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

[queen-peanut]

hey all. ok, like all of you, i have recieved a letter stating i owe them 375 for a ministry of sound annual downloaded on the 27th december last year. here's what i did. i called them to tell them i never downloaded this album as i enjoy the joyful sounds of metallica, told them that i followed legal sky procedure and place a password upon my modem (netgear) which isn't the greatest piece of kit, i told them this can be easily hacked within 20 mins using 2 pieces of software ( my husband has his cisco cert) they told me i had to pay 375 or be taken to court i replied with ''fine, but you will recieve at least £1 a month after i have filled in a means form'' they stated the minimum was £50 a month, i responded with ''take me to court, me dads a barrister'' upon which i also stated that if they could PROVE that i personally had downloaded the tracks then i would personally pay the cost of the album not the extortionate amount they'd quoted. they said it wasn't feasable. i now refuse to give them anything. they can't send me to prison, but they can take me to small claims, which in turn costs them more, considering (by the looks of it) there are hundreds of us, and to get all that money back......typically isn't worth it, they WILL drop it, i told em they'd get 50 quid at the end of the month, when i move house (which they don't know) plus when i also drop sky like a ton of bricks. i shall be contacting offcom and bbc watchdog on monday morning, as this isn't illegal but it sure has hell ain't legal! its extortion, and if played correctly could work out in my favour as a doctors note can sign me off with stress anxiety and depression which in turn i can claim off them with ''emotional distress''........all else fails ring em up actin as thou your deaf! how can u hear music if ur deaf! good luck all xxxx

[Huff&Puff]

To all the new members, the standard advice is to send a single letter of denial, and then ignore them after that, unless they actually issue court papers (there is more chance of being struck by lightning).

 

My own opinion is that it is better to just write a LoD in your own words, if you use a template you will just get an idiotic response saying that they won't accept a template

 

IMO, they will not actually take a defended case to court, there are a million defences, and they have lost in other European countries where this has been tried. It is jut a variant of the private parking [problem], and nothing to get worked up about.

[benk103]

But... surely I can't be the only one wondering 'can you send an LoD if you have actually downloaded the file in question?'

[mos law suit!!!]

i got the same letter yesterday! they want £375 for the annual 2010 fron november, they said in the letter they got the info on the ip address from a company called Easynet Limited!

 

anyone got ant advice on what to do???

[HelloKitty101]

I got my letter today from ACS:Law for downloading the Cascada album, and bloody hell they sure scared the living day lights out of me. I feel alot better after reading up on this matter on the forums, but it still unsettling and I am still a bit worried.

 

This is what my letter says incase it different from anyone else because if I remember correctly on the other forum the letters never accused you personally but on my letter it kinda does.

 

Based on the evidence supplied to us, your internet connection has been used to make the Work available on P2P network(s) in infringement of our clients' copyright and in breach of sections 16 and 20 of the Act. Where our clients' work has been copied on to the hard drive of a personal or office computer used to make the Work available on p2p networks, there will also have been a breach of provisions of section 16(1)(a) and 17 of the Act

 

This is the scary part

 

Our clients' evidence demonstrates that you are responsible for committing one or more of these infringements, either directly yourself or by you authorising (inadvertently or otherwise) third parties to do the same. This gives our client grounds to bring a civil claim against you, amongst other things damages for the infringement of copyright. Our client hold you responsible for committing these infringements and subject to either satisfactory resolution of this matter or any submission you may make, we are instructed to pursue this matter, which may ultimately mean a legal action being instituted against you in a civil court.

Can anyone confirm they got the same letter?

[thomas2008]

How come it is the same album mos the annual 2010 and all in the november december time also how can they fine you when you have only downloaded it and not uploaded it smells a bit fishy to me:evil:

[trixy11]

I too have received a letter today from gallant macmillan for the same mos album in december. God they must be gonna rake it in off all of these £375 bills!! Dunnno what to do, my heads done in looking on tinternet for inspiration :-?

[8of9]

Here's a little bit of news I found interesting "http://www.bcs.org/server.php?show=conWebDoc.36277" . Lets hope other ISPs jump on the bandwagon .

 

Dont think that this will help people who have received letters of claim as they have been obtained through a Norwich Pharmacal Order (NPO). The NPO is what the ISP's need to challenge.

