Believe it or not, that’s not the most ridiculous part. Check out MPAA lawyer Marie van Uitert’s explanation:

It is often very difficult, and in some cases, impossible, to provide such direct proof when confronting modern forms of copyright infringement, whether over P2P networks or otherwise; understandably, copyright infringers typically do not keep records of infringement.

Yes, you read that right. The MPAA claims it doesn’t need to prove infringement because proof is just too much work.

My jaw’s still on the floor. Nevermind that van Uitert needs to be disbarred for proposing that convictions don’t require evidence. We know the MPAA holds itself above the laws on fair use and cybercrime — but even I never thought they held themselves above proof.

Post from: EveryJoe

MPAA: We Don’t Need No Stinking Proof!

If it can happen to Revision3, it could happen to your business too. We’re simply in the business of delivering entertainment and information – that’s not life or death stuff. But what if MediaDefender discovers a tracker inside a hospital, fire department or 911 center? If it happened to us, it could happen to them too. In my opinion, Media Defender practices risky business, and needs to overhaul how it operates.

\r\n\r\nCopyright trolls think the need to protect their work gives them the right to hurt the innocent. Louderback says the FBI is now on the case. Let\’s hope those Media Defender dogs finally pay for all their cybercrimes.

Post from: EveryJoe

MPAA Dogs Hack Diggnation