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

[andydd]

Snow capped mountains ! That's because he's using a FREE TEMPLATE (marinelli) He must be short of cash or saving up for the ICO fine.

 

NNOO..Its a quiz, you have to identify which mountain Mr crossley is going to throw himself off of Winner gets.....copy of Evacuate The bloody dancefloor.

[nickyorm]

he better not bloody send me any flaming more letters, i was one of the sky users who's details were leaked in their emails so he can kiss my fat hairy arse! Sorry about that.

Edited October 12, 2010 by nickyorm
miss spelt lolz

[pingu200]

The whole template thing is a joke. Nothing wrong with a template. If it clearly states your case in such a way that you could not add or detract from it and you agree entirely with its meaning, how can that be wrong?

 

Your second letter should not add or detract anything from that sworn statement and should in fact reinforce your intention to stand by what it says.

 

Thanks Zoomboy, good advice, well received.

[pingu200]

he better not bloody send me any flaming more letters, i was one of the sky users who's details were leaked in their emails so he can kiss my fat hairy arse! Sorry about that.

 

Same here Nicky. Thanks a lot SKY, shows how much you value your customers. Maybe time to switch to Talk-Talk or Virgin?

[pingu200]

To people replying to ACS LAW

PLEASE PLEASE DO NOT FORGET TO ASK AFTER THE HEALTH OF ANDREW

 

Ha ha! Nice one. Maybe also ask if he's getting the 'Lambo or the Ferrari', as he's "so predictable".

Think maybe he puts the "Dic" in "predictable".......

[scouserat]

As it was pornography that I was accused of uploading (not downloading) this pathetic excuse for a human being went on to tell me that he had spoken to my neighbours and they had apparently told him that 'I was into that kind of thing'!!!!

 

Does this not mean that Mr Miller has admitted he's breached the DPA (assuming he has spoke to the neighbours), by making an alleged debt and information of that kind public? Last time I checked that was punishable by a fine up to £5000 and up to 6 months in prison.

[blashey]

You're wasting your time. All Blashey does is ask the question then come back and ask the same question a few weeks later if he/she doesnt like the answer given.

 

 

thats not true im worried

[zoomboy]

thats not true im worried

 

And that's perfectly understandable. But I believe you have been given good advice, based on your admission. Putting on the blinkers and hoping someone else tells you something you want to hear isn't in your best interests.

 

You have admitted guilt. Now you must pay, it's now just a question of how much.

[andydd]

And that's perfectly understandable. But I believe you have been given good advice, based on your admission. Putting on the blinkers and hoping someone else tells you something you want to hear isn't in your best interests.

 

You have admitted guilt. Now you must pay, it's now just a question of how much.

 

Thats not exactly true, a solicitor may well argue that the 'admission' is under duress or provide you with another good defence.

 

Even then, there is a very strong argument that the damages or loss incurred is nowhere near the figure asked for.

 

I do agree though that blashey has been given some good advice, and re-asking hoping for a different answer is a bit pointless, we are just members of the public here so ultimately any answer given is irrellevant its upto you and the solicitor involved (ACS/GM), of course whether ACS continues to exist is doubtful especially if they find that they can no longer get any NPO's or they are fined out of existence by the ICO.

 

Andy

[cerberusalert]

This youtube video should give people a laugh http://tinyurl.com/37se5qm

[Shaggy123]

thats not true im worried

 

Understandably, but returning and asking the same question again a few weeks later gets a bit tiresome.

[andydd]

This youtube video should give people a laugh http://tinyurl.com/37se5qm

 

Ha..Brilliant..hillarious and very cleverly done too

 

Andy

[Mattyhatty]

Hmmm bit disheartened to see ACS POOR is still sending out these letters. I thought my 1st letter was suffice even when they sent a template rejection letter.

 

Im not concerned the people im aiding are on the list that has been leaked, but where can i find this list just to make sure? So i can inform them of the safe procedures to take in case anything turns up in the post randomly accusing them again n again etc etc

 

I have a lot to write in a 2nd letter for them, im glad the breach of info came before i sent it off!!!

[wittzend]

thats not true im worried

 

 

Blashey, you've admitted to GM that you have shared the "work", you offered them £100, and declined.If it was me I would ask for a breakdown of thier heads of claim. Then up your offer to however much you think is right. I think if it did go to court,the courts would talk a dim view of GM for not accepting the offer and wasting court time.

