You know first of all I felt sorry for KC. I assumed that there was nothing that they could do until I read
this:
It seems that Tiscali (TalkTalk) simply told ACS:Law to get stuffed:
“TalkTalk is the only major ISP which has refused to divulge customers’ information to lawyers pursuing alleged copyright infringers. We have held this position since the issue came into view and we continue to stick by this policy. If we are ever ‘instructed’ to disconnect or throttle a customer who has not been found guilty in a court of law, we will refuse to do so and challenge the instruction through the courts if necessary,”
While a few other providers (including KC) happily gave over customers details without putting up a fight:
..several ISPs including Be, O2, BT, Plusnet, Enternet and Kingston were not opposed to the court order forcing them to hand over their customers’ private details to ACS:Law.
As for why KC didn't defend it's customers, I guess the answer is likely to be that its in KCs best interests to scare the file sharers off the network because they don't have the bandwidth to support them.
My advice for anyone hit with this transparent money-making scheme is go get some free advice from
http://www.beingthreatened.com/ and don't pay ACS:Law a penny.
For an insight into how ACS:Law see their marks read this quote from TorrentFreak:
“Recently leaked documents exposed the inner workings of the process, dubbed by some ‘speculative invoicing,’ showing that claims are assigned a ‘litigation rating’,” he told TorrentFreak.
“Factors affecting the rating tended not to be based on the evidence supporting the claim but on the appointment of legal representation, technical ’savvy’ and the finances of the client – or lack thereof,” he added.
P.S I merged the two topics you started on this subject to make it easier for people to find.
Poll
SHOULD THEY
