To add on to what djtaz said ...
I also work for an ISP, the second largest of Sweden. We also have direct access to the modems/gateways/phone-ata:s and whatevere, and can both monitor and throttle as we please. However, if a person connects their own router with NAT between our equipment and their computers, there's nothing we can do other than seeing the combined usage for that customer, all originating from the same piece of equipment––ie. the router.
Anyways, despite the fact that we can do all this, we don't. Reason is simple, we don't want to fuck with our customers. We comply with the existing legislation––particularly IPRED in Sweden since April 1st of this year––and hands out customer details for a specific ip at a given time to copyright holders when ordered so by a court of law, so that they can sue that particular individual in a civil law suit.
There is nothing in the legislation at present in Sweden that even allows us as an ISP to disconnect our customers because a private entity––read the entertainment industry––claims someone has breached their intellectual property rights. This also goes for sending out letters. As trivia, a law allowing for ISP:s to disconnect users from the internet following claims from the industry actually got squashed in the French parliament just about a week ago.
The plaintiff has full responsibility to convince a judge that download of "a severe enough nature" have originated from a particular IP at a given time to have the account details given out. (Uploading however, more or less automatically qualifies for having your details handed out, since that's filed under "making available to the general public", which is considered naughty.)
Following this, they themselves can send out letters of request for compensation or whatever, BUT this won't go via your ISP in any way over here. If you just refuse, they have to sue you in court. Here, THEY have to prove beyond conceivable doubt that it's you personally who is responsible for the intrusion of intellectual property.
So far, no cases have come to this in Sweden––partly because the legislation is new––but, as mentioned earlier, in Denmark, where they have similar legislation, the only ones losing in court are the ones who confessed. There, the "Wireless defence" made it impossible for the plaintiffs to prove guilt.
I also work for an ISP, the second largest of Sweden. We also have direct access to the modems/gateways/phone-ata:s and whatevere, and can both monitor and throttle as we please. However, if a person connects their own router with NAT between our equipment and their computers, there's nothing we can do other than seeing the combined usage for that customer, all originating from the same piece of equipment––ie. the router.
Anyways, despite the fact that we can do all this, we don't. Reason is simple, we don't want to fuck with our customers. We comply with the existing legislation––particularly IPRED in Sweden since April 1st of this year––and hands out customer details for a specific ip at a given time to copyright holders when ordered so by a court of law, so that they can sue that particular individual in a civil law suit.
There is nothing in the legislation at present in Sweden that even allows us as an ISP to disconnect our customers because a private entity––read the entertainment industry––claims someone has breached their intellectual property rights. This also goes for sending out letters. As trivia, a law allowing for ISP:s to disconnect users from the internet following claims from the industry actually got squashed in the French parliament just about a week ago.
The plaintiff has full responsibility to convince a judge that download of "a severe enough nature" have originated from a particular IP at a given time to have the account details given out. (Uploading however, more or less automatically qualifies for having your details handed out, since that's filed under "making available to the general public", which is considered naughty.)
Following this, they themselves can send out letters of request for compensation or whatever, BUT this won't go via your ISP in any way over here. If you just refuse, they have to sue you in court. Here, THEY have to prove beyond conceivable doubt that it's you personally who is responsible for the intrusion of intellectual property.
So far, no cases have come to this in Sweden––partly because the legislation is new––but, as mentioned earlier, in Denmark, where they have similar legislation, the only ones losing in court are the ones who confessed. There, the "Wireless defence" made it impossible for the plaintiffs to prove guilt.
