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

[captain-123]

5 people who ignored all of the letters and didn't turn up at court so the judge had no choice but to give a default judgement.

 

Number of people who sent off LOD who have been taken to court = 0

 

Follow the advice in the speculative invoicing handbook.

 

stanwixman are you best mates with a Mr Crossley by chance? You seem to be ignoring very good advice and constantly ask people to check his site.

Edited June 8, 2010 by captain-123

[nosymoose]

Hi Guys

 

thanks for all the info, having read through the whole thread and other sites I have seen that they are declining template letters. Many people have said it is irrelevant whether its a template or not as i have in fact replied. So if i have sent a template letter and they then reply saying they will not accept it should i just re-send them it? and back and forth and so on and so on until they just get sick?

 

evacuate the dancefloor - as if I'd listen to that tosh let alone download it

 

Cheers All

[Scooby Doo69]

Hi Guys

 

thanks for all the info, having read through the whole thread and other sites I have seen that they are declining template letters. Many people have said it is irrelevant whether its a template or not as i have in fact replied. So if i have sent a template letter and they then reply saying they will not accept it should i just re-send them it? and back and forth and so on and so on until they just get sick?

 

evacuate the dancefloor - as if I'd listen to that tosh let alone download it

 

Cheers All

 

You are advised to get your own legal advice as no one on here as far as I am aware a solicitor, but it's ironic that ACS are using a template to deny a template LOL

 

At the end of the day, it's the facts that count. If you use a template a beer mat or a stone tablet, it's irrelevant. A letter of denial is a letter of denial. A Court isn't going to punish you for using your initiative to get your facts across.

 

For me a single letter of denial stating no further correspondance will be entered into should be sufficient.

[Scooby Doo69]

File sharing litigation results

 

saw this on their website and now im panicing . Aparantly acs have successfully received over 80% of payments from letters sent out. Other sites on the net say five people have been prosicuted as they didnt turn up in court so awards were made against them on default. However if they didnt turn up how many people have turned up in court in these cases?

 

You are taking the ACS propaganda as the single truth. The same web site stated last Year that they were moving to new offices, about to issue loads more Court cases and increasing the size of their team.

 

The fact is that if ACS had won a single case in Court then it would be on the front page of their web site. Their postal address is still the same, so no new massive office, etc.

 

Before ACS Law, Davenport Lyons are reputed to have taken some people to Court, choosing the easy options of those who had ignored correspondance and/or decided to not turn up in Court, so the judge had no option, but to settle the case in their favour by default.

 

Check out the beingthreatened.com web site and read their speculative invoicing download for more information and the best cause of action to pursue.

 

Either way, get your own independent legal advice.

 

ACS know this is good business and easy money. They want you to pay up. The more people like you that do so without asking questions the more profit for them. Paying up is also an admission of guilt even if you pay up to make the whole thing go away. What's to stop you being a target again in the future?

[heronway]

please could you send me a letter of denial as well as I am struggling to find one. thanks heronway

[Scooby Doo69]

please could you send me a letter of denial as well as I am struggling to find one. thanks heronway

 

Whilst a template is okay to use, it's better in your own words. Check out beingthreatened.com and their speculative handbook where you will find a sample template LOD.

[tp123]

File sharing litigation results

 

saw this on their website and now im panicing . Aparantly acs have successfully received over 80% of payments from letters sent out. Other sites on the net say five people have been prosicuted as they didnt turn up in court so awards were made against them on default. However if they didnt turn up how many people have turned up in court in these cases?

 

stanwixman,

 

This forum is to aid people with genuine concerns in getting help and advice so that they may make an informed decision on how to deal

with ACS Law. It also enables people to impart any experience and knowledge they may have to help others.

 

It seems apparent from your posts that you either have a vested interest in ACS Law and it's activities or that you are incapable of taking advice.

 

Please think carefuly before posting any more random coments as you could potentialy influence others in making a decision that they could well regret.

[heronway]

I too have received the letter for "Evacuate the Dancefloor" and will be sending my LOD on monday. Is this just the same old all over again (looking at previous posts), and i apparently did this in October 2009!!!

 

could you send me or tell me where to get a LOD from as I am struggling

[tp123]

You are taking the ACS propaganda as the single truth. The same web site stated last Year that they were moving to new offices, about to issue loads more Court cases and increasing the size of their team.

