[Closed] Help! Quick Legal Advice Required

What's your query?

Some info would get you a quicker answer.

I've watched a few dramas with court scenes in. Tell me your issue?

Octopus love? 😯

I am a barrack room lawyer - will that do?

It's regarding copyright infringement. Basically a case of being fined/threatened with court action by the authors of a song that was downloaded in the past from a program called bittorrent.

I am looking for some quick legal advice.

A [i]proper[/i] solicitor won't give you 'free advise' over the internet/phone.

They are right heartless [i]bashturds[/i].

Don't worry you get Internet access in prison.

I think that's pretty specialist for a lawyer.

Isn't it clearly unlawful though? Just say you won't do it again.

*is glad he does not download illegally*

EDIT : do you have any defence?

How do they know you had an illegal download? What did you do with the tune?

IIRC people have been prosecuted for uploading but not for downloading

Oh yes they have TJ

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8441306.stm

http://m.digitaljournal.com/article/274415

I reckon you might need a good lawyer to beat the riaa lawyers.

Best if luck.

That's in the US Drac.. although we do actually have stricter copyright laws than over there as we have no such thing as fair use over here. In fact I believe it's technically illegal to make copies of any of the music you own, even to stick on an MP3 player... but on the whole I think everyone agrees it's a pretty silly bit of law now...

Anyway, I'd not heard of any new cases come up for this recently, and the latest I had heard was that the BPI might be sending out warning letters towards the end of this year...

So, I am guessing this is an individual artist suing over a downloaded track?

I think they have to prove it was you first.

First question:

How do they know it was you and not someone else on your computer?

How do they know it wasn't someone jacking in on your insecure WiFi?

Could have been an anonymous kid, couldn't it.

Presumably your computer is totally clean of anything suspect by now? I'm sure one of the PC tech crowd will tell you how to do a secure delete.

Which? have produced something which may be able to help... see

http://www.which.co.uk/advice/what-to-do-if-youre-accused-of-file-sharing/index.jsp

Don't matter where it is the record industries are hunting down some downloaders. The oh i must have had my wifi hacked won't wash either. Your responsible for looking after it.

Right on PC now s easier.

http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/the_web/article3353387.ece

Article there, I'd be checking to make sure this is genuine and not a scam too.

As I understand it the RIAA has no recourse to do anything in this country, or any other except the US, so they could possibly sue someone from the UK in the US courts, but that seems a little extreme... not that they probably haven't thought about it! But although they might technically win, they'd never get anything out of it unless the person sued decided to go to the US for some reason...

In this country it's up to the BPI to do the same job as the RIAA, and so far, the BPI have been an awful lot less trigger-happy about this.

Drac... that's the Digital Economy Act, or whatever it's called these days... the last government got it passed in the last few days before they broke up for the election, so it's not law yet!

Anyway, the plans for that are a 3 strikes and you are out system, where you initially receive a letter warning you to stop, then another, and on the third strike you can get kicked off the internet. However, it's looking like some of that could be in trouble due to the Human Rights Act of all things... as I believe that it's now been decided in Europe that internet access is a human right in a modern society, or something like that. But who knows where that will all end up!

Yup couldn't find anymore funnynick but thanks for reminding me what happened. Doesn't mean that the BPI or whatever is is here haven't decided to sue. I'd thought his ISP may have said something not unless he's changed or they didn't see the need.

Still I'd look at the scam thing serious as just an email or letter from them demanding seems ominous.

At present I believe the BPI are holding off, and if it is them I'd expect this to be all over the various techie news sites by now, and you are right, if it had been the BPI they would have gone through the ISP etc...

My guess, as I said above, is that it is an artist suing directly through a law firm. This has happened a number of times in the UK, but I'd not heard of anything for a while... the last big one was over a computer game I seem to recall...

But you are right, it could well be a well directed scam...

Check out the following for help.

http://www.yourrights.org.uk/

http://www.yourrights.org.uk/yourrights/the-rights-of-defendants/index.html

If you need free legal representation, contact the Community Legal Service helpline on 0845 608 1122 – they will recommend solicitors who can help in your area.

