I thought of this as a poll question, but it may be better off in GQ or GD, as always, at the discretion of the mods.
http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2001/08/23/pirate/index.html
IANAL, but it seems to me that a legal argument could be made that the fellow in the article has been deprived of his right to due process.
What would be the strongest legal argument to present against the DMCA, if not due process?
The people weren’t arrested. Their internet service was cut
off. I think they could probably ask for pro-rated ISP subscription
money back.
If the guy can show he was monetarily damaged by not having
e-mail, he might have a civil suit. Probably wouldn’t be
worth it.
I agree with you, bup.
Thinking about civil suits, who would be the most likely target?
I would think either the MPAA or the organization that provided “his” IP to the MPAA would be liable for something…
However, I was trying to think more generally of ways that legal challenges to this “law” might be brought about.