Reddit has gone head-to-head with a group of filmmakers over the past year, aiming to protect the privacy of its users.

In three separate cases, the filmmakers subpoenaed Reddit for details of users who commented on various piracy related topics.

The movie companies said they were not planning to go after these people in court but wanted to use their comments as evidence in ongoing piracy liability lawsuits against Internet providers.

Reddit viewed the requests as intrusive. The company objected to the initial attempt , arguing that handing over the requested information would violate its users’ right to anonymous speech. Reddit later responded similarly to a second and third subpoena request.

The movie companies took these cases to a federal court, asking it to compel Reddit to comply. The court refused to do so, three times already .

Filmmakers Request ‘De Novo’ Review

The film companies were not happy with the denials and refused to give up. When U.S. Magistrate Judge Thomas Hixson denied their most recent attempt in February, relating to the case against ISP Frontier Communications, they moved for a ‘ de novo ’ review at a California federal court.

In their motion, the rightsholders cited jurisprudence suggesting that an IP address is not necessarily ‘unmasking’ personally identifying information. They argued that the magistrate judge ignored key arguments and arrived at the wrong conclusion.

The companies stressed that the commenters could prove crucial in their battle against ISP Frontier. Among other things, the court’s suggestion that there might be other ways to obtain similar evidence was premature, they said.

Reddit’s Objections

As expected, Reddit objected to the request for a ‘de novo’ review. The company argued that, as the court repeatedly found, the filmmakers have other non-intrusive options to gather evidence against Frontier, including seeking evidence from the ISP and its subscribers directly.

Reddit further noted that the filmmakers’ argument that IP-addresses do not “identify” users is misguided at best.

“Reddit does not require its users to give their real name or addresses, and so the only identifying information Reddit may maintain on its users is their IP address, which is precisely why the Movants here seek the users’ IP addresses. If IP addresses were not identifying, Movants would not be seeking them.”

At worst, the argument is disingenuous, Reddit wrote. The movie companies previously used a Redditor’s IP address to obtain the name and address of a subscriber, requesting their torrenting history and more.

“[A]fter Reddit provided Movants with IP address data for a single Reddit user last year, the Movants immediately identified that IP address by subpoenaing T-Mobile, and they have been harassing that user with motions practice ever since,” Reddit countered.

Court Denies ‘De Novo’ Review

After reviewing these and other arguments, this week the court sided with Reddit. In a single sentence, without further detail, U.S. District Court Judge James Donato denied the request for ‘de novo’ review.

“The motion for de novo determination of the motion to enforce the subpoena is denied, and the magistrate judge’s order is affirmed, for the reasons stated on the record,” Judge Donato writes.

Paired with the earlier rejections and denials, it’s clear that courts are hesitant to allow discovery of Redditors’ private information in connection with these non-party lawsuits.

The filmmakers have proven to be persistent and can appeal this outcome, or file yet another case. However, recent developments seem to have lowered the need to take further action related to the Frontier case.

Filmmakers Have an Alternative Now

The movie companies previously stressed that the Redditors could prove to be of key importance, since they had difficulty obtaining the required evidence from Frontier subscribers directly. However, that may have changed.

Frontier previously redacted the personal details of its subscribers, when filmmakers asked for information in their piracy liability lawsuit. Earlier this month, however, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York ordered the ISP to share these subscriber details in full .

The court concluded that, with proper safeguards , the interests of copyright holders weigh stronger than the privacy interests of Frontier subscribers.

These Frontier subscribers are materially different from the Redditors, as their alleged piracy activities, monitored via their IP addresses, are at the heart of the liability lawsuit against the ISP.

The unredacted information of Frontier subscribers should help the movie and music companies link the IP addresses to Frontier subscribers, which is required to establish the direct infringement claim and hold Frontier liable.

As for the safeguards, the court stressed that the filmmakers can’t harass the subscribers. It further stressed that their personal information can only be used for the Frontier lawsuit, adding that the highly confidential information should be destroyed 30 days after the proceedings conclude.

Whether the filmmakers will get the evidence they’re looking for remainsto be seen. That said, the ‘anonymous speech’ of the piracy-commenting Redditors remains well protected.

From: TF , for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.

Reddit has gone head-to-head with a group of filmmakers over the past year, aiming to protect the privacy of its users.

In three separate cases, the filmmakers subpoenaed Reddit for details of users who commented on various piracy related topics.