Also consider contacting the Law Centres Federation on 0207 4284400, info@lawcentres.org.uk, or www.lawcentres.org.uk, to find a centre near you.

If you live in London, another organisation that might be able to help is the Mary Ward Legal Centre, who give advice and free information sessions. Their telephone number is 0207 831 7079, or www.marywardlegal.org.uk.

These telephone numbers are the ones on my records, but they might have changed since. Google to be sure.

The file was downloaded, but since then we removed the file and programs and we now purchases music through itunes, so we realised the wrongs before receiving the letter. It seems wrong that the author of the song is claiming £300 is a fair compromise package before going to court?!

I'm annoyed about the fact that this is an individual (comprising of three authors) who are claiming. This could happen again with a different party, surely a warning letter would be the best action? Why are they not undertaking action against the provider of the package e.g. bittorrent?

I'm looking for a quick response of how best to deal with the case not someone spending hours helping me!!!

The documentation is from a firm called ACS:LAW and have contacted the service provider for IP addresses. All looks genuine.

Well, firstly Bittorrent is only a protocol which allows P2P filesharing, and is perfectly legal as demonstrated by the government currently using it to distribute files.

If the software was then used for performing copyright infringement, that is not the fault of the software authors, unless it was expressly created and marketed as such. Napster got caught in this one, and got sued by the RIAA in the US and lost... and owed a lot of money.

Think of it this way... a hammer is a perfectly useful tool, but also rather handy for breaking and entering a house! Is that the fault of the hammer maker?

By the sounds of it, if you are stating that you did in fact download the song, then I would imagine that you don't have too many legs to stand on unfortunately, and that it would be cheaper to pay up than try to fight it in court.

And yes, it's possible, but unlikely I would imagine, that other artists could seek the same type of redress for downloading their music.

who's the artist? Tell 'em you didn't like the song and you'll give them a fiver.

Ooooh... scrub some of that... have a look at [url= http://www.p2pnet.net/story/40070 ]this[/url]...

Looks like they try this on with a lot of folks... have a look [url= http://acsbore.wordpress.com/2010/01/26/received-a-letter-from-acs-law-dont-panic/ ]here[/url] as well...

Another good website [url= http://beingthreatened.yolasite.com/ ]here[/url]...

Some good info coming out of you guys. Keep it coming and much appreciated. 🙂

Its a scam
http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/acs-law/198192-acs-law.html

£300 is alittle excessive for one song. Couldn't you write back offering a reasonable but lower sum in mitigation?

Hora, you owe me money, if you do not pay i will take you to court. I want £50 today and then £100 every week for 52 weeks.
If you do not pay me , you could go to prison.

--
Now Hora, do you think you owe me any money? Do you think i could win in court? do you know anything about law?
hora, i'll let you off, you don't owe me money, but if i write serious looking letters to you enough, would that change? no it wouldn't.
would i win in court, no i wouldn't

this whole thing is a scam, ACS:law are trying it on

I'm annoyed about the fact that this is an individual (comprising of three authors) who are claiming. This could happen again with a different party, surely a warning letter would be the best action? Why are they not undertaking action against the provider of the package e.g. bittorrent?

Sorry to hear this, but I have to disagree. Ignorance is not a defence. Taking music without paying for it is theft, and you ([i]should[/i]) know it.

Whether this is or isn't a scam, I can't help you. Maybe you could write or phone the artist's record company to find out more info. Saying that you've received the threat and don't know why...

I've also heard of law firms sending out letters in the hope that you pay, if not they aren't really bothered. They are more interested in the commecial theiving for pirate cds and dvds etc.

If you only used the music for personal listening, I'd ignore it. Commercial usage is another thing.

Taking music without paying for it is theft, and you (should) know it.

Technically, I believe that's incorrect, it's breach of copyright no?

Personally, I reckon 1-2% of my CD's are copies, and I've gone on to buy music by a lot of those artists so it works out ok. I do have an issue with people who don't pay for anything, because it results in less quality music for me.

