Interesting judgement. An unbiased view would be that the judge is giving Unite enough rope to hang themselves by. I can't see Unite putting up a very creditable opposition to an IT specialist proposed by the plaintiff. Reading the judgement the union doesn't seem to have an enormous amount of technical knowledge and is in no position to argue the toss on an individual's credentials. The expert witness for the plaintiff seems to be under no illusions about the ability to unearth the relevant data,
The piece about individuals swapping userids sounds like so much hogwash. I can't help but wonder if this is part of a concerted attempt to avoid being held responsible in court. The key will be the IP addresses of the offenders. That provides traceability to physical addresses. Of course there is still the 'it wasn't me, it was my brother' defence that was put up at one of the Employment Tribunals. I think I begin to hear a certain tonsil clearing exercise being made by a lady of ample proportions.