Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Music Media Movies Your Rights Online

RIAA MediaSentry, Dead In US, Is Alive In Australia 305

Posted by kdawson
from the down-under-up-for dept.
newtley writes "Disgraced and discredited 'private investigator' MediaSentry, fired by former patrons Vivendi Universal, EMI, Warner Music, and Sony Music and their RIAA, may be dead and buried in America, but it's alive and well, resurfacing in Australia where it's once again plying its trade, probably under new management. 'I currently (but not for long) reside at a student dormitory... in Brisbane, Australia,' says a p2pnet reader, continuing: 'Yesterday I got called into the Managers office because the network manager had been contacted by MediaSentry and emailed one of the generic copyright infringement emails as a result of me downloading Angels and Demons. Now instead of studying for my exams and working on my final assignments I must take time to find a place to live before the 29th of May (2009).'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

RIAA MediaSentry, Dead In US, Is Alive In Australia

Comments Filter:
  • by Andr T. (1006215) <andretaff@gma[ ]com ['il.' in gap]> on Friday May 22, 2009 @11:59AM (#28054913)
    Damn, you could at least lose your dormitory for a movie worth watching.
    • by eldavojohn (898314) * <[moc.liamg] [ta] [nhojovadle]> on Friday May 22, 2009 @12:05PM (#28054999) Journal

      Damn, you could at least lose your dormitory for a movie worth watching.

      Even worse result:

      <RIAA> See? Illegal file sharing is why Angels and Demons did poorly at the box office and got an average rating of 38% [rottentomatoes.com]! It isn't the economy or quality, folks, our formula has never failed therefore it must be the file sharers! </RIAA>

    • by Ash Vince (602485) on Friday May 22, 2009 @12:32PM (#28055441) Journal

      In my day most people got thrown out of university accommodation for having wild parties and trashing the joint or for dealing drugs.

      How things have changed.

  • by cyber-vandal (148830) on Friday May 22, 2009 @12:01PM (#28054937) Homepage

    You chose to break the law and were punished for it.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      He choose to break the RIAA rules and got judged in a kangaroo court.

      Or was that extortion?

      • by oahazmatt (868057) on Friday May 22, 2009 @12:11PM (#28055105) Journal

        I don't really see too much room for debate when the accused states the matter as simply as "...a result of me downloading Angels and Demons". I don't read this and feel that the person is genuinely feeling remorse for what was done, only for getting caught.

        • by Nerdfest (867930) on Friday May 22, 2009 @12:17PM (#28055189)
          Not having read TFA, I'm assuming that he was actually kicked out of his residence for violating some sort of agreed upon terms of residence/bahaviour which he did admit to violating. If it's because he broke copyright law, there should be at least some sort of due process. The universities in North America have been amongst the few that have generally stood up to RIAA bullying tactics. Sounds like a different ball game in Australia.
          • by BobMcD (601576)

            I don't know. The word 'allegedly' is missing, is it not? Confessions usually aren't up for a lot of debate, are they?

            'Innocent until proven' is fine, but it sounds like the accused caved in the face of the evidence. If the accusation was false, THEN due process would likely have attached due to the assertion of innocence.

            The same thing happens in the US all the time. After the arrest you are given the opportunity to confess. Those that do confess DO NOT go to trial.

            How exactly is this ethically/morall

            • by Psyborgue (699890)
              He admitted, presumably only *after* he was punished. He never got a chance to defend himself, now did he? If he wasn't guilty, would he have had a venue or opportunity to defend himself? What if it were you accused, and you *hadn't* downloaded the movie in question (maybe it was a roommate using a shared computer or somebody using your computer as a wifi access point).
    • by Andr T. (1006215) <andretaff@gma[ ]com ['il.' in gap]> on Friday May 22, 2009 @12:05PM (#28055005)

      It seems he got a damn fast judgement. And a damn fast judgement done by a private company.

      Does anyone remember 'Judge Dredd'? 'I am the law!!!'

      • by chabotc (22496) <chabotc AT gmail DOT com> on Friday May 22, 2009 @12:21PM (#28055269) Homepage

        +1 on this sentiment.

        He was punished based on an accusation, not on being found guilty.. that's skipping over an incredibly vital step in the justice system.

        Really that's only a small step away from how 'justice' was administered during the 'Dark Ages'. I thought we had left that behind us, but apparently having lawyers and money means you don't have to bother with such pesky details anymore. More so because we're not talking of a fine or something small, but of evicting someone!

