Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • In this type of managed block most of the owners/tenants have other places elsewhwere and only use them occasionally so the concierge service have keys to ensure the smooth running of the block. Now I would be tempted to fit an old fashioned lock as well as the swipe pass if you are there all fo the time (subject to any necessary permissions). after all, it is for your convenience, not theirs
    • No-one can represent you as far as the debt liability goes so the CAB might have given your creditors a sob strory but that is not a representation by you so means nothing as far as the SB clock goes. My mum could admit that I owe money to a creditor and offer to pay but there is no relationship between her and the creditor so whatever she said or did wouldnt chaneg that. Now bailiffs like to pile on the guilt in trying to get relative to cough up for debts that arent theirs but they dont get paid otherwise.
    • Well, if they're living and working then they wouldn't be taking any state benefits surely?  So I dont see any issue.   Of course, the universal wage for all would eradicate any ill feeling towards people, and this constant narrative that someone is taking something from someone.  That's my real issue with capitalism if we move on slightly - we're all on different levels of the pyramid and most people are constantly looking over their shoulder at what the person next to them has.  Tory's talk about labour indulging in the politics of envy, but it's actually the capitalist free market system they have created which fuels this hatred towards other people.  I think that capitalism promotes competition and as such envy plays a big role in every one of us because we're all competing with one another...  better house, better car, better this and that.   Ask yourself if you'd be worried about an immigrant taking what you perceive to be yours by rights if there wasn't a more level playing field and people were treated equally regardless of where they were born/skin colour/gender etc?  People can't seriously be happy living like this.. constantly mistrusting, looking over your shoulder, paranoid, angry...
    • Could be a conflict of interest but if a family owned co you are not likely to get anyone else. can be someone of the same level. in all my years involved in union activity I have never met a licensed union chairman so mehtinks that you would be better off seeking independent advice or speak to the current branch officers of the union that has recognition/representation . If the confusion shown in your posts is translated into the workplace grievance procedures you may well end up worse off than with a simple and coherent presentation of your case so get someone else to be with you, ideally someone with the authority to actually represent you or the managers will fiond it difficult to undershatnd what it is you want
    • The result of not attending is already known to you. They will continue and the no show will count against you and may be worthy of dismissal in itself As for handing in your notice- too late, they are not obliged to accept it when a disciplinary hearing  is in the offing.
  • Our picks

stunned_monkey

Dessault Systems Solidworks/CJCH sols - copyright infringement threats

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 358 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Hi All,

I received an email about a week ago telling me that "their clients" have elected not to pursue the case as they don't believe I've been misusing it commercially.

 

 

He also went on patronisingly to warn me they'd be monitoring my mac address for future use (time to get Windoze to spoof it then) and absurdly insisted that a 192.168 address correlation could be used in evidence. I'm not doing their job for them by telling him this is daft and that I know what I'm talking about (much as I was tempted).

 

I made a mistake in replying to them in the first place and not denying I was using the software.

 

 

Has ANYONE received a threat-o-gram who ISN'T the registered owner of the domain to whose email the threat was sent? Don't think so... this is really the only "evidence" they have.

 

A final word.

... Any software company has a right to make money and protect their interests within the law.

Much as people troll the debt forums telling people to stop keep trying to wriggle out of paying their debts, this is a situation where however guilty we may be, simply demanding they stick to the applicable laws and making demands witin those laws will make the majority of these threats go away.

 

Or in this case just ignore/block them. You can't threaten someone who can't hear you.

 

All IMO of course :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

commercial use is the key here....

and I don't think the little fish are their intended targets either.

 

 

mac address tracing is BS too. they haven't a clue, with regard to the IP address eihter

what the hell they are talking about.

spoofers!!

 

 

https://askleo.com/can_a_mac_address_be_traced/


PLEASE DONT HIT QUOTE IF THE LAST POST IS THE ONE YOU ARE REPLYING TOO.

MAKES A THREAD TWICE AS LONG TO SCROLL THROUGH!

please do not post jpg images directly to a topic..USE PDF ....READ UPLOAD.

 

WE CAN'T GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU SEND ME A LINK TO YOUR THREAD - I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER HELP THERE

Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here

spreadsheets 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought given my knowledge in copyright law I would reply to this thread and offer some pointers.

 

First of all it is clear that at least some posters on here have infringed and should buy licenses.

