Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • No I'm not. Even if I was then comments on this forum wouldn't constitute legal advice in the formal sense. Now you've engaged a lawyer directly can I just make couple of final suggestions? Firstly make sure he is fully aware of the facts. And don't mix and match by taking his advice on one aspect while ploughing your own furrow on others.  Let us know how you get on now you have a solicitor acting for you.
    • Oil and gold prices have jumped, while shares have fallen.View the full article
    • Thank you for your reply, DX! I was not under the impression that paying it off would remove it from my file. My file is already trashed so it would make very little difference to any credit score. I am not certain if I can claim compensation for a damaged credit score though. Or for them reporting incorrect information for over 10 years? The original debt has been reported since 2013 as an EE debt even though they had sold it in 2014. It appears to be a breach of the Data Protection Act 1998 Section 13 and this all should have come to a head when I paid the £69 in September 2022, or so I thought. The £69 was in addition to the original outstanding balance and not sent to a DCA. Even if I had paid the full balance demanded by the DCA back in 2014 then the £69 would still have been outstanding with EE. If it turns out I have no claim then so be it. Sometimes there's not always a claim if there's blame. The CRA's will not give any reason for not removing it. They simply say it is not their information and refer me to EE. More to the point EE had my updated details since 2022 yet failed to contact me. I have been present on the electoral roll since 2012 so was traceable and I think EE have been negligent in reporting an account as in payment arrangement when in fact it had been sold to a DCA. In my mind what should have happened was the account should have been defaulted before it was closed and sold to the DCA who would then have made a new entry on my credit file with the correct details. However, a further £69 of charges were applied AFTER it was sent to the DCA and it was left open on EE systems. The account was then being reported twice. Once with EE as open with a payment arrangement for the £69 balance which has continued since 2013 and once with the DCA who reported it as defaulted in 2014 and it subsequently dropped off and was written off by the DCA, LOWELL in 2021. I am quite happy for EE to place a closed account on my credit file, marked as satisfied. However, it is clear to me that them reporting an open account with payment arrangement when the balance is £0 and the original debt has been written off is incorrect? Am I wrong?
    • OMG! I Know! .... someone here with a chance to sue Highview for breach of GDPR with a very good chance of winning, I was excited reading it especially after all the work put in by site members and thinking he could hammer them for £££'s and then, the OP disappeared half way through. Although you never know the reason so all I can say is I hope the OP is alive and well regardless. I'd relish the chance to do them for that if they breached my GDPR.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Solidworks - Dassault Systems - copyright infringement threats


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1566 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

Hi all

 

New to this forum but have read all the threads about these Dessault cases with great interest. I received the same email yesterday and would be grateful if someone could tell me what the outcome of their situation was given that over a year has passed since this discussion was active....are you all in prison? Or sold your homes to pay for a licence?!

 

A little bit about my situation; I am a designer and have from time to time used Solidworks although it is not my default package hence the reason I couldn't afford to lump out the thousands they ask. I am a soletrader and only do this as part of my income, the rest of time is spent lecturing at a university. If pressured I would probably buy the basic license to get them off my back but I fear they will press for the full premium pack which is mega £££££. I certainly can't afford it at the moment.

 

Any input would be greatly received, last night's sleep was restless to say the least.

Link to post
Share on other sites

no nothing happened at all

just sc@mmers

 

tell use your story

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi jozzle, sorry to hear they’ve got their claws into you too. But you say you’ve read the thread through yet ask how it went for us all.

 

First things first: DON’T REPLY or acknowledge their threat in any way.

 

Do you use the same PC to collect email from the domain which you own (registrant details available from a whois lookup) which can be tied to a clear CAD usage for work? eg if your domain is “freelancecad.com” or “davedoesmechanicadesign.com” then they might have an arguable case. They will have tied your email address to the mac address of the machine on which you’re using SW.

