ACS:Law copyright file sharing claims, Gallant Macmillan - and probably some others along the way...

[tp123]

to KimB94:

 

Having been up until 2 this morning researching this, I would strongly suggest looking for (google) and reading the speculative_invoicing_handbook. Its a pdf that explains how this scheme works and offers advise on what to do if you receive one of these letters.

[Time on my hands]

To all new recipients - this is not a [problem].

 

The speculative invoicing handbook (google it - I can't post links here) is a great place to start, as is the forum at another site that the mods here wont allow links to [cough] Slyck [cough].

 

Don't panic, you are not alone in this.

[Scooby Doo69]

I've had a letter from this company also asking for £495.00, yet I didnt download the file in the letter, and have checked on laptops at home, and nothing on them either.

 

When should I write denying this issue ? I have a wireless connection at home, and called my service provide who apparently provided my details to ACS LAW, and they said that there is no record of any request for my information, and that anyone can find out peoples service provider.

 

I have no intention of paying this, as I am not guilty. I feel sorry for the people who fall into the trap of sending payment to these guys.

 

Should I wait for next letter, or send my denial letter now telling them I didnt do anything, and to prove I did ?

 

thoughts appreciated.

 

Obviously it's best to get independent advice. The best advice though is free by searching on the internet for ACS Law. There are several really good websites around (beingthreatend, slyck, speculative invoicing)where people in your position have already gone through the mill before you. The good news is that if you are innocent then you have little to worry about as to date no one has been confirmed as taken to Court.

 

Now if it was me, I'd send a single letter of denial telling them that you didn't do it and will not be entering into further correspondance. ACS Law appear to date to be operating on a numbers game, sending legal letters to get people to pay up a sum that is not in relation to the offence(s) claimed.

 

Davenport Lyons who operated a similar operation before they backed out due to the negative publicity claimed to have won a few cases in Court where a defence was not filed, so in my opinion it's dangerous to ignore this letter.

 

Be warned thought that ACS Law do monitor the internet forums though so refrain from giving away personal information.

 

Good luck, you are not alone by a long shot...

[Time on my hands]

Scooby Doo is correct that ACS are reading these forums and will jump on any chance to connect an online comment to one of their recipients.

 

Also this is a mail-merge letter numbers game for them. They stand to make far more from 100 scared people paying up out of ignorance than they do from taking 1 person to court and risking their entire business model being torn apart.

 

No matter what ACS say, as far as we are aware (and many of use have been following this for years now) no contested court cases have ever gone ahead.

 

Take independant advice in order to craft your LoD. Give away as little information as possible - don't mention anything to them about your WiFi setup. Any information that you give them will be turned around and thrown straight back.

 

Also, your letters of denial will invariably be followed up by a letter stating that they will not accept you denial because you 'sent them a template from the internet'. Don't be frightened - they're just fishing for more information.

 

If we keep up pressure we will win. Other law firms have already pulled out of this game for bad publicity. The only reason that ACS have not followed suit is because they have no reputation to protect.

[KimB94]

-tp123

 

I have read the website handbook you sent, and now im 100% im not going to give in the money & im going to just ignore the letters, might send 1 or 2 letters of denial and just leave the rest. I can't do much more, I'm only 15 LOL. I hope this is a scheme though, I don't think my mum would like coughing up £1000

[zero_flight]

Has anyone rang ACS:Law and spoke to Andrew crossley?

 

All I keep getting is this Terrance bloke , Andrew is either busy or out of the office.

 

Can you send a recorded letter addressed to this Andrew and only he can sign for it, because of all the times i've rang I either get Terrance of a message saying their either busy or out of the office.

Edited April 16, 2010 by zero_flight

[bigD27]

Hi All

 

I'm new to all this malarky, but I have also received a letter for our friends at ACS:Law demanding £495, again with MediaCAT.

 

When first reading the letter it is amazing how much horror it fills you with, been unable to sleep or eat properly for ages. Though thankfully after finding this forum I feel much calmer about it. The problem I found in perticular was thinking back to whether your did or didnt do it. I cant remember what I was doing last week let alone last year. But the file in question does not ring any bells nor was it found in my computer or its history.

