Here's a really interesting article on what is happening elsewhere. That said, Hotfile has frequently done everything in its power to delay litigation. You can be sure that other porn companies also have access to the same swarm data, etc. Even with overhead, taxes and model fees, Mr. First, their copyright notice flashes on the screen while their record-keeping notice probably for regulatory reasons remains on screen for much longer. This would help Corbin Fisher to declare victory, pursue the uploaders, allow Hotfile to demonstrate that it cooperates in cases of infringement and deter future uploaders. Balls slam into taint on one end as spit drips off balls on the other while everyone moans and pumps into each other.
So this is not cut and dry by any means. They are way, way behind the curve. I don't have exact figures but it's safe to assume that each site has a membership of around 25,000, conservatively. They will simply stop downloading. Corbin Fisher is making money hand over fist. I believe there is precedent for that where judges have forced the plaintiff to pursue suits in each jurisdiction, which obviously increases the expenses exponentially.
Have you seen his recent videos? So nothing is cast in stone. But even then there are quite a few hurdles to surmount to sue downloaders successfully. And the people who were bitching about not being paid by Hotfile when the accounts were deleted may ultimately be very happy that they were. Even then, these kinds of judgments can likely be discharged in bankruptcy. People can always go to their friends' places to download files.
Most businesses would kill for that. Some of these kids live in remote areas and do not have the money to purchase authorized content. Some context: I am a huge torrent user. Hard to say what prompted the settlement, etc. The folks who are launching these suits may well be experts in copyright law but the issues being considered at the Justice Department are a very different kettle of fish.
Nor should anyone be downloading from Hotfile. Their argument is that the downloaders followed links to Hotfile. The current round of litigation will just promote the development of new sharing technologies. That said, here's the most recent information regarding one of the lawsuits. I download stuff all the time, but I'm not a dick about it. If Hotfile receives, as it once did, over 22 million individual visits a day, each clicking on, say, three links, that's 24 billion unique records. And I did plenty of illegal stuff before I was 18, and I would have been horrified to be outed before I was ready.
If you're only suing a couple of dozen does in a jurisdiction, your costs are going to run into the thousands of dollars, much more if a case goes to court. I haven't bought a song, a movie, or high-end software in a great long time. However PayPal and the uploaders are still named. The point is an overall full court press to make sure that we hit the thieves on all fronts. Also, I thought the pornilove suit and Hotfile suits had already been settled? Corbin Fisher's counsel is a very effective lawyer and the lawsuits are not without merit. That has drawn the attention of the Justice Department as it is being viewed as a potential abuse of due process.
Not sure whether clicking on a link is proof enough of a download when the one-click hosting sites did not keep records of downloaders, but the lawyers for Corbin Fisher are quite intelligent and capable. But let's just say it's a billion unique records - how much storage and computing power would that take? When there were a handful of sales a year to buy older product. The old thread was deleted because it included personal information about that site's owners and models, etc. A user name and password? Per the Disney et al suit, Hotfile did not keep logs of downloads until after it deleted a huge number of user accounts. And they're not suing everyone. To show that they were keeping track of downloads to demonstrate that they were not a hotbed of illicit content.
Now they could refile as the dismissal is without prejudice. I think they would have made more money from me if they'd just offered a la cart purchases. For example, a guy can go to three different friends' places to download three different files at three different times. As one of the articles linked above noted, it is all well and good to get judgments but if you can't collect on them, all you can really do is put a black mark on someone's credit report and attempt wage garnishment, etc. But it's rather difficult to hear a confessed serial downloader of pirated content pontificate about the illicit activities of others.