If I'm reading the article right, he was arrested because they tracked a bank account used for ad revenue back to him.
The charges were:
- Conspiracy to commit criminal copyright infringement
Conspiracy To Commit Money Laundering (Click to show)
2166. Jury Instruction -- Conspiracy To Commit Money Laundering
1. Beginning on or about _____________, and continuing through on or about __________________, within the __________ District of ________, and elsewhere, the Defendants,
__________________, did unlawfully, willfully and knowingly combine, conspire, confederate and agree together and with each other, and with others known and unknown to the Grand Jury, to commit certain offenses under Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1956 and 1957, as follows:
- to conduct and attempt to conduct a financial transaction affecting interstate commerce, which transaction involved the proceeds of specified unlawful activity, (that is, ), (1) with the intent to promote the carrying on of such specified unlawful activity and (2) with the intent to engage in conduct constituting a violation of [26 U.S.C. § 7201], [26 U.S.C. § 7206] to wit, (describe conduct), and (3) knowing that the transaction was designed in whole or in part to conceal and disguise the nature, location, source, ownership, and control of the proceeds of said specified unlawful activity, and (4) knowing that the transaction was designed in whole and in part to avoid a transaction reporting requirement under [State] [Federal] law, and that while conducting and attempting to conduct such financial transaction knew that the property involved in the financial transaction, represented the proceeds of some form of unlawful activity, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1956(a)(1); and
- knowingly to transport, transmit and transfer and attempt to transport, transmit and transfer a monetary instrument and funds from a place in the United States to and through a place outside the United States with the intent to promote the carrying on of specified unlawful activity, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §1956(a)(2)(A); and
- knowing that the property involved in a financial transaction represented the proceeds of some form of unlawful activity, to transport, transmit and transfer and attempt to transport, transmit and transfer a monetary instrument and funds from a place in the United States to and through a place inside the United States knowing that such transportation was designed in whole or in part to conceal and disguise the nature, the location, the source, the ownership and the control of the proceeds of specified unlawful activity, and to avoid a transaction reporting requirement under federal law, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §1956(a)(2)(B); and
- knowingly to engage, attempt to engage and cause and aid and abet others in engaging in monetary transactions in criminally derived property that was of a value greater than $10,000, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1957;
- Two counts of criminal copyright infringement.
If the conspiracy to commit money laundering is accurate, they have to prove he was using the money for something illegal, hence the copyright infringement charges, or that he was moving money from inside the states without reporting it correctly. If he used a bank account outside the US and beats the copyright charges, this charge is basically bogus. It seems to me that they have to prove he was violating copyright infringement, which basically means he wasn't respecting the DMCA take down notice. Bigger question, why wasn't he using bitcoin before bouncing the money to an account with his name on it?
The IP address seems to be how they knew where to find him, but it still doesn't explain how they linked his name to the site. The only reasonable conclusion is that it was tied to a bank account. If they can't get him for conspiracy to commit money laundering, they basically have no case. Did I read that wrong?
There seems to be more than enough evidence to prove that he was respecting the DMCA take down notice and that any overlooked item was done through incompetence and not deliberately. Does the argument; hash indexes are not copyright material, not hold up in court?
Not sure what the 2 counts of copyright infringement are, maybe he had something on his computer when they arrested him? Perhaps I just don't understand the law that well, but it seems a flaky case to expedite someone for.
Originally Posted by awdrifter
It's his own fault for using iTunes. He runs a torrent site, he should know how to get those stuff.
The real article should read "Torrent site owner still wasting life with iTunes!"