- Related Stories
-
MPAA sues newsgroup, P2P search sites
February 23, 2006 -
File-swapping leaders nearing D-day
February 1, 2006 -
MP3Board case moves to New York
October 17, 2000
The lawsuit (click for PDF), filed in U.S. District Court for the Central District of California by Torrentspy.com parent Valence Media, doesn't identify the man the company says was approached by an MPAA executive. But the suit calls the man a former associate of one of the plaintiffs and alleges that he was asked to retrieve private information on Torrentspy.com, a search engine that directs people to download links.
Torrentspy's complaint includes claims that the man whom the MPAA allegedly paid $15,000 to steal e-mail correspondence and trade secrets has admitted his role in the plot and is cooperating with the company.
"It is a Hollywood drama, what happened here," Ira Rothken, Torrentspy's attorney, said in a telephone interview Wednesday evening.
The allegations come three months after the MPAA filed suit against Torrentspy and other directories for allegedly making it easier for pirates to distribute movies over the Internet.
"These claims (by Torrentspy) are false," Kori Bernards, the MPAA's vice president of corporate communications, said in an e-mail to CNET News.com. "Torrentspy is trying to obscure the facts to hide the fact that they are facilitating thievery. We are confident that our lawsuit against them will be successful because the law is on our side."
The suit filed by the MPAA was a departure from the organization's previous strategy of going after Web sites that were directly involved in aiding file sharing. By suing Torrentspy, as well as such companies as IsoHunt, BTHub.com, and TorrentBox.com, MPAA was declaring that it saw little difference between the file-swapping networks that the studios have aggressively taken to court and those companies that direct people to works that may be protected by copyright.
One MPAA executive is quoted in Torrentspy's lawsuit as saying: "We don't care how you get it," referring to the alleged assignment to dig up information on Torrentspy.
Some of the information that the man allegedly pilfered included a spreadsheet containing Torrentspy income and expenses from January to June 2005, copies of private e-mails between Torrentspy employees, detailed information on the company's servers, and billing information, according to the lawsuit.
Torrentspy alleges in the suit that the man, whom the company refers to as the "informant," has provided documents that prove the nature of his relationship with the MPAA, including a written agreement signed by the hacker and an MPAA executive, Rothken said.
"We have very significant proof of wrongdoing and the MPAA's involvement," Rothken said. "We think it's ironic for the MPAA to claim that they are protecting the rights of the movie studios and then go out and pirate other people's property."
Rothken said that the MPAA also paid the hacker to "gather nonpublic information" about other Torrentspy-related sites. Rothken declined to specify which sites.
Following all this, the "informant" had a change of heart and contacted Torrentspy.
"By doing that, he's mitigating the harm that he did," Rothken said. "He is also allowing us to get a remedy against the MPAA and to help us stop them from using the stolen data."
Torrentspy has asked the court for unspecified damages and a jury trial.
CNET News.com's Joris Evers contributed to this report.
See more CNET content tagged:
lawsuit, hacker, hiring, suit, e-mail
--
Pixel image editor - http://www.kanzelsberger.com
The industry FOUGHT all those innovations, not created them.
the Grokster ruling and apply it to Sony and all these
other companies (specifically record companies). The
same arguments they used against Grokster would
apply. For years they held the technology rights and
distribution contracts that essentialy made it impossible
for an individual artist to promote their product. I am a
card carrying member of ASCAP and have been a
professional musician for 20+ years. I have no
sympathy for companies that could probably also be
prosecuted under RICOH statutes (racketeering) as
well. In the past I wouldn't have been able to be heard
because I wasn't "signed" .ie pay for distribution and
radio promotion, advertising etc... through a high
percentage of the profits from my own hard work. If
that's not a classic "protection" scheme, call me stupid.
I'm not bitter about not being "signed" or not becoming
famous. I'm just sick of the little guy getting screwed! Is
it too much to ask for a level playing field so the real
"cream" rises to the top. Think about how many artists
"suck" and then consider how they got to be on the
medium that you find them. My guess is they got
"signed" to what was probably a lopsided "deal". Hootie
and the Blowfish only made $60,000 dollars on
Cracked Rear View. Gee...I wonder who made the rest
of the millions? I wonder what other options they had at
the time they signed....some "deal".
some record companies explored releasing infected
"shares" to damage people's property as a way to
thwart filesharing. Fast forward to today..Sony's
"rootkit" approach is a similar approach that also
caused public outcry. The rootkits did nothing malicious
mind you, but they did alter your system at the core
level without your knowledge...thus making it a virus by
definition. I'll reiterate...they never learn!
Then fine, using your own legal reasoning, you shouldn't care where we get our files from, pirated or otherwise. Yes, pirating is illegal, but so is hacking, so who are you guys to say that we are doing something wrong and play it off like you guys are saints, when you too are breaking the law? Yes, I understand pirating is bad, I'm just saying they ain't no saints and therefor shouldn't be making these alligations as if they were such.
By using extended third parties, you can apply the "I didn't do it , so don't blame me, it was the other guy!" Karl Rove Defence!
You expect MPAA, to play by the rules, when they can cheat at arm's length do you?
For after all the failed ENRON top exec's tried and failed recently, but it will be at least another 2 years or so before they finally get jailed or scam a new trial? with funds that were stolen from both the shareholders and the staff pension fund! But then ,our dear and near, mostly unloved corrupt ruling politician's do it to the voting public on a daily basis!
Oh well pay for what you get and get what you pay for!
- by gregpetersen March 6, 2009 1:47 PM PST
- I heard that <a href="http://sewelldirect.com/Gefen-Wireless-HDMI-Extender.asp">wireless hdmi</a> is hack proof. Just because it is wireless, doesn't mean you can hack it!
- Reply to this comment
-
(33 Comments)