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 new official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread

Postby MrFredPFL » Thu Sep 11, 2008 12:59 pm

keefy wrote:
MrFredPFL wrote:
ghost1987 wrote:Other thing is that they proof of IP adress and date file name bla bla bla is worthless means nothing BECAUSE it is dynamic IP - it could belong to ANYBODY - means nothing.


sorry, but i have to disagree with this. i am not on the side of DL or whoever they represent there - but that statement is a gross overgeneralization. it is possible to keep track of who had what IP address at what time. how accurate is that info? it depends on many factors: the ISP in question, what system they use to record the IP addresses they assign, how long they save the data, etc. it also hinges on how accurately the supposed infringer's IP address was timestamped by logistep or whomever - and possibly other factors i have left off this list.

saying the info means nothing in any situation is a defense which, imo, would be shredded in court. if you want to dispute the address, choose specific reasons to dispute it - not "well, it's dynamic".

a library loans books to anyone - and cheerfully loans the same book out to different people, over and over again. their computer records who took which book out at what time, and when they returned it. how long do they save that info? i don't know - i would guess it varies from one library to the next, just like ISPs and dynamic IP assignment records. to say they could never know who had any particular book at any specific time would be dead wrong.


So the argument that a IP address means nothing as its only a location is blown out of the water. Yes/no?


yes. imo, no one should try to argue that an IP address means nothing. to do so would not help your case at all. instead, i think it would harm your credibility by portraying you as a person who is willing to say anything to beat the case against you.

here are a couple of things, however, that you could argue:

an IP address is not linked to a person, but an account. it does not definitively show WHO was using the connection at any given time. what i do NOT know is: how does england view responsibility in a case like this? do they care if it was, for example, your kid, or some friend, who did it instead of you?

an IP address is only as accurate as your ISP's record keeping. if they are sloppy, then it's possible the address is garbage. however, if you go down this road, you had better be prepared to demonstrate evidence that your ISP is guilty of sloppy record keeping. just saying "well it could be wrong" won't get the job done. i would imagine any judge in this patents court is going to assume that when an ISP says they know who that IP address was assigned to at a given time, they are accurate - unless and until you show the court a reason to doubt it.
MrFredPFL
 
Posts: 15709
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2005 4:48 pm

Re: The new official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread

Postby ghost1987 » Thu Sep 11, 2008 1:33 pm

from reading all your posts I undestand that their evidence are good enough to lose in court and there is no need to explain ourselfs that ''i haven't done it'' cause their IP evidence even if its dynamic show exactly that I or someone in my home did it and doesn't matter if i did it or not I'll lose right? I had no pc at that time but how I'm going to prove it? I throw all bills away I changed internet provider few times ,from period of january to may i had like 3 different providers (orange,pipex,virgin) so that is not possible for me to ring my provider and ask him what i have download on that day (2nd Feb 2008).

Can anyone give me an answer what to do - treat that case seriously or think about that as a scam?
other thing I would like to ask you guys why on begining they charged me £503 and on next letter £600??? DL didn't answer me to that question.
If they take me to court and I'll lose that case then how much they can charge me???
by the way they accusing me for download not upload they also didn't send me any concrete evidence I asked them for they told me that they have evidence but can only show it in court...
User avatar
ghost1987
 
Posts: 114
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2008 6:41 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: The new official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread

Postby MrFredPFL » Thu Sep 11, 2008 1:35 pm

i'm sorry, but that is not what i said. at this point i am reluctant to offer you legal advice.
MrFredPFL
 
Posts: 15709
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2005 4:48 pm

Re: The new official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread

Postby MrFredPFL » Thu Sep 11, 2008 2:09 pm

to elaborate: you seem to gravitate towards one extreme or the other when it comes to the importance of IP evidence. what i am trying to say is that is neither meaningless nor infallible. in my opinion, if an ISP says an IP was assigned to you at a particular time, the court will believe it until given a reason to not believe it.

how will you prove you had no PC at the time? i have no idea, other than providing witnesses to attest to that.

regardless of how many providers you had during a given period, you would not be able to ring anyone and ask them what you downloaded. they don't know. not even DL will make that claim, and they are not a bit shy about claiming things.
MrFredPFL
 
