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

[zero_flight]

I received my first letter in April sent of my LOD, then a month later received a second letter stating that they were doubling the original amount. I have just replied with a second LOD, not sure if I will hear anymore. Have sent all correspondence to Which magazine.

[dracula666]

Hey guys, just a quick question regarding 'evacuate the dancefloor' lettter. What evidences to you have on your letters? I've got p2p protocol: bittorrent 6.2.0, related title: top 40 singles UK (2009-08-16). Just wondering if the letters are all the same or they tend to generate different evidences.

I received a letter 2 weeks ago and planning to send my first LOD by the end of this week...

[youtube]

All letters will be almost identical until somebody shows us otherwise. All letters will include an IP address which will almost certainly be related to your connection unless ip spoofing has happened or a mistake by the ISP has been made, (extremely rare). Other information on the letter will the file name they have stated was uploaded on your connection and the client the file was downloaded with.

 

They used to list the monitoring company but as of recent it seems more and more people are not being given this information. Probably due to their new monitoring company NG3 systems being totally unknown and as such their evidence could be in extreme doubt.

[jm666]

ACS Law are using a company called NG3 Systems Limited as their "IT forensic experts"

NG3 Systems Limited are a Private Limited Company. Company No.06228621

The nature of their business is listed as Hardware consultancy and Software publishing.

Company registered on 26/04/2007

Operates from 31 Albatross Close, London, E6 5NX. - Imagery suggests this is a block of flats. Demographics sites support this "mainly 2 bed flats"

Current Appointments: 1 Director - Iranian, Name: TORABI, ALIREZA.

1 Secretary - Iranian, Name: GHALANSOUI, ANOOSHA.

Supporting Evidence: Various web searches show results of TORABI, ALIREZA involved in IP packet capture discussions.

 

freebsd-questions - week of 17 March 2008

 

http://unix.derkeiler.com/pdf/Mailing-Lists/FreeBSD/net/2008-03/msg00291.pdf

 

Subject also hosts a website called zangbar.com

 

[...] zangbar.com: "Alireza Torabi" owns about 4 other domains View these domains > is a contact on the whois record of 3 domains

2 registrars have maintained records for this domain since 2006-12-20 with 1 drop. This domain has changed name servers 6 times over 1 year.

Registrant:

Alireza Torabi

Alireza Torabi

London, LONDON W1

GB

Registrar: NAMESDIRECT

Domain Name: ZANGBAR.COM

Created on: 20-OCT-09

Expires on: 20-OCT-11

Last Updated on: 10-JAN-10

 

just found this from forums in April. As youtube posted earlier "their evidence could be in extreme doubt"

[bob92101]

I wonder if 31 Albatross Close, Beckton, London, E6 5NX is registered for use for business purposes or is a residential address?

[bigD27]

Just wondering how many people from the last batch (the £495 'porn' ones) that were received about April, have heard anything else?

 

Looks like the guy above has just heard again, I never sent a LOD and havent heard anything else. Whats others experiences?

 

I had received one of the 495 porn ones, back in April. Had responded with an LOD and have received a 2nd letter about a week ago. They not asking for any extra money. It looks like the letter is explaining what they ment with the first one, responsible for the IP and connection blah blah blah... Gave 28 days to respond.....which I shall, with another LOD. It does play on the nerves some what though. Its pretty shocking that the first letter anyone receives is that demanding money so that they dont take you to court. My, what a fair deal!

[zero_flight]

If they have such strong evidence against the accused of the alleged infringement, then why has nobody been taken to court ???. Out of the thousands of letters that they send, the whole things very fishy. Which is why there appears to be no court action brought against people. I can not believe how long the SRA are taking in investigating this firm. It is as plain as black and white that there is something seriously wrong with their practices. Other professions would have to account for there actions. So when are ACS Law, or Mr Crossley ?.

[Scooby Doo69]

If they have such strong evidence against the accused of the alleged infringement, then why has nobody been taken to court ???. Out of the thousands of letters that they send, the whole things very fishy. Which is why there appears to be no court action brought against people. I can not believe how long the SRA are taking in investigating this firm. It is as plain as black and white that there is something seriously wrong with their practices. Other professions would have to account for there actions. So when are ACS Law, or Mr Crossley ?.

 

I suspect because it costs time and money to go too Court and it's a 50-50 result.

 

Just imagine if they lost, the whole thing stops there and then as the precedent would be that their evidence is not reliable in UK Law.

 

Even if they won, they would only achieve the ability to plaster it all over their web site.

