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

[kiptower]

all I can suggest is that people contact her , and ask her to push "ant and dec" to take the matter up where the prev goverment left off in the case of these [problematic],

[bob92101]

I will certainly write to Heidi Alexander as suggested. I have already written to my MP, the Solicitor's Regulation Authority, the Consumers Association, the BBC, various newspapers and my ISP - who I will be leaving soon.

 

It would be nice to be able to get these ideas out to a wider audience, many of who may already have paid out and not be aware of this site - which is why I decided to write to the media - any further suggestions?

 

I am absolutely opposed to piracy in any form and broadly support the Digital Economy Act 2010 and the graduated response scheme - i.e. warnings, education and denial of Internet access for persistent offenders. However, I would very much like to see the intimidatory activities of ACS and its inevitable offshoots stopped permanently.

[8of9]

I will certainly write to Heidi Alexander as suggested. I have already written to my MP, the Solicitor's Regulation Authority, the Consumers Association, the BBC, various newspapers and my ISP - who I will be leaving soon.

 

It would be nice to be able to get these ideas out to a wider audience, many of who may already have paid out and not be aware of this site - which is why I decided to write to the media - any further suggestions?

 

I am absolutely opposed to piracy in any form and broadly support the Digital Economy Act 2010 and the graduated response scheme - i.e. warnings, education and denial of Internet access for persistent offenders. However, I would very much like to see the intimidatory activities of ACS and its inevitable offshoots stopped permanently.

 

Yeah. Well said.

It is obvious that what is going on is widely known about in government, ISP's, SRA etc. What is strange however is that NOT ONE of these official and regulatory bodies is doing anything about it, or at least publically they're not. We know that the SRA are investigating ACS Law, as they did with Davenport Lyons before and from whom ACS picked up when they got out. How long do they need? Surely the SRA have enough evidence to put a stop to this.

Perhaps it needs a "name" or a "celebrity" to be accused to bring this into the public domain. (or do ACS Law filter the names and addresses supplied and deliberately exclude those who might attract unwanted publicity??)

Meanwhile it still goes on.....

[noclue22]

hello all,

 

well i recieved a letter a couple months ago and i sent them a letter of denial but i have just recieved another letter of acs law telling me that it is still an active case and that they wont accept my letter of denial as they call it a generic one taken off a website and thus isnt applicable. I now have 14 days to pay them the money!!!!!

 

What do i do now? do i write another letter or do i ignore them as i claimed i would do in my letter of denial? what are my options?

[andydd]

hello all,

 

well i recieved a letter a couple months ago and i sent them a letter of denial but i have just recieved another letter of acs law telling me that it is still an active case and that they wont accept my letter of denial as they call it a generic one taken off a website and thus isnt applicable. I now have 14 days to pay them the money!!!!!

 

What do i do now? do i write another letter or do i ignore them as i claimed i would do in my letter of denial? what are my options?

 

Ignore them, you've sent a valid LOD, that is ACS's standard response.

 

If you are feeling cheeky you could write back and say you do not accept their letter as it appears to be a mass produced generic one

 

Andy

[noclue22]

Ok cheers andy.

 

Has there been many instances of 2nd letters then? should i expect a 3rd. I am a little worried as i am due to go away for nearly 3 months soon and i dont want to come back to loads of letters and find myself way over my head.

[rudy691]

my mate has received the first letter from ACS claiming that he downloaded some mp3 and they're telling him to pay nearly £300 !

 

told him to send that letter of denial now, will keep you updated on this !

 

Thanks

[tp123]

Hi,

 

No change in my case - still awaiting a reply to my second letter of denial.

 

It seems that a new channel of complaint has opened up with reports that the BBCs One Show are planning to do a feature on ACS Law. This info comes from a post on the Slyck site which includes a link to the relevant website.