The movie companies said they were not planning to go after these people in court but wanted to use their comments as evidence in ongoing piracy liability lawsuits against Internet providers.

Reddit viewed the requests as intrusive. The company objected to the initial attempt , arguing that handing over the requested information would violate its users’ right to anonymous speech. Reddit later responded similarly to a second and third subpoena request.

The movie companies took these cases to a federal court, asking it to compel Reddit to comply. The court refused to do so, three times already .

Filmmakers Request ‘De Novo’ Review

The film companies were not happy with the denials and refused to give up. When U.S. Magistrate Judge Thomas Hixson denied their most recent attempt in February, relating to the case against ISP Frontier Communications, they moved for a ‘ de novo ’ review at a California federal court.

In their motion, the rightsholders cited jurisprudence suggesting that an IP address is not necessarily ‘unmasking’ personally identifying information. They argued that the magistrate judge ignored key arguments and arrived at the wrong conclusion.

The companies stressed that the commenters could prove crucial in their battle against ISP Frontier. Among other things, the court’s suggestion that there might be other ways to obtain similar evidence was premature, they said.

Reddit’s Objections

As expected, Reddit objected to the request for a ‘de novo’ review. The company argued that, as the court repeatedly found, the filmmakers have other non-intrusive options to gather evidence against Frontier, including seeking evidence from the ISP and its subscribers directly.

Reddit further noted that the filmmakers’ argument that IP-addresses do not “identify” users is misguided at best.

“Reddit does not require its users to give their real name or addresses, and so the only identifying information Reddit may maintain on its users is their IP address, which is precisely why the Movants here seek the users’ IP addresses. If IP addresses were not identifying, Movants would not be seeking them.”

At worst, the argument is disingenuous, Reddit wrote. The movie companies previously used a Redditor’s IP address to obtain the name and address of a subscriber, requesting their torrenting history and more.

“[A]fter Reddit provided Movants with IP address data for a single Reddit user last year, the Movants immediately identified that IP address by subpoenaing T-Mobile, and they have been harassing that user with motions practice ever since,” Reddit countered.

Court Denies ‘De Novo’ Review

After reviewing these and other arguments, this week the court sided with Reddit. In a single sentence, without further detail, U.S. District Court Judge James Donato denied the request for ‘de novo’ review.

“The motion for de novo determination of the motion to enforce the subpoena is denied, and the magistrate judge’s order is affirmed, for the reasons stated on the record,” Judge Donato writes.

Paired with the earlier rejections and denials, it’s clear that courts are hesitant to allow discovery of Redditors’ private information in connection with these non-party lawsuits.

The filmmakers have proven to be persistent and can appeal this outcome, or file yet another case. However, recent developments seem to have lowered the need to take further action related to the Frontier case.

Filmmakers Have an Alternative Now

The movie companies previously stressed that the Redditors could prove to be of key importance, since they had difficulty obtaining the required evidence from Frontier subscribers directly. However, that may have changed.

Frontier previously redacted the personal details of its subscribers, when filmmakers asked for information in their piracy liability lawsuit. Earlier this month, however, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York ordered the ISP to share these subscriber details in full .

The court concluded that, with proper safeguards , the interests of copyright holders weigh stronger than the privacy interests of Frontier subscribers.

These Frontier subscribers are materially different from the Redditors, as their alleged piracy activities, monitored via their IP addresses, are at the heart of the liability lawsuit against the ISP.

The unredacted information of Frontier subscribers should help the movie and music companies link the IP addresses to Frontier subscribers, which is required to establish the direct infringement claim and hold Frontier liable.

As for the safeguards, the court stressed that the filmmakers can’t harass the subscribers. It further stressed that their personal information can only be used for the Frontier lawsuit, adding that the highly confidential information should be destroyed 30 days after the proceedings conclude.

Whether the filmmakers will get the evidence they’re looking for remainsto be seen. That said, the ‘anonymous speech’ of the piracy-commenting Redditors remains well protected.

From: TF , for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.

Reddit has gone head-to-head with a group of filmmakers over the past year, aiming to protect the privacy of its users.

In three separate cases, the filmmakers subpoenaed Reddit for details of users who commented on various piracy related topics.

The movie companies said they were not planning to go after these people in court but wanted to use their comments as evidence in ongoing piracy liability lawsuits against Internet providers.

