Whose Burden Of Proof Is It When Accused Of Unauthorized Uploading?
from the questions,-questions,-questions dept
We've already seen how flimsy the evidence can be when people are accused of sharing unauthorized content online. It takes a lot more than just an IP address to show that the person was actually making unauthorized content available. However, that doesn't preclude some legal bullying in the meantime. TorrentFreak has an article about a bunch of folks who were accused of unauthorized sharing of a video game. Many were surprised, claiming they had never heard of the video game, suggesting that among other things, their computers were hacked, their router was used without permission or that the accusing company simply had bad data. Any of these are possibilities, but the lawyers in the case are now demanding a lot of additional information from anyone who pushed back at the initial charge. Among other things, the lawyers are demanding a copy of the instructions that came with the router each accused person uses, evidence that they use an anti-virus product and a firewall, specific evidence to explain how their computer or router may have been compromised and evidence to show that the person took adequate measure to prevent any intrusion. This seems like quite a stretch. It hardly seems reasonable to demand all this information when the original accuser is unable to provide the details to prove that the person they're accusing actually did anything wrong. If this is allowed, they might as well just accuse everyone of unauthorized uploading and demand contrary proof from each individual. The problem, though, is that many people get scared off by letters from lawyers and give in to needless bullying.