Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons or ACS?
 

During March I received a letter from Davenport Lyons, stating that they had obtained my address details and name from VM (via court order). Secondly they stated that they had "proof" that I had downloaded and shared (via P2P) a pinball game belonging to a German company (actually American) during Oct 2006. They stated that if I sent £350 (£49 covers the cost for VM to provide the personal details) and filling in a form admitting I had done it, they would not take me to court. Reading various forums I have found out that this has happened to 100's if not 1000's of people in the UK, hence why I am starting this thread, to see what experiances they have had with this issue.

Gazzaaa

Re: Hvae you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

vm has 3,000,000 bb customers and lets face it we all download stuf we shouldent ,so 3,000,000 court cases ,i think not .AND YOUR INOCENT UNTILL PROVEN GUILTY IN A COURT OF LAW .IF YOU SEND NOTHING IT WOULD COST TO MUCH TO TAKE YOU TO COURT ,AND NEVER ADMIT GUILT.SOME CHANCERS TRYING IT ON .

Re: Hvae you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

In the UK, piracy is the act of making money from infringing copyright and is a crime that can be taken to the criminal courts. Theft is the act of taking a physical object from its rightful owner with the intent of never returning it and can also be taken to criminal court. Copyright infringement is the act of copying something without the permission of the copyright owner and is only a civil crime and can only be taken to the civil courts.

More information on this story can be found on the register, here's the LINK

Re: Hvae you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

if you do a google for Davenport Lyons virgin media you find some more info on others who've had similar letters. scary.

Re: Hvae you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Did you download this game?

Re: Hvae you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Well this should prove interesting. I don't download off anything other than,

A. Private trackers if its the last chance to get something.

B. Newsgroups.

If i get a letter i would interested to know on what system they found me. Was it Newsgroups or Torrent. ?

Considering the amount i use my Broadband ;) I should be favorite to receive one of these letters

---------- Post added at 11:55 ---------- Previous post was at 11:52 ----------

Indeed. I think this will link to the letter.

Re: Hvae you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

DON'T ANSWER THAT!!!:Yikes:

Re: Hvae you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

No. This is a Pinball game. It is very rare I play games and they then tend to be car related. There is a free download on the American site but it does not look to be very good.

Re: Hvae you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Ask them for their "Proof".

Re: Hvae you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Sounds like a very elaborate April fools to me. It's their lack of evidence and that they are just too quiet about it that gets me thinking. But's its got a lot of people worried.

Re: Hvae you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Seems a bit suspicious to me...

And you've said you never even shared the computer game?

Re: Hvae you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

I reckon this is bogus, but:

You could play a double bluff here. I would be tempted to contact Davenport Lyons as a "concerned citizen" to warn them that some unscrupulous third party was using their name to cause distress and perpetrate a fraud.

I reckon that they would respond by either confirming that the letter received was genuine (unlikely), or advising you to dump said letter in the bin.

Anyway assuming this game was downloaded via the use of Bit Torrent? This works by the download of packets of information from any number of other users at the same time (1 to may thousands) so to single one out of many (to me) would be nigh impossible.

Load of benghazi!!

Si thee

Re: Hvae you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Its a scam letter.
http://www.slyck.com/forums/viewtopi...8764241f43ed34

Re: Hvae you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

I have never heard of them

Re: Hvae you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

1st post here, but i have been following the daveport lyons business. The Slyck forum thread only carries responses to the article. here's the full article about their questionably legal activities.

Having outstayed its welcome in Germany, a company is bringing its legal strategy against file-sharers to the UK. Its first targets are 500 P2P users who illegally distributed a game according to the company, even though many of the victims never even heard of the game in question. All Filesharers receive a letter in which they are urged to settle the case for a relatively small sum of money. So who are the accusers and what quality of evidence do they hold?


Since early March 2007, many internet forums have been buzzing with news of users receiving letters from UK law firm Davenport Lyons, alleging that they have illegally distributed (uploaded) the ‘Dream Pinball 3D’ game from German company Zuxxez Entertainment. The letters, which were sent out to 500 alleged file-sharers, demand a minimum of £340 ($667) to avoid being taken to court and claimed potential costs of “tens of thousands of pounds�. Most of the alleged filesharers never even heard of the pinball game, or never had the IP-address that was listed in the letter. However, some already report to have paid the settlement money because they don’t want any legal trouble, it almost sounds like a perfect scam.

