Privacy International Plans To Sue ACS:Law For Mishandling Information On Those It Threatened

from the oops dept

A bit more fallout from the ACS:Law email leak. In the comments on our last post, cc pointed out that one of the discoveries in the leaks is that ACS:Law did not properly protect the private information of those who paid up after receiving a pre-settlement threat letter. In fact, the email leaks apparently revealed over 10k names, addresses and credit card details in some cases. Because of this, Privacy International is planning to file a lawsuit against the company, for not living up to EU privacy regulations on such information. PI is claiming that the company violated data protection laws by allowing sensitive information to be stored on a public-facing server, and not taking the “appropriate technical and organisational measures” to protect the data.

Filed Under: , ,
Companies: acs:law

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Privacy International Plans To Sue ACS:Law For Mishandling Information On Those It Threatened”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
20 Comments
Simon says:

BSkyB finally challenging them too...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/blog/2010/sep/28/bskyb-acslaw-filesharing

“UK’s fourth largest broadband provider says it will no longer cooperate with controversial law firm”

Of course, it would have been nice if they’d done that from the start. When compelled to hand over IP addresses by court order, I would love an ISP to add some covering text along the lines of :

Please find attached the subscriber details that our records show was leasing the IP address xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx on [date | time]. Note that this information pertains only to the person paying for the account, and does not identify individual users or devices.

Hephaestus (profile) says:

This really doesnt seem to be all that profitable any more ....

“The Information Commissioner has said a fine of ?500,000 could be levied upon ACS:Law, which also faces a disciplinary tribunal by the Solicitors Regulation Authority, legal action by pressure group Privacy International and legal action from people it apparently wrongly-identified as downloading illegal material.”

I would be neat if RIAA and MPAA e-mails became public. It would clean all of the RIAA lawyers out the Justice department.

Claire Rand says:

Don't Forget...

Firstly a fine of “up to £500,000” could be the sort of “up to” your ISP uses so don’t expect much, though I do think something will happen this time, just not much more than a public ticking off.

Also PI… ahhh yes, wasn’t it one of their bods who was fine with the likes of phorm and their nasty little scam? perhaps ACS:Law should have hired him to produce a few statements.

The very fact that scams like this fall apart once people know about them is why the people trying to push them want this to end up much more criminal so they don’t have the costs.

Slightly surprised the BBC is covering it though, they are normally more likely to point out the evils of file sharing. Maybe some things are slowly changing, at least until the blue/yellow ones yank the chain tight again.

Call me Al says:

Re: Don't Forget...

“Slightly surprised the BBC is covering it though, they are normally more likely to point out the evils of file sharing. Maybe some things are slowly changing, at least until the blue/yellow ones yank the chain tight again.”

Like with the 4chan thing a few weeks ago. The BBC actually presented the story and that it was in retaliation for anti-piracy efforts rather than just a random attack. I was pretty happy to see BBC actually present both sides on such an issue.

Duke (profile) says:

Coverage

If you look at the MSM, it is only really being covered by the BBC and the Guardian (both fairly anti-Sky) and they are going with the “people” story of the personal details being available, not all the legal or file-sharing stuff. They’ve also really pushed the porn access. In particular, the BBC headlines refer to the “Porn list” and “Adult video-sharing list” – and they are still referring to “illegal filesharing” (admittedly with “alleged” sneaking in occasionally).

There are two sides to this story; one is the personal data leak, which is what the ICO, Privacy International and the MSM are all discussing, and then there is the details about the legal practice, the “scaring”, the dismissal of justice and due process, the back-door deals with ISPs, and the estimates for what the “actual” damages would be in a fairl trial etc. which, hopefully, the SRA will deal with, but the media are ignoring.

hmm says:

Various news sites are saying sky broadband now won’t co-operate with ACS:LAW…

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/11430299

I assume other providers will have to follow suit, because knowing that ACS:LAW is deliberately posting peoples names, credit card info etc (perhaps as a way to ‘punish’ them more?), they open themselves to liability by offering customer data.

Leave a Reply to Richard Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Ctrl-Alt-Speech

A weekly news podcast from
Mike Masnick & Ben Whitelaw

Subscribe now to Ctrl-Alt-Speech »
Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...