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

[angrydebtor]

from reading his emails on that other forum. you do have to say that crossley is like a robotic parrot and so full of his own self importance it beggars belief lol

[humpy07]

I have been asked by a friend to draft a 2nd LOD to ACS... it's based largely on titbits stolen from various sites, but I thought I'd paste it below in case anyone is looking for a template.

 

NB: PLEASE REMEMBER TO PUT 'WITHOUT PREJUDICE SAVE AS TO COSTS' ON THE TOP OF YOUR LETTER!

 

Dear Sirs

 

WITHOUT PREJUDICE SAVE AS TO COSTS

INFRINGEMENT OF COPYRIGHT – LETTER OF CLAIM

 

I write further to your letter dated ............ I note that you have not provided any further evidence to support your allegations of Copyright Infringement, and have merely reasserted the allegations of your initial Letter of Claim dated ............

 

I refer you to my letter dated ............. in which I denied ANY offence under Sections 16(1)(d) and 20 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. Once again, I vehemently deny committing any offence under the aforementioned Act, or authorising any person to commit any such offence.

 

I feel it prudent to advise you that your continuing threat of court action in this matter is tantamount to harassment, and I reserve the right to address this matter through any means available to me. I put you on notice that I have shared my concerns regarding your procedures with the Solicitors Regulation Authority and Information Commissioner’s Office, and have been advised by the former that they are currently investigating ACS:LAW.

 

Please note that should this matter proceed to Court, I will be seeking to fully recover any and all of 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.

[Mal Chelovek]

Quite why anyone would respond to a letter from this bunch of jokers escapes me!

 

This is my first post and it's late but I'll be back.

 

 

 

THOUGHT FOR THE DAY: The "646 [problem]" , anyone.

[Shaggy123]

I made my position clear in the first letter. They've replied with the 'it's a template, blah blah blah'. I don't care if it's a template, my position stands so no further correspondence will be entered into.

[BARFLY]

Looks like TBI have thrown in the towel and are no longer pursuing alleged filesharers!

[BARFLY]

It's reported on the which website. Can't be doing with the negative publicity it seems, nothing to do with the veracity of the business model!

[download-muppet]

Thats awsome!!

 

One less niggle for people to worry about =)

 

So does anyone a little more knowledgeable than me know what the future holds now this Digital Economy Bill is set to pass? Are all those innocents out there who have already been accused of file sharing going to get even more letters demanding payments based on the fact that they are now responsible for their internet security?

 

Sounds daft to me. You can have all the wireless security in the world wired up to you account, but if someone can clone an IP, then what guarantee do you have of remaining 'innocent'? Other than never using the internet of course?

[Caimbeul]

Thats awsome!!

 

One less niggle for people to worry about =)

 

So does anyone a little more knowledgeable than me know what the future holds now this Digital Economy Bill is set to pass? Are all those innocents out there who have already been accused of file sharing going to get even more letters demanding payments based on the fact that they are now responsible for their internet security?

 

Sounds daft to me. You can have all the wireless security in the world wired up to you account, but if someone can clone an IP, then what guarantee do you have of remaining 'innocent'? Other than never using the internet of course?

 

The DEB is not yet through completely or final (i believe). Also I do not believe that they can hold you responsible for the security of your wireless connection prior to any law coming into effect, only thereafter as the legeslation was not in effect at that time.

[multi]

The DEB is not yet through completely or final (i believe). Also I do not believe that they can hold you responsible for the security of your wireless connection prior to any law coming into effect, only thereafter as the legeslation was not in effect at that time.

 

 

The DEB got through the commons and the lords. It received royal assent and is now law - The Digital Economy Act.

 

However, The technical measures and notification procedures are unlikley to be in effect for several months, possibly not until the end of this year / beginning of next year. There is to be deveral more periods of consultation and fiddling with it yet.

 

ACS:law have declared victory and, characteristically are misunderstanding it utterly. According to them, the DEA (Digital Economy Act) makes the person who owns the connection responsible for the infringment. This is 100% false. It does not change the sections of the CDPA 1988 in question and if they want to take you to court for financial damages they still cannot make the connection holder liable for them.

[ccsnet]

Some news about TBI giving up.....

 

Legal firm to stop issuing net piracy letters News - PC Advisor

 

Terran

[ccsnet]

.......and some about ACS sending out more....

 

Lawyers to keep sending piracy threats | THINQ.co.uk

 

Terran

[Caimbeul]

"Because it is inherantly, unfair and unethical" (Quote from Head of Legal affairs at Which?) Need we say more?

[Mr. B]

..

Edited April 14, 2010 by Mr. B

[teaboy2]

The DEB got through the commons and the lords. It received royal assent and is now law - The Digital Economy Act.

 

However, The technical measures and notification procedures are unlikley to be in effect for several months, possibly not until the end of this year / beginning of next year. There is to be deveral more periods of consultation and fiddling with it yet.