        Oh while we're at it: What if someone accused you of having *something* illegal on your computer, be it a non licensed picture, an bit of software you didn't obtain legally, or some content you've downloaded. Would you be so happy to instantly loose your home without any independent parties being involved in judging what's true and appropriate ?

      • by amicusNYCL (1538833) on Friday May 22, 2009 @12:53PM (#28055741)

        How do you people know he didn't get due process? How can you even assume that? Considering the fact that he confessed to this on a public website, I'm thinking his conversation with the manager went something like this:

        Manager: Hey, kid. I got this letter here from a company called MediaSentry claiming that they traced a download of Angels and Demons to your PC. Is that true?
        Kid: Yes.
        Manager: GTFO.

        That's due process, right there. The kid decided to use his study time to search for, download, and presumably watch a movie which he wasn't entitled to download, and now he's crying because he has to use his study time to find a new place to live.

        The only thing newsworthy about this story is the fact that MediaSentry is operating in Australia, the kid who got what he deserved is not the story.

      • by Yaur (1069446)
        I read it as his college is throwing him out of the dorm, not that he was judged by a court. If he admitted to the network admin that he used school resources to pirate content taking those resources away seems like a reasonable thing for the college to do.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Psyborgue (699890)
      There is something called due process. He got none.
      • by owlnation (858981) on Friday May 22, 2009 @12:33PM (#28055447)

        There is something called due process. He got none.

        While that is true... He really would have got much more sympathy, even on /., if he had the brains to write:

        "the network manager had been contacted by MediaSentry and emailed one of the generic copyright infringement emails as a result of me (allegedly) downloading Angels and Demons."

        Honestly, students today... what is education coming to? Seems too easy to get into Uni these days. Innocent until proven guilty, but if you are admitting your guilt, then there's a good chance you are. He would have had a reasonable grounds for fighting this if he'd denied any wrong doing and shifted the burden of proof. Not very smart not to.

        • by kramulous (977841) on Friday May 22, 2009 @04:17PM (#28058687)

          Except, culturally, things work a little differently here. Or, at least they used to.

          When you do something wrong, you own up to it. You admit your mistake. To deny you did something that you did actually do is seen as cowardice.

          It goes back to the playground rules when you were at school.

          But the times, they are a changing. More often, people are choosing to get a lawyer (goon) and hide behind them and make up bullshit lines instead of owning up and admitting what they did was wrong.

          The innocent until proven guilty line only works for me when the accused is actually innocent. The guy in the story was just being a non coward.

      • He goes to a university, they kicked him out. The only due process he is allowed is whatever they granted him when he agreed to go there in exchange for him paying them money.

        I have no sympathy for him. He knew it was wrong to download it without paying for it. Instead of whining here, he should be addressing the issue with whatever governing boards are at his school.

        Or look into transferring his credits to another school and getting on with his life.
        • by Psyborgue (699890)

          Just because he wasn't technically entitled to any due process doesn't mean it's right. Regardless of where it happens, you deserve a right to defend yourself from accusations.

          even if he was "guilty", in a court of law, would that same evidence be admissable? think about it. Private corporations shouldn't be allowed to play police.

    • by vivaoporto (1064484) on Friday May 22, 2009 @12:17PM (#28055199)
      Had he committed an actual crime (as in criminal offense) and stole the DVD on a store, he would probably only get fined [retail.org.au]

      "Infringement notices not only provide a prompt and direct response to shop theft under $600, they significantly reduce the cost and paperwork associated with prosecution. The ARA would therefore expect that authorities continue working to reduce shop theft and improve deterrence with firmer enforcement measures," Evans said.

      From July 1 2008 police will be able to issue infringement notices for seven common offences, including shop theft of less than $600. The infringement fine for this offence will be two penalty units ($227). Guidelines for the use of infringement notices for this offence provide that police will consider factors such as the person's criminal record, whether the matter appears to be part of a wider criminal operation and whether restitution is an issue before deciding whether to issue an infringement.

      Notice that even in the case of an actual criminal activity, police will take many variables in context before to punish.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        And in this case, he only got emailed. Media Sentry didn't demand that the university terminate his residency contract.

        That was the result of a contract he willingly entered into between himself and the university about behaviour. He admits he did as described in the letter, and as a result, the university is asking him to leave the dorms.