 

Nope, threatening to take people to Court is far more profitable to the tune of £1,000,000 to date, so why risk spoiling it all?

[captain-123]

The other thing to think about is there is a post over on Slyc which points to a German expert of an evaluation of the sotware used by one of these companies (Logistep) These were the people who were used in the initial claims by Davernport Lyons. It is the company which digiprotect used initially before setting up their own system.

 

The expert said that while the software looks to work correctly there are flaws and that no information is actually stored, ie the data that was supposedly uploaded / downloaded so if they all work like that how can they prove that a substantial part of the work was made available which is what is required under CDPA rules.

 

It can also not tell if your wifi was unsecured or hacked.

 

I think this is where the problem lies if you have all of this inforamtion something which the DEB will require then why this cat and mouse game, however because the DEB isn't compulsory this system will just carry on regardless as I can't imagine the SRA doing anything about it. It seems to me that they are just another toothless body which doesn't like upsetting any of the people it is supposed to keep in check.

 

Lets be hones the Davenport Lyons affair still rumbles on and it's only taken well over a year to get nowhere. It would appear that solistors view the SRA with contempt which I'm sure is how the people effected by this are starting to feel. I would have thought that after such stinging critism from the Lords it might have sparked them into action but apparently not. So onward and upward lets see how many of the general public we can scare and torment for year after year with no resolution in sight, and nothing stopping NPO after NPO.

[mrkerr]

Has anyone actually just ignored these letters and seen what happens?

 

I recieved one for Cascada???? where they are requesting that I pay £295. Some things that interested me was that a) they dont have any real proof that would stand up in court (and this would be small claims court by the way because it's under £1000). b) How do they justify these charges. I did not download this file but even if I did, why would I pay more than the £10 max it is worth on itunes etc. (they are assuming that you share files, but have absaloutly no proof of this or it would say so in the letter). c) the isp address in question is currently still in use by someone else and registered to a different hostname. (you can search isp addresses via google).

 

I have spoke to my friend who studied law at degree level. He doesn't seem to think that I should take this seriously and just ignore it. He said that they will continue to send letters until they get bored, but he feels that this is a fishing mission aimed to extort money from people that worry or stress more than others. (they have not taken anyone to court as of yet, or so I believe)

 

He also stated that they cant just turn round and claim more and more money with each letter as this has to justified and they have already given you a settlement figure (some people have suggested that they double the ammount requested in second letter?)

 

So who knows, I think personally I will wait for the second letter and take it from there. Then if the money has doubled I can throw that in the pot for an explanation as well.

 

What are your thoughts on this? Is it too risky?

[mrkerr]

Oh sorry, and d) I was led to believe that copyright infringement was acriminal act. So why then are they not involving the police in their extortion racket?

[Valuev]

Mrkerr, I ignored my first letter which I received a few months back and havent heard anything yet. Some people who replied have been contacted again, with the price going up.

 

Im not stating its is better to ignore, as some see it as risky, but its the route Ive chosen.

[mrkerr]

Thanks Valuev,

 

I think I will just ignore it and hopefully they will get bored of threatening me with their nonsense.

[peter_piper316]

Of the first round of letters that went out in April, has anyone had a follow-up 2nd letter - I'm particularly interested in those involving "Media CAT".

[tp123]

peter_piper316,

 

I received a letter in April involving Media CAT and have had a second letter. It was the standard "we don't accept...based on a template...from internet..." crap, oh, and the claim is now for double the amount! (part 36 offer)

[youtube]

Reply back to part 36 asking how the settlement sum was determined. I'm sure its a law he has to comply with this request, make his life hell. Apparently he doesn't like these kinda of requests. Oh also deny as well!

[patrickq1]

view the SRA with contempt that is how we should veiw these toothless wonders,after all they receive an income of sorts from MR CROSSLEY so why should they lose money because of a few complaints,there words not mine they only estimated a few hundred complaints,what a load of bull so i would say i strongly view the SRA with utter contempt

my opinion only

as for acs crossley the guy is the lowest creep on this earth playing on peoples fears your complaints would be better of going to watchdog and which ...for what its worth

patrickq1

[zero_flight]

peter_piper316,

 

I received a letter in April involving Media CAT and have had a second letter. It was the standard "we don't accept...based on a template...from internet..." crap, oh, and the claim is now for double the amount! (part 36 offer)

 

 

I also received the same letter about two weeks ago, sent off my second LOD last week.