 

I have already complained to Which?, Watchdog, SRA, LCS, MPs etc, and can now add the BBC One show to that list. I would encourage anyone elses to do so, if only to raise public awareness of this foul practice as the post on Slyck also indicates that according to Which?, many people are still paying up.

[Scooby Doo69]

Hi,

 

No change in my case - still awaiting a reply to my second letter of denial.

 

It seems that a new channel of complaint has opened up with reports that the BBCs One Show are planning to do a feature on ACS Law. This info comes from a post on the Slyck site which includes a link to the relevant website.

 

I have already complained to Which?, Watchdog, SRA, LCS, MPs etc, and can now add the BBC One show to that list. I would encourage anyone elses to do so, if only to raise public awareness of this foul practice as the post on Slyck also indicates that according to Which?, many people are still paying up.

 

Now that would be funny, although good luck for Dom in trying to find Andy. The office is a virtual address and He'd have to find His home address. I know it, but Dom will have to find it out for Himself LOL

[The GodMother]

Oh l think dom is wonderful at things. |Look at the work he does on cowboy builders on c5.

[andydd]

Ok cheers andy.

 

Has there been many instances of 2nd letters then? should i expect a 3rd. I am a little worried as i am due to go away for nearly 3 months soon and i dont want to come back to loads of letters and find myself way over my head.

 

Letters schmeters !.

 

You may or may not get multiple letters, somewhere a few posts back there is a template of factors that ACS use to determine whether to keep hassling you, factors such as your employment, what you said to them did you admit having a wifi network, have you a lwayer, etc, etc.

 

One denial is good enough, no point playing letter ping-pong, REMEMBER ACS have yet to fight any case in court !

 

Andy

[bob92101]

- - - -

You may or may not get multiple letters, somewhere a few posts back there is a template of factors that ACS use to determine whether to keep hassling you, factors such as your employment, what you said to them did you admit having a wifi network, have you a lwayer, etc, etc.

- - - -

I thought that the general idea was that you should give ACS no information at all. Certainly not your employment details or whether you have wifi

 

As to having a lawyer, surely this would involve getting a lawyer to write to ACS which would cost you :?

 

Contacting the BBC One show sounds like a good idea.

[andydd]

I thought that the general idea was that you should give ACS no information at all. Certainly not your employment details or whether you have wifi

 

As to having a lawyer, surely this would involve getting a lawyer to write to ACS which would cost you :?

 

Contacting the BBC One show sounds like a good idea.

 

Yes....That is what i was implying, but some people do feel the need to blurt out their details which ACS may use to their advantage.

 

Although if you are unemployed that is going to go to your advantage, as you may be able to get legal aid, and in any case even if ACS won in Court, a judge may require you to pay a £1 a week or something.

 

Andy

[Scooby Doo69]

Yes....That is what i was implying, but some people do feel the need to blurt out their details which ACS may use to their advantage.

 

Although if you are unemployed that is going to go to your advantage, as you may be able to get legal aid, and in any case even if ACS won in Court, a judge may require you to pay a £1 a week or something.

 

Andy

 

This is civil law so no such thing as legal aid.

It's a game of numbers, kick up enough of a stink and they won't pursue you regardless. There are enough saps out there paying out of fright, to make it go away, etc.

[Time on my hands]

To all of you who have received a nastygram - paying up just feeds them more incentives to carry on with their scheme.

 

I know how frightening these letters can be - particularly the second or third, and especially if they happen to coincide with one of Andy's press releases (although these have been thin on the ground as of late).

 

Please read the speculative invoicing guide, and please understand the difference between accusations of uploading and downloading.

 

Give them nothing - no personal details, no money. Remember, some of us have been playing letter pingpong for over 2 years, although my last letter was nearly 10 months ago - a sure sign that he's finding it more profitable to bully newbies into coughing up.

 

Stand up to bullies! You're not in the playground now - you can fight back.

[Scooby Doo69]

Remember this forum is for the innocent. If you are guilty seek legal advice, but recommendations from within the legal community is an offer of no more than £50 is in line with the nature of the offence.