Reddit viewed the requests as intrusive. The company objected to the initial attempt , arguing that handing over the requested information would violate its users’ right to anonymous speech. Reddit later responded similarly to a second and third subpoena request.

The movie companies took these cases to a federal court, asking it to compel Reddit to comply. The court refused to do so, three times already .

Filmmakers Request ‘De Novo’ Review

The film companies were not happy with the denials and refused to give up. When U.S. Magistrate Judge Thomas Hixson denied their most recent attempt in February, relating to the case against ISP Frontier Communications, they moved for a ‘ de novo ’ review at a California federal court.

In their motion, the rightsholders cited jurisprudence suggesting that an IP address is not necessarily ‘unmasking’ personally identifying information. They argued that the magistrate judge ignored key arguments and arrived at the wrong conclusion.

The companies stressed that the commenters could prove crucial in their battle against ISP Frontier. Among other things, the court’s suggestion that there might be other ways to obtain similar evidence was premature, they said.

Reddit’s Objections

As expected, Reddit objected to the request for a ‘de novo’ review. The company argued that, as the court repeatedly found, the filmmakers have other non-intrusive options to gather evidence against Frontier, including seeking evidence from the ISP and its subscribers directly.

Reddit further noted that the filmmakers’ argument that IP-addresses do not “identify” users is misguided at best.

“Reddit does not require its users to give their real name or addresses, and so the only identifying information Reddit may maintain on its users is their IP address, which is precisely why the Movants here seek the users’ IP addresses. If IP addresses were not identifying, Movants would not be seeking them.”

At worst, the argument is disingenuous, Reddit wrote. The movie companies previously used a Redditor’s IP address to obtain the name and address of a subscriber, requesting their torrenting history and more.

“[A]fter Reddit provided Movants with IP address data for a single Reddit user last year, the Movants immediately identified that IP address by subpoenaing T-Mobile, and they have been harassing that user with motions practice ever since,” Reddit countered.

Court Denies ‘De Novo’ Review

After reviewing these and other arguments, this week the court sided with Reddit. In a single sentence, without further detail, U.S. District Court Judge James Donato denied the request for ‘de novo’ review.

“The motion for de novo determination of the motion to enforce the subpoena is denied, and the magistrate judge’s order is affirmed, for the reasons stated on the record,” Judge Donato writes.

Paired with the earlier rejections and denials, it’s clear that courts are hesitant to allow discovery of Redditors’ private information in connection with these non-party lawsuits.

The filmmakers have proven to be persistent and can appeal this outcome, or file yet another case. However, recent developments seem to have lowered the need to take further action related to the Frontier case.

Filmmakers Have an Alternative Now

The movie companies previously stressed that the Redditors could prove to be of key importance, since they had difficulty obtaining the required evidence from Frontier subscribers directly. However, that may have changed.

Frontier previously redacted the personal details of its subscribers, when filmmakers asked for information in their piracy liability lawsuit. Earlier this month, however, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York ordered the ISP to share these subscriber details in full .

The court concluded that, with proper safeguards , the interests of copyright holders weigh stronger than the privacy interests of Frontier subscribers.

These Frontier subscribers are materially different from the Redditors, as their alleged piracy activities, monitored via their IP addresses, are at the heart of the liability lawsuit against the ISP.

The unredacted information of Frontier subscribers should help the movie and music companies link the IP addresses to Frontier subscribers, which is required to establish the direct infringement claim and hold Frontier liable.

As for the safeguards, the court stressed that the filmmakers can’t harass the subscribers. It further stressed that their personal information can only be used for the Frontier lawsuit, adding that the highly confidential information should be destroyed 30 days after the proceedings conclude.

Whether the filmmakers will get the evidence they’re looking for remainsto be seen. That said, the ‘anonymous speech’ of the piracy-commenting Redditors remains well protected.

From: TF , for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.

In a lawsuit filed at a U.S. district court early January 2022, video game giant Activision targeted German company EngineOwning UG, plus a number of individuals associated with the cheat-making and distribution business.

With a flood of similar cases, some filed by competitor Bungie, providing a template, Activision’s complaint alleged, among other things, that the defendants trafficked in circumvention devices, in violation of the DMCA’s anti-circumvention provision.

Warring Parties Come Out Fighting

For more than a year, the EngineOwning defendants played to their strengths, characterizing Activision as a fifty billion dollar corporate bully targeting a handful of under-resourced, overseas defendants, with little means of fighting back. Yet fight back they did.

