Jump to content


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


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4902 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi rkojosh,

 

In answer to your questions:

1) Yes, you will most likely receive another two or three letters after letter number 2 - I was accused of downloading Scooter - Jumping all over the world last year (I didn't think anyone would want to upload that...). After a 5 or 6 letter ping-pong all correspondence ceased (even though the last letter stated that they were filing for a summons).

 

2) They are legally allowed to do it... As stupid as the law is they can send out mass shots like these. What a wonderful legal system we have.

 

3) It's a given that no one would **** on him if he was on fire

 

Oh and finally... The whole "do I reply, don't I" argument.

Whilst I cannot be 100% sure about this, most sources indicate responding to the first letter. Subsequent letters are up to your discretion.

If Madonna would stop adopting third world children and pigs would fly and some of these cases went to court then it would bode better that you responded, but what's the chances of that happening?

 

So after each additional letter you receive, you send back another letter of denial and asking them for no further correspondence - and that’s it? Or is there more to it than that?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 4.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Zero Flight,

 

They make them up. It's outrageous. They're pitched at a level where they guess a reasonable proportion of punters, inexperienced with the law, will pay up hoping it will all "go away", rather than go to the time and expense of employing a solicitor or standing up for themselves and issuing their own denial letters.

 

They have no idea how much (if anything) has been uploaded, so there is no attempt to link the 'damages' to any an actual loss of profit. How could there be? There seem to be a set of pretty standard charges: £495 for movies / pron, £295 for a game, etc. Clearly as the 'guilty' would ALL have uploaded entirely different volumes of data, these charges are not linked any real loss of profit. It's all too much like hard work, even if it were possible.

 

Why should ACS Law care? If people keep paying up, and they never take any (contested) cases to court, they can do what they like - until the SRS or another body intervenes and puts a stop to it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably not. Companies frequently use their solicitors address as their own registered address. Larper could be in any sort of business and may just be clients of ACS.

 

Recently sent a firm LOD myself having received one of the Pron variety demanding £495.00. I anticipate the boringly predictable follow-up with the ludicrous accusation of 'template' usage / and or 'questionaire' in due course.

 

Whilst there seems to be plenty here about LODs, etc, there doesn't seem to be much discussion regarding the level of 'damages' levied by ACS Law

on those who may be guilty?

 

In the event you DID upload (say) a film. How many copies would you have uploaded (just a partial copy? one copy? more?). Remember your upload bandwidth will be significantly less than your download.

 

What does that equate to in lost profit? On one £15 DVD - less than £10. Plus costs - a quid or so for the court paperwork, standard letter, etc?

 

So EVEN IF you were guilty - why on earth would you pay these ridiculous amounts of 'damages'? Why not offer, say, £50, in full and final settlement? Obviously ACS would try and extract more, but would they have a leg to stand on if you had offered them an entirely realistic (even generous?) sum?

 

Ill think youll find that their arguement is that if you uploaded one piece of copyrighted material and that was then sitting on a P2P site and was downloaded say 100 times then they've lost 100 x £5 = £500, at least I think thats what they are saying.

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Ill think youll find... that was then sitting on a P2P site....at least I think thats what they are saying"

 

To be blunt then, I don't think you do know what you're saying at all. With Bittorrent you do not upload data to some remote location and park it there for all and sundry to grab in sequence like a sweetshop - you share it in real time from your drive.

 

If that is the extent of your knowledge, then I would recommend some research if I were you.

 

The reality is that most download far more than they upload. If a 'normal' download of anything is 1 copy - then, on average, a 'normal' upload is likely to be less than one copy.

 

Nevertheless, if you just fall over and accept whatever "they are saying", clearly you should pay up whatever they say too? Which is their whole game, isn't it?

Edited by HenriIV
Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a mention of ACS in the Lords recently. Things are moving, but as usual... VERRRY slowly. Lords Hansard text for 9 Jun 201009 Jun 2010 (pt 0001)

 

As ACS law applied for the IP address information using the Norwich Pharmacal Order, by the terms of that order they are obliged to provide information as to how many of these have resulted in court proceedings when requested by the Data Owners (ie your ISP).

As it is now over a year since ACS first applications, the ISP's should be asking this question.

If they haven't then they should be reminded of this by everyone whose personal details have been given to a conman and a bully, and the fact that not one person has been taken to court on the information that they have supplied demonstrates that this is a complete [problem] and a bluff, and this might just give them a reason to contest the order.

