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

[captain-123]

Im not saying that I've owned up - but they've got 5 infringements against me - 1 download and 4 subsequent uploads through utorrent.

 

My situation is different to most on here it would seem. Don't get me wrong I'd love to avoid paying out but as advised on here, sending a LOD isnt an option, neither is ignoring...so what else can I do?

 

If you haven't done it then it doesn't matter if they say 30 thousand downloads and 90 thousand uploads.

 

To have comitted the offence under CDPA rules you have to have done the dead or authorised someone else to do it. If you haven't done either of these things then you are innocent. It is that simple.

 

If you think about it if everyone rings them they will all get similar information, they are hardly like to say nope you called our bluff when we've checked we have nothing on file.

 

I would sugest doing a search for being threatend website and speaking to people over in the chat room they will give you some support.

[Mattyhatty]

Im not saying that I've owned up - but they've got 5 infringements against me - 1 download and 4 subsequent uploads through utorrent.

 

My situation is different to most on here it would seem. Don't get me wrong I'd love to avoid paying out but as advised on here, sending a LOD isnt an option, neither is ignoring...so what else can I do?

 

 

But im sure you bought a new laptop yesterday and recycled your hard drive and told me you never saw that file in your life..... ?

 

;) Can you see why this LOD is priceless to EVERYONE

 

'' any thing said above is a hypothetical scenario and its means are to provide an interesting debate rather than guidance to those who wish to incriminate themselves further by destroying such evidence towards the allegations of alleged pirate infringements. I shall and will not be held responsible for the misinterpretation of what I say on these forums''

[Jamuir]

Im not saying that I've owned up - but they've got 5 infringements against me - 1 download and 4 subsequent uploads through utorrent.

 

My situation is different to most on here it would seem. Don't get me wrong I'd love to avoid paying out but as advised on here, sending a LOD isnt an option, neither is ignoring...so what else can I do?

 

what do they mean by 4 subsequent uploads ? the same file uploaded on 4 separate occasions ? 1 torrent with 4 connections

[seymourtitty]

well, if you download it once, and then keep it in the torrent shared folder...anything can happen...people upload it from you as long as it sits there

[floppydog]

With regards to you have downloaded 1 and uploaded as many as they want you to believe. They cannot prove beyond any reasonable doubt that you did it. They can argue that that IP address that was allocated to you was being used to make this alleged upload / download. If they were standing over your shoulder looking at you doing it, if they had the police banging on your door when you were doing it, then you could put up your hands and say yep " I'm guilty". What they cannot prove is that the IP address that was allocated was in fact yours (not being spoofed, hijacked or otherwise) and that you were downloading / uploading as they are stating. It is all a game of we say you say. It's almost like Cluedo, Cascada - Evacuate the dancefloor - utorrent. Oh, is that wrong can I have another guess !!!

[floppydog]

Another BIG MISCONCEPTION. Because you are downloading you must be uploading. Anyone who truley knows torrents will agree that if you are downloading (leeching) you can set up the software to allow as many uploaders as you wish or NONE !!!!. Most downloaders setup their software to acheive this. The lawyers all assume that because you are downloading, you must be uploading (distributing) the file.

[blashey]

last december my brother showed me how to get u torrent and he said i could download albums from sites to see if i liked them before buying them as i prefer proper cds but like to hear what i might like to buy

 

i downloaded an album in december 09 an 80s remix ministry of sound 80s album listened to it and didnt like it so deleted it

 

 

last thursday i open a letter from solicitors gallant and mcmillan on behalf of ministry of sound saying i was an illegal file sharer and would be taken to court unless i paid £370

 

i tried to explain i was naive and only wanted to listen before buying proper copy and had not downloaded any other album except that one and had got rid of u torrent as i was plagued by viruses

 

im angry at my stupidity and the fact i spent tens of thousands of pounds over the years on vinyl and cds i get done for wanting to just listen not copy but they said 7 other people downloaded it from me while i was downloading it

 

also by admitting it over the phone i have no choice but to pay within 21 days or go to court

 

can i still go to a solicitor to get a smaller amount paid to them or have i messed myself up by saying i would pay the 350

 

 

 

i have just noticed the ip address on the letter sent is different from the one my computer is telling me does that make any diffence even though i phoned them admitting i done it and couldnt pay until september which the sent out a letter agreeing to

[captain-123]

i have just noticed the ip address on the letter sent is different from the one my computer is telling me does that make any diffence even though i phoned them admitting i done it and couldnt pay until september which the sent out a letter agreeing to

 

 

nope, your ip address is dynamic and will change over time.

[blashey]

so im buggered

[captain-123]

If you have admitted it I would say the best you could do is try and make a lower offer but that's just my opinion i'm no expert.

[Shaggy123]

What ever way it doesnt matter I have had parties here with 30 people up, I know of a least 5 people that have accessed and haved logged my passcode. I had a friend who pulled up in the driveway to send a quote off via email lol. I cant see they can make anything stick. Gallant is clutching at straws and hoping people will be stupid enough to pay up. Its all scare tactics - They say thier letters aren't threatening - I would say otherwise.

 

As I said WEP is easily hackable whats saying that you didn't have that security enabled.

 

It sounds to me like you havent got security enabled on your router.

[White-Dragon]

If anyone responds to gallant Macmillan with a denial or a request for actual evidence of an individual infringing copyright and recieves a 2nd letter from them get in touch about it's content. I expect it to be more threatening in it's tone and demands. Cheers

[stupiditto]

It sounds to me like you havent got security enabled on your router.

 

hmmm or it could be wep enabled which is easily hacked - the flaws go on ....