After retaining counsel in the United States, defendants including Valentin Rick, Alex Kleeman, Bennet Huch, Leon Frisch, Leon Schlender, Leonard Bugla, Marc-Alexander Richts, Pascal Claβen, and Remo Löffler, filed a motion to dismiss. Activision’s amended complaint had added new claims under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, and two further counts of racketeering (RICO). In general, however, none of the defendants relished the idea of visiting the U.S.

A month later, two of the defendants broke ranks and settled with Activision. Court records indicate that one settled for $2m and the other for around half that, but money wasn’t the only thing on Activision’s mind. As always, information can also prove helpful.

Defendants’ Odds of a Win Take a Nose Dive

Activision’s response to the motion to dismiss was aggressive, to put it mildly. Armed with what appeared to be freshly-obtained records of EngineOwning’s internal communications, the court heard how the defendants “routinely trade detailed instructions on how best to illegally launder” their shared profits, while engaging in “fraudulent tax-dodging schemes.”

Also laid bare were allegations of lavish overseas spending, including weeks spent in the presidential suite of a Zurich hotel, and alleged pondering over whether to pay a defense lawyer or spend 10K on cocaine instead.

With the lawsuit expanding to more than 25 defendants, communication between the EngineOwning defendants and their U.S. attorneys ground to a halt; they subsequently received permission from the court to withdraw from the case. In July 2023, four of the defendants indicated they would defend themselves moving forward, but that was the last the case heard of them.

Activision Moves For Default Judgment

In an order dated Wednesday granting Activision’s motion for default judgment, District Judge Michael W. Fitzgerald recalled the facts of the case as alleged by Activision. Defendant Valentin Rick is described as the founder of EO (EngineOwning) and the “mastermind behind the venture.”

Together with Rick, co-creator/co-founder Leon Frisch is responsible for developing, marketing, distributing, and selling the cheats. The bulk of the rest form EO’s core team, with the remainder described as having site moderation, tech support, and reselling responsibilities.

‘$14.5m in Damages Sounds Reasonable’

Satisfied that Activision has indeed suffered lost profits and goodwill at the hands of the defendants, Judge Fitzgerald notes that all Activision claims pass muster.

“The Court therefore concludes that Plaintiff sufficiently alleges claims for violation of the DMCA, violation of the CFAA, violation of RICO, and intentional interference with contract,” his order reads.

“Here, Plaintiff seeks a total of $14,465,600 in statutory damages. Ordinarily, such a large sum of money at stake would weigh in favor of Defendants. But the Court has ‘wide discretion in determining the amount of statutory damages to be awarded.’ Here, the Court deems the amount of requested damages reasonable, given that Plaintiff alleges that Defendants have acted willfully.”

Finding that the defendants’ failure to appear is unlikely to be due to “excusable neglect”, the Judge granted a permanent injunction, which includes the transfer of the engineowning.to domain to Activision.

For violations of the DMCA’s anti-circumvention provision (17 U.S.C. § 1203(c)(3)(A)), Activision sought the minimum statutory damages of $200 per violation multiplied by the estimated number of downloads of the cheating software in the United States (72,328).

Activision asked for the defendants to be held jointly and severally liable for damages totaling $14,465,600 plus $292,912 in attorneys fees; in the context, the Judge found the request reasonable.

In the meantime, it’s business as usual at EngineOwning, but for how long is unknown.

Having disengaged from the lawsuit last year, it seems unlikely that a new spirit of cooperation will suddenly become a feature of events moving forward.

Given the history, if there are rules to be followed, finding a way around them to gain an unfair advantage might be the most logical outcome.

Activision’s Motion for Entry of Default and the Court’s Default Judgment are available here and here (pdf)

From: TF , for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.

In a lawsuit filed at a U.S. district court early January 2022, video game giant Activision targeted German company EngineOwning UG, plus a number of individuals associated with the cheat-making and distribution business.

With a flood of similar cases, some filed by competitor Bungie, providing a template, Activision’s complaint alleged, among other things, that the defendants trafficked in circumvention devices, in violation of the DMCA’s anti-circumvention provision.

Warring Parties Come Out Fighting

For more than a year, the EngineOwning defendants played to their strengths, characterizing Activision as a fifty billion dollar corporate bully targeting a handful of under-resourced, overseas defendants, with little means of fighting back. Yet fight back they did.

