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 ACS:LAW/Davenport-Lyons lawsuit discussion

Postby Rupert Bear » Mon Mar 22, 2010 10:14 am

A Certain Smile wrote:Maybe Terence can, under oath, proclaim that he has never, ever engaged in onanism?

Just maybe...


:lol: :lol:

You see what you people are doing to me now? My pet hate has gone out of the window.
Rupert Bear
 
Posts: 22
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2010 9:32 am
Location: Blighty

Has it occured...

Postby Scooby Dooy69 » Mon Mar 22, 2010 10:34 am

..to anyone that at the crucial time of the bill going through Parliament that this may be ploy to get people to take their eyes off the ball?

Let's stick to the battle in hand people!!!

:thumbup:
Scooby Dooy69
 
Posts: 39
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 5:41 am

Re: The official ACS:LAW/Davenport-Lyons lawsuit discussion

Postby HelloAll » Mon Mar 22, 2010 3:30 pm

http://www.38degrees.org.uk/page/speako ... einternetl

Seems another group is against the bill as well.
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 ACS:LAW/Davenport-Lyons lawsuit discussion

Postby Renegade » Mon Mar 22, 2010 3:38 pm

On a browse around I've happened across the very useful whatdotheyknow.com. On this website people place freedom of information act requests, which when responded to are shared publicly.

On the website they have the SRA listed as a public body not yet under the scope of the act, but willing to respond as if they were. Of interest to people in this thread are likely to be the following two recent requests to the SRA:

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/n ... bout_andre

and

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/c ... relevant_t

You may find this of particular relevance to your campaigning with MPs. It's interesting that complaints against the three law firms (only one of which was actually active on filesharing law at the time) reached up to 20% of all complaints made to the SRA in Sept 09!
Renegade
 
Posts: 971
Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 12:37 am

Re: The official ACS:LAW/Davenport-Lyons lawsuit discussion

Postby unclet » Mon Mar 22, 2010 4:32 pm

READ ABOUT THE AUDACIOUS ATTEMPT BY U KNOW WHO TO TAKE DOWN SLYCK, cannot believe it "Defamatory" because he was called a "W*&%@R". TT ever heard the saying "words will come back someday to haunt you??" remember what u put into the public domain at 0743pm on the 06/04/2003 on 'dragonlink'. People in glass houses shouldnt throw stones. If you all haven't seen the 199 posts by TT on this site take a look, being called a ONANIST is the least of the things he could be refered to.
He can't take an oath because he would PERJURE himself. :nopity: :puke:
unclet
 
Posts: 82
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 9:29 pm

Re: The official ACS:LAW/Davenport-Lyons lawsuit discussion

Postby SteveOh » Mon Mar 22, 2010 5:02 pm

That letter from @ndrew C to Slyck made me laugh! "The London" .. amateurish at best Andrew/Terence! -

Also Andrew why does Nicola J Beales scanned signature have to appear on your letters? .. too chicken to sign anything on your behalf? or has Terence not Managed to scan your signature yet? and does she even know you are using it? Are you even allowed to use it as she doesnt work for you? mmmmmmm
SteveOh
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 8:53 am

Re: The official ACS:LAW/Davenport-Lyons lawsuit discussion

Postby SteveOh » Mon Mar 22, 2010 5:28 pm

Rupert Bear wrote:
A Certain Smile wrote:Maybe Terence can, under oath, proclaim that he has never, ever engaged in onanism?

Just maybe...


:lol: :lol:

You see what you people are doing to me now? My pet hate has gone out of the window.


