Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeD
If your car is photographed speeding and you do not know who was driving the police/prosecution have to prove you were the one driving. Whilst the owner has a legal responsibility to name the driver if it wasn't them, that doesn't apply in the cases where you cannot name the driver*. It is the case where you cannot honestly name the driver that is the one that matches the IP issue.
If you don't know who is responsible for the download and you've taken reasonable steps to find out, i.e you've protected your wifi and you've checked all the computers members of the household use and found none of them are responsible, then the courts should have to prove you did it and not just rely on the IP as sufficient proof.
|
Yes, there I agree with you. The area in which I've disagree with some of the previous posters is the situation where, for example, evidence of copyrighted material is found on a household computer, but the people in the household refuse to say who was the actual downloader. In that circumstance, I think that either to prosecute the property owner, or to jointly prosecute all members of the household in a "common endeavour" proceeding would be justified.