Topic: Sales of accounts and invites to invite-only sites - page 2. (Read 13514 times)

It was and is not my intent to troll this site. I am trying to improve this site, even though admin are ignoring an issue that has real consequences for various parties. As stated previously, I am unaffiliated with any sites brought up in this or prior threads, none of the admin of the sites mentioned knew or had prior contact with me prior to bringing this topic to light here on bitcointalk.org.  I could have chosen a different thread or poster regarding unauthorized sales of access codes or credentials (whether they be hacked/compromised, or unauthorized sales).  I specifically chose to create a thread regarding this topic and also respond to the sales and other actions (hacking, brute forcing, reselling services via proxy) of Gabriel Seletchi ("torac") because his actions were the most egregious violations of laws of various nations.   Sales of access codes and credentials are illegal.  Associating these illegal transactions with Bitcoin reduce the reputation of the currency and place the site and its staff in a position where they can face criminal and civil liability. This is a serious issue. Trolls, users, and staff can ignore the issue, but sooner or later there can and may very well be legal action taken by some party who finds their access codes or credentials sold on this website. This is not a threat, it is a observation regarding the liability that the site faces by not banning unauthorized sales of credentials by resellers that hold no ownership of provisioned credentials that are in fact owned by site owners or institutions.

+1 If I were him I would leave it be for now, no need to push the envelope, btw, "sheepleader" is not selling accounts anymore, so...

I think Shep is an owner/admin/mod on one of the websites whose invintes/accounts are sold here. Hence his perseverance and why most of his posts are related to this ''issue''. Looking at his date of registration I think he only came here to take those offers down.

LOL ad hominem now. Clearly you are loosing the arguments

Let's repeat:

a) The treaty isn't law, it doesn't even matter what the treaty says. The people only need to care about local laws.
b) The current laws in USA do not forbid of sale of legal accounts. The are two laws in USA that we should be concern with: Patriot Act and Homeland Security Act.
c) Only one state in USA passed in law that prevents account sharing - TN.
d) It is legal to share your account except in one state - TN. Netflix of course can ban you.

You are welcome to use facts, as I did.

Clearly you are not a very bright troll so let me clarify this again for you.  Your Netflix account is a provisioned subscription account, you do not own your account, nor do you own a right to resell services.  The netflix law concerned free account sharing of paid accounts (like with a relative or friend), which is technically theft of service with illegal access because an account holder is sharing services only intended to be provided to the account holder.  This however has been proven many times to constitute access fraud. You can't freely share your investment bank account credentials with a guy off the street. You can't freely share your DoD access with a civilian.  You can't freely share your credentials to a medical database with unauthorized users (again criminal penalties apply). The list goes on.

The main reason Netflix and most other subscription based businesses won't prosecute minor violations of abuse is because it could create high customer turnover if customers feared they were going to be prosecuted (it doesn not mean the act itself of sharing service is not illegal).  However, if you were reselling Netflix services under a proxy (financial gain), you would face criminal and civil prosecution for theft of service. Netflix pushed for specific clarification into law, but this doesn't mean they could not have users prosecuted under existing law.

Sales of account credentials or access codes are illegal and will earn you jail time.  It is irrelevant if it is Netflix, amazon, itunes, or any other service provider, the sale of access codes or credentials itself is access fraud (misuse of access), and anyone who uses those credentials or access codes is also engaging in access fraud (illegal access) with theft of service.

I have provided the proof that shep's claims are baseless. Only one states in USA forbids sale of accounts, it's TN.

We can lock the thread now.

The account is not "owned" it is provisioned.  And yes selling your account credentials qualifies as theft of service unless Netflix allows it. Sharing your account credentials for a paid subscription service (meaning you have paid your bill) without any monetary compensation may not be illegal in the US depending on your state law, but in spirit of existing law it does qualify in some form as passive theft of service. End of discussion, the end. I'm out

You're welcome to research those questions.  I'm not going on a 5 hour fishing expedition to satisfy your curiosity (although I'd be interested to read what you did find, assuming this post was made with genuine interest).

With that said, I'd love to stick around and post for another 4 hours, responding to other posters was fun, well mostly those users who weren't attempting to troll (not directing this at you, but in general).

Of course making a silly statement again. We're talking about selling OWNED account, not STOLEN ones. Don't go offtopic.

No prove to us that sharing a netflix account is illegal in every state in USA.

If you believe that you're highly mistaken. Anyone that believes you better get ready for some jail time..

has a websites ToS ever been used to sue a user?

if yes, did anyone ever use said site again?

--

edit: Also has a websites ToS ever been used to criminally convict a user that broke it?

It is illegal to share account credentials if Netflix's ToS do not permit it and it would be considered theft of service. They may allow for you to use access credentials across multiple devices and IP as long as your subscription account is used by the primary registered user that is the subscriber (account holder).

I do believe though if Netflix observes an account logging in from multiple in different regions that they will limit your logins,  restrict simultaneous connections from different regions, and suspend your account for abuse of service if those controls fail to remedy the site abuse.  No business wants to lose a legitimate paying customer to churn, if that customer is a good customer (again this is for a different discussion in another topic), but some customer that abuse services will see their account services terminated and may be prosecuted if the abuse is considered so extreme that it would harm the business.   A perfect example would be a company re-selling netflix services via proxy (assume a netflix account wasn't limited).

And here is the answer, Shep is wrong for about 98%. Only one state forbids sale of username/passwords it's TN:

http://money.msn.com/saving-money-tips/post.aspx?post=233ad531-5543-4fdd-b50d-b6abc7d58f0b

You're trolling and making baseless accusations against this forum and against me personally.

Also you need to learn to quote properly.

Let me give you a different example:

Is it illegal to share a Netflix account?

That is the topic of this thread.  vampire is trolling and going wildly off-topic.

Why would we ban those companies? I thought this whole discussion rooted from the idea of stopping the sales of account information?

Then no one would ever talk here, that isn't a very good point. There are a lot of companies here, so you're proposing to ban them all?

Again provisional access requires that rules be followed hence why you don't see CIA analysts, investment bankers, or employees selling their access credentials.  If you do you face criminal and civil liability.  The law of most nations respects this and is codified as statutes under judicial law.  You can ignore it, that's fine by me, it doesn't mean you won't face criminal and civil penalties.

I see it differently, since you're mixing in ToS. And that's contract law.