The letters state:

"Our client has retained forensic computer analysts to search for and identify internet addresses from which their games are being made available on so called "peer to peer" (P2P) internet sites for the purposes of making them available for download by third parties without our client's consent or licence"

Note that the letters are not addressed to an individual, just ‘Dear sir or madam’ - this proves that the ‘forensicâà ƒÂ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢ process cannot correctly identify an alleged infringer behind an IP address.

It continues:

"Our client is in possession of compelling evidence that on the following date and time 15.09.2006 12:15:22 [made up date/time for illustration purposes] (captured in the German time zone), the Game was made available from the internet protocol (or IP) address XXX.XXX.XXX.XX specifically for the purpose of downloading by third parties. Pursuant to a High Court Order, the internet service provider XXXXXXXXXXXXX identified you as the subscriber associated with that IP address at the time in question".

TorrentFreak has seen evidence that suggests alleged infringers’ IP addresses were being collected within hours of the game appearing on the eDonkey network. Unconfirmed reports even suggest that the delay could be measured in minutes.

So where exactly does this ‘compelling evidence’ come from, who are these ‘forensic computer analysts’ and why does the letter speak of evidence gathered in the German time zone? A little background;

Back in 2005, it became evident that Zuxxez Entertainment had decided to take a very aggressive course of action against Germans accused of sharing their game ‘Earth 2160′ on the eDonkey network by employing a law firm to file 12,000 claims with the state prosecutor’s office in Karlsruhe (the home town of Zuxxez). In the German case the settlement were also relatively low, giving the alleged filesharers an easy way out, instead of taking it to court.

The ISPs in Germany soon got tired of all these ungrounded, and seemingly random infringement notices, and they soon stopped responding to the claims Zuxxez made until there was some hard evidence against their customers. Zuxxez realized then decided that they couldn’t make any easy money in Germany anymore and moved to the UK, still using the same strategy.

In each claim, the law firm shows the software alleged to have been uploaded (in the UK it’s the Pinball game), the IP address of the alleged infringer plus the users emule/edonkey user ID and a timestamp. So who collated this information? Enter Logistep, a Swiss anti-piracy company employed by Zuxxez to track down eMule users they claim were sharing its software, gather information and use it to gain Court Orders to force ISP’s to give up the names and addresses connected to the accused IP address. In the UK, it’s believed that up to 18 ISP’s were presented with Court Orders to force them to reveal users personal details.

Although Zuxxez and Davenport Lyons don’t openly admit to using Logistep in these UK cases, it seems more than likely, given that information on the Internet Piracy Portal states that Logistep are a partner of Schutt, Waetke (the law firm dealing with the German cases) and also Davenport Lyons in the UK. Of interest is that Zuxxez Entertainment has its home in Karlsruhe, Germany and so does Logistep, even though the company appears to be registered in Switzerland.

In each English case it’s likely that Davenport Lyons will have obtained what is known as a Norwich Pharmacal Order, which relates to the obtaining of information regarding infringements from parties who may not themselves be involved in the infringement, i.e the ISP. In the original Norwich Pharmacal Co and Others v Customs & Excise Commissioners case in 1973/74, it was ruled that a party who became even innocently involved in someone else’s wrong doing, was under obligation to provide the injured party with information to identify the wrong doer.

Apparently, such an order should not be granted where it’s clear that the plaintiff is ‘fishingâà ¢â€šÂ¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢ (phishing) for information and is attempting to discover something that will form the basis of a court action. As the law firm is very obviously making a ‘phishingâà ƒÂ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢ attempt to obtain the name of a possible infringer other than the account holder, this should be something that anyone accused should take up with their lawyer.

Davenport Lyons imply that the evidence against alleged infringers is so good that the fact that a court order was granted is likely to be enough to prove guilt. This is seriously up for debate. In Germany, a criminal investigator has stated that Logistep refuses to reveal how it gathers information against alleged infringers so it becomes impossible to confirm that the data it collects is correct. In my opinion, it is of paramount importance that Logistep is required to reveal how it gathers such evidence in order to prove its validity to a court, otherwise it’s possible that there would be errors, leading to the wrong people being accused and/or convicted. A UK Government audited and approved system could give their case credibility but until such an audit takes place, I don’t see how their systems can be trusted.