 

They also recently claimed on their website that they had teamed up with a US firm called US Copyrights Group. This US firm publicly denied the relationship last week and the ACS Law website was quickly changed (3rd June 2010)

 

The SRA's code of conduct states:

 

7.01 Misleading or inaccurate publicity - Publicity must not be misleading or inaccurate.

 

Haven't ACS:LAW contravened this by falsely claiming on their website that they have formed a working relationship with US Copyright Group?

 

1.06 Public confidence - You must not behave in a way that is likely to diminish the trust the public places in you or the legal profession.

 

Don't they do this everyday they are still in operation?!

[tp123]

@heronway

 

Also,

 

Have just found;

 

1st LOD template on page 107 of this forum.

2nd LOD template on page 106 of this forum.

 

Hope this helps.

[numberonedon]

ok wat a thread i am a new member and ive had the acs letter FIVE pages with my ip hash of the downloaded file address everything wanting like 395 pounds wtf is goiung on this andrew crossley has been charged with actions unbefitting a solicitor TWICE so i think this is a gross misconducting way to practice the wife is going mental coz its in her name so plz wat do i do?

ignore/respond what?any help wud be very gratefully accepted as the wifes not happy saying look its legit no nookie for u sod pants??but the thing is wen it supoosedly happened i was on wireless with different isp and unsecured wifi wen i rang i asked for the dude they said hes not available well i said i wanna talk to a senior solicitor and the bird on the phone said she was?how is this poss if ther is only 1 active registrd solicitor there?if u can call him that

[Valuev]

Thanks for this forum/thread There is no need to feel alone in this

I also recieved a letter from ACS Law clearly you can see the high court letter is a fake with all the crossing outs with different handwriting and dodgy fading stamp marks . Clear 17 Feb stamp, Draft crossed out and a scribble date 21 (unreadable month) 2010

I know the court order which was with mine was legit because I spent a couple of hours ringing the 'Chancery division at the high court' and eventually got through to the guy who is looking after it, not the judge that signed it, but was assured it was legit and he pulled it up and read it back to me.

 

Mine also had crossing outs and about 7 stamps all over and looked 'fake' thats why I decided to check, if they were using 'fake' court orders they would be in 'HUGE' trouble. Ring and check yourself, and if it is fake, then its good night Vienna for ACS:-)

 

Like I mentioned before, getting diddly squat from me:lol:

[Sol]

Well I've spent all of yesterday and today reading through this thread before posting and I'm glad I did.

 

My mum contacted me yesterday saying she was being sued for £295 for allegedly downloading Evacuate the Dancefloor (I assume it's Cascada). It appears that this 'firm' change the type of file they are suing for and send out letters in bulk for the same files.

 

My mum's emailed the SRA a complaint and I got her to email ACS right away yesterday, but I'll get her to type a letter instead after reading this.

 

Surely, though, after over a year of harrassing people like this, the relevant authorities can get rid of the red tape and take action against this 'firm'?

[tp123]

Perhaps this is another reason why ACS Law have never taken anyone to court:

 

Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 CHAPTER 48

 

Part 1 Chapter VI

Remedies for Infringement

 

Rights and remedies of copyright owner

 

97 Provisions as to damages in infringement action.

 

(1) Where in an action for infringement of copyright it is shown that at the time of the infringement the defendant did not know, and had no reason to believe, that copyright subsisted in the work to which the action relates, the plaintiff is not entitled to damages against him, but without prejudice to any other remedy.

 

Taken from Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 CHAPTER 48 [online] available from http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1988/ukpga_19880048_en_5#pt1-ch6-pb1-l1g97

Edited June 8, 2010 by tp123
typo

[zero_flight]

Why or why is ACS:LAW refusing to send proof of ownership of copyright from their client?

 

Because their client doesn't own the copyright mayby lol

 

My legal advisor told me to use the template letter for the first and second LOD, I will be adding this to my second LOD and so they will probably refuse it again but tough **** .

[erraticmemory]

Anyone know what we can do if we've already paid? Had a look back but not seen anyone else posting regarding this... been told to send in a letter of retraction (retracting the signed undertakings) but would that even make a difference now? Don't fancy having the lost £300!