Or the Latin "manu stuprare"?
SteveOh
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 8:53 am

Re: The official ACS:LAW/Davenport-Lyons lawsuit discussion

Postby dream pinball 3d lol » Tue Mar 23, 2010 3:48 am

i have to agree with a previous post about keeping this in line with fighting for the innocents as what acs law tried doing to this forum has spread world wide like a tsunami with the word wanker firmly on an agenda,im sure things said on this forum are mostly humor in terms of the word wank but acs law has taken this very personal,
and example of what can escalate is seen here,
http://torrentfreak.com/wp-comments-post.php
post 71 is interesting others quite funny or nasty depends who you are,but it just goes to show how thing can get out of hand,interestingly its acs law who started the ball rolling on this one
dream pinball 3d lol
 
Posts: 216
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 6:25 pm

Re: The official ACS:LAW/Davenport-Lyons lawsuit discussion

Postby Hickster » Tue Mar 23, 2010 4:56 am

Ok Guys, sorry for my Excessive enthusiasm but it did hit me like a lightning bolt, minus the two smoking boots. I think we should now focus at the matter at hand which is the DEB and writing to the MP's and other relevant agencies regarding ACS LAW and Tilly Bailey & Irvine. Let us put yesterdays fun behind us now and focus on the road ahead. We have had a day of fun, but let us regroup and move forward.

In their own words ACS LAW have shown us what we are up against, so let us use that. I KNOW the BBC are aware of the situation and I also know the BBC are at this moment compiling a story on them. Let us delegate to the Media what we can and now focus on the importance of informing the Members of Parliament about the TRUTH of this matter.

We do NOT need to lie or exaggerate the case is VERY clear. Let us just keep informing people, calmly and politely

I notice my previous post was deleted, and I applaud that, that is why their are moderators, and in their judgment my post was not appropriate, I support that descision. Let us regroup and MOVE FORWARD
Please feel free to email me at:
acs.bore@gmail.com

Read the BLOG Here
http://acsbore.wordpress.com

Faceless Keyboard Warrior
User avatar
Hickster
Faceless Keyboard Warrior
 
Posts: 1499
Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 2:25 pm

Re: The official ACS:LAW/Davenport-Lyons lawsuit discussion

Postby whereswally » Tue Mar 23, 2010 6:20 am

When contacting the SRA, what is the most appropriate subject heading under their investigation department? Professional complex fraud? Dishonesty?

Cheers
User avatar
whereswally
 
Posts: 75
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2010 12:25 pm

Re: The official ACS:LAW/Davenport-Lyons lawsuit discussion

Postby Time on my hands » Tue Mar 23, 2010 6:24 am

Can I just add that it's very encouraging to see Andrew acting in this way, as it clearly indicates that our actions are having an impact upon his business model.

Congratulations to you all.
Time on my hands
 
Posts: 204
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2009 10:14 am

Re: The official ACS:LAW/Davenport-Lyons lawsuit discussion

Postby whereswally » Tue Mar 23, 2010 6:39 am

It doesn't stop there, he is causing distress, financial and social problems for hundreds of innocent people out there. The time, efforts and money that people have spent on this whole escapade so far has to be accounted for. I must admit, I have even been tempted to study law as a result, just to fight people like Andrew J Crossley.

I for one, won't stop until justice is brought against this man and his immoral firm.
User avatar
whereswally
 
Posts: 75
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2010 12:25 pm

Re: The official ACS:LAW/Davenport-Lyons lawsuit discussion

Postby Scooby Dooy69 » Tue Mar 23, 2010 8:02 am

whereswally wrote:It doesn't stop there, he is causing distress, financial and social problems for hundreds of innocent people out there. The time, efforts and money that people have spent on this whole escapade so far has to be accounted for. I must admit, I have even been tempted to study law as a result, just to fight people like Andrew J Crossley.

I for one, won't stop until justice is brought against this man and his immoral firm.


But this isn't about just ACS Law.

It's about TBI, Davenport Lyons, any other law firm who jumps on the ambulance chasing bandwagon, Digiprotect, any other IP tracing firm whose process is far from flawless, porn companies, etc who are profiting from their otherwise unsellable products and countless other people and companies.

ACS Law are just the paid messengers, a cog in a large money making process.