RichPenny - Member

Taking music without paying for it is theft, and you (should) know it.

Technically, I believe that's incorrect, it's breach of copyright no?

But you knew what I meant though, no???

Personally, I reckon 1-2% of my CD's are copies, and I've gone on to buy music by a lot of those artists so it works out ok. I do have an issue with people who don't pay for anything, because it results in less quality music for me.

And that should be the artist's choice and not yours. I also think there's too much crap music, so losing a few of the pop groups wouldn't be a problem. I also think that the quantity of quality music will not be affected.

The quantity of quality music is affected because it simply isn't possible for lots of people to make enough money from music to dedicate themselves properly.

I think the artist would choose that I had one copy and then bought something else, rather than buying none of their music. Occasionally I'll copy something to introduce someone to new music, in the hope that they'll like it and buy more music.

And yes, I was being a bit pedantic 😉

RichPenny - Member

The quantity of quality music is affected because it simply isn't possible for lots of people to make enough money from music to dedicate themselves properly.

I think the artist would choose that I had one copy and then bought something else, rather than buying none of their music. Occasionally I'll copy something to introduce someone to new music, in the hope that they'll like it and buy more music.

I possibly agree with the first point, but it is too easy to release a record and everyone thinks it's an easy way to make a few quid. The dedicated artist will still make music but not get it to a wider audience, so the quality music will still be there, you simply won't know about it. IMO the most interested parties in the equation are the distributors and record companies.

I agree that the internet is an excellent way for new artists to introduce their music to a wider audience for free, and for me is the future for the music industry or at least the development for new artists. The quality acts will survive and the dross will sink. I think there are plenty examples of acts who make music for the sake of making music and not in the pursuit of millions, The Fall may fall into this category. But it is the artist's choice and not yours regarding what happens to the music.

I get fed up of people taking my photos, using them on their web page or blog, mentioning my name and expecting that I'm satisfied with the free publicity!!!

And yes, I was being a bit pedantic

Good job I'm not... 😉

Counter sue for breach of privacy by ACS law? The Register has covered this in the past but the legal interpretation may have changed since then.

The Fall are possibly not the best example, as I imagine they are making a living from music. Therefore they are able to dedicate themselves to it, rather than working an 8 hour day and then getting a few hours to work on their songs. It has become more difficult to make money from music and that's a shame because it can and does hold people back. I do like the transfer of power from distro/labels (and my company runs a label!) but it isn't entirely positive.

I can see why you don't like people using your work for their own purposes, but I equate introducing people to new music as free publicity for the band. I don't gain anything from it, unlike people using your photos.

The quantity of quality music is affected because it simply isn't possible for lots of people to make enough money from music to dedicate themselves properly.

1) who cares about the quantity it's the quality that counts
2) a [i]real[/i] musician will play whether they get paid or not, it's the music that's important

Yet despite the wealth of information available to anyone with a web browser and a rudimentary grasp of Google, people continue to give ACS:Law money. In the first 11 months of their scheme they collected an amazing £1,000,000 from these letters. How many cases went to court? Zero.

One day people will see this cash cow for what it is and stop feeding it. Hopefully that will be before we see our first flying pig.

Perhaps I didn't express it clearly. It is much easier to be a better musician if you can do it full time. Some will still succeed and be heard by a wider audience. But some will not, and that saddens me because music is ****ing amazing, and people should be able to dedicate themselves to it. Your [i]real[/i] musician is irrelevant to me if I can't hear his music!

As an example, one of my colleagues is signed to a prominent uk electronic label, Rephlex. In the early 90's, he could have made enough money to spend more time making music and improving his studio. Now he cannot, and that is a shame.

a real musician will play whether they get paid or not, it's the music that's important

Can just imagine the reaction around here if it was suggested that sweaty IT merchants shouldn't get paid for what they do - after all, people still produce open source software without getting paid, don't they? So why should anyone get paid for it? "It's the software that counts".

As an example, one of my colleagues is signed to a prominent uk electronic label, Rephlex. In the early 90's, he could have made enough money to spend more time making music and improving his studio. Now he cannot, and that is a shame.