IF YOU HAVEN'T DONE IT ALREADY, DEMAND THAT YOUR ISP OBTAIN THIS INFORMATION FROM ACS LAW.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Ill think youll find... that was then sitting on a P2P site....at least I think thats what they are saying"

 

To be blunt then, I don't think you do know what you're saying at all. With Bittorrent you do not upload data to some remote location and park it there for all and sundry to grab in sequence like a sweetshop - you share it in real time from your drive.

 

If that is the extent of your knowledge, then I would recommend some research if I were you.

 

The reality is that most download far more than they upload. If a 'normal' download of anything is 1 copy - then, on average, a 'normal' upload is likely to be less than one copy.

 

Nevertheless, if you just fall over and accept whatever "they are saying", clearly you should pay up whatever they say too? Which is their whole game, isn't it?

 

As I work in IT Support I am well aware of how P2P works thanks you very much, I know that the actual (whole) copyrighted files in question here do not sit in a central location, although the actual 'torrent' files do reside in a central location (and many courts across the world have taken this fact to be enough to close P2P companies down and/or fine them, Napster, Pirate Bay, being the most high profile).

 

But the end result is very much like your sweetshop analogy, to the end users, the reality is, we can all go online and grab all the 'sweeties' we want.

 

Anyway, my main point is still that in my opinion, ACS would use the same arguement in court (if they ever had the balls to show up), their claims have never been that you downloaded a single file, it is that the file was available from your IP address for others to download, thus depriving their clients of a certain amount of money.

 

I did not say in my post that people should roll over and pay up and am puzzled at how you could reach that conclusion.

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

"ACS would use the same arguement in court..."

 

That's my point - ACS are full of arguements, claims, counter-claims and the like - that's their business.

 

That does NOT necessarily mean they are 'right', acceptable, realistic, reasonable, have any basis in reality, or anything else. Just because Crossley has decided to demand £495, or £295 or whatever, does not necessarily mean it is an appropriate figure.

 

Crossley is JUST a solicitor, not some sort of judge, jury and executioner as some seem to believe.

 

Until he is challenged in Court by a Defence, or the SRA takes some action, Crossley can continue making whatever arguements and claims he likes unopposed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So based on Andys theroy if l put something on my comp then they could demand l pay the company for the fact its on my comp. What if l had already paid the company for the said item as now dvds are comming with a downloadable disc that you can put on any hard drive.

OFT debt collection guidance

 

Please remember the only stupid question is the one you dont ask so dont worry about asking the stupid questions.

 

Essex girl in pc world looking 4 curtains 4 her pc,the assistant says u dont need curtains 4 a computer!!Essex girl says,''HELLOOO!! i,ve got WINDOWS!!'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So based on Andys theroy if l put something on my comp then they could demand l pay the company for the fact its on my comp. What if l had already paid the company for the said item as now dvds are comming with a downloadable disc that you can put on any hard drive.

 

I believe thats the case, (well, not just in your comp, but in the folder used by P2P programs), even If you've bought the DVD/CD in question,. that is for your own personal use, it would be a breach of copyright if you:-

 

a) made copies and gave them to your friends

or

b) Store the file on a location on your HD that was connected to P2P traffic, thus allowing people to download the file from you (of course in reality they are only downloading 'bits' from you and 'bits' from other users).

 

Note: b) is often refered to (wrongly, even by me in my earlier post :|) as 'uploading' a file, although the reality is you don't actually physically do that.

 

What ACS are 'claiming' (although with not much to back them up in law) is that by having the file in question sitting on your hard drive and available to P2P users is the same as you standing outside HMV giving away CD's, punters then take the CD from you instead of buying it in HMV, depriving the artists (Scooter ! :)) of money.

 

ACS's 'proof' is that at some point Digital Protect or whoever they use, identified the file on a P2P site and one of the IP addresses was eventually tracked down to you, or at least, your home, of course a lot can go wrong in this tracking down process.

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is stupid as the DVD is allowing for digital copy or summing will look it up more later on one of the discs

OFT debt collection guidance

 

Please remember the only stupid question is the one you dont ask so dont worry about asking the stupid questions.

 

Essex girl in pc world looking 4 curtains 4 her pc,the assistant says u dont need curtains 4 a computer!!Essex girl says,''HELLOOO!! i,ve got WINDOWS!!'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is stupid as the DVD is allowing for digital copy or summing will look it up more later on one of the discs

 

99% of DVD's have CSS copy protection on them so they can't be copied, go try copy a DVD onto your hard drive and it wont be playable, it will be all garbage.

 

Of course since the invention of DeCSS over 10 years ago, there has been plenty of software to enable you to work round this but still, technically illegal.

