News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on UK Police: download a file, go to jail for 10 years and pay an "unlimited" fine.

Re:UK Police: download a file, go to jail for 10 years and p... by bobsoap on Wednesday February 15, 2012 @08:04PM (#3596938)
"The majority of music files that were available via this site were stolen from the artists"

How can UK police (or SOCA, or whoever) claim that before trial? When that notice was put on the site, the "individuals behind this website" (another loaded term right there, geez) had only been arrested. Trial hadn't even begun yet.

Without knowing UK laws - aren't these solid grounds for a libel and slander claim?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:UK Police: download a file, go to jail for 10 years and p... by anigbrowl on Wednesday February 15, 2012 @08:28PM (#3596986)
No. They can know on the basis that the files are hosted for download but that the site operators have made no revenue payments or signed contracts with the publisher/distributor of the media in question. The UK does not have the same kind of common carrier provisions in Telco law that exist in the US.

Edit: downvote away, but I didn't write the law, I'm just telling you how it operates: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Economy_Act_2010#Sectio... The government is considering alternatives: http://www.ipo.gov.uk/types/hargreaves.htm

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:UK Police: download a file, go to jail for 10 years and p... by pyre on Wednesday February 15, 2012 @10:01PM (#3597169)
I don't think that the parent post was talking about common-carrier provisions[1]. The point being that the police are stating something ("these files were stolen") as fact prior to the trial. The assumption being that these facts need to be proven at trial. The same reason that the accused is called the 'suspect' and not the 'criminal' in police press reports. I'm not sure that this quite equates to something like saying, "he's a drug dealer," prior to getting a drug dealing conviction, though.

[1] Actually, 'common carrier' only applies to phone companies in the US. You're thinking of the 'Safe Harbour' provisions that are part of the DMCA.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:UK Police: download a file, go to jail for 10 years and p... by batista on Thursday February 16, 2012 @01:15AM (#3597623)
The point being that the police are stating something ("these files were stolen") as fact prior to the trial. The assumption being that these facts need to be proven at trial. The same reason that the accused is called the 'suspect' and not the 'criminal' in police press reports.

However the police does call the victim "the murdered guy" and the place the arsonist burned "the burned down building". Some things are a simple statement of fact.

Similarly, the presence of "pirated files" is not something that is that difficult to examine and state as a fact pre-trial. And the other side would only win a libel trial if they could prove that this is not the case, which, I guess, it is. Else, they would be punished and counter-sued for that attempt too.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:UK Police: download a file, go to jail for 10 years and p... by bobsoap on Wednesday February 15, 2012 @11:05PM (#3597335)
Didn't downvote you... not sure how to do that on here tbh.

Thanks for the explanation and the references.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:UK Police: download a file, go to jail for 10 years and p... by Zirro on Wednesday February 15, 2012 @11:27PM (#3597391)
The ability to downvote appears below the upvote-button once you've reached more than 500 karma.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:UK Police: download a file, go to jail for 10 years and p... by SODaniel on Thursday February 16, 2012 @12:51AM (#3597554)
"We have noticed that a lot of people in this area have committed violent crimes. So we are assuming you are a violent offender as well."

WTF!

[ Parent | on HN ]