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

[cerberusalert]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-11443861

 

A London law firm has pledged to continue to target file sharers, despite controversy surrounding the acquisition and care of users' data.

 

Gallant Macmillan is to go to the High Court on 4 October to seek the personal details of hundreds of PlusNet users.

 

It will be interesting to hear what Chief Master Winegarten has to say about the application.

[patrickq1]

it also lets Andrew know its easy to hack anyones account proof of the pudding huh ? hehe

[andydd]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-11443861

 

 

 

It will be interesting to hear what Chief Master Winegarten has to say about the application.

 

Well..first of all you would of thought (or at least hope) that the ISP's involved (is it BT or O2) will question the whole process, many legal people believe that the Norwich Pharmacetical order is flawed right from the begining, it was a case many years ago that has no relevance to handing over of bulk personal data where it is very dubious that there is any wrong-doing.

 

It is clear that when ISP's have stood upto it (TalkTalk and Virgin) then they are not pursued any further, I'm sure there are now many people who believe that this is a stance that the other ISP's should of taken all along, instead of handing over our data willy-nilly and making money out of it !

 

Andy

[kilotango22]

I really do hope he refuses the application, this cannot have escaped his attention, he must now realise even without any technical knowledge its nothing more than a legal [problem]. Is there a twitter feed I can follow as I'm away for most of next week and won't have pc access. I'm desperate to see what he has to say on monday.

Go for it CMW and show us mortals that British justice will not be hijacked to screw innocent members of the public.

[panther12]

Having had a quick look through some of the emails (peeing myself laughing at some of them) I notice there's some attatchments from other solicitors where people have paid for a solicitor to deal with the letter. Hmmmm, I wonder if it's worth sending a message to these solicitors informing them that their private messages including personal details of their clients are now open for everyone to see!!

[Jasper1965]

Hmmmm, I wonder if it's worth sending a message to these solicitors informing them that their private messages including personal details of their clients are now open for everyone to see!!

 

 

Through the tears of laughter I couldn't help but notice that the ACS outward bound emails contain the following footer:

 

This e-mail is confidential and may well be legally privileged. If you

have received this mail in error, we put you on notice of its status,

please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and then delete this

message from your system.

 

Looks like I've a lot of emailing to do then.....

[Jasper1965]

Well..first of all you would of thought (or at least hope) that the ISP's involved (is it BT or O2) will question the whole process, many legal people believe that the Norwich Pharmacetical order is flawed right from the begining, it was a case many years ago that has no relevance to handing over of bulk personal data where it is very dubious that there is any wrong-doing.

 

It is clear that when ISP's have stood upto it (TalkTalk and Virgin) then they are not pursued any further, I'm sure there are now many people who believe that this is a stance that the other ISP's should of taken all along, instead of handing over our data willy-nilly and making money out of it !

 

Andy

 

Well said.

 

There's a very well informed blog on the matter here http://www.wiredvc.com/acslaw-159and-the-33norwich-pharmacal-orders/

 

We can only hope that the legal system wakes up and realises they've been duped, that would probably put this approach to bed once and for all.

[huggy41]

there web site is still down it's just not fare i wonder if i should ring him on his mobile to let him know

:lol:

[andydd]

there web site is still down it's just not fare i wonder if i should ring him on his mobile to let him know

:lol:

 

Its over a week ago that Mr Crossley said that events of last week were nothing and that the company would carry on, as the site is now gone and no-one seems to be answering the phone that doesnt appear to be true.

 

Andy

[huggy41]

i wonder if i should email his ffffffing x wife as he called her to see if he's alright

[andydd]

i wonder if i should email his ffffffing x wife as he called her to see if he's alright

 

ha..her and that f**ing hermit

[wozgeog]

where is everyone?

[STC12]

lol - thinking the same thing. hopefully still trawling through the leaked database !

My guess is that no new letters have been going out so no new ppl looking on here for help !

Although GM NPO hearing on Monday could change that. I suspect we wont get a decision on Monday tho.

[Nelly070]

Great News !!

Got a letter today from GM saying in light of the info I have provided, they can confirm that they have closed their file on me.

I sent two LODs to them,the 1st was the template from on here and the 2nd was in my own words.

They also said "Due to the extent of this campaign, our phone lines have been very busy. We apologise if this caused you any inconvenience or distress"

"We would recommend that you ensure your internet connection is always secure in order to avoid any future unknown unlawful file sharing activity"

 

Hopefully this is the 1st sign of them backing down on the back of the ACS Law fiasco !!

Hope you all get a similar letter soon.

At last I can stop worrying about this !!

Edited October 1, 2010 by Nelly070

[huggy41]

nice one

[STC12]

have ACS ever written to anyone saying their case was closed ? Or do we all just hang on and hope ?

