Why Are UK Police Allowing Entertainment Industry Employees To Arrest And Interrogate People With Their Help?
from the incredible dept
We've discussed in the past the oddity of how a UK anti-piracy group, FACT (Federation Against Copyright Theft), which is a private organization set up and controlled by large entertainment industry players, being deeply involved in criminal investigations and cases against individuals. In the case against Surfthechannel, FACT was directly involved in seizing and keeping the computers involved and then in paying the police for the prosecution. Even if you can reasonably argue that they should be involved in helping with providing information for the investigation, you'd think most people would agree that that's where the industry's involvement should end. They shouldn't be present on raids. They shouldn't get to touch or keep the evidence. And they certainly shouldn't be financing and pressing the criminal case.But, apparently, the industry's control over law enforcement in the UK continues. TorrentFreak reports on how FACT teamed up with local police to send five police cars to house to arrest a guy and seize his electronic equipment with FACT employees, because FACT claimed the guy had filmed a movie and uploaded it. Apparently, the person they were actually looking for no longer lived at the address, but it didn't stop police from taking the guy to the police station where he was interrogated mainly by FACT employees with the police just sitting back and taking notes.
“At the police station I was interviewed by the police together with FACT (Federation Against Copyright and Theft). During questioning they asked me about Fast and Furious 6, where I obtained a copy from and if I was the one who went and recorded it at the cinema.”As for what charges were used to arrest the guy? The vaguely ridiculous: "Miscellaneous Offense." When the guy questioned the police, they said they "could not find the relevant charge." Wow.
Despite police involvement, as in previous cases it appears they were only present in order to gain access to the victim’s property, sit on the sidelines taking notes, and for their powers when it comes to presenting crimes for prosecution.
“I was detained for 3 hrs 12 minutes, out of that I was questioned for approximately 40 minutes. One police officer and two FACT officers conducted the interview. The police officer sat back and let FACT do all the questioning, so FACT were running the show,” the man reports.
In the meantime, the guy has been released on bail and told that he's not allowed to enter any movie theater in England or Wales "while the investigation is being carried out."
No matter which side of the debate you're on, I'd hope you can recognize how utterly insane it is to allow private parties to effectively run a criminal investigation like this.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: entertainment industry, fact, law enforcement, private companies, uk
Companies: fact
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
You should see what they do to people who illegally import blank disks. Their bodies are never found.
It wouldn't be surprising if these FACT "officers" carry black badges with red cross-like emblems on them. Would be most fitting.
/joke
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Because the corporations own the Government. Simple as that. And this won't change without some heavy protesting. Revolution if you will. And I'm afraid there will be blood. See how the Occupy movements were dealt with. Brushed aside as some hygiene problem, thrown out because they were disturbing some church somewhere...
We've gone past the opportunity to turn this back without bloodshed for a while now.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Link?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Nor should private parties be running the Federal Reserve.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Nor should private parties be running the Federal Reserve.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Nor should private parties be running the Federal Reserve.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Nor should private parties be running the Federal Reserve.
I'm more worried about the airspeed velocity of an unladen African Swallow and you didn't mention a damn thing about it in your comment, so I guess we are all even now.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Nor should private parties be running the Federal Reserve.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Nor should private parties be running the Federal Reserve.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If that is your concern ootb, why aren't you on your own site doing that? No your real concern is your hidden love affair (in your head) you wished you had with Mike.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Well, that sounds alright!
Federation Against Copyright and Theft? That sounds like something I could get behind, as copyright is being heavily abused to steal from the public.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Except the copyright True Believers don't think it is the least bit insane. They won't come right out and say so, of course, because doing so will show the true depth of their Zealotry. Instead they will attempt to obfuscate the matter, or even more likely try to change the subject altogether.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
*facepalm*
I'm pretty sure that in the next round of legislation, that's going to be in the TPP. You just can't let FACT have all of the credit in a royally bad idea.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: *facepalm*
And as far as the TPP is concerned, the MAFIAA is probably using FACT (among others) to show the world is doing this and succeeding already.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Isn't this what you wanted?
So the content owners are just doing what you wanted. They're providing the manpower to solve the cases. They're helping the cops just like a burglary victim helps the cops. You're the one that wants the content producers to police their own content. Well now they're doing it. Why don't you just sit back and enjoy getting your way?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Isn't this what you wanted?
Maybe you need to conduct a search.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Isn't this what you wanted?
Really? When do burglary victims get to interrogate the accused perpetrator or handle the evidence?
Also, when we talk of the rights holder's having to pay for enforcement of their rights we are usually talking about civil proceedings. And that is how it should be. The cops won't spend resources to investigate your neighbor just because you wish to sue him for putting his fence on your property. That investigation comes out of your pocket.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Isn't this what you wanted?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Isn't this what you wanted?