        Should have considered, perhaps, that they might actually have desired and expected that he adhere to the contract that he as an adult signed.

      • Notice that even in the case of an actual criminal activity, police will take many variables in context before to punish.

        Cops can use discretion on whether or not to arrest, it's up to judges to issue punishment.

      • Had he committed an actual crime (as in criminal offense) and stole the DVD on a store, he would probably only get fined

        Well that depends, doesn't it? Was the store a university-run store, or did he use university resources to help him steal it? Because, in this case, he used the university's network to download the copyrighted material. That's different than walking into an unrelated store and shoplifting, the university has a responsibility to police its own resources.

      • What would have happened if he'd have stolen it from the University DVD shop? Presumably he used the university's network to download it in violation of the contract he signed with them.

    • This is fascinating. (Score:4, Interesting)

      by TerranFury (726743) on Friday May 22, 2009 @12:18PM (#28055215)

      I'm going to pretend I have no opinion in this post and instead make a "meta-comment:"

      What I find fascinating is that, just a year ago, an overwhelming majority of Slashdot readers would have defended this student, written posts to the effect that it is justifiable to download copyrighted work, made angry statements about the MP/RI-AA, and the like. Now, I see many more posts (and story tags -- currently "righttosteal") like yours. Sure, the old pro-pirate posts are still around -- they are probably even still the majority -- but I think that the percentage is lower. I wonder if this means that attitudes are changing, and whether this is due at all to the RIAA's campaign.

      • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

        by mftb (1522365)
        I approve. Blind pro-piracy is extremely childish. Oh wait, slashdot.
      • Re: (Score:2, Redundant)

        by grahamd0 (1129971)

        Or it could that the rational part of Slashdot's audience never actually supported anyone's right to download copyrighted material without paying, but objected their to their hijacking and circumventing the legal system to protect said material.

        In this case, the poster freely admits he did exactly what he was accused of. He isn't being persecuted by the RIAA, he is in blatant violation of the terms of his residency and his university is simply enforcing the policy he agreed to (perhaps without reading the

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by phantomfive (622387)
        No, it depends on the story. A certain story type will bring out certain commenters. Same with OS wars: some stories will bring out Mac fans, others will bring out the Microsoft defenders. Or global warming, some will bring out the tree-huggers, others the unbelievers. This guy, sounding like a whiner, gave a chance to those who aren't as pro-pirate.

        Although I have to say my opinion in favor of copyright (and against piracy) has gotten a bit stronger for a few reasons:
        1. I've had time to think, and I re
    • by JSBiff (87824) on Friday May 22, 2009 @12:24PM (#28055299) Journal

      I put crime in quotes, because I believe it's only a civil infraction (although, I don't know much about Australian copyright law). In any case, getting kicked out of a dorm room for one 'count' of copyright infringement seems a little harsh, no? I mean, they could have started by just cutting his Internet access for a couple days or a week or something.

      I mean, I really fail to see how it is even *legal* to kick someone out of a dorm room/apartment/etc for copyright infringement. Don't you guys have any tennants' rights laws in Australia?

    • Laws and their sentences are written down for anyone to see.

      If part of the tenancy agreement said that they'd boot you out for copyright infringement fair enough. If they've just said that they can evict you at their discretion (as I suspect) then this is very unlike breaking the law and getting judicially punished for it.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Sasayaki (1096761)

      Millions of people break the law every day; this particular issue of law, specifically. Copyright infringement. Why do all of those people deserve no punishment at all, while this guy deserves to lose his home?

      My issue is not that he should be allowed to do what he did, but that the punishment is:

      a) Extremely excessive, even for a habitual, repeat offender. We allow rapists to keep their homes (and even provide them with a new one!); is this worse than rape?

      b) Extremely sporatically enforced. Would you supp

    • by vertinox (846076) on Friday May 22, 2009 @01:22PM (#28056199)

      You chose to break the law and were punished for it.

      As opposed to the people that break unjust laws and were punished for it?

      I mean Aung San Suu Kyi [bbc.co.uk] has my sympathy even though she has indeed broke the "law" of her nation. She's probably going to suffer a long time because it.

      I'm not saying that what the file sharer did in anywhere in comparison with what she is trying to accomplish in Burma, but make a blanket statement that because you break a law means you don't get sympathy is foolish indeed.

      Hell. Legally, the American Revolutions broke the law when they revolted.

      Remember...

