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

[andydd]

http://www.wiredvc.com/acslaw-159and-the-33norwich-pharmacal-orders/

 

A very good well written article here.

 

Andy

[Flyyyte]

It appears to me no matter what the outcome, these (insert your own expletive here) will be around in one shape or another. The courts could really make it a little more difficult by asking all of these companies to limit the NPO to one name at a time rather than batches. I wonder how that would affect their business model. ?

 

Sorry to disagree. ACS:Law is dead. Its pay-up-or-else days are over. They're over not because Crossley has been defeated on the grounds of his own choosing but because his firm has proved itself to be neither fit nor proper to hold confidential information passed over by ISPs.

 

Would ISPs take the risk of handing over that confidential info to wannabe Crossleys in future? Not a chance: BT is already steaming over its entanglement with Crossley, seeing as -- through its own fault -- it breached data protection regulations in handing out unencrypted files. So it's in line for a legal hammering from the regulator, too.

 

There's also a belatedly dawning awareness by the Chancery Court itself that it may have been. . . conned. And that's actually the most serious development of all.

 

To hypothesise: just how in future is any wannabe Crossley going to convince a Court that it is fit and proper to hold confidential data? Not a single ISP will in future roll over on a Norwich claim *without* the law firm involved being able to demonstrate 100% dependability in that regard.

 

As for Crossley, there are now question marks over ACS:Law's credit licence, which is rumoured to have expired in 2008 and never been renewed. So apart from being a fit and proper entity to hold confidential data, was ACS:Law legitimately able to indulge in the financial practises it followed in its pay-up-or-else campaign?

[floppydog]

@Flyyyte - Not a problem. We are all here trying to give our opinions and views and I hope that we are all learning that when a collection of like minded people get together, good things can be accomplished. However as I said I believe this is still going to happen until such times as a law can be passed to stop it, IMO with regards to the ISP's they are making good money out of giving data away and as long as they send it encrypted (B.T. probably will from now on) they feel that they have done their bit.

Edited September 29, 2010 by floppydog
spolling error

[blashey]

as for gallant has that made them laughable now too ?

[xskyuser]

Had to laugh as I read the indignation from Sky at ACS:Laws lax security. Being a Sky customer and after receiving a letter from Crossely I was intrigued by their comments that cloning and piggy-backing were impossible in P2P and that their experts disregarded these results, bit of a contradiction to start with. Anyway it turns out that accessing another Sky router is easy, there is a web site dedicated to generating your unique Sky password and its been active since 2008. Obviously I will not give details of the site but sky do know about it, when I questioned them about it they had no comment to make, what a surprise!

This seems like a ideal defence to these unfounded allegations if you are innocent and are not a computer expert because after all Sky sell there system on the basis that “The Sky Broadband wireless router has been designed to use secure encryption technology and we pre-configure the wireless security with a default password when you first install your Broadband router. By default our routers` wireless security is on – which is not standard practice from most Broadband providers. We do this because your Broadband security is very important to us.” In there response to Ofcoms consultation on the DEA in July Sky say" Draft clause 7.12.3 provides subscribers with grounds for appeal if they can show that they took “reasonable steps” to prevent other persons infringing copyright by means of the ISP service. However, it is unclear what constitutes “reasonable steps” and Ofcom should provide some clarity. For example Sky has the encryption key printed on the bottom of the router. If Sky subscribers follow our instructions i.e. encrypt the network, (a) would these be reasonable steps? And (b) is it an acceptable defence to argue that that another person in the household was able to use the pc connect “securely” to that router using that same encryption key?" They do not mention the fact that their routers can so easily be compromised. It seems to me that the fact that you as a sky customer you used a Sky router, that you are obliged to use under your contract, and you used a Sky recommended password in your security, you cannot be held responsible if your system is compromised and used to illegally file share.

Something else I came across in my research was the possibility that the routers supplied by Sky, Netgear models, are originally supplied with a system that can be configured to block P2P file sharing, when Sky flash there own system on to the router this ability is removed. Obviously Sky as a copyright owner need to talk to Sky as an ISP.

