Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

×

+ - Is being in the same BitTorrent "swarm" equal to "interacting"?-> 1

Submitted by
NewYorkCountryLawyer
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "In the new wave of bittorrent downloading cases, the plaintiffs' lawyers like to lump a number of "John Does" together in the same case in order to avoid filing fees ($350 a pop). Their excuse for 'joinder' is the allegation that the defendants 'interacted' with each other by reason of the fact that their torrents may have eminated from the same "swarm". In Malibu Media v. Does 1-5, when John Doe #4 indicated his intention to move for severance, the Court asked the lawyers to address the "swarm" issue in their papers. So when John Doe #4 filed his or her motion to quash, sever, and dismiss, he filed a detailed memorandum of law (PDF) analyzing the "swarm" theory in detail. What do you think?"
Link to Original Source
This discussion was created for logged-in users only, but now has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Is being in the same BitTorrent "swarm" equal to "interacting"?

Comments Filter:
  • by nurb432 (527695)

    Id say they interacted, semi-anonymously since you didn't identify the before hand, but still there was intentional interaction.

Have you reconsidered a computer career?

Working...