Slyck.com
 
Slyck Chatbox - And More

Official ACS:LAW/DL letter/legal threat discussion

For discussion of the threatened legal action surrounding the alleged filesharing of pornography, computer games and music. (Golden Eye Int LTD / GEIL / MIRCOM / TCYK)
Forum rules
PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING: Slyck Forum Rules

Welcome to this forum, should you have received a letter do not panic, read the threads and make a (hopefully more informed) decision on how you want to proceed.

To avoid repeating previous posts, please familiarise yourself with the following information before posting.

Summary site (BeingThreatened.com) and Chat (IRC) or Chat (WebClient)

Speculative invoicing and “pay up or else” schemes for copyright infringement - Citizen's Advice Bureau

Speculative Invoicing Handbook

I've received a letter, what should I do? and Davenport Lyons - What can we do as a group?

Re: The official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread - discussion

Postby ntscuser » Thu Dec 11, 2008 7:44 am

DLvictim wrote:I am just wondering how much longer "Slyck.com" can survive! Because the whole premise of this site is telling people how to illegally download things and get away with it. That is why they are pushing the "NEWSGROUP" Advertisements now.
No, it is telling people how they can share files online. Whether the files they choose to share are legal or illegal is totally up to them.
User avatar
ntscuser
 
Posts: 1968
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 9:15 am
Location: United Kingdom but originally from Holland

Re: The official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread - discussion

Postby bonnington » Thu Dec 11, 2008 7:51 am

http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/25/33 ... ge-20.html

Is there any way of verifying the claim of victory in the Small Claims Court from the 2nd post on this page???
bonnington
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 2:00 pm

Re: The official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread - discussion

Postby Me2 » Thu Dec 11, 2008 8:30 am

bonnington wrote:http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/25/33611570-have-you-received-letter-davenport-lyons-page-20.html

Is there any way of verifying the claim of victory in the Small Claims Court from the 2nd post on this page???


Sign up on the forum, pm the person and ask if they can provide proof, and post it here/register/torrentfreak etc.
Me2
 
Posts: 247
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2008 2:16 pm

Re: The official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread - discussion

Postby dotpixel » Thu Dec 11, 2008 8:41 am

Great news from so many directions. But the job isn't done yet.

I think we shouldn't let go, particularly of the ICO complaint route. There's already a great template by penumbra, all you have to do is update it with your name and address, and post it online on http://www.ico.gov.uk/ESDWebPages/GenEnq.asp

I have complained to the ICO before and they HAVE to get back to you, and they did. It took them a while, but it's not the kind of organisation which can simply ignore your complaint.

If this is successful, this will definitely prevent any future claim (by Davenport Lyons or anybody else) trying to extort money in similar way from innocent people. Even for our own cases, when a decision by the ICO is made it will show the judge that DLs practice is no longer acceptable and will put in big question their entire operation.
dotpixel
 
Posts: 44
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 9:14 am

Re: The official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread - discussion

Postby Paladwyn » Thu Dec 11, 2008 9:24 am

ntscuser wrote:
DLvictim wrote:I am just wondering how much longer "Slyck.com" can survive! Because the whole premise of this site is telling people how to illegally download things and get away with it. That is why they are pushing the "NEWSGROUP" Advertisements now.
No, it is telling people how they can share files online. Whether the files they choose to share are legal or illegal is totally up to them.


Indeed... filesharing is NOT illegal as media companies may have you think. We have made it clear on many occaisions that we don't entertain ideas of people downloading illegally. the "I'm guilty, tell me how to get away with it" seems to be being ignored now.

My last album I downloaded off Bittorrent was perfectly legal! So...yeah.
Don't roll your chair backwards, you might run over my foot.
Paladwyn
 
Posts: 3991
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 4:55 pm
Location: Saskatchewan, Canada

Re: The official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread - discussion

Postby camrepus20 » Thu Dec 11, 2008 12:36 pm

DigiProtect speaks:

'However, the company (who has been rather quiet during all of this) has granted an interview to xbiz where it refutes the arguments that it's uploading content, saying that the terms of the contract were simply necessary to transfer the legal rights to DigiProtect. Of course, if that were true, why not say they transferred the actual copyrights, rather than say they had obtained the rights to make content available, along with listing out the specific file sharing networks. Oddly, DigiProtect then goes on to claim that any online distribution of porn is illegal online due to laws against distributing porn to minors. That seems like a total nonsequitor.'