      Sometimes following a law is not always the right thing to do because sometimes a law is written in an unethical or immoral way.

  • Getting students evicted by putting pressure on the dorm management? That's setting a new standard in scumbag behavior, so what's next now? How do you go deeper when you've already dug a six feet trench underneath the sewer lines?
    • by IndieKid (1061106)
      It's probably part of the tenancy agreement, "you agree not to break the law within these premises" etc. He could probably go to court to claim his innocence, but since he's just delcared on slashdot that he did indeed download the film illegally using P2P I somehow doubt that's the route he'll be taking.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      There is NOTHING in the story to suggest that MediaSentry put any pressure on the university to evict. They'd probably not even be aware that he lived on campus (in Australia, the VERY vast majority of students do not live on campus, and I don't believe a single university has even a single year where you are required to live on campus).

      They sent an email informing the college as owners of the IP address of the infringement. He admitted to it, and while looking over the agreement for use of his dorm, which

      • Yeah, you're probably correct. Because they did nothing wrong, immoral or generally unethical in the united states so far, right?
        • They sent a letter. I have no love for Media Sentry and their 'scatterfire' methods. But the university showed him the email, and he admitted it was him and that he did it.
  • 'Yesterday I got called into the Managers office because the network manager had been contacted by MediaSentry and emailed one of the generic copyright infringement emails as a result of me downloading Angels and Demons. Now instead of studying for my exams and working on my final assignments I must take time to find a place to live before the 29th of May (2009).'"

    Exactly what is the student's complaint?

    If he did break the law, he needs to accept the consequences. If he didn't break the law, he should rebu

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Psyborgue (699890)
      And how, exactly, could he rebut the accusation? What venue could he use if he was falsely accused?
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by johannesg (664142)

      'Yesterday I got called into the Managers office because the network manager had been contacted by MediaSentry and emailed one of the generic copyright infringement emails as a result of me downloading Angels and Demons. Now instead of studying for my exams and working on my final assignments I must take time to find a place to live before the 29th of May (2009).'"

      Exactly what is the student's complaint?

      If he did break the law, he needs to accept the consequences. If he didn't break the law, he should rebut the accusation.

      I believe his complaint is that, for stealing ~$10 worth of books, he is now being punished by losing his house and possibly an academic year.

      Some of us still believe that crime and punishment need to be in balance somehow, and that simply isn't the case here.

      • by Necroman (61604)

        Uhh, I'm guessing he means the movie: http://www.angelsanddemons.com/ [angelsanddemons.com]

      • I believe his complaint is that, for stealing ~$10 worth of books, he is now being punished by losing his house and possibly an academic year.

        Oh c'mon, man up Nancy. I got kicked out of the dorm my freshman year for smoking pot inside. I didn't fight it, because I knew I was obviously wrong, in fact I knew it wasn't OK to do that before I even did it, and I *even* knew that if I got caught they would probably kick me out. So they kicked me out, I got an apartment nearby, and never even missed a day of classes (well.. not because of moving, anyway).

        He knew that what he was doing wasn't allowed, and that there was punishment for it. He might ha

    • by BobMcD (601576)

      I'm with you on this one.

      Where, exactly, exists the possibility that downloading Angels and Demons is a morally/ethically acceptable thing to do?

      You can dismiss the usual complaints immediately. The student was not:

      A) replacing a purchased copy

      B) circumventing unreasonable restrictions

      C) using the internet as another medium for broadcast content

      D) rebelling against the cost of a ticket

      etc, etc, etc

      So if the student is innocent, this needs to be yelled from the rooftops. Otherwise punishment seems perfectl

    • by langelgjm (860756) on Friday May 22, 2009 @12:34PM (#28055479) Journal

      If he did break the law, he needs to accept the consequences. If he didn't break the law, he should rebut the accusation.

      Let me help you understand: the problem is that the consequences are inappropriate to the conduct. Your line of reasoning would have everyone accept whatever consequences are in place, no matter how draconian.

      There, now, that wasn't so hard, was it?

    • by Rycross (836649)

      My point of view is that copyright infringement (which is not theft), should warrant, at most, a bill for the goods copied and, at most, a 50% penalty fee on top of that. Getting kicked out of your home for downloading a movie is grossly out of line with the actual damages that occurred (and most copyright infringement penalties are... such as $700 for a $1 song).

    • by PMuse (320639)

      If he did break the law, he needs to accept the consequences. If he didn't break the law, he should rebut the accusation.

