Ernest Miller pursues research and writing on cyberlaw, intellectual property, and First Amendment issues. Mr. Miller attended the U.S. Naval Academy before attending Yale Law School, where he was president and co-founder of the Law and Technology Society, and founded the technology law and policy news site LawMeme. He is a fellow of the Information Society Project at Yale Law School.
Ernest Miller's blog postings can also be found @ Copyfight LawMeme
Feel free to contact me about articles, websites and etc. you think I may find of interest. I'm also available for consulting work and speaking engagements. Email: ernest.miller 8T gmail.com
This might not be news to some, but I've seen the first Notice and Takedown letter for a BitTorrent user. I know that Hollywood has been monitoring BitTorrent for some time (RIAA Monitoring BitTorrent?), but I hadn't actually heard that they were sending notices, not only to those who "seed" the files, but to the people who download using the P2P protocol: Chilling Effects: Notice of Copyright Infringement: August 9, 2004. A little searching around finds this story from ZeroPaid's BBS: Cease and Decist Letter.
1. Alexander Wehr on November 7, 2004 10:43 AM writes...
I want to see a lawsuit involving the downloading of current tv shows, especially those carried on basic cable channels which are received by the vast majority of americans.
The 1984 betamax decision gives us every right to record and archive tv shows for later viewing.
If the defendant in question has paid for the channels airing the shows in question, it is a powerful argument that there is little difference between recording it yourself(fair use) and allowing someone else to go through the trouble for you (maybe he can do a better job than you).
Even with a sharing program like bit torrent, if you paid for the channel, and your share ratio is below 1.00, this means you have not "distributed" even 1 copy to anyone else.
The argument is even MORE powerful if the vast majority of americans receive that channel/show, and considering people can afford cable long before a decent computer or broadband, this is quite easily the case.
IN SHORT: i REALLY want to see an EFF lawyer take a case as described above and send the MPAA packing on this one.
3. Hunter McDaniel on November 8, 2004 01:48 AM writes...
The way Bit Torrent is designed, every downloader is simultaneously an uploader. This is not a bug, it's a feature! It's what allows a file to spread rapidly without depending on a powerful central server. If the file is copyrighted, it also means that there is no such thing as a (legally safe) download-only user.
I'm not surprised one bit that this is happening. BT is the ultimate tool for them, providing them with IP's of all users. There can be no question of whether a IP was or was not sharing a file, unlike kazaa or some of the other p2p applications that only display number of files shared.
Earlier in the year, my ISP was notified by the MPAA that I was downloading episodes of Showtimes 'Dead Like Me'. My ISP in turn forwarded the email to me. They didn't seem too concerned about it, but they felt compelled to notify me to cover their legal bases.
What worried me was that MGM/MPAA referenced my downloading episode 1. I downloaded 15 episodes after that! Fortunately, they only sent the one email.
Ernest Miller pursues research and writing on cyberlaw, intellectual property, and First Amendment issues. Mr. Miller attended the U.S. Naval Academy before attending Yale Law School, where he was president and co-founder of the Law and Technology Society, and founded the technology law and policy news site LawMeme. He is a fellow of the Information Society Project at Yale Law School.
Ernest Miller's blog postings can also be found @
1. Alexander Wehr on November 7, 2004 10:43 AM writes...
I want to see a lawsuit involving the downloading of current tv shows, especially those carried on basic cable channels which are received by the vast majority of americans.
The 1984 betamax decision gives us every right to record and archive tv shows for later viewing.
If the defendant in question has paid for the channels airing the shows in question, it is a powerful argument that there is little difference between recording it yourself(fair use) and allowing someone else to go through the trouble for you (maybe he can do a better job than you).
Even with a sharing program like bit torrent, if you paid for the channel, and your share ratio is below 1.00, this means you have not "distributed" even 1 copy to anyone else.
The argument is even MORE powerful if the vast majority of americans receive that channel/show, and considering people can afford cable long before a decent computer or broadband, this is quite easily the case.
IN SHORT: i REALLY want to see an EFF lawyer take a case as described above and send the MPAA packing on this one.
Permalink to Comment2. Derek Slater on November 7, 2004 04:22 PM writes...
It's not clear to me from the C+D that they were going after a downloader rather than an uploader. What am I missing?
Permalink to Comment3. Hunter McDaniel on November 8, 2004 01:48 AM writes...
The way Bit Torrent is designed, every downloader is simultaneously an uploader. This is not a bug, it's a feature! It's what allows a file to spread rapidly without depending on a powerful central server. If the file is copyrighted, it also means that there is no such thing as a (legally safe) download-only user.
Permalink to Comment4. julie on November 8, 2004 01:27 PM writes...
I'm not surprised one bit that this is happening. BT is the ultimate tool for them, providing them with IP's of all users. There can be no question of whether a IP was or was not sharing a file, unlike kazaa or some of the other p2p applications that only display number of files shared.
Permalink to Comment5. Andrew on November 8, 2004 02:59 PM writes...
Earlier in the year, my ISP was notified by the MPAA that I was downloading episodes of Showtimes 'Dead Like Me'. My ISP in turn forwarded the email to me. They didn't seem too concerned about it, but they felt compelled to notify me to cover their legal bases.
What worried me was that MGM/MPAA referenced my downloading episode 1. I downloaded 15 episodes after that! Fortunately, they only sent the one email.
Permalink to Comment