Forum - View topic

NEWS: Funimation Dismisses Its One Piece BitTorrent Lawsuit

alexcampos wrote:

Ugh.....Funimation should just GO AWAY!!!

Maybe you should go away?

Ugh.....Funimation should just GO AWAY!!!

Stop buying their DVDs and maybe they'll stop licensing everything out there.

Rukiia wrote:

alexcampos wrote: Ugh.....Funimation should just GO AWAY!!! Maybe you should go away?

Guys, you don't really get it. Justin Bieber should be the one going away.

i feel sorry for that 1 person who is still on the hook. lol

I don't know why people have to use illegal route to watch OP when you get watch it legally and free.

Spotlesseden wrote:

i feel sorry for that 1 person who is still on the hook. lol I don't know why people have to use illegal route to watch OP when you get watch it legally and free.

Some people can't because of region lockout like our dear friends in Europe or anything south of the US. Does OP streaming in Canada?

He kinda did in that CSI episode?

Spotlesseden wrote:

i feel sorry for that 1 person who is still on the hook. lol I don't know why people have to use illegal route to watch OP when you get watch it legally and free.

Some people can't because of region lockout like our dear friends in Europe or anything south of the US. Does OP streaming in Canada?

Does OP streaming in Canada?

Rukiia wrote:

He kinda did in that CSI episode?

Huh? CSI episode? You wouldn't happen to be talking about THIS CSI episode, would you?

asimpson2006 wrote:

Does OP streaming in Canada?

Nope. On their website it is only available to USA consumers.

Ugh.....Funimation should just GO AWAY!!!

Stop buying their DVDs and maybe they'll stop licensing everything out there.

It's funny though, there were only 1028 or so unique IP's the other 309 were duplicates. Who ever compiled the list, and even allowed it to be summited to the courts did a pretty terrible job. What is even more intriguing is that, defendant Doe 1 and Doe 2 are the same person, and the judge removed Does 2 - 1337. So did that also remove Doe 1?

Quote:

According to the judge's order, the actions of each defendant did not constitute "acting in concert" but rather acting individually, although identically.

Quote:

Restatement (Second) of Torts § 876. Persons Acting In Concert For harm resulting to a third person from the tortious conduct of another, one is subject toliability if he (a) does a tortious act in concert with the other or pursuant to a common design with him, or (b) knows that the other's conduct constitutes a breach of duty and gives substantial assistance or encouragement to the other so to conduct himself, or (c) gives substantial assistance to the other in accomplishing a tortious result and his ownconduct, separately considered, constitutes a breach of duty to the third person.

Which obviously bit torrent falls under all of those,
(a) because all the defendants had to use the same method of acquiring the file (bit torrent)
(b) "substantial assistance" would be equivalent to seeding, and "encouragement" would be the basis of bit torrent itself; sharing.
(c) Obviously seeding would be "substantial assistance"
Does anyone have copies of the court documents? Already have the complaint, cover, and exhibit.

a) they would have to actively be helping each and every other person knowingly, with bittorrent it's fairly passive, just because two people just so happened to shoot the same guy on two different days, doesn't mean they worked in concert, for example.

b)not everyone can say they know the other person is doing something illegal that they're connected to, just look at how some studios download their licensed works which isn't a breach of duty, and just being connected to the torrent doesn't encourage others to be on it

c)not everyone using bittorrent uploads equally, so not everyone would be giving others "substantial" assistance.

Basically, the connection between two people using bittorrent for the same torrent is very tennuous at best. It would be like catching two different shoplifters in the same store at seperate times of day, just because they happened to do the same crime doesn't mean they acted together,

and to joinder all of those people together they would have to prove that every single other person knowingly assisted every other person at the same time. That is one reason why courts over the United States have refused to let these cases go through.

Comment on Clause (a)
:a. Parties are acting in concert when they act in accordance with an agreement to cooperate in a particular line of conduct or to accomplish a particular result. The agreement need not be expressed in words and may be implied and understood to exist from the conduct itself. Whenever two or more persons commit tortious acts in concert, each becomes subject to liabilityfor the acts of the others, as well as for his own acts. The theory of the early common law was
that there was a mutual agency of each to act for the others, which made all liable for the tortiousacts of any one.

Earlier on, they had their own player that played in Canada...... I hope the beta site they're launching goes back to that.