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

[#1]

To find me they do not need a court order so should PN spend resources defending me? If not why should they spend resources defending the court order?

[#2]

The majority of Plusnet customers do not buy domains or static ip addresses.
They just browse web sites etc and do not run servers that require DNS.
BTW Why do you publish your name and telephone number via DNS?
It's not necessary.

[#3]

I'm with Asbo and most of the others on here. ACS law seem to be using 'bullying' tactics in an attempt to make money. If they had evidence that would stand up in court ( and were actually interested in protecting copyright! ) I'm sure they would be taking people to court, they aren't!. That's because they probably know their evidence is not really valid. Its dissapointing, to say the least, that our juducial system seems to keep allowing their NP orders and it seems that the only way to stop them is for the ISP's to contend the orders, as is demonstrated by those who do contend, being dropped from any order.

[#4]

Quote from: A

BTW Why do you publish your name and telephone number via DNS? It's not necessary.

The rDNS will give my domain and a Whois for the domain will give my name and address. I could remove the latter from Nominet records but I'm not too concern having it in the public domain

[#5]

i have no problem with the copyright holders fighting for the money in lost revenue, as long as they keep to a promise I've heard them make that they will only go after the top few % of hardened pirates that upload and download 24/7 (which will be very hard as this group of uses will encrypt and anonymous there ip's)
so with that in brackets said there going to have to go after the next group of people and that's the heavy users that don't know or to lazy to anonymous there ip's to send the message out to others, but then once they have done this the buzz word around the school's/ www will be how to's on going all ghost recon and so the copyright traffic (encrypted and anomized) of this country's communication backbone network will once hot up again (not as bad as before, but very close to that).
where does the copyright holder now go after in there quest for the year 1980's sales profits. Do they shut the vpn's and proxies down?
remembering that once there trying to shut these down all the damage they have done to there rep by the guilty to proven innocent  rubbish they tried against there mostly paying customers as even the hardened pirates will now and then buy legit media esp when its from the net at the right price and experience
I've had a herbal tea and the above seems to me what will happen, acs law just seem to me a company out to make as much money as possible during this trial period of reducing copyright infringement and these snake oil sales men like this should be stopped right now, so that the big media companys can work a decent way to get what they want and what there customers need.
acs law seem to have approached the media companys with this and the media big boys not knowing how to put a soultion to this have said yes to them as at this current time it must of seemed the best stab in the dark apporach (they will regret it in a sum years time))

[#6]

Quote from: Chris

Hi all, We're still keeping tabs on this thread and are aware that the 30th June is tomorrow. If I'm honest I'm not sure how much, if any, information we will be able to share with you on top of the discussions we've already had on this but we'll keep asking. Thanks

REALLY NOT GOOD ENOUGH !!!!
If after all this time PLUSNET Have received a letter from ACS Law showing they have not taken any one to court, from the hundreds or thousands of names and addresses given to them by Plusnet, then surely Plusnet owe it to us to publish this information.
If they have received the information and then continue to unapose these court orders then they should be sued for "Accessories to Blackmail" after all if no one has been taken to court then the NPO is not being used for its true purpose, which is to enable the plaintiff to get the information to prosecute people NOT SEND BLACKMAIL letters.
If PLUSNET Publish this information it would be a catalyst to other ISPs to enable them to Appose the Court orders. If NO ISP Gives out the information then ACS LAW Cannot continue with this revinue stream!

[#7]

It's worth bearing in mind that we *have* asked for that information, I'm not saying we definitely won't share it, just setting the expectation that we may not.

[#8]

@itsme The fact that your data is easily traceable is a choice you make. If you believe you are ‘safe’ by leaving your personal data on the WWW then that is your call. However, the issue here is that ACS law are using a loophole in the law that allows them to force PN to hand over our personal data regardless of if you care about it being released or not.  PN don’t seem to see that this process is a clear abuse of the law and have done nothing to investigate it. It’s easier and cheaper for them to just dish out our data.
This affects every PN customer. You don’t need to be someone who shares files to be on the receiving end of a nasty gram, you just need to own an internet connection. Innocent people are being targeted. Some people may be comfortable with receiving and defending a claim that threatens to take them to court unless they pay up, but I would hazard a guess that most would not.
For those that have not received a letter then I’d like to point out that they are not ‘nice and friendly’. They are intimidating and threatening and for me personally very frightening. I have a young daughter and as someone who at first didn’t understand the legal or technical side of these claims I was terrified that I would end up in jail and that my daughter would be taken away. I can’t think of anything more horrifying and upsetting.
You may be under the impression that if you write to ACS Law and tell them it wasn’t you, offer your PC as evidence and protest that you cannot determine who used the connection that they would drop the case, but they do not. They ignore all these comments and continue to harass, bully and scare people into paying up..
Not only do you get bullied but you may receive a claim accusing you of sharing pornography.
Imagine this… you’re wife pays for the internet connection and receives a letter claiming that it’s been used for sharing gay pornography. Not only do you have to defend yourself against the inaccurate claim but you have to reassure your wife that you are not gay!
Or… perhaps you are a parent with children and receive a claim of this type. Does this put doubt into your mind that your child may be sharing and watching inappropriate material?  How do you find out what they have or have not been doing? How do you prove it?
How many children get beaten over it?
How many relationships get damaged over it?
How many people suffer illness due to stress over it?
You may think you are safe because you never go near pornography, you never even installed a P2P program, but this is all irrelevant because if you own an internet account it could be YOU next.
So PN Subscribers….sit back and relax if you don’t care. I just hope your number doesn’t come up next.
Plusnet your attitude to this disgusts me. You just don’t give a dam. Your so called customer service director is probably happily playing golf right now (must be why he never replied to my letter). As long as you let this continue then you’re as bad as the solicitors that throw out these claims.

