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

[STC12]

5aday - well done for just restating your denial. You don't have to do their job for them by telling them who MIGHT have used the connection ! They have to prove their allegation, not get you to do it for them!

[Mattyhatty]

They also asked me to name others who use the connection so that they can pursue them instead of me.

.

 

 

This is the part that infuriates me with these law firms. They havnt a clue how to pin point infringers, harrass and scare the innocent and bully them into getting others on the list.

 

Hypothetically If you mentioned others that use the connection what can they possibly do. Who then gets the allegations and the fine? I bet the **** law firms would give you all a fine. Mentioning other innocent people doesnt prove a thing. Id be cocky and send them a list of 10000 random names.

[huggy41]

i've got a list of 8040 names if thats of any use

[5aday]

5aday - well done for just restating your denial. You don't have to do their job for them by telling them who MIGHT have used the connection ! They have to prove their allegation, not get you to do it for them!

 

I did also mention how easy it was to find websites showing you how to hack routers and fake IP addresses. I also pointed out how they had not followed the pre-action protocols in their own template letter.

 

Can I say thanks again to the people on this site and "beingthreatened.com" I was proper flapping for a while. Your advice really made a difference.

 

I hate these pond-feeding low-life solicitors that make a living off of bullying and intimidation. My wife is in a right state over this. It was nearly a divorce.

[cerberusalert]

It was nearly a divorce

Not all bad then?

[zoomboy]

Not all bad then?

 

Hahaha

[wittzend]

It was nearly a divorce.

 

Now there's an idea,anyone know a dodgy solicitor:lol:

[izzitme101]

ok here is some good info for you

 

http://www.groklaw.net/search.php?query=riaa&keyType=phrase&datestart=&dateend=&topic=0&type=stories&author=0&mode=search

 

the comments sections in each of the articles linked on this page will give various numbers of flaws in this system of screenshotting an ip adress to prove infringement, the flaws are huge, and should stop anyone getting ip details again for a long time. Feel free to diseminate the info and pass the relevant info to the lawyers working for this, and if anyone happens to have contact within bt, im positive it wil help their fight to.

 

I have passed this blog info on to ralli myself, and had an interesting chat to

 

 

 

In other news,

 

The High Court in Dublin ruled today that there was no precedent in Irish law to force ISPs to identify and disconnect people accused of illegally downloading copyrighted files. The court case was spurred by objections to the recording industry's three-strikes system from Irish internet provider UPC. Earlier this year, Eircom, one of Ireland's other large ISPs, gave in and implemented the system

[zoomboy]

but can i take that risk as i admitted it to them

 

If you admitted liability and actually committed the offense you should probably make the settlement. If you choose to change your admission at this stage I can't see it going well for you. Your only battle would be to attempt to sway the court to a lower figure on the basis there is no evidence in regard to how many downloads were made, so damages should be limited to the amount of one known copy being downloaded - but that's a hell of a risk that'll cost you some fancy lawyering to sort out.

 

Whatever, you've done, I think your only course is settle or be prepared to get legal representation - and that's not gonna be cheap.

 

I'm no expert here, so this is all just my opinion based on a bit of homework from my own investigations.

[pingu200]

Had the reply to my LOD from ACS yesterday.

It stated that they refused to accept my LOD as it was a template.......... their bloody letter was a template!!!!!

Anyway, it made me laugh......

I'm just conducting my 2nd LOD now, and will put in some nice comments about exactly how wifi works and unsecured routers, malicious persons who hack into wifi networks, spoofing IP addresses etc

Give them a little tech lesson to show them how stupid they really are.

 

In civil law 'balance of evidence' is required to show beyond doubt if someone is guilty.

I'm afraid the balance is in the accused favour, as I understand it that the IP address refers to the wirelss router and not individual PCs etc.

 

Anyone who has just received the first 'speculative invoicing' letter from any bloodsucking law firm, take heart - they can't prove that you are guilty without real evidence, like checking your hard drive! It's down to you to stand firm and stick to your guns.....

 

Cheers.......

 

D

 

"STRENGTH IN UNITY"

[STC12]

Pingu - How recently did you receive the 2nd letter - if you have just received it, this seems to indicate ACS are still operating. I had hoped they had stopped !

