Skip to content

Category: computers

ACS:Law Case Collapse – Crossley Tries To Save His Ass

The hearings at the Patent Court under Judge Birss have been most interesting for followers of the filesharer harassment story.  If you’re not familiar with this story this commentary will help before the story continues.

In that post I wrote:

Even the courts were getting tired of the demands of companies like ACS:Law, as Chief Master Winegarten warned.  Now we have the Judicial Review into this Act.  This was coming; it’s a pity the ISPs didn’t put up more of a battle earlier or this may have come a lot earlier.

Now Chief Master Winegarten’s warning has come to pass with disastrous results for Andrew Crossley and ACS:Law, all thanks to Judge Birss QC.

Last December,  Judge Birss QC sat in the England and Wales Patents County Court (PCC) and dismissed a bid by ACS:Law to get default judgements against eight people for alleged copyright infringement.  Judge Birss then decided to convene one sitting of the PCC to consider twenty seven cases brought by ACS:Law in what he described as “an unusual step” in an unusual case.

At that sitting Judge Birss rejected an application by ACS:Law to have the cases dropped and adjourned the hearing until yesterday.  It was at the reconvened hearing yesterday that things went even more pear shaped for Andrew Crossley and ACS:Law.

Continue reading ACS:Law Case Collapse – Crossley Tries To Save His Ass

ICO Issues First Fines But Scares No-One – UPDATED

If the news that the Information Commissioner’s Office has levied its first fines  is supposed to scare people and organisations into being ethical, compliant with the law, using common sense and following sensible IT security precautions then I’m afraid the ICO is deluded.

Remember that the ICO is complicit in the mass privacy breaches by BT and Phorm in their secret and illegal testing.  The ICO did nothing to prevent this from happening.  The ICO now says that it doesn’t need technical expertise for its role.  I say that is bulls**t. The ICO needs technical expertise as much as it needs legal expertise.  Its abysmal perphormance in the Phorm phiasco proves that it does.

Continue reading ICO Issues First Fines But Scares No-One – UPDATED

Home Office RIPA Consultation – Inept? Incompetent? Can’t Be Arsed?

Like that fart you work your cheeks to get out silently so your grandparents don’t chastise you for breaking wind, the Home Office have snook out a consultation paper on amendments to the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA).

You know, the one BT and Phorm violated multiple times in their secret and illegal tests.

You know, the one the Metropolitan Police were too thick to understand.

You know, the one the Crown Prosecution Service don’t seem to comprehend either.  How many days is it now? 765?

Deadline for consultation responses is 7th December.  It wasn’t put on the public consultations page until today.

Continue reading Home Office RIPA Consultation – Inept? Incompetent? Can’t Be Arsed?

The Grauniad Lacks Clue on The #DEAct?

The recent report by The Guardian about the Judicial Review into the Digital Economy Act seems to be little more than a whining board for those proponents of the legislation who are annoyed by the prospect of the review.  The comments after the article say as much. This is my brief (ish) summary of how the DEA came into being & how supporters of the legislation are behaving.  I don’t know if The Guardian has forgotten to mention some of the other salient facts or just missed them out for a word limit so here they are.

Continue reading The Grauniad Lacks Clue on The #DEAct?

UK Now On Final Notice Over Phorm

Phorm and the UK “government” might just come to realise that the backlash against internet snooping and illegal DPI based advertising is a serious one.

The EU has announced that it is moving to the second phase of its proceedings against the UK government over its failure to enforce laws protecting internet users’ privacy.

Nazi war criminals are still prosecuted for their crimes from years ago. Other criminals are prosecuted for their crimes in previous years. Why shouldn’t those involved in allowing these crimes to happen face judicial process?

Those involved in the collaboration with BT and Phorm, whoever they are, whatever their status and regardless of for whom they were working must face the courts.

Continue reading UK Now On Final Notice Over Phorm