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/200812 ... 3086.shtml

Oh dear.... :howdy:
camrepus20
 
Posts: 6
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 12:53 pm

Re: The official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread - discussion

Postby HelloAll » Thu Dec 11, 2008 3:59 pm

I don't recall seeing this link, but it is a good one about the money making team of Davenport Lyons and Co.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/hi/techn ... 766448.stm
http://www.beingthreatened.yolasite.com/
DL* = Davenport Lyons DavenPORN Lyons* = Davenport Lyons
ACS:LAW promoting the physical and sexual abuse of women with each letter they send.
HelloAll
 
Posts: 259
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2008 7:42 am

Re: The official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread - discussion

Postby ntscuser » Thu Dec 11, 2008 4:30 pm

camrepus20 wrote:DigiProtect speaks:

'However, the company (who has been rather quiet during all of this) has granted an interview to xbiz where it refutes the arguments that it's uploading content, saying that the terms of the contract were simply necessary to transfer the legal rights to DigiProtect. Of course, if that were true, why not say they transferred the actual copyrights, rather than say they had obtained the rights to make content available, along with listing out the specific file sharing networks. Oddly, DigiProtect then goes on to claim that any online distribution of porn is illegal online due to laws against distributing porn to minors. That seems like a total nonsequitor.'

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/200812 ... 3086.shtml
They are claiming to have bought the online rights for the purposes of suing anyone who puts it online which is nonsense. In every country that I know-of a contract to do something illegal is automatically null and void.
User avatar
ntscuser
 
Posts: 1968
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2006 9:15 am
Location: United Kingdom but originally from Holland

Re: The official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread - discussion

Postby my2pworth » Thu Dec 11, 2008 4:56 pm

HelloAll wrote:I don't recall seeing this link, but it is a good one about the money making team of Davenport Lyons and Co.

Looks like this thread is getting a little too large for it's own good :-(

Unfortunately, the amount of duped info is bogging it down - That link has been referred to several times, right from day one of it's publication, as per:

search.php?st=0&sk=t&sd=d&keywords=766448+stm&t=44092&sf=msgonly&ch=-1

Ah well - Methinks a little weeding may be on the cards - One can't see the wood for the trees :-)
However, the search function works well :wink:

M2PW
ACS LAW > DAVENPORT LYONS > DL > Gallant MacMillan > Golden Eye Internaional Ltd. > GEIL > Ben Dover > O2 > BE > Bethere
my2pworth
 
Posts: 74
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2008 1:07 pm

Re: The official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread - discussion

Postby MEMOR » Thu Dec 11, 2008 5:41 pm

Has anyone heard of Jim Beresford - respected Solicitor - screwed UK Government and Clients out of £140,000,000.

Today he and his sidekick have been struck off.

Quote from the article says:

"The country has never seen greed from its professional classes on the extraordinary scale that we witnessed from the solicitors who rushed to sink their noses into the coal-health feeding trough," he said.

"It was allowed to happen because of lazy government and indecisive regulation, but this result is going to send shockwaves throughout the legal industry."



http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article5325602.ece

As an ex miner, I find that I, and thousands of others, as well as the UK Goverment, have been directly or indirectly screwed by him!

These Companies have got to be tamed !

The timing of this, could not be better!

Sign the Petition, Now

Send a letter the ICO, Now

MEMOR
MEMOR
 
Posts: 238
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2008 11:23 am

Re: The official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread - discussion

Postby sonic_11 » Thu Dec 11, 2008 5:46 pm

ntscuser wrote:
camrepus20 wrote:DigiProtect speaks:

'However, the company (who has been rather quiet during all of this) has granted an interview to xbiz where it refutes the arguments that it's uploading content, saying that the terms of the contract were simply necessary to transfer the legal rights to DigiProtect. Of course, if that were true, why not say they transferred the actual copyrights, rather than say they had obtained the rights to make content available, along with listing out the specific file sharing networks. Oddly, DigiProtect then goes on to claim that any online distribution of porn is illegal online due to laws against distributing porn to minors. That seems like a total nonsequitor.'

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/200812 ... 3086.shtml
They are claiming to have bought the online rights for the purposes of suing anyone who puts it online which is nonsense. In every country that I know-of a contract to do something illegal is automatically null and void.


Ok, can I just clarify this...

DigiProtect say that to distribute porn online is illegal because of the possibility of minors accessing this.

But DigiProtect have secure the rights to do this (illegal act) somehow?

Is there any way to prove that they have been uploading these porn titles, games and music files, making them available so that they can then try to track downloaders?
sonic_11
 
Posts: 15
Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2008 11:57 am

Re: The official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread - discussion

Postby miaow » Thu Dec 11, 2008 6:13 pm

sonic_11 wrote:DigiProtect say that to distribute porn online is illegal because of the possibility of minors accessing this.