 

Secondly it sounds like the claimant is not acting very well. When I make a claim for infringement my Letter of Claim starts by explaining about the IP and who owns it. It then lists various laws. It then mentions the laws the Defendant broke causing copyright infringement. It then lists the remedies required. Within the section that mentions damages it also has a big long list of court cases won. Any credible copyright claimant should be able to fall back on past court wins to show their seriousness and also proof of monetary loss. I also include a copy of a court judgment with each letter.

 

My process is then to wait two weeks. If there is no response I send out a second letter and wait another week which is a courtesy. If there is no response I issue proceedings. Speed is such I can go from initial letter to default judgment in two to three months. I am under the impression that people should work within the pre-action protocols. Some of the behaviour described here clearly breaches those and constitutes unreasonable behaviour.

 

Your response should be in writing only. You should mention in your response that you do not give them permission to contact you any other way. It is perfectly reasonable to wait a week before replying to a piece of correspondence. After all, you are entitled to time because you can seek advice elsewhere and consider your options etc.

 

Arguing about commercial use may be counterproductive. What you believe to be commercial doesn't matter, what their terms and conditions say does.

 

Damages that could be claimed? Well the Defendant would be entitled to the cost of the license, their costs, and if the uses are commercial then additional damages for flagrancy. You could also throw in interest. I've seen 97(2) mentioned but perhaps the more pertinent one is the recent Absolute Lofts case where the judge considered "moral prejudice". Basically the more profit you make the more they can claim from you. This renders and Island V Tring disclosure obsolete.

 

http://nipclaw.blogspot.co.uk/2015/09/damages-for-infringing-copyright-in.html

 

Ultimately people here are taking a risk in not settling if they have infringed. I am reminded of the Getty letters that were sent out. Many small businesses ignored them and refused to pay. There was no evidence that Getty ever took anyone to court. And then in 2009 they did so... and the removal firm JA Coles had to pay them £1,953.31. More cripplingly though, JA Coles also agreed to pay Getty's costs which were rumoured to be £20,000.00. To add a little fuel to the fire, they apparently got their initial legal advice from a web forum which had a thread on it dedicated to people trying to get out of paying!

 

https://www.out-law.com/page-10367

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New to the forum and this thread is why I've registered to add to the list.

 

 

  1. Received an email from Solicitors stating they represent DSSW - infringement of copyright without license
  2. Identified, correctly, MAC Address - used 20 times between 20xx - 20xx
  3. States 'company is not licensed to use software
  4. No mention of IP address
  5. Mention of 'damages of at least....(value of software)' and sale price of software. Listed example cases of awarded damages, apparently
  6. Contact must be made within a few weeks to contact the writer. Detailed resolution to include 3x elements
  7. Mentioned any attempt to delete software.....well it's a bad thing and can be detected

Posting to add to the 'targeted' initial email list. So expecting something in writing end of the month or so.

Certainly gets one thinking. I've read through this thread several times now and still uneasy.

Cheers for the posts thus far,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Update - received email in letter format, un-registered post. So nothing was signed for. Awaiting next stages, whatever those may be to see if I need to respond.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ignore


PLEASE DONT HIT QUOTE IF THE LAST POST IS THE ONE YOU ARE REPLYING TOO.

MAKES A THREAD TWICE AS LONG TO SCROLL THROUGH!

please do not post jpg images directly to a topic..USE PDF ....READ UPLOAD.

 

WE CAN'T GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU SEND ME A LINK TO YOUR THREAD - I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER HELP THERE

Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here

spreadsheets 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any updates from SpartyO_O & Red51984?

 

One of my family members has just received the same email with 3 days to respond. I saw that Stunned Monkey got a good result, just wondering how things were going with the other guys?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As post 106


PLEASE DONT HIT QUOTE IF THE LAST POST IS THE ONE YOU ARE REPLYING TOO.

MAKES A THREAD TWICE AS LONG TO SCROLL THROUGH!

please do not post jpg images directly to a topic..USE PDF ....READ UPLOAD.

 

WE CAN'T GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU SEND ME A LINK TO YOUR THREAD - I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER HELP THERE

Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here

spreadsheets 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to emphasise my question from an earlier post, and I suspect this is the way they're "finding us":

 

Do you personally own the internet domain to whose registered address they've sent the letter? Do you use the same computer to collect/send email?