According to a computer forensics expert, the evidence held is likely to be inconclusive and the digital equivalent of Hearsay. Visitors to this thread will note that the expert seems to be offering his services on a no-win, no-fee basis. If his support means that the accused don’t have to go to Court, then he says there is nothing to pay. Any fees will be taken from costs awarded should the accused win their cases. We cannot endorse this guy but it’s certainly worth a look. There is an interesting post about other legal issues here.

Several people accused of uploading Dream Pinball are concerned that they may have an unsecured wireless network and that unknown third-parties may have committed an offence without their knowledge. Davenport Lyons have already responded to at least one person who put this scenario to them;

“There has already been a ruling in the German courts confirming that a wireless network is the responsibility of its owner and any consequences of failing to secure the network fall upon the owner of it, irrespective of who carried out the illegal activity�.

There was indeed a decision in the regional court of Hamburg on 27th July 2006 (ref 308 O 407/06) which ruled that the owner of an internet connection is responsible for infringements which take place on it. Presumably, if there had been a case under relevant UK law, Davenport Lyons would have mentioned it, rather than having to resort to referencing a German case.

So it appears that in the UK it may remain uncertain as to whether an account holder is liable for the actions of others on his internet connection. It’s an issue for the Court to decide, not a law firm or anti-piracy company. Indeed, an English Court may decide that the person who has had their wireless network hacked, bandwidth stolen, connection used illegally and reputation damaged, is actually a victim of a crime themselves and if companies like Logistep have the ability to identify the criminal who did this, then surely they have a legal obligation to do so. Anyone who feels they are the victim of this fraud should present this scenario to their lawyer.

In addition to the ‘uploadingâ €™ claim, one of the claims in the letter relates to the illegal copying of the game to the hard drive. Even if someone in the UK is found responsible for what someone does on their internet connection, surely they cannot be guilty of copying the game to the hard drive if this was done by an unauthorised user accessing an unsecured wireless LAN, on a PC outside of their control?

In Germany the district court in Mannheim denied Schutt-Waetke any fees they asked from a defendant, claiming the firm had already filed over 3700 similar cases and it was hard to see where such automated proceedings would require extensive work justifying any fees. A Court may or may not decide that should be the case here.


Dirk Hassinger, the sales director at Zuxxez said he had tried to find a law firm prepared to charge low fees because he didn’t want to “bankruptà¢ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚¬Ã‚ÂÂ� file sharers. On face value, this seems like a considerate thing to do, until you examine some of the wording in the Davenport Lyons letter;

“In the event that you were not able to pay whatever sums the court may direct, our client would have no option but to take steps to enforce the debt against your property�

So Zuxxez don’t want to bankrupt people but are quite willing to threaten their family home. Very considerate. It’s more likely that Zuxxez make the settlement ‘affordableà¢ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚¬Ã¢â€žÂ¢ to make sure defendants choose not to go to court. If going to court means companies like Logistep are forced to reveal their methods and they prove suspect, the whole process could fall to its knees. If someone is proven unresponsible for the actions of a wireless hacker, the whole process could fall to its knees. Obviously this is the last thing that Zexxez, Logistep or Davenport Lyons want.

Finally, having battered the German legal system with their proceedings and taking steps to do the same in the UK, it appears Italy is also becoming a target . Ominously, Logistep also have legal partners in Dubai, Israel, Austria, Poland and the USA.

The Corporate Enemies of File-Sharers list just got longer.

Re: Hvae you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Nope, it's legit...

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/03/28/uk_share_hunt/

Re: Hvae you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Yeah a legal scam, they probably put the game onto the p2p networks to start with.

Re: Hvae you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

I like pinball. lol

Re: Hvae you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Downloading is OK, it's the sharing that is the problem. If you have received the letter DO NOT PAY. By paying you will be admitting guilt, leaving you wide open for them to exort you again. They need to prove that YOU shared it, there are numerous ways in which you could be innocent.

