Rikkitic: Can an argument not be made that Bypass is doing nothing that every DNS proxy and VPN in the world is not also doing, and they are being unfairly singled out just because they happen to be an easy target located in New Zealand? The letter of the lawyers claims that their clients are suffering huge losses due exclusively to the activities of Bypass. That implies that if Bypass ceases and desists, the losses will also cease. This is, of course, nonsense. Putting Bypass out of business will not make the slightest bit of difference. The people who don't already use overseas proxies will simply learn how. So how can Bypass be blamed for those losses?
pretty much, although arguing it won't make any difference means you believe global mode has had no impact on the amount of people using Netflix US.
If that is the case, and it makes no difference, then it's a worthless product for Callplus to sell so they should just stop selling it anyway.
Also, it's not just the impact of having the product, it's also the level of marketing it that causes the damages. i.e. a small DNS proxy based out of the Bahamas that spends $1000/year marketing it's service to kiwis is having a much much smaller impact than the third largest ISP in NZ, who spends millions every year marketing it's services.
they are bieng 'singled' out because
a) the damage they are causing is much much higher
b) it's actually possible to sue them under NZ law.
To create an analogy:
stealing from your employer is illegal.
If you steal a Macbook Pro form your employer, expect them to report it, fire you, and take you to court.
If you steal a pencil, expect them to probably do nothing.
does this mean the macbook thief is being 'unfairly singled out' if his employer takes him to court, but does noting about the pencil theif?
Trusted
Lightbox
