RE: Chewbacca Defense
The Chewbacca defense was shown in South Park, used by a high paid lawyer in the case of the record industry versus Chef. Chef wanted to be acknowledged for his earlier work, a song called "Stinky Breeches", which was being sung by Alanis Morrisette. The boss of the record company has him sued. The lawyer argues "Why would Chewbacca, a 6-foot wookie, live on Endor with the Ewoks? It does not make sense! Why am I arguing about Chewbacca when a mans life is at stake? It does not make sense! if it does not make sense, you must find in favour of my client!"
Put simply, it was all about confusing a jury, bamboozling the stupid people who weren't even smart enough to get out of jury duty.
Anyway, back to the real topic in hand, Google's argument doesnt make sense in todays day and age. A broadband supplier must have enough IPs for all customers, as it is an "Always On (tm)" connection. The only reason they dont supply free static IPs is that they CAN charge for them. An IP address does, for the majority of people, identify them, as their IP is unlikely to change for weeks, if not months or even years. Also the number of people with static IPs is increasing, and they are then definately uniquely identifiable. Unless of course someone is using an anonymising technique. But why should it be up to the user to anonymise their IP?
Also, if the EU find in Googles favour, that throws a lot of the record industries techniques out of the window. If the EU say it is not a unique ID of the user, how then can the record indistry say "Your IP downloaded this file, I'm gonna sue you"? For this reason I hope that the EU makes the stupid descision on this one.