After retaining counsel in the United States, defendants including Valentin Rick, Alex Kleeman, Bennet Huch, Leon Frisch, Leon Schlender, Leonard Bugla, Marc-Alexander Richts, Pascal Claβen, and Remo Löffler, filed a motion to dismiss. Activision’s amended complaint had added new claims under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, and two further counts of racketeering (RICO). In general, however, none of the defendants relished the idea of visiting the U.S.

A month later, two of the defendants broke ranks and settled with Activision. Court records indicate that one settled for $2m and the other for around half that, but money wasn’t the only thing on Activision’s mind. As always, information can also prove helpful.

Defendants’ Odds of a Win Take a Nose Dive

Activision’s response to the motion to dismiss was aggressive, to put it mildly. Armed with what appeared to be freshly-obtained records of EngineOwning’s internal communications, the court heard how the defendants “routinely trade detailed instructions on how best to illegally launder” their shared profits, while engaging in “fraudulent tax-dodging schemes.”

Also laid bare were allegations of lavish overseas spending, including weeks spent in the presidential suite of a Zurich hotel, and alleged pondering over whether to pay a defense lawyer or spend 10K on cocaine instead.

With the lawsuit expanding to more than 25 defendants, communication between the EngineOwning defendants and their U.S. attorneys ground to a halt; they subsequently received permission from the court to withdraw from the case. In July 2023, four of the defendants indicated they would defend themselves moving forward, but that was the last the case heard of them.

Activision Moves For Default Judgment

In an order dated Wednesday granting Activision’s motion for default judgment, District Judge Michael W. Fitzgerald recalled the facts of the case as alleged by Activision. Defendant Valentin Rick is described as the founder of EO (EngineOwning) and the “mastermind behind the venture.”

Together with Rick, co-creator/co-founder Leon Frisch is responsible for developing, marketing, distributing, and selling the cheats. The bulk of the rest form EO’s core team, with the remainder described as having site moderation, tech support, and reselling responsibilities.

‘$14.5m in Damages Sounds Reasonable’

Satisfied that Activision has indeed suffered lost profits and goodwill at the hands of the defendants, Judge Fitzgerald notes that all Activision claims pass muster.

“The Court therefore concludes that Plaintiff sufficiently alleges claims for violation of the DMCA, violation of the CFAA, violation of RICO, and intentional interference with contract,” his order reads.

“Here, Plaintiff seeks a total of $14,465,600 in statutory damages. Ordinarily, such a large sum of money at stake would weigh in favor of Defendants. But the Court has ‘wide discretion in determining the amount of statutory damages to be awarded.’ Here, the Court deems the amount of requested damages reasonable, given that Plaintiff alleges that Defendants have acted willfully.”

Finding that the defendants’ failure to appear is unlikely to be due to “excusable neglect”, the Judge granted a permanent injunction, which includes the transfer of the engineowning.to domain to Activision.

For violations of the DMCA’s anti-circumvention provision (17 U.S.C. § 1203(c)(3)(A)), Activision sought the minimum statutory damages of $200 per violation multiplied by the estimated number of downloads of the cheating software in the United States (72,328).

Activision asked for the defendants to be held jointly and severally liable for damages totaling $14,465,600 plus $292,912 in attorneys fees; in the context, the Judge found the request reasonable.

In the meantime, it’s business as usual at EngineOwning, but for how long is unknown.

Having disengaged from the lawsuit last year, it seems unlikely that a new spirit of cooperation will suddenly become a feature of events moving forward.

Given the history, if there are rules to be followed, finding a way around them to gain an unfair advantage might be the most logical outcome.

Activision’s Motion for Entry of Default and the Court’s Default Judgment are available here and here (pdf)

From: TF , for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.

In a lawsuit filed at a U.S. district court early January 2022, video game giant Activision targeted German company EngineOwning UG, plus a number of individuals associated with the cheat-making and distribution business.

With a flood of similar cases, some filed by competitor Bungie, providing a template, Activision’s complaint alleged, among other things, that the defendants trafficked in circumvention devices, in violation of the DMCA’s anti-circumvention provision.

Warring Parties Come Out Fighting

For more than a year, the EngineOwning defendants played to their strengths, characterizing Activision as a fifty billion dollar corporate bully targeting a handful of under-resourced, overseas defendants, with little means of fighting back. Yet fight back they did.