[andydd]

I would of thought that any company would now find it very hard to continue this type of claim, mainly due to the adverse publicity, the fact that many ISP's are going to be more reluctant to handover info. and also that many people are now fully aware of how ACS operate and that they are aware of the vraious methods of defence.

 

Andy

[IrishRugbyFan]

That really is good news! Enjoy a good night's sleep. Somehow I can't see ACS sending out any letters along those lines... Reckon he is gonna hang in there until they rip his fingers off...

[cerberusalert]

ISPs admit to taking money for handing over subscribers' data http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1736800/isps-admit-taking-money-handing-subscribers

[cerberusalert]

ICO is serious about fining bullying law firm

The Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) told The INQUIRER on Tuesday that it was already in discussions with ACS:Law and was considering what action to take against the bullying law firm, holding the option of fining the outfit up to £500,000. And it seems the ICO is not just blowing hot air to appease taxpayers.

 

Deputy information commissioner David Smith told The INQUIRER, "This will be a landmark moment in ensuring that firms take [data protection] seriously. There have been a lot of questions asked of us about whether we are actually going to fine firms, and I can assure people that we will be actively using this power."

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1736537/ico-fining-bullying-law-firm

[andydd]

Some good stuff from thje inquirer site.

 

It's hard to see how Andrew Crossley and his apparently sole practicioner firm will manage to weather this storm, let alone show up in court asking for more data from ISPs following all this.

 

In some ways the ISPs are off the hook, at least for the moment, maybe. After all Sky was just complying a legally binding court order for information, it claims.

 

The question is, however, if ISPs would take a more aggressive stand against handing over personal data about their subscribers without solid proof of wrongdoing in the first place, might they stand better chances to avoid becoming mired such public relations disasters?

 

Andy

[cerberusalert]

Law firm poised to move into file sharing arena

Cramer Pelmont to act differently to ACS Law

A firm of London-based solicitors is considering moving into the illegal file-sharing arena, Which? Computing understands.

 

Cramer Pelmont Solicitors (Cramer Pelmont), which has offices in both central and north London, has confirmed that it intends to start work in this area.

 

However, it has said it will not be employing the same volume litigation model used by ACS: Law Solicitors (ACS Law).

http://www.which.co.uk/news/2010/09/law-firm-poised-to-move-into-file-sharing-arena-232072/

 

It is understood that although Cramer Pelmont says it has no intentions of adopting the same business model employed by ACS Law, it has employed Terence Tsang in a trainee solicitor position at the firm.

 

Terence Tsang has experience in the volume litigation file sharing arena, having worked for ACS Law as a paralegal, and at Davenport Lyons.

 

However, we have evidence to show Mr Tsang was still in contact with Andrew Crossley of ACS Law in August this year when Mr Tsang was apparently attempting to broker a deal between ACS Law and a new (IP) data supplier, in which it its understood he stood to earn up to 2.5 per cent commission for himself.

Edited October 1, 2010 by cerberusalert

[wittzend]

have ACS ever written to anyone saying their case was closed ? Or do we all just hang on and hope ?

 

Yes they did, I would hang fire with the popping of the champagne corks.I think that if they send a couple of letters dropping the case, and let it be known (trolls) then it would scare those who dont recieve a letter, to basically panic into paying. Basic scare tactics. I would happily be proved wrong.But I dont think I will.

Edited October 1, 2010 by Mr lex
Attempting to bypass the swear filter and threatening language

[wozgeog]

Some good stuff from thje inquirer site.

 

It's hard to see how Andrew Crossley and his apparently sole practicioner firm will manage to weather this storm, let alone show up in court asking for more data from ISPs following all this.

 

In some ways the ISPs are off the hook, at least for the moment, maybe. After all Sky was just complying a legally binding court order for information, it claims.

 

The question is, however, if ISPs would take a more aggressive stand against handing over personal data about their subscribers without solid proof of wrongdoing in the first place, might they stand better chances to avoid becoming mired such public relations disasters?

 

Andy

 

Well said andydd.

 

If the Information Commissioner doesn't hand out a hefty fine to Crossley for this data fiasco then the DPA won't be worth "diddly squat"

[wittzend]

Great News !!

Got a letter today from GM saying in light of the info I have provided, they can confirm that they have closed their file on me.

I sent two LODs to them,the 1st was the template from on here and the 2nd was in my own words.

They also said "Due to the extent of this campaign, our phone lines have been very busy. We apologise if this caused you any inconvenience or distress"

"We would recommend that you ensure your internet connection is always secure in order to avoid any future unknown unlawful file sharing activity"

 

Hopefully this is the 1st sign of them backing down on the back of the ACS Law fiasco !!

Hope you all get a similar letter soon.

At last I can stop worrying about this !!

 

Call me suspicious but your posting's are a bit iffey:|