[panther12]

You could bring a private action which could prove expensive or contact a solicitor as mentioned earlier who is bringing a class action.

 

Not sure if anything will come of it but what the heck, might as well give it a try, if nothing else but to cause as much inconvenience to the buggers! The person I'm helping received their letter from GM, so it's not just ACS who the solicitors want to hear from.

----------------------

Thank you for providing us with the information in your earlier emails.

We will now assess your claim, individually and as part of a potential group action, and return to you when we have further information.

Regards

[jstaffo8]

can anybody tell me how i can get of this list of names and addresses because i have been sent a letter for a pornography film and want to know if i am on it.

[ACS-won't pay]

Still can't believe ACS Law haven’t issued a statement about the data loss yet, and taken steps to inform people whose data has been breached.

I know I’m on the evacuate the dancefloor list.

[bob92101]

Following ACS:Law's recent loss of highly confidential data, I wonder how many people will be happy to allow ACS:Law's l33t IT experts loose on their home PCs?

 

On a more serious note, I wonder how this will impact on ACS:Law's credibility, on the Solicitor's Regulatory Authority's attitude to their behaviour and whether anyone will get anywhere with a class action against ACS:Law.

 

Meanwhile, I have no doubt that some other shyster solicitor will leap aboard the bandwagon and will take a bit more care over their data security.

 

Keep chasing your MP!

[wozgeog]

Interesting site

 

sites.google.com/site/acsillegalsite/home/the-players

[Bingobongobango]

Has anyone received their third letter from GM yet??

 

Sent off my response to their second letter back in Aug and not heard a peep since.

[cerberusalert]

ACS are required to have Solicitors Indemnity Insurance to cover such situations & IIRC the SRA have a fund too.

[STC12]

The insurance cover sounds like good news as I cant see ACS LAW having any cash left after the Information Commissioner fines them ! I have added my details to the Ralli claim - not sure if anything will come of it but if we can get some cash out of them or the solicitors insurance, I hope this will increase premiums for all solicitors and make them think twice before picking up the case work of ACS LAW.

I also understand that a "precedent harrasment case" has been through the High Court and is awaiting judgement. Once we have that we should know if a claim against ACS Law can take place.

And has anyone heard a thing from Gallant ? They have not really featured in the news this week and seem to have gone to ground !

[andydd]

(To obtain the lists)

 

It's available on torrent sites, youll have to download the whole torrent of the email backup and then perform some jiggery pokery untill you can actually read the mails, ..and then go through 6000 of them to find the spreadsheet..its not exactly quick, although the mails have been posted on various sites (not in torrent form) but these appear to come and go, no doubt due to the dubious legality of posting the emails.

 

Andy

[andydd]

If you read through the emails it is clear that there are numerous reasons when ACS Law did actually 'drop' the case against the infringer.

 

1) If the 'infringer' was a child.

 

2) If the 'infringer' claimed the 'wireless defence' (although later on ACS say this won't be a valid excuse)

 

3) If the person is disabled or there is some other sort of problem.

 

4) The check sheet has a tick box marked 'Politically sensitive' (not sure what this relates to, although they have in one instance accused a former circuit judge).

 

5) Its more likely to get drop if you employed a solicitor.

 

6) It is very likely to get dropped if you can show some sort of error (even minor), for example someone was claimed to be using a torrent program version 4.0.0.8, but the 'infringer' proved that the version mentioned was unreleased at the time of the offence!

 

7) That in your reply you show that you are very asture both in legal and IT matters (this clearly makes ACS worried !)

 

8) Other instances, ACS accused a B & B who said they had no idea who the guests were at the time and another when ACS accused a foster family, this especially scared ACS as there are various laws reagrding the identification of people in foster care.

 

Alass there are many replies that say..I'm sorry it wont happen again or I didnt do it guv, etc or It was someone else, alas ACS had no hesitation in chasing up letters like that.

 

The best way to get it dropped was (is ?) to write a very strong professional letter (pref from a solicitor and not one of the 'templates'), denying any knowledge of the matter and finding an inaccuracy in the details that they sent and showing that you have considerable IT and legal knowledge, also mentioning that should the matter progress to court you would be seeking considerable costs.