 

All you would really have to argue is that you weren’t using it, your son/daughter/uncle/bloke next door was using your machine, and you thought it was a demo copy. They can’t prove it was you.

 

They still have to stump up the cost of taking you to court, and best case for them is they are awarded the cost of buying the software according to another previous post on this thread. This means it’s in their interests only to scare you into coughing up. Scare tactics cost little.

 

Also I suggest you definitely don’t partition your hard disk and install a second copy of your OS of choice onto the new partition, create a dual boot system and DEFINITLEY don’t disable the network adapter in that installation and install and only use SW there. It’s also a terrible idea to subscribe to a VPN and spoof the mac address on your “clean” installation. Nord VPN has a deal on at the moment for 3 years for $99.

 

All IMO J

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

New to this forum but have read a number of other threads on this subject with great interest, would be very grateful of any advice from the members and anyone who has had experiences of this especially through Solidworks.

 

I received an email yesterday 1/8/18 from a Solicitor in Cardiff acting on behalf of Dessault systems/solidworks stating that

"Our client has discovered that your company has been using SOLIDWORKS, without the necessary licenses, that is to say your usage has occurred without the consent of our client or any of its authorised resellers."

 

They then chuck in a lovely little paragraph of Solicitor legal chat just to confuse and scare you I guess?

"According to the applicable national legislation, this is an infringement of our client’s copyrights in the Software. As a result of infringement of its copyright, our client is entitled to, inter alia, the following remedies: an inquiry as to damages for infringement of copyright including an inquiry as to additional damages pursuant to s97(2) of the Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 and damages pursuant to the Intellectual Property (Enforcement, etc.) Regulations 2006 and Directive 2004/48/EC or, at our client’s option an account of profits; Publication of any Judgment obtained; and Costs.

 

It goes on to state that I have '3 days to reply' to the above message, this seems like a very short period of time for me to gather my senses and seek advice.

 

I do have an illegal copy of the programme installed on my laptop and have indeed been caught red handed! I do however only use it from time to time as it's not my default piece of CAD sofware, however this may change in the not so distant future so I'd prefer to keep my nose clean! As I'm no IT god I have installed the software on the same laptop that is used to register to my domain which I'm guessing is how they now have my name and work address on their correspondence.

 

A little bit about what I do; I am a designer and the word design is clearly mentioned in my domain through which they contacted me on. I am a soletrader and the studio work makes up approx 40% of my income, the other half coming from work in a university.

 

As I mentioned I can forsee that Solidworks is going to be become used more frequently as part of my work and am therefore considering buying the basic license, however I fear they're after a bit more than that!

 

Any help and advice gratefully received.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi jozzle

 

I have moved your thread to the appropriate forum....please continue to post here to your thread.

 

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your prompt reply stunned monkey and DX.

 

I do indeed have the same PC to collect email from my domain, which I guess is how they know my work address as well? Although it is pretty clearly stated on my website along with contact numbers so I'm not too hard to find!! It also mentions design in my domain and email address so there's no denying that it's clearly what I do. However the type of design I do is a bit basic and therefore rarely requires the power of a package like Solidworks. the more I'm typing the more I think it's going to be tricky to worm my way out of this one!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi jozzle, sorry to hear they’ve got their claws into you too. But you say you’ve read the thread through yet ask how it went for us all.

 

First things first: DON’T REPLY or acknowledge their threat in any way.

 

Do you use the same PC to collect email from the domain which you own (registrant details available from a whois lookup) which can be tied to a clear CAD usage for work? eg if your domain is “freelancecad.com” or “davedoesmechanicadesign.com” then they might have an arguable case. They will have tied your email address to the mac address of the machine on which you’re using SW.

 

All you would really have to argue is that you weren’t using it, your son/daughter/uncle/bloke next door was using your machine, and you thought it was a demo copy. They can’t prove it was you.

 

They still have to stump up the cost of taking you to court, and best case for them is they are awarded the cost of buying the software according to another previous post on this thread. This means it’s in their interests only to scare you into coughing up. Scare tactics cost little.

