isoHunt tells court why Hollywood is wrong

Posted: Sat May 03, 2008 5:52 pm

I haven't written about our court case with the MPAA in a while. The numerous court filings we've submitted are often hard to read and comment on, but I believe this latest round of briefs filed in response to Judge Wilson's questions on clarification of the legal and technical issues of BitTorrent and isoHunt concerns you and how information is exchanged on the internet at large.

Central District Court of California wrote:

The Court currently has under consideration Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment on Liability. Before the Court issues its order, it would benefit from supplemental briefing regarding certain issues presented in the moving papers and at oral arguments. Specifically, the Court would benefit from a further description of the separate components involved in the bit-torrent downloading process used by Defendants' website. From the moving papers and the oral arguments, it is unclear which of the components involved are distributed or provided by Defendants. Supplemental briefing should also include a brief explanation of the interaction between these components and Defendant Fung's website, as well any connection with the copying of actual files and the services Defendants provide.

...

As followup to Wired's post about MPAA (Secretly) Tells Court Why BitTorrent Tracking Sites Violate Copyrights (MPAA's first supplemental brief in response to court), here's our briefs filed in response to MPAA's filings:

I know these are long reads, but there are important issues raised in these briefs. The MPAA has taken a narrow point of view that copyright infringement is stealing, that isoHunt serves no other purpose than promoting and facilitating infringement of Hollywood films, that we the search engine together with www.Torrentbox.com and www.Podtropolis.com the trackers are akin to the bogeyman selling pirated DVDs on the street, that caching, linking, and indexing by and of automated and open systems is same as targeted and willful distribution. Our answer is a resounding no. isoHunt is a tool in the collective "BitTorrent ecosystem" akin to the Web, we do not want it to be used for copyright infringement against the wishes of copyright holders, we have a long-working Copyright Policy and relations with them (large and small, except the MPAA), and we have sought to promote at every opportunity uses of isoHunt and BitTorrent by various independent content producers of all sorts (video, music, software). You can find tons more examples of uses by independents in my declaration. To find us guilty is to find the Web at its infancy guilty because it was full of porn, and Yahoo guilty for making a directory of it. The freedom of search engines and linking are the fundamental principles of freedom of speech, to take it away is to end the internet and democracy as we know it.

For the legally inclined, our briefs linked above draws connection with the Grokster and Sony Betamax cases, both landmark cases in US copyright laws in relation with the latest technology of the time. Our case should it go to trial will set another precedent, for better or worse.

And on a sidenote of the MPAA's rhetoric that piracy is killing them, which is what this whole case is about: First they made peace with BitTorrent.com and sued other BitTorrent sites like us, leaving their message none too clear. (filter copyright infringing content on request and verification? Check) And considering isoHunt indexes BitTorrent.com, we have just created an infinite loop in their argument. Other good pieces include they proving themselves wrong with their own stats (stats to show the stock market), while having other stats like this and this to show Congress (both proven grossly "off" from reality). On the other hand though, I do think good film making should be rewarded, and the box office agreed. For one, I'm quite excited about Iron Man ( good reviews and great trailer ) and I want to see it soon. In theater that is, and you should too! Maybe I'll write a review after I've watched.

And I realize I just gave Hollywood a free ad. Maybe they should pay me.

Update May 8: Some interesting takes on this from Ars and TorrentFreak

Posted: Sat May 03, 2008 6:11 pm

Nice... and looooong.
I especially like how you mentioned they(the 'plaintiffs') are trying to obtain complete control over BT technology to their likings.

Love your comparisons too. And examples as to open source software trading/distribution on BT.

Great read. You certainly have a way with words IH.

Posted: Sat May 03, 2008 6:19 pm

I just read as much of that I could stomach which included reading over all 42 pages of the first link and browsing through the others... thank god I'm a fast reader.

After sucking all that in, and thinking about it... only for a few minutes now mind you, I'm just wondering one thing , and I would like it explained to me.
Exactly what is the MPAA's argument ...all about? It really sounds like an invented scenario they've created that doesn't actually apply... at least not to this website or it's trackers, nor a great deal of the other trackers and sites out there.

.and as I've said before man keep up the fight, this for me is less about the immediate impact it could have on my own file sharing and p2p, but the future of the internet as a whole, and I'm glad your out there for us nameless masses just as a voice to be heard.

Posted: Sat May 03, 2008 6:24 pm

Crooked_Ferret wrote:

I just read as much of that I could stomach which included reading over all 42 pages of the first link and browsing through the others... thank god I'm a fast reader.

After sucking all that in, and thinking about it... only for a few minutes now mind you, I'm just wondering one thing , and I would like it explained to me.
Exactly what is the MPAA's argument ...all about? It really sounds like an invented scenario they've created that doesn't actually apply... at least not to this website or it's trackers, nor a great deal of the other trackers and sites out there.

.and as I've said before man keep up the fight, this for me is less about the immediate impact it could have on my own file sharing and p2p, but the future of the internet as a whole, and I'm glad your out there for us nameless masses just as a voice to be heard.

