http://www.t3.com/news/law-firm-hands-out-thousands-of-fines-to-suspected-digital-pirates?=42559 The link is pretty much self explanatory, but i was wondering ar ethey actually allowed to do this?? data protection and all that.
Yes, because the suspected digital pirates are suspected of breaking the law. If someone's not done anything wrong, or has downloaded stuff that isn't copyrighted, they'll be fine.
Im not sure of the legality of it, however if I was a BT customer I would transfer my services elsewhere. As much as I am anti piracy, I believe that it is wrong to pass on such details to a law firm, if it was for the police I wouldnt object as much. I wonder how much hey are paying BT for the details? BT dont do anything for nothing.
We can safely presume it's entirely legal. The SRA would make it entirely not worth the while of the solicitors to do anything illegal in general and particularly on this sort of scale. They wouldn't pass on the details to the police, anyway, because you can't expect the CPS to sift through many billions of files they don't care about and don't understand. Nobody cares about the effect of piracy in the local community, votes do not depend upon it, we don't read horror stories about promising teenagers brutally torrented to death or toddlers molested with KaZaA in the tabloids. So you can imagine it's a low-priority thing for the cops. The solicitors on the other hand are being paid to make maximum use of the information to scare people.
It is a breach of the DPA, you cannot process any personal data for any purpose other than it was collected. They are allowed to pass on your details to 3rd parties for marketing only if you agreed to it. You cannot agree to having your details passed onto a law firm, and it is against the DPA to do so without a court order. It is against the DPA to pass on any information which is can personally identify any data subject other than to the police or relevant authorities, unless you are required to by court for a criminal not civil case.
If you do get a letter, don't bury your head in the sand. You have a limited time to respond. Step 1: Write a response refuting the claims, and inviting them to direct all future communications via your lawyer (see next bit). Step2: If you don't have a lawyer, phone a local one. Tell them what's going on, they'll likely want you to come in for a chat. First hour is free (usually) but dont be shy to ask up front on the phone. They might refer you to another lawyer who is more technically savvy, that's cool. Either way, at this stage your lawyer doesn't need to do anything other than wait for a letter replying to yours. If that letter never comes, you wont have paid your lawyer anything. If it does, then you've got legal advice on the matter (which you need). Step 3: Await their response to your lawyer. Consider that if 25,000 people do this (i.e. that means if you're reading this, and you have a letter, you really should do this immediately) the plaintiff's lawyers are going to be overwhelmed for a good while. Your lawyer will not let you be a victim of these bully tactics. You have a right to a fair trial, and thats what you should get. These bottom feeders live off the fact you're too shy, polite and embarrased about the whole situation, so you'll pay up, even though you're not guilty of anything. Stand up to the bullys.
I hear there is an individual called Mandelson that wants to change the laws.... also: Anti-Piracy Outfits Demand Cash Without Proof http://torrentfreak.com/anti-piracy-outfits-demand-cash-without-proof-091129/
*sits waiting for a letter* I've told my dad over and over to change from BT, they're an awful ISP as is!
What, wait - how did this company get details of people downloading and the ISP details exactly? Getting IP address' through public trackers I'm assuming? There's just a big chunk of story missing.
Is this going to be another case of some old lady getting prosecuted because somebody hijacked her wireless. Smells like a Davenport Lyons case all over again.
You know if we say that name bit-tech forums Googles really well for it and they start watching the thread..
yes, they probably would, and then fine you the cost of the lawyer who decides if you are a good guy or not. and am i the only one who tought for a minute BT was Bit-Tech? i was already getting worked up about it...
Surely copyright infringement is a civil court issue and not criminal court - hence the CPS don't give two hoots? It's only when it's piracy for the purpose of making money that they start to get interested. That's how I understand it anyway.
i remoember reading about this ages ago they found some terribly inaccurately way of tracing IPs and then sent out letters without ever intending to follow up afterwards because they didnt have a leg to stand on if they were challanged as theyre source for the IPs wasnt good enough. the bbc website says they had a court order to get the names and addresses so it must be legal http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/05/12/davenport_lyons_acs_law/ http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8381097.stm
Yes, I think that's probably correct - though the CPS are pretty much the be-all and end-all of public prosecution in the UK, so if they won't it'll have to be a civil matter, as you said, in which case the police won't be involved anyway...?
little misleading title check out http://www.acs-law.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=51&Itemid=60 which shows all the court orders they have filed and it shows that it is not just BT who have been ordered to give out the details but the following BE UNLIMITED BT EASYNET ENTANET KCOM MISTRAL ORANGE PLUSNET SUPANET O2 TISCALLI THUS VIRGIN
That is more or less every major isp in britain. Im shocked that mine is on there (sky-t/a easynet) however if i recieve a letter I will fight it all the way.