The Digital Economy Bill only received Royal Assent on 8th April 2010, some of it it became law on June 8th 2010, the full process comes into force once OFCOMS regulatory code is approved by parliaiment.

Part of says:

Obligation to notify subscribers of reported infringements Show EN

After section 124 of the Communications Act 2003 insert—

 

“Online infringement of copyright: obligations of internet service providers

 

124A Obligation to notify subscribers of copyright infringement reports

 

(1) This section applies if it appears to a copyright owner that—

(a) a subscriber to an internet access service has infringed the owner’s copyright by means of the service; or

(b) a subscriber to an internet access service has allowed another person to use the service, and that other person has infringed the owner’s copyright by means of the service.

(2) The owner may make a copyright infringement report to the internet service provider who provided the internet access service if a code in force under section 124C or 124D (an “initial obligations code”) allows the owner to do so.

(3) A “copyright infringement report” is a report that—

(a) states that there appears to have been an infringement of the owner’s copyright;

(b) includes a description of the apparent infringement;

© includes evidence of the apparent infringement that shows the subscriber’s IP address and the time at which the evidence was gathered;

(d) is sent to the internet service provider within the period of 1 month beginning with the day on which the evidence was gathered; and

(e) complies with any other requirement of the initial obligations code.

(4) An internet service provider who receives a copyright infringement report must notify the subscriber of the report if the initial obligations code requires the provider to do so.

(5) A notification under subsection (4) must be sent to the subscriber within the period of 1 month beginning with the day on which the provider receives the report.

(6) A notification under subsection (4) must include—

(a) a statement that the notification is sent under this section in response to a copyright infringement report;

(b) the name of the copyright owner who made the report;

© a description of the apparent infringement;

(d) evidence of the apparent infringement that shows the subscriber’s IP address and the time at which the evidence was gathered;

(e) information about subscriber appeals and the grounds on which they may be made;

(f) information about copyright and its purpose;

(g) advice, or information enabling the subscriber to obtain advice, about how to obtain lawful access to copyright works;

(h) advice, or information enabling the subscriber to obtain advice, about steps that a subscriber can take to protect an internet access service from unauthorised use; and

(i) anything else that the initial obligations code requires the notification to include.

(7) For the purposes of subsection (6)(h) the internet service provider must take into account the suitability of different protection for subscribers in different circumstances.

(8) The things that may be required under subsection (6)(i), whether in general or in a particular case, include in particular—

(a) a statement that information about the apparent infringement may be kept by the internet service provider;

(b) a statement that the copyright owner may require the provider to disclose which copyright infringement reports made by the owner to the provider relate to the subscriber;

© a statement that, following such a disclosure, the copyright owner may apply to a court to learn the subscriber’s identity and may bring proceedings against the subscriber for copyright infringement; and

(d) where the requirement for the provider to send the notification arises partly because of a report that has already been the subject of a notification under subsection (4), a statement that the number of copyright infringement reports relating to the subscriber may be taken into account for the purposes of any technical measures.

(9) In this section “notify”, in relation to a subscriber, means send a notification to the electronic or postal address held by the internet service provider for the subscriber (and sections 394 to 396 do not apply).”

 

READ IT IN FULL Digital Economy Act 2010 (c. 24)

 

There might be a "Bandwagon" here but it isn't on our behalf!

 

It seems to me that this bill puts the onus on the ISP's to act on any alleged copyright infringements from rights holders who provide evidence that their copyright has been infringed. This should stop (I think, as I aint no lawyer) individual consumers and IP addresses revceiving letters of claim from the likes of ACS Law.

So its very gallant of BT to join TALKTALK challenging this bill now when it is going to effect them directly.

Where have they been since this all this started?? Where have they and all the other ISP's been when their customers have been threatened?? Why has there been no challenges to any court orders by any ISP until now? (TALKTALK excepted who have resisted throughout) I can imagine that the other ISP's will crawl out of the woodwork and also challenge this bill now it means that it is they who will have to police this.

What would be interesting to find out is what part of this bill is being challenged, and why. And if successful what effect this has on the situation now and in the future.

[boardtoday1234]

Hi all just found this forum after receiving a letter today for the Cascada-Evacuate The Dancefloor track i supposidly donwloaded back in September 2009.

same as rest wanting the £295 payment to settle - part of me was thinking to pay to get rid of as to much on with family to concentrate on but on other hand thought if pay this what else will they say i have done - don't want ten of these letters to pay!