Posts: 15709
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2005 4:48 pm

Re: The new official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread

Postby ghost1987 » Thu Sep 11, 2008 2:27 pm

Sorry but my english is not best in the world but on some other forums people saying dynamic IP is not a concrete evidence other saying that dynamic IP is the same as static and there is no difference between them,how on earth I'm gonna to prove that i haven't done it I got no bills no letters from provider nothing except my word against them.
Why We not gather ourselfs together and accuse them for threatening us,how many people received a letter from them in UK?
25K??? we should create some god damn defense as a individuals have no choice to stop them, together we have more power If everyone pay lets say 50£ for a good lawyer to defend us all in court.
If they take me to court and I will lose it I'll have no choice but kill myself in that court maybe then media and everyone will realize why some money grabbing bastards can do what they want and innocent people have to suffer.

I'm also very thankful for your help :D ,sorry for my tone but I'm so angry about whole thing :pissedoff:
User avatar
ghost1987
 
Posts: 114
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2008 6:41 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: The new official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread

Postby MrFredPFL » Thu Sep 11, 2008 2:41 pm

the other side to IP evidence is: where and how did they (DL) get the IP address to begin with? thus far, their methods have remained their own little secret. in my opinion, if and when any of these cases go to trial (and so far, none of them have, apparently), it would be far more productive to challenge the accuracy of how the IP was gathered to begin with, as opposed to challenging the ISP's ability to remember who had which IP when. there are countless cases where it has been demonstrated that the methods used to get an IP address by these so-called investigations have been flawed - for example, the pirate printer episode. if you don't know about that one, hopefully someone who has a link handy will provide it.

as a footnote: anyone who says a dynamic IP address is meaningless is ignorant. it is NOT the same as a static IP address either. IP addresses are assigned by your ISP. they keep track of who they assign what to, whether that IP was assigned indefinitely (static - most IPs people think of as static really aren't truly static - they still change, just very rarely) - or just assigned for a day or so (dynamic). in either case, they keep track of who they gave what number to. the question is, how accurate is their logging system, and how long do they keep the logs for.
MrFredPFL
 
Posts: 15709
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2005 4:48 pm

Re: The new official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread

Postby Paladwyn » Thu Sep 11, 2008 2:47 pm

A dynamic IP is not 'concrete' evidence about the same as a static IP...It normally isn't enough to place blame. DL seem to think it is...however it is not up to you, or DL to decide that. It's all about trying to convince the judge. Personally, I would bring up or challenge the reliability of an IP address, it helps the judge understand that there very well COULD be that flaw. I would not base the entire argument on it, but just casually state that assuming the IP is even correct, as there have been times where this has been wrong.

Then you would need to convince the judge that even if it was your account, that it may not have even been you. This is where any evidence (ie: your computer) would come into play. The point about the static/dynamic/reliable IP would become moot past this point anyways if they find that you weren't even the person that downloaded it, OR they find that you were...so while the IP point may be worthwhile to bring up, it will become useless past this point.

Finally, even if they managed to find the software on your computer - and this is something I wouldn't recommend...you would need to convince them that it wasn't you, coulda been somebody else. This course is last ditch and if you are guilty and at this point...well, ya just hosed yourself. Chances are if it was on your computer, it was you - trying to convince a judge that it wasn't...ain't really gonna happen.

The second point is the most important...as alot of people are running wireless routers, which can be unsecured - which makes it extremely easy for anybody to drive by and connect...grab a few bytes of a file and continue on, hitting various hotspots as they go, automatically switching and connecting wherever. This is where you would need to contest the responsibility rule - the connection owner is not responsible for the activities on the connection.
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 new official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread

Postby ghost1987 » Thu Sep 11, 2008 4:30 pm

have anyone read that:
http://gareth.halfacree.co.uk/2008/07/d ... ns#more-25

''It is important to realise that by replying in this way you are //not// risking a criminal record - if Davenport Lyons //were// to sue, it would be a civil case. The only thing they would be granted in victory would be the fee they originally requested, so you really have nothing to lose.''

