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

[chelsea2010]

2 points re Cascada name change from Kopie to Eshuijs

1 if ACS Law have changed the name on the court order after using it surely it makes the court order null and void and therefore they obtained the iP addresses's unlawfully or by deception.

2 If The Cascada track was 1 file in the named torrent file it does not necessarily mean that particular file was downloaded or even part downloaded.

 

If anybody can confirm or deny these points please let us know

[chelsea2010]

Can I just ask is your Court Order dated the 17th February 2010 or has it a different date on ?.

My date is the same also the name is only changed from Kopie to Eshuijs on the front page, on the back it still reads Allan Kopie

[ryedonny]

My date is the same also the name is only changed from Kopie to Eshuijs on the front page, on the back it still reads Allan Kopie

 

Mine also has the name change from Kopie to Eshuijs. Also, the ip address does not match my pc.

Strange how most of (or all) the cases are for the tracks by "cascada" or "The ministry of sound".

 

Don't think I'm even going to reply to these [problematic].

 

Watch this if your still paranoid YouTube - Davenport Lyons - threatening letters.

[chelsea2010]

Although i'm sure I didn't download the track I have no way of proving it as my PC gave up on me months ago and I had to replace it with a spanking new Laptop. Will they be able to take this away even though I purchased it in March 2010 and this supposed download upload happened last year. As I only received the letter yesterday they can not accuse me of ditching the evidence either. I just do not want them to take away my new laptop!

[tp123]

[...]Will they be able to take this away even though I purchased it in March 2010 [...] I just do not want them to take away my new laptop!

 

This is a civil case. They can't take anything away.

 

The only "evidence" they have is an ip address that was gathered via a piece of software that employs a tehnique called deep packet inspection. This effectlvley and in very simple terms, intercepts data flowing between two points, and from that discovers the ip address. There are however, many explanations as to how an ip address can be incorrectly gathered.

 

This "evidence" has never been tested in a court and is extremley unlikely to be, for many reasons.

 

Don't panic

[mos law suit!!!]

Hi, got my letter from Gallant MacMillan 2 days ago about mos the annual 2010 have havent slept a wink since!!

They said i made it available for download 27/11/09, as like most of you the ip address is nothing like mine and the want £375!!

Is everyone is in agreement that if i sent a letter of denial it wont be taken any further?

[peed_off]

Has anyone had any correspondance from ACS lately regarding copyright holder Darker Enterprises?

 

I received a letter of claim from ACS in April in respect of movies that Darker Enterprises allegedly have the copyrights to. I sent a LOD and have heard nothing since. Seems I should've received a second letter from ACS ages ago.

 

I'm wondering if Darker Enterprises have dropped the case (I see from earlier posts that they're having problems renewing their shop licences).

Is anyone else in the same boat as me?

[demoneq]

Sample Letter of Denial

 

 

ACS:LAW

Andrew J Crossley

20 Hanover Sq,

London,

W1S 1JY

 

(insert 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.

 

 

Yours Faithfully

 

(Your name)

 

Hi

anyone send this ? let us know if this letter can halp us or what is answer from ACS Law

 

p.s. in my letter is they have my personal details from Be Un Limited but i dont have internet from this company i have from O2 , how its happen?

[TudorBlue]

I received a letter from ACS Law yesterday. I downloaded an album in 2009. I used utorrent to download it (like an idiot) The letter included lots of legel stuff, stuff I do not understand. The one thing I do know, is that my ip address is included in the letter as is the exact time and date that I downloaded the album. I have to pay £300 or it goes to court. What I am worried about is, if I sign the form and pay (I dont have a problem with paying), this will be an admission of guilt and it may open up the floodgates. I can see from reading through the posts that ACS Law seem to be a little on the unscrupulous side and will stop at nothing to make money. I dont know is this matters or not but I already had the original copy of the cd that was sealed but didnt want to break the seal just to rip the cd to my ipod. Stupid and misguided fool I am, I thought it made it ok for me to dl the album.Can anyone offer me any sound advice?

[josephbloggs]

hi all.

i note that one of the three persons mentioned in the ownership of evacuate the dancefloor is manuel rueter aka dj manian.

he has and is involved in many songs which will appear as singles but also as many compilation albums available on p2p websites.

many people will have come on here to see if acs is real and lets be honest you all will of downloaded the file or a relative will have and you want to see if you can get away with it.

the point i am making is that if someone pays asc law for lets say evacuate the dancefloor off either the album or a compilation album with that on, can this guy on the court order who has interest in another song off the same download then persue for liabilty for the same amount for another song, so if cascada album has 15 tracks on - next month can he issue another court order for his next track. then some people will pay through the nose 15times after downloading one album?

and if the letters and subsequent payments of fines provoke more music execs to pursue for each individual track then millions of people will be screwed as so many people do it on a daily basis.

[mos law suit!!!]

Has anyone actually downloaded the album there being acussed of???

[TudorBlue]

deleted

Edited July 18, 2010 by TudorBlue

[TudorBlue]

deleted

Edited July 18, 2010 by TudorBlue

[mos law suit!!!]

