Even though it's blocked access by US visitors and stopped hosting torrent tracker files .Apparently the MPAA is out for blood in its case against the once mighty TorrentSpy BitTorrent tracker site and it isn't looking pretty for believers of net neutrality and user privacy. Back in May the "Honorable" Jacqueline Chooljian, a federal judge for the Central District of California in Los Angeles, ruled that TorrentSpy had to begin tracking users' activity on the site in clear violation of its own user privacy policy. Rather than do so it merely decided to cut off access by US visitors. It seemed for a time that the matter was then resolved, for surely, aside from the fact that the site is NETHERLANDS-BASED site, the fact that they even went so far as to block US visitors seemed like more than enough reason for the MPAA to o longer have a case against them. Unfortunately CNet is reporting that the case is far from over and that the MPAA wants Judge Choolijan to hold TorrentSpy in contempt for not observing its order to hand over its server log data. "(TorrentSpy) took steps to make the Server Log Data unavailable for the express purpose of avoiding compliance with the (court) order," the movie studios said in documents filed with the court last week. "This claim should be seen for what it is: another illegitimate attempt by defendants to evade authority of this court and the May 29 order." What's so ironic is that the site isn't even hosted in the United States nor does it even serve US visitors, so it's startling to see the MPAA's efforts to hold it in contempt of US laws. ISOHunt also took the additional step of halting its hosting of torrent tracker files, making it merely an indexing site that lists links to .torrent files located on 3rd party BitTorrent tracker sites. This should have made its legal headache with the MPAA go away right? Wrong. "The irony here is that studios are blowing hot and cold," said Ira Rothken, TorrentSpy's attorney."On one hand they asked in their lawsuit for TorrentSpy in essence to shut down U.S. traffic. When the company did, the plaintiffs complained that TorrentSpy is in violation for not supplying information under the log file order. They're never satisfied." If TorrentSpy no longer serves US visitors and thereby has no data for them to collect, does the MPAA want it to start allowing US visitors again so it can begin tracking them? Does it want TorrentSpy to renew it's facilitation of piracy in the US? I don't get it. The premise that the MPAA is operating under is utterly insane and should be the real criminal enterprise that's at question in the case. What's even crazier is that according to CNet "As part of the sanctions, the studios want the judge to rule that the movies belonging to the studios found on TorrentSpy's site infringed on their copyright." Hasn't anyone told the MPAA that BitTorrent tracker sites don't actually host any content? I guess not. Moreover, the case should be bring up some serious debate on the issue of net neutrality and on why a US court is allowed to hassle a Dutch site that serves no US visitors. It's making the phrase "ugly american" look even uglier. Perhaps it's time for TorrentSpy to cut to the chase and head for greener pastures in the BitTorrent paradise that is Sweden. I'm sure that the Pirate Bay might even cut it a deal on hosting fees. Looking for more stuff to watch or download?
|
|
|
They should just give the MPAAthe middle finger and head to Sweeden and unblock US visitors again.