Re: Hvae you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

I believe the downloading of copyrighted material in this country without paying is illegal. Until recently(2005) Sweden was the only European nation that let people download copyrighted material for personal use, but if you happen to live in Canada it's perfectly legal at the moment as long as you don't share.

If someone wants to download copyrighted material without fear of prosecution the safest way at the moment is via newsgroups as you're not sharing.

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

downloading anything for personal use in the uk is totally legal.
you can even call virgin or any other isp and ask them they will say the same.

half the tech guys i know there when i regually check if its fine tell me
to "Fill my boots" just make sure your carefull if your re-distrobuting i.e. uploadin


if it was true that it was illigal in the uk for downloading you think isp's would be increasing braudband from 1mb, 10mb, 20mbit

lets face it that is all bruadband is for ... theres no other reason why
you would need 10mbit/20mbit to read an email or buy from ebay.

superfast connections is for downloading nothing more the isp know this
so if it was a case of being illegal the courts would be flooded with infrigement cases just like this legal scam

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Provided you've paid for it if a fee is required then yes.

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

An update. Originally found on Slashdot.

http://torrentfreak.com/this-is-how-...u-downloading/

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

So if its working on the ip address then any UK file sharer on a cable modem will have a defense which i will not go into here other than it would involve a mac address. :)

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Hi

I have just been told about this thread and I have no idea how many of you here have like us got one of these letters, suffice to say and I am not trying to steer people away from this forum, but I think it might be a good idea to look here http://www.slyck.com/forums/posting....=reply&t=31051

Where some of us and now thinking about uniting and fighting Davenport at their own game, also I did start a thread in the newsgroup uk legal when I got my first letter where there is some sound advise.

Be aware their may be a second wave of letters being put together.

Re: Hvae you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Exactly what my better half said after she read this thread, entrapment??

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

got a letter today ...but not for downloading a pinball game but test drive unlimited...if they think they are getting anything out of me they better think againhavnt shared it doesnt work and ive brought the game now anyway...

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

This was in the media very recently. They are actively planning to go after those who don't pay up their £300 demand. So if you've got a letter, you had better not ignore it. Write back to them (recorded) explaining that you do not believe you have done what they say you have done, and request details of the evidence they say they have.

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Did you originally 'try it out' via torrents or newgroups?

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

im hearing differant things..ome people are saying dont reply and others are saying reply...seems like a bit of a scam to me

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Judging by what you said here:

Things aren't looking too promising for you :erm:

Let's hope your receipt for the game was dated before the letter.

No point in asking us for advice; you need to see a solicitor.

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

I certainly wouldn't ignore a letter from Davenport Lyons

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/08...g_gamer_fined/

It could cost you dearly, and its no scam eaither.

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Its no scam. Do yourself a big big favour and deal with the letter before your taken to Court

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Rememebr the 350 initial payment (or the court fines) are not that you downloaded the game, but you shared the game (hence they can request more than what a single copy of the game is worth) as most P2P's automatically share the game it means that the company rubs it's hands in glee :(

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Anyone interested in this issue may find this of use/interest to them.

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Interesting article, but largely academic considering that the judgement was made in her absence in court.

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

That was kinda my point. They're making money because people aren't standing up to them. From the article it sounds like if she'd responded to them, asking to see proof, they probably wouldn't have let it get to court.

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

I think if a serious attempt is made to resolve the situation amicably between the parties, perhaps even the original settlement could be reduced.

I have some other views on that article which I am loathed to bring up, but I may do so another time if its reasonable to do so.

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

yo everyone
ive just had a letter sayin i have to pay £526 for download test drive unlimited in feb 08, now the thing is yes i did d/l but not in 08 but in 07 probably july-ish. and its legal for personal use and i never share my d/l's. so i mean they are just stupid cuz with any isp u will get a warning poss 3 times then you get cut off. non of this ********. hey if they take me to court, fine. and they wont cuz they will lose...lack of evidence, they didnt even sign the papers with a specific name, its just the company name which isnt allowed.

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Let us know what happens at court then.

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Good luck in court.....

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

You may be able to reclaim any costs you incur in court from whoever provided you with that legal advice (if they are legally qualified). ;)

Good luck in court - let us know how you got on.

