Jump to content


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


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3827 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/welcome-consumer-forums/107001-how-do-i-dummies.html

 

 

 

 

Advice & opinions given by patrickq1 are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 4.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/welcome-consumer-forums/107001-how-do-i-dummies.html

 

 

 

 

Advice & opinions given by patrickq1 are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/welcome-consumer-forums/107001-how-do-i-dummies.html

 

 

 

 

Advice & opinions given by patrickq1 are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/welcome-consumer-forums/107001-how-do-i-dummies.html

 

 

 

 

Advice & opinions given by patrickq1 are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just copy & paste the article or url into Google Translate

Anthrax alert at debt collectors caused by box of doughnuts

 

Make sure you do not post anything which identifies you. Although we can remove certain things from the site unless it's done in a timely manner everything you post will appear in Google cache & we do not have any control over that.

 

Vir prudens non contra ventum mingit

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

17 Port & Maritime Regiment RCT

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is thought to be reasonable to use 10% of an article when reproducing it with creditation. Reproducing the full article without any creditation is seen as plagiarism and leaves the site open to being sued. :eek:

Anthrax alert at debt collectors caused by box of doughnuts

 

Make sure you do not post anything which identifies you. Although we can remove certain things from the site unless it's done in a timely manner everything you post will appear in Google cache & we do not have any control over that.

 

Vir prudens non contra ventum mingit

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

17 Port & Maritime Regiment RCT

Link to post
Share on other sites

Patrick, can you put me out of my misery and explain what all this means, as I'm totally confused :confused:

 

Haven't even started on the Voddie, yet, so can't be that... Until later, that is... ;)

Always happy to help where I can!

:lol:

Beware of legal advice given on a private forum - do you REALLY know who is posting? Are they REALLY accountable for their posts? What if you follow their advice and get something wrong?

It was Winston Churchill who said; "Democracy is the worst way to run a country except for all the others"

 

Advice and comments posted by car2403 are offered purely without prejudice. They reflect only my personal opinion and do not represent the opinion of this forum or it's management. You should always seek legal advice from a qualified legal advisor. As a member of the site team, I disable reputation - reputation points mean nothing, please check my posting credentials yourself and make an informed decision. You shouldn't PM me and await a reply - I may be too late with a response. No replies will be given in Private Messages - just as with getting advice from the forum, getting advice via Private Messages is dangerous. CAG is about sharing successes so others can follow your example, this is primarily why I'm here, so please don't be offended if I don't offer replies in PM that doesn't comply with this. Help CAG to help others by keeping your thread up to date.

 

 

USEFUL LINKS; New User Guide to CAG | Can't find what you're looking for? | Intro to Consumer Credit Litigation | Is My Agreement Enforceable | Default (Surleybonds) Template Letter | Defaults - background, removal methods, challenges and taking a claim to Court | Digital Signature Guide | Overdrafts and the CCA

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't comment further until Patrick does first ;)

Always happy to help where I can!

:lol:

Beware of legal advice given on a private forum - do you REALLY know who is posting? Are they REALLY accountable for their posts? What if you follow their advice and get something wrong?

It was Winston Churchill who said; "Democracy is the worst way to run a country except for all the others"

 

Advice and comments posted by car2403 are offered purely without prejudice. They reflect only my personal opinion and do not represent the opinion of this forum or it's management. You should always seek legal advice from a qualified legal advisor. As a member of the site team, I disable reputation - reputation points mean nothing, please check my posting credentials yourself and make an informed decision. You shouldn't PM me and await a reply - I may be too late with a response. No replies will be given in Private Messages - just as with getting advice from the forum, getting advice via Private Messages is dangerous. CAG is about sharing successes so others can follow your example, this is primarily why I'm here, so please don't be offended if I don't offer replies in PM that doesn't comply with this. Help CAG to help others by keeping your thread up to date.

 

 

USEFUL LINKS; New User Guide to CAG | Can't find what you're looking for? | Intro to Consumer Credit Litigation | Is My Agreement Enforceable | Default (Surleybonds) Template Letter | Defaults - background, removal methods, challenges and taking a claim to Court | Digital Signature Guide | Overdrafts and the CCA

Link to post
Share on other sites
I cannot comment any furthur LTWFB..i do apologize, but strict censorship is now in place im afraid :rolleyes:

 

You know perfectly well what the situation is I have explained it to you twice, once publically and once by PM, but to reiterate and for the benefit of other posters I will explain one more time. Your post #1557 was moderated because you copied & pasted an article from another website in it's entirety & without giving credit to either that site nor the author. This is breach of copyright and as such the consequences to this group/site could be dire, not only to CAG itself but to the very people who seek help.

