Butler
Member
Registered: 2nd Jun 05
Location: London
User status: Offline
|
To be honest, if sueing lee leg doesnt go as planned. Im sure Ian could always dig out the thread by him telling everyone he nicked a phone. 
|
Butler
Member
Registered: 2nd Jun 05
Location: London
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jas16v
http://corsagsi.myfreeforum.org/sutra2532.php#2532
Christ, all that over a bloody corsa forum.
|
steve101
Member
Registered: 25th Oct 04
Location: Kilmarnock, Ayrshire, Scotland
User status: Offline
|
I once administrated a Forum, and I like the idea of sueing someone over this sort of behaviour. However, I suppose concrete evidence would need to be present, as it doesn't appear to be easy.
-Proof that the password was stolen not given
-Solid Proof that it was him that posted the stuff
to give a couple. You have to think though, if the password was given to him why would he abuse the "privelage" of having the access.
His ISP will probably distribute a warning/service cancellation anyway if it does indeed go that far.
|
Ian
Site Administrator
Registered: 28th Aug 99
Location: Liverpool
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by drax
LOL how can you 'SUE' someone, under for the computer missuse act.
Let alone for breaking a TOS which is not official. So he used someone elses password, its not like he rofled your gibson and caused any damage to any property virtual or real.
I've no idea. I'll gladly take advice that isn't piss taking. It costs me time and it has caused hassle and upset to those involved. I'm after doing something. If you can help let me know. If you want to laugh at my frustration, do that elsewhere.
If he was given the password then the access is still unauthorised - I don't want him here - just would mean that whoever permitted the access was facilitating the crime. That would need to be proven of course but its Lees word against Kats which for me is just about as good as proving it.
[Edited on 25-05-2006 by Ian]
|
Ian
Site Administrator
Registered: 28th Aug 99
Location: Liverpool
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by gianluigi on Corsa GSi
PS....Ian its called "Case Law" not "Test Case"
PMSL
I don't care what its called. If you can help, let me know.
|
steve101
Member
Registered: 25th Oct 04
Location: Kilmarnock, Ayrshire, Scotland
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ian
I've no idea. I'll gladly take advice that isn't piss taking. It costs me time and it has caused hassle and upset to those involved. I'm after doing something. If you can help let me know. If you want to laugh at my frustration, do that elsewhere.
If he was given the password then the access is still unauthorised - I don't want him here - just would mean that whoever permitted the access was facilitating the crime. That would need to be proven of course but its Lees word against Kats which for me is just about as good as proving it.
Should have a good case against him then. I reckon you should go for it.
|
Dom
Member
Registered: 13th Sep 03
User status: Offline
|
Not peeing on your fire Ian as it would be an interesting case if it gets to court and if you could get the evidence. But like you say its his word against kats, with him knowing the password as well as him writing the comments, as it could be both parties!
edit - my mistake, im sure ip address are logged with posted messages. Though is it illegal for him to post such comments if the password was to given him?
[Edited on 26-05-2006 by Dom]
|
Ian
Site Administrator
Registered: 28th Aug 99
Location: Liverpool
User status: Offline
|
I also have a failed attempt to reset the password, which would indicate the intent, regardless of Kats involvement. Plus I'm sure as its not a serious offence in the grand scheme of things you only need proof on balance of probability and not having removed all doubt.
So we have Kats IP traffic, which consistently comes from her house, then Lees, which comes from Lees house, then a failed reset attempt from Lees house, then some posts under Kats name from Lees house. Balance of probability?
[Edited on 26-05-2006 by Ian]
|
Ian
Site Administrator
Registered: 28th Aug 99
Location: Liverpool
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dom
Though is it illegal for him to post such comments if the password was to given him?
There may be a complaint that Kat could make deformation of character or something. His posts were bad and his private messages worse, I personally would be quite upset if someone said such things while appearing to be me and the person reading through it was me, and I'm quite sure Kat feels the same. Its a bloody heartless thing to do.
|
Sam
Moderator
Premium Member
Registered: 24th Dec 99
Location: West Midlands
User status: Offline
|
She knowingly gave him her username and password - should she not be reprimanded for this too then?
|
Ian
Site Administrator
Registered: 28th Aug 99
Location: Liverpool
User status: Offline
|
Evidence?
|
Sam
Moderator
Premium Member
Registered: 24th Dec 99
Location: West Midlands
User status: Offline
|
There is evidence, yes.
|
Dom
Member
Registered: 13th Sep 03
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ian
quote:
Originally posted by Dom
Though is it illegal for him to post such comments if the password was to given him?
