|
|
|
286
 
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 19:34:27
Posts: 449,
Visits: 1,859
|
|
But how far should one go?
It would be possible to remove the torrent client for ubuntu - but then, aren't there web/http trackers? (not to mention the occasional legal torrent)
And what about youtube, google books and radio playlists?
As far as I can see, the only way to ensure no copyright is breached on a public access computer is to remove the computer.
|
|
|
|
|
Pentium
Group: Moderators
Last Login: Today @ 22:15:56
Posts: 3,170,
Visits: 3,428
|
|
Just a thought here.
If you provide a 'Free Open Wireless internet access' to your paying guests, as some Hotel chains do, and its quite legal to do so, then the people trying to put pressure on the local wireless access point provider can't win.
So to summarise an open wireless access point is convenient to you the subscriber to an ISP, it's also not illegal to have one, and there's nothing they can prove.
If they recommend you close and encrypt the wireless point send them a proforma invoice for the services of a computer technician to carry out the work, on the understanding that once they pay your proforma invoice as part of the agreement they're entering into by making that payment you will of course get your wireless access point encrypted.
If they insist that you should also have an anti-virus and firewall installed send them an annual agreement so that they can pay for you to have such expensive fripparies installed and kept up to date.
That way if they do decide to take you to court you'll already have a financial counter claim for them to answer too.
My bet is that if the claimants received a counter claim with every letter they sent out they'd soon give up the activity as a fruitless exercise.
Mad Malc
|
|
|
|
|
Pentium
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 22:21:16
Posts: 2,175,
Visits: 5,049
|
|
It sounds like scam to me.
Non of it adds up, the £600, the lack of proof (i.e. dates, times,ip address and files shared, they probably don't even know your IP address) and the out of court settlement.
Don't ignore it, get in touch with an official body to confirm it but I wouldn't worry about it.
gaming: E4400@2.66GHz / P5K-E / 2x1GB PC8000@533MHz / 2x80GB D'Max 9-RAID0 + 320GB / 8800GTS 512MB / ViewSonic VX2835wm
server+media: P4 2.8GHz @ 2.4GHz / 775Dual-VSTA / 2x512MB PC3200 / 1000GB+500GB+250GB / HD2400pro
also: P3 for the mrs and a linux box and probably enough bits to build another one
|
|
|
|
|
286
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 19:34:27
Posts: 449,
Visits: 1,859
|
|
They do quote a date & time, an IP and the file in question. Also, a client was mentioned - libtorrent (or something similar).
I guess they have obtained the name and address through the ISP after probing a torrent swarm (unless they have got it completely wrong with their evidence gathering).
|
|
|
|
|
Pentium
Group: Moderators
Last Login: Today @ 22:15:56
Posts: 3,170,
Visits: 3,428
|
|
Hi Dave
Another thing that asking D&L to pay up in order to put in place applications on your system at their behest, in order to protect their clients copyright, is that should it proceed to court you have a monetary counter claim, so if for example the proforma invoice for the services of a competent computer technician is around £40 to £50, and D&L refuse to pay that, then clearly the value of the copyright infringed material is worth less than £40 to £50.
There are also very few jurors or members of the legal profession out there who would hand on heart say they're fully competent to completely lock down a wireless access point so that any determined third party can't break into it. Particularly if a wireless router were provided to the court for the plaintiffs council to configure whilst the court watched on.
Mad Malc
|
|
|
|
|
286
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 19:34:27
Posts: 449,
Visits: 1,859
|
|
I really cannot see the company making much headway through the courts. I get the impression that their stance will seem foolhardy once they have lost their first case.
As said, the bill-payer has no legal requirement to encrypt a wireless connection or install a whole range of monitoring/restrictive apps on public access computers - so it becomes absurd to lay the blame at their feet.
If copyright infringement were a criminal offense rather than merely a civil one - none of these cases would make it as far as court. However, with civil cases being won by a majority probability (ie 51% chance of guilt = guilt) rather than insurmountable proof/evidence of personal guilt required by criminal cases - there is a good chance that if DL choose their victims wisely, they might just have a small streak of success.
|
|
|
|
|
386
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 22:50:28
Posts: 626,
Visits: 50,800
|
|
It could also be pointed out that the IP address that they have is that of a router, for which, I believe, they are not required to keep logs from, and if they were, those logs would have to be scrutinised to the minute to get the relevant information.
Also point out that they would be stupid to allow any customer to use p2p across their wifi as it would seriously intefere with other customers usage, and hence their business would suffer.
I basically operate a wide area hotspot, and if I see anyone using p2p, they are kicked off with immediate effect so as not to hinder other users.
Regards
Tim
Famed Author Of The MM Mug Slogan"T:\Invalid System Status, Insert Drink To Continue"! Main Rig;P5V-VM DH, E2160, 2Gig 667,WD 120,Optiarc DvdRw, 6600GT. 2nd Main Rig; Asus M2A-VM HDMI, AMD 64 x2 5000, 1 Gig Geil 667, LG DvdRw, Maxtor 320. Old main;Shuttle Sn45, Xp2600+, 1gig Crucial, Radeon 9200se, WD120 Gig, LG DVDrw Old Spare; MSI K7N2Delta ilsr,Xp3000+, 512meg Crucial, FX5900, 2x WD120Gig +WD80 Gig, Asus DVD + DVDrw, Games Rig; 965P-DS3P, E4400 C2D,2gig Crucial 667, x1950XT, 5oogig Samsung, LG Dvd & Dvd R/W , Dev Rig Asus P5B, E6300 C2D, 2gig Geil 800, 7900GT, 250Gig WD, LG Dvd & Dvd R/W, Kids Rig Asrock 4CoreDualVsta, E4300 C2D, 1gig Geil 667, Asus 6600GT, LG Dvd & Dvd R/W - All XP Pro Sp2 or Vista Ultimate
|
|
|
|
|
Pentium
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 19:35:28
Posts: 5,437,
Visits: 28,984
|
|
malc_wright (09/08/2008)
Just a thought here.
If you provide a 'Free Open Wireless internet access' to your paying guests, as some Hotel chains do, and its quite legal to do so, then the people trying to put pressure on the local wireless access point provider can't win.
So to summarise an open wireless access point is convenient to you the subscriber to an ISP, it's also not illegal to have one, and there's nothing they can prove.
If they recommend you close and encrypt the wireless point send them a proforma invoice for the services of a computer technician to carry out the work, on the understanding that once they pay your proforma invoice as part of the agreement they're entering into by making that payment you will of course get your wireless access point encrypted.
If they insist that you should also have an anti-virus and firewall installed send them an annual agreement so that they can pay for you to have such expensive fripparies installed and kept up to date.
That way if they do decide to take you to court you'll already have a financial counter claim for them to answer too.
My bet is that if the claimants received a counter claim with every letter they sent out they'd soon give up the activity as a fruitless exercise.
Umm I dont think the excuse that it is a free open access point and therefore it's use is not the liability of the supplier just wont fly. Unless you get the user to agree to T&C where you are not liable then it probably leaves the provider in a very risky legal area......
Anyway. Stopping P2P traffic is probably a good idea anyway: and doesn't require any faffing about with PC's or w/e. Just lock down the access point to provide web access (and possibly IM) only. It's a half hour job and makes sure nothing like this ever happens again.
If they do take them to court and have an IP, files and other evidence then I would imagine they will win. If they sue for facilitating the distribution of copyrighted stuff they have them over a barrel really because it is true (I believe in civil law ignorance is not a defence).
Cheers,
Tom
My Crime is that of curiosity, my crime is that of outsmarting you
|
|
|
|
| | |