Identification by IP

[MizzFuzzyMoran]

this judgment seems to open the door to litigation against organizations that inaccurately use ip addresses to identify individuals for disciplinary maintenance and management purposes

i understand allot of forums use ip bans and this ruling would put the forum admins and owners in the firing line from those who have been adversely affected by forum bans

i can see allot of forums quietly undoing existing bans hoping those they have banned wont notice that they can access those sites again

 

[CheriColette]

That is an interesting result and Im sure it wont take someone long to close that gap. 

Similarly, I know of someone who was jailed for 6 months because his son downloaded inappropriate material which was traced though IPaddress but proven when the police checked his computer. Once again it was not  substantiated, who had done the download and as the son had skipped town, and the computer belonged to the father>>>>he was arrested and served time. 

So be careful who has access to your computer.

[Monti Messmer]

One judge and a handful of cases. Until a high court make this to a "rule" this is no hope for anyone.

There was a similar case in my country where the copyright holder used a IP tracking software. Then the court ruled that this software is illegal. 

Problem is that no one on the Internet can be sure not to break any world wide law until the governments and the high courts adapt to the new technique and speak clear words.

In this particular case most judges wouldn´t bother if the owner or his son .... shared the files. The owner is held reliable for whatever happens to his connection. At least in my country. Same applies to using dads car and kill someone. If they cannot proof who drove the car - the owner is guilty.

Be careful, Monti ;-)

[Theresa Tennyson]

---

MizzFuzzyMoran wrote:

this judgment

seems to open the door to litigation against organizations that inaccurately use ip addresses to identify individuals for disciplinary maintenance and management purposes

i understand allot of forums use ip bans and this ruling would put the forum admins and owners in the firing line from those who have been adversely affected by forum bans

i can see allot of forums quietly undoing existing bans hoping those they have banned wont notice that they can access those sites again

 

---

That case is about issuing a subpoena, which is a legal action that is meant to be served to a specific person. A forum IP ban is an attempt to mitigate a nuisance coming from a certain internet location - whether the nuisance is caused by one person or forty at that location doesn't mean vinegar to a rabbit. You'll just have to keep finding new ones...

[MizzFuzzyMoran]

---

Theresa Tennyson wrote:

---

MizzFuzzyMoran wrote:

this judgment

seems to open the door to litigation against organizations that inaccurately use ip addresses to identify individuals for disciplinary maintenance and management purposes

i understand allot of forums use ip bans and this ruling would put the forum admins and owners in the firing line from those who have been adversely affected by forum bans

i can see allot of forums quietly undoing existing bans hoping those they have banned wont notice that they can access those sites again

 

---

That case is about issuing a subpoena, which is a legal action that is meant to be served to a specific person. A forum IP ban is an attempt to mitigate a nuisance coming from a certain internet location - whether the nuisance is caused by one person or forty at that location doesn't mean vinegar to a rabbit. You'll just have to keep finding new ones...

---

are you related to the corrupt turkish idiot theresa

he used the same ineffectual blunderbuss of an approach to try to oppress the innocent

he failed too

[Perrie Juran]

---

MizzFuzzyMoran wrote:

this judgment seems

to open the door to litigation against organizations that inaccurately use ip addresses to identify individuals for disciplinary maintenance and management purposes

i understand allot of forums use ip bans and this ruling would put the forum admins and owners in the firing line from those who have been adversely affected by forum bans

i can see allot of forums quietly undoing existing bans hoping those they have banned wont notice that they can access those sites again

 

---

I don't see how you can arrive at this conclusion.

Particularly because Forum use would be considered a privilege and not a right.

You might have a case for slander if they publicly published the names of the accounts that were banned.

"9.3 Linden Lab's liability to you is expressly limited, to the extent allowable under applicable law.

IN NO EVENT SHALL LINDEN LAB OR ANY OF ITS DIRECTORS, OFFICERS, EMPLOYEES, SHAREHOLDERS, SUBSIDIARIES, AGENTS OR LICENSORS BE RESPONSIBLE OR LIABLE TO YOU OR TO ANY THIRD PARTY FOR ANY LOSS OR DAMAGES OF ANY KIND, INCLUDING FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, ECONOMIC, EXEMPLARY, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, RELIANCE, SPECIAL, OR PUNITIVE LOSSES OR DAMAGES OR DISGORGEMENT OR COMPARABLE EQUITABLE REMEDY, FOR LOST DATA OR LOST PROFITS, ARISING (WHETHER IN CONTRACT, TORT, STRICT LIABILITY OR OTHERWISE) OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SERVICE (INCLUDING ITS MODIFICATION OR TERMINATION), THE LINDEN SOFTWARE, THE WEBSITES, THE SERVERS, YOUR ACCOUNT (INCLUDING ITS TERMINATION OR SUSPENSION) OR THIS AGREEMENT, WHETHER OR NOT LINDEN LAB MAY HAVE BEEN ADVISED THAT ANY SUCH DAMAGES MIGHT OR COULD OCCUR AND NOTWITHSTANDING THE FAILURE OF ESSENTIAL PURPOSE OF ANY REMEDY.

NO VALUE, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, IS GUARANTEED OR WARRANTED WITH RESPECT TO ANY CONTENT, LINDEN DOLLARS, VIRTUAL TENDER OR VIRTUAL GOODS AND SERVICES. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS YOU MAY HAVE IN YOUR CONTENT OR ANY EXPENDITURE ON YOUR PART, LINDEN LAB AND YOU EXPRESSLY DISCLAIM ANY COMPENSABLE VALUE RELATING TO OR ATTRIBUTABLE TO ANY DATA RELATING TO YOUR ACCOUNT RESIDING ON LINDEN LAB'S SERVERS. YOU ASSUME ALL RISK OF LOSS FROM USING THE SERVICE ON THIS BASIS.