Quote from: Chris

It's worth bearing in mind that we *have* asked for that information, I'm not saying we definitely won't share it, just setting the expectation that we may not.

If you can’t tell us what you are doing (if anything) to investigate this then at least tell us WHY you can’t tell us!! What’s stopping you informing us?

[#9]

Quote from: Tidgy

If you believe you are ‘safe’ by leaving your personal data on the WWW then that is your call. up..

My personal details are available from the web from many sources some I have control over like telephone directories and some I have not as the case of being a named contributor on a couple of patents. These have my full name and address and I have no control over them

Quote from: Tidgy

cannot determine who used the connection that they would drop the case

As someone who is part of Fon/BTfon who share their WiFi connection should I be worried? Probably but I'm not.

Quote from: Tidgy

letter claiming that it’s been used for sharing gay pornography

Is this copyright pornography?

[#10]

Quote from: itsme

Is this copyright pornography?

Yes of course. It's all copyright material that is being claimed on.
By the way with regards to the  the BT Fon Wi-Fi sharing thing. These hotspots that are used by others sharing part of your network have thier own ID and are not traceable to your connection.

[#11]

The IP the hotspot is using is my IP so ACS and the likes will come to me first. The routing of the hotspot traffic goes via Fon and they keep records of the connections but not sure if the record traffic other than the usage.
Edit.: Just to add I use Fon not BT Fon, I joined before BT became involved so the handling of the hotspot traffic goes via Fon (I believe in Italy) and is not handled by BT.

[#12]

I expect there is a VPN created and the users are required to log on user their account details, but I don’t know and it’s irrelevant anyway. The fact is that if you own a network you are venerable. If you get a letter of claim and you write to ACS to inform them that you share your network then I doubt they would care.
There is no law that states you have to secure your wireless network, but these things are not important to ACS Law, they purely want to generate revenue so they will persist until you refuse to correspond further and wait for court paperwork or you give in and pay up.
You may have more backbone than others and be totally unfazed by letters from solicitors demanding that you pay up for something that was done on your network or you simply may be network and internet savvy and know that there is no way to prove who actually committed the infringement of copyright they are claiming for. Other people are not. All we are asking is that PN investigate the method of identification by these solicitors so that innocent people like myself are not subjected to this. Once the claim form is through our door there is nothing we can do other than start letter writing to protest our innocence. However, PN have the opportunity to contest the evidence when the Court Order is applied for.
PN know the method of identification is flawed yet they do nothing.

[#13]

When Plusnet supply these IP addresses to these scammers, do they use a system that has been subject to external audit?
In the past PN only needed to record ip addresses for recording account usage - but it's not as if getting it a bit wrong was going to upset anyone or cause serious loss of income.
Is there any independent verification of ISP's in general when it comes to supplying correct ip addresses?
Is the IP history more or less reliable than PN's accounting system (joke).
We've seen that PN have difficulty recording accurate telephone call information (periodically) - but this is "old technology".

[#14]

1st July 2010. 6 months and 1 day since the deadline set in the "Court Order" for PlusNet to provide all the details of subcribers to ACS Law. 1 day past the deadline set in the "Court Order" for ACS Law to provide to Plusnet, a list of people who they have taken to court from the many hundreds or thousands given to them by PLUSNET.
So PLUSNET what is the answer to my question that i posed back in post one to this thread.
Have you received information from ACS Law, if you have what is the number of people taken to court and how many names did you give out in the first place. If you have received this information and will not share with us, then i would like a PUBLIC REPLY ON THIS FORUM STATING YOUR REASONS. If ACS Law have not replied yet, then they are in breach of the "Court Order" and as I am a paying subsciber of PlusNet I would like PlusNet to pursue it vigorously.
Note if PLUSNET have received the information, and it states none have been taken to court, and they still give out names and addresses knowing that noone has been taken to court, couldPlusNet be taken to court as "Accessories to Extortion, both before and after the fact"? - I dont know I am just asking the Question!
PLUSNET - GIVE YOUR PAYING SUBSRIBERS A LITTLE RESPECT AND PUBLISH THE FINDINGS.

[#15]

Im not really fussed about the findings, as the number of people actually taken to court will be a big fat ZERO.
However i would like Plusnet to confirm that they intend to contest ACS:Law and theyre shoddy practices!