 

My court order like ones i read on pages 130's is from 17th feb 2010 still - but now there is a manual crossing out of the name Allan Kopie to have allan eshuijs - surely thats not legal to alter a court document to a different name!

 

thinking of following prev people and sening a LOD - has anyone had much experience of this how long does it go on for and do you just ignore after 2nd LOD.

 

the letters state that got info of my IP from Be un limited but i am with o2. O2 is on the front of the court order but they have said got my details from be un limited?? or they the same company or are their letters utter rubbish?

 

bit worried by this letter with having 2 young kids cannot afford to pay or get took to courtbut feel if pay will just mean more letters for different tracks etc that know nothign about.

[randomuser]

Received a letter today from Gallant Macmillan. I'll hold my hands up and say I've downloaded the file, but I'm pretty worried - does this go down as a criminal offence, and as such on your criminal record?

MATE I AM SENDING YOU A PM NOW - READ IT ASAP, SERIOUSLY.

 

NEW PEOPLE TO THE FORUMS - IF YOU ARE GOING TO SIGN UP, FOR GOD SAKE CREATE A NEW USER NAME THAT HAS NO ASSOCIATION WITH ANYTHING ELSE YOU DO ON THE INTERNET - READ THE SPEC INVOICING HANDBOOK AND YOU WILL ALL UNDERSTAND WHY.....

[lostinspace333]

To all the new members, the standard advice is to send a single letter of denial, and then ignore them after that, unless they actually issue court papers (there is more chance of being struck by lightning).

 

My own opinion is that it is better to just write a LoD in your own words, if you use a template you will just get an idiotic response saying that they won't accept a template

 

IMO, they will not actually take a defended case to court, there are a million defences, and they have lost in other European countries where this has been tried. It is jut a variant of the private parking [problem], and nothing to get worked up about.

 

what makes me laugh about the so called soliciters is that they are based bang in central london you would think theyre some top notch solicitors. the letter we received today looks like it was made by a 15 year old on word and it looks highly unprofessional. also it states that they 'prefer' not to take it to court and would like to settle it ie want us to pay. seems like harassment and bullying IMO.

 

can someone also send a link to where an example of a lod can be seen for a guide. thank you.

[confused10]

I've also had this letter from gallant mcmillian yesterday accusing me of download the ministry of sound annual 2010 dating 23.12.09 via bittorrent!and are asking for a payment of £375!! Wish i ain't got!

 

Can some please give me some advice on what to do!?

Do i phone them? Or write them a letter?

[chelsea2010]

I too got my letter regarding Cascada yesterday also with the name changed on the court order. Another thing I find strange is the proof they give from my ISP provider is that the file name was "UK Top 40 Singles Chart 13-09-2209" and does not mention Cascada. I did not download such file anyway and it is not on my PC, my worry is that one of my kids may have downloaded it or part of it and deleted it.

[Nelly070]

Deleted

Edited July 20, 2010 by Nelly070

[zero_flight]

Hi,

I got this same letter from Gallant Macmillan this morning, although they are claiming that I made MOS The annual 2010 available for download in November.

I do have the album on my computer as I ripped it to put on Itunes.

They are claiming £375.

 

I have checked the IP addreerse IP addresses change.

 

What shoud I do ?

 

It sounds very much the same practice as Davenport and Lyons and ACS Law. I would have thought that general advice would be the same, if you have not done it send a letter of denial. However, also seek independent legal advice. Not really sure of the credibility of this new firm.

[tp123]

Sample Letter of Denial

 

 

ACS:LAW

Andrew J Crossley

20 Hanover Sq,

London,

W1S 1JY

 

(insert 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.

 

 

Yours Faithfully

 

(Your name)

[zero_flight]

I wonder if this new firm has employed Terrence Tsang ?. Or is this just coincidence that he left ACS Law not so long ago. Nothing would surprise me when dealing with these money grabbing so called professionals.

[tp123]

@zero_flight

 

How ya doing?

 

Have you heard anything following your 2nd LOD yet?

 

I have not had a response yet - seems they are too busy at the moment!

