Interesting Letter?
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Printer Friendly Page
- Plusnet Community
- :
- Forum
- :
- Help with my Plusnet services
- :
- Broadband
- :
- Interesting Letter?
Interesting Letter?
15-02-2010 2:21 PM
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Report to Moderator
I received an interesting letter from ACS:LAW this morning claiming that in April 2009 a download was made from my pc.
I have googled the company name and there are pages and pages worth of people claiming its a scam, has anyone heard of them?
Re: Interesting Letter?
15-02-2010 2:36 PM
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Report to Moderator
M
Superusers are not staff, but they do have a direct line of communication into the business in order to raise issues, concerns and feedback from the community.
Re: Interesting Letter?
15-02-2010 2:37 PM
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Report to Moderator
I believe we have been contacted again by by a third party to provide information relating to IP addresses, these normally come through to us as a legal request.
Re: Interesting Letter?
15-02-2010 2:38 PM
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Report to Moderator
ACS
Re: Interesting Letter?
15-02-2010 9:00 PM
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Report to Moderator
Quote from: mrmarkus1981 I received an interesting letter from ACS:LAW this morning claiming that in April 2009 a download was made from my pc.
How can you be expected to know your internet-facing ip address was 10 months ago?
Of course, since every web site you visit is informed of your ip address, anyone who runs a web-site could
claim you have downloaded something from their site - and have your ip address as "proof".
An ip address is not a valid way of identifying an individual.
It's public knowledge.
"In The Beginning Was The Word, And The Word Was Aardvark."
Re: Interesting Letter?
15-02-2010 9:35 PM
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Report to Moderator
Re: Interesting Letter?
18-02-2010 8:42 PM
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Report to Moderator
Quote from: Chris Sounds similar to an issue that cropped up a while back.
I believe we have been contacted again by by a third party to provide information relating to IP addresses, these normally come through to us as a legal request.
Chris - can you inform us if plusnet release that information uncontested? If so, you may be interested in the advice being given out by beingthreatened.com in their "speculative invoicing hand book"
If, as stated by Dave in the post you quoted, you neither agree with the action, nor believe in the ability to correctly identify offenders, then you have a DUTY to protect your customers as vigorously as you legally can. I strongly suggest plusnet should consider contesting future requests for information:
For the rest of us - we should consider if we want to remain with an ISP who are willing to give out our details to the lawyers of pornographers - without contesting it (if that is what happened)
Sorry guys, but this makes me MAD. It doesn't take much digging to find out what an thoroughly nasty bunch are behind this stuff, and I am frankly sickened that ISP's are prepared to go along without resistance - I sincerely hope plusnet is not one of them.
Quote Destroy the Business Model
Further on in this handbook you will find a section that diagrammatically sets out how exactly the speculative
invoicing scheme works. There are clear weaknesses in the plan; it is these that have to be exploited to stop
these businesses in their tracks.
The successful operation of the scheme involves several crucial ‘weak links’ – without which everything falls
apart. Let’s look at those:
The ‘pre-compliance’ of your ISP
At present the majority of ISPs confer with the lawyers in advance of the application for the Norwich
Pharmacal Order. They make it clear that they will not contest the application (ie. they will not question the
validity of the information supplied as evidence against you). Unless they have changed their minds since
the order releasing your details was signed, your ISP was one of them. Your ISP did not consider that it was
worth their time or effort to protect you from the threats that they knew would follow, despite being fully
aware of weaknesses of the information cited as evidence. The ISPA – the ISPs’ own trade association has
stated that they are "not confident” in the abilities of the data collectors to correctly identify copyright
infringing users.
Three facts:
· An ISP is a business.
· They won’t protect you because they don’t think it’s worth it.
· As their customer you have the perfect chance to show them they’re wrong. Cost them money –
ditch them – and tell them why.
In November 2009, ISP BT allowed an order to be made against them, uncontested. It related to 25,000 IP
addresses. It is estimated that this will translate to approximately 15,000 BT broadband subscribers.
If 15,000 subscribers leave BT they can’t afford to ignore it. Do it. Leave your ISP and tell them exactly why -
you can’t trust them to act responsibly.
It doesn’t make a real difference who you choose as your new ISP so long as you make it very clear to the
ISP that stitched you up why they lost you.
What you do:
What you do:
What you do:
What you do: Ditch your untrustworthy ISP. Start your notice period NOW. And tell them why.
Re: Interesting Letter?
18-02-2010 9:43 PM
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Report to Moderator
Quote You might think that ISPs (who fully understand
the flaws in the evidence) would
contest the application.
Sadly not; most of
the ISPs roll over
and play dead.
Frankly they can’t
be bothered to
object. It would
appear that if there is
a likelihood that an
ISP would contest an
application they get
dropped from it before it
happens. It is easier and
safer for the operators of
this scheme to proceed
with the ‘easy’ ISPs than
risk having their evidence
challenged. Thus far this
factor hasn’t been enough to
encourage other ISPs to do
anything other than play ball
with the scheming solicitors.
With no-one to contest the
application (only the ISPs are
entitled to do so – as the application is ‘against’
them) the Master (the ‘judge’ if you like) has little
option but to grant the orders.
