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

[andydd]

At the end of the day, ACS can bamboozle everyone with specifics until the cow comes home...

They are not entitled to a penny off anyone with the court say so 1st & even then, only once all the person outgoings have been taken into account.

It will also cost them money taking so many people to court.

Hardly worth their while to just get back £1 per month if anything at all.

Thats the top & bottom of it basically.

 

You still seem to be forgetting that the letters they have sen out are 'civil' or 'pre-court' action, they are legally entitled to ask for whatever they want (of course doesn't mean they'd get it!) their FAQ does indeed go a little way into explaining their so-called 'costs'..(i.e..they could claim you hosted a game costing £50 on a P2P site and 1000 people downloaded it, thus they'd want 50 grand)...Everything in the letters so far from ACS have nothing to do with courts at all, but of course they are threatening that that could be the next step..(unlikely of course as we all know).

 

Also your personal circumstances may be that you could only afford a £1 a month but other people here may have higher earnings, I've had experiences of a CCJ and eventually had an attachment of earnings to the tune of £50 a month, and I'm not exactly a high earner.

[mr.ton]

Yes they are entitled to ask for what they want.

The public are also entitled to tell them to get lost.

The way they have worded their threatograms means nothing & has no legal basis whatsoever.

Its for them to take the individual through the court process & to see what happens then...

If the individual loses then thats were what i mentioned above comes into effect about how best to repay etc...

Thats assuming they do lose as there's every chance ACS can lose as well if the individual has legal representation etc...

ACS have effectivley created a legal minefield field here & there's more chance of it blowing up in their faces than in that of the consumers/individuals in my view.

[Delta82]

Credit to Being scammed at TF . .

 

I attended the court proceedings this morning between Topware and BE UN LTD, much to the angst of Andrew Crossley. Not sure if he even knew that courts are public and as such anyone may attend and observe (provided that you don't interrupt / interfere, and you ask the judge nicely).

 

Now the link between Davenport Lyons and ACS: Law became oh so more clear. The link is about as close as possible without them being the same company. Even in the minutes preceeding the hearing, a representative of DL was giving prepatory documents to Andrew Crossley for him to use at the hearing...

 

During the hearing the Master even had to ask if this was the same case that he saw previously with DL, and wasn't that them in the corridoor?

 

Also in attendance was a Miss Camilla Balleny from ARNOLD & PORTER LLP.

Arnold & Porter LLP - Camilla Balleny

As far as I could tell, she was representing A&P who represent Virgin Media and BE UN Ltd.

 

The end result of the hearing today was that this hearing and two others (similar but with other ISPs) until Monday 8th June 11am, same place.

 

What was so interesting were the claims that Andrew Crossley made to Master Wintergarten during the proceedings. That 1500+ letters had been sent out, and that a significant proportion of people pay the demand (35-40%). This is SO much higher than what we (collectively on the forums) had thought. Not sure if it's bull***t or bravado, but of course there wouldn't be any docs available to back that up. It was more that he was convincing Master Wintergarten that they were doing the right thing, and having success, and that if they weren't guilty why would they pay etc.

 

That means that if some 500 people have paid up, each at around £600, that's £300k going into someone's pockets. Makes the whole thing worthwhile... almost... until you get sticken off as a lawyer for all this, and get made to pay the money back (perhaps).

 

I spoke to Camilla Balleny (think I freaked her out a little) after the hearing, and asked her if she knew how they got the IP addresses, and if she knew that the method that they got them was illegal or dubious at best, and had been thrown out of court in other european countries, and that a lawyer got struck off for 6 months for doing this.... Although I wasn't expecting any answers, her surprise, discomfort and silence spoke volumes. I even offered her to see the letter that ACS Law had sent me, though by this stage I think she just wanted to get the hell out of there.

 

Camilla - if you're reading this, the offer stays open, I'm sure plenty of us would be happy to send you eformat versions of our letters.

 

So, where from here? Well, I was going to go over to Hanover Square and visit Andrew Crossley, but after seeing him in the flesh, and having him validate in front of me all that we had previously suspected, I just didn't see the need.