      That's harsh to the point of hypocrisy coming from this site. Slashdot has spent years scheming about how to rebut such accusations even when they're true. Slashdot has spent years arguing that such downloading shouldn't be a crime, or should be punished only lightly (e.g., fine = retail price). Where are those posters today? Where are those moderators today?

      Even those of us who think that what he did was wrong ought to be offering him a chance to crash at their place for a month or so.

  • Boo hoo.... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Lumpy (12016) on Friday May 22, 2009 @12:03PM (#28054967) Homepage

    "Now instead of studying for my exams and working on my final assignments I must take time to find a place to live before the 29th of May (2009).'""

    Wah?

    I mean come on, you're paying the price for doing what you knew would get in hot water at school. you DID read the acceptable use policy before you signed it right?

    • by daveime (1253762)

      You managed to take time out from studying and doing assignments to watch the movie. Pity you just didn't go to the cinema and shell out the measly $5 like the rest of us.

      If you are looking for sympathy, don't be so bloody blase about what you did. At least show some remorse. You sound like you consider this acceptable behaviour, and are only griping because you got caught this time.

      And thank your lucky stars it was an informal e-mail to your network admin, and not one of the "pay us $5000 dollars and we'll

    • Re:Boo hoo.... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by langelgjm (860756) on Friday May 22, 2009 @12:28PM (#28055379) Journal

      you DID read the acceptable use policy before you signed it right?

      He must have missed the part in the AUP where it said dorm management would evict you for violating network policies based on the accusation of a private third party.

      Seriously, WTF /. Half the comments are along the lines of "you deserve this." Sure, he was downloading infringing material and violating the AUP - cut off his internet access. But throwing someone out of a dorm?

      Hint: what's to stop a creative student who is pissed at someone from spoofing an e-mail from MediaSentry to the management, and having someone else thrown out?

      The real ire should be directed at the management for throwing someone out of housing for violating network policies. What next - run an open access point, and you get expelled? Download a song, and your landlord throws you out of your apartment?

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by sbeckstead (555647)
        You of course also have no knowledge of any action or investigation management took before throwing him out as we only have his half of the story. I hate to go all Les Miserables on people but he did steal the loaf of bread and he readily admits it. ( that's a simile people or even perhaps a metaphoric loaf of bread that he metaphorically stole)
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by langelgjm (860756)

          I hate to go all Les Miserables on people but he did steal the loaf of bread and he readily admits it.

          If you've read Les Mis, you'll remember that Jean Valjean is thrown in prison for five years after stealing a loaf of bread. I.e., an unreasonable penalty for a crime that he did commit. So yeah, your analogy is more apt than you seem to realize :-)

          It's true that we only have his half of the story. On the other hand, I have a really hard time concocting any other side of the story that would warrant throwing someone out of housing for violating network policies. If he came crying to /. about how his network

    • Due Process (Score:5, Insightful)

      by FreeUser (11483) on Friday May 22, 2009 @12:34PM (#28055477)

      "Now instead of studying for my exams and working on my final assignments I must take time to find a place to live before the 29th of May (2009).'""

      Wah?

      I mean come on, you're paying the price for doing what you knew would get in hot water at school. you DID read the acceptable use policy before you signed it right?

      Um ... where's the due process. A third party, which has been discredited in another country and fired by the copyright cartels there because their ability to track offenders has been so abysmal and inaccurate, has made an accusation. One that, based on their track record in the United States, should be taken with a mountain of salt.

      Based on that accusation, someone has been evicted from their home at a time when they should be studying for exams. As far as I can tell, there's been no disciplinary due process, no hearings, no opportunities for appeal, just a summary eviction with no opportunity for the student to put their case forward. Maybe s/he is guilty. Maybe his/her roommate is a prick and used his equipment to do something stupid so they wouldn't pay the price. Maybe someone else did it entirely, and spoofed his IP address. Or maybe, like in so many cases in the US that the company had to close their doors, no one in the dorm was involved at all, and they're barking up the wrong tree completely.

      Doesn't matter. Summary punishment has been meted out, on the barest of accusations. That is a problem, the student's guilt or innocence not withstanding, and if I were considering sending a kid to university, that's one school I would avoid quite possibly wasting my hard earned money on.