After retaining counsel in the United States, defendants including Valentin Rick, Alex Kleeman, Bennet Huch, Leon Frisch, Leon Schlender, Leonard Bugla, Marc-Alexander Richts, Pascal Claβen, and Remo Löffler, filed a motion to dismiss. Activision’s amended complaint had added new claims under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, and two further counts of racketeering (RICO). In general, however, none of the defendants relished the idea of visiting the U.S.

A month later, two of the defendants broke ranks and settled with Activision. Court records indicate that one settled for $2m and the other for around half that, but money wasn’t the only thing on Activision’s mind. As always, information can also prove helpful.

Defendants’ Odds of a Win Take a Nose Dive

Activision’s response to the motion to dismiss was aggressive, to put it mildly. Armed with what appeared to be freshly-obtained records of EngineOwning’s internal communications, the court heard how the defendants “routinely trade detailed instructions on how best to illegally launder” their shared profits, while engaging in “fraudulent tax-dodging schemes.”

Also laid bare were allegations of lavish overseas spending, including weeks spent in the presidential suite of a Zurich hotel, and alleged pondering over whether to pay a defense lawyer or spend 10K on cocaine instead.

With the lawsuit expanding to more than 25 defendants, communication between the EngineOwning defendants and their U.S. attorneys ground to a halt; they subsequently received permission from the court to withdraw from the case. In July 2023, four of the defendants indicated they would defend themselves moving forward, but that was the last the case heard of them.

Activision Moves For Default Judgment

In an order dated Wednesday granting Activision’s motion for default judgment, District Judge Michael W. Fitzgerald recalled the facts of the case as alleged by Activision. Defendant Valentin Rick is described as the founder of EO (EngineOwning) and the “mastermind behind the venture.”

Together with Rick, co-creator/co-founder Leon Frisch is responsible for developing, marketing, distributing, and selling the cheats. The bulk of the rest form EO’s core team, with the remainder described as having site moderation, tech support, and reselling responsibilities.

‘$14.5m in Damages Sounds Reasonable’

Satisfied that Activision has indeed suffered lost profits and goodwill at the hands of the defendants, Judge Fitzgerald notes that all Activision claims pass muster.

“The Court therefore concludes that Plaintiff sufficiently alleges claims for violation of the DMCA, violation of the CFAA, violation of RICO, and intentional interference with contract,” his order reads.

“Here, Plaintiff seeks a total of $14,465,600 in statutory damages. Ordinarily, such a large sum of money at stake would weigh in favor of Defendants. But the Court has ‘wide discretion in determining the amount of statutory damages to be awarded.’ Here, the Court deems the amount of requested damages reasonable, given that Plaintiff alleges that Defendants have acted willfully.”

Finding that the defendants’ failure to appear is unlikely to be due to “excusable neglect”, the Judge granted a permanent injunction, which includes the transfer of the engineowning.to domain to Activision.

For violations of the DMCA’s anti-circumvention provision (17 U.S.C. § 1203(c)(3)(A)), Activision sought the minimum statutory damages of $200 per violation multiplied by the estimated number of downloads of the cheating software in the United States (72,328).

Activision asked for the defendants to be held jointly and severally liable for damages totaling $14,465,600 plus $292,912 in attorneys fees; in the context, the Judge found the request reasonable.

In the meantime, it’s business as usual at EngineOwning, but for how long is unknown.

Having disengaged from the lawsuit last year, it seems unlikely that a new spirit of cooperation will suddenly become a feature of events moving forward.

Given the history, if there are rules to be followed, finding a way around them to gain an unfair advantage might be the most logical outcome.

Activision’s Motion for Entry of Default and the Court’s Default Judgment are available here and here (pdf)

From: TF , for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.

In today’s throwaway society, there can be a tendency to undervalue. Expensive smartphones are carelessly dropped and replaced, while an intermittent fault is seen as an excuse to buy better TV, rather than as a signal to check the batteries first.

Yet, things that have true worth, due to their history and other intangible qualities, are not so easily replaced. Last December, when the city of Seoul, South Korea, got out of bed to nationwide news reports of graffiti being sprayed on the walls of the ancient Gyeongbokgung Palace, it wasn’t difficult to see why people were so upset.

Built in 1395, Still Incredible

Gyeongbokgung dates back to the Joseon dynasty, making it very nearly 630 years old. It’s had a lot of restoration work done over the years, including a rebuild in 1867 after being destroyed 270 years earlier. But as the news report shows, culture and history aren’t valued by everyone.

