Golden Eye (International) Ltd - We have a troll trying on for the third time!

[rhino666]

Looks like more people are trying to get in on Golden Eyes act.

 

( from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-25347913)

 

Thousands of Germans are reported to have been sent letters asking them to pay a fee for porn they are alleged to have streamed illegally online.

 

Law firm Urmann (U+C) is acting on behalf of Swiss copyright protection firm the Archive,

and is asking for one-off payments of 250 euros (£210).

 

It confirmed to the BBC that the letters have been sent but would not say how many.

 

A growing number of affected people are claiming to be wrongly accused.

 

According to a German news site, more than 10,000 people are affected.

 

The German case is one of the first to target people accused of streaming rather than downloading pornography.

 

In this case U+C is targeting users who, they claim, have viewed content from porn-streaming site Redtube.

 

The law firm was unwilling to speak about its work to the BBC. Neither was the Archive available for comment.

 

In a twist, its campaign appears to have been taken up by cybercriminals who are sending out fake emails

purporting to come from U+C but containing malicious software.

 

It led the law firm to issue a warning on its website urging people not to open the emails.

 

"Fake warnings on behalf of U+C have been sent by email.

This email does not come from the law firm.

Warnings on behalf of our clients are shipped exclusively by mail," it said.

 

Real evidence

 

The practice of law firms pursuing alleged copyright infringers has become a growing concern in recent years.

 

"In previous cases like this, we've seen some people pushed into paying up when they may have done nothing wrong," said Peter Bradwell of the Open Rights Group.

"It can seem more expensive or embarrassing to challenge the accusation.

"If a company wants to write to people it claims have infringed their copyright, a court needs to at least make sure the evidence they have is of a high standard and that letters being sent are fair and easy to understand."

[rhino666]

Sureley a point that should stand for EVERYONE now and in the future is :

How are you supposed to know if something is copyrighted if there's no copyright warning before you download or watch something.

[gerson]

Looks as though the German court are reviewing their decision

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-25492267

 

G

[unclebulgaria67]

Dangerous if they go down the streaming route. If this was accepted by a court, then anyone who viewed copyrighted material on Youtube or any other online site could be liable to pay a relevant amount for the material.

 

Personally I think the copyright/license holders should only be able to go after the person who uploaded the material in the first place and any site that makes the material available to others.

[gerson]

Hi UB,

 

I agree - if 'streaming' is deemed copyright infringement then all users of iPlayer/Youtube, etc. will all be liable to be fined by some unscrupulous lawyer at some point.

 

Of the 80+ requests to the different (multiple) German courts for ISP user details approx 25+ were rejected because the court took issues (re: streaming as opposed to download)

 

Malibu Media also took a defeat in Münich court - where the court stated that a) they are not the owners of the movies, b) the movies had never been released locally in Germany and as such there is no copyright and c) as they are 'pure pornography' the productions are not 'personal intellectual creations' and are not entitled to protection under Germany's copyright laws....

 

G

[Horsen]

Sureley a point that should stand for EVERYONE now and in the future is :

How are you supposed to know if something is copyrighted if there's no copyright warning before you download or watch something.

Hi Rhino666.

I know this isn't the right thread to discuss copyright but basically every image, picture, painting work of art etc plus any written word is protected by copyright. It is up to the author how they deal with the copyright and that can cause problems. It is a complete minefield and there are many instances of copyright infringement in the courts.

[rhino666]

They (GEIL ) had 12 months to do their work. That 12 months is now well and truly up! From march 2012 that they had to destroy the IP addresses on their CD evidence after 12 months AND write to the people they'd written to letting them know their records had been destroyed. GEIL have NOT done this.

[rhino666]

You should be OK now as there 12months to get hold of people expired many moons ago. They ignore most the court orders so if you do get a letter from them ignore it as they were supposed to have got people by approx Dec last year and supposed crime is supposed to have taken place with 3 years of them moaning about it.

