🚀 go-pugleaf

<email_me@mts.net> wrote in message 
news:kp5433dbij13t7e77sies9hhi98j57gmfi@4ax.com...
>
> With comments like "there's nothing wrong with his company identifying
> alleged file swappers when ordered to do so" , the opperative word is
> alleged. This ISP deseves to have their users leave them enmass, what
> ever happened to innocent till proven guilty?

> http://www.cbc.ca/arts/story/2005/04/21/swap050421.html
>
> A lawyer for ISP Videotron says there's nothing wrong with his company
> identifying alleged file swappers when ordered to do so.
>
> "We do it on a regular basis [when issued a court order]. It's not
> very complicated," Serge Sasseville said in an interview with the
> Canadian Press.

You imply that it's some sort of arbitrary and capricious act on their part, 
or that other ISPs would not act this way in the same set of circumstances. 
They would if they're smart.

The significant part of the quote is "when issued a court order". The ISP is 
*required by law* to comply. There is not 'right' being infringed by their 
compliance. It's a matter of obeying the law. As for the right to be 
considered innocent until proven guilty, their actions do not impinge on 
that right. the Court issues the Order based on evidence that convinces the 
Court the order is warranted -- it's very common, btw, for the Court to 
significantly restrict an Order form what was requested. A judge weighs the 
need to gather evidence and the rights of the people involved and makes an 
Order. The ISP acts on the Order with appropriate diligence and accuracy.