 

These are my own thoughts on the matter,I have no legal expertise other than reading up on different forums.Hopefully someone can confirm or disagree with me.

[STC12]

mattyhatty - just pm'd you

Edited October 13, 2010 by STC12

[car2403]

Just a word of warning, here - where the DPA is breached, originally, you wouldn't want to become a data controller yourself by dishing the same data out left, right and centre

[Mattyhatty]

very much so, its almost contradictory for me to try and find details on the list, because at the same time it means i am in control of the data.

 

But i luckily have a profession and with the right behaviours, will avoid getting into any trouble!

 

I understand at no points does CAG authorise the distribution of the data and will not be affiliated with it if it is.

 

haha disclaimer for you something ACS Law should have covered their arses on at the start.

[andydd]

Blashey, you've admitted to GM that you have shared the "work", you offered them £100, and declined.If it was me I would ask for a breakdown of thier heads of claim. Then up your offer to however much you think is right. I think if it did go to court,the courts would talk a dim view of GM for not accepting the offer and wasting court time.

 

These are my own thoughts on the matter,I have no legal expertise other than reading up on different forums.Hopefully someone can confirm or disagree with me.

 

Yes..maybe read up on CPR Part 36, this is an official offer to settle and the other party will be penalised if they dont settle and it goes to court and they are awarded less than the offer you made.,

 

I believe ACS were (or maybe did) send out some CPR Part 36 letters as part of their next stage, but the 'infinger' is perfectly entiltled to send one back with his own offer, I had to do this in a recent leasehold court case I had, it was the first time I had ever heard of CPR 36 but it is quite easy to understand.

 

Of course this only applies if you actually believe that GM will take court action, the consensus so far on that is that they prob wont.

 

Andy

[blashey]

Blashey, you've admitted to GM that you have shared the "work", you offered them £100, and declined.If it was me I would ask for a breakdown of thier heads of claim. Then up your offer to however much you think is right. I think if it did go to court,the courts would talk a dim view of GM for not accepting the offer and wasting court time.

 

These are my own thoughts on the matter,I have no legal expertise other than reading up on different forums.Hopefully someone can confirm or disagree with me.

 

i done that i am awaiting their reply

[Mattyhatty]

Just a quick insight to a potential letter being sent out to those who dont reply. This is part of the literature.

 

''The current status of this matter is that it remains live and has now been designated as a case for potential issue. This means that legal proceedings may be issued against you, subject to final instructions to do so from our client. ''

 

Those who admit it and those who ignore the letters are in a worse case than those who denied all infringements.

 

yet the quote above is what ACS LAW sent or were sending the above. It seems they dont intend to take any one to court because its not up to them... but maybe the owners themselves?????

[nickyorm]

there was a website i found where u could check to see if you were on it. i'll try to find it

[cerberusalert]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1320368/Home-wi-fi-hacked-seconds.html

 

Home wi-fi 'could be hacked in five seconds'

[zoomboy]

there was a website i found where u could check to see if you were on it. i'll try to find it

 

I believe it was taken down as it wasn't in the best interests of those it listed. As damning as it was to ACS it was seen as more detrimental to those on it.

[andydd]

The troublwe with routers and wifi is that most people do not (and prob are not tech savvy enough) to change the default settings, once into a wifi network it is very easy to use the deault IP address and default name and passwords to allow acces to a router and you can cause all sorts of havoc.

 

For example my neighbour has an unsecured wifi and I now have access to his router, his cable modem and his printer, i prob could access his PC's too, but doesnt appear to have any turned on, once into the router you can easily then change the password and effectively take full control over it and lock him out.

 

At my mums house i was able also to gain access due to guessable passwords..(the dogs name..oh come on..ha !) and then all you have to do is google the router and 9 times out of 10, the defaults wont have been changed.

 

Andy

[username101]

Well I received my second letter from ACS:Law today after 4 months of hearing nothing from them. Saying that my case is still live and they do not accept my template letter and I have to pay up within 14days.

 

I am going to write my second LOD stating I standby my 1st LOD and I have nothing more to offer and I will not be communicating with them again. I have spoken to a solicitor and they have advised me that my 1st LOD is valid and they have no real reason not to accept it.

 

Do you think it worth saying I am aware of their recent situation where they were hacked and DPA was breached and if my details are found to be on that list I will be taking action against them?