In line with most people's view, a 2nd LOD is not legally required ( although i sent a 2nd one !) but probably best just to stick to the facts of 1) I didn't do it & 2) I didn't authorise anyone to do it, and that you do not understand why they keep making this claim, and further letters demanding money will be treated as harassment.

The general advice is keep it short and to the point and don't say anything that might encourage them to come back a third time.

I sent my 2nd LOD 4 weeks ago and have heard nothing since.

[andydd]

Having read the ACS leaked emails there seems to be little difference between sending a LOD and just ignoring them, they are still likey to pester you anyway, ACS's figures show that the largest majority, 40% simply ignore them.

 

The best bet is (was ?) to try and avoid the template letters, do not give them any further information, do not mention other household members, whether or not you have or wireless and DO NOT admit any sort of responsilibity or shift the blame onto someone else ('it must of been my kid', for example.).

 

A clever ploy is if you can show any errors in their data (even if it is very small), one clever 'infringer' noted that they accused him of using a version of Vuze which was not released at the time and he went on to prove it, this clearly worried Crossley, another was dropped because Crossley 'liked it when people made an effort' when someone had a very strong technical/legal knowledge.

 

Anyway..Id be very suprised if ACS carry on, but as we all know there are other lowlifes willing to crawl out from under their rocks and carry on with this dubious practise, most (if not all) have some involvement with the horrid Mr Tsang.

 

Andy

[Joe-L]

Hi,

 

I first posted about 3 weeks ago after I had a letter of claim from ACS. Havent been back on the forum since (or hardly online!) I sent off a Letter of Denial using the template on Beingthreatened. Yesterday I received a letter from ACS stating they were not going to take any notice of the letter I sent them as it was a template, and again asked me to pay up within 14 days.

 

Im about to draft my 2nd LOD, but dont know if I should state that I know what 'difficulties' they are facing with data being leaked etc?

 

In my next letter to them I will tell them that a) their letter to me is a template, b) I, nor anyone else in my household, did not download or upload the titles they mention, and c) that any further letters from them will be treated as harassment.

 

Hopefully they will stop pestering me!

 

Joe-L

[pingu200]

Pingu - How recently did you receive the 2nd letter - if you have just received it, this seems to indicate ACS are still operating. I had hoped they had stopped !

In line with most people's view, a 2nd LOD is not legally required ( although i sent a 2nd one !) but probably best just to stick to the facts of 1) I didn't do it & 2) I didn't authorise anyone to do it, and that you do not understand why they keep making this claim, and further letters demanding money will be treated as harassment.

The general advice is keep it short and to the point and don't say anything that might encourage them to come back a third time.

I sent my 2nd LOD 4 weeks ago and have heard nothing since.

 

STC12, my second letter was dated 7 Oct, so I guess they can still afford paper and printer ink for the time being (for how long though?).

Thanks for the advice on my reply. It makes sense, just give the basics and give nothing away.

We'll see how long this keeps them off.

Cheers......

[huggy41]

To people replying to ACS LAW

PLEASE PLEASE DO NOT FORGET TO ASK AFTER THE HEALTH OF ANDREW

[LAL123]

I have been fighting ACS Law for a couple of months now and totally refute all the accusations and my case has gone pretty much the same as everyone else.I complained to the SRA,OFT,Chief Winnegarten,Sky and most importantly the ICO. Here is a direct quote from the letter i received from the ICO relating to ACS laws leak of personal info "it appears ACS Law may have failed to comply with the 7th principle in this case.

This is because it may not have kept personal information securely.The precise nature of the incident remains under investigation at this time.In light of this it appears possible that ACS Law has not complied with the DPA in this case. If you believe that you have suffered damage as a result of a contravention by ACS Law of the data protection act you may be entitled to compensation from ACS Law and you should seek legal advice" So i urge anyone who's details may have been leaked to complain to the ICO immediately.If you then decide to pursue ACS for damages you should contact Deborah Rainford at Ralli solicitors who are considering putting together a group action

[count orlok]

In my next letter to them I will tell them that a) their letter to me is a template, b) I, nor anyone else in my household, did not download or upload the titles they mention, and c) that any further letters from them will be treated as harassment.

