>Hello, anon, we're here on behalf of the DMCA, we have

Well given that I live in Canada

Option A;
>It was for personal use and I never made any money off it

Option B;
>I don't know what you're talking about, my mom set-up the wifi and it's been slow, does that mean someone else has been stealing our internet?!?!?

EZ

>>57827410
Counter sue my ISP and the government for breaching privacy policy and violating 4th amendment rights.

My p2p traffic is over VPN, they have no idea what I'm sending and where unless they're doing deep packet inspection and illegally handing information over to law enforcement.

File: 84NRq.gif (2MB, 370x281px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 370x281px

>implying they'd get passed the porch
>unless they were disguised as pizza delivery

File: 1479841364866.png (341KB, 749x650px) Image search: [Google]

341KB, 749x650px

>>57827410
>Hello, anon, we're here on behalf of the DMCA, we have a few questions for you

"My lawyer will contact you. This interview is over."

>>57827438
Nobody will believe either.
OPs Selling price to Fine ratio of 1:2 is low, realisically its about 1:28.
So the fine should be M$3.50

File: dumbledore.jpg (157KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

157KB, 1920x1080px

>>57827410
>US copyright law

File: vygapu6a.jpg (70KB, 420x675px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 420x675px

>>57827410
Well, I don't watch or distribute CP or anything like that. If the police knock down my door over a few songs and some video games I torrent, at least one of them is going with me. I'll shoot those motherfuckers.

>>57827646

>implying any other country produces content worth stealing

>>57827410
>living in a police state
brb seeding torrents 24/7 from my home connection without data caps

>>57827410
I'm not american. I don't live in the US. I don't give two shits about it.

Begin reciting random anime openings in a confused tone while texting my lawyer.

>>57827410
>on behalf of the DMCA
Are you literally retarded?

>>57827646
/thread

>>57827410
AM I BEING DETAINED?
AM I FREE TO GO?

>>57827623
>beyond a reasonable doubt

>>57827410
Welp, I'm never going to take advantage of freeleech ever again after this. Thanks [*************] for getting me sent to prison cause I ain't paying that shit.

>>57827410
>on behalf of the DMCA

Anyone that responded seriously after seeing this is literally mentally retarded.

>>57827410

>sir, I want to pay
>it's not that simple, since you owe money

Why are you such a fucking retard OP?

File: snap.png (158KB, 433x529px) Image search: [Google]

158KB, 433x529px

>>57827410
>What would you do in this situation?

>>57827506
Not if you live in britain or U.S. given their new rule 41 for Federal investigations (any judges warrent allows them to legally search your computer)

>>57831469
Stop running windows like a faggot then.

>>57827410
offer my boipucci

>>57829752
"on behalf of the DMCA" sounds kinda like "I'm calling you from Windows".

>>57827623
Speculative invoicing is illegal in my country. I suggest you move somewhere where the freedom is citizens is respected.

I'm scared of viruses so I don't pirate games and very rarely pirate software.
I'm scared of DMCA so I don't download American music or movies. Sometimes I'll download 20+ year old movies for my dad.

I only download Japanese music, anime, and doujins. So I'm fairly safe.

>>57831704
>I only download Japanese music, anime, and doujins.
Same.

It's a damn shame the governments of the world are finally trying to gain control of the internet. We are already seeing most online retailers actually charge taxes now. I miss the 90s were no one gave a fuck. Internet going mainstream fucked us all.

>>57827410
>I don't know jack shit about laws the post

>>57832100
On one hand, I don't like having to pay extra for taxes, but on the other hand it is unfair to brick and mortar businesses if online retailers don't have to charge taxes.

How can MicroCenter compete when Amazon and Newegg are automatically ~7% cheaper because they don't charge tax?

>>57827410

>'Woah man, if this is about illegally downloading movies and stuff just give me a list and I'll pay for them'

I would not say this. Automatic response to police questioning should always be, "I will not answer any questions without a lawyer." One should not EVER talk the police if they suspect you of a crime, as it will never benefit you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-7o9xYp7eE

>this goes back for years
Side note: statute of limitations on the DMCA seems to be 5 years for criminal proceedings, 3 years for recovery of damages.

https://www.copyright.gov/legislation/pl105-304.pdf

IANAL

>>57827438

DMCA is an American law. You are not legally obligated to follow American law as a Canadian.

>>57827410
"I want a lawyer."

>>57827555
Sauce?

>>57827927
>US law

>>57831548
Toplmao

>>57827438
Underage b&

File: 1477427909399.gif (2MB, 280x358px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 280x358px

I would pick up my phone and call the cops because there are others cops trying to arrest me and they should be arrested for making false claims

>>57827506
i work in a datacenter
nothing is private you chilidog

File: 1292745158618.jpg (84KB, 588x720px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 588x720px

>>57827410
>>Hello, anon, we're here "on behalf of" the DMCA, we have a few questions for you

Then the burden of proof to prove you are actually the DMCA(or acting for them) is on you.

A fraudulent email via a third party is not good enough. A fraudulent phone call through a third party is not good enough. In fact anything less than an actual letter addressed to me which I can independently verify via calling/mailing the DMCA with the contact info listed on the DMCA's SSL site, will suffice. Not the DMCA contact info from the letter in question, don't fall for the numerous scams out there.

If they actually contact me in person and have provable legal authority I have one word for them. Lawyer. My lawyer specifically, who I would mention by name and ask to speak with.

In addition the words "on the behalf of" mean either

A: We don't have the authority of the organisation we're representing.

or

B: The organisation we are representing does not have the authority we do.

Keep your mouth shut and hire a competent lawyer to act on your behalf.

Also the Digital Millennium Copyright Act is a law, not an organisation. Your wording suggests you're just a scammer.

>What would you do in this situation?
Keep my mouth shut ideally. But we don't live in an ideal world. If they are questioning you like this they are either gathering evidence to convict you(which they don't have yet), or trying to get more evidence/a confession. They're not trying to cut a deal with you, but legally they can tell you that's what they're doing.