Tudorblue is there anyway apart from the ip address that they can prove u done it??

[TudorBlue]

I know nothing

Edited July 18, 2010 by TudorBlue

[mos law suit!!!]

Gallant MacMillan have the supposed date and time i made the album available for third party download, an ip address and says i used a Bittorrent!!

[mos lawsuit!!!]

hi all,

thanks for the advice, i got the letter from g&m saying i owe £375 for downloading the album mos the annual 2010. I did download the file however the date they have given is incorrect as it states on my p.c the correct date when i downloaded it. their date is a month out. what should i do? deny i downloaded this file on this date?

 

any answers would be much appreciated.

[loling]

Hi Guys, first time on here, I have just recived the letter from ASC:LAW yesterday. Its stating the fact Ive downloaded that casdada evacuate the dance floor song and is wanting £295!!!! This is a JOKE! I dont listen to that type of music Im into my Indie/Rock mixture!!! I spoke with o2 and asked them about the "Be unlimited" and they are O2's equipment provider or somthing???? Im not going to accpet somthing that Ive not done! we live in a block of flats it would not surpise me if my connection had been hacked or my ip has been spoofed as I hear its easy for a person who knows about this stuff to do? Im going to be seeing a solicitor sometime next week to get a bearing on what to do if anything as I feel its a [problem] to scare people out of money and I wont stand for IT!!!!!!!Any info you guys have would be great

[ryedonny]

Don't write to them, they're not going to anything trust me. Its a [problem], they send thousands of letters out and they hope as many people as possible get scared and pay. There's also a few scaremongering comments left on here and I'm in no doubt that they work for the [problematic].

 

Even if they had solid proof that you downloaded the songs from your ip address, they can't prove which person in your household actually downloaded the file. Reminds me of the cops who pulled over a car for speeding and the driver and passengers all sat on the back seat before the police tapped on thier window. "I wasn't driving" LOL

[tp123]

@TudorBlue and mos lawsuit!!

 

If you did download, or more accurately, make the "work" available to third parties via p2p networks, the sum of money claimed is dispraportionate to the potential loss of sales for the rights holder.

 

I would seek legal advice with a view to making a counter offer for an amount in the region of about £20.

 

Check out Michael Coyle at Lawdit Solicitors - they specialise in this area.

 

regards

 

tp123

[tp123]

 

I've contacted Sky who said that they did pass my information onto ACS Law, but that was on 15th April, whereas the stamp on the High Court of Justice Document is dated 17th February. That doesn't really add up?

 

ACS Law obtained a court order for Sky (and other ISPs) to provide the names and addresses of ip address holders on the 17th Feb. The ISPs had to provide this information within a specified time. It seems that Sky provided it on the 15th April.

 

I am not sure on the technicalities of the infrigement if it concerns individual tracks from a an album, for example; if you downloaded multiple tracks from an album, but not the track ACS refer to in the letter.

 

Regarding the time issue, I believe they make the file available for download for a long period time in order to "catch" more victims. For this reason, I'm sure the times and dates will vary for individuals. The "work" I was accused of making available[...] last year, is still available for download as of last week!

 

As I said previously, if you have infinged copyright, seek legal advice with a view to making a counter offer for an amount in the region of about £20. Check out Michael Coyle at Lawdit Solicitors - they specialise in this area.

 

Bear in mind though that NO ONE HAS BEEN TAKEN TO COURT. What evidence do they have that YOU as an indivdual made the "work" available to third parties or authorised anyone else to do so? NONE

 

Regards

[lostinspace333]

just wandering that it seems like they have sent atleast a thousand of these threats to people. is it even liable in a court to do such thing? also the fact that the internet is addressed to one person but anyone could have downloaded it, does it make the bill owner liable? ive dealt with solicitors once and they were quite professional. these lot seem like [problem] artists who've hired some whizzkid geek who knows a bit about computers. decided to target peoples ips willy nilly and seem to think that is concrete evidence demanding 37 times the amount of the actual price of the cd. also if they did decide to take someone to a small courts would it cost them a lot and also due to location would they take the nearest person to them?

[thomas2008]

i spoke to the the soliciters gallant mcmillan yesterday and they said they posted 7000 letters out

[tp123]

[...]also the fact that the internet is addressed to one person - EDIT - not a person, a device - but anyone could have downloaded it, does it make the bill owner liable? ive dealt with solicitors once and they were quite professional. these lot seem like [problem] artists who've hired some whizzkid geek who knows a bit about computers. decided to target peoples ips willy nilly and seem to think that is concrete evidence demanding 37 times the amount of the actual price of the cd. [...]

 

Ha ha - You've got it spot on mate!

 

However shaky their evidence and imoral their practices, it is in fact not a [problem] but a scheme that employes Civil Procedure Rules. Pre-action protocol and peoples' fear and ignorance as tools to extort money.

[tp123]

i spoke to the the soliciters gallant mcmillan yesterday and they said they posted 7000 letters out

 

So if just 20% of people pay, 1400 x £375 = £525,000

 

Half a million for some creative letter writing!