''My prediction is that once this letter has been sent - and I’d recommend using a tracked service such as Special Delivery - you’ll make it to Davenport Lyon’s ‘troublemakers’ list, and never hear from them again.'' - I wroted that to them by both mail and special delivery post I also charged them a 25£ administration fee for every letter/form I have to reply instead they send me a letter explaining why they can't send letters via recorded delivery and my administration fee will be rewarded in court if I win case.Seems like DL keep reading forums and they are aware of what people can write to them so they can find excuse
User avatar
ghost1987
 
Posts: 114
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2008 6:41 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: The new official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread

Postby ghost1987 » Thu Sep 11, 2008 5:09 pm

User avatar
ghost1987
 
Posts: 114
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2008 6:41 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: The new official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread

Postby PorkyPig » Thu Sep 11, 2008 5:15 pm

ghost1987 wrote:from reading all your posts I undestand that their evidence are good enough to lose in court and there is no need to explain ourselfs that ''i haven't done it'' cause their IP evidence even if its dynamic show exactly that I or someone in my home did it and doesn't matter if i did it or not I'll lose right? I had no pc at that time but how I'm going to prove it? I throw all bills away I changed internet provider few times ,from period of january to may i had like 3 different providers (orange,pipex,virgin) so that is not possible for me to ring my provider and ask him what i have download on that day (2nd Feb 2008).

Can anyone give me an answer what to do - treat that case seriously or think about that as a scam?
other thing I would like to ask you guys why on begining they charged me £503 and on next letter £600??? DL didn't answer me to that question.
If they take me to court and I'll lose that case then how much they can charge me???
by the way they accusing me for download not upload they also didn't send me any concrete evidence I asked them for they told me that they have evidence but can only show it in court...


God Man, Calm Down!

All DL can do is identify the account holder, loads of people can share that account either with or without your permission!

DL are trying to claim that account holders are responsible for any infringements on that account, who says so? and in reality how can they be, the whole point of of having a broadband account 24/7 is that family members or whoever can access that account whenever they want for whatever they want, whether they're bidding on ebay for an item that ends at 3.00 a.m downloading their emails at 4.30 a.m, or brousing Slyck forums having their breakfast, DL are just a low life bunch of internet ambulance chasers, do the research on the people behind this money making exercise and abuse of civil law and decide if you really want to make these low life scumbags any richer.

I certainly don't, deny their claims and stop communicating with them, it's not worth the stress and anger it creates, after that, anything with a DL logo on it should go straight in the bin unopened.

However, DO NOT ignore genuine court correspondence, assuming you'll ever get any.

I'm really hoping that DL carry out their threat to issue 25,000 claims, at least the powers that be might sit up and take notice then.

Fat Cat Lawyers going after single, unemployed mothers in order to fatten the coffers of corrupt ex jailbirds doesn't make good press, I'm also sure in amongst that 25,000 their will be a few characters more than able to fight back in several not too pleasant ways for DL, also it's far easier for those people to lose themselves in a crowd of 25,000 than a group of 500! and that includes me, I've had a real gutfull of DL!

I for one am looking forwards to payback time...
PorkyPig
 
Posts: 48
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 3:58 pm

Re: The new official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread

Postby piXelatedEmpire » Thu Sep 11, 2008 7:18 pm

@ghost1987.. please take a few moment to read through some of the threads/posts that have alreadt been made, many of the questions you are looking for answers to have been discussed thoroughly.

Flyingfig wrote:ghost1987 you have absolutely nothing to worry about. As you say that you did not use your PC on the date in question as it was out of action, your ISP will have records of your internet usage on a day by day basis and they will make that available to the court to confirm no usage over the period in question - if it gets that far - if you ask them.

How do you think Davenport Lyons obtained the information about whom was asigned the IP address that they allege was sharing the game in question?
Ross Wheeler, CEO of Albury.net.au, referring to the Australian Governments internet filtering plan wrote:"It's the most ill-conceived pile of stupidity by the biggest bunch of cretins that I've ever seen in my life"
piXelatedEmpire
 
Posts: 4680
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2006 4:45 pm
Location: ESPNs NBA page

Re: The new official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread

Postby Paladwyn » Thu Sep 11, 2008 7:27 pm

DL can put in a request to the ISP asking for details of the person who was using the IP address of xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx at a certain date. Depending on their data retention policies, they may or may not have the information. Since an IP address is unique at any given time, no two addresses can be active on the internet at the same time.

There are a few ways to clone modems to act like somebody elses service, but I have no details on it...other than Virgin Media in the UK was a target of such things. For all intents and purposes, an IP address isn't enough put certain blame.

