Quote:
Originally Posted by gideongallery
this of course did wonders for their attempt to argue that people should be held responsible for their unsecured wifi.
if they could secure their own servers and they were a million dollar corporation
how could a house hold be expected to do better.
|
I do not like file sharing specially when you see ripped sites and other peoples work be it porn or mainstream all over the net for free. It is not right, but I do not agree at all by the way they send out these bullshit letters demanding money. Its just another money making scheme which puts them in the same boat as file sharers in my eyes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ACS:Law
Quality of evidence against suspected copyright infringers
ACS:Law identify suspected copyright infringement through peer-to-peer file sharing by the IP address of the internet user's connection. However, ACS:Law's use of Logistep's technology has been the subject of an investigation by Which?, who said that "innocent people are being accused".[33][34] Following the batch of 10,000 letters sent in January 2010, over 150 people contacted Which? saying that they had been falsely accused.[11] In an interview with The Guardian, one person who had received letters from ACS:Law commented: "ACS:Law act as investigator, judge and jury without any regard for who their actions affect."[35]
Researchers in Washington DC found that the technology often results in false positives.[36] ACS:Law responded saying "we are happy that the information we get is completely accurate".[11] A study by the ISP TalkTalk showed that unsecured wi-fi networks can easily be accessed without permission, leading to innocent users being accused of activity carried out by a third party.[37] Andrew Heaney, spokesman for TalkTalk, explained "the lack of presumption of innocence and the absence of judicial process combined with the prevalence of wi-fi hacking will result in innocent people being [blamed]".
Criticism from the music industry
ACS:Law has been criticised by representatives of the music industry. The British Phonographic Industry (BPI) said "our view is that legal action is best reserved for the most persistent or serious offenders - rather than widely used as a first response", adding that they would not be adopting the tactics of ACS:Law.[42]