 

He is taking this seriously, making a lot of money from it, and although seemed a little disorganised he was doing a fair job of convincing everyone else - who either didn't have the knowledge or information to know better.

 

The hearings were adjourned because the ISPs hadn't had time to verify all the facts (times, IPs etc) of the NEW batch of IPs to be churned through this ever growing fiasco. So thank you at least for that much, that the ISPs are checking that they're not giving out the wrong details this time.

[tommyboy22]

i cant wait for watchdog to get their teeth back into this topic....its obvious davenport lyons are behind it again, must have made a few quid first time round i guess and threatening people and scaring them is even low for these maggots....dont pay a penny if you do you will get targeted next time..oh yes there will be a next time..1000 x £665.00 equals £665,000.00 think about it...how can anyone who calls themselves a legal firm think that a minor can sign a document like that and as if your gonna supply your credit card details or bank transfer and put it in the post..this firm is nothing but a pair of clown shoes....

[robjam1969]

Cracking piece of work Delta! A surprise for Mr Crossley me thinks!

 

On a slightly different note just contacted Consumer Direct who were not interested in the slightest. Basically told me to reply and deny. Thanks!!

[Delta82]

Cracking piece of work Delta! A surprise for Mr Crossley me thinks!

 

On a slightly different note just contacted Consumer Direct who were not interested in the slightest. Basically told me to reply and deny. Thanks!!

 

 

No its a credit to "Beingscammed" ... he/she is a member over at torrentfreak and caught up in this damn fiasco and went to the hearing and reported back

 

So congrats to she/him

[opaque]

I think one of the maddest things about this isn't so much that a company/lawyers can get this information, it's that they are using it to apparently track people downloading a certain game or two.

And that the people getting the letters haven't downloaded that particular game!

 

If it was a letter saying, we know you've downloaded 'x'. X being something that the person HAD downloaded we could argue about Data Protection and the way information was gained etc but the simple fact is that everyone I've seen online talking about this and getting a letter has no idea why they have been picked as they've never even heard of it!

[sduffield]

We need to find out whether ACS Law have used individual IP addresses in their court orders, or have they used blocks/range of IP addresses. It maybe that they have seen an IP address using p2p, but then used whois utilities to target the whole range of IP addresses in that subnet.

[andydd]

Credit to Being scammed at TF . .

 

I attended the court proceedings this morning between Topware and BE UN LTD, much to the angst of Andrew Crossley. Not sure if he even knew that courts are public and as such anyone may attend and observe (provided that you don't interrupt / interfere, and you ask the judge nicely).

 

Now the link between Davenport Lyons and ACS: Law became oh so more clear. The link is about as close as possible without them being the same company. Even in the minutes preceeding the hearing, a representative of DL was giving prepatory documents to Andrew Crossley for him to use at the hearing...

 

During the hearing the Master even had to ask if this was the same case that he saw previously with DL, and wasn't that them in the corridoor?

 

Also in attendance was a Miss Camilla Balleny from ARNOLD & PORTER LLP.

Arnold & Porter LLP - Camilla Balleny

As far as I could tell, she was representing A&P who represent Virgin Media and BE UN Ltd.

 

The end result of the hearing today was that this hearing and two others (similar but with other ISPs) until Monday 8th June 11am, same place.

 

What was so interesting were the claims that Andrew Crossley made to Master Wintergarten during the proceedings. That 1500+ letters had been sent out, and that a significant proportion of people pay the demand (35-40%). This is SO much higher than what we (collectively on the forums) had thought. Not sure if it's bull***t or bravado, but of course there wouldn't be any docs available to back that up. It was more that he was convincing Master Wintergarten that they were doing the right thing, and having success, and that if they weren't guilty why would they pay etc.

 

That means that if some 500 people have paid up, each at around £600, that's £300k going into someone's pockets. Makes the whole thing worthwhile... almost... until you get sticken off as a lawyer for all this, and get made to pay the money back (perhaps).

 

I spoke to Camilla Balleny (think I freaked her out a little) after the hearing, and asked her if she knew how they got the IP addresses, and if she knew that the method that they got them was illegal or dubious at best, and had been thrown out of court in other european countries, and that a lawyer got struck off for 6 months for doing this.... Although I wasn't expecting any answers, her surprise, discomfort and silence spoke volumes. I even offered her to see the letter that ACS Law had sent me, though by this stage I think she just wanted to get the hell out of there.