 

Hopefully they will stop pestering me!

 

Joe-L

 

I'm don't wish to be pedantic, but they will be.

 

I say this as what you have written is an admision that you or a member of your household did download or upload the tittles they mention.

 

What you need to write is either; "I, nor anyone else in my household, did download or upload the titles they mention", or "I, or anyone else in my household, did not download or upload the titles they mention".

[Shaggy123]

If you admitted liability and actually committed the offense you should probably make the settlement. If you choose to change your admission at this stage I can't see it going well for you. Your only battle would be to attempt to sway the court to a lower figure on the basis there is no evidence in regard to how many downloads were made, so damages should be limited to the amount of one known copy being downloaded - but that's a hell of a risk that'll cost you some fancy lawyering to sort out.

 

Whatever, you've done, I think your only course is settle or be prepared to get legal representation - and that's not gonna be cheap.

 

I'm no expert here, so this is all just my opinion based on a bit of homework from my own investigations.

 

You're wasting your time. All Blashey does is ask the question then come back and ask the same question a few weeks later if he/she doesnt like the answer given.

[STC12]

For the record I also CC'd my letter to the SRA and to my local MP and showed that clearly on the letter to ACS. Not sure if that helped but to date no 3rd letter !

[piglette]

I think it is a really good idea to write to the SRA and your MP, we do need to make a lot of noise about what is happening and the misery that has been caused to so many innocent victims. Also Vince Cable MP should be made aware of the problems of his Digital Economy Bill which was rushed through by the previous government last April, after Peter Mandelson was lobbied by the music industry.

 

I see that AC is now designing a new website at http://www.wal-sca.com/ and http://www.acs-law.co.uk. For some unknown reason it has got snow capped mountains on it. There is nothing else, so nothing to attack for the moment as the website is empty apart from the fact that he is regulated by the SRA number 513065. I wonder for how long.

[wozgeog]

Snow capped mountains ! That's because he's using a FREE TEMPLATE (marinelli) He must be short of cash or saving up for the ICO fine.

[zoomboy]

Had the reply to my LOD from ACS yesterday.

It stated that they refused to accept my LOD as it was a template.......... their bloody letter was a template!!!!!

 

The whole template thing is a joke. Nothing wrong with a template. If it clearly states your case in such a way that you could not add or detract from it and you agree entirely with its meaning, how can that be wrong?

 

Your second letter should not add or detract anything from that sworn statement and should in fact reinforce your intention to stand by what it says.

[zoomboy]

You're wasting your time. All Blashey does is ask the question then come back and ask the same question a few weeks later if he/she doesnt like the answer given.

 

Sorry, I'm new on here. Spent many, many hours on slyck though.

 

Edit: After finding a very comprehensive response to blashey in post3058067 I'd have to agree fully. I can't post a link yet, or I would.

Edited October 12, 2010 by zoomboy

[zoomboy]

Pingu - How recently did you receive the 2nd letter - if you have just received it, this seems to indicate ACS are still operating. I had hoped they had stopped !

 

acsbore has evidence of a 1st letter of claim being sent out on 4th Oct. ACS are like a terminator, just won't die! But then they have a pottential £500k bill to settle.

[zoomboy]

Looks like ACS are now getting desperate to collect as much revenue as possible before they are closed down permanently.

 

I recieved a phone call on my mobile from Jonathan Miller last week just after the 'email leaks' appeared in the public domain, this weasel asked me if there was a problem with my 'payment' as nothing had been recieved by them from me in respect of my copyright infringement!!!

 

...

 

 

Sorry but that smells like crap to me? If it smells like crap, tastes like crap and looks like crap... then I'm gonna call it crap. If that WAS someone from ACS then I'll eat my hat. Even they wouldn't be so stupid as to act in such a way.

 

My guess would be your details are online and someone is messing with you or worse, trying to get you to part with more details to [problem] some money out of you.

 

If you THINK you are a victim of the data breach spend some time changing your details to minimise the risk of fraud.