My guess would be that isoHunt is 'helping' in the 'distribution' of copyrighted material. Even though all it does is pretty much track and index it.
Basically they want all torrent tracking/indexing sites removed, I guess.

But not everything is copyrighted either.
And you can't control what it posted, or by whom.

Posted: Sat May 03, 2008 6:30 pm

A very sincere and humble Thank You IH. Thanks for going to bat for all of us and every internet user, everywhere. May you be blessed with health and happiness forevermore. Again, thank you.

Posted: Sat May 03, 2008 8:31 pm

It's a fine hair to split...Whether or not isohunt indexes and tracks illegal content...this is the internet. This is the reality of the information age and file sharing " All Hail Napster" from days gone by...!! Thank you for fighting this fight. They will never win it..I just pray that Isohunt is not one of the casualties on the quest to win this battle.. There are literally hundrend of thousands of public and private trackers around. If you take down one..four more will "Pop up". Thanks team at isohunt for the job you do and for running "By Far"..the classiest site on the net. Jo

Posted: Sat May 03, 2008 8:41 pm

jojoplin2003 wrote:

It's a fine hair to split...Whether or not isohunt indexes and tracks illegal content...this is the internet.

Not really. Isohunt indexes .torrent files, they are not protected by copyright nor do they contain anything that infringes copyright. The trackers mearly provide peer locations, again nothing to do with infringing anyones copyright. The allegation is that isohunt facilitates others in infringing copyright, which is the same as blaming speeding on Ford.

Posted: Sat May 03, 2008 9:52 pm

you have to admit that after reading over the material, you have a great argument and have made it understandable for anyone with a complete lack of knowledge regarding p2p and torrent use, I was impressed, as stated by others, with the comparisons given, to be honest, I would consider Isohunt to have the least amount of liability amongst the 400+ torrent sites out there, simply because of its nature as a search engine, its quite simple, Isohunt finds, it does not create, there is no illegal action being done by Isohunt, and a clear distinction between its actions and what has been implied by the MPAA is made. A connection between the case and the MPAA's want to acquire all usage of bittorrent technology is easily made as well, especially with the new functions of purchasing and renting material as a .torrent, functions not offered by isohunt and are only offered by sites with lucrative deals with the MPAA. It's just amazing that they think a case can be made of this. I search tirelessly for public domain torrents and isohunt is still the only reliable site for them, others are very difficult and most often have a limited amount of .torrent files for public domain and legal torrents. Not only this, just about but the only updates put on the site are about the legal torrents that have been posted and NEVER is there a mention of copyrighted material or advertisement of copywritten material in order to propogate its use.

We could go into how the artists and developers, for the most part, get screwed by the middlemen that create the copyright laws in order to get their own grubby hands on others creations, but that is a different argument and we don't want to give anybody nightmares......

Posted: Sat May 03, 2008 11:46 pm

Here's what I have to say.

Hollywood should stop trying to sell tickets and start sell torrents instead ^_^
And this one may be crazy, but for that free advert, the MPAA should just leave you and IsoHunt alone. @_@

Other than that, we all should just do what Linux and the rest of the open source world has, get a bunch of lawyers to help back up the open technology movement.

And what I mean by that is look how GNU and EFF works. Instead of playing into the hands of the lobbyists we beat them at thier own game by creating a correlation of top ran torrent ethical bit torrent sites, not even going anywheres newer touching tpb on that same sense, and a bunch of ucla lawyers that actually goes up front of all the out of touch grey haired profiteers that run things on wall street and the capital hill, showing them the real stats and what really goes on in words they understand(i.e. think "computer friendly" vs wysiwyg or command prompt debate ^_^). Then and only then will we be able to put an end to all the bollics from the RIAA and MPAA.

Oh and once that's done, the said correlation can then help the backing of new media groups and great indy content creators. This way we fix the issue of the crappy movies shoveled out of Hollywood..

Posted: Sun May 04, 2008 8:18 am

a long list of arguements, if they win it goes against all previous laws it could possibly change the internet for ever and allow a kind of "fashism" to take control. The truth is they dont have the time and resources to get every end user who MAY be downloading copyright material. This really looks like an obvious way of "creating" a case to make a scapegoat. Not just a scapegoat an unfair chance to make an example of bittorrent and to censor the net..which is to censor every single one of us. They are lossing money so they say, thats why this is happening. But it just looks like they are picking the easiest target, rather than the most lawful...imho

Posted: Sun May 04, 2008 12:26 pm

Quote:

The MPAA has taken a narrow point of view that copyright infringement is stealing, that isoHunt serves no other purpose than promoting and facilitating infringement of Hollywood films, that we the search engine together with Torrentbox and Podtropolis the trackers are akin to the bogeyman selling pirated DVDs on the street, that caching, linking, and indexing by and of automated and open systems is same as targeted and willful distribution.

If that's the case they should be going after google as well, afterall, they server up results for .torrent files.