[stupiditto]

If anyone responds to gallant Macmillan with a denial or a request for actual evidence of an individual infringing copyright and recieves a 2nd letter from them get in touch about it's content. I expect it to be more threatening in it's tone and demands. Cheers

 

It was threatening in the first one pay up or we will proceed further!!!

 

Are you saying that you have had a second letter or you are waiting a reply?

[Shaggy123]

hmmm or it could be wep enabled which is easily hacked - the flaws go on ....

 

WEP is easy to hack if you know what you are doing and have the right tools. It's doubtful non pc savvy people could hack it.

 

What sort of friends are yours if they are using their IT skills to hack your network?

[stupiditto]

WEP is easy to hack if you know what you are doing and have the right tools. It's doubtful non pc savvy people could hack it.

 

What sort of friends are yours if they are using their IT skills to hack your network?

 

Not sure what you are trying to get at but when a friend comes round and says is it ok to use your network and you say ok. What is the next question you get asked? Whats the network key. So you give it to them. All they have to do is tell windows osx to remember it and they can use the network anytime in the future as I have said before I have had a mate pull up in the driveway so he could send a quote via email!!!

 

Who said it was a mate cracking my security I live in a end terraced house with 3 neighbours attached.

 

If I do a available network search 10 networks pop up - In my

 

thats a floor.

[Shaggy123]

Who said it was a mate cracking my security

 

You've admitted yourself your mate pulled up outside and used it.

 

More fool you if you allow others access to your network. You're just asking for trouble.

[BARFLY]

seems the SRA are dragging out their investigation even further. from slyck today:

 

"spoke to the SRA today - couldn't give me any more information than the fact that its still ongoing. I asked how long these things normally took and she said because they are still getting quite a large volume of complaints it will remain ongoing as they have to take all these into consideration also, especially as the format on some of the letters have changed! Asked me to call back in about a months time."

 

pathetic. should be the SRA that are being investigated. the old boys club. i hope the "format of the letters" statement doesn't refer to GM as they are a seperate investigation altogether. can't remember anyone suggesting the format of Andy's letters have changed to a more conciliatory tone! when it eventually concludes i've no doubt it will be a damp squid, with a smack on the wrists for Andy, but recognition that the tone of his letters has changed!!!!!????

 

it was being reported by broadband genie two weeks ago that the investigation was winding up and would be concluded at the end of July! the SRA are to solicitors what the CRS is to DCAs!

[kilotango22]

seems the SRA are dragging out their investigation even further. from slyck today:

 

"spoke to the SRA today - couldn't give me any more information than the fact that its still ongoing. I asked how long these things normally took and she said because they are still getting quite a large volume of complaints it will remain ongoing as they have to take all these into consideration also, especially as the format on some of the letters have changed! Asked me to call back in about a months time."

 

pathetic. should be the SRA that are being investigated. the old boys club. i hope the "format of the letters" statement doesn't refer to GM as they are a seperate investigation altogether. can't remember anyone suggesting the format of Andy's letters have changed to a more conciliatory tone! when it eventually concludes i've no doubt it will be a damp squid, with a smack on the wrists for Andy, but recognition that the tone of his letters has changed!!!!!????

 

it was being reported by broadband genie two weeks ago that the investigation was winding up and would be concluded at the end of July! the SRA are to solicitors what the CRS is to DCAs!

 

I'm no expert but I don't think his letters are illegal, if any of us sent menacing letters though demanding money we would get a visit. I'm fully expecting nothing to come of their investigation and he will carry on with what he is doing regardless.

 

This new Bill might be the thing what stops him. I quite like the 3 strikes idea, but as I don't fileshare I'm not bothered. I am bothered about receiving letters from dodgy solicitors though trying to extort money out of me.

[BARFLY]

i agree with you regarding the outcome. not sure about the DEB, though. will ACS be obliged to use the three strikes route? or is that mainly for the ISPs? surely ACS can continue to pursue alleged copyright infringers with reference to copyright law as he doing at the moment.

[stupiditto]

You've admitted yourself your mate pulled up outside and used it.

 

More fool you if you allow others access to your network. You're just asking for trouble.

 

Who said it was my mate who caused the infringement? You dont know, I dont know, they dont know - flawed!!! So you are sitting in a wi fi hotspot in starbucks or mcdonalds and you decide to use their internet access what happens then???? - flawed again.

[Shaggy123]

Who said it was my mate who caused the infringement? You dont know, I dont know, they dont know - flawed!!!

 

You've authorised him to use your connection, therefore it's unsecure.

 

Authorising others to use it is just asking for trouble.

[stupiditto]

You've authorised him to use your connection, therefore it's unsecure.

 

Authorising others to use it is just asking for trouble.

 

Would you deny a mate the use of your internet connection?

 

What im trying to get at is there are so many ifs and buts, this case just cant stand up.

[kilotango22]

i agree with you regarding the outcome. not sure about the DEB, though. will ACS be obliged to use the three strikes route? or is that mainly for the ISPs? surely ACS can continue to pursue alleged copyright infringers with reference to copyright law as he doing at the moment.

 

I don't think he will stop until he is either struck off, not likely in my opinion or convicted of a crime as a result of this, as I don't think what he is doing is basically illegal I don't think that is likely either.

 

He certainly wont stop as a result of bad publicity, the guy used to be a DJ, he is on an ego trip and probably loves all the attention.

[Shaggy123]

Would you deny a mate the use of your internet connection?

 

Depends what he wanted to use it for.

 

I certainly wouldnt hand it out to all and sundry. I'd change the WEP key periodically too.