 

It is ironical that a post which is in breach of copyright has to be removed from a thread that is dealing with the very same. The only difference being is that the majority of posters are innocent whereas your post was a blatant breach for all to see in a public forum.

 

There is absolutely nothing to stop people discussing the article or even using quotes within moderation, but to plagiarize whole articles is not on.

I cannot comment any furthur LTWFB..i do apologize, but strict censorship is now in place im afraid
If 'strict censorship' was in place this thread would have been closed long ago.

Finally, this is the last word on the matter. It is not open to negotiation or discussion.

Edited by cerberusalert

Anthrax alert at debt collectors caused by box of doughnuts

 

Make sure you do not post anything which identifies you. Although we can remove certain things from the site unless it's done in a timely manner everything you post will appear in Google cache & we do not have any control over that.

 

Vir prudens non contra ventum mingit

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

17 Port & Maritime Regiment RCT

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, for heaven sake, just write a summary of the articles...

 

The last article is alledging that one "Terence Tsang" is the registrar of an ACS law domain name, and has something to do with Davenport Lyon. This is based on Davenport Lyon documents being marked as authored by "ttsang"

This Tsang is apparently a cybersquatter. I suppose that the implication is that the "expert" evidence used by ACS and DL is based on work by Tsang.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The first article seems to confirm what we already thought about the Davenport Lyon campaign - that it was based on people not contesting the matter and paying up. The authors claim to have come into possession of a letter setting out how revenues are divided between DL, Digiprotect and the rights holders. DL gets over 1/3rd, but within that third, it has to account for the costs where people contest cases (as I understand it - translation ain't great).

It seems that Digiprotect is an intermediary between law firms and rights holders (like CMCs in areas of mass litigation), but that Digiprotect does not have contractual arrangements with rights holders for law firms to pursue contested cases.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The second article essentially alledges that Digiprotect infringed copyright in the IP tracing software developed by Logistep. Logistep terminated Digiprotect's licence to use the software some time in 2007 and they confirmed this to the article's authors, who claim to be in possession of evidence put before a judge to obtain an order for disclosure of names and addresses linked to IPs. The evidence includes logistep data schedule date marked in mid 2008.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The third article appears to be 50 50 devoted to the German law on recovering damages and costs from people targeted and to the manner in which DL decided whether to proceed with a case. The German costs rules are hard to understand through google translate, so no summary of that stuff.

DL kept a record for each target, recording their status (e.g. married, student etc), the alledged infringement, any defence put forward, further action to be taken and whether or not a lawyer was instructed by the target.

The authors seem to be of the view, from an analysis of a number of these records that the best response to accusations from DL would have been a) to deny the allegation, but provide no further information or b) to instruct a solicitor.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The third article appears to be 50 50 devoted to the German law on recovering damages and costs from people targeted and to the manner in which DL decided whether to proceed with a case. The German costs rules are hard to understand through google translate, so no summary of that stuff.

DL kept a record for each target, recording their status (e.g. married, student etc), the alledged infringement, any defence put forward, further action to be taken and whether or not a lawyer was instructed by the target.

The authors seem to be of the view, from an analysis of a number of these records that the best response to accusations from DL would have been a) to deny the allegation, but provide no further information or b) to instruct a solicitor.

 

You did better than I did trying to sort Googles translation!!!

 

On the last bit, I had the impression that they were using a point score system, allocating points due to a number of factors. Outright denial or instructing a solicitor produced a low score = no action.

 

Is that correct?

 

david

Link to post
Share on other sites

HHmm..Seems nothing really new to be honest, The Terrance Tsang bit is discussed right at the begining of this thread and its prob irrellevant.

 

The rest of it just accuses all the companies involved being in it for the money, something we all knew anyway.

 

The 'points system' isn't suprising, that DL alledgedly took a couple of people to court and won by default (due to their no-show) would appear to show that they did their homework first and predicted that outcome.

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, the apparently used a 0-10 points system. They noted that when LawDit acted for someone the score was 3. However, 3 is still not "no action" (that'd be 0).

As to the outright denial, I think that what they mean is that if you offer information then they will keep corresponding with you to try to convince you that you're wrong. This may also be tied up with the German law, because it seems that if you claim that someone else hacked your computer or used your connection, then you can still be liable for costs... at least... that's what I think they're saying...

Link to post
Share on other sites
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3827 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...