US and German Courts Deny Mass Claims Against File-Sharing Network Members

There is always enough lovers to fish in troubled waters. Nowadays, "muddy water" is missing on the web, especially in cases involving file sharing. We all heard about the demonstration courts over some users of file-sharing networks who downloaded several musical compositions or films. It turns out that this is only the tip of the iceberg, in some countries law firms are cashing in on "lit up" users. For example, DigiProtect from Germany has long and reliably engaged in literally blackmailing users of torrent servers and other similar resources. But it seems that the finest hour of this and other companies is ending - the courts are canceling lawsuits en masse.

DigiProtect and other companies have found an interesting way to receive money: through specialized software, members of file-sharing networks are tracked (they track those who upload illegal content and those who download it). As much data as possible about such users is collected, and in the future the company sends letters demanding compensation for copyright infringement, otherwise the case is initiated against the user who refused to pay. In addition, enterprising dealers try to keep track of users who are pumping strawberries and not ordinary films. The calculation is simple - some solid burgher, having received a letter threatening to transfer the case to court, willingly pays money, trying to hush up the case.
')
The most interesting thing is that DigiProtect itself acts in the interests of the rights holders, and the dealers have no problems with the law, because they seem to work like the law. So far, no one has filed a counterclaim with charges of blackmail.

In the US, there are also guys who act in this way - this is the infamous US Copyright Group organization that constantly files thousands of lawsuits. But Americans are not doing very well - the judges have recently refused to consider such cases. For example, the last massive lawsuit included 4577 cases. After reviewing the case, only 140 of these thousands remained. Claims are rejected by the courts with notes of the absence of a legal basis for initiating a case.

Recently torrentfreak reported that a German court rejected DigiProtect, which sued 266 individual lawsuits against users who decided to indulge in a strawberry by downloading it from a file sharing service. The judge has already dismissed the case orally, and a formal refusal to initiate the case is expected. The reason is the same - the lack of a legal basis.

And the same torrentfreak reports another case, this time with the British law firm ACS: Law. This company is doing all the same - it blackmails the participants of file-sharing networks. Claims of the company have repeatedly been rejected in court, and now the company has decided to “retire”. By the way, the judge who considered the last lawsuit from ACS: Law called it "brain-affecting." In general, since the judges leave such comments, it can be expected that such sharashkins of the “fight against copyright infringement” offices will start to close en masse.

And in general, it would be time to subside all the hype around file sharing. As correctly noted earlier on Habré , "The role of torrents in the dissemination of culture and knowledge exceeds the damage from them at times."

Via torrentfreak