Even you admit that it's not a 100% chance, which is my point -- we're using an IP address to identify the studio as the responsible party here, which we frown upon for home users.
You talk about the stuff that all defense attorneys do in the residential cases, then say for some reason a corporation should be better equipped to handle it. Which, maybe there's some relevancy to that, but still the root point is: we're using an IP address to identify a responsible party, which isn't a 100% science.
This also isn't a trial, it's a published article.
If you show me a residential environment that has a dedicated IT staff that only allows qualified people on the network, then you can assume one of the qualified people is responsible for the traffic. You still have to figure out which one because 'an IP address is not a person'.
I'm applying the same standards to either situation. The way a corporate network is configured (excluding cases of incompetence) gives you pretty solid evidence that AN employee was in violation. You still have no idea which employee, which is why an individual suit like in the residential cases would be highly unfounded. Same standard when it comes to that rule. The only difference is that you can go after a corporation as a cohesive group, whereas you cannot go after a household as a cohesive group.
Right, an IP isn't identifying. But these people want us to think it is when it's convenient for them so we MUST treat them like they treat others. Huge fine, life/company running big, and punishments involving never touching anything that uses electricity ever again.
Like torture, I wouldn't wish it on my enemies. But I do wish it on those who user it on others.
Besides, unlike everyone they've attacked they can make it stop whenever they want simply by admitting an IP address is not user identifying.
You talk about the stuff that all defense attorneys do in the residential cases, then say for some reason a corporation should be better equipped to handle it. Which, maybe there's some relevancy to that, but still the root point is: we're using an IP address to identify a responsible party, which isn't a 100% science.
This also isn't a trial, it's a published article.