BT said that it wanted a temporary halt on all new and existing applications until a "test case" could be heard.
That's exactly what is needed, a "test case".
A decent defence would be able to force IP harvesters to prove their tracking software's reliability, and maybe even get the courts to decide whether snooping on what people are downloading counts as "intercepting private communications" under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act.
Polluting the evidence works like this. When a client asks for a list of peers who are downloading the same torrent, the tracker software automatically inserts several “random IP addresses” that are not in the swarm. They are based on existing sub-nets, but might be from people who may not even be aware that BitTorrent exists.
Dear Terence,
regarding the test monitoring in BitTorrent: can you please specify whether you require us to being able to distinguish whether the user was downloading OR making the work available?
If this distinguishing feature is required we have to conduct testdownloads.
We will be able log higher numbers if testdownloads are NOT required - yet we would not be able to distinguish whether the user was logged because he downloaded OR made available the work to us
Dear Claus
* We are happy to agree to a non disclosure agreement to put your mind at ease in relation to your confidential information. In reality, the only information we require from Media Protector are a list of captured IP addresses and experts report. We do not expect confidential information about the inner workings of your proprietary software to be disclosed......