2,845 O2 porno downloaders will be asked to Ben Dover

by Mark Tyson on 25 July 2012, 11:00

Tags: O2/Telefonica (NYSE:TEF)

Quick Link: HEXUS.net/qabj4b

Add to My Vault: x

Nearly 3,000 O2 broadband customers will be contacted by lawyers representing Golden Eye International (GEIL), concerning downloads of films produced by UK pornographer Ben Dover. TorrentFreak has got hold of a copy of the letter due to be sent out next month to IP address “fingerprinted”, and therefore implicated, individuals.

GEIL had initially applied to the High Court for the details of 9,000 individuals who allegedly downloaded the adult movies. However the court decided to only ask O2 to reveal the identities of 2,845 account holders who are accused of downloading Ben Dover studio material. There will be an appeal by GEIL in 2013 to get the rest of the names and contact details. This also probably depends on how much money GEIL can extract from the soon-to-be-accused downloaders.

A typical Ben Dover DVD which could cost some broadband users £700

The judge asked the content of the letter to be watered down from a straight demand for payment of £700 fines that GEIL was in favour of. Money owed will be determined “case by case”, depending on answers given to the initial letter from GEIL. The letter, according to TorrentFreak can be summed up in one sentence “We say you’re a pirate, but we can’t prove it and need you to help us.” Likening it to a previous legal threat to broadband customers TorrentFreak say “we can confirm that it amounts to little more than a rehashed ACS:Law-style scheme to extract cash settlements from Internet users based on flawed and incomplete IP address-only ‘evidence’. While the intervention of Consumer Focus and the High Court means that it is less aggressive than the letter sent by ACS:Law, it still has plenty of faults.”

A key paragraph in the letter asks the addressee to admit sharing copyrighted material “Please state whether you admit that you have downloaded the Work and/or made it available for download by others, and if so the extent to which you have done so.” A lawyer experienced in fighting off ACS:Law, Michael Coyle, speaking to TorrentFreak said “…no infringement can be proven unless people accept that they did it or GEIL get to inspect their hard drive”.

Consumer Focus has an article about the copyright claim letter on its website. Mike O’Connor, Chief Executive of Consumer Focus said: “We do not condone copyright infringement, but innocent people should not feel bullied into settling claims and they must be made aware of where to go for help. We intervened in this case to make sure that consumers are treated fairly. People will not have ready access to the sort of specialised legal advice necessary to respond to allegations of copyright infringement. That is why we are working with the Citizens Advice service to provide clear advice to consumers about what to do if they are accused of copyright infringement.” So if you do get a letter, you may contact the Citizens Advice Bureau about what to do next, via your local walk-in centre or on 08454 04 05 06.

Download a copy of the letter from the BBC News website. (PDF)



HEXUS Forums :: 10 Comments

Login with Forum Account

Don't have an account? Register today!
It's uploaders, technically.
There's seriously a company named after a school joke?

Anyway, how do they actually find out who's ‘guilty’? It doesn't sound like O2 were directly involved and I can't see Torrent websites sharing anything. Do they just get someone to find related torrents and see who's seeding it?
From what I seem to remember, a lot of these companies set up their own seeds and then captured the IP of people downloading/uploading. It's why there use to be black lists of IP addresses known to be doing things like that, either government or private companies etc.
Aren't they technically providing it themselves then which could be regarded as free if they are happy to upload it for people to leech?
I would imagine that they either post join existing torrents or seed their own. They are allowed to distribute their content in any way they deem fit, so they're not breaking copyright laws. As soon as anyone else does it becomes copyright infringement.