 

I shall, of course, be denying the accusation and they wont get a bean out of me unless they take it to a court and they tell me to. I feel much safer knowing that there are hundreds if not thousands of people in the same situation.

 

I shall keep you all updated with the progress.

 

Thank you for all your help.

[rob_a]

Listen up and listen good!

 

The letter you have been sent is inviting you to incriminate someone or pay moneys to ACS:Law and admit guilt leaving you open to further claims.

 

You should reply to the letter, not before you know what's going on.

You should not give away any information AT ALL.

 

The contact details given on the website pertain to a "front" office. Mr Crossley does not want to meet you or discuss your case.

Virtual Office 20 Hanover Square in London, W1S 1JY - Davinci Virtual

 

Do not rely on information on his website, its not in his interests to advise you accurately. ACS:Law has also made legal attempts to challenge those who criticise his methods (just ask slyck.com).

 

for more info: ACS:Law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Slyck.com • View topic - The official ACS:LAW/Davenport-Lyons lawsuit discussion

 

and a copy of a letter I sent him on behalf of a friend:

 

 

ACS:LAW

Andrew J Crossley

20 Hanover Sq,

London,

W1S 1JY todays date

 

RE: Letter of Claim Dated (insert date) concerning “insert file in question as mentioned in the letter” (“The Work”)

Dear Sir,

I am writing in reply to your letter of claim dated (insert date) stating that my connection was used in an infringement of copyright, using peer to peer networks which allegedly occurred on the date (insert date) and concerns the work “insert file in question as mentioned in the letter” (“the work”).

You assert in your letter that the infringement was apparently traced to my internet connection. I note that I am not personally being accused of the infringement, as you have no evidence to this effect.

Nevertheless, I categorically deny any offence under sections 16(1) (d) and 20 of the CDPA 1988. I have never possessed a copy of the work in any form, nor have I distributed it, nor have I authorised anyone else to distribute it using my internet connection. I note that section 16(2) of the act requires a person to either directly infringe copyright, or authorise someone else to do so. I have done neither, and you have not provided any evidence of my doing so.

As such I cannot and will not sign the undertakings as provided by you.

As you seem to be perfectly aware, it is impossible to link an IP address to a particular person or computer without further detailed analysis, which requires a level of expertise I do not possess. Furthermore the delay in your sending of a letter of claim precludes any such analysis. In your letter you state that “it is unlikely that a simple denial (without further explanation) will change our view of the circumstances”, unfortunately I do not have the expertise to provide a detailed explanation. As such I can only conclude that I have been a victim of foul play.

As far as I am aware, there is no law in the UK under which you could properly hold me responsible for an infringement occurring via my internet connection, without either my knowledge or permission. I would be interested to hear your legal basis for attempting to do so.

Please inform your clients that if they wish to pursue this matter, I will seek to recover all my costs to the maximum permitted by the Civil Procedure Rules. The signature of the undersigned confirms the statement provided to be accurate and legally binding under the terms required by pre-action protocol in civil law.

Yours Faithfully

Your name

[b.b.bling]

Silly question: Does it matter if ACS Law have spelt your name wrong?

 

I've just been sent one of these 'Letter of Claim' thingies and will be trying to make sure my 'Letter of Denial' is good as possible.

[rob_a]

Don't reply immediately!

 

It'll only speed up the "wheels of justice" which we all know turn very slowly.

 

By all means write your letter, but personally I would leave it as long as possible before replying. On behalf of my mate, I waited 3 months before replying. That was 6 months ago and haven't heard a dickie bird since.

 

These mailshots are going out in the tens of thousands, they don't want to take you to court, they could lose. They won't read your letter if it doesn't have a cheque in it as they are swamped with mail.

 

Remember, you are innocent until proven otherwise, which is not going to happen unless you provide proof or admit guilt.

[zero_flight]

I was going to send my LOD within the next three weeks, do you think that I should wait longer ?.

[rob_a]

Well I'm cautious of telling you what to do, but....

 

The time-scales he mentions in the letter are to panic you into coughing up.

 

There is no hurry, he has to fish for info before he could proceed. He has to wait for your reply. He can send more letters asking the same thing, but without a reply he's diddled. However, I wouldn't advise ignoring him forever.

