[Politics_Observer]

What is your take? Should VPNs be totally outlawed to protect the copyright owners of music and movie producers? Or should VPN users have the right to privacy even in the case of copyright infringement via the use of a VPN? Is there a happy medium between the two? If so, how and how would such a happy medium be implemented while still respecting privacy rights? Most people like the right to privacy, correct? Even those in Hollywood like the right to privacy I would assume. Is there a solution? What about dealing with all the various legal jurisdictions of various different countries where these VPNs reside?

Here is another interesting topic, what about when businesses abuse defamation of character lawsuits against customers who post negative reviews about their businesses but such reviews are telling the truth and are honest in a bid to simply just shut them up? Doesn't such abuse of lawsuits encourage VPN to use so that people can freely express themselves in an honest way without fear of being sued for it? Or should companies be allowed to prevent people from freely expressing themselves honestly through frivolous defamation of character lawsuits?

In many cases, lawyers can't sue people for defamation of character when they use VPNs because in some cases they can't find out who they are. Sometimes, web companies will take down such negative reviews given the business owners have no "recourse." But what if the VPN user was telling the truth? Shouldn't customers have a right to review businesses they pay without fear of being sued for an honest negative review when a business does a poor job for the customer?

Businesses have a lot of money to file what could be really frivolous lawsuits against individuals who don't have deep pockets in a bid simply to shut them up and punish them for an honest truthful negative review. Do VPNs sometimes legitimately check the sometimes unwarranted power of businesses who seek to crush privacy in a bid to prevent a check on their sometimes unwarranted power? Which side are you on and who is right?

A group of over two dozen film studios has repeatedly taken popular VPN providers to court, sometimes extracting judgements worth millions of dollars in damages. While piracy remains the central issue, recent legal arguments employed by Hollywood studios have surpassed accusations of copyright infringement and delved into dirtier waters.

Filmmakers attempting to recoup revenue lost to piracy have long alleged that VPN companies both encourage online piracy and have clear-cut evidence that their customers are abusing the privacy and security provided by virtual private networks. But court records show that studios’ legal teams have also accused VPN providers of enabling illegal activity far beyond copyright infringement and, legal experts say, are challenging the notion that VPNs should exist at all.

In March, 26 film companies brought allegations against ExpressVPN and Private Internet Access (PIA), popular “no-log” VPN companies owned by Kape Technologies. The plaintiffs include production companies like Millennium, Voltage, and others behind a slate of popular films. The lawsuit centers on allegations of user piracy. However, court documents reviewed by WIRED reveal plaintiffs arguing that these VPN providers refuse to prevent users from using their services to commit serious illegal acts and run marketing campaigns that openly “boast” that law enforcement is unable to extract any information about their users.

Generally speaking, VPNs give users greater privacy protections by encrypting their online activity and rerouting it through the company’s servers, concealing their IP addresses. Many VPN providers, including ExpressVPN and PIA, claim to maintain “no logs” of their users’ internet activities. This means VPN providers can’t access data to turn over to police or comply with copyright infringement claims. Similar to arguments against comprehensive encryption, the film companies paint VPN providers as culpable in any crimes committed while using their services.

“Emboldened by Defendants’ promises that their identities cannot be disclosed, Defendants’ end users use their VPN services not only to engage in widespread movie piracy, but other outrageous criminal conduct such as harassment, illegal hacking and murder,” reads the lawsuit, filed in US District Court in Colorado. “When these crimes become public, Defendants use these tragic incidents as opportunities to boast about their VPN services.”

The VPN companies responded in court filings that the “inflammatory topics” plaintiffs evoked are irrelevant to copyright infringement. Allegations as far afield as “hacking, stalking, bomb threats, political assassinations, child pornography, and anonymous online message board posts full of hate speech and appearing to encourage violence and murder” are a ploy to portray the VPNs in “a cruelly derogatory light," argue the VPNs’ legal teams.

Beyond vague examples of heinous crimes, the court filing mentions an Express VPN subscriber admitting to downloading child sexual abuse material (CSAM). The film companies also call out the personal political views or activities of those employed by the VPN companies. Specifically, they focus on Rick Falkvinge, who’s known for his political views and arguments that CSAM should be legal. Falkvinge previously served as PIA's “head of privacy” and created the political Pirate Party. He has repeatedly advocated for reforms to copyright laws, calling “copying and sharing” a “natural right.”

“Any opinions expressed by Rick Falkvinge are his own and not a reflection of PIA or its beliefs as a company. In particular, PIA in no way condones child sexual abuse or exploitation of any form,” a PIA spokesperson said in a statement to WIRED. An ExpressVPN spokesperson added that its policies strictly forbid anyone using its service to traffic in CSAM.

PIA’s attorney argues that the allegations that it aids serious illegal activity must be stricken from the case because they are completely irrelevant and “serve only to inflame emotions in a misguided attempt to prejudice the Court and the public against the defendants by false association with the non-parties whose conduct is described in these paragraphs.”

ExpressVPN and PIA further denied the production companies' broad allegations. An ExpressVPN spokesperson said the court had dismissed the claims in the filmmakers' suit but was not able to disclose the terms of the settlement. The spokesperson also emphasized that the “operation of ExpressVPN’s service has not been changed or otherwise impacted in any way relevant to the parties’ dispute.”

PIA maintained that this litigation jeopardizes user privacy and that it will therefore keep fighting in court. “We assert that the use of VPNs is a legitimate way to protect one’s online privacy—a fundamental human right, which is increasingly in jeopardy of infringement,” the company said.

Legal counsel representing the movie studios did not respond to WIRED’s request for comment.

https://www.wired.com/story/hollywood-p ... -lawsuits/