:wink:
Scooby Dooy69
 
Posts: 39
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 5:41 am

Re: The official ACS:LAW/Davenport-Lyons lawsuit discussion

Postby sunnyd » Tue Mar 23, 2010 10:08 am

Much of the information in this link may already be provided/posted somewhere in this thread, but this link is a consolidation of information which also refers people back here to Slyck.

http://acslawscammers.bravehost.com/index.html
Follow Slyck on Twitter @SlyckDotCom
Join Slyck's Facebook Fan Page
sunnyd
 
Posts: 30027
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 2:34 pm

Re: The official ACS:LAW/Davenport-Lyons lawsuit discussion

Postby Drake » Tue Mar 23, 2010 10:13 am

So is this the thread where we're not supposed to call the ACS guys a bunch of wankers?
User avatar
Drake
 
Posts: 2060
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2003 12:56 pm
Location: Meepos (where charging for MP3s is illegal!)

Re: The official ACS:LAW/Davenport-Lyons lawsuit discussion

Postby penumbra » Tue Mar 23, 2010 10:17 am

sunnyd wrote:Much of the information in this link may already be provided/posted somewhere in this thread, but this link is a consolidation of information which also refers people back here to Slyck.

http://acslawscammers.bravehost.com/index.html


I do beleive that's the site of a friend of one of the regular contributors to this thread :wink:
Don't take rubbish from ACS:Law / Digiprotect / Logistep lying down. Go to Beingthreatened.com for advice and help others out by meeting your MP and filling out the statistics form! This scheme will not stop unless you are willing to contribute.
User avatar
penumbra
 
Posts: 414
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2008 3:54 am

Re: The official ACS:LAW/Davenport-Lyons lawsuit discussion

Postby sunnyd » Tue Mar 23, 2010 10:22 am

I did not take the time to read back to all the pages, but good, it's all good. :) :wink:

Edit: I should add, :toast: to all of you that have worked so hard on this. I am just happy to post anything I can find related, and I apologize if anything was (or may be) duplicated from articles I found/find.
Follow Slyck on Twitter @SlyckDotCom
Join Slyck's Facebook Fan Page
sunnyd
 
Posts: 30027
Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 2:34 pm

Re: The official ACS:LAW/Davenport-Lyons lawsuit discussion

Postby penumbra » Tue Mar 23, 2010 11:18 am

To anyone who has received a letter and is new to the thread, welcome. If you could be so kind as to fill in the beingthreatened stats form, we are collecting information on this scheme which is coming in very useful in our lobbying activites.

An excellent condensing of the situation you find yourself in and how you can approach a solution can be found in the speculative invoicing handbook, which can be found here.

If you want to get politically involved (you really should - it's been pretty successful so far), a link to email Harriet Harmen about the Digital Economy Bill can be found here. If you want some ideas on what to put into your letter to her then see below (Personally, I wouldn't use the template letter at the link - it's not very relevant to our situation).

In addition to Harriet Harman, the chair of the Labour party, you really should contact at least 3 people on the lists below, as well as your own MP. Failure to do so will mean you have little reason to complain that politicians don’t listen (they can’t if you don’t ask them to!).

We can’t make it any easier, simply click the link for the names below, include the ministers name in the email subject. Keep your email specific to the Digital Economy Bill, and the potential that the Bill could only extend ACS:Law’s campaigns, or else allow them to sidestep the new provisions and continue to go after the innocent with little evidential backing. Make it clear that you feel the bill requires further debate and it is simply not good enough that it will be passed in the "wash-up" before the election.