 

This is, I believe, the connection they're making - they're recording the machine’s MAC access, and sniffing email traffic (this is easy, it's unencrypted), then doing a lookup on that domain and if the name you tack onto your emails matches the owner of the domain, they shout hooray and send a threat-o-gram to the domain's registrant at its registered address.

 

The funny thing is, this approach is likely only to “catch” one-man-bands because larger companies will be behind firewalls with mail servers handling email etc.

 

I suggest the primary defence is: “I am not the only user of this computer and I/my company does not use Solidworks” (your teenage kid installed it and was using it for school without you realising it wasn’t a trial version or something – solidworks DO tacitly encourage this ‘misuse’.)

 

All IMO, take with pinch of salt :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

or we are not ofcourse hearing from large companies and I doubt we will

as thats bound to be mass unlicensed use which is what they are targeting.

but getting the little guy in their sweep too.

 

 

probably more down to ip searches I bet too


PLEASE DONT HIT QUOTE IF THE LAST POST IS THE ONE YOU ARE REPLYING TOO.

MAKES A THREAD TWICE AS LONG TO SCROLL THROUGH!

please do not post jpg images directly to a topic..USE PDF ....READ UPLOAD.

 

WE CAN'T GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU SEND ME A LINK TO YOUR THREAD - I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER HELP THERE

Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here

spreadsheets 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello.

 

We are a very small company (only two people). And We have 2 Solidworks legal licenses. But one of our computers came from another part of Europe with a version of Solidworks without a license.

For some weeks we have used this version, finally we noticed the problem and activated the legal license that we have.

 

The problem is that as indicated by other people in the forum they contacted us about the use of a fraudulent license. The contact was from the reseller and from CJCH.

 

The most ironic thing is that, although we could have used the unregistered license for a few weeks, we have legal licenses.

 

I do not know how they found us, I am not familiar with the subject, but here we are connected to a very large network. I do not know what evidence they have, but it really could have been any other person I think ...

 

 

We have spoken with the CJCH studio and they have not cared about this situation and they want to force us to buy a license in 30 days (even though we already have the licenses).

 

But reading the forum information I think there is still some hope.

 

 

What do you think? What is the method to follow?

 

Thank you very much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, I think the headline is that you aren’t the prey they’re searching for. It was an oversight on your part and you’re very sorry and have now activated the license *you already owned*.

 

As much as they shout and scream and stamp their feet and threaten to advise their clients to commence court action, my experience suggests these are all just scare tactics. I suggest you write to them and state categorically you will not be buying an additional license, but will continue to use the license(s) you already had and have now correctly activated. This is something very easy for them to check, you may wish to invite them to do so. You might want to throw in some suggestion of jumping ship for another CAD provider if they don't bugger off.

 

 

The bottom line is yes, you made a mistake, but it didn’t actually *cost* them anything other than the time they’re now wasting chasing you.

 

Just my 2p…

 

 

Hello.

 

We are a very small company (only two people). And We have 2 Solidworks legal licenses. But one of our computers came from another part of Europe with a version of Solidworks without a license.

For some weeks we have used this version, finally we noticed the problem and activated the legal license that we have.

 

The problem is that as indicated by other people in the forum they contacted us about the use of a fraudulent license. The contact was from the reseller and from CJCH.

 

The most ironic thing is that, although we could have used the unregistered license for a few weeks, we have legal licenses.

 

I do not know how they found us, I am not familiar with the subject, but here we are connected to a very large network. I do not know what evidence they have, but it really could have been any other person I think ...

 

 

We have spoken with the CJCH studio and they have not cared about this situation and they want to force us to buy a license in 30 days (even though we already have the licenses).

 

But reading the forum information I think there is still some hope.

 

 

What do you think? What is the method to follow?

 

Thank you very much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ignore them


PLEASE DONT HIT QUOTE IF THE LAST POST IS THE ONE YOU ARE REPLYING TOO.

MAKES A THREAD TWICE AS LONG TO SCROLL THROUGH!

please do not post jpg images directly to a topic..USE PDF ....READ UPLOAD.

 

WE CAN'T GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU SEND ME A LINK TO YOUR THREAD - I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER HELP THERE

Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here

spreadsheets 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi , Just thought id let you knwo i hav nt heard a dicky bird . They are phishing . ignore them , or have some fun with them , especially the idiots from the local re sellers . ha ha

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep , still heard nothing . Honestly don t waste time worrying about it .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello everyone,

 

We have just been written by a person whose email is from @ 3ds.com

 

And his signature says below:

 

"License Compliance and Anti-Piracy, UK & Ireland

 

Dassault Systemes SOLIDWORKS Corporation "

 

I think I should worry ... ???