 

Camilla - if you're reading this, the offer stays open, I'm sure plenty of us would be happy to send you eformat versions of our letters.

 

So, where from here? Well, I was going to go over to Hanover Square and visit Andrew Crossley, but after seeing him in the flesh, and having him validate in front of me all that we had previously suspected, I just didn't see the need.

 

He is taking this seriously, making a lot of money from it, and although seemed a little disorganised he was doing a fair job of convincing everyone else - who either didn't have the knowledge or information to know better.

 

The hearings were adjourned because the ISPs hadn't had time to verify all the facts (times, IPs etc) of the NEW batch of IPs to be churned through this ever growing fiasco. So thank you at least for that much, that the ISPs are checking that they're not giving out the wrong details this time.

 

Where are the court cases heard ?.I'm sure i read it somwhere but i forgot. I'm just about to go out to lunch in the park at hanover square and may have a nose at no 18, I work at 17 which is very wierd , although they arnt in the building next door, its more opposite n over the road.

[Delta82]

Where are the court cases heard ?.I'm sure i read it somwhere but i forgot. I'm just about to go out to lunch in the park at hanover square and may have a nose at no 18, I work at 17 which is very wierd , although they arnt in the building next door, its more opposite n over the road.

 

 

 

 

Proceedings Before the Masters – Chancery Division

ROOM TM7.08

Before CHIEF MASTER WINEGARTEN

Monday 11th May 2009

At 11 o'clock

Topware Interactive Inc v Be Un Ltd

[penumbra]

Proceedings Before the Masters – Chancery Division

ROOM TM7.08

Before CHIEF MASTER WINEGARTEN

Monday 11th May 2009

At 11 o'clock

Topware Interactive Inc v Be Un Ltd

 

Information about - Chancery Division

 

 

 

"The Chancery Division of the High Court is based in the Thomas More Building at the Royal Courts of Justice in London and is divided between Chancery Chambers and Bankruptcy and Companies Court.

The Office hours are 10.00am to 4.30pm"

[porkiepiepig]

I also been to the CAB today, they also advised me to ring Consumer Direct and to reply to ACS Law with a letter of denial.

Also if anybody who can not afford a solicitor, I was told some might do a free consultation from 15 to 30 minutes but its best to search around to see if they do this.

 

I will also send a copy of my letter to Watchdog very shortly with the advice that I've been told.

[andydd]

I also been to the CAB today, they also advised me to ring Consumer Direct and to reply to ACS Law with a letter of denial.

Also if anybody who can not afford a solicitor, I was told some might do a free consultation from 15 to 30 minutes but its best to search around to see if they do this.

 

I will also send a copy of my letter to Watchdog very shortly with the advice that I've been told.

 

Dont forget the link i put up earlier to the slyk site wchich mainly had advice from lawdit solicitors, this had useful info as to what to put in your letter.

 

Andy

[tommyboy22]

found this draft statement i think i will use............................................I did not download and did not make available for upload your clients work “Two Worlds” via my Internet connection, nor did I authorise anyone else to do so.

 

I deny any breach of the CDPA 1988 sections 16(1)(d) and 20 of the act.

 

I have never possessed a copy of the work in any form, nor have I distributed it, or authorised anyone else to distribute it using my internet connection.

 

Any proceedings that you may choose to take will be fully and vigorously defended, please inform your client 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.

[Superjonboy]

I've just had another thought, surrounding how they arrive at their compensation amount.

 

As someone sated earlier they could take the stance that the game costs £50 and that 1000 people downloaded it from you, therefore £50,000. To be honest this does seem to be how they are working it out.

 

The thing about this is that even if I'd downloaded the game, which I haven't, I'd most likely have downloaded it from someone els who recieved a letter. If this is the case then the amount of compensation they should be seeking would be the amount of letters sent out multiplied by the cost of the game plus additional costs for administration.

 

Game retail price x Amount of letters + Administration = Compensation.