In the UK, we have something called a private prosecution. That's what FACT do, with the assistance of the police. What is wrong and unethical is the collection of evidence. FACT should have zero interaction with that part of the investigations.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Isn't this what you wanted?
Interesting.
What about the interrogation part? Wouldn't that sorta of fall under the collection of evidence part also?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Isn't this what you wanted?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Isn't this what you wanted?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Isn't this what you wanted?
What burglary victim gets to arrest their suspects themselves and then interrogate them at the police station?
Please provide details. Thanks.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
I believe it's rather difficult for a "right-hander" to draw a sword when it's hung on the "right" side.
On the (sigh) other hand, as the left side of the brain controls the right-hand side of the body, left-handers are the only ones who're really in their right mind.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
That the police didn't know what law they were supposedly using doesn't surprise me - it is fairly common (police aren't taught the law); the TorrentFreak article refers to s17 Copyright Designs and Patents Act, which is relevant, but I think they really want s107. The last time there were prosecutions under the CDPA for this, the prosecutors got the wrong crime anyway...
What worries me about this is the apparent lack of a defence lawyer in the interviews. From what I've seen of previous cases such as this (with the film and music industries) where a good lawyer has been involved from early enough on, the case has collapsed (in one case, when the prosecutors were forced to admit they had no idea what was going on as the music industry enforcers were running everything).
There was a case a few years ago (over SurfTheChannel) where Federation Against Copyright Theft Ltd and a local police force were taken to court over their actions in an arrest (including the police's decision to hand over all their evidence to Fact Ltd after they'd decided not to prosecute), but the court of appeal sided with Fact Ltd. The guy in question is currently (iirc) in prison pending appeal of his conviction.
Private prosecutions are rare but do happen from time to time; they're something of a historical oddity, but not all that unreasonable - it wasn't the Fact Ltd paying the police, but Fact Ltd paying for their own private prosecution (providing lawyers etc.).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
And while we're at it, I also really hate those [insert hated & persecuted minority group here], so lets pay UK police to prosecute them for [insert illegal thing this minority group is typically associated with]. Who cares if we don't have evidence, we can just make it up, since we'll get to store the evidence in our homes and offices!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
They are just following the lead of the police in the USA.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I was shocked
They really have now made made 6 Fast and Furious movies?
There is the real crime.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I was shocked
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I was shocked
Fast and the furious is awesome.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Meanwhile, the film in question (Fast & Furious 6) has taken $314 million worldwide so far (as of last weekend), and the guy who uploaded the movie is likely to have taken exactly $0 profit for himself. Aren't we all glad to be having our rights removed because a studio doesn't feel like they're making enough money? (Yes, before the trolls come in, this doesn't excuse his actions, but there's nothing in the actual actions that defends this kind of response).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Where does he live?
Because I happened to hear from someone that he recorded Fast and Furious 6, and also he has about sixty gigs of child pornography on his computer.
That's just a fourth-hand anonymous tip. Should fly in the UK.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mistake
> longer lived at the address, but it didn't stop police from
> taking the guy to the police station where he was interrogated
> mainly by FACT employees with the police just sitting back
> and taking notes.
That's not what the linked article says. It says the cops went to the first address, found out that the suspect didn't live there anymore, then went to the place where he currently lives and arrested him there. They didn't arrest anyone at the first address.
> The person they were looking for no longer lived at the address
> but in the space of 15 minutes three cars, four detectives and
> two FACT officers HAD MADE IT TO THE CORRECT LOCATION.
> Armed with an emergency search warrant issued out of hours
> by a judge, police and FACT officers entered the suspect�s home.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This should really be in the Onion
Special agents successfully raided the house of the 24 year old mastermind of worldwide movie piracy, and have the suspect in custody pending his extradition to the US and subsequent detention in Guantanamo Bay.
Outside of a police station in the West Midlands, Chris Dodd, president of the MPAA proudly proclaimed, "Mission Accomplished."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This doesn't sound legal...
"So, in principle, it is possible for a member of the public to prosecute a public figure for an offence under SOCPA or indeed for fraud. However, even assuming that the difficulties outlined above can be overcome there are two further practical problems. First, a private prosecutor does not have any of the powers of the police to seize evidence or question suspects, and he or she has no right of access to statements, evidence, or other documents held by the CPS. Putting together sufficient evidence to amount to a "case to answer" on the basis of publicly available material will often be tricky. Second, the court may make an order that a party pay costs that have been incurred as a result of an unnecessary or improper act or omission. If it considers that the prosecution was completely misconceived and the defendant incurred costs as a result then there may be a substantial bill to pay."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]