 

I believe his last mailshot was around 40,000 strong. He is a Sole Principal (only lawyer there), he may even employ people to open his mail.

 

40,000 is a lot of mail. I have done a project where I had to action 14,000 pieces of mail on my own. That took 2 months of solid work and I type damn quick and all the mail was in the same format (questionnaires). Mr Crossley will have to deal with individually written letters, therefore will have to read them all. Or maybe he'll check for cheques and guilt admission then bin the rest.

 

1 man taking 40,000 people to court. Do me a favour. The courts won't thank him for that and there's no way the press won't pick up on it.

[inatiable-cj]

BBC technologies latest article on Digiprotect and ACS Law: BBC News - Anti-piracy firm defends net hunt

[b.b.bling]

Sound advice but in regards to my question and how to reply to them when they''ve sent a LoC spelling my name wrong.

 

I have no idea about the actual and potential technicalities.

[rob_a]

If the name is still recognisably yours I would ignore the mistake. If its a total cock-up I would reply that there was no one of that name at that address.

 

If your name was Clare and the letter said Claire it would be hard to argue that it wasn't you. That's the essence of it.

[derr]

can anyone with a new letter post it here so we can have a look? See how it differs of compares with the ones others have had. Also take a look at the acs thread on the Slyck forum.

[tp123]

@derr

 

Sadly I don't have a scanner so I can't post a copy of the letter from ACS:LAW/MEDIA CAT on here. I have, however compared it with the letter from TBI on page 99 of this thread. It is idenical exept for the following:

 

Page 1

 

On ACS:LAW Letter headed paper (obviously)

 

1st paragraph reads (word for word): "We are solicitors acting for Media C.A.T Limited ("Media CAT"), a copyright protection society and exclusive territorial

licensee of rights granted by _________ in a movie sold under the name __________ ("THE WORK"), which has been released in the United Kingdom

 

2nd paragraph reads: By an order dated 17 Feb 2010 of Chief Master Winegarten sitting at the high court [...] I believe this paragraph is the same as in previous letters with just the details of the court order/ISP changing.

 

3rd paragraph: title: Client. Almost the same as the paragraph in the TBI letter of the same title except instead of P2P internet sites it says P2P networks.

 

4th Paragraph: title: Copyright infringment. a load of speil about infrigment of copyright using P2P networks and cites CDPA 1988.

 

Page 2

 

1st paragraph: Title: Evidence. same info as in TBI letter but in a nice table. followed by a list of supporting documents as in the 3rd page page of the TBI letter.

 

2nd paragraph: Title: Unlawful Act and consequences. same as the remainder of page 3 of the TBI letter.

 

The rest of the letter is almost identical to the TBI letter shown on page 99 of this thread, differing only in terms of dates, ISPs, "the Work" and gives 21 days to pay.

 

The forensic IT experts are named on page 2 in the list of supporting documents as NG3 Systems Limited.

 

I know this isn't as good as having a copy but I hope it helps.

[zero_flight]

I received a letter from them also on Tuesday, it appears to be exactly the same in format as your letter. Have you examined the so called court order, it looks like a fake to me, its written on, areas crossed out, etc. What do you think ?. Also following research the so called forensic experts that they used have been thrown out of three european courts and asked to delete information.

[tp123]

zero_flight,

 

The court order appended to my letter was also suspect - it looked like it had been photocopied a million times!

 

I was interested in your comments on ther "forensic experts" I will also do some research into them (NG3 Systems Limited?)

 

This may be a coincidence but just before and ever since recieving this letter I have, again, got some kind of spyware/virus on my system and have had problems with my connection. So having spent a lot of time getting help and advice I got to checking my router. Amongst other issues, I found that the log was reporting constant intrusions from various IP address locations including china and the UK.

 

Anyone else experience this?

[Scooby Doo69]

@derr

 

Sadly I don't have a scanner so I can't post a copy of the letter from ACS:LAW/MEDIA CAT on here. I have, however compared it with the letter from TBI on page 99 of this thread. It is idenical exept for the following:

 

Page 1

 

On ACS:LAW Letter headed paper (obviously)

 

1st paragraph reads (word for word): "We are solicitors acting for Media C.A.T Limited ("Media CAT"), a copyright protection society and exclusive territorial

licensee of rights granted by _________ in a movie sold under the name __________ ("THE WORK"), which has been released in the United Kingdom

 

2nd paragraph reads: By an order dated 17 Feb 2010 of Chief Master Winegarten sitting at the high court [...] I believe this paragraph is the same as in previous letters with just the details of the court order/ISP changing.

