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 3826 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

  • Replies 4.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

been following this thread over the last couple of days now... so if you do get a letter from these muppets, do you simply ignore (and not enter into any comms with them) or do you need to address it?

 

i am concerned as a BT customer that my details may be now in the hands of acs and would like to know what the suggested route is, should a belated xmas pressie comes through my letterbox!

\"I Think you\'ll find our charges are fair and laid out in our terms and conditions Mr Butler....\"

Link to post
Share on other sites
been following this thread over the last couple of days now... so if you do get a letter from these muppets, do you simply ignore (and not enter into any comms with them) or do you need to address it?

 

i am concerned as a BT customer that my details may be now in the hands of acs and would like to know what the suggested route is, should a belated xmas pressie comes through my letterbox!

 

I very much hope you dont get it but if you do, then dont ignore it. If you have not done it then answer with simple denial. Dont show anger inyour letter of denial. The less you say the better.

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi everyone,

 

im new to this forum.

like most people her i have been recieving the threatening letters from ACS:LAW

 

i have sent a first lod to which they just sent another letter claiming to have received no responce. even though i sentand paid for next day delivery. and i have now recieved

"NOTICE OF OFFER TO SETTLE - PART 36"

 

and now im even more at a loss on what i should be writing back.

i am just your average joe. i aint got a clud how to but letters together for anything like this. i found a template for my firs lod but have had no luck trying to find anymore. so im asking if anyone knows of any more lod templates that i could see/use to respond to this PART 36 letter. or if anyone else has recieved this letter could you please help/tell me in what you did and what i can do next.

 

thank you all for your time.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
hi everyone,

 

im new to this forum.

like most people her i have been recieving the threatening letters from ACS:LAW

 

i have sent a first lod to which they just sent another letter claiming to have received no responce. even though i sentand paid for next day delivery. and i have now recieved

"NOTICE OF OFFER TO SETTLE - PART 36"

 

and now im even more at a loss on what i should be writing back.

i am just your average joe. i aint got a clud how to but letters together for anything like this. i found a template for my firs lod but have had no luck trying to find anymore. so im asking if anyone knows of any more lod templates that i could see/use to respond to this PART 36 letter. or if anyone else has recieved this letter could you please help/tell me in what you did and what i can do next.

 

thank you all for your time.

 

 

 

Hiya..Don't panic, firstly read the BBC report this clearly shows that many beleive it is merely a money making [problem] and there is no way they want to risk going near a court in case it bought it all crashing down.

 

The Part 36 bit is just about trying to settle out of court to avoid wasting a courts time, but we all know that it wont go near a court so its pretty irrelevent, nothing has really changed since the very begining of this thread, the advice is still write a LOD, there is no need to start playing letter ping pong, of course come back here if you ever get actual court proceedings issued against you, untill then just relax and become part of the 'Internet campaign' that Mr Crossley mentions :)

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi can i ask for a list of all ISP who have rolled over and given our IDs out to this ACS-law so i can avoid to re-new my contract with all spineless ISP. Tiscali/Talk-Talk, BT, Virgin, are the few i have on my list of avoidables, can any m8s add to this please? and i would also like to invite all CAGs to add to my campaign im sick of reading about us having to fight our own little corner, if one ISP took action against ACS this would come to a end as quick as it started BUT they havent, if they lose 30.000 customers they have lost lots of £££££££££. The only ISP what i havent hurd of rolling over is AOL is this true? THANKS.

 

 

As far as I know, all ISPs have "rolled over" as you put it. Because they have been ordered to hand over the details by a court, there probably isn't a great deal that they can do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

+

As far as I know, all ISPs have "rolled over" as you put it. Because they have been ordered to hand over the details by a court, there probably isn't a great deal that they can do.

 

True...it should actually be upto the court to say 'hang on a minute, show us some proof that these are the people responsible', Im sure even if that question was asked then ACS would point to the (untested) so-called evidence of Digiprotect, I doubt wether the judge has the faintest clue what they are on about if they start talking about ISP's and IP address and bit torrents anyway, he just rolls over and does what they say !

 

What is worrying is that many ISP's didnt have a clue what was going on, if you look back to the begining of this thread youll see responses from ISP Customer service ranged from 'its a fake [problem], ignore it' to 'I havnt a clue whats going on', only a few people actually got the actual truth from their ISP.

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just read about this on the bbc website. About someone who was meant to have downloaded something 18 months ago! i thought isp s only had to keep records of ip address etc. for 6 months?

Link to post
Share on other sites
hi everyone,

 

im new to this forum.

like most people her i have been recieving the threatening letters from ACS:LAW

 

i have sent a first lod to which they just sent another letter claiming to have received no responce. even though i sentand paid for next day delivery. and i have now recieved

"NOTICE OF OFFER TO SETTLE - PART 36"

 

and now im even more at a loss on what i should be writing back.

i am just your average joe. i aint got a clud how to but letters together for anything like this. i found a template for my firs lod but have had no luck trying to find anymore. so im asking if anyone knows of any more lod templates that i could see/use to respond to this PART 36 letter. or if anyone else has recieved this letter could you please help/tell me in what you did and what i can do next.

 

thank you all for your time.