 

Also I suggest you definitely don’t partition your hard disk and install a second copy of your OS of choice onto the new partition, create a dual boot system and DEFINITLEY don’t disable the network adapter in that installation and install and only use SW there. It’s also a terrible idea to subscribe to a VPN and spoof the mac address on your “clean” installation. Nord VPN has a deal on at the moment for 3 years for $99.

 

All IMO J

 

 

And those can be bypassed and tracked pretty easily. I used to do it for a living.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

jozzle:

 

Well first off, don’t reply to them at all. It’s very unlikely they’ll pursue you any further than their threat-o-grams. You may also get calls from their reseller claiming to “want to help”. I blocked the number. I regret ever answering them.

 

SW make piracy easy for a reason. You are learning the software and one day might be in a position to want to buy it. Harassing you in this way is a very good reason why this policy may backfire. They left me alone when I told them categorically that I wouldn’t be buying a license (because I could not afford to) and was no longer using the software – having never used it for commercial purposes anyway. If you decide to talk to them, you could try telling them you were interested in trialling it (they will know for how long you’ve been active on it).

 

They have a bunch of ‘likely’ evidence, but have no proof. All it would take would be a 3rd party who uses your computer to have installed it without your knowledge/understanding.

 

 

 

renegadeimp:

 

 

Yeah, me too. Where there's a will, there's a way. But a VPN would have hidden one of the single biggest pieces of info they collected against me, ie my ISP's internet address, which they used to chase down my identity through my ISP. All they would sniff on my local machine is a couple of 192.168 addresses and its MAC (and port 25 traffic)

 

 

Can software be written to bypass a disabled network adapter in the background?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just spoken to Solidworks in a muffled tone and using a fake alias, I had no idea how expensive it was.....£5,645!! That's a ridiculous sum of money for a small business to stump up. On top of that it's £1,145 a year to continue to have the pleasure of using their software!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
I've just spoken to Solidworks in a muffled tone and using a fake alias, I had no idea how expensive it was.....£5,645!! That's a ridiculous sum of money for a small business to stump up. On top of that it's £1,145 a year to continue to have the pleasure of using their software!

 

Hi jozzle,

 

Did you pay something to Solidworks finally?

Did you reply them?

 

Tanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

thread closed to stop newbie bumping

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all

My situation has escalated somewhat!

I've ignored them and received two letters which I have again ignored.

 

I've now received a final email stating that I must respond by 31st Dec or they will commence legal proceedings and I will be liable to their court costs and cost of software.

This has come from a new person at the solicitors, namely their compliance and enforcement officer.

They have offered an out of court settlement of £6k plus vat which I simply cannot afford.

It seems they're not going to go away!

 

As I previously stated in my original thread, I do have the word 'design' in my domain name which is sort of a give away that I am directly involved in the industry.

It's this that's bothering me, it seems most cases on this forum are casual users/hobby makers that have got rumbled.

 

I don't however use their software regularly enough to justify owning it, I have to open some files occasionally to check details but these are not parts or components I have modelled.

I also have to use it at the university where I teach where they own hundreds of legitimate licenses, one of which is installed on my college machine!

Ironically it was on a university IP address that they caught me using the software on my personal computer.

 

Not sure if anyone else has reached this stage yet?

I'm happy to share the letter I received if it helps?

 

It could be a bit of a miserable Xmas at this rate : (

Link to post
Share on other sites

thread reopened.

 

you should have been told to block and bounce their emails

do it now

 

read it carefully it doesn't say WILL anything..

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, there definitely is no use of the word 'Will'. It says 'Our client is entitled to commence legal proceedings.'

 

I haven't been advised to block and bounce emails, does that not make it seem like someone is at home? Surely then I won't know if they are beginning legal proceedings?!

Link to post
Share on other sites

well don't suppose then..

 

they will commence legal proceedings and I will be liable to their court costs and cost of software.