But DigiProtect have secure the rights to do this (illegal act) somehow?


Yes.

Is there any way to prove that they have been uploading these porn titles, games and music files, making them available so that they can then try to track downloaders?


Pretty unlikely, for the same reason that they can't prove that any of the people that they have accused are responsible.

Please don't forget that accusing *them* of a criminal offence is not an automatic get out of their accusations of civil offences of copyright infringement.

If, for example, you went to court and said "Yes, I did upload xyz, but they're uploading R18 material to minors, and that's a criminal offence", the judge would find you guilty. He would have no choice. You've admitted it. That they're breaking the law, more seriously, is not relevant to them taking you to court.

It does however mean that they is a greater chance that authorities in EU countries will take action against them.
miaow
 
Posts: 17
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2008 6:45 pm

Re: The official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread - discussion

Postby MEMOR » Thu Dec 11, 2008 6:25 pm

Yes I know, its Beresfords again

But some sentences quoted, contain golden nuggets - Yes I'm thinking of the Murdochs and the rest of the innocents here, being bullied by you know who......

The Solicitors Regulation Authority, which brought the charges against Mr Beresford and Mr Smith, welcomed the tribunal's decision to find them guilty of conduct unbecoming a solicitor.

It said the charges were "aggravated by the scale and sophistication of their operations, the sums of money involved, the length of time over which the misconduct occurred and the vulnerability of the persons affected".

OK, I will get back on track now.......

Write to the ICO and sign the No10 Petition now.

MEMOR
MEMOR
 
Posts: 238
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2008 11:23 am

Re: The official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread - discussion

Postby my2pworth » Thu Dec 11, 2008 9:47 pm

.
Slimey Lawyers = Money grabbing B**stards !!

For newbies to the forum, and those in contact with the SRA & ICO - Don`t forget, our French counterpart`s response ! After all, we are all supposed to be equal in the EU !
If the SRA do their job properly, this is the very least, that should happen to the scumbags at DL* :evil:

Quotes taken from the original TorrentFreak article, when this story first broke.
http://torrentfreak.com/lawyer-who-thre ... hs-080405/

"Lawyer Who Threatened File-Sharers is Banned For 6 months" = Elizabeth Martin :twisted:

Unfortunately for Elizabeth Martin, it’s not just the general public who are disgusted by her actions. She has been the subject of a Conseil de l’Ordre du Barreau de Paris disciplinary investigation - and subsequent condemnation - by none other than her own peers. How embarrassing.
The disciplinary board decided that “By choosing to reproduce aggressive foreign methods, intended to force payments, the interested party also violated [the code] which specifies that the lawyer cannot unfairly represent a situation or seriousness of threat.”
In addition, the lawyer also violated the code by cashing payments into a private account, not the usual dedicated litigation account, known as a ‘Carpa’. Martin also refused to reveal how many payments had been received from file-sharers.
For these serious breaches, Elizabeth Martin was ordered by the disciplinary board to suspend her activities as a lawyer for 6 months. Furthermore, she was banned from belonging to the National Council of the Bars (CNB) and other such professional associations for a period of 10 years.

Now let`s post that to the lawyers and legal forums, and see what sort of response they come back with :)

M2PW
ACS LAW > DAVENPORT LYONS > DL > Gallant MacMillan > Golden Eye Internaional Ltd. > GEIL > Ben Dover > O2 > BE > Bethere
my2pworth
 
Posts: 74
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2008 1:07 pm

Re: The official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread - discussion

Postby 1100110101 » Fri Dec 12, 2008 5:36 am

my2pworth wrote:.
Slimey Lawyers = Money grabbing B**stards !!

For newbies to the forum, and those in contact with the SRA & ICO - Don`t forget, our French counterpart`s response ! After all, we are all supposed to be equal in the EU !
If the SRA do their job properly, this is the very least, that should happen to the scumbags at DL* :evil:

Quotes taken from the original TorrentFreak article, when this story first broke.
http://torrentfreak.com/lawyer-who-thre ... hs-080405/

"Lawyer Who Threatened File-Sharers is Banned For 6 months" = Elizabeth Martin :twisted:

Unfortunately for Elizabeth Martin, it’s not just the general public who are disgusted by her actions. She has been the subject of a Conseil de l’Ordre du Barreau de Paris disciplinary investigation - and subsequent condemnation - by none other than her own peers. How embarrassing.
The disciplinary board decided that “By choosing to reproduce aggressive foreign methods, intended to force payments, the interested party also violated [the code] which specifies that the lawyer cannot unfairly represent a situation or seriousness of threat.”
In addition, the lawyer also violated the code by cashing payments into a private account, not the usual dedicated litigation account, known as a ‘Carpa’. Martin also refused to reveal how many payments had been received from file-sharers.
For these serious breaches, Elizabeth Martin was ordered by the disciplinary board to suspend her activities as a lawyer for 6 months. Furthermore, she was banned from belonging to the National Council of the Bars (CNB) and other such professional associations for a period of 10 years.