Posted: Sun May 04, 2008 12:29 pm

unkn0wn2u wrote:

If that's the case they should be going after google as well, afterall, they server up results for .torrent files.

that's pretty much the argument right there.

Posted: Sun May 04, 2008 1:13 pm

OG wrote:

jojoplin2003 wrote:

It's a fine hair to split...Whether or not isohunt indexes and tracks illegal content...this is the internet.

Not really. Isohunt indexes .torrent files, they are not protected by copyright nor do they contain anything that infringes copyright. The trackers mearly provide peer locations, again nothing to do with infringing anyones copyright. The allegation is that isohunt facilitates others in infringing copyright, which is the same as blaming speeding on Ford.

Or gun related crime on the NRA, or obesity on McDonalds, or poverty on the G8 etc. none of which would ever happen of course. I wonder if i could sue Dan Foglebergs estate for making me such a pussy in the 70's? LOL

BTW. With the amount of registered users on isohunt being so massive, would some kind of petition be of any use to this legal fiasco? I for one would sign it.

Posted: Sun May 04, 2008 1:25 pm

IH wrote:

I haven't written about our court case with the MPAA in a while. The numerous court filings we've submitted are often hard to read and comment on, but I believe this latest round of briefs filed in response to Judge Wilson's questions on clarification of the legal and technical issues of BitTorrent and isoHunt concerns you and how information is exchanged on the internet at large.

Central District Court of California wrote:

The Court currently has under consideration Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment on Liability. Before the Court issues its order, it would benefit from supplemental briefing regarding certain issues presented in the moving papers and at oral arguments. Specifically, the Court would benefit from a further description of the separate components involved in the bit-torrent downloading process used by Defendants' website. From the moving papers and the oral arguments, it is unclear which of the components involved are distributed or provided by Defendants. Supplemental briefing should also include a brief explanation of the interaction between these components and Defendant Fung's website, as well any connection with the copying of actual files and the services Defendants provide.

...

As followup to Wired's post about MPAA (Secretly) Tells Court Why BitTorrent Tracking Sites Violate Copyrights (MPAA's first supplemental brief in response to court), here's our briefs filed in response to MPAA's filings:

I know these are long reads, but there are important issues raised in these briefs. The MPAA has taken a narrow point of view that copyright infringement is stealing, that isoHunt serves no other purpose than promoting and facilitating infringement of Hollywood films, that we the search engine together with www.Torrentbox.com and www.Podtropolis.com the trackers are akin to the bogeyman selling pirated DVDs on the street, that caching, linking, and indexing by and of automated and open systems is same as targeted and willful distribution. Our answer is a resounding no. isoHunt is a tool in the collective "BitTorrent ecosystem" akin to the Web, we do not want it to be used for copyright infringement against the wishes of copyright holders, we have a long-working Copyright Policy and relations with them (large and small, except the MPAA), and we have sought to promote at every opportunity uses of isoHunt and BitTorrent by various independent content producers of all sorts (video, music, software). You can find tons more examples of uses by independents in my declaration. To find us guilty is to find the Web at its infancy guilty because it was full of porn, and Yahoo guilty for making a directory of it. The freedom of search engines and linking are the fundamental principles of freedom of speech, to take it away is to end the internet and democracy as we know it.

For the legally inclined, our briefs linked above draws connection with the Grokster and Sony Betamax cases, both landmark cases in US copyright laws in relation with the latest technology of the time. Our case should it go to trial will be another landmark case.

And on a sidenote of the MPAA's rhetoric that piracy is killing them, which is what this whole case is about: First they made peace with BitTorrent.com and sued other BitTorrent sites like us, leaving their message none too clear. (filter copyright infringing content on request and verification? Check) And considering isoHunt indexes BitTorrent.com, we have just created an infinite loop in their argument. Other good pieces include they proving themselves wrong with their own stats (stats to show the stock market), while having other stats like this and this to show Congress (both proven grossly "off" from reality). On the other hand though, I do think good film making should be rewarded, and the box office agreed. For one, I'm quite excited about Iron Man ( good reviews and great trailer ) and I want to see it soon. In theater that is, and you should too! Maybe I'll write a review after I've watched.

And I realize I just gave Hollywood a free ad. Maybe they should pay me.

true. i always watch movies in the theaters and even still buy some of my favorites to dvd. this is the same for most of us. if the movie is good, it will still make more than enough between advertising affiliates like audi (im buying an a6 this week), bk, etc. i still waited in line friday night, like everyone else probably, for an hour with my family to see it. and ill buy it on blue ray as soon as it comes out. its just the greedy rich trying to get richer. (like the oil companies who net profit in the hundreds of billions each year). theoretically, isn't hollywood trying to monopolize movie entertainment? even this, i believe, is too much for anyone to control. if this site goes down, another will emerge, with a new name, every time with our united support. still they will try to spend millions to try to save thousands.

Posted: Sun May 04, 2008 2:19 pm

Isn't isoHunt just a directory for the .torrent files? How could they file you under copyright infringement if all you're doing is connecting peers to one another?