Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Is being in the same BitTorrent "swarm" equal to "interacting"?

NewYorkCountryLawyer (912032) writes | more than 2 years ago

1

NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "In the new wave of bittorrent downloading cases, the plaintiffs' lawyers like to lump a number of "John Does" together in the same case in order to avoid filing fees ($350 a pop). Their excuse for 'joinder' is the allegation that the defendants 'interacted' with each other by reason of the fact that their torrents may have eminated from the same "swarm". In Malibu Media v. Does 1-5, when John Doe #4 indicated his intention to move for severance, the Court asked the lawyers to address the "swarm" issue in their papers. So when John Doe #4 filed his or her motion to quash, sever, and dismiss, he filed a detailed memorandum of law (PDF) analyzing the "swarm" theory in detail. What do you think?"
Link to Original Source

cancel ×

1 comment

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Yes (1)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 2 years ago | (#40500275)

Id say they interacted, semi-anonymously since you didn't identify the before hand, but still there was intentional interaction.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?