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Look i can see what ur saying but seriously has anyone known a freind go to court, not what the news or any media ******** says.
Im willing to stand up to these idiots and put a stop of this, im sure my memory serves me well someone within these 3 pages did say if we all do our part they will move away from us like they did from Germany, am i right???
so heres my msn, IF you wanna put a stop to this and your all in the same ****y situation as im in, then contact me.
slash181@hotmail.co.uk

i dont want this turning out that all of us are having to pay redicoulus amount of money.

steve

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Do me a favour and watch the language please, I know it's being caught be the swear filter but there's still no need for it.

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

they probably do have some form of "evidence". but i wouldn't take this with a pinch of salt IMO. it could come and bite you on the bum..

(speaking from experience)

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

ah sorry dude, presumed that it was kk. my bad.

steve

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Thx :tu:

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

yeh could do, but trying to sort out an Legal Scam is gonna be hard. its amazing how the only two games that ive heard that they've tried doing people for is that pinball one and test drive.
they invade our privacy by watching what we are doing on the internet and our isp's dont even know about it.
but they have been updated on the fact whats happening also OFFCOM has been in liason with the CAB over this now this past few weeks since this scam has been going on
so we need to act!

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Some mixed ideas here. You can't have your privacy invaded if you share rights protected software over public torrents or peer-to-peer networks.

You keep using the word scam, at least in two posts, but this is about unlawful re-distribution of copyright protected material. I don't like this ambulance chasing method employed by solicitors any more than the next man, but the only way you may win this is by having a very good solicitor who's an expert in this area. Sadly though, this is a civil matter, so you'll have to pay for that kind of expertise.

Some good honest advice here. If you can't afford representation talk to them now, make them a reasonable offer of settlement, and for goodness sake learn from this.

Unless there is a win in the courts for the user, and such a win sets a legal president (sp?) then more and more of these letters are going to be sent, and people are going to be out of pocket for the sake of spending a few pounds on a rather poor software title.

I think its fair to say, we've just had the bill for all those so called free lunches.

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

well okay obviously im going to be open to opinions and what others are saying as i am trying to sort this out for myself and everyone.
BUT.....it is a scam, if you where illegally sharing you would get a warning from your isp! not anyone else as its on their service your doing this. even virgin have said themselves do not pay!
heres a few links of other forums that i have studied, and i advise you also to study as tbh i think everyone has no idea (including myself) what is happening, im just going by what my isp has told me.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...formation.html

http://torrentfreak.com/this-is-how-...u-downloading/

http://www.p2pnet.net/story/12361

http://www.slyck.com/forums/viewtopi...8764241f43ed34

i would like just to say one thing, please dont try to be negative on this situation i am just like you and the next person around,trying to sort this out.
we need to start standing up to this and show em, i have freinds in germany saying that it happened over there for a few years and if you ignored the third letter nothing happens......not sure if its the same here.

if you have any advise, contacts, or you wanna just help not come out with sarcy comments cause it does not help im here to be helped and to help you guys too.

********this is not aimed at any post current just wanted to say before some guy finds this and just doesnt take it serious, as it is lol but thank you for everyones advise.....good luck in court :) and all the rest BUT LETS GET 'EM*********

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Two things.

Virgin Media have never said do not pay, they, and other ISP's have been served with court order forcing them to give up customer data.

Secondly, and I emphasize this clearly, it is not a scam, because if it were there wouldn't have been such large fines dished out to people by the courts, and I am not just talking about Davenport Lyons.

You want advice?.....go talk to a solicitor, we are up against the big boys now. Rights holders are bypassing the ISP's user policies because they have come out and said that they don't police the Internet, if you don't believe me go ask the head of Carphone Warehouse. Whilst the £16,000 fine against one file sharer was not a precedent (thanks forevarwar), it is certainly an eye opener, especially as the game company got a whacking share of that against the value and quality of the title shared.

There are a couple of posters here with some consumer advice experience, popper comes to mind, and having scanned through those articles, all of which I have read before at some time or another there is the possibility that some facts from those articles may help some "victims".

The truth though is simple, file sharers beware, you're going to be out of pocket.

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

ever had a letter toto?

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Thats why i NEVER EVER use torrents any more. Its SSL newsgroups all the way for me.