[stanwixman]

stanwixman,

 

This forum is to aid people with genuine concerns in getting help and advice so that they may make an informed decision on how to deal

with ACS Law. It also enables people to impart any experience and knowledge they may have to help others.

 

It seems apparent from your posts that you either have a vested interest in ACS Law and it's activities or that you are incapable of taking advice.

 

Please think carefuly before posting any more random coments as you could potentialy influence others in making a decision that they could well regret.

 

TP123 I dont have a vested interest in ACS law and I am quite well capable of taking advice. I am just trying to get answers as I said in the above post panicking. I just posted a link to the web site to show people on this forum what ACS law was saying and hoping someone unlike you would take a look and help answer the questions. I dont see how this makes me incapable or have a vested interest or influence people into making any decisions eh? All i want is some help in this matter like everyone else thats all . Please be more considerate in future replies thanks.

[sugarkane2010]

So we received the generic Cascada upload letter yesterday. Found this site very helpful, will be sending the letter of denial.

 

My question is though, has anyone noticed that on some peoples letters, the name is 'Allan Kopie' but on others (including mine) it is 'Allan Eshuijs'. That definately ain't no spelling mistake.

 

Also been in touch with SRA, Watchdog and Legal Complaints. Think it is absolutely disgusting that this is 'legal'.

 

Noticed a few people posted saying they had anxiety/depression and/or family problems. The last thing these people (and anyone else who hasn't been uploading for that matter) need is some ****** [causing problems] money 'legally'.

 

Will also be contacting my local MP. Read somewhere too that apparently the guy in the last parliament that deals with all of the copyright kind of stuff was made aware of all this, but did nothing about it. Pretty pathetic considering that's what he was paid his (presumably) huge salary for. Disgusting.

[tp123]

stanixman,

Fair one - It comes across badly.

 

But, in my defence if you read back over your posts you will see that despite several good replies to your posts you continued to make comments such as "they say that iSP info is sufficent evidence and that i cant claim it was someone else etc as it was up to me to secure my routher. also a publican was fined 8 grand as somenone else was downloading music using free wifI SO THIS must of gone to court" and "He says people are paying up and that he will take offenders to court ? Please help as im cacking it here - i cant afford £295 let alone the thousands he says could be awarded if it goes to court? check out the web site?" You then posted a reply with a link to the ACS Law website.

 

With this in mind, do you not agree that;

 

(a) On the face of it and to the many other people who have been involved in this a while and have put time into investigation, research, reporting and

advising others like yourself. People who have witnessed on this very forum attempts by ACS Law masquerading as victims to steer people in the wrong

direction, that it may have seemed a bit suspicious?

 

(b) Some of your comments may have been interperated as scaremongering and leading - a tacit used by ACS Law on this forum in the past and a tactic that forms the very basis upon which their scheme is effective.

 

Maybe if you had spent more time reading the thread, perhaps even from the begining, your posts would have been worded differently?

 

So I'm sorry "someone like me" took your posts the wrong way and I will endeavour "to be more considerate in future replies" if only so that I may continue to help others that receive these worrying letters.

 

Regards

[8of9]

I've been reading the many posts about the reciept of a letter of claim since April as it was then that I received my first letter. I sent a LOD like many before me. Now just received my second letter as my first looked like a template!. Sent second LOD. Now just waiting.

One point that I would like to make is that the "DATA" accompanying the claim gives the file ID of the alledged download/upload. I googled this file ID and found it to be available for download on several torrent sites. If ACS Law are acting for the copyright holders, and they are concerned about the "Intellectual Property Rights", why is this file still available? Why do the copyright holders allow it to remain so?

I believe that most Torrent providers have a facility for copyright holder to have a file removed. As this file is still available some 12 months later is it safe to assume that either:

a) They are not the copyright holders and can't request its removal.

b) They are deliberately leaving the file there as a way to "generate" more revenue.

c) Its just a trap

[Scooby Doo69]

I've been reading the many posts about the reciept of a letter of claim since April as it was then that I received my first letter. I sent a LOD like many before me. Now just received my second letter as my first looked like a template!. Sent second LOD. Now just waiting.