There may be a complaint that Kat could make deformation of character or something. His posts were bad and his private messages worse, I personally would be quite upset if someone said such things while appearing to be me and the person reading through it was me, and I'm quite sure Kat feels the same. Its a bloody heartless thing to do.
Couldn't agree more, sounds like you have evidence to back it all up with, like IP address logs. Though couldn't another person/user of his internet connection be responsible for this? So it cannot be 100% proved that it was him, just that his internet connection was used. Dont know how that would stand up in court.
Though i hope you go ahead ian, would be an interesting case and would probably change a few things for admins of message boards
|
Ian
Site Administrator
Registered: 28th Aug 99
Location: Liverpool
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dom
Though couldn't another person/user of his internet connection be responsible for this?
I think thats called a trojan defence after people blaming hacking stuff on trjoan viruses and the like which take control of the machine off the user and therefore the user is innocent, but I'm sure the last couple of cases on that have not supported that defence and the people have still been prosecuted.
|
Ian
Site Administrator
Registered: 28th Aug 99
Location: Liverpool
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sam
There is evidence, yes.
And is it better than 'Lee said so'?
|
Sam
Moderator
Premium Member
Registered: 24th Dec 99
Location: West Midlands
User status: Offline
|
Don't tell me what to do, Ian. I am just telling you there is evidence of what I said in my previous post, take it further with Kat and Lee - not me, thank you very much.
Oh and at your sly post deletion!
[Edited on 26-05-2006 by Sam]
|
Ian
Site Administrator
Registered: 28th Aug 99
Location: Liverpool
User status: Offline
|
Kat is offline and Lee is a liar.
|
Ian
Site Administrator
Registered: 28th Aug 99
Location: Liverpool
User status: Offline
|
Not sly - have it back - if you want to get involved, get involved, if you want to post in here just to tell me that you have evidence but not supply it then your contribution is fairly worthless.
I'm curious as to what you could possibly have that makes you so sure.
I'm happy that she didn't supply it, and even if she did, I'm quite sure that she didn't anticipate what Lee would do with it, which further reinforces my view of Lee being deceitful and untrustworthy.
|
Sam
Moderator
Premium Member
Registered: 24th Dec 99
Location: West Midlands
User status: Offline
|
Well I am not a party to this so it's nothing to do with me, all I am saying is that there is evidence, and no it's not 'Lee said so' as you put it.
Anyway, this is as far as my involvement in this thread goes. 
|
Ian
Site Administrator
Registered: 28th Aug 99
Location: Liverpool
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sam
She knowingly gave him her username and password - should she not be reprimanded for this too then?
A fairly substantial claim and a question over some serious moderation, sure, you want nothing to do with this eh.
Nice profound post, shame you're stopping now before its actually useful.
|
Sam
Moderator
Premium Member
Registered: 24th Dec 99
Location: West Midlands
User status: Offline
|
Well when you've told me to "post and get involved or say nothing and fuck off", why should I contribute any further to this thread?
|
stubs
Member
Registered: 30th Jun 02
Location: Bolton
User status: Offline
|
Sue!!
Who is Kat?.. Is she trustworthy, and likely to stand up in court & testify against Lee? Surely, if he's used her account without her permission, and then posted bad stuff about her, she would be willing to help you out....?
|
Ian
Site Administrator
Registered: 28th Aug 99
Location: Liverpool
User status: Offline
|
Its a choice Sam, make it.
Kat is the girl whose account was used today by Lee.
|
Sam
Moderator
Premium Member
Registered: 24th Dec 99
Location: West Midlands
User status: Offline
|
I already have.
All I will say is this - before you decide to pursue litigation proceedings against Lee, I would suggest you take into account that he is not entirely to blame for what's happened today.
Speak to him about it, don't speak to him about, it's up to you. I'm not willing to discuss this any further personally as I am not a party to it.
|
Ian
Site Administrator
Registered: 28th Aug 99
Location: Liverpool
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sam
She knowingly gave him her username and password
quote:
Originally posted by Sam
I am not a party to it.
|
