In reference to BERR response “p2p – 01 – FOI.PDF”
This response is typical of a medium to heavy user, and would appear to be teens or early twenties. The respondent is clear that a contract should fulfil it's advertised role, and that the ISPs shouldn't be selling and promising what it can't, or doesn't want to, deliver. The user is also quite forthright in pointing out that there are options and legislations already in place to deal with the problem – a civil suit through the courts. That it is either costly, or slow does not mean that it is ineffective (it's the norm in civil suits, party to prevent frivolous suits). It is quite rightly pointed out that removal of the courts means that the basics of law and order are circumvented, and that the paper is asking for comments on vigilantism.
There are no major factual inaccuracies, although no deep understanding of the law is evident, the legal understanding is consistent with a layman's perspective.
Consultation analysis overview