A simple click of a "like" button could now follow you to court. In the United States, a judge has just validated evidence linked to likes displayed on social networks.
Internet users are increasingly directly targeted by the courts in cases of piracy. Following the sentencing of an IPTV user in Greece to five months in prison, and the requirement for SFR's parent company to transmit the data of 100 subscribers to the United States, a new case is raising concerns. This time, it's an American accused of illegal downloading who is being criticized for... his social media likes. The court ruled that his online likes could be taken into account as a clue. Now, even a digital trace as trivial as a “like” can be used in legal proceedings.
According to TorrentFreak, the case pits the defendant against Strike 3 Holdings, a company specializing in the prosecution of copyright infringement, particularly in the adult industry. The company claims to have detected illegal downloads from an IP address linked to the defendant’s home. In addition to 25 pieces of content belonging to the latter, nearly 5,600 files of other works—films, TV shows, and music—are believed to have passed through this connection. The analysis relies on detection software, capable of checking whether files are being shared in fragments via BitTorrent, a method often used to track pirates.
Judge upholds use of likes as evidence in piracy case
To strengthen its case, Strike 3 highlighted the defendant's public interests, visible on social media. According to the company, the man follows pages dedicated to Star Wars, Minions, and other content identified in the downloads. The defense, however, argues that this argument is too weak: it claims that many people like these same works, including those close to the defendant. Furthermore, only 0.45% of the incriminated files correspond to these displayed likes.
The judge nevertheless considered that these elements, although partial, are sufficient to proceed with the case. In his order, he indicated that the “likes” constitute a credible basis for associating an identity with online activities. This does not yet prove guilt, but authorizes the opening of the discovery phase. This decision could open the way to other similar cases, where social activity becomes evidence. The trial therefore continues its course, unless an agreement is reached in the meantime.
0 Comments