Dear mr. Kuik.

One of my associates had a curious story to tell me the other day. It
was about someone who sued another for what he perceived to be a clear-
cut matter of the accused causing damages for him. Well, to be accurate,
the details of the story suggested the first person had sued the other
after being instructed by a lobbying proxy to find a random target
appropriate for a lawsuit – but let’s not get sidetracked.

The case progresses, albeit slowly. And before the case comes to court,
the property of the accused is taken as evidence. However, no proof of
the crime the accused was sued for was found. No matter, of course – the
damage is done, and the property belonging to the accused is gone for an
indeterminable period of time, and so is the funds the accused would
have available, due to the nature of the charges brought against him.

Time passes, and the accused eventually gets his property returned. His
money too, is freed, and he can at least get on with his life for the
time being. But did the lack of proof for the crimes he was accused of
result in a dismissal of the case? Now, here is where the story truly
starts to become incredible.

What happens is in allegedly that the accuser attempts to equate the
initial accusation with another activity the accused was engaged in.
Even though, as mentioned, no proof of the accused criminal activity was
found. And so, the case enters the court- system, with slim to no hope
for the accuser of ever achieving a victory – bar the possibility of
overturning some centuries of legal practice in the western hemisphere.

And so the trial, two years after the initial raid on false pretenses –
false, as evidently no evidence was available, and what was done to
convince the authorities was an insistence on how one thing was equal to
another, which the trial would soon determine whether was true – the
trial would begin. And so the accuser lost the case – the initial
justification for the raid was false, and no legal argument would be
deemed appropriate to describe how the accused was actually a criminal,
as alleged.

Now, you might think this story is unbelievable at this point, but it is
not yet finished.

In the aftermath of the trial, after the accuser was soundly defeated on
all points, you might wonder what would happen to the accused. Would he
pursue a claim of reparations against the accuser, or indeed against the
police, for causing him serious problems for the only reason of
satisfying the accuser’s wish to try a semantic argument in court?

No, as we draw towards the conclusion of the story, we learn that
instead, the accuser returns to the accused, who has just been
vindicated by a court, to threaten him in person – for the same crime
once more. The same crime which the accused was just excused. One can
only imagine that the reason for this curious behavior was that the
police had the sense to follow the law, and could as such not justify
going in their stead, as previously was the case.

But that leaves us with several questions – what restraints, if any, do
you consider it is legally necessary to abide by when acting on behalf
of your organization? What restraints do you consider applies to your
organization in general? Do you consider yourself and your associates to
be above the law? Or do you believe there is a sound legal basis for
harassing people in their homes, even when there can be no ambiguity
about whether your organization’s “creative” accusations can, or will,
have any traction in court? And if so, what does that legal argument
rest on? And in what way do you consider this argument to still be
undecided in an appropriate court?

I hope you can get back to me, as I’m doing some preliminary
investigation for a newsitem for my university paper, and any help in
this regard would be welcome – even though I must admit I have my
reservations about believing this story, as it sounds rather fanciful
that anyone retaining nominal control over their senses would pay
someone for the services you are alleged to have offered.

Sincerely yours,

Acting tough huh? Let’s see what happens when your ass gets penetrated by several men. I am sure you will like it.

http://www.releases4u.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=2627&pid=24417&mode=threaded&show=&st=&
http://www.security.nl/article/11130/1

p2p is makeing more money for them.
They should be happy :S

Although, This Mob is so intrenched into the political system, the criminal Recording industry and Movie industry are pulling the strings.

These guys are the modern day Mafia.

I’m not big on histroy, but how did the days of chicago run by the mob end? ’cause I think the RIAA etc. are just a newer version of this mob.

Perhaps BREIN can be taken to court and charged with intimidation? Any Dutch lawyers prepared to offer their services for free?[/quote]

Currently , the euro parliament is working on a law wich will abolish p2p.
And criminalize all participants in the complete chain.

There is only one solution, fight for your rights, and join your national Pirate Party.