 

 

 

yes i agree with Andydd answer to you that not to panic, stay calm and just send another lod refer to section 16(1) and 20 of CDPA 1988. and deny . ANSWER AS SHORT AS POSSIBLE. No anger and no ping pong match.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Has any one seen the pic,s of the ACS law team and Logistep? there is a link on slyck they look like real dodge pots to me, they look like Romanian pick pockets :D:D have they been on crime watch yet?

Link to post
Share on other sites
I've just read about this on the bbc website. About someone who was meant to have downloaded something 18 months ago! i thought isp s only had to keep records of ip address etc. for 6 months?

that may true but ace law told that me it takes up to a year to get all the paperwork in order to send out the first letter.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Pub Landlord fined £8000 over customer's illegal Wi-Fi download | T3 magazine

 

Any one for the dark ages ? Thats where we will end up with people and companies afraid to provide or use WIFI.

 

Terran

 

Ive thought this too, how can my local starbucks or weatherspoon pub 'police' what people do on their network or how about houses with mutiple occupants, I have a flatmate but am I supposed to barge into his room now and again and demand to see what he's doing on his pc ?

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with that article is that it isn't authenticated. A mysterious Pub Landlord 'fined' yet 'The case has been brought about by the copyright holder itself (whoever that may be)'. Surely as a civil action the defendant would have had to pay costs & compensation if the case was found against him, not a fine? Also I would have thought if this was a legitimate case it would have aroused national media interest and the parties named along with the relevant court.

 

I wonder if this is a case of 'Chinese Whispers' perpetrated by some less than trustworthy party wanting to feed the paranoia created by a 'cash cow' civil action that has yet to enter any courtroom?

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
The problem with that article is that it isn't authenticated. A mysterious Pub Landlord 'fined' yet 'The case has been brought about by the copyright holder itself (whoever that may be)'. Surely as a civil action the defendant would have had to pay costs & compensation if the case was found against him, not a fine? Also I would have thought if this was a legitimate case it would have aroused national media interest and the parties named along with the relevant court.

 

I wonder if this is a case of 'Chinese Whispers' perpetrated by some less than trustworthy party wanting to feed the paranoia created by a 'cash cow' civil action that has yet to enter any courtroom?

 

i wonder if its being spread by one of crossley's gang member. I am sure few in this forum are indirectly working for his intrests

Link to post
Share on other sites
+

 

True...it should actually be upto the court to say 'hang on a minute, show us some proof that these are the people responsible', Im sure even if that question was asked then ACS would point to the (untested) so-called evidence of Digiprotect, I doubt wether the judge has the faintest clue what they are on about if they start talking about ISP's and IP address and bit torrents anyway, he just rolls over and does what they say !

 

What is worrying is that many ISP's didnt have a clue what was going on, if you look back to the begining of this thread youll see responses from ISP Customer service ranged from 'its a fake [problem], ignore it' to 'I havnt a clue whats going on', only a few people actually got the actual truth from their ISP.

 

Andy

 

I think I see what you are saying, but IF the judge knows little of what ACS are doing, or what they are doing it for I think ISPs have then failed to sufficiently fight ACS in court. They certainly (ISPs) have the cash and power to easily rip ACS' case apart in the courtroom. They didn't, nor does it seem they are interested in doing so. Surely ISPs, who should know what ACS & Co are doing, and who are the first point of contact with the court should be proving to the judge whats wrong here and making him understand if he doesn't?

 

ISPs, I believe, are missing a good opportunity here to prove they actually care about their customers by fighting a good fight in court. At the very least I think they should publicise what is happening here, but I have so far failed to find any correspondence from my own ISP (BT) on this matter, which suggests to me they are not interested in the big picture here. It's clear to me that ACS are putting up a good case in court, well prepared. Come on ISPs, wake up.....:|

Link to post
Share on other sites

JPTS33

I agree m8 the only way ISP are going to stand up and listen to loyal innocent customers is when they are losing lots of £££££££ thats why i would love to find a ISP who have not give our details out and all them customers can migrate to that ISP. Or for a ISP to challenge ACS in court and turn the tables round, what ever ISP finds the balls to challenge ACS in court i think will gane tens of thousands of new cusomers.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The problem with that article is that it isn't authenticated. A mysterious Pub Landlord 'fined' yet 'The case has been brought about by the copyright holder itself (whoever that may be)'. Surely as a civil action the defendant would have had to pay costs & compensation if the case was found against him, not a fine? Also I would have thought if this was a legitimate case it would have aroused national media interest and the parties named along with the relevant court.

 

I wonder if this is a case of 'Chinese Whispers' perpetrated by some less than trustworthy party wanting to feed the paranoia created by a 'cash cow' civil action that has yet to enter any courtroom?

 

I agree completely. Everything about those articles feels wrong, and it's very strange how nobody can ever verify any of these cases. Just like Davenport Lyons' "£16,000 judgement" :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Bad news for thoise in scotland on this one, acs law have won in court to get the personal details of 30k people from isps.

What do you mean bad new for Scottish, have no one in Scotland ever got a letter from ACS. How is the court order any different to the others.

Link to post
Share on other sites

oh hang on was my bad, was from the royal courts of justice in london, heres the press release

 

UPDATE 30000 UK Broadband ISP Customers Face Illegal File Sharing Threat Letters − ISPreview UK

 

at bottom of the article:

ACS: Law are currently also under investigation by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), though details of this action remain unknown.

question everything!

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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3826 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...