Quote:
Originally Posted by Kymmy
Begs the question then if it was flawed then how did it get the ruling for the IP details???
|
Simple, the ruling was made on legal process. All Davenport Lyons needed to do, was prove that there
appeared to be a case of breach (not prove one), and the details were required to follow up the possible breach. Anybody can obtain a release order with only a small amount of evidence showing they need the account holders details to aquire more evidence. If there was actual physical proof of a copyrights breach, the judgement would not state "appearing that there is a
prima facie case", "
which
may give rise to a claim for Copyright infringement".
Quote:
prima facie case
n. Law
A case in which the evidence presented is sufficient for a judgement to be made unless the evidence is contested.
|
As it was not released in order to be contested, they got the court order, in the same way they got default judgements on those who didn't turn up to court.
It's a dirty trick that even the law society are now looking at, as complaints have been made from some people who's details were released.