dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
7
share rss forum feed

JonyBelGeul
Premium
join:2008-07-31
reply to Optional

Re: How can people be wrongly accused of this recent issue?

You ask two questions. How can somebody can be wrongly accused, and what to do when it happens.

The first is obvious. The IP is not the person, as many others have pointed out. For example, the IP could be assigned to a person, who owns a cafe, who offers free wifi to customers.

The second is different. It's about evidence. Without direct evidence that the person did the deed, that's all that's needed for the charges to be dropped and the case to be dismissed. However, in the case of our cafe owner, he could present this evidence on top of pointing out the lack of evidence for the plaintiff. Charges dropped, case dismissed.

Even in the event that the person did do the deed, it's still up to the plaintiff to prove it by way of presenting evidence of such.

IANAL, so if you're serious about protecting yourself in case of wrong accusation, then consult a lawyer.
--
My blog. Wanna Git My Ball on Blogspot.

bt

join:2009-02-26
canada
kudos:1
said by JonyBelGeul:

The second is different. It's about evidence. Without direct evidence that the person did the deed, that's all that's needed for the charges to be dropped and the case to be dismissed. However, in the case of our cafe owner, he could present this evidence on top of pointing out the lack of evidence for the plaintiff. Charges dropped, case dismissed.

Even in the event that the person did do the deed, it's still up to the plaintiff to prove it by way of presenting evidence of such.

This is a civil case. Direct evidence isn't necessary to win the case - they just have to convince the judge that it's more likely the defendant did it than didn't do it.

UK_Dave

join:2011-01-27
Powassan, ON
kudos:2
So the more people you share your connection with, the smaller the odds get of it being you.....

Hmmm....

Mass civil disobediance through passive WIFI sharing....

I like it.....

stevey_frac

join:2009-12-09
Cambridge, ON
My router has the ability to set up separate guest network, that can't route to my local computers, just straight to the internet. Who's to say who might use such a thing.

JonyBelGeul
Premium
join:2008-07-31
reply to bt
said by bt:

said by JonyBelGeul:

The second is different. It's about evidence. Without direct evidence that the person did the deed, that's all that's needed for the charges to be dropped and the case to be dismissed. However, in the case of our cafe owner, he could present this evidence on top of pointing out the lack of evidence for the plaintiff. Charges dropped, case dismissed.

Even in the event that the person did do the deed, it's still up to the plaintiff to prove it by way of presenting evidence of such.

This is a civil case. Direct evidence isn't necessary to win the case - they just have to convince the judge that it's more likely the defendant did it than didn't do it.

That's flawed logic. If direct evidence is not necessary, then it does not automatically follow that arguments alone are enough. Arguments are not evidence. However, if you mean that direct evidence is not necessary, but indirect evidence could be sufficient, then I agree. But then, it all depends on the evidence itself, not the arguments.

On the subject of "more likely", that's probabilities. And if we only look at the probabilities concerning how many people use how many IP's, it's immediately obvious that there's many times more people who use the same IP than just the one person assigned this IP. Think of all the cafes, all the enterprises, all the homes, all the schools, that use a single IP to connect to the internet, but use an intranet to connect all its users. So it would be immensely difficult for anybody to convince a court that the person assigned the IP did the deed indeed, without direct evidence.
--
My blog. Wanna Git My Ball on Blogspot.

funny0

join:2010-12-22
said by JonyBelGeul:

said by bt:

said by JonyBelGeul:

The second is different. It's about evidence. Without direct evidence that the person did the deed, that's all that's needed for the charges to be dropped and the case to be dismissed. However, in the case of our cafe owner, he could present this evidence on top of pointing out the lack of evidence for the plaintiff. Charges dropped, case dismissed.

Even in the event that the person did do the deed, it's still up to the plaintiff to prove it by way of presenting evidence of such.

This is a civil case. Direct evidence isn't necessary to win the case - they just have to convince the judge that it's more likely the defendant did it than didn't do it.

That's flawed logic. If direct evidence is not necessary, then it does not automatically follow that arguments alone are enough. Arguments are not evidence. However, if you mean that direct evidence is not necessary, but indirect evidence could be sufficient, then I agree. But then, it all depends on the evidence itself, not the arguments.

On the subject of "more likely", that's probabilities. And if we only look at the probabilities concerning how many people use how many IP's, it's immediately obvious that there's many times more people who use the same IP than just the one person assigned this IP. Think of all the cafes, all the enterprises, all the homes, all the schools, that use a single IP to connect to the internet, but use an intranet to connect all its users. So it would be immensely difficult for anybody to convince a court that the person assigned the IP did the deed indeed, without direct evidence.

you cant walk into a court and constantly say oh probably he did this and that you will get whacked with a heresy motion if you keep it up without any actual evidence...

the only actual evidence known is that they have a list of ip addresses getting some bits of there files. The statement of claim asks for commercial judgements NOT non commercial ones. WELL at the hearing they should be all asking for discovery of the COMMERCIAL aspects cause just sharing a file does not nor ever has required a transfer of money ....PROVE that is what i am asking any court or plaintiff....and you can't ....there isn't even a doubt that you can't prove it was commercial thus the wish by them to gain the ids of users for a commercial lawsuit should die right there.

go refile for non commercial and btw you just lost 5K of that 10K wish
and judges for a couple of movies are never going to give 5K
they were told not too.