Apple settles the last Tiger Torrent lawsuit
On December 9th I saw a document which intimated that Apple and the last defendant in the original "Tiger Torrent" lawsuit were close to reaching a settlement, which would be filed on December 13th. I sat on this so as not to cause any problems while it went through, however everything went through yesterday. With a little knowledge of the system and some cash you could view the court papers, but since they're public documents I'm posting them here:
There can be an out-of-sight-out-of-mind quality to a story like this, and if you're wondering what the deal is, an earlier entry lays most of it out, and links to the rest of the earlier posts and my earlier contact with David. With this settlement, it's my understanding that the Tiger Torrent lawsuits are now over, as there have been no other filings against any John Does...
It's been almost a year since everything went down, and I'll admit a knot between my shoulders I wasn't entirely aware of anymore unwound when I saw the documents -- I had a decent-sized chunk of my life invested in it, and it had a major impact on my head, let alone life. The dilemmas that came up during it are things I don't want to ever be involved in again, such as having to decide what to post and what needed to be kept in reserve for others to make use of.
There really was much that wasn't said in regards to what was going on, and I know a lot of it freaked me out. Even more of it pissed me off, but it was an unusual situation where posting some of what was going on would have removed a chip from the table others could use towards a settlement agreement. I note some of the above because I'm aware those involved became people to me, rather than screen names to give a thumbs-up or down on in the internet arena of instant opinion, and more about doing what felt right and getting the information where it needed to go to do the most good, rather than just getting the information out.
It certainly became less to me about whether they were right to leak the beta and about the hell that was going to happen because of it -- and not being able to get behind it. Throughout it all I was filled with a sense of disappointment as often as anger.
You may recall that the Tiger Torrent lawsuits were part of a spate of legal actions Apple launched against individuals which aren't over and are still ongoing -- one of which has the EFF involved in a big way because of the implications for the future. None of it seemed to have had a long-term impact, as after a lull the rumors and betas picked right back up as these things always seem to do if there's an interest, and the short lull Apple gained by trying to make examples out of people seemed to be coming at an awfully high price to everyone involved.
Easily the biggest thing I took away from it was the reality that in a case like this your guilt or innocence -- and what happens if you are found guilty -- is often secondary to your ability to pay for a civil defense against a legal team on retainer. I know in my conversation with David awhile ago, he was having to switch lawyers and was dangerously close to defaulting in Apple's favor because he was hitting broke. The average person doesn't have a fighting chance if a corporation decides they want to use them for a headline.
While there are still some open-ended questions regarding criminal charges floating around, this hopefully really is the end of it. I've learned a ton over the last year, and while situations like this are going to keep occurring -- it again certainly didn't take long for x86 OS X builds to get everywhere -- my hope is that Apple has also.
Posted by drunkenbatmanDecember 14, 2005, at 11:56 AM
Comments (13)
Posted by: DyvE at December 14, 2005 01:25 PM
I was sued over a couple of domain names that I had registered. A company one day decided they wanted them and sued me in federal court.
Guess how important who's right and who's wrong is when a big company sues a college student.
Posted by: t0dd at December 14, 2005 01:50 PM
"While are still some open-ended questions regarding criminal charges floating around"
I believe you mean "While THERE are still"
Posted by: Ed Gordon at December 14, 2005 02:02 PM
Couldn't/shouldn't grammer corrections be handled via email? Just seems a little smartass.
Posted by: anon at December 14, 2005 05:54 PM
So there were lots of details you say you didn't want to share at the time because they might affect the parties to the case... Now that the case is settled can you share them?
This post seems awfully "meta" as is.
And what's the long term impact?
I agree that the consequences for the students was out of proportion to the suffering of the company, but isn't that part of punishment and deterance?
Assuming that sharing expensive software isn't going to suddenly become leagal, shouldn't more be done to let people know that it's not, and how serious the consequences can be?
Posted by: Retard at December 14, 2005 07:30 PM
On the one hand you have a big corporation swallowing up and spitting out a couple of poor people via the (hideously expensive and completely over-priced) legal system and on the other hand you have people who broke the law/their agreements (and therefore the law). Would the same issue be raised if they hadn't of done anything?