They would require more evidence than JUST the IP, but it is all about convincing the judge.
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 new official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread

Postby zappagirl » Fri Sep 12, 2008 2:09 am

I like the post by Gareth regarding the template letter requesting details under the Data Protection Act and enclosing the £10 fee.

I think if enough of us apply this approach DL will back off.

It is like the banks having to refund extortionate bank charges once enough fuss was made about it. Hopefully we will be more trouble than we are worth to DL for them to pursue us any further.

They are hunting very small deer, and it is bad form!!!!!!
zappagirl
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2008 5:40 am

Re: The new official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread

Postby enigmax » Fri Sep 12, 2008 2:27 am

Good luck with the claim under DPA. I've chatted with someone who tried to do the same thing with his ISP and is still waiting.
User avatar
enigmax
 
Posts: 813
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 6:58 am
Location: torrentfreak

Re: The new official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread

Postby ghost1987 » Fri Sep 12, 2008 6:38 am

Post removed
Last edited by ghost1987 on Sun Oct 19, 2008 8:24 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
ghost1987
 
Posts: 114
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2008 6:41 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: The new official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread

Postby boingboing » Fri Sep 12, 2008 8:10 am

Has anyone had anything back from the lawyer that enigmax found for us? I was going to send him my details etc but decided not to at the moment as he is probably overloaded. It would be good if we could have some feedback.


I've been asking the same thing on here for a while now, and nobody has replied with anything. I'm not sure if they are sworn to secrecy, but it would be good to get a lawyer's view on some of the questions that are repeatedly cropping up.
boingboing
 
Posts: 189
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 12:46 pm

Re: The new official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread

Postby geoffro » Fri Sep 12, 2008 8:23 am

The lawyer in question is doing this out of the goodness of his heart and has to coordinate his business at the same time. Throw into the mix that he also has a baby due any day and it's quite understandable that he has to prioritise his tasks. Be patient :)
geoffro
 
Posts: 41
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2007 5:03 am
Location: Sittingbourne, Kent

Re: The new official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread

Postby zappagirl » Fri Sep 12, 2008 8:24 am

Lawyer's name is

michael dot coyle at lawdit dot co dot uk
zappagirl
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2008 5:40 am

Re: The new official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread

Postby Skeleton » Fri Sep 12, 2008 8:43 am

Has anybody here actually been issued with court proceedings?
seems we are all playing the waiting game.
User avatar
Skeleton
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2008 7:03 am

Re: The new official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread

Postby dedd » Fri Sep 12, 2008 9:16 am

It seems that there are a lot of people appearing on here and panicking as they have just received new letters presumably of the famous "25,000" pirates batch.

The instructions for what people to do with these has remained the same throughout really (i've been in the same boat for almost a year now):

- it is advisable to reply in some simple manner stating that you deny their claims(there are templates in these forums that can be useful, though obviously do not copy them exactly). This ensures that they know you exist, and that you are willing to put up a fight, and should mean that they will not go after you for some "default" ruling in an assumption that you won't turn up to court like the legendary "4 default rulings" (though i'm beginning to doubt these people are real, and are not just a deliberate media stunt to scare people).

- They almost certainly will reply to this with some more scary words, probably involving "duty of care" or "informing your isp of your breach of contract". The more they say, the more they embarass themselves, and it is worth pointing out the flaws in their arguments (again templates and comments in this forum will help). However I don't think any further letters will make a difference.

- It is obvious from people on this forum that they will not take people who respond to court. There are people who have waited 2 years, and no court papers. Their game is therefore to scare people into paying this "settlement" fee and they are making enough fool's gold from this as it is (approx 25,000 letters x 25-40% pay settlement of approx £500 =approx 3.75 million), why risk this? They know they cannot reliably win. If they were to lose a case, their game would be up. I would be extremely surprised if they ever did this, unless the law were to suddenly change to their advantage.

- Please do not pay, you will be perpetuating their game, and forcing many more innocents into the same boat.

Hope that helps a bit, you can take it from someone who is probably further down the DL road of suffering than you (and there are others who are even further down the road, which made me worry less in the first place). If you hear of people (actual defending people) going to court, and losing, then maybe you should could contact them and pay, but not until then.
dedd
 
Posts: 19
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 8:49 am

Re: The new official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread

Postby PorkyPig » Fri Sep 12, 2008 5:21 pm

Hi Dedd,

I've had this hanging over me since March 2007, everything you say in your post is correct, I'm amazed at the terrror a solicitors letter can invoke in some people.