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

look its a scam face it, they got the date wrong in which the game was release, they havnt signed it lawfully, and its all over the place. the mojority of the letter talks bout them gettin money, they want full credit/debit card details

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

You have a choice... ignore it and wait for a court summons, if you don't want it to go that far then contact the company....

Just remember that you;ve put information on this forum using your IP admitting that you did download the game illegally ;) All it takes is another court order to get the IP :(

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

lol well tbh i didnt cause i never shared it, i never share my torrents they are all for personal use. so how sure are you there is gonna be a court summoning

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

How do you know there won't be??? The news reports prove that companies have done so in the past and are planning to do so in the future..

---------- Post added at 15:18 ---------- Previous post was at 15:13 ----------

The letter is stating that you downloaded it, not shared it...

Direct admission that you did download it

In the UK since when???????????

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

I think that scam might be a bit strong a word. You yourself have admitted downloading the game they have identified - the date stamps might not match, but they've obviously found the suspect they were looking for.

I'll agree it's possible that they're hoping for everyone to pay up rather than go through court (which costs them money too) but scam implies they're just making things up to con people - which they're clearly not.

It might also be worth highlighting that the warnings from the ISP are only part of an agreement between SOME ISPs and SOME rights holders. There is nothing to stop other rights holders (as is the case here) going through the courts to force release of the data from any ISP - at which point you will not get any notification from the ISP.

It's possible that the company paid by the rights holders hasn't done the best job in the world (as hinted by the CAG thread you linked to) but don't think for one minute that means it's a scam.

Any attempt to fight through the courts here would rely on proving evidence faulty rather than proving innocence - dodgy ground to say the least. All that will do is force them to up the quality of work done and in turn the size of the first instance out of court settlement figure asked for.

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

http://torrentfreak.com/why-bittorrent-works/

So you did share

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Whether you shared it on upload or not (and unless you're happy with abysmal download speeds (i.e. < 2K/s) you probably did upload too even if only while downloading), that doesn't mean the "honeytrap" wasn't in the swarm merrily handing you pieces of the game and logging your IP both in the torrent requests for the pieces and in the acks.

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Good point,

That's what a lot of people forget that in this instance it's a civil claim and doesn't need the burden of proof to overturn the automatic INNOCENT label

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

actually i will put down what it says :

Our client is in possession of evidence that on the following UK date(s) and at the following time(s), all or part of the work was made available from the named internet protocol ( or IP) address(es) using the following P2P protocol(s), specifically for the purpose of being downloaded by third parties.

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

OK, lets focus on the wording of that letter and how bittorrent works.

From my understanding, even IF you weren't uploading at all and accepting your download on the sub 2K speed, the other clients out there don't know that. All they know is that you are another member of the swarm and as a member of the storm can be guaranteed to have at least some of the data.

They have evidence you were a member of a swarm in a protocol designed to facilitate uploading as much as much as downloading with the focus of the swarm being the rights protected data.

At that stage, the burden of proof is likely to fall squarely on your shoulders to prove you weren't uploading (remember they don't know which other members of the swarm you've uploaded to even if you didn't upload to them) rather on them to prove that you were'nt uploading in a protocol designed for uploading.

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Not what you put in your first post.

As Sirius and others have stated P2P/Torrent automatically shares what you download (only BBC iplayer and other legal p2p apps can turn this off) that is the point of P2P/torrent, you can restrict the upload but as the letter says "all or part of the work" it only takes a slight fraction of a file and they've got you..

The letter is irrelavant to a court case as once they apply for a case all evidence (logs from them and the ISP) will be submitted so what dates on the letter is inconsequencial

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

okay well they havnt even signed it properly lol sorry that was a pathetic come back, erm okay i completely overlooked during the download period of the uploading, and yes i do know how it all works just got 2 letters in front of me saying ive gotta pay £565 on both letters.

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Again the letters are just really a warning stating that they WILL take action if you don't agree to thier company set fine. After that a court case will NOT use the already recieved letters but the proof that they have...

Will be intresting though as sooner or later someone will fight it and then it'll become a landmark case which I'm sure a lot of other companies with P2P data will stream out of the wings...