[fkofilee]

So to necro a thread but these monkeys are trying it on again.

[unclebulgaria67]

So to necro a thread but these monkeys are trying it on again.

 

Nothing being reported online about this. Have you had a letter ?

[Stigman]

Nothing being reported online about this. Have you had a letter ?

 

http://torrentfreak.com/virgin-customers-targeted-in-new-porn-piracy-shakedown-150314/

 

Stigman

[rhino666]

They're ignoring what the high court said and about 18months too late.

ask them to prove who was at the PC at the time of the supposed infringement as the courts would be very interested in as many people have access to your pc and the bill payer can't be held responsible for every adult.

[rhino666]

section 9 http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2012/1740.html

and this might also help https://wiki.openrightsgroup.org/wiki/Golden_Eye_International , But reading through https://acsbore.wordpress.com/ yes they are on the prowl again.

3rd para https://acsbore.wordpress.com/2014/01/

[unclebulgaria67]

It is a different copyright owner who is trying this. I think the ISP should advise its customers when they have had to pass on their personal information via a court order.

 

I have suspicion that the porn and film studios are uploading their own films to internet sites, so they can later pursue people for money. Most of what they produce would not make them much money. But if enough people download their products, then when the law permits it, they could make a lot of money.

 

Have you noticed that most of the film work titles where they are pursuing people for money are not blockbusters, where hundreds of thousand or millions of people have downloaded.

[rhino666]

Golden eye is Golden eye. They're not giving up and they will do as they please

[rhino666]

Is there ANY kind of law these people have broken?

[Stigman]

I have suspicion that the porn and film studios are uploading their own films to internet sites, so they can later pursue people for money. Most of what they produce would not make them much money.

 

Have you noticed that most of the film work titles where they are pursuing people for money are not blockbusters, where hundreds of thousand or millions of people have downloaded.

 

There was talk of this happening when The Expendables 3 was uploaded in near-perfect DVD quality approx. 3 weeks before the cinema release dates.

 

Then the movie owners Millennium Films & Lionsgate began then targeting file-sharers.

 

Stigman

[unclebulgaria67]

There was talk of this happening when The Expendables 3 was uploaded in near-perfect DVD quality approx. 3 weeks before the cinema release dates.

 

Then the movie owners Millennium Films & Lionsgate began then targeting file-sharers.

 

Stigman

 

I seem to remember that the film studios gave up because they did not want the bad publicity of going after people. Many will be young people with very little in the way of finances and in family households, it may not be easy to identify the person who breached copyright.

 

It is the person who uploaded/downloaded the material and not the owner of the internet connection who would be responsible.

 

If people are using VPN services to mask their internet connections, that won't make it easier.

 

What the copyright holders should be doing is going after the torrent sharing sites and getting their material removed.

 

This really is no different to one person buying a DVD or a book and passing it around their friends/family to see it. But of course the internet allows it to happen on a much bigger scale.

[rhino666]

Back to GEIL who think they're above every law and [problem]......Yeah [problem] !

[unclebulgaria67]

Back to GEIL who think they're above every law and [problem]......Yeah [problem] !

 

Do these recent letters have anything to do with GEIL ?

[rhino666]

Well they seem to like putting their name to them, from what people say.

[unclebulgaria67]

Well they seem to like putting their name to them, from what people say.

 

They would have to say so, given the previous court rulings.

 

The new letters seem to come from US law firms, who think they can make money in the same way as previous ones have tried.

[rhino666]

Called ?

[unclebulgaria67]

Called ?

 

It is in the article linked to by someone previously.

 

TCYK LLC based in the US. Not sure who would be sending the letter out to UK people.

[rhino666]

Oh great as if things aren't bad enough:

http://www.pocket-lint.com/news/133145-if-you-re-with-sky-and-use-torrents-your-details-might-already-be-in-the-hands-of-copyright-trolls#