 

Linden Lab does not ensure continuous, error-free, secure or virus-free operation of the Service, the Linden Software, the Websites, the Servers, or your Account, and you understand that you shall not be entitled to refunds or other compensation based on Linden Lab's failure to provide any of the foregoing other than as explicitly provided in this Agreement. Some jurisdictions do not allow the disclaimer of implied warranties and, to that extent, the foregoing disclaimers may not apply to you."

An issue here might be the final sentence.  When you signed up for SL and (if you) agreed to the TOS, you agreed that:

"10.2 The applicable law and venue is in San Francisco, California.

You agree that this Agreement and the relationship between you and Linden Lab shall be governed by the laws of the State of California without regard to conflict of law principles or the United Nations Convention on the International Sale of Goods. Further, you and Linden Lab agree to submit to the exclusive personal jurisdiction and venue of the courts located in the City and County of San Francisco, California, except as provided in Section 10 regarding arbitration."

 

Linden Lab has never claimed error free operation of the Service or it's serviceability for any use.

At best you might be able to get a Court to order that LL reinstates your access to the Service.  A claim for damages would be a push.

Really, if any one would be in a position to make a Claim for damages it would be the Merchants over the lackluster performance of the Market Place.  But LL never warranted anything to them about its usability.

 

 

[Theresa Tennyson]

---

MizzFuzzyMoran wrote:

---

Theresa Tennyson wrote:

---

MizzFuzzyMoran wrote:

this judgment

seems to open the door to litigation against organizations that inaccurately use ip addresses to identify individuals for disciplinary maintenance and management purposes

i understand allot of forums use ip bans and this ruling would put the forum admins and owners in the firing line from those who have been adversely affected by forum bans

i can see allot of forums quietly undoing existing bans hoping those they have banned wont notice that they can access those sites again

 

---

That case is about issuing a subpoena, which is a legal action that is meant to be served to a specific person. A forum IP ban is an attempt to mitigate a nuisance coming from a certain internet location - whether the nuisance is caused by one person or forty at that location doesn't mean vinegar to a rabbit. You'll just have to keep finding new ones...

---

are you related to the corrupt turkish idiot theresa

he used the same ineffectual blunderbuss of an approach to try to oppress the innocent

he failed too

---

Yeah, blunderbusses are notoriously inaccurate. Like the "ad avatarem attack in response to a legal point which you can't address" blunderbuss.

[MizzFuzzyMoran]

---

Theresa Tennyson wrote:

---

MizzFuzzyMoran wrote:

---

Theresa Tennyson wrote:

---

MizzFuzzyMoran wrote:

this judgment

seems to open the door to litigation against organizations that inaccurately use ip addresses to identify individuals for disciplinary maintenance and management purposes

i understand allot of forums use ip bans and this ruling would put the forum admins and owners in the firing line from those who have been adversely affected by forum bans

i can see allot of forums quietly undoing existing bans hoping those they have banned wont notice that they can access those sites again

 

---

That case is about issuing a subpoena, which is a legal action that is meant to be served to a specific person. A forum IP ban is an attempt to mitigate a nuisance coming from a certain internet location - whether the nuisance is caused by one person or forty at that location doesn't mean vinegar to a rabbit. You'll just have to keep finding new ones...

---

are you related to the corrupt turkish idiot theresa

he used the same ineffectual blunderbuss of an approach to try to oppress the innocent

he failed too

---

Yeah, blunderbusses are notoriously inaccurate. Like the "

ad avatarem

attack in response to a legal point which you can't address" blunderbuss.

---

so you dont subscribe to the belief that it is better that ninety-nine guilty men go free than one innocent man hang

a forum ip ban which prevented a whole organization from participating because of one supposed annoyance would not find favour

@perrie ll has deliberately settled several cases which have called into question its rights to terminate acounts unilaterally thus prejudicing the users ability to liquidate assets which is one of ebbes edge cases that the tos changes were intended to forestall although the draconian retrospective arrest of intellectual property is still to be tested and might yet be found wanting

[Sassy Romano]

There is no issue or connection here to that case and IP bans from a service or it's forums, especially if there's no right to the service.

In the case that you cited, there is a financial claim against an individual based upon an IP address.  Clearly that's ridiculous.  How do you solve that for a university campus for example where the whole site might go through one proxy service.

That's far from being banned from a forum site which was an example that you gave.  If they don't want you to have free access to forums, tough, it's not a right.

[Qie Niangao]

---

i understand allot of forums use ip bans and this ruling would put the forum admins and owners in the firing line from those who have been adversely affected by forum bans

---

It's still not clear to me the sort of "firing line" in which forums would find themselves. Somebody with an IP ban would sue them for... what? Are there non-frivolous damages that could be demonstrated to arise from a forum ban? Or is the idea that there's something criminal, maybe somehow a violation of a constitutionally protected right, or... ? 

(On the other hand, the ruling may have some good effect in the fight against copyright trolls, its actual subject. Even that, however, is far from certain, especially as it applies -- or doesn't -- beyond south Florida, or after appeal.)

[jwenting]

well, it might show some uninformed forum operators that ip bans are ineffective in that you're not banning a specific person and worse you're potentially banning a lot of people who could have become paying customers of your company if you'd only not banned someone using the same IP address earlier.

Sadly a lot of punters on the internet still think IP bans are the universal and perfect solution to any and all trouble an internet based service can have (and that includes a lot of SL denizens who think that if only they had an IP tracker on their sim they could detect alts and ban them, something LL doesn't allow for that same very good reason, it doesn't work and has a lot of potential negative consequences).