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

[cerberusalert]

It's a [problem] see; Infringement of Copyright Notice - 'Two Worlds' - P2Pfreak.com

[cerberusalert]

 

Make a complaint to your local trading standards & the OFT

 

 

The Office of Fair Trading: Contact us

[cerberusalert]

I had to laugh when I read that piece, my IP is listed amongst the many others but one problem they would have to overcome is the fact that Kcom & Eclipse (who are one and the same IP) do not issue static ISP addresses, mine can change a dozen or more times a day.

 

Then of course there's the little matter of file sharers who use 'third party' servers.

[cerberusalert]

I'd ignore them for now. It seems that those that respond to them start to get hounded, whereas those that have ignored them have been left alone. According to the link you gave, there have been no known proscecutions so far, besides just having an ISP address proves nothing anyway. I think they would have a very hard time proving anything & would rather rely on some poor smuck just coughing-up without a fight.

[cerberusalert]

All these guests just 1 thread

More than likely they've had similar letters too & a google search has thrown this thread up.

[cerberusalert]

As seen on Watchdog BBC - Watchdog: Davenport Lyons - threatening letters

[cerberusalert]

The software that has been used to 'harvest' these ISP addresses is unproven. The company operating it are not recognised in several EU countries as internet forensic experts. At least two countries, Switzerland & Italy have thrown similar cases out of court.

 

Add to that, anyones ISP address can be 'cloned' & any P2P sharer worth their salt would be using a program which hides their ISP address or would download through a third party website. So all in all they would have difficulty proving anything in a UK court.

[cerberusalert]

There's no debate as to whether Virgin or any of the other ISPs should or shouldn't have supplied the information, they were ordered to by the court so they had no option. Some of the ISPs are in court today in fact see post #235

 

Here is a copy of the court order; http://www.acs-law.org.uk/images/rea3.pdf

[cerberusalert]

UK court success against file sharing

 

I would hardly call it UK Court success; the first example never went to court & she settled & the second was won by default because she didn't defend.

 

While this was the first case heard in the United Kingdom of its type, experts believe that it is only the tip of the iceberg in litigation, and many others accused of similar breaches are to follow.

What experts? The same experts that are depending on unproven & unapproved forensic software?

[cerberusalert]

Personally I think they'll fall at the first hurdle with their "forensic evidence".

 

6 “Good” Evidence

Digital evidence must have all the attributes of other types of admissible evidence. Computer-derived evidence provides a number of challenges for the courts and for forensic procedures in general. To understand some of the issues it is useful to consider what “evidence” is in general terms.

Evidence is that which is offered before a court to persuade it to reach a particular view of events which may be in dispute. In general, evidence may be:

real – an object which can be brought to court and examined on the spot;

testimonial – the eyewitness observations of someone who was present and whoserecollections can be tested before the court;

documentary – a business or other record in any form which, once its authenticity hasbeen proved, can be examined for content;

technical – where a forensic technician has carried out some procedures on original“real” evidence and has produced some results. Technical evidence, in the eyes of thecourt, is not the same as expert evidence, which also includes giving opinions;

expert – the opinions of someone who is expert in a particular field and/or the conclusions of that expert after carrying out a specific investigation;

derived – a chart, video, etc. created from primary evidence to illustrate how certainconclusions might be drawn.

Evidence presented in court has to satisfy tests which fall into two main categories, admissibility and weight.

6.1 Admissibility

For evidence to be admissible, it must satisfy certain purely legal tests of acceptability. This tends to be a function of jurisdictions derived from the English common law as opposed to those based on European civil codes. The best known of the admissibility rules are:

the “hearsay” rule, which excludes reports of reports;

the “fairness in evidence acquisition” rule, which grants discretion to judges toexclude material obtained, for example, in violation of the codes of conduct in the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 and Police Act 1997; and

the “broad” rule that exhibits including documents need to be produced into court by a human witness who can be cross-examined.

The actual rules are quite complex and have many exceptions. In the UK, intercepted data content can be used only for intelligence purposes – it cannot be admitted in evidence for a court to consider.

 

6.2 Weight

Having satisfied the admissibility criteria, the evidence can be considered then for weight of fact – its persuasiveness or probative value. While in the final analysis “weight” is a non-scientific concept, there are a number of desirable features in non-testimonial evidence, that is, exhibits and documents of various kinds. These attributes include that an exhibit is:

authentic – specifically linked to the alleged circumstances and persons;

accurate – free from any reasonable doubt about the quality of procedures used to collect the material, analyse it (if appropriate and necessary) and introduce it into court. It has to be produced by someone who can explain what has been done. If a forensic method has been used it needs to be “transparent”, that is, freely testable by a third-party expert. In the case of exhibits which themselves contain statements – a letter or other document, for example – “accuracy” must also encompass accuracy of content. This normally requires the document’s originator to make a witness statement and be available for cross-examination;

complete – it tells within its own terms a complete story of particular set of circumstances or events.

