to be screwed more than you. And Peerblock really does nothing. I've been busted with and without it. My privacy has been preserved in all cases.

Also, you're applying descriptors like brutal, rampant, and relentless to a benign and simple act like downloading. Something which you've admitted doing yourself. That's just sensationalism, and doesn't actually prove any points. None of your justifications make any sense or difference to the law, and you would be considered an equal opportunity target. I know...sadly enough my "fine line" is rather difficult to convey whether verbally or typed BUT...I use the word "rampant" to differentiate me. Yes, I download but I buy a significant amount too. I buy the movies more often than not, that I watch multiple times.

As for music though.........I'm all about rampant music pirating as it truly fuels the REAL MUSIC BUSINESS for the artist and packs their stadiums of people buying 35 dollar t-shirts that only cost the band 1.50 to buy.

Look, you know what I mean by "rampant" and I'm sure most would agree it's crappy to always take take take and never give back.............at least I do.

And above all else, I'm an IT pro, as far as I'm concerned, GOD granted me the ability and knowledge to circumvent the system.........so I am an exception. Don't blame me too much...I'm really just the messenger.

29.5.2015 08:31 #9

tim4

I received a letter from COX stating that I was in the top 250 IP addresses being turned over.

My wife and I do not pirate. The two of us are the only ones who use our internet. Our WiFi is secured. I work in IT, so I checked our computers for a virus, or any other signs that out IP could be used for pirating. I came up with nothing. My router logs show nothing. None of our computers have music on them at all. (We use our phones for music).

There is no way we are in the "Top 250". We shouldn't be on the list at all.

This leads me to believe that either the data collection methods used are unreliable, or the company suing COX is coming up with IPs out of the air.

Either way it is unfair.

29.5.2015 14:55 #10

Estuansis

I have a substantial hard copy collection of media that would rival most enthusiasts'. I also am an IT Pro of sorts. Experience in the support industry, Degree, Certifications, etc etc. I think I'm qualified enough to say that what I do with my computer should be anonymous and private. My ISP so far agrees with that as they simply forward the letters and have not taken any action against me after some 20 cease and desists. In my eyes, my info has remained private even if someone has detected what I'm doing. I expect that to continue, or my ISP is going to be losing my business.

29.5.2015 15:13 #11

AfterDawn: News