just a small point, or large for the executives, if their convicted.
when its copyright piracy
for commercial gain, it falls under criminal law not civil (tort)law... also theres that next section that also happens to nicely cover Phorm and kent as the supplyers of said infringing devices to the executives in charge at the ISPs...
and while its nice to have the police and the CPS do the deed and investigate each and every single one of these unlawful/criminal RIPA and copyright theft for commercial profit cases, ultimately, any single person effected can bring a private court case against these executives....
but the ISP/Phorm executives will be fine OC ,they already had their legal teams conduct those unpublished due dilligence legal report findings already, lets hope the judge doesnt do a stanford on them, and conclude given the stanford ruling and the masses of existing copyright rulings in all them well used QC law books dont say something different.
see:
S.107 of the
Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 ("CDPA") established the following categories of offences: [img]Download Failed (1)[/img]making or dealing in infringing copies of copyright works;
[img]Download Failed (1)[/img]making or possessing an article specifically designed or adapted for making copies of copyright works; and
[img]Download Failed (1)[/img]causing a work to be performed, played or shown in public.
Making or Dealing in Infringing Articles
It is an offence under s.107 (1) of the CDPA to
(a) make for sale or hire,
(b) import into the United Kingdom otherwise than for private and domestic use,
(c) possess in the course of a business with a view to committing any act infringing copyright,
(d) in the course of a business
(i) sell or lets for hire,
(ii) offer or expose for sale or hire,
(iii) exhibit in public, or
(iv) distribute, or
(e) distribute otherwise than in the course of a business to such an extent as to affect prejudicially the owner of the copyright,
an article which is, and which is known to be or where there is reason to believe it to be, an infringing copy of a copyright work. Anyone convicted of such making, importing or distribution may be fined or sentenced to up to 2 years in prison upon conviction on indictment or 6 months imprisonment and a fine up to the statutory minimum on summary conviction, or both (s. 107 (4) CDPA). The maximum penalty for any other offence under s.107 (1) is 6 months imprisonment or a fine up to level 5 on the standard scale on summary conviction, or both (s. 107 (5)).
Making or Possessing Specially designed or adapted Articles for Making Infringing Copies
It is an offence under s.107 (2) to make an article specifically designed or adapted for making copies of a particular copyright work, or possess such an article, knowing or having reason to believe that it is to be used to make infringing copies for sale or hire or for use in the course of a business. The maximum penalty for an offence under this sub-section is 6 months imprisonment or a fine up to level 5 on the standard scale on summary conviction, or both (s.107 (5)).
Communicating the Work to the Public
The new offence of communicating a copyright work to the public is provided by a new s.107 (2A). The penalty for that offence is a imprisonment not exceeding 3 months, a fine up to the statutory maximum or both on summary conviction, or 2 years imprisonment, a fine or both under a new s.107 (4A).
...
---------- Post added at 04:50 ---------- Previous post was at 04:20 ----------
remember, thats PER offence, not per trial conviction
http://www.cjsonline.gov.uk/offender...ntencing/fine/
Fines are penalties available to courts for a wide variety of offences. In the Magistrates' Courts offences that attract fines are subject to maximums from level 1 to level 5.
Level 1: £200
Level 2: £500
Level 3: £1,000
Level 4: £2,500
Level 5: £5,000
There's no limit to the amount the Crown Court can fine, but the amount will take into account the seriousness of the offence and the offender's ability to pay.
---------- Post added at 05:11 ---------- Previous post was at 04:50 ----------
well no matter what the Executives (and/or their legal teams told them, although if they did perhaps they need taking off retainer and replacing ) or other personel in the ISPs or Phorm think,or try and tell you that its legal, under uk law the
Definition of a minor is
14. Under the Regulations a minor is a person under the age of 16 years.
and also
Law: Being under legal age; not yet a legal adult.
so thats clear, not of legal adult age, being less than 18, hence not able to authorise a legal ISP contract change.... to be wiretapped,followed,tracked,stalked, etc, but we know this already
