Feeds

Tiscali and BPI in filesharing standoff

C&W keeping well out of it

Choosing a cloud hosting partner with confidence

The Tiscali letter in full:

Alleged Copyright Infringement

Suspension and Disclosure of Customer Information

Thank you for your letter dated 10 July 2006, notifying us of your allegations that certain customers of Tiscali UK Limited ("Tiscali") have and continue to infringe the copyright in various sounds recordings owned or controlled by certain members of The British Phonographic Industry Limited ("BPI").

In your letter, you request that Tiscali:

  1. suspends the relevant customers until such time as they enter into an undertaking with the BPI in the form required by you;
  2. discloses the personal details of the relevant customers to the BPI;
  3. itself enters into a legal agreement with the BPI obliging it to do the above.

I will deal with each of these issues in turn below.

Firstly, however, I would like to be clear that Tiscali does not support or condone use of its network for abuse or infringement of copyright.  Tiscali has a history of co-operating with those investigating any such matters, within the limits of its own legal obligations and whilst respecting the legal rights of our customers.  Moreover, Tiscali has done a great deal of work to further the development of the legitimate online music community and has developed and enjoys an excellent working relationship with most of the major record labels in the UK and many independent labels, the majority of which are your members.

Suspension. You have sent us a spreadsheet setting out a list of 17 IP addresses you allege belong to Tiscali customers, whom you allege have infringed the copyright of your members, together with the dates and times and with which sound recording you allege that they have done so.  You have also sent us extracts of screenshots of the shared drive of one of those customers.  You state that such evidence is "overwhelming".  However, you have provided no actual evidence in respect of 16 of the accounts.  Further, you have provided no evidence of downloading taking place nor have you provided evidence that the shared drive was connected by the relevant IP address at the relevant time.

Similar requests we have dealt with in the past, have included such information and, indeed, the bodies conducting those investigations have felt that a court would consider it necessary to see such evidence, supported by sworn statements, before being able to grant any order.

Therefore, in order to assist you, we will require the following information from you:

  1. in respect of the remaining 16 IP addresses, please provide screenshots of each user's shared drive so that you can prima facie establish communication to the public;
  2. in respect of all 17 IP addresses, please provide evidence that shows that the user id is connected via the IP address concerned at the relevant date and time;
  3. if you wish to establish that downloading is taking place, please also provide evidence of this;
  4. as these IP address are dynamic and are allocated to a user upon connection for the duration of the connection only, please confirm that the timings provided are all BST, so that we may accurately identify the customer details.

In the meantime, we have contacted the customer, in respect of whom you have provided partial evidence of communication to the public of copyrighted sound recordings and have given such customer seven days from the date of receipt of our letter to provide an explanation.  Should we not receive an adequate explanation during such period, we shall suspend the user's account pending resolution of your investigation, assuming by that time we have received evidence from you of a link between the user account and the IP address at the relevant time.

At this point, I would like to make it clear that a similar procedure will be followed in respect of the remaining 16 customers, once you have provided proper evidence.  Tiscali does not intend to require its customers to enter into the undertakings proposed by you and, in any event, our initial view is that they are more restrictive than is reasonable or necessary.  However, should you wish our customers to enter into your undertakings, you will need to approach them directly.  It is a matter for them to decide whether they wish to enter into such undertakings or defend proceedings against them in the courts.  It is not for Tiscali, as an ISP, nor the BPI, as a trade association, to effectively act as a regulator or law enforcement agency and deny individuals the right to defend themselves against the allegations made against them.

Disclosure of customer details. As you will already be fully aware, Tiscali will not be able to disclose customer details to you unless you obtain a court order requiring us to do so.  To disclose without a court order would put Tiscali at risk of breaching the terms and conditions of its customer agreements, and the provisions of the Data Protection Act 1998.

Tiscali Undertakings. As we have mentioned above, Tiscali has always co-operated with investigations into alleged infringement conducted by copyright owners, whilst observing its own legal obligations and respecting the legal rights of its customers.  In the circumstances, we do not consider it necessary nor desirable to enter into such undertakings nor do we believe that, in circumstances where we are co-operating with your investigation in the manner we have outlined in this letter, that a court would require us to do so.  Furthermore, we do not believe that you have at present satisfied the requirements of section 97A of the Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 with the information you have provided.

We look forward to receiving the information requested above.

Yours sincerely

Tiscali UK Limited

Choosing a cloud hosting partner with confidence

More from The Register

next story
Facebook pays INFINITELY MORE UK corp tax than in 2012
Thanks for the £3k, Zuck. Doh! you're IN CREDIT. Guess not
Facebook, Apple: LADIES! Why not FREEZE your EGGS? It's on the company!
No biological clockwatching when you work in Silicon Valley
Happiness economics is bollocks. Oh, UK.gov just adopted it? Er ...
Opportunity doesn't knock; it costs us instead
Sysadmin with EBOLA? Gartner's issued advice to debug your biz
Start hoarding cleaning supplies, analyst firm says, and assume your team will scatter
YARR! Pirates walk the plank: DMCA magnets sink in Google results
Spaffing copyrighted stuff over the web? No search ranking for you
Don't bother telling people if you lose their data, say Euro bods
You read that right – with the proviso that it's encrypted
Apple SILENCES Bose, YANKS headphones from stores
The, er, Beats go on after noise-cancelling spat
prev story

Whitepapers

Cloud and hybrid-cloud data protection for VMware
Learn how quick and easy it is to configure backups and perform restores for VMware environments.
A strategic approach to identity relationship management
ForgeRock commissioned Forrester to evaluate companies’ IAM practices and requirements when it comes to customer-facing scenarios versus employee-facing ones.
High Performance for All
While HPC is not new, it has traditionally been seen as a specialist area – is it now geared up to meet more mainstream requirements?
Three 1TB solid state scorchers up for grabs
Big SSDs can be expensive but think big and think free because you could be the lucky winner of one of three 1TB Samsung SSD 840 EVO drives that we’re giving away worth over £300 apiece.
Security for virtualized datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.