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

im really wanting to fight it tbh
thank you for all your help, might be on the news soon :D
ive sent a letter to davenport lyson asking for more evidence as the accusation is false, see what that comes up with. will let ya know asap

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

There's 2 sides to that though. If the rights holder wins, as you say, it'll open the flood gates.

However if the rights holder loses, it shouldn't be seen as a green flag for P2P. All that will do is clearer define the requirements from the rights holder and essentially set them up for a more likely positive result in 6 months time when they've gone back and got the necessary data from a new bunch of P2P users.

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

The simple fact that some people have paid means that even if they don't win the court case they'll just keep on sending out the letters... Fear itself will mean that they'll always get someone paying "thier fine"

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Please do and good luck :tu:

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Very true - along a similar line there were suggestions on the CAG thread that slash181 linked to indicating that perhaps DL knew some of the data was bad but sent all of the letters anyway in the hope of some payouts.

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

btw ive got another link from a few anon's
http://www.slyck.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=44092
that is a new thread explaining loads.

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Does this then mean VM keep detailed records of who had what IP address, when?
IP addresses are dynamic, 2 customers with the same NIC MAC can and frequently do battle over an IP address. How can they prove who had what, when?

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Yes, all ISP's keep detailed IP assignment (for a period of time), or they should. :)

Simply, an ISP keeps a DB of its IP allocation mechanism, what IP address was assigned to what user on what date/time (based on radius user name or some other mechanism such as modem MAC).

In relation to the NIC MAC assignment on cable networks, you can't have two or more of the same client MAC and Modem MAC on the same uBR. If two or more customers had the same NIC MAC, they would likely be on different uBR's which would mean different IP ranges, hence seemingly accurate IP assignment data.

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

You can. 2 customers have the same NIC MAC on the same ubr.
If both trying to connect at the same time, only one gets on. Say this is the one that illegally downloads games, movies, whatever. They then go offline, the other customer reboots and gets the IP address the other guy had. He then surfs the web, checks his mail and a while later gets a letter and hasn't a clue what it's about.

It can and does happen and lately more and more often.

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Having read the linked articles, it got me thinking about the defence that the wireless router may not have been secure at the time, and whether its a reasonable defence. I thought of it this way.

What if, being very stupid I didn't lock my car door, and left my keys in the ignition. The car got stolen and was used in connection with a crime. Would that make me an accessory to that crime?

No, I don't think it does. It just makes me look stupid, and voids my car insurance.

---------- Post added at 13:18 ---------- Previous post was at 13:16 ----------

Two customer NICs on the same uBR yes, but for each to get service at the same time they would still have to have different modem MAC addresses, and therefore each customer would have a different IP address.

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Even with different modem MACs, the ubr only accepts 1 NIC MAC. So both won't get on at the same time.
Isn't the ip address assigned according to the NIC MAC and not the modem MAC?

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

The same with wireless, you're responsible for the connection and any legal action that might come from it (the same as the car analogy with the cancellation of the insurance, you pay for the damage to the car unless you claim it back from the thief), The thief whether it be wireless theft or car is basically breaking the theft laws only...

In this country though that breaks down as theft has be that the person will steal with no intent of giving back it's one of the reasosn as to why TWOK became the normal offence...

In the end the simple facts are if you don;t secure something then you will be responsible for it to some extent...



Two customer NICs on the same uBR yes, but for each to get service at the same time they would still have to have different modem MAC addresses, and therefore each customer would have a different IP address.

---------- Post added at 13:23 ---------- Previous post was at 13:21 ----------

The rDNS of the IP would show that the cloned modem is in a different area...

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Oh I fully agree, its the "to some extent" that seems to be the key according to som interested parties in those articles.

I'm behind the law here in that trying to secure a conviction for copyright theft is the right thing to do, but playing devils advocate that on an unsecured wireless network there could be very reasonable doubt really makes me think. :)

---------- Post added at 13:32 ---------- Previous post was at 13:31 ----------

It's assigned to both in concert, that is why you can have matching client MACS but not matching modem MACS.

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

"To some extent" normally means that a judge could go either way... If he took into account VM's own T&C's then he would err on the side that you were responsible..

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Your analogy is slightly flawed. It would be more accurate to say that your car is stolen, crime committed and then the criminals put your car back in the same position without your knowledge that it has ever gone. Later the police trace your car and charge you as the owner of the car, which was witnessed at the scene. Your defence would be that someone cloned your plates, or you can prove you were elsewhere. Some of these people have no such defence.