 

regards

 

tp123

[boardtoday1234]

Hi all just found this forum after receiving a letter today for the Cascada-Evacuate The Dancefloor track i supposidly donwloaded back in September 2009.

same as rest wanting the £295 payment to settle - part of me was thinking to pay to get rid of as to much on with family to concentrate on but on other hand thought if pay this what else will they say i have done - don't want ten of these letters to pay!

 

My court order like ones i read on pages 130's is from 17th feb 2010 still - but now there is a manual crossing out of the name Allan Kopie to have allan eshuijs - surely thats not legal to alter a court document to a different name!

 

thinking of following prev people and sening a LOD - has anyone had much experience of this how long does it go on for and do you just ignore after 2nd LOD.

 

the letters state that got info of my IP from Be un limited but i am with o2. O2 is on the front of the court order but they have said got my details from be un limited?? or they the same company or are their letters utter rubbish?

 

bit worried by this letter with having 2 young kids cannot afford to pay or get took to courtbut feel if pay will just mean more letters for different tracks etc that know nothign about.

 

 

 

OK had no sleep last night worrying about the letter i got yesterday on cascada. I have read the posts on here but does it actually work to send LOD and then not reply again. I do not want to get taken to court!

Also i am now woried that it they say i have downloaded this file will i then get others now also?

 

I am sure i have not downloaded it but then worry that maybe I have when mates round one night and then deleted or someone else has on my PC at some time - where would I stand if it did actually get downloaded.

[zero_flight]

I too got my letter regarding Cascada yesterday also with the name changed on the court order. Another thing I find strange is the proof they give from my ISP provider is that the file name was "UK Top 40 Singles Chart 13-09-2209" and does not mention Cascada. I did not download such file anyway and it is not on my PC, my worry is that one of my kids may have downloaded it or part of it and deleted it.

 

 

Can I just ask is your Court Order dated the 17th February 2010 or has it a different date on ?.

[zero_flight]

@zero_flight

 

How ya doing?

 

Have you heard anything following your 2nd LOD yet?

 

I have not had a response yet - seems they are too busy at the moment!

 

regards

 

tp123

 

I am doing fine, feeling great as I have had no further letters from them. Though I still expect to get a third one, but I am just hoping that the whole dreadful business has finished. As you say it seems like they are focusing their attention on further new claims.

 

Thanks.

[Nelly070]

Hi all,

Is the IP address they list my wireless router or is it my actual laptop ?

 

thanks

[tp123]

OK had no sleep last night worrying about the letter i got yesterday on cascada. I have read the posts on here but does it actually work to send LOD and then not reply again. I do not want to get taken to court!

Also i am now woried that it they say i have downloaded this file will i then get others now also?

 

I am sure i have not downloaded it but then worry that maybe I have when mates round one night and then deleted or someone else has on my PC at some time - where would I stand if it did actually get downloaded.

 

My advice (which does not constitue independent legal advice) is to send a single letter denying it and then forget about it. They may send more letters trying to scare you into paying but ignore them. Once you have replied with one letter, you have discharged your duties as the defendant in accordance with the code of conduct for pre-action protocol. After this you only need to react to an official court order - which is, well, unlikly to say the least!

 

hope this helps a bit

[zero_flight]

OK had no sleep last night worrying about the letter i got yesterday on cascada. I have read the posts on here but does it actually work to send LOD and then not reply again. I do not want to get taken to court!

Also i am now woried that it they say i have downloaded this file will i then get others now also?

 

I am sure i have not downloaded it but then worry that maybe I have when mates round one night and then deleted or someone else has on my PC at some time - where would I stand if it did actually get downloaded.

 

The majority of individuals on this forum have been in your situation, I felt exactly the same 3 months ago when I received my 1st letter from them. However, I did a lot of research and found this forum. I probably would have just ended up paying to make the whole thing disappear. There is a lot of good advice, but you must also seek independent legal advice. To date there is no evidence that ACS Law has taken anyone to court, their evidence is poor. Remember that they want you to have sleepless nights, worrying about it so that you will pay up. If you have not done it send a LOD, even if you get further correspondence from them stand you ground. I sent my 2nd LOD to them 4 weeks ago, have heard nothing yet. Good luck.

[tp123]

Hi all,

Is the IP address they list my wireless router or is it my actual laptop ?

 

thanks

 

laptop

 

The ip address of the laptop and the one detailed in the letter will be somthing like 82.110.108.xxx

 

The ip address for the router will look somthing like 192.168.0.1 (default)