| Where exactly is the line? Hello all, I registered specifically to post this response, and will probably stick around too.
Today I recieved an e-mail from my ISP (as many here have, I'm sure) regarding an accusation of illegally transfering copyrighted material (in this case a movie, over BitTorrent). This accusation was made by a group calling themselves BayTSP Inc (you've probably heard of them).
Apparently they got my IP address from using a BitTorrent client directly (as all information provided by BayTSP can only be obtained in such a manner, or by hacking the tracker itself).
Now, before I get to the legalities of such groups approaching my ISP, and conversly any information my ISP provides to them about myself:
The information BayTSP provides as "proof" of their accusation (which they actually state in the letter is a "criminal offence", not an accusation of one, but an actual criminal offence commited) only contains the following:
My IP, my DNS, a Port Transfer Port Number (which interestingly and unsuprisingly to me is blank as I did no such transfer), a Torrent File name, a File size (in bytes), the tracker address and port.
None of this information is proof of a crime. None of this information can in fact be substanciated by BayTSP without incriminating themselves in the act of copyright infringement (by way of attempting to download copyright materials from my computer).
How is it that a group such as this can then approach my ISP and say:
"BayTSP's search of the protocol listed below has detected infringements of Paramount's copyright interests on your IP addresses as detailed in the attached report."?
Nothing in their information has even the slightest hint of an act of copyright infringement! As has been said on this topic time and time again, displaying a filename and size within a service is not in itself an act of copyright violation, nor is making the actual content itself available. The only proof of a copyright infringement would be the transfer of the file itself (with either a proven sufficient volume of data to allow viewing of a vast majority, or the whole, of the video file.)
In this case no such transfer ever took place. In fact, I have no idea where this came from as the actual file name listed (Son.of.Rambow[2007]DvDrip-aXXo) I have never downloaded in my entire life! To be honest, after reading a synopsis on the film on imdb, I would never want to watch (let alone waste disk space by downloading) this film.
Now to the heart of this matter.... anything my ISP says to this group (or any other individules or entites).
In response to this "threat" (as I interpret it within my right to do so) I have exercised my legal right to demand any and all information that my ISP has disclosed to any entities, and to whom they have disclosed it.
By law (the Data Protection Act) once such a demand is made, a company holding information about you is legal required to provide it.
If my ISP has divulged any information about myself to any entities without my concent or knowledge, then I shall be opening a civil lawsuit against them (as I have both the time and the money to do so).
With regard to BayTSP Inc., I am strongly considering beginning a civil lawsuit against them for making legal threats without jusitification, leading to undue stress. Would anyone here disagree that I have grounds for just such a case (before I approach my lawyer, that is)?
Also does anyone agree that I have grounds for a lawsuit based on defermation of charecter?
I really don't mind how many lawsuits I have to file, as I said I have both the time and the money, and I want to send a message to these hooligans that make accusations (and threats) without foundation, and threaten the innocent without evidence.
Additionally, as I know for certain that I have never downloaded (let alone uploaded) this file, wouldn't it seem likely then that this company is fabricating this nonsense? And that in fact they got my IP either randomly or by some other nefarious means, and then attributed it to this torrent file specifically to make this threat?
As this topic has pointed out, copyright police are not in the habbit of providing actual proof of their claims, so how far-fetched would it be for them to begin fabricating what little "evidence" they do provide?
I know the following for a fact:
- None of the computers on my network (as all are under my control and not accessible to anyone else) have downloaded the file mentioned in their threat
- No one has breached the security of my Wireless Network (and definatley not the cabled network)
- On the time and date stated in their threat, my systems were ALL offline as I was moving my home office from one room to another (as a friend and my misses can testify)
- My IP address is static and belongs only to me |