  • Not sure about what colleges you went to but off-campus housing > *, only reason I thought people live in the dorm was because it is required for the first two years for new students.
  • Oy (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Tridus (79566) on Friday May 22, 2009 @12:09PM (#28055063) Homepage

    "Now instead of studying for my exams and working on my final assignments "

    It seems to me that if you were really concerned about studying, you'd have done it before downloading Angels & Demons.

    • by langelgjm (860756)

      It seems to me that if you were really concerned about studying, you'd have done it before downloading Angels & Demons.

      Maybe he was downloading it to watch after exams :-)

  • Yeah right (Score:2, Insightful)

    by phantomfive (622387)

    Now instead of studying for my exams and working on my final assignments I must take time to find a place to live before the 29th of May (2009)

    Yeah right, that's what I used to say when I was in college too. If you had actually been studying for your exams and working on your final assignments instead of watching movies, you wouldn't be in this situation, would you?

    • If you had actually been studying for your exams and working on your final assignments instead of watching movies, you wouldn't be in this situation, would you?

      Do you work every hour that you exist? Do you not have any time off doing things other than working? Do you think you could have come up with a marginally more clever response than a trite cliche?

      The student hasn't helped himself entirely by being so blase, but losing your home over downloading a film? When is that EVER balanced justice? ...Carl

  • Find out the names and addresses of the management of MediaSentry and.......

  • Of course he could have also been studying and working on assignments instead of downloading crappy movies and infringing on the copyright rights of those that hold them.

  • by apathy maybe (922212) on Friday May 22, 2009 @12:15PM (#28055169) Homepage Journal

    As expected, there are a large number of replies by people who didn't even bother to read the summary. (Or, have poor reading comprehension, or even both, I guess.)

    The submitter is not the same as the student.

    Anyway, the point is, MediaSentry is still "alive", and still sending out automated messages.

    Now it seems that the student admitted to downloading the file ("as a result of me downloading Angels and Demons"), which sort of screws over any real complaint they may have had.

    Personally, I think it's disgusting that the manager paid any attention to the "generic copyright infringement email" at all. Seriously, if I were in that situation, I would delete the email and forget about it.

    I wonder, who is MediaSentry acting for in this situation? Does that company know that MediaSentry is doing this? Do MediaSentry have the right to sue on behalf of that company?

    And, is MediaSentry keeping track of these emails and watching for responses?

  • by howlingmadhowie (943150) on Friday May 22, 2009 @12:20PM (#28055247)
    this is weird. i'm i the only one here who finds this punishment (eviction) to be totally over the top for this copyright infringement?
    • by rhsanborn (773855) on Friday May 22, 2009 @12:27PM (#28055361)

      No, not in this case. If the dorm manager had evicted him for scratching the paint, it's a direct issue betwene the manager and the student. This, on the other hand, is the student bringing issues down on the dorm via legal issues with a third party. It looks like the dorm doesn't want to deal with fighting legal battles that aren't it's problem. The student likely signed an acceptable use policy, and so long as the student admitted fault or there was acceptable level of evidence, there shouldn't be a problem. The only issue would be blindly evicting based on every letter sent to the dorm management. It doesn't look like that's the case given the admission of downloading the film.

  • Admit stuff much? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by fahrbot-bot (874524) on Friday May 22, 2009 @12:27PM (#28055359)

    ... as a result of me downloading Angels and Demons.

    Haven't you learned anything?
    Your correct phrase should be: "... me allegedly downloading ..."

  • You don't go to jail for cheating on a test.

    You do get kicked out of school, however.

  • It seems that the situation is this: 1. Person X has by his own admission downloaded a movie. The admission was probably in some blog post, he hasn't (hopefully) admitted anything to the dorm management. 2. Dorm management received an email from MediaSentry telling them about some copyright infringement, and asking them to take the strongest possible action. 3. Dorm management talked to the guy, and the guy thinks he now has very little time to find a new place to stay. In the USA, one of the main problem
  • This doesn't sound like MediaSentry. In this case they actually located an actual download. That's not MediaSentry's style.
  • Maybe (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Frankie70 (803801) on Friday May 22, 2009 @03:30PM (#28058135)

    Now instead of studying for my exams and working on my final assignments I must take time to find a place to live before the 29th of May (2009).

    Maybe you should have been studying for your exams & working on your final assignments instead of downloading movies illegally.

Put your Nose to the Grindstone! -- Amalgamated Plastic Surgeons and Toolmakers, Ltd.

Working...