Points to address:
  • The need to halt volume legislation by setting a limit on Norwich Pharmacal Orders. If the evidence is so perfect, why do they need to do things in volume? The law firms could pursue each case individually and recover costs from a winning case, but only if the evidence is good.
  • The need to ensure the Digital Economy provisions are followed as a matter of first intent. Law firms and their clients will side step the provisions and carry on business as usual otherwise.
  • UK data protection laws in this area are not currently in line with the rest of the EU. Advocate General Kokott gave the opinion in the Telefonica Vs Promusicae case (C-275/06) that EU directives 2000/31, 2001/29, 2004/48 and 2002/58 do not oblige Member States to communicate personal data in order to ensure effective protection of copyright in the context of civil proceedings - and that a fair balance needs to be struck between the various fundamental rights and, in particular, the principle of proportionality.
  • The time taken for the SRA to investigate allegations of bad practice. Over 12 months is outside the OLSCC targets but there is no consequence for this. Should solicitors be entirely self regulating?
  • The need to provide remedy for unjustified claims of infringement. Something similar to the CDPA clauses allowing challenging of vexatious claims on patents or designs would be sufficient.
  • The need to ensure evidence used to base claims of infringement is openly shared, publicly criticised and reviewed and shared in full at the first letter of accusation including a monetary claim.
  • It would be better to leave out the sections of the bill relating to copyright and debate them properly in the next session then rush through poorly thought out and potentially damaging legislation before this session of parliament ends.
  • And anything else relevant you can think of!

In all cases keep it polite, ask for feedback from the minister (or shadow minister) and if possible give a phone number and request a ring back. Remember, the ministers are there to represent YOU. You MUST make clear you are writing to them as a minister/shadow minister for an area in which influence is vital. Otherwise they will inform you they cannot intervene as they are not your MP. You already know this, but want them to look into it in their capacities as members with responsibility in a related area.

Labour
Stephen Timms (Minister for Digital Britain)
Jack Straw (Minister for Justice)
Ben Bradshaw (Minister for Culture, Media and Sport)
Pat McFadden (Minister for Business, Innovation and Skills)

Conservatives
Jeremy Hunt (Shadow Secretary of State Culture, Media and Sport)
Dominic Grieve MP (Shadow Secretary of State for Justice)
David Cameron (Party Leader)

Liberal Democrats
Don Foster (Shadow Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport)
David Howarth (Shadow Secretary of State for Justice)
Nick Clegg (Party Leader)

Also don’t forget to contact your own MP and ask them to pass on your concerns to the ministries of justice, culture, media and sport and business, innovation and skills.

http://www.writetothem.com/?a=westminstermp
Don't take rubbish from ACS:Law / Digiprotect / Logistep lying down. Go to Beingthreatened.com for advice and help others out by meeting your MP and filling out the statistics form! This scheme will not stop unless you are willing to contribute.
User avatar
penumbra
 
Posts: 414
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2008 3:54 am

Re: The official ACS:LAW/Davenport-Lyons lawsuit discussion

Postby Billpayerr » Wed Mar 24, 2010 8:17 am

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/20 ... l-protests
"We want a debate," said Jim Killock, executive director of the Open Rights Group, which has campaigned against many of the strictures in the bill. "Without the appropriate legal scrutiny the government's plans will criminalise innocent people and prevent them from conducting their lives, work or education online.

Wish I could attend, but I’m there in heart and spirit. :D

http://torrentfreak.com/uk-anti-piracy- ... um-100322/

TorrentFreak has also been informed that a torrent of all the discussions is being prepared and will soon be seeded on every major BitTorrent tracker. If ACS:Law haven’t yet heard of the Streisand Effect, maybe they should look it up.

I might download that! <- joke by the way Andrew :roll:
Billpayerr
 
Posts: 158
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 8:20 am

Re: The official ACS:LAW/Davenport-Lyons lawsuit discussion

Postby derr » Wed Mar 24, 2010 8:44 am

there is a separate thread for tilly bailey irvine but I think they should be within the original thread as they are not getting mentioned enough and they should be as they are the new kid and are getting off lightly- or seem to be. Please bring up their name more often in the body of the conversations re acs:law
derr
 
