theprof00 said:
It is completely different. What you're saying amounts to: Would you want a federal agent living in your house, taking up space so they can make sure you're not breaking the law at any given moment? Because that's what this will allow. There is no invasion of privacy. They are finding WHERE in the country these IPs are from. They don't care who looked at what, only where they are from. There is a big difference, and it was outlined in the case which is what the judge ruled on. He did rule to give them full authority to sue downloaders or youtube watchers. He sided with them in the circumstance that they are using it to prove jurisdiction. |
Stop using biased example, the better example is do you want none law enforcer to peep through your damn house? and NO government don't need to put an agent inside the house to monitor everyone. There are inventions called computer and camera system for that.
Not invasion of privacy? I don't need corporate giving the right to track our ips.
Your contradicting your own arguement.







