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

[Huff&Puff]

Pirate Bay Tricks Anti-Pirates with Fake Peers | TorrentFreak

 

Does this still happen?

 

 

Yes. It is one of the many difficulties they would face if they ever tried court.

[BARFLY]

It's been reported that the SRA are to report on the ACS saga by the end of the month. How long has this investigation been ongoing? A year, more or less! What a joke! Does anyone seriously believe they will stop ACS? They'll condemn the tone of the letters as being threatening. But ACS can challenge the findings and continue in the meantime. Another investigation, another year... Maybe they'll agree to tone down the letters. But will the practice be stopped? I don't think so. If ACS are in contravention of guidelines what will happen to them? Do they get fined? Does the fine go to the SRA? Do they get struck off?

[zero_flight]

It's been reported that the SRA are to report on the ACS saga by the end of the month. How long has this investigation been ongoing? A year, more or less! What a joke! Does anyone seriously believe they will stop ACS? They'll condemn the tone of the letters as being threatening. But ACS can challenge the findings and continue in the meantime. Another investigation, another year... Maybe they'll agree to tone down the letters. But will the practice be stopped? I don't think so. If ACS are in contravention of guidelines what will happen to them? Do they get fined? Does the fine go to the SRA? Do they get struck off?

 

Well we can only hope that the SRA will do something radical to ACS Law, but we will just have to wait and see.

[8of9]

I remember many years ago watching a real-life show about US cops, they put a cop dressed as a tramp in a doorway with some dollar bills hanging out of his pocket, not surprisingly, some passers-by helped themselves to the money, the cops then pounced and nicked them, seems like the above is just the modern day equivilant.

 

Andy

 

I think this would be considered as "Entrapment".

 

"Entrapment arises when a person is encouraged by someone in some official capacity to commit a crime. If entrapment occurred, then some prosecution evidence may be excluded as being unfair, or the proceedings may be discontinued altogether".

 

It would be hard to argue that ACSLaw were acting in an "official capacity"

Edited July 21, 2010 by 8of9

[andydd]

I think this would be considered as "Entrapment".

 

"Entrapment arises when a person is encouraged by someone in some official capacity to commit a crime. If entrapment occurred, then some prosecution evidence may be excluded as being unfair, or the proceedings may be discontinued altogether".

 

It would be hard to argue that ACSLaw were acting in an "official capacity"

 

But it is known that Digital Protect (or whoever do the work for ACS) have been putting files up and then just watching to see who downloads them.

 

Andy

[Giant555]

On a different note, has anyone had a reply from Gallant Macmillan to their 1st LOD. Their initial letters went out around 6th July and requested a response within 21 days. Can anyone update?

[zero_flight]

On a different note, has anyone had a reply from Gallant Macmillan to their 1st LOD. Their initial letters went out around 6th July and requested a response within 21 days. Can anyone update?

 

I am sure that I read that someone had received a reply from their LOD, after a few days.

[Mattyhatty]

The 'accused' account holder in my situation just sent out the first LOD to ACS LAW recorded delivery. Think it said 21 days to reply. How ever... its a relief to see that letter sent.

 

They tried to tweak the template LOD but the wording was so beautiful, it expressed everything that they wanted to say but couldnt.

 

The end states its legally bound with a sig too. And they added extra regarding their defence.

 

If they come back with the template excuse, then il make them send the LOD again in a different font

[Mattyhatty]

Well we can only hope that the SRA will do something radical to ACS Law, but we will just have to wait and see.

 

 

Im relying on SRA too. Infact - i really need to send them my complaint to aid this! stats to be in their favour.

 

What kind of outcome could we expect if successful? Because i bet ACS wont return any of the payments. And there will be some stupid loop hole where they create a new company, transfer the willing staff and start again ( sounds familiar )

[kilotango22]

I think the SRA will sweep it under the carpet, however it is not the first time Mr Crossley has been in trouble with them so hopefully they can come down hard on him this time.

 

My LOD was a template, I am expecting them to reject it, I shall then write and ask them what basis in law they have for rejecting a letter which complies with the code of conduct.

 

Now then, have you all written to your ISP's?? This is a question you need to be asking them, feel free to use this as a template, I'm sure they wont reject it:

 

Did (Insert ISP Provider name) at anytime indicate to ACS Law that you would not oppose a court order requiring you to release my data. If this is the case can you inform me on what authority in my contract with you and under your obligations to the Data Protection Act you did so as it appears you may have breached Data Protection Legislation.

 

Make sure you send a copy of the letter to these people:

 

Information Commissioner's Office

Wycliffe House

Water Lane

Wilmslow

Cheshire SK9 5AF

[Giant555]

I am sure that I read that someone had received a reply from their LOD, after a few days.

 

I believe that was the legend 'queen-peanut' on the 17th, surely there must have been some others? Loads of GM 'accused' said they were going to send LODs. Just wondered what other experiences were;-)

[Billpayerr]

Did (Insert ISP Provider name) at anytime indicate to ACS Law that you would not oppose a court order requiring you to release my data. If this is the case can you inform me on what authority in my contract with you and under your obligations to the Data Protection Act you did so as it appears you may have breached Data Protection Legislation.

 

As far as I am aware there is nothing in the Data protection act that requires a data holder to oppose or contest a court order by law.

 

Please do complain to the ISP and ask them why they have not contested the evidence presented in court as it is clearly flawed and identifies innocent people. Ask them if they are going to refuse to co-operate with further court orders (like Talk Talk do) and ask them why not?

 

Another point you should ask your ISP is, have they charged ACS law for the data they provided? It has recently come to light that ACS Law may have tried to reclaim costs incurred to them from the ISP, where in fact they have never been charged for the release of data.