Now let`s post that to the lawyers and legal forums, and see what sort of response they come back with :)

M2PW


What are the odds that DavenPort Lyons have simply put Elizabeth Martin's letters through an online translator and then sent these threatening letters out without doing so much as a spell/grammar/is this legal check? Might be worth trying to get a hold of one of these French Letters?
1100110101
 
Posts: 338
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2008 3:42 pm

Re: The official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread - discussion

Postby rsrikanth05 » Fri Dec 12, 2008 6:22 am

Hwy guys, the petition has NOW got 123 signatures, so it should soon hit 200!!!!
So, share the link eveyone: http://www.tinyurl.com/davenporn
.........
User avatar
rsrikanth05
 
Posts: 1793
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2005 6:11 am
Location: Up in the clouds

Re: The official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread - discussion

Postby my2pworth » Fri Dec 12, 2008 9:34 am

The Davenport Lyons letters - Online

In spite of DL* threats to anyone publishing their original letters or replies online, it seems that someone has given them the finger, and "leaked" some scanned copies to "Wikileaks" :oops: - Good on Ya -Mr/Mrs/Ms Anon !

Although low quality, the 16 page pdf file allows us all, to at least get the gist of things.
https://secure.wikileaks.org/wiki/UK_pi ... 8_Nov_2008

With credit to Gareth Halfacree for this find.
Well, after deciding I was unable to post a copy of the Davenport Lyons letter - the one that was kindly scanned in and sent to me by a mysterious benefactor - owing to the threats of legal action the company is apparently taking against anyone who distributes said letter online, I was surprised - shocked, even - to find the self-same letter posted on good-old Wikileaks.... http://gareth.halfacree.co.uk/2008/12/t ... ns-letters


Every linkin helps :wink:

M2PW
ACS LAW > DAVENPORT LYONS > DL > Gallant MacMillan > Golden Eye Internaional Ltd. > GEIL > Ben Dover > O2 > BE > Bethere
my2pworth
 
Posts: 74
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2008 1:07 pm

Re: The official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread - discussion

Postby MEMOR » Fri Dec 12, 2008 9:52 am

"Lawyer Who Threatened File-Sharers is Banned For 6 months" = Elizabeth Martin :twisted:

Unfortunately for Elizabeth Martin, it’s not just the general public who are disgusted by her actions. She has been the subject of a Conseil de l’Ordre du Barreau de Paris disciplinary investigation - and subsequent condemnation - by none other than her own peers. How embarrassing.
The disciplinary board decided that “By choosing to reproduce aggressive foreign methods, intended to force payments, the interested party also violated [the code] which specifies that the lawyer cannot unfairly represent a situation or seriousness of threat.”
In addition, the lawyer also violated the code by cashing payments into a private account, not the usual dedicated litigation account, known as a ‘Carpa’. Martin also refused to reveal how many payments had been received from file-sharers.
For these serious breaches, Elizabeth Martin was ordered by the disciplinary board to suspend her activities as a lawyer for 6 months. Furthermore, she was banned from belonging to the National Council of the Bars (CNB) and other such professional associations for a period of 10 years.


M2PW

Thanks for reminding us about this

Copies ought to got o the SRA, Which and the legal and Lawyers forums . - I will do my bit - but if we all do the same, we will ensure that this, gets the maximum exposure, it demands,



MEMOR




M2PW[/quote]
MEMOR
 
Posts: 238
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2008 11:23 am

Re: The official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread - discussion

Postby rsrikanth05 » Fri Dec 12, 2008 10:16 am

128 signatures!!!!
That's 5 mnore in less than 4 hours.
Come on guys...
Only 72 more signatures and then..... w00t...
@my2pworth
thanks a lot for the link..
.........
User avatar
rsrikanth05
 
Posts: 1793
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2005 6:11 am
Location: Up in the clouds

Re: The official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread - discussion