 

ACS:law have declared victory and, characteristically are misunderstanding it utterly. According to them, the DEA (Digital Economy Act) makes the person who owns the connection responsible for the infringment. This is 100% false. It does not change the sections of the CDPA 1988 in question and if they want to take you to court for financial damages they still cannot make the connection holder liable for them.

 

couldnt agree more.

 

And just to add to what your saying:

 

We dont actually own the connection as we all rent our connections from an internet provider. So to say we own the connection, would be the same as saying we own the house that we rent from a landlord who is infact the real legal owner of the house. So the legal owner of the connection is in fact the Internet provider and not the subscriber who's renting the connection by monthly subscriptions.

 

So any legal case against us that is based on such argument would be flawed and unsuccessful.

[ccsnet]

I posted this yesterday too but it went in to the ether..... An ACS Law ( content used from there web site but trojen not by them ) virus....

 

Bogus piracy virus hits net | THINQ.co.uk

 

Terran

[cashins]

Well that didn't take long did it.

 

Yet again a shoddy piece of legislation, shoved through pronto to keep some vested interests happy, will actually create more problems than it was ever intended to solve.

 

Good news is though, given time it will almost certainly fall flat on it's face in the courts.

 

David

[mrjoolz]

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.

[narkedoff]

Oh dear a certain firm has 2 unpaid county court judgments against it ....... Northampton CCBC, 9/3/2010, case number 0QT18910, £3,556 and from its previous address ....... Newbury Court, 10/05/2007, case number 7NB00477, £5,690. Wonder what they are for, can it be found out easily enough? ........... perhaps unpaid Royal Mail invoices!!!!

Just shows the kind of organisations we have out there administering "justice for their clients"

[zero_flight]

Was the company filling the claim Media C.A.T Ltd by any chance?

 

[Mod edit, commercial links are not allowed, please read the FAQs]

 

They are supposed to be in fiancial trouble anyway.

 

This is nothing but a joke or what?

 

If you want to checkit out yourself search the business directory for Media C.A.T ltd and you will see a full report of the company

Edited April 15, 2010 by zero_flight

[multi]

Er, Was that really a "commercial" link, mods?

 

I would reccomend anyone interested in actually discussing this freely decamp to a certain forum threatened with libel. Also, check out beingthreatened. Google the speculative invoicing guide.

[KimB94]

Hi Everyone, Im 15 years old, female and live with my mother. We are using Sky Broadband and I'm the only person in the house using the internet. Yesterday I got one of the ACS:Law letters with the guy Andrew J.Crossley name on it. Apparently last year I had been using some P2P thingy and downloaded a segment of porn. EXCUSE ME, I have never in my entire life downloaded anything, specially not pornography!

My mum was worried, stressed out & was about to pay up, since it said something to do with court on it, but I stopped her. This whole thing doesn't look legit enough for me, so im here to ask you guys, what do I do?

 

Do I pay?

Do I ignore it and every letter they will send us?

Do I go to the people down town and ask for their advice?

If they take us to court, what the hell do we do, me & my mum are so little knowledge on this! Please reply with your advice & opinions x - 20 days left!

[KimB94]

Can everyone please help me?

Im 15 years old, I live with my mother, Im female and Im the only one using the internet. We use Sky broadband and just yesterday we got the ACS:Law letter by Andrew J. Crossley. We're to pay £495 for downloading some porn movie using a P2P thingy.. EXCUSE ME. I have never i my entire life downloaded anything, especially not pornography! So what do we do? My mother was going to pay up, only because it mentioned the high court, but luckily i stopped her to do some researching.

 

Do I pay up?

Do I ignore every letter they will send to us?

If we go to court, what the hell do we say? Im the only one using the internet in this house.

 

Please give me your advice & opinions, we only have 20 days x

[tp123]

Hi,

 

I recieved one of these letters on Tuesday from ACS:LAW and was initialy shocked because on the face of it, looked pretty serious with court papers and the like. On closer inspection alarm bells started ringing when I read that it was about infringing a copyright by downloading a file. I dont do downloading so was sceptical of it's authenticity. My doubts were confirmed further when it went on to allege that I had "made available to 3rd parties" some kind of pornogrphic movie. The final straw was when they suggested I pay £495 to "settle the matter without court action"

 

I searched for information on this company and eventualy was directed to this forum, which I have to say, is very imformative and has certainly put my mind at ease.

 

I plan to send a one off letter flately denying their outragous allegations and refusing to enter into any further communication with them. There has been mention of some "LOD" templates that I woud like to have a look at just to get an idea of how to structure my response, but I cant seem to find them.

 

Any help and advise would be greatly appreciated.

 

Keep up the good work!

[zero_flight]

Have you contacted your ISP to see if your information has been requested? I did and was told no such request was sent. No court order has been issued to them , and if it had been you would of received a email from them telling you about the infringement of copyright.

[tp123]

No, I havn't contacted ISP yet I think I wil though. As a point of interest, like kimB94 I am also on Sky Broadband. I wander if they send these bulk claims out by ISP? Maybe its the turn of the SKY users?!