Comment by otterley
9 months ago
The plaintiffs do have the burden of proof, but there are many ways to Rome. Any evidence they can find, whether it be packet captures, client and server logs, incriminating emails, or even admissions, will be proffered to the court and/or jury.
many ways to Rome
Fair enough, but I wouldn't be surprised if none of those methods pan out.
1) Given the timeline, it seems unlikely that anyone was doing a packet capture.
2) Why would anyone at META have been paying attention to, or logging, which blocks were being seeded and which weren't? Who would have personal knowledge such that they could admit that transmission didn't seed the declaration of independence 6 million times?
Again, they don’t have to trace actual data flows to have sufficient evidence to convince a court or jury that Meta is in breach of the law.
Other examples of evidence include an admission from a Meta employee during a deposition that they were instructed to download a bunch of copyrighted material and the undertook the efforts to do so.
Or, perhaps the plaintiffs seized the machines used in the scheme (happens all the time following a TRO and discovery motion) and found whole copies or traces of the copyrighted works on them, or even local client logs that suggest that it was done.