[rkojosh]

Hey, I can't tell everyone how helpful they have been. I literally had just signed on the dotted line and was about to post it off when I thought I'd have one last look on the internet about ACS.... Which brought me here! Thank god!

Saved me £295! The letter I recieved was for Evacuate The Dance Floor. Going to be sending my LOD off soon. Going from what people are saying, I am expecting to recieve a second letter requesting double the amount? I have a couple of questions which I would like answered if possible!

1) Has anyone recieved a further letter after letter number 2, if so, what did it say and what did you do?

2) Has anyone actually put in their LOD why they have sent these exact word for word letters out to 100's of people which in it self, sugests its not legit and gaurantees they have no legs to stand on!?

3) He is the work of the devil and I just don't understand how he is still getting away with this. (granted - that wasn't a question, and just a rant! )

Thanks again people...

[shenme]

Hey, I can't tell everyone how helpful they have been. I literally had just signed on the dotted line and was about to post it off when I thought I'd have one last look on the internet about ACS.... Which brought me here! Thank god!

Saved me £295! The letter I recieved was for Evacuate The Dance Floor. Going to be sending my LOD off soon. Going from what people are saying, I am expecting to recieve a second letter requesting double the amount? I have a couple of questions which I would like answered if possible!

 

1) Has anyone recieved a further letter after letter number 2, if so, what did it say and what did you do?

2) Has anyone actually put in their LOD why they have sent these exact word for word letters out to 100's of people which in it self, sugests its not legit and gaurantees they have no legs to stand on!?

3) He is the work of the devil and I just don't understand how he is still getting away with this. (granted - that wasn't a question, and just a rant! )

 

Thanks again people...

 

Hi rkojosh,

 

In answer to your questions:

1) Yes, you will most likely receive another two or three letters after letter number 2 - I was accused of downloading Scooter - Jumping all over the world last year (I didn't think anyone would want to upload that...). After a 5 or 6 letter ping-pong all correspondence ceased (even though the last letter stated that they were filing for a summons).

 

2) They are legally allowed to do it... As stupid as the law is they can send out mass shots like these. What a wonderful legal system we have.

 

3) It's a given that no one would **** on him if he was on fire

 

Oh and finally... The whole "do I reply, don't I" argument.

Whilst I cannot be 100% sure about this, most sources indicate responding to the first letter. Subsequent letters are up to your discretion.

If Madonna would stop adopting third world children and pigs would fly and some of these cases went to court then it would bode better that you responded, but what's the chances of that happening?

[samueladams]

Of the first round of letters that went out in April, has anyone had a follow-up 2nd letter - I'm particularly interested in those involving "Media CAT".

 

I did. I sent off an LOD immediately after receipt of the first letter. Received a second later days later basically just asking me to prove that it wasn't my internet connection. Also, "strongly" recommending i obtain legal advice. They state that they are confident that, despite my reporting of their activities to Consumer Direct, they are not breaching any legal rules

[zero_flight]

Well I have just responded with my second LOD, after that no further correspondence. Still expecting to receive third, fourth letters ???.

[Trusty10]

Well if you were waiting for things to quieten down, take a look at Companies House website. Then search company number 07213422. It appears as though an expansion is on the horizon.

[HenriIV]

Well if you were waiting for things to quieten down, take a look at Companies House website. Then search company number 07213422. It appears as though an expansion is on the horizon.

 

Probably not. Companies frequently use their solicitors address as their own registered address. Larper could be in any sort of business and may just be clients of ACS.

 

Recently sent a firm LOD myself having received one of the Pron variety demanding £495.00. I anticipate the boringly predictable follow-up with the ludicrous accusation of 'template' usage / and or 'questionaire' in due course.

 

Whilst there seems to be plenty here about LODs, etc, there doesn't seem to be much discussion regarding the level of 'damages' levied by ACS Law

on those who may be guilty?

 

In the event you DID upload (say) a film. How many copies would you have uploaded (just a partial copy? one copy? more?). Remember your upload bandwidth will be significantly less than your download.

 

What does that equate to in lost profit? On one £15 DVD - less than £10. Plus costs - a quid or so for the court paperwork, standard letter, etc?

 

So EVEN IF you were guilty - why on earth would you pay these ridiculous amounts of 'damages'? Why not offer, say, £50, in full and final settlement? Obviously ACS would try and extract more, but would they have a leg to stand on if you had offered them an entirely realistic (even generous?) sum?

Edited June 18, 2010 by HenriIV
wrongly worded

[zero_flight]

On many occasion I have wondered where they get their compensation amounts, £495, £990. Totally ridiculous amounts.