 

Andy

Edited September 30, 2010 by andydd

[Bingobongobango]

(To obtain the lists)

 

It's available on torrent sites, youll have to download the whole torrent of the email backup and then perform some jiggery pokery untill you can actually read the mails, ..and then go through 6000 of them to find the spreadsheet..its not exactly quick, although the mails have been posted on various sites (not in torrent form) but these appear to come and go, no doubt due to the dubious legality of posting the emails.

 

Andy

 

What type of jiggery pokery??

[wozgeog]

add the magical .eml to each file manually in your case...........hehehehe

[baffledbygm]

Great news about Crossley- been reading with interest.

 

But I'm one of GM's victims. Does this sound like he's bluffing?

 

(bbc website, news, technology, 2nd story down)

 

Its been 6 weeks since I sent my LOD without a reply. Was starting to relax until I saw this. Really hope this is just arrogance he's displaying. Perhaps hes been taking lessons from Crossley? Hoping Monday doesn't go well for him and the NPO is not granted. Seriously though if he's having trouble getting an NPO won't taking people to court prove even more problematic? But if I'm one of the ones he takes to court don't think my nerves could cope with it.

[andydd]

add the magical .eml to each file manually in your case...........hehehehe

 

Ha,...yeah..one email at a time...that'll keep ya busy

 

I used "Bulk Rename facility", bit OTT but did the job, there are various progs to import into Outllok or Thunderbird but with Outlook you can just click on the .eml's individually which opens them up (and the attachments can then be viewed).

 

And

[unclebulgaria67]

Andy

 

You could cheekily email Mr Crossley to offer your services. Sounds like he could do with some IT know how !!!!

[andydd]

Andy

 

You could cheekily email Mr Crossley to offer your services. Sounds like he could do with some IT know how !!!!

 

Ha..Funny you shopuld say that, my last job was actually in a building next door to ACS in Hanover Square, I saw that in the emails some of the staff used to go to the same bar as me and my friends..

 

I'm currently after a job and have had interviews for a few IT support companies (that i suspect ACS use and it wouldnt be worth them having their own IT guy for only 17 staff).

 

Andy

[STC12]

Just spoken to sky : their position is that they provided the customer names and addresses under the court order - nothing they could do about it. I mentioned talk talk and sky said their legal advice was to provide the info. The sky person said that he was not aware re charging / selling info to ACS LAW or to the other copyright holder whose contract appears on this forum but he looking into that and will call me back. To be fair to Sky, the guy was genuinely apologetic and confirmed that they would not provide ACS LAW any further information.

Will see what happens when they call back.

[STC12]

I also gave GM a call to ask what they were doing with their cases in light of the current media interest in ACS LAW and themselves. GM promised to call back but have not. I rang ACS LAW and all they have is an answering service - nobody to talk to ! quelle surprise...

[cerberusalert]

Just spoken to sky : their position is that they provided the customer names and addresses under the court order - nothing they could do about it. I mentioned talk talk and sky said their legal advice was to provide the info. The sky person said that he was not aware re charging / selling info to ACS LAW or to the other copyright holder whose contract appears on this forum but he looking into that and will call me back. To be fair to Sky, the guy was genuinely apologetic and confirmed that they would not provide ACS LAW any further information.

Will see what happens when they call back.

Maybe you should email him a copy of the Sky agreement.... encrypted of course.

 

http://i.imgur.com/MJac1.jpg

Edited September 30, 2010 by cerberusalert

[Mattyhatty]

hahaha yep

 

that is a common thing AGAIN.

 

I was on the unofficial sky forum and they were big headed to mention that no monetary sum or exchange was used in the pass of information.

 

BIG GOD DAAAAAAMN PORKIES!

 

the people you call at sky are just the messengers. I wouldnt shoot them but remember that theyre probably being scripted with answers to popular QnAs. So the answer they provide is just a cover up to the truth. Sky wont tell its customers what really happens behind closed doors.

 

Until those closed doors are knocked down and everyone can look inside.