Quote:
Originally Posted by ceedee
As I understand it, the BPI's 3-strike scheme would not expect or require ISPs to inspect any P2P data. Rather the BPI would obtain "evidence" via third-party "spies" who'd join, for instance, a particular bittorrent swarm and allegedly record the participants' IP addresses which would then be traced back to the ISP with an allegation that the individual had breached copyright.
I can't imagine any court accepting the idea that the IP address had been obtained incorrectly, as participation in the torrent swarm is open to anyone (or any member, in the case of a private tracker).
However (again, to the best of my knowledge) the "evidence" provided by these "spies" have not yet had their methods accepted as accurate or foolproof by a UK court so instead the BPI are seeking the extra-judicial (and much cheaper) route of bullying ISPs into making a disconnection.
|
Well, not sure about the Courts challenging the evidence, but here is a
news report to show that the BPI, in this country, has been rather successful in its data collection methods .
ISP's rightly do not want to collect this data, why the hell should they. If rights owners cock it up, it should fall on their heads.
You have to wonder though, if such fines work through the courts, why all this three strike palava.
I can't find the article on the parent who lost his case, but I'll keep looking. I do remember thinking though that if he didn't understand file sharing before the court case, I bet he does now...poor sod. It also got me thinking, if they contacted his ISP first, who then made him aware of the situation, perhaps he could have saved himself a boatload of cash.
---------- Post added at 18:24 ---------- Previous post was at 18:20 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by ceedee
Are you saying that you think it's perfectly okay for an ISP to disconnect a customer purely due to the unsubstantiated allegation of a third-party agent of a copyright holder who is paid a fee per shutdown without a court's approval and with no right of appeal?
How on earth do you imagine the ISP will defend themselves against a counter-action by the customer?
I apologise if I've misinterpreted your response but it otherwise doesn't seem to query or rebut my statement.
|
Hell no, no ISP should take the claim at face value, there should be sufficient evidence to back up the claim, and that evidence has to be supplied. Absolutely no way should a customer loose his connection on hear say.
You need not apologise, there is nothing more just and right than a good cause, I just like to bring some perspective to the table.
