Comment by TheSpiceIsLife
9 months ago
> I'm not sure a good¹ lawyer on the other side would let you get away with claiming
Fortunately that’s not how courts work.
I’m not familiar with the case, but it’s possible setting a 1 byte per second limit showed intent to not distribute.
It’s also possible that setting a 1 byte per second limit showed they were aware what they were doing was illegal.
Intent matters. I can well imagine a judge saying something like this:
While I am satisfied it has been proven you are aware that by torrenting said files, distribution also occurred. However, I am also satisfied it has been proven that by setting a 1 byte per minute upload limit, you had taken those steps you could to limit uploads in an effort to prevent the prohibited activity. Other evidence presented to the court demonstrates you are regularly employed, that your finances are generally in order, and you have not received payment for the meagre distribution that occurred as a consequence of your behaviour.
It is my opinion that the case brough by the prosecution does not rise to the level of requiring a sentence, nor even a conviction.
You're free to go.
> Intent matters
I agree with you intent matters, and I agree with you that setting the upload limit to 1 byte per second shows intent, I just disagree about what intent it shows.
You'd still be conspiring with others to violate copyright.
1 reply →
In the context of a book, that could still be seeding a book every few hours..
1 byte per second would give you a couple of pages every few hours. So probably not.
I byte pee second translates to a little over 3KB/hr. Depends on the book.
5 replies →