And the problem is that there are probably 1,000s of people just like you downloading for free for a bit of free publicity. 😉

konabunny - Member

a real musician will play whether they get paid or not, it's the music that's important

Well, that's just great for you, isn't it? The musician can keep working his bollocks off and you can get the music you like for free. Why should s/he have to work unrewarded? Don't you think there'd be more time to make better and more interesting music if the musician didn't have to, for instance, spend time fixing bikes and painting houses because of sales lost to piracy?

I think you know what was meant. As I understand it money is not the only reward for an artist. As I said before it's the astist's choice whether the music is released for free or not.

Can just imagine the reaction around here if it was suggested that sweaty IT merchants shouldn't get paid for what they do - after all, people still produce open source software without getting paid, don't they? So why should anyone get paid for it? "It's the software that counts".

Maybe it should be free judging by some of the crap that's written and charged for! 😉

Never downloaded anything other than live dj mixes Simon, which aren't commercially available. The fact that I've spent about £20k on recorded music helps keep my conscience clear 😉

I haven't read this thread in detail, just a very quick scan and I might have missed key points, but

(a) it sounds like the guy is blackmailing you? look up the law on blackmail and see if you can counterclaim?

(b) could he have broken the law in obtaining this data? Data Protection Act for example?

(c) you always, always have defences available to you, and remember the criminal burden of proof is beyond reasonable doubt

(d) call those numbers I gave you above asap and stop wasting your time on this board. I didn't post them for my health!

(e) don't give this guy any money until you've taken proper advice.

Its a scam - as above on one has been prosecuted in the UK for downloading. Just ignore them.

Well he if hadn't posted on here he might not have found it was a scam. A simple google search once again would have fixed it but we let him off because he was probably shitting bricks.

Can I ask who your isp is, so that if it's mine as well, I can cite their behaviour as a reason to change isp.

Another vote for it being a scam here - these people send out letters hoping the recipient will have enough other worrying material that might not cast them in a good light to not want anybody looking into it. The rights/wrongs aside it costs them very little money to send out some letters, if even one in 100 people pays its a good business.

Throw it in the bin.

Contractor that sat next to me at work for a while got one of these letters demanding £500 paid up instantly and sat there trying to think up ways to not let his finance find out. Most entertaining... if a little scary to think what was on his home PC.

[i]Can I ask who your isp is, so that if it's mine as well, I can cite their behaviour as a reason to change isp. [/i]

Uhuh! Yeah like he's going to do that.

Well it was my partner who got the mail so she was worrying about having to pay a large sum of money. As it was a Saturday the solicitors was closed and the CAB wouldnt be open. Thought i'd ask here as I know there is a wide range of people on here who may have more knowledge on the subject than me. The advice has been great and we will call the number first thing tomorrow and meet he CAB for their advice.

Drac, unless I am missing something obvious, why wouldn't op tell us who his isp is?

It's not like you can do anything with it, but perhaps if ISP's freely complying with the likes of ACS realise that they are losing business, then they might just do something. It's not as it it's confidential?

So what was the problem with the request?

Well given in here he has admitted he's downloaded files in the past and then if he gives ISP away how hard do think it would be to add that with his current ip together.

Just received the same letter, wanting £295.

Date and time of download, even what client I was using.

Anyone else received one?

I take it I just ignore?

Will you tell us who your ISP is, I34key? Drac seems a bit paranoid that the men in black are watching this forum waiting for an admission of guilt.

Sky

Sorry Drac, you lost me. Kevster telling us that he's BT, or Orange, isn't suddenly going to "blow the gaff" when he's already received a letter and that it's clear his isp has shared his d/l info.

Or is "Kevster" on a forum, saying say he is using BT for his broadband suddenly going to immediately entrap him?

You clearly don't want to know which isp's are giving out your private data, but I do.

It is Sky. I would send a letter of denial stating you are not entering into any further correspondence. From what I gather its a scam and no one has been taken to court. Plenty of stuff online and worth clicking on the links provided.