Have you received a letter from Davenport Lyons or ACS?

[annstitchen]

Hi
in regards to Davenport Lyons I posted that I have received letter and from links from here I have contacted Lawdit Who have been very help full and they are helping me with this case, they can not sure what the outcome will be but I have to give it a go.

[Kaleb45]

I got a Letter of Claim from DL.I dont know what to do but i searched internet and i decide to go to lawyer because "paying any sum of money to DL is like to write GUILTY on Your face".They have to prove it.So battle for justice has begun.

[Kymmy]

If they didn't have evidence from the ISP you wouldn't have the letter....

It's been said a hundred times before unlike a criminal case they don;t have to prove you guilty beyond any doubt, all they have to do is show thier evidence and unless you have evidence to the contrary then they win

It's mentioned recently that the unsecured network defence is working great in Europe... I suppose then that even if it doesn;t work here the European court of appeals would be the place to go

[photodude]

Originally Posted by annstitchen

Hi
in regards to Davenport Lyons I posted that I have received letter and from links from here I have contacted Lawdit Who have been very help full and they are helping me with this