Images in the media revealed that the graffiti was sprayed in several locations, together almost 150 feet long. The image below shared online represents just a small part of the damage, which sadly increased after a copycat struck the next night.

The characters in red reportedly say ‘free movie’ and elsewhere the name of an artist and their album was reportedly daubed. Under the blurred-out blue text in the middle, lay something more valuable: a probable motive.

Suspects

The damage was caused over two days, a Saturday and Sunday night. One suspect handed himself into the police on Monday, a then 17-year-old who said he’d been paid 100,000 won – less than $75.00 – to deface the palace.

While initially citing difficulties in the investigation due to the suspects’ use of Telegram, which is both encrypted and based overseas, several people were already talking to the police.

The 17-year-old and his 16-year-old girlfriend were both detained in December; the latter was present when the damage was taking place on December 16, 2023, but played no active role, reports suggest. A man in his 20s admitted that he caused damage the next evening in what appears to have been a copycat incident.

The teenagers said that they were offered 3 million won, almost $2,200, to spray the web address of an illegal streaming site on the palace. They identified the instigator by his online nickname, ‘Team Leader Lee.’

Man Was Arrested, Escaped, and Arrested Again

On May 25th (some reports cite May 22nd), ‘Team Leader Lee’ – now identified as Mr Kang, the alleged operator of an unnamed illegal streaming site – was arrested and taken to court. From there he was taken to the Cyber Investigation Unit at the Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency.

He arrived there around 13:50 and for reasons that aren’t being made clear, somehow managed to escape. Police reportedly deployed all of their resources and by 15:40, 30+ year-old Kang was back in custody.

Police say they have evidence to show that Kang offered the money in exchange for promoting his website in graffiti on the sides of the palace. Kang’s also suspected of posting illegal pornography on the site, including the worst kind, according to a police report.

In total, damage caused by the suspects has led to 150,000,000 won ($109,500) in restoration costs, The Korea Times reports. Korea’s Cultural Heritage Administration (CHA) says the pair responsible will face a civil lawsuit for damages.

The man in his 20s is currently on trial in a criminal case. Prosecutors are pushing for three years in prison, an indication of how seriously the offense is being taken.

Kang has a warrant out for his arrest and faces a number of charges and potentially many years in prison. Should he be convicted, one of the most valuable commodities of all may prove elusive; it waits for no one and can never be restored, not for any amount of money.

From: TF , for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.

In today’s throwaway society, there can be a tendency to undervalue. Expensive smartphones are carelessly dropped and replaced, while an intermittent fault is seen as an excuse to buy better TV, rather than as a signal to check the batteries first.

Yet, things that have true worth, due to their history and other intangible qualities, are not so easily replaced. Last December, when the city of Seoul, South Korea, got out of bed to nationwide news reports of graffiti being sprayed on the walls of the ancient Gyeongbokgung Palace, it wasn’t difficult to see why people were so upset.

Built in 1395, Still Incredible

Gyeongbokgung dates back to the Joseon dynasty, making it very nearly 630 years old. It’s had a lot of restoration work done over the years, including a rebuild in 1867 after being destroyed 270 years earlier. But as the news report shows, culture and history aren’t valued by everyone.

Images in the media revealed that the graffiti was sprayed in several locations, together almost 150 feet long. The image below shared online represents just a small part of the damage, which sadly increased after a copycat struck the next night.

The characters in red reportedly say ‘free movie’ and elsewhere the name of an artist and their album was reportedly daubed. Under the blurred-out blue text in the middle, lay something more valuable: a probable motive.

Suspects

The damage was caused over two days, a Saturday and Sunday night. One suspect handed himself into the police on Monday, a then 17-year-old who said he’d been paid 100,000 won – less than $75.00 – to deface the palace.

While initially citing difficulties in the investigation due to the suspects’ use of Telegram, which is both encrypted and based overseas, several people were already talking to the police.

The 17-year-old and his 16-year-old girlfriend were both detained in December; the latter was present when the damage was taking place on December 16, 2023, but played no active role, reports suggest. A man in his 20s admitted that he caused damage the next evening in what appears to have been a copycat incident.

The teenagers said that they were offered 3 million won, almost $2,200, to spray the web address of an illegal streaming site on the palace. They identified the instigator by his online nickname, ‘Team Leader Lee.’