Postby DLvictim » Fri Dec 12, 2008 10:33 am

Even people who have had no threats from Davenport Lyons should sign the petition because if we don't defeat them then they could be sending these threatening letters out to many hundreds of thousands of people in the future, not just 26,500. That is how serious the situation could get. How many innocent people would get caught in the net if DL or other lawyers sent out 200,000 letters?
"If any members of staff from Davenport Lyons who have a concience are reading this, you can anonymously leak incriminating documents to the following website without a trace"

http://www.wikileaks.org
DLvictim
 
Posts: 15
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2008 3:30 pm

Re: The official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread - discussion

Postby Me2 » Fri Dec 12, 2008 10:45 am

DLvictim wrote:Even people who have had no threats from Davenport Lyons should sign the petition because if we don't defeat them then they could be sending these threatening letters out to many hundreds of thousands of people in the future, not just 26,500. That is how serious the situation could get. How many innocent people would get caught in the net if DL or other lawyers sent out 200,000 letters?



I've got 6 people to sign it (or at least they say they have and I don't doubt them, I just don't know their names) and I'm pretty sure none of them will have had a letter from DL. So yay... But anyway, gaming communities, ISP discussion forums etc should be good places to find people who are interested in the petition.
Me2
 
Posts: 247
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2008 2:16 pm

Re: The official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread - discussion

Postby rsrikanth05 » Fri Dec 12, 2008 11:24 am

Me2 wrote:
DLvictim wrote:Even people who have had no threats from Davenport Lyons should sign the petition because if we don't defeat them then they could be sending these threatening letters out to many hundreds of thousands of people in the future, not just 26,500. That is how serious the situation could get. How many innocent people would get caught in the net if DL or other lawyers sent out 200,000 letters?



I've got 6 people to sign it (or at least they say they have and I don't doubt them, I just don't know their names) and I'm pretty sure none of them will have had a letter from DL. So yay... But anyway, gaming communities, ISP discussion forums etc should be good places to find people who are interested in the petition.

The queston is: Have you signed the petition?
If not http://tinyurl.com/davenporn
.........
User avatar
rsrikanth05
 
Posts: 1793
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2005 6:11 am
Location: Up in the clouds

Re: The official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread - discussion

Postby geoffro » Fri Dec 12, 2008 11:53 am

Petition signed by a number of people at this end.

Also, I have been emailed by Which magazine. They want to know the details of my story and would like to view the documentation I have received to date. Apparently they have received a "large number of complaints "

I will take great pleasure in causing DL as much damage as is humanly (and legally) possible. I just hope others don't lose their nerve or simply presume that "everyone else is dealing with it so I don't have to".

We need as MANY PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE to follow every avenue required. If you can't be bothered to follow the few simple steps to eradicate DL from our lives, then be it on your own head. It's all here for you.....ON A PLATE
geoffro
 
Posts: 41
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2007 5:03 am
Location: Sittingbourne, Kent

Re: The official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread - discussion

Postby my2pworth » Fri Dec 12, 2008 12:16 pm

rsrikanth05 wrote:@my2pworth - thanks a lot for the link..

You're welcome ! - Here's another one:- http://cabalamat.wordpress.com
This link includes Gareth Halfacree's template letter response to DL* for new innocent victims.

Gareth points out that ..
“ So far, not a single person who followed my advice and replied to the demands with a Subject Access Request has been taken to court or made to pay a single penny.”


P.S. - Have you checked your sig lately ? - The first two links seem to be foo-barred :wink:
Maybe you should include the petition link instead - http://tinyurl.com/davenporn :)

M2PW
ACS LAW > DAVENPORT LYONS > DL > Gallant MacMillan > Golden Eye Internaional Ltd. > GEIL > Ben Dover > O2 > BE > Bethere
my2pworth
 
Posts: 74
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2008 1:07 pm

Re: The official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread - discussion

Postby Me2 » Fri Dec 12, 2008 12:25 pm

rsrikanth05 wrote:
Me2 wrote:
DLvictim wrote:Even people who have had no threats from Davenport Lyons should sign the petition because if we don't defeat them then they could be sending these threatening letters out to many hundreds of thousands of people in the future, not just 26,500. That is how serious the situation could get. How many innocent people would get caught in the net if DL or other lawyers sent out 200,000 letters?



I've got 6 people to sign it (or at least they say they have and I don't doubt them, I just don't know their names) and I'm pretty sure none of them will have had a letter from DL. So yay... But anyway, gaming communities, ISP discussion forums etc should be good places to find people who are interested in the petition.

The queston is: Have you signed the petition?
If not http://tinyurl.com/davenporn

uhh well yes, obviously :lol:
Me2
 
Posts: 247
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2008 2:16 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Torrent Download Court Action Threat/Settlement Letter Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron
© 2001-2008 Slyck.com