 

3rd paragraph: title: Client. Almost the same as the paragraph in the TBI letter of the same title except instead of P2P internet sites it says P2P networks.

 

4th Paragraph: title: Copyright infringment. a load of speil about infrigment of copyright using P2P networks and cites CDPA 1988.

 

Page 2

 

1st paragraph: Title: Evidence. same info as in TBI letter but in a nice table. followed by a list of supporting documents as in the 3rd page page of the TBI letter.

 

2nd paragraph: Title: Unlawful Act and consequences. same as the remainder of page 3 of the TBI letter.

 

The rest of the letter is almost identical to the TBI letter shown on page 99 of this thread, differing only in terms of dates, ISPs, "the Work" and gives 21 days to pay.

 

The forensic IT experts are named on page 2 in the list of supporting documents as NG3 Systems Limited.

 

I know this isn't as good as having a copy but I hope it helps.

 

Looks like the standard demand that they send out. Can I ask what the title of the film is that they are claiming was uploaded?

 

The reason I ask is that to date they have only gone after porn films.

[tp123]

Scooby doo69

 

The "work" in question is a porn film, I am reluctant to name it on here in case they are using different "works" to identify people on here - Someone in an earlier post said ACS monitor this forum.

 

I was on a site investigating the untrusion alerts on my router log mentioned in my previous post and one reply was this:

 

"[...], but looks to me like you have perhaps acquired an IP address whose previous owner allowed file sharing and remote access to his PC."

 

What?!

[Scooby Doo69]

Scooby doo69

 

The "work" in question is a porn film, I am reluctant to name it on here in case they are using different "works" to identify people on here - Someone in an earlier post said ACS monitor this forum.

 

I was on a site investigating the untrusion alerts on my router log mentioned in my previous post and one reply was this:

 

"[...], but looks to me like you have perhaps acquired an IP address whose previous owner allowed file sharing and remote access to his PC."

 

What?!

 

Fair comment. Was not interested in the title as such, just whether ACS Law had managed to penetrate into the non-porn film market.

 

IP addresses are like telephone numbers and after a set period of time are recycled for use by IPs. I doubt whether this is the case though. Given the age of the alledged offence, IPs have to keep logs and they will cross reference it to the account holder at the time.

 

Stick to your guns, get independent legal advice and send your LOD if you are innocent.

 

As I've said on here many times before, if I ever receive one of these letters I'd send a single LOD explaining my innocence and clearly state that I will not be entering into further correspondance.

 

This is a game of chance for ACS Law and Media CAT. If they legally threaten say 5 people and 1-2 or two pays the demanded sum, then they are quids in.

[tp123]

Cheers Scooby Doo69, I've written my letter and will post nearer the 21 day deadline.

 

I'm fed up that this has caused so much hassle and wasted so much time. I feel sorry for people who would have just paid up.

 

I am also concerned firstly, that this company has any information about me at all and secondly, worry what else they may do with the data they have obtained. I wonder if it is worth sending a request under the freedom of information act, I think it is called a SAR. to see what exactly they have?

 

Any thoughts anyone?

 

Does anyone have any info on NG3 System Limited?

[zero_flight]

I have tried to obtain further info on the case but have been told that I do not have any rights to the information.

[samueladams]

Hi everyone,

 

I received a letter from these guys today. I had apparently downloaded an adult film and they want over £500 from me. I immediately called them saying what a load of bull it is as i have never downloaded such film before. The dopy receptionist refused to put me through to anybody, saying that it is al dealt with by post...which I do find quite hard to believe, that there would be nobody to speak to .

 

Anyway, i'm just after clarification that this is an attempted [problem]? And also, what is best to do? Ignore it, or respond denying downloading it?

 

Thank god for the internet and for this thread! I was worried for a good 10 mins!

 

Cheers,

 

"Samuel"