View Single Post
Old 04-01-2011, 04:57 PM   #210
HarryT
eBook Enthusiast
HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
HarryT's Avatar
 
Posts: 85,557
Karma: 93980341
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: UK
Device: Kindle Oasis 2, iPad Pro 10.5", iPhone 6
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr ploppy View Post
The law changes one important aspect of it — they no longer need any evidence. The accusation alone is enough to start the punishment process.
An IP address is prima facie evidence. Not perhaps definitive proof, but evidence, none the less. And it's exactly the same evidence that, under previous legislation, a rights-holder could have gone to court with to request a court order for the ISP to release personal information about the account holder. Indeed, that's still what has to happen if the rights-holder wishes to instigate legal procedings against the alleged offender.

Despite your protestations, nothing has changed here, in terms of the standard of proof. There is still an assumption of innocence, and a rights-holder still has to go to court, and present evidence of wrong-doing to that court, before any "punishment" will take place.
HarryT is offline   Reply With Quote