One point that I would like to make is that the "DATA" accompanying the claim gives the file ID of the alledged download/upload. I googled this file ID and found it to be available for download on several torrent sites. If ACS Law are acting for the copyright holders, and they are concerned about the "Intellectual Property Rights", why is this file still available? Why do the copyright holders allow it to remain so?

I believe that most Torrent providers have a facility for copyright holder to have a file removed. As this file is still available some 12 months later is it safe to assume that either:

a) They are not the copyright holders and can't request its removal.

b) They are deliberately leaving the file there as a way to "generate" more revenue.

c) Its just a trap

 

What Torrent sites are you referring to? Some will act right away on a take down request, others like The Pirate Bay will ignore any requests.

[Scooby Doo69]

Anyone know what we can do if we've already paid? Had a look back but not seen anyone else posting regarding this... been told to send in a letter of retraction (retracting the signed undertakings) but would that even make a difference now? Don't fancy having the lost £300!

 

I really think you should take legal advice on this one as in my opinion trying to get any money back from ACS will be a non-starter, but there is no harm in trying. You could cancel payment if it's not too late and send off a LOD explaining why. If the already have your money though, then they mostly likely accept it as an admission of guilt.

[zero_flight]

I've been reading the many posts about the reciept of a letter of claim since April as it was then that I received my first letter. I sent a LOD like many before me. Now just received my second letter as my first looked like a template!. Sent second LOD. Now just waiting.

One point that I would like to make is that the "DATA" accompanying the claim gives the file ID of the alledged download/upload. I googled this file ID and found it to be available for download on several torrent sites. If ACS Law are acting for the copyright holders, and they are concerned about the "Intellectual Property Rights", why is this file still available? Why do the copyright holders allow it to remain so?

I believe that most Torrent providers have a facility for copyright holder to have a file removed. As this file is still available some 12 months later is it safe to assume that either:

a) They are not the copyright holders and can't request its removal.

b) They are deliberately leaving the file there as a way to "generate" more revenue.

c) Its just a trap

 

It's like I said before, If you contact ACS:LAW and request the proof of ownership they say "You do not have the rights to such information", so in otherwords their clients don't own the rights.

 

Without this proof they don't have a case LOL

[numberonedon]

rite the letter we hav al had is re to evacuate the dancefloor by cascada and yes it is all real court order everything and it is thru a tracker that we hav been allegedly pulled up on tghis as staff at a site we hav a ongoing problem with trackers wich are used on the torrents so we hav implemented a list of banned ones wich are no longer to be used for the safetey of all our mebers and visiters as its a public site so best be safe than sorry BUT if u look at the letter u have got the is 2 types of number codes one called file id and one called guid if u type the file id into ur google it will bring up the album/song in question so u can inform the sites it is on the file id is reffered to as the hash code but anyway i hope this helops in sumway as sum11 said shud they inform the sites the go for it enter the hash(file id on u paperwork)but in future IF u did download or do from torrent sites chek the trackers on the file u download ther shud be them on the file download page coz me i most proberly did download it but seriously cant rember also using peerblock or peerguardian helps immensly so again i hope this helps here is a list of banned trackers wat we have banned so if u c these dont download

http://denis.stalker.h3q.com/announce

http://tracker.ilibr.org:6969/announce

http://exodus.desync.com:6969/an​nounce

http://tracker.irc.su/announce

http://tracker.irc.su:80/announc​e

http://tracker.prq.to/announce

http://red.tracker.prq.to:80/ann​ounce

http://94.75.205.147:80/announce

http://tracker.kalkin.de:6969/an​nounce

http://66.172.60.1-66.172.60.25​​5

http://66.177.58.1-66.177.58.25​​5

http://66.180.205.1-66.180.205.​​255

http://209.204.61.1-209.204.61.​​255

http://216.151.155.1-216.151.15​​5.255

ttp://tracker.to:2710/announce

[peter_piper316]

I suspect ACS' customers of not being genuine copyright holders too, for all the reasons previously discussed.

I'm intrigued about the NPO application process though. Shouldn't the supposed copyright holders prove themselves as being such when applying to the court for the NPO? Is this questioned/investigated by the court prior to issuing the NPO?

If not, well, anybody could request an NPO based on a list of IP Address that have allegedly done something wrong.