It's your access so it's up to you to ensure that it's secure. If it's secure i.e. got a password, then anyone using it is doing so with your permission, so you're guilty by default.
A defence based on some random 3rd party having accessed your account without your knowledge and consent, who then carried out the offence would be up to you to prove, not vice versa imo.

I'm of course looking into this as I await the letter, all the info out there is to respond in the manner of "I don't know" or "it wasn't me".
This place is handy.
http://dietrolldie.com
In my case I really don't know, I've been using the internet a long time. When and if I get the letter I'll look at it and decide what to do but I certainly will not be paying up large sums of money.
Don't pay any money, even small amounts as it will just encourage them to put you on a list of soft targets and invite more demands. It also establishes a business relationship between you which makes it easier for them to harass you.

I was never wrong about market values, but don't that stop you trolling hardStick to being wrong about market values![]()

I was never wrong about market values, but don't that stop you trolling hard![]()
Go read the Digital Economy Act 2010 - which came inot effect about a year ago, and then come back to me mate.Doesnt matter about liability anyway, an IP address is not proof enough to win a court case, there are a thousand examples of it failing worldwide.
Its like saying if I clone your license plate on your car and do a hit and run, you are liable because its your plate reg no.
What's the CAB got to do with anything, you ****ing cretin?Trolling by advising someone to listen to the Citizens Advice Bureau rather than an ingnorant [HASHTAG]#bitter[/HASHTAG] spreading FUD
[HASHTAG]#newspeak[/HASHTAG]
Go read the Digital Economy Act 2010 - which came inot effect about a year ago, and then come back to me mate.
As it allows companies to assume guilt until proven otherwise.
What's the CAB got to do with anything, you ****ing cretin?

Lets not ave an argument in this one fellas as it'll derail and I would like sensible advice. I'm not ****ting it or anything but am slightly concerned that I will have to write letters denying everything and possibly end up in court.
So if anyone disagrees with advice please post reasons why and lnfo backing it up where possible. Thanks it's been good so far.
I'm waiting for a response from Die Troll Die.
The law caters for that assumption ffs, that's the pointThe company can assume all it wants.
Its the court that calls the shots. And they need proof, not assumptions.

Have you actually HAD a letter then?
If not I wouldn't worry about it unless you do.
Don't know if this is useful - https://torrentfreak.com/sky-will-hand-over-customer-data-in-movie-piracy-case-150310/
''The facts are simple. If letter recipients did not download or share the film or did not authorize someone else to do so (i.e by specifically telling someone else that they can use their connection to download and share pirate content) then the subscriber is not responsible for the infringement and does not have to pay a penny.
If someone else did share TCYK’s film on the Internet connection in question then it is up to TCYK to identify that person by name. The bill payer is under no obligation to try to help TCYK to do so if they have no idea who that person is.''
Don't lose any sleep about it, but it is a warning shot. I've said for ages that people downloading file shares and watching illegal streams are skating on thin ice. There's too much money at stake around this entire issue for it to simply go away. The major corps who are losing revenue because of the practice, won't give up trying to reduce their losses.I had the letter from Sky but not from the company mentioned yet. I'm researching now just incase it becomes an issue.