Plusnet will give your personal details to ACS Law with not informing you!!

[#1]

Plusnet will (to be fair, so will every other ISP except TalkTalk) give your personal details to the law company ACS Law, when presented with a court order. Now this may sound correct but these court orders have been granted to enable ACS Law to take the people to court, but to date not one person has been taken to court!!. What they use them for is to send out letters informing the user that their IP address has been used to upload copyright material to the internet, they then demand a large amount of money to settle out of court. It doesnot matter wether the user has done the deed or not, they are not interested, they will just move on to the next person if the user declines to pay. To date they state they have collected £1 million plus. very little of the money goes to the artist and most ends up in the hands of ACS Law or Digiprotect (the company who own the copyright). Plus net (and most other ISPs) has provided thousands of personal details to this company, on the understanding that they will use the details to take the user to court, not just send out threatening letters. As stated earlier NOT ONE PERSON HAS BEEN TAKEN TO COURT, on the court order it states that ACS Law must provide PlusNet with a list of people who have been prosecuted within 6 months.
Why has Plusnet not contacted ACS Law to find out how many of their customers have been prosecuted as stated on the Court order. If they get the answer ZERO will they stop giving personal details to these "Scammers"
I have contacted PlusNet with regard to this issue on their main site, but got no answer.

[#2]

Hi there,
This was discussed fairly recently here.

[#3]

No, you have misread my post....
the post you pointed to goes way off topic and is next to useless.
What i want to know is WHY HAS PLUSNET NOT ASKED ACS Law WHY THEY ARE STILL ISSUING NOTICES WHEN IT CLEARLY STATES ON THE NPO (Norwich Pharmacal Order) THAT THEY MUST PROVIDE PLUSNET WITH THE FACTS REGARDING HOW MANY PLUS NET SUBSCRIBERS HAVE BEEN TAKEN TO COURT.
As I understand it, NOT ONE HAS BEEN TAKEN TO COURT.
I have contacted plusnet previously and received the same "Stonewall" reply please research this and explain why Plusnet still give out our personal details inorder to allow this "Law" firm to threaten innocent (As every one is until proven different) people with bills for large amounts of money.
Please note i have been a loyal subscriber to FORCE9 for the last 10 years (Part of Plusnet).

[#4]

TBH I'm not a legal expert, and I'm not aware of 'NPO', but I can advise that we will only give the information we are required to by a court order.
Yes the previous discussion went off topic, but our response hasn't changed.

[#5]

NPO is the abbrieviation for "Norwich Pharmacal Order" this is the correct name for the "Court order" you have received.
At the risk of sounding like i am repeating myself...
Please ask your legal department to contact ACS Law (as they have the right to do as stated on the "Court order") and ask them how many of their customers have been taken to court. I assure you the answer will be ZERO. In light of this why are Plusnet still giving our personal/PRIVATE details to ACS Law to enable them to perpetuate this scam! (I call this a scam as it was referred to as such by Lord Clement-Jones in the house of Lords on 18 jan 10.
>

[#6]

I was not aware of this point and am also interested in Plusnets response

[#7]

I've asked the question for you.

[#8]

Thanks,
I look forward to the answer with interest.
you may want to pass on the following http://www.gillhams.com/dictionary/556.cfm to your law dept as it is a definition of a Norwich pharmacal order.
and states that "The person seeking the court order must have a genuine intention of commencing proceedings."

[#9]

Hello,
I was wondering how you were getting on with your legal department and the question you asked them on Friday?

[#10]

Just because PN has the right to ask for some more details, it doesn't excuse them from complying with a lawfully issued court order.
Since they are going to comply anyway, why would then have any interest in what the details are to be used for.
The real issue is that courts are granting these orders - you can't blame companies from complying with the courts though.

[#11]

Plusnet has a duty of care to it's users to ensure that information it is handing over as a result of a court order is being used in an appropriate many (and in accordance with the stated purpose presented by the plaintiff when the order was made).
If it is not being used correctly then Plusnet should go back to the court.
I rather think the court would take a very dim view of it being used solely to blackmail people and not with the genuine intention of bringing prosecutions.

[#12]

I am still waiting for an answer to my post from Plusnet, and am very disapointed at the time the Mods have taken to ask a simple question to their Law Dept. I am enclosing an abridged copy of the Court order showing the paragraph referring to the disclosure of the amount of prosecutions taken.

[#13]

Please note that mods and PN are different people, mods are customers like yourself.
The question to the relevant department was put by PN staff, which was probably the right thing to do.

[#14]

The Moderators are just customers like yourself and have no special insight into or influence over the daily workings of Plusnet.
Adie got in before me

[#15]

In case anyone is interested i am enclosing the full version of the Court order