To be honest, I find it very amusing that people come on saying how it's a scam, they'll fight it etc. in one breath, while in the other actually admitting to the crime and trying to argue either the evidence, or that their mate says it's legal for them to download as long as only they use it. Complete balls and how they think they can justify it by picking at technicalities, such as the letter isn't signed, or the date is a little out... If you don't remove the torrent from your client, it will continue to be seeded to others way beyond the date you think that you last shared it. Some people are asking to be caught by clearly having no understanding of the technology they are using to break the law.

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

It was purely devils advocate, and just to set the record straight, I have never said this was a scam, so I am assuming you are pointing that comment at others. :)

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

We get the same on the motorcycle forums, they scream and shout as to how a speed camera is there for revenue, they moan that they've got a NIP for breaking the speed limit and then they admit to doing 100+ down a motorway to see if the bike can do it....

Simple fact is if they didn't speed then they'd have no reason to moan. Same as if you download then accept the possible consequences...

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Surely that should be he "may" err on the side that I were responsible?

I don't think this point has been fully tested in court yet, and I am still not convinced that because the customer may have had an insecure wireless network it automatically makes them the culprit in law. It could do, but until its fully tested.....I'm going to reserve judgement on that, like my judgement means a jot. :)

Again, let me stress I am not on the side of anyone who flouts copyright law for their own selfish pleasure, any one familiar with my comments on another thread will know that only too well.

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Yes, the first part of my post was to extend your argument, the second part was aimed at others! :)

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

You having a go at my grammar?? :bsmack: :D :p:


There has been cases of people found guilty of theft of services via wireless and also as this thread is about people defaulting on a copyright/file sharing judgement..

But YES it will be very interesting when someone actually defends themselves and whether they use the insecure wireless defence...

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Let's face it, NTL's DHCP servers keep logs of who they give out IPs to. The companies working for the people who own the copyright to the material being download keep logs of which IPs connect to them to download and when they do it. They just marry the two together and get people's names. Notice how none of the people who have leters have been completely innocent of ever downloading the material, they've just argued that they were either, only downloading, or downloaded it at another point in time.

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Grammar no, just the verb used. :):):)

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

err was the verb, may/would the modifier ;)

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

I was merely pointing out that that until a judge makes a decision, we could not say that he "would" err on the side of VM, but that he "may". :)

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Why have 20meg download speeds? Its all very interesting but companies that promote there server speeds like Sky, Virgin etc are just has guilty as the individual downloading/uploading a torrent file. And whats amusing about this i do not see Davenport going after the like of Sky or Virgin Media etc.

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

To perhaps download demos, paid or free content...

Just because you have a high speed internet connection it doesn;t have to mean that it there for purely downloading warez

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Darn all those those guilty car manufacturers....................

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Possibly because my Mrs likes to watch streaming TV at the same time as video chatting with her friends on the PC and I like to play on xbox live without a slowdown. Also, if people do choose to download something, like an MSDN iso or whatever, they like it to come down asap, not be waiting for 12 hours while it dribbles down, so they can do other things.

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

thank you for those that emailed me, if ur a victim to this letter from davenport lyons email/add me at slash181@hotmail.com.
we should all stick together as ive contacted a lawyer and virgin media who to suprise say 'what davenport lyons are doing is illegal and should be banned', it has been in europe just not in the uk yet. this way if we all are in touch we can all be updated on the next stages and stand up to this.

steve

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Who in Virgin Media said 'what davenport lyons are doing is illegal and should be banned'?

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

i couldnt tell ya to be honest, it was a couple of days ago. i think it began with G....

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Strange that, because I'm not sure its Virgin's official line, more likely some ones personal opinion.

Re: Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons?
 

Yes, taking someone to court for copyright theft is illegal and should definitely be banned! You heard him, 'somebody' at VM said it, so it must be true!

I like the beginning too, poor victim's of this terrible illegal act, being persecuted and prosecuted!

---------- Post added at 18:31 ---------- Previous post was at 18:28 ----------

Gary @ VM, Graham @ VM..... Ginger maybe...