They will skip the notice via proxy (your ISP passing a notice to you without identifying you to the claimant) and go straight to court to have the ISP forced to provide the ID of the subscriber for a specific IP observed to be active torrenting copyrighted materials.
Then they’ll attempt to recover those court costs from that subscriber as well as sue them for the original copyright infringement.
I think they’ll have quite an uphill battle with that approach, particularly when trying to prove the subscriber to an internet connection is also responsible for, let alone aware of, the alleged infringement. If it was that easy, they wouldn’t have bothered with notices to begin with.
Yeah this happened during the Napster era and it was so incredibly unpopular and unsympathetic with the general public that it didn’t continue after a while. Suing a single mom on food stamps for thousands of dollars because her teenage son downloaded a game one time is a truly abominable look for a company.
Can someone TL;DR the actual “worse” thing?
They will skip the notice via proxy (your ISP passing a notice to you without identifying you to the claimant) and go straight to court to have the ISP forced to provide the ID of the subscriber for a specific IP observed to be active torrenting copyrighted materials.
Then they’ll attempt to recover those court costs from that subscriber as well as sue them for the original copyright infringement.
I think they’ll have quite an uphill battle with that approach, particularly when trying to prove the subscriber to an internet connection is also responsible for, let alone aware of, the alleged infringement. If it was that easy, they wouldn’t have bothered with notices to begin with.
Yeah this happened during the Napster era and it was so incredibly unpopular and unsympathetic with the general public that it didn’t continue after a while. Suing a single mom on food stamps for thousands of dollars because her teenage son downloaded a game one time is a truly abominable look for a company.