 

Of course this, in my personal case would mean the administration costs were £615.

 

The IP tracing software definately has flaws anyway because there is 100% no chance I downloaded the game or even had BitLord software on my computer. I'm a student member of BCS and as a programmer/web designer I'm not in the habit of stealing other peoples work.

[Delta82]

Update of sorts

 

Seems 1 of the posts by Michael Coyle over at Lawdit has been removed .. but still in Google cache ACS law - Copyright Law Articles and News - Lawdit Reading Room

 

Not sure what to make of it all at the moment ..

[penumbra]

Update of sorts

 

Seems 1 of the posts by Michael Coyle over at Lawdit has been removed .. but still in Google cache ACS law - Copyright Law Articles and News - Lawdit Reading Room

 

Not sure what to make of it all at the moment ..

 

Seems reasonable. He wrote that expressing concerns about the outfit. Now they've boon shown to be at least real (if not reputable) he could reasonably change the post. Taking it down is perhaps a bit much, but these lawyers are very libel conscious .

[Wintord]

Out of interest has anyone been in contact with a national newspaper reguarding this, they might be interested, exspecially has similar has already been covered by watchdog

[Delta82]

Ok this is taking from Torrentfreak... posted by Snookersport

 

GoodNews All!!!

 

Well I've had a call from Watchdog wanting me to forward the letter on so they can investigate this further. I believe this is going to be big... I've scanned the letter and sent it via email in PDF format..

 

I urge everyone to do the same as it looks like this has hit the press bigtime looks like a lot of people are calling in about it....

 

Hopefully

[porkiepiepig]

Excellent news about Watchdog has the saying goes more the merrier so lets contact them, also try Consumer Direct on reporting a [problem] that I found linked from another forum.

 

https://secure.consumerdirect.gov.uk/reportascam.aspx

[andydd]

Some interesting related stories.

 

BBC NEWS | Technology | French 'net piracy' bill passed

 

I'm glad Im not a froggy, it looks liken they are even unclear as to how 100% definatley prove that they are disconnecting the right people.

 

The socialist parliamentarian Patrick Bloche said the bill was "dangerous, useless, inefficient, and very risky for us citizens".

 

BBC NEWS | Technology | Net firms reject 'policing role'

 

The second one has an interesting quote.

 

It added: "Ispa members have consistently explained that significant technological advances would be required if these measures are to reach a standard where they would be admissible as evidence in court.

 

You can add comments to this story, might be worth mentioning ACS on it ?

 

Andy

[Delta82]

Ive a nagging thought of "what will I do if they take me to court" ..probably just stress and tiredness

 

Anyway after another scan through my paperwork I was sent ..

I have 2 letters of which one states I pay £860 on one and £730 on the other

 

theres a total of 6 ip address logged on my paperwork they sent me... all over 5 days and at different times..never one set time.

 

 

Now Ive seen people mention they were asked to pay 600 or around that mark but no were near the amount Ive been asked to pay...

[swoopsta]

Ive a nagging thought of "what will I do if they take me to court" ..probably just stress and tiredness

 

Anyway after another scan through my paperwork I was sent ..

I have 2 letters of which one states I pay £860 on one and £730 on the other

 

theres a total of 6 ip address logged on my paperwork they sent me... all over 5 days and at different times..never one set time.

 

 

Now Ive seen people mention they were asked to pay 600 or around that mark but no were near the amount Ive been asked to pay...

 

It would seem like you are paying the £65 fee 6 times, plus two lots of £600 - does it mention 2 separate "works" on the letter ?

[Delta82]

Both letters are identical

 

1 has 4 addys listed for me supposedly sharing two worlds

 

2nd letter has 2 addys again supposedly sharing two worlds

 

and both say we will only be seeking one payment of damages from you

[porkiepiepig]

Hello,

 

This was just posted on another forum by somebody else, it seems Andrew from ACS was fined some time ago.

 

Surely this shows his character is no saint.

 

Infringement of Copyright Notice - 'Two Worlds' - Page 26 - P2Pfreak.com

 

Scroll down on the above page until post 389, there will a link to click on.

Edited May 13, 2009 by porkiepiepig