Off topic, this also happened in the poll tax protests back in god knows when.. I was there, didn't pay - still haven't!

People, you really have to learn to hate so called authority, and then learn how to fight, both physically and the system.

Once you have ingrained in you, complete hatred of your persecuters and the willingness to do whatever it takes to get even, you're halfway there, anger is GOOD!, harming yourself isn't!.

Philosophically, in the big scheme of things, this doesn't rate that highly, just a bunch of lowlife lawyers abusing civil law for personal gain, absolutely nothing to do with so called copyright theft, and just one lawfirm in the UK doing this?

Easy money for the rest if they want to go down that road, so far not any others trying DL's dirty tactics, maybe 99.9% of law firms in the UK are actually decent (not holding my breath on that one) anyway, DL are right out there in the sewer of crap lawyers, I can smell them from here!

Paying them just gives them more money to persecute other innocent victims, so don't even consider doing that!

There's a saying in the UK that you can't get get blood out of a stone, there is abolutely no point in going after people with no income, DL know that, a few high profile cases that they can intimidate others with is their aim, it's probably worth the investment on the intimidation front to scare others into paying up, but they'll never get £16,000 out of someone with no resources, it's just another scare tactic!
PorkyPig
 
Posts: 48
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 3:58 pm

Re: The new official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread

Postby PorkyPig » Sat Sep 13, 2008 12:48 pm

PorkyPig
 
Posts: 48
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 3:58 pm

Re: The new official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread

Postby Silly Boy » Sun Sep 14, 2008 1:36 am

Hi,

I have had one of these letters sent through regard Test Drive unlimited. It pretty much follows the same story as to what other people have been getting. I received the letter the other day and the date in question that the ip address was found with this file was back in Nov 2007. They have also included a high court order that Davenport Lyons sent to the ISP companies asking them to disclose information. How long do isp companies such as e.g Virgin keep records of ip addresses? I have heard 6mths.

Another part of the document goes on to state that the ED2K link that was was hit/shared/downloaded by the ip address was also downloaded by the "monitors" and verified as a genuine copy.

Now this is the thing, this is a game that i have not heard of, well until now that is. With peer to peer sharing, some files are named something completly different to what you actually want but still have the same ed2k link. So anyone seemingly downloading something legit could get a nasty surprise. If you click on it and then realise that it is indeed a file that you were not after and delete it and your ip has been pinged then they will still send out the letters. I generally download demos, that way i can try a game before purchase, again the same thing applies, it may be a demo when in fact the actual game itself.

So i am unsure what to do, everyone is saying do not pay, and i am inclined to thing the same way, but if this is going to drag out over a few years tehn that is stress to my family that is not worth having. As a result of this i have completely stopped use of any peer to peer software as the innocent can get the wrong file and get penalised.

So if i sign then that makes me guilty of downloading, even if a mistake or it was not even me that did it? does that then mean that i am put into a area that will be looked at when the second round of companies come sniffing for money?

I think a warning letter would have sufficed, but it seems a bit heavy handed to send letters out saying pay up or we will take you to court.
Silly Boy
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 12:55 am

Re: The new official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread

Postby Vaio » Sun Sep 14, 2008 9:49 am

I don´t know the proper way to create a thread so I will just put this here and anyone of you can repost this as an standalonw thread.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/vi ... le-Sharers

Several companies in the U.K. and elsewhere have criticized the legal campaign against file sharers, saying it's a mistake to punish consumers, but Billins disagrees, advocating a more hard-nosed approach to the problem. "People who steal your product are not your customers," he said. "We do not have a very high opinion of such statements. There's too much sympathy for people who've been asked to stop infringing companies' copyrights."
Be water my friends!
Vaio
 
Posts: 12
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 2:17 pm

Re: The new official Davenport-Lyons lawsuit thread

Postby Silly Boy » Sun Sep 14, 2008 1:48 pm

If Davenport sends these documents out as standard mail, how can they be sure that they are being recieved by the recipent? What happens if you are away for any period of time?
Silly Boy
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 12:55 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

cron
© 2001-2008 Slyck.com