Man Was Arrested, Escaped, and Arrested Again

On May 25th (some reports cite May 22nd), ‘Team Leader Lee’ – now identified as Mr Kang, the alleged operator of an unnamed illegal streaming site – was arrested and taken to court. From there he was taken to the Cyber Investigation Unit at the Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency.

He arrived there around 13:50 and for reasons that aren’t being made clear, somehow managed to escape. Police reportedly deployed all of their resources and by 15:40, 30+ year-old Kang was back in custody.

Police say they have evidence to show that Kang offered the money in exchange for promoting his website in graffiti on the sides of the palace. Kang’s also suspected of posting illegal pornography on the site, including the worst kind, according to a police report.

In total, damage caused by the suspects has led to 150,000,000 won ($109,500) in restoration costs, The Korea Times reports. Korea’s Cultural Heritage Administration (CHA) says the pair responsible will face a civil lawsuit for damages.

The man in his 20s is currently on trial in a criminal case. Prosecutors are pushing for three years in prison, an indication of how seriously the offense is being taken.

Kang has a warrant out for his arrest and faces a number of charges and potentially many years in prison. Should he be convicted, one of the most valuable commodities of all may prove elusive; it waits for no one and can never be restored, not for any amount of money.

From: TF , for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.

In today’s throwaway society, there can be a tendency to undervalue. Expensive smartphones are carelessly dropped and replaced, while an intermittent fault is seen as an excuse to buy better TV, rather than as a signal to check the batteries first.

Yet, things that have true worth, due to their history and other intangible qualities, are not so easily replaced. Last December, when the city of Seoul, South Korea, got out of bed to nationwide news reports of graffiti being sprayed on the walls of the ancient Gyeongbokgung Palace, it wasn’t difficult to see why people were so upset.

Built in 1395, Still Incredible

Gyeongbokgung dates back to the Joseon dynasty, making it very nearly 630 years old. It’s had a lot of restoration work done over the years, including a rebuild in 1867 after being destroyed 270 years earlier. But as the news report shows, culture and history aren’t valued by everyone.

Images in the media revealed that the graffiti was sprayed in several locations, together almost 150 feet long. The image below shared online represents just a small part of the damage, which sadly increased after a copycat struck the next night.

The characters in red reportedly say ‘free movie’ and elsewhere the name of an artist and their album was reportedly daubed. Under the blurred-out blue text in the middle, lay something more valuable: a probable motive.

Suspects

The damage was caused over two days, a Saturday and Sunday night. One suspect handed himself into the police on Monday, a then 17-year-old who said he’d been paid 100,000 won – less than $75.00 – to deface the palace.

While initially citing difficulties in the investigation due to the suspects’ use of Telegram, which is both encrypted and based overseas, several people were already talking to the police.

The 17-year-old and his 16-year-old girlfriend were both detained in December; the latter was present when the damage was taking place on December 16, 2023, but played no active role, reports suggest. A man in his 20s admitted that he caused damage the next evening in what appears to have been a copycat incident.

The teenagers said that they were offered 3 million won, almost $2,200, to spray the web address of an illegal streaming site on the palace. They identified the instigator by his online nickname, ‘Team Leader Lee.’

Man Was Arrested, Escaped, and Arrested Again

On May 25th (some reports cite May 22nd), ‘Team Leader Lee’ – now identified as Mr Kang, the alleged operator of an unnamed illegal streaming site – was arrested and taken to court. From there he was taken to the Cyber Investigation Unit at the Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency.

He arrived there around 13:50 and for reasons that aren’t being made clear, somehow managed to escape. Police reportedly deployed all of their resources and by 15:40, 30+ year-old Kang was back in custody.

Police say they have evidence to show that Kang offered the money in exchange for promoting his website in graffiti on the sides of the palace. Kang’s also suspected of posting illegal pornography on the site, including the worst kind, according to a police report.

In total, damage caused by the suspects has led to 150,000,000 won ($109,500) in restoration costs, The Korea Times reports. Korea’s Cultural Heritage Administration (CHA) says the pair responsible will face a civil lawsuit for damages.

The man in his 20s is currently on trial in a criminal case. Prosecutors are pushing for three years in prison, an indication of how seriously the offense is being taken.

Kang has a warrant out for his arrest and faces a number of charges and potentially many years in prison. Should he be convicted, one of the most valuable commodities of all may prove elusive; it waits for no one and can never be restored, not for any amount of money.

From: TF , for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more.