 

There have been some new DVD's that also contain a digital copy for use on your PC or mobile, (new Family Guy for example), but there are still strict rules on how many times it can be copied, etc and it still (in theory) for your own personal use.

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

im aproching the 21 day dead line to reply back to the first letter, do i reply or just leave it and save wasting my time writing a letter to this idiot.

 

Although the grounds for their claim are suspect and it's doubful that anything will ever come of it, bear in mind that he has sent his letter of cliam in accordance with the Code of Practice for pre-action protocol. In order that you would be viewed by the courts (should it ever get there!)to have complied with the code yourself, I would advise responding with a letter. This was also the advise of Which? legal editor when I spoke to her.

 

If you google: code of practice for pre-action in intellectual property disputes and check out section 4, it tells you what the letter of response should include.

 

Regards

 

TP123

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just about to send off my first LOD and was looking again at the discrepancy between the ACS letter and the High Court paperwork.

 

The person mentioned in the ACS letter, Allan Eshuijs, did indeed co-write Evacuate the Dancefloor but the name "Allan Kopie" who is mentioned on the Court paperwork doesn't seem to exist. Is it a coincidence that the band Cascada are German and that the word "Kopie" is German for "copy"???

 

Anyway, seeing as this High Court paperwork was issued with the name of a person who either does not exist or at the very least has no claim of copyright, then surely this should have been thrown out on this basis alone!?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Although the grounds for their claim are suspect and it's doubful that anything will ever come of it, bear in mind that he has sent his letter of cliam in accordance with the Code of Practice for pre-action protocol. In order that you would be viewed by the courts (should it ever get there!)to have complied with the code yourself, I would advise responding with a letter. This was also the advise of Which? legal editor when I spoke to her.

 

If you google: code of practice for pre-action in intellectual property disputes and check out section 4, it tells you what the letter of response should include.

 

Regards

 

TP123

 

Just another thought............how can ACS prove that you received their letter of claim? What I am saying is, if people receive the claim and do nothing, surely nothing more can come out of it other than ACS having to send the same letter again using recorded delivery!?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just another thought............how can ACS prove that you received their letter of claim? What I am saying is, if people receive the claim and do nothing, surely nothing more can come out of it other than ACS having to send the same letter again using recorded delivery!?

 

I thought this when I first started investigating this nonsense! I remember reading somwhere (sorry can't remember the source att) that they don't have to prove they sent it as any court "assumes that if a letter is sent, it would have been delivered"

 

Strange, I know, but its probably to do with the balance of probablities again..."on balance, it is probable that the defendant recieved the letter" or somthing like that.

 

Any clarifcation would be welcomed!

Link to post
Share on other sites

ACS:LAW

Andrew J Crossley

20 Hanover Sq,

London,

W1S 1JY todays 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.

As far as I am aware, there is no law in the UK under which you could properly hold me responsible for an infringement occurring via my internet connection, without either my knowledge or permission. I would be interested to hear your legal basis for attempting to do so.

Please inform your clients that if they wish to pursue this matter, I will seek to recover all my costs to the maximum permitted by the Civil Procedurelink3.gif Rules. The signaturelink3.gif of the undersigned confirms the statement provided to be accurate and legally binding under the terms required by pre-action protocol in civil law.

Yours Faithfully

Your name

 

is this the one you mean does everything look ok with it

thanks dan

Link to post
Share on other sites

ACS:LAW

 

is this the one you mean does everything look ok with it

thanks dan

 

Yeah thats the one mate. personally I chopped out some stuff and added some bits specific to me, but this gives a rough idea.

 

Be prepared however, to get a reply saying they "dont accept your letter as it's a template." This is a standard response and is no doubt for the purpose of keeping the "communications channel" open to try and extract more information from you, and/or to allow them to up the stakes and demand a higher amount of money.

Link to post
Share on other sites

recieved a letter from acs law a couple of months ago.sent a lod and about three weeks later recieved a letter saying that there has been no payment or response from me .my letter was sent by recorded delivery.is this what they do deny recieving a letter from the victims of this legal [problem].

Link to post
Share on other sites

recieved a letter from acs law a couple of months ago.sent a lod and about three weeks later recieved a letter saying that there has been no payment or response from me .my letter was sent by recorded delivery.is this what they do deny recieving a letter from the victims of this legal [problem].

 

Could be their way of dismissing your reply. Can't you check with post office to see if they received a signature for your letter and take it from there?

ps. email acs with your LOD

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4902 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...