Posts: 20
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2010 8:59 am

Re: The official ACS:LAW/Davenport-Lyons lawsuit discussion

Postby unclet » Wed Mar 24, 2010 11:09 am

TBI are not getting off lightly believe me on that, derr, as to the "thread" I can only guess that you'll get an appropiate answer soon enough from the forum moderators.
unclet
 
Posts: 82
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 9:29 pm

Re: The official ACS:LAW/Davenport-Lyons lawsuit discussion

Postby Hickster » Wed Mar 24, 2010 3:57 pm

Message from an MP

"There is a possibility that the Bill might have a second reading on April 6th, then the wash up would presumably kick in if the General Election is called on that day. I thought it better to wait until then before providing you with a fuller reply."
Please feel free to email me at:
acs.bore@gmail.com

Read the BLOG Here
http://acsbore.wordpress.com

Faceless Keyboard Warrior
User avatar
Hickster
Faceless Keyboard Warrior
 
Posts: 1499
Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 2:25 pm

Re: The official ACS:LAW/Davenport-Lyons lawsuit discussion

Postby penumbra » Wed Mar 24, 2010 5:11 pm

Hickster wrote:Message from an MP

"There is a possibility that the Bill might have a second reading on April 6th, then the wash up would presumably kick in if the General Election is called on that day. I thought it better to wait until then before providing you with a fuller reply."


You do seem quite good at grabbing people's attention, don't you :P
Don't take rubbish from ACS:Law / Digiprotect / Logistep lying down. Go to Beingthreatened.com for advice and help others out by meeting your MP and filling out the statistics form! This scheme will not stop unless you are willing to contribute.
User avatar
penumbra
 
Posts: 414
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2008 3:54 am

Re: The official ACS:LAW/Davenport-Lyons lawsuit discussion

Postby Hickster » Wed Mar 24, 2010 5:15 pm

penumbra wrote:You do seem quite good at grabbing people's attention, don't you :P


I try Pen I try, usually for the wrong reasons though :roll:

Hope you like the new images http://tinyurl.com/ye3vd9k

Hope you like them!
Please feel free to email me at:
acs.bore@gmail.com

Read the BLOG Here
http://acsbore.wordpress.com

Faceless Keyboard Warrior
User avatar
Hickster
Faceless Keyboard Warrior
 
Posts: 1499
Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 2:25 pm

Re: The official ACS:LAW/Davenport-Lyons lawsuit discussion

Postby fishslice » Wed Mar 24, 2010 7:06 pm

I'm given to understand that this new bill is being pushed through, before May 6th, otherwise, it's effectively rail roaded.

Now, this should bother everyone for the following reasons:

1, The bills getting rushed through, super quick when many issues regarding rights, the appeal process (customers accounts), personal freedom/liberty and the whole Long Tail argument is not being heard properly.

2, This bill is being driven by corporate publishers, who care little for artists commercial rights and more for their own deep pockets.

3, There's much evidence to suggest that file sharing is entirely beneficial for experimental, eclectic artists who rely on exposure of there work rather than relying on creatively bankrupting record deals from some smug publisher for their success. There are real trickle down benefits for many artists, Quoting the Featured Artists Coalition ' illegal file-sharing could help new acts gain promotion.'

4, Politicians like Steven Timms are being bullied into taking action, without having the balls to act on their own instinct for what's right/wrong/relevant?

5, The new bill has the potential to criminalise tens of thousands of house holders for a what is largely an insignificant issue in the grand scheme of anti-social disorder, ie: the degree of work required to police this properly far outweighs or is disproportionate to any alleged crime.

6, and finally and most significantly this new bill does little to address the real problem, which is that, old dinosaur publishers, who are mistakenly under the belief that they are on the side of right, are doing nothing to adjust to the digital age.

Our culture, commerce, our entire economic way of life is changing and has changed. The bill has lost all relevance before it's even been instated.
fishslice
 
Posts: 128
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2004 3:43 am

PreviousNext

Return to Torrent Download Court Action Threat/Settlement Letter Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

© 2001-2008 Slyck.com