 

Either way if it was me I'd be asking evidence.

[zero_flight]

Well its coming up to nearly three weeks since I sent my second letter of denial. As of yet I have not heard anything, but it took them one month to respond to the first letter of denial that I sent them. I have sent all correspondence to Which magazine editor, as requested.

[Scooby Doo69]

 

I know how frightening these letters can be - particularly the second or third, and especially if they happen to coincide with one of Andy's press releases (although these have been thin on the ground as of late).

 

Oh yes, the famous press releases and promises of more cases going to Court (with no evidence of any to date), moving to plush new premises, partnerships across the pond, etc.

 

[Valuev]

Personally, I wouldnt even open up yourself into a game of 'letter ping pong' if you havent done it, just ignore it, and they wont respond. The only ones that are getting more letters are the ones that are 'denying' it.

[HenriIV]

The only ones that are getting more letters are the ones that are 'denying' it.

 

Do you have any evidence to support that statement?

[randomuser]

Personally, I wouldnt even open up yourself into a game of 'letter ping pong' if you havent done it, just ignore it, and they wont respond. The only ones that are getting more letters are the ones that are 'denying' it.

Erm no....then if they decide to take you to court they could win automatically as you failed to reply to the letter and didn't defend or deny the accusations....Seems pretty obvious to me it is better to reply and say you did not do it.

[tp123]

Erm no....then if they decide to take you to court they could win automatically as you failed to reply to the letter and didn't defend or deny the accusations....Seems pretty obvious to me it is better to reply and say you did not do it.

 

Well said.

 

Remember that these letters, however unreasonable they seem, are legitimate claims (although based on suspect evidence) made in accordance with the code of practice for pre-action conduct in intellectual property disputes. This code requires that the "defendant" should provide a written response.

 

It's obviously up to the individual what they do but IMO should one of these claims ever get to court, a dim view would be taken by the Magistrates if the defendant had not , as a minimum, replied with a denial and hence discharged his duties to comply with the code of conduct.

[Scooby Doo69]

Well said.

 

Remember that these letters, however unreasonable they seem, are legitimate claims (although based on suspect evidence) made in accordance with the code of practice for pre-action conduct in intellectual property disputes. This code requires that the "defendant" should provide a written response.

 

It's obviously up to the individual what they do but IMO should one of these claims ever get to court, a dim view would be taken by the Magistrates if the defendant had not , as a minimum, replied with a denial and hence discharged his duties to comply with the code of conduct.

 

Totally agree, whilst each to their own, it's a very dangerous game to play to ignore the letters. In my opinion they will just give up when the cash cow dries up, but there is a chance that they will try to set a legal precedent and take someone to Court as they would have nothing to lose. Chances are this would be someone who'd not defend themselves or had admitted the offence and not paid up.

 

Remember Davenport Lyons targeted those who ignored all letters and did not turn up in Court and got a default judgement. In these circumstances the judge would have no alternative.

 

I have said all along, a single letter of denial would be sufficient stating that no further correspondance will be entered into. This way, any further letters and demands for monies could be construed as harrassment in the unlikely event of this going to Court.

[devonwoman]

Just to let you know where i am. Received first letter 3 months ago, sent off LOD 2 days later and have not heard back from them as yet. Just out of interest what is longest someone has waited for until a second letter came.

[peter_piper316]

Just to let you know where i am. Received first letter 3 months ago, sent off LOD 2 days later and have not heard back from them as yet. Just out of interest what is longest someone has waited for until a second letter came.

 

I've been waiting quite a while (not quite 3 months yet though) for my 2nd letter to come too.

Don't know if I've been lost amongst the sheer number of claims they've issued, or if I've been specifically singled out (either they've dropped the case, or planning a more specific 2nd letter for me)?

 

devonwoman - was your claim regarding Media Cat? Mine was.