Posted by: Dave at December 14, 2005 10:03 PM
This seems to be yet another chapter in the epic battle of wanting to control information, and information wanting to be free. What really irked me in this case is that Apple had leaks internally, and to stop their own bleeding, they decided to take advantage of a couple of kids barely in their 20s. It's like stubbing your toe, getting mad, and punching your kid sister in the head as she walks by. The sister looks up to you, looks to you for protection, and BAM. No doubt that the kids that ran these sites looked to Apple with awe, just wanted to be part of the action, and the impersonation of the 800 lb gorilla that they so admired just up and punched them in the grill - hard.
Posted by: Dave at December 14, 2005 10:06 PM
I'd like to follow up by saying it doesn't seem to me that the universe is always very fair in its dispensing of karma.
Posted by: Jeffrey Flowers at December 14, 2005 11:32 PM
"Easily the biggest thing I took away from it was the reality that in a case like this your guilt or innocence -- and what happens if you are found guilty -- is often secondary to your ability to pay for a civil defense against a legal team on retainer."
I think that is true of criminal court as well. How many people are in jail now because they couldn't afford a good attorney?
People say that rich people get special treatment in the court system, but I think what really happens is that they have the money to make the system work the way it is supposed to.
Posted by: Drew at December 15, 2005 12:49 PM
The severity of a punishment in a case like this is always a tough issue to grapple with... but I think the point to understand is that no matter the supposed, doe-eyed innocence of these "kids" doing something they felt would have no harm, they knowingly committed a punishable offense. They basically pirated commercial software in the biggest way possible (by making it freely available to the public domain), violated pre-release agreements, and embodied/validated the worst fears of every software company on earth... That only makes them trust us (their users) less and create more restrictive user agreements and more invasive technology to stifle piracy (can anyone say Sony Rootkit). Defense in this case is not what the defendants could not afford... they did it, and that seems that was fairly easily proven. Mitigation of consequence is what those steep legal fees were trying to buy and that is the tough question. A corporation suing an individual into bankruptcy doesn't really do anyone any good (Apple wouldn't really benefit and the world doesn't need more poor people), but it needs to be known that companies will vigorously protect their assets and their rights to those assets. Hackers and pirates beware; this dog (Apple) has teeth! I work for a software company and I have no doubt they would, and should, go after anyone who did something like this with the same vigor. After all, protecting the value of their software keeps me and my family fed. Apple is actually wearing the shiny white polycarbonate hat here by showing some mercy. I suppose my point is this... To keep yourself from getting sued, don't do illegal things.
Posted by: dirk stoop at December 15, 2005 06:11 PM
Nice rant Drew, but a bit over the top imho. As far as I can recollect the guys who got sued were never entitled to the pre-release software anyway. The beta stuff was handed over to them by an unnamed person who did have a paid ADC membership and did sign an agreement stating that he would not distribute the software.
The fact that a few of them had free ADC memberships -which don't entitle you to osx prerelease stuff- was used by Apple in court to show that they did have at least an agreement with each other. But the anon guy who never got sued, namely the one who did obtain the beta legally from Apple and spread it further is the only one who broke a direct agreement here.
That doesn't mean it wasn't stupid, but hey, who am I to judge that?..
Posted by: bronc at December 16, 2005 04:50 AM
a year later and you are digging up legal papers? that's obsessive, dude... i forgot this was still going on...
Posted by: Jon H at December 18, 2005 05:59 AM
Ed writes: "I think you hit the nail on the head in those last few paragraphs. The big, scary fear is that as if thousands or millions of people (a corporation) choose to sue an individual, there are very few resources available for that individual to fight back with."
Given the distinctly authoritarian direction the Bush administration is taking, I think corporate lawsuits are probably not the paramount concern people should have.
Further, the corporate lawsuits will only get worse as the government becomes more authoritarian, and the little guy will be in an increasingly poor position.
I think you hit the nail on the head in those last few paragraphs. The big, scary fear is that as if thousands or millions of people (a corporation) choose to sue an individual, there are very few resources available for that individual to fight back with. Not only are the corporations winning more times than not, but they don't seem to be having to do the work to prove it that they would do if faced with an adequate defense.