Check your paperwork to see if the money being ‘claimed’ includes this fee.

 

It’s about time the ISP’s started defending their subscribers. If we complain enough….they may listen!

[Systorm]

Hi guys, seen somebody post that The One show is showing their article on this tomorrow (16th July). Well I can inform you it has been pushed back to the (22nd July).

 

Sorry .

 

Was anything mentioned in tonights prog?, I was at football unfortunatly...

 

Sent my LOD recorded del on tue, now its a waiting game...

[youtube]

No mate, changed again, wont post any more info on it as their schedule changes from day to day and don't want to give any more dates out in case they change again. Infact I haven't actually heard when it will be shown after it was obviously cancelled on the 22nd. We will be able to watch it on iPlayer when its been shown. Sorry for any inconvenience it may of caused to anybody if you stayed into watch it and it wasn't on.

[8of9]

Was anything mentioned in tonights prog?, I was at football unfortunatly...

 

No show again.....

......WILL SMITH last week,TOM CRUISE tonight. Crossleys being "bumped" off the programme by some big names!!

 

From Slyck Forum

"by Hickster » Thu Jul 22, 2010 9:38 pm

Hi Guys Regarding the "One Show", I am in touch with one of the people involved and I have been told that it has currently been put back due to further investigation. I think they are going to do a bigger story than what was first planned. It WILL happen so lets just wait for it. I am sure it will be a GREAT Piece".

Edited July 22, 2010 by 8of9
added

[Mattyhatty]

haha i have sky player - im recording it on series link so i can miss it each time and replay it. I wont upload it though. Dont want ACS law sending me any more letters

 

I interested for some media coverage on this actually. Im surprised there hasn't been anything in the SUN with some major headline about piracy and how the music industry loose out on POTENTIALLY BILLLIONS of dollars.

[queen-peanut]

I believe that was the legend 'queen-peanut' on the 17th, surely there must have been some others? Loads of GM 'accused' said they were going to send LODs. Just wondered what other experiences were;-)

 

 

howdo all, not heard a sausage since, i cancelled sky, just watchin one show now, hope its on, and yep its entrapment, if they wanna proceed wi court thats fine, only cost you a quid a week after u've filled in a means form etc, so bugger em, we're are still in recession regardless of whatever anyone else says. they can bite me bum

[wellangry]

I sent lod a few days back. copied some template. am really fuming about this as have never and would never download any mos crap. i cant believe sky didnt inform me someone was requsting my details...is that legal? i would like to meet this solicitor. got better things to do than play letter ping pong with these muppets..might seek some legal advise for compensation. can u claim for stress caused???

[8of9]

Hi Ozzy MOS

Just going back to your post of a few weeks ago,

 

 

Like a lot of people I have found this site after recieving a letter from Gallant Macmillan on friday accusing me of sharing Ministry of Sound - The Annual 2010 in december, or more accurately I should say the letter addresses and accuses my father. Still trying to work out how best to address this, I admit I did download the file, but my father, who did not download it, and did not authorise me to do so, is the one who the letter is addressed to. Would it be wise of him to send a LOD and deny all knowledge? Does anyone know if it is in any way possible that this software company could have recorded the MAC address of the particular machine the file was downloaded to?

 

Were you accused of downloading the whole album or just one track, and did the torrent contain the full album?

What I'm wondering is that if the torrent contained the whole album then there are many artists that appear on it, most signed to other labels. Ministry of Sound will obviously have permission to use their work on "The Annual 2010 but have these other artists given their permission for their work to be used in this way by MOS & ACSL and, if not, aren't ACSL guilty of making their work available for download themselves?

Do the other artists even know that this is happening? and if they did would they allow it?

(This has probably been answered elsewhere and if it has I do apologise)

 

8of9

[Mr Anonymous]

If you admit (pay) for the single track of the said album, guess what happens next?

The accuser advertises his success, gets more sponsorship (on a no win no fee basis) then goes for the next track on the album, you've paid once how can you deny the next one?

He's a genius, he needs to be right up there with loan sharks, estate agents, tape worms and other parasites..

[stanwixman]

Hi back in February i got a letter from ACS law and promptly sent off my letter of denial. Todate i still havent heard back. Then today I got another letter from Gallant Macmillan saying i had downloaded MOS electronic Eighties and that I have again to pay £350. This time they dont mention court proceedings but say if i pay up i can keep the album! . I have drawn up anohter letter of Denial but havent sent it off yet. Which mag are aware of this new firm but say that Gallant said that they will look at all lods and Ministry of sound will look at each case on merit before taking things further. I am really panicing now i havent done this downloading but if its happened twice how many more times? Gallant say that unsecure browers etc are no defense and that they will pass on all lods to mos . should i pass on my lod or ignore it this time and should i worry anymore re this as opposed to acs and this seems more of a threat this time. I am due to go on holiday to finland on monday so dont need this hassle - please can someone help put my mind at ease. I know i have done nothing wrong but I CANT afford to pay anything let alone the stress etc

Edited July 24, 2010 by stanwixman

[stevo7790]

Well if you haven't done anything wrong, then why worry? send the LoD and then relax

[stanwixman]

thanks stevo I will send it off. I am just thinking about wehter they will not accept my lod and pass it to MOS and whats to stop other solicitors sending out more letters ?

[stevo7790]

Stanwixman,

 

the point being if you have done nothing wrong, nothing illegal... then they can do whatever they like!

In this case though it is up to them to prove you did download/share/upload whatever, which because you didn't do any of the above is going to be pretty difficult, and why should you even consider paying them?

[stanwixman]

deleted

Edited July 24, 2010 by stanwixman