And:
Who is rolling over?
Re: Interesting Letter?
18-02-2010 10:26 PM
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Report to Moderator
Lots of help and advice here
http://beingthreatened.yolasite.com/
And for the record - I am not a file sharer - I don't even use P2P apps for legal purposes (Except where they are part of eg IPlayer). However, I have been reading of the tactics of these people for some time, and getting increasingly wound up by them. What I have read this evening (prompted by this thread) is eye watering.
EDIT: Sorry - duplicate link to Barry - I'll leave it anyway.
Re: Interesting Letter?
19-02-2010 9:53 AM
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Report to Moderator
Quote from: collinet And:
Who is rolling over?
That interests me as I was under the impression that we were legally obliged to provide this information (I'll bring that post to the attention of the powers that be). This is nothing new and has been happening for years now. Last year a lot of the requests originated from Davenports on behalf of the software publishers Codemasters.
Bob Pullen
Plusnet Product Team
If I've been helpful then please give thanks ⤵
Re: Interesting Letter?
19-02-2010 10:33 AM
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Report to Moderator
I know that ISPs simply state that they are a conduit and are not responsible for the material their customers transport over their infrastructure but I would hope that my ISP wouldn't simply just roll over and give MY personal details to a complete stranger based on unproven allegations. If I turned up with a court order demanding the contact details for an IP would you just roll over and give it to me?
Also if the allegations are untrue and its simply a case of trying to blackmail me - where does that leave PN from a legal point of view? Isn't helping blackmailers a criminal act?
Re: Interesting Letter?
19-02-2010 10:45 AM
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Report to Moderator
Quote from: Bob
Quote from: collinet And:
Who is rolling over?
That interests me as I was under the impression that we were legally obliged to provide this information (I'll bring that post to the attention of the powers that be). This is nothing new and has been happening for years now. Last year a lot of the requests originated from Davenports on behalf of the software publishers Codemasters.
Bob - it may be that you are legally obliged - but you are NOT legally obliged to do so without contesting. You also have obligations under the data protections act.
Basically if I walk up to plusnet towers, together with my solicitor, and demand all your customers details, will you give them to me, or will you force me to get a court order to do so AND challenge that request for a court order in court before it is given.
I would seriously hope it is the latter.
EDIT: and let me add - if you give MY name and address to the lawyers of pornographers, without being ordered to by a court, and without challenging that order, then I will be coming after you under the terms of the data protection act. I don't know if I will have a legal leg to stand on, but you can count on it that I will be finding out.
Re: Interesting Letter?
19-02-2010 10:58 AM
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Report to Moderator
I'm not in the least bit concerned - but then I know that I have never downloaded either software or media which is not covered by an appropriate license.
I wonder if the people receiving these letters could guarantee the same thing?
If they could, then it's nothing to worry about anyway.
If they can't guarantee the same thing, I guess that some people might agree that there is some value in these letters being sent.
Re: Interesting Letter?
19-02-2010 11:03 AM
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Report to Moderator
Quote from: collinet Basically if I walk up to plusnet towers, together with my solicitor, and demand all your customers details, will you give them to me, or will you force me to get a court order to do so AND challenge that request for a court order in court before it is given.
Of course we wouldn't give you all of our customers' details however I suspect you know that's the case? Over recent years though we have responded to orders from the high court to disclose the contact information for customers who were assigned IP addresses from our network at a given point in time.
The other situation where this commonly happens is when we get requests from the police for similar information.
I'm certainly not going to get into a legal debate about this. As it stands we have supplied said company with the information they have ordered us to. This information is accurate. Whether the IP addresses we've disclosed were in fact sharing the accused content at the time the company refers to is a matter to be disputed between the defendant and ACS themselves.
I wasn't aware of Talk Talk's stance on this until now, however I will ensure it is brought to the attention of BT's legal department.
Bob Pullen
Plusnet Product Team
If I've been helpful then please give thanks ⤵
Re: Interesting Letter?
19-02-2010 11:20 AM
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Report to Moderator
Quote from: James_G S'funny.
I'm not in the least bit concerned - but then I know that I have never downloaded either software or media which is not covered by an appropriate license.
I wonder if the people receiving these letters could guarantee the same thing?
If they could, then it's nothing to worry about anyway.
If they can't guarantee the same thing, I guess that some people might agree that there is some value in these letters being sent.
I think even for those completely innocent (and there is enough documentary evidence of the unreliability of id by IP), then getting a number of legally bullying, threatening letters from solicitors, (effectively demands with menaces), will be quite upsetting and stress inducing for many people. Especially when accompanied with accusations of downloads of hard core porn, and threats of exposure in court, together with massive damages/costs if it goes that far.
I wonder how many people have paid £500 to make the threats go away, even if they have been completely innocent. This is what the companies doing this rely on! It is a bit like a protection racket. "Pay us money, and we'll leave you alone...... for a little while"
If you want to get an idea how VICIOUS this scheme is, then read up on it here, and follow all the links
http://torrentfreak.com/new-anti-piracy-lawyers-chase-uk-file-sharers-090508/
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Printer Friendly Page