Details leaked of Sky customers alleged to have infringed copyright

[tek-monkey]

Anyone followed what is happening with ACS:Law recently, they are the tossers who send out the 'We think you downloaded pr0n, pay us £500 now or we'll sue you' letters to grannies and 6 year olds. Seems they are in a bit of crap, to say the least. Those nice guys at 4chan did a DOS on them, then got access to their emails and an unencrypted list of thousands of sky subscribers they plan to sue. Details here.

More interesting is the fact that in some of the emails they discuss which cases to drop immediately, in case they get lawyers, as they can't let a test case go to court. Interesting....





Admin edit: Moved posts to new thread.

 

[tek-monkey]

A better article from the register shows that they really did bring this on themselves:

ACS:Law at that time was, along with several other rights holder-related websites, already the subject of a DDoS attack by 4chan members under the auspices of "Operation: Payback is a Bitch".

However when The Register caught Crossley on his mobile, he singled out ACS:Law for extra punishment.

"It was only down for a few hours. I have far more concern over the fact of my train turning up 10 minutes late or having to queue for a coffee than them wasting my time with this sort of rubbish," he said.

Posts on 4chan show this was all the encouragement members needed to redouble the attack.

Apparently there is a full list of 8,000 people, their contact details, and which porn film they downloaded. Wonder if any locals are on it?

 

[My Name is URL]

Just reading this page:

http://torrentfreak.com/leaked-emails-reveal-profits-of-anti-piracy-cash-scheme-100926/

The comments are great and provide some great links to prank calls, copies of company e-mails etc....

 

[My Name is URL]

This is a beauty...

http://www.yourfilehost.com/media.php?cat=other&file=933119857.pdf

 

[My Name is URL]

Anyone live in the following postcodes?

ST161NP
ST162FB
ST162TS
ST163NB
ST163QY
ST16HL
ST16JJ
ST16QT
ST174AU
ST174PB
ST179BP
ST179EB
ST179EW
ST179LE
ST179SY
ST179ZP
ST195NX

 

[tek-monkey]

Not looked through the data yet, does it give email addresses?

 

[age'd parent]

Anyone live in the following postcodes?

ST161NP
ST162FB
ST162TS
ST163NB
ST163QY
ST16HL
ST16JJ
ST16QT
ST174AU
ST174PB
ST179BP
ST179EB
ST179EW
ST179LE
ST179SY
ST179ZP
ST195NX

Yes, a sky address not far from me that can detect on wireless, I'm not saying which post code though

 

[tek-monkey]

You can search for your nearest infringer here.

 

[MyCult]

That is HILARIOUS

My details appeared on 'porn' list

Claire says there is no way she or her partner downloaded pornography

The 'facts' suggest something different Claire

 

[shoes]

ACS:Law's website appears to be down also!

www.acs-law.org.uk

Nor is it cached.

 

[tek-monkey]

Not sure how true it is, but I heard their ISP pulled the plug when this all went live.

 

[tek-monkey]

FYI, wanna see how much Sky were paid to pass on peoples details? Click here.

 

[shoes]

So what's the deal with Sky then, are they in the wrong also for data protecting infringement?

Wonder how many of the 8000 on that list will still be Sky Broadband customers this time next week?

 

[tek-monkey]

Nah, there was a court order to realese the info so in a way sky had to. The fact that they get paid just speeds up the passing of names, interestingly Virgin customers don't seem to get targetted at all.

 

[shoes]

Excellent, glad I have Virgin!

The way I understand this though is that they can track it down to an IP address and therefore a physical address. So if more than one person inhabits a residence then how can they prove that it was the subscriber and not their spouse, children etc. which allegedly downloaded the porn. In fact their prosecution is literally worthless, surely?

 

[Gramaisc]

Have ACS ever actually pursued somebody through the courts? Or is all this something close to legalised blackmail, where they just threaten you with legal procedures in the hope that you'll pay up.

 

[shoes]

That's what I'm trying to establish really, because I can't see how legally they can do this?!

Also isn't it basically saying 'buy yourself out of trouble' - pay us £x and avoid being sued by the porno industry.

Ah yeah, you said it - legalised blackmail.

Bunch of ******* thieving scamming ****s.

EDIT: Everyone watches/has watched porn at some point. Who has actually paid for it? It's a multi-billion dollar industry but no one seems to pay for it?! Je ne comprends pas.

 

[CuteStaffsGuy]

That's what I'm trying to establish really, because I can't see how legally they can do this?!

Also isn't it basically saying 'buy yourself out of trouble' - pay us £x and avoid being sued by the porno industry.

Ah yeah, you said it - legalised blackmail.

Bunch of ******* thieving scamming ****s.

EDIT: Everyone watches/has watched porn at some point. Who has actually paid for it? It's a multi-billion dollar industry but no one seems to pay for it?! Je ne comprends pas.

For every person who's clever enough to download it for free there are probably 2-5 who aren't I'd guess. The reason the porno industry are trying to do this is that they perceive piracy as their biggest problem which may be true I dunno, but I'd say it's more likely to be the fact that there is just so much porn out there now the market is flooded.

 

[tek-monkey]

Have ACS ever actually pursued somebody through the courts? Or is all this something close to legalised blackmail, where they just threaten you with legal procedures in the hope that you'll pay up.

Nope, apparently the emails gathered from that server backup show that they assessed who to pursue to ensure they never went to court. I've not read them, but I saw one quoted* saying something along the lines of 'We have too many infringements, the fine would be big enough for him to get lawyers involved, so if we do pursue it can only be for a few items at most'. They can't afford a legal battle, as their methods are flawed on many levels. If I had one I'd happily go to court, hell I'd enjoy it!



* So possibly not real, but...

 

[My Name is URL]

Excellent, glad I have Virgin!

The way I understand this though is that they can track it down to an IP address and therefore a physical address. So if more than one person inhabits a residence then how can they prove that it was the subscriber and not their spouse, children etc. which allegedly downloaded the porn. In fact their prosecution is literally worthless, surely?

Have a look at the very good PDF in my post further up (#4).

A letter from one accused persons lawyer and part of the defence is that they cannot prove who did the downloading.