[cerberusalert]

This whole business stinks, the original solicitors Davenport Lyons' dropped this like a hot brick when Watchdog got involved. They are still being investigated by the Solicitors Regulatory Authority over the matter, ACS:Law crawled from under their rock along with all the files & some of the staff from Davenport Lyons' to continue these cases which they don't have a chance of winning legitimately. I wonder whether ACS:Law think they are exempt from investigation too? Or will they cut and run when enough mugs pay towards their not so little [problem]?

 

Major law firm drops filesharing threats ? The Register

[cerberusalert]

one question i would like to ask is who is chief master winegarden

 

Information about - Chancery Division

[cerberusalert]

there putting the file on there for you to download free then trying to say your ripping them off by downloading the file they put there

 

It's called a 'Honeytrap' which they are trying to turn into a moneytrap.

[cerberusalert]

There were court cases in Germany, Italy & Norway which were thrown out because the courts decided that the technology used by Digiprotect were unproven and they could not be relied on as expert witnesses.

[cerberusalert]

if it has not been downloaded offer for an independant deep packet inspection to be paid for by ACS,if and when it comes back as clear sue for defamation i am in the proccess through which to begin a action against DAVENPORTS ,nothing has been downloaded from this computor so i got no worries

on the other hand Davenports have a lot to worry about i just cant wait for a case to be brought against me in fact i have demanded they begin action imediately

patrickq1

 

Any forensic analysis of the H/D would be pointless, it could easily be replaced after the alleged download event.

[cerberusalert]

The crux of their allegations is that a particular ISP address has been used at a particular time, they have no evidence as to what computer was used, or if indeed that the registered user was actually implicated or if they had an 'open' network or if it had been hacked into (there is enough open software allowing someone to do that). They can't even get the file size right, they've accused some people stating that the file was over 100MBs & others that the size was 40 odd MBs. If they can't get that fact right what chance with any of their evidence? Particularly as similar claims using the technology they are depending on was thrown out of the courts in Italy & Germany as unproven & their forensic experts thought of as quacks.

[cerberusalert]

What's a LOD that others have sent ?

 

Letter Of Denial

[cerberusalert]

Is there a template for such a thing ?

Apologies for the novice questions...

 

Thanks

 

....................I did not download and did not make available for upload your clients work “Two Worlds” via my Internet connection, nor did I authorise anyone else to do so.

 

I deny any breach of the CDPA 1988 sections 16(1)(d) and 20 of the act.

 

I have never possessed a copy of the work in any form, nor have I distributed it, or authorised anyone else to distribute it using my internet connection.

 

Any proceedings that you may choose to take will be fully and vigorously defended, please inform your client that if they wish to pursue this matter, I will seek to recover all my costs to the maximum permitted by the Civil Procedure Rules.

[cerberusalert]

They're probably busy responding to questions from the Trading Standards, the OFT, the ICO, Solicitors Regulation Authority, various MPs, Newspapers and T.V programs + anyone else people have complained to.

[cerberusalert]

All the ISPs received court orders to reveal the information. There's a link to the order earlier in the thread if you look.

[cerberusalert]

He said that ACS: Law work on behalf of the government and my ISP could no longer help me in any way and to deal with ACS: Law directly.

 

Of course they do & Idi Amin is going to be Beatified.

[cerberusalert]

hi has any one put a template l,o,d in the thread I cant see one but there is a lot to trawl through cheers

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/198192-acs-law-34.html#post2277687

[cerberusalert]

See; BBC NEWS | Technology | Innocents accused of net piracy

http://www.ispreview.co.uk/story/2009/06/30/uk-ispa-doubts-accuracy-of-illegal-broadband-file-sharing-evidence.html

[cerberusalert]

Heaven knows why they are whinging on about template letters, the legal profession use them all the time, it doesn't matter a jot where or who created them.

 

The realisation is probably dawning on them that there is now a collective involved in this & they are no longer dealing with an individual who has no or little knowledge and who's only recourse was to either pay their demands or line the pockets of some other legal wallah in order to exonerate themselves.

 

Firms like this have complained in the past to judges about their 'victims' using the aid & resources of forums & were given short shrift & if these muppets try the same line they'll undoubtedly get the same.

Edited July 24, 2009 by cerberusalert

[cerberusalert]

they will have no time to take anybody to court

To my knowledge they haven't taken anyone to court yet. Their predecessors did & only won one case & that was only because the defendant failed to defend so they won by default.