 

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ignor it . load of rubbish. They ll start phoning you soon and eventually send you a letter through the post . They can t do anything . Read through this thread and you ll realise you have nothing to worry about.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just got the same email and call asking for about 10 large. How should I proceed? I'm in the US

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

not sure how it works over there

but pers i'd ignore


PLEASE DONT HIT QUOTE IF THE LAST POST IS THE ONE YOU ARE REPLYING TOO.

MAKES A THREAD TWICE AS LONG TO SCROLL THROUGH!

please do not post jpg images directly to a topic..USE PDF ....READ UPLOAD.

 

WE CAN'T GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU SEND ME A LINK TO YOUR THREAD - I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER HELP THERE

Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here

spreadsheets 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I just got the same email and call asking for about 10 large. How should I proceed? I'm in the US

 

Also just got one in the US.

 

 

The letter.

We represent Dassault Systemes SolidWorks Corporation (“DSSW”) located in Waltham, Massachusetts.

As you may know, DSSW provides world-leading 3D design software and solutions to more than 150,000 customers in a wide range of industries around the globe. DSSW is the publisher and owner of all right, title and interest in and to its proprietary suite of software known as SOLIDWORKS (the “Software”). DSSW owns the copyright in the United States and elsewhere for this Software.

Our client has informed us that “insert company” has been using the Software without valid licenses in complete disregard of DSSW’s valuable intellectual property rights and in violation of the end user license agreement (“EULA”) governing “insert company”’s use of DSSW’s products, and specifically the Software. By engaging the sophisticated monitoring technology described in the EULA, DSSW has irrefutable evidence that “insert company” has accessed SOLIDWORKS Premium, the add-ons and other versions of the Software identified on Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof.

“insert company”’s continued use of the Software without valid licenses constitutes infringement of DSSW’s rights under the United States Copyright Act and will likely subject “insert company” to liability for statutory damages. Specifically, U.S. copyright law provides for civil as well as criminal penalties for infringement. Even absent proof of any actual damages, a copyright owner such as DSSW is entitled to statutory damages of up to $150,000.00 for each work that is willfully infringed. See 17 U.S.C. Section 504©. Each copy of the Software is a separate work under the Copyright Act, and DSSW has consistently registered its copyrights for years.

In light of the foregoing, we demand that “insert company” immediately cease and desist its infringing activities. DSSW is willing to settle this matter amicably upon “insert company”’s prompt purchase of the appropriate licenses and 12 months of subscriptions for SOLIDWORKS Premium and any other SOLIDWORKS add-on products indicated on Exhibit A. A DSSW Compliance Mediator will be contacting you to resolve this matter.

Any purchase of licenses to regularize your unauthorized and infringing use of the Software other than through and under the direction of the SolidWorks Compliance Mediator shall be null and void.

This letter does not constitute a complete or exhaustive statement of our client’s rights, claims, contentions, or legal theories. Nothing stated herein is intended as, nor should it be deemed to constitute, a waiver or relinquishment of any of DSSW’s rights or remedies, whether legal or equitable, all of which are hereby expressly reserved.

EMAIL.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The law of England and Wales is sufficiently different to US Federal law (they cite federal law) that I'm not sure it is wise that you are asking on a UK-focused site.

 

If your company wasn't using their software without a license, then reply, letting them know that (that much will be the same, whatever the jurisdiction!).

 

If it might have been, you need to find a US equivalent to CAG (or speak to an attorney in the USA).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posts moved to jozzle own thread.

 

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?489010-Solidworks-Dassault-Systems-copyright-infringement-threats

 

Please continue there.

 

Regards

 

Andy


We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

We got the letter also. Really odd as we were given a copy from a former customer that is out of business now, and the machine we purchased already has it on it.

 

Not sure where to go with this one, they asked us to call them back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

not read this thread then?


PLEASE DONT HIT QUOTE IF THE LAST POST IS THE ONE YOU ARE REPLYING TOO.

MAKES A THREAD TWICE AS LONG TO SCROLL THROUGH!

please do not post jpg images directly to a topic..USE PDF ....READ UPLOAD.

 

WE CAN'T GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU SEND ME A LINK TO YOUR THREAD - I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER HELP THERE

Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here

spreadsheets 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...