DragonHawk wrote:The copyright cartels don't have to prove it was you without a doubt, they just have to show more evidence than you do.
But I don't have to!
You don't have to what?
In order to get access to my HDD they'll need a court order ...
When the copyright cartels go after someone, what they usually do is start with activity on file sharing networks. Given the P2P nature of such, this is often fairly straightforward to do. So now they have "illegal activity" associated with your IP address. They go to the ISP, who folds like a lawn chair and hands over their logs. So now they have further evidence that "illegal activity" was happening from your IP address. At this point, they sue you, saying, "Here is clear evidence the owner of this IP address is doing illegal things".
At that point, it's up to you to offer a defense. If your only defense is, "Neener neener, prove it was me", it's a fair bet you're going to lose the case.
Now, the defense, "My network is deliberately wide open as a public service; it could have been anyone" might actually fly. But it would depend on the judge and the jury, I think. Laws like the horrible DMCA try to put the burden on the operator in such cases anyway.
I myself have the added bonus of working as a private IT consultant, so I can make (here's that added bonus) the argument that the loss of hardware during an RIAA discovery would result in an undue financial burden due to its impact on my productivity.
If your hard disk is subpoenaed, you can indeed make that argument. The judge may decide you need to turn it over anyway, in which case, tough tootsies. Or the judge may buy your argument, but again, you're defending yourself here. If you refuse to offer any counter-evidence, you'll be in poor shape. Assuming you win the case, you could counter-sue the media mafia for damages after the fact, of course. But they don't care about that.
I work in healthcare, ergo allowing unsupervised third-party access to my HDDs is a violation of federal law (under HIPPA).
I assume you mean HIPAA. Good luck with that defense. I can't quote chapter and verse from that law, but most laws have plenty of provisions for investigations and court proceedings. Information uncovered during discovery not relevant to the case is almost always considered confidential.
Again, college != private individual.
There are two things you should know about the law:
- The law doesn't have to be fair
- The law doesn't have to make sense
Again, I'm not saying this is the way things *should* be, just that this is the way things *are*.