 

you've never replied...

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

dx has it pretty much covered. Remember for them a threat letter costs almost nothing, and saying it's from their "enforcement officer" or othersuch is merely a tactic to scare you. And it's working. Their behaviour smells a lot like the stuff you'll read on the debt forums...

 

One thing to go and have a google on is "pre-action protocol". It's the stuff they have to send you as a formal warning before initiating legal action. I think you'll agree they haven't done this (it includes setting out all the evidence against you, which will be less-than-concrete IP/MAC address stuff - especially if they cite 192.168.x.x, 10.x.x.x, 172.16-32.x.x addresses) and all they're issuing are threat-o-grams.

 

I totally agree you should be blocking their emails - they have no way of proving you've ever received them so you don't need to worry about ever reading them. Act on postal threats only if they comply with PAP.

 

My threat went away when I told them categorically that I would not be buying a licence because I couldn't afford it, and that I wasn't using it for commercial purposes (can they prove otherwise in your case?).

Link to post
Share on other sites

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks stunned monkey.

I've had a good read through the Pre action protocol doc on the link. I think they have actually complied with this in their correspondence with me, it's all been very clear. The only thing they've not done is provided any evidence other than my Mac address.

 

I need a new laptop anyway, I might just burn this one.....no more evidence!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

unless the have sent by ROYAL MAIL a Letter of/before Claim

from a Solicitor

stating solidworks as their client

and

included the reply form

they have NOT complied

service by email that they don't even know works is pointless

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...
32 minutes ago, Son-of-monkey said:

 

 

I've spoken to the reseller again today - had to check if he was still coming for our planned meeting - he wasn't. However he also let slip a few things as I questioned him pretty hard on what this is all about. 

 

Stop talking to the reseller. That lot really made my skin crawl, and seem to be graduates of the school of debt collectors.

 

32 minutes ago, Son-of-monkey said:

 

1. He said Dassault won't care if I used the software or not - and have stated their attitude can be summarised using the following metaphor (one which Dassault staff use themselves) If someone steals a porsche it doesn't matter if they get 10 feet out of the showroom or drive it 100 miles. its still theft.

 

If that is indeed their attitide, why would you want to use their software, where such a minor infraction results in attempted extortion? Especially as they tacitly endorse it anyway, by simple virtue of not employing suifficiently strong anti-piracy measures (try running a dodgy copy of Creo and see how far you get ;) I suggest you give them one chance to honour their offer for startups *which you were going to use*, or you'll switch to Fusion 360 and take your chances in court.

 

So their actions have directly resulted in the loss of a customer. They really should care about this..

 

32 minutes ago, Son-of-monkey said:

 

2. The reseller stated specifically that the solicitors / Dassault will NOT release any information relating to the data they have collected to me unless it goes to court. This seems dodgy as hell to me.

 

Well, they have to tell you formally what evidence they have before issuing court proceedings (14 days IIRC). Have a look for Pre-action Protocol for more info. It may be that they've now realised their evidence is a pile of easily defeatable hogwash following people like me laughing at them for citing 192.168.x.x IP addresses, so they sit on it in the hope of scaring you instead.

 

 

32 minutes ago, Son-of-monkey said:

4. He is apparently passing my details to the person at Dassault in charge of compliance and they are going to get in touch with me today.  

 

Tell him/her the above, block the reseller.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

hello .... i'm also receiving threats and thought i'd update here after finding the CJCH thread - https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/401391-dessault-systems-solidworkscjch-sols-copyright-infringement-threats

edit: and this thread - https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/416326-solidworks-dassault-systems-i-want-to-use-and-pay-for-it-but/

 

It's certainly unsettling to know someone has my name on a list somewhere.  

Anyone have any updates what to expect after the emails?

 

Edited by unsettledchimp
added link to other thread
Link to post
Share on other sites

Block and bounce..ignore

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

best to create your own topic

hit create in the top red banner

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...