said by 88615298:
The plan has seen fierce criticism from the EFF and some researchers because it assumes guilt before innocence and requires users pay a $35 fee just for the honor of defending themselves against accusations
If I get arrested for a crime, the cops think I did it( ie GUILTY of said crime ) before I've had a trial. Thus I have to pay to prove I am not guilty.
If I am sued in a civil case I have to pay to defend myself. The court doesn't investigate and decides I'm not guilty BEFORE a trial. That's the whole point of a trial.
ISPs have traditionally been legally terrified of this entire affair, refusing to talk in any detail about their piracy mitigation measures -- in part because they've falsely accused people in the past and are worried about legal liability for screwing up.
It would be incredibly bad luck to be falsely accused 6 times in a row. Something akin to being struck by lightning while being eaten by a shark.
Considering the "penalty" the first 5 strikes is a letter and the penalty for the 6th strike is um NOTHING( maybe throttling ) I'm not seeing the point of all the hub bub.
If you're accused of rape, sure there is a chance you are could be falsely accused. Happens all the time. However if you are accused 6 times in a row there is no way you are not guilty.
you were doing ok till hte cops part about you being guilty , no if that were the case you'd not get a trial of any kind or that right and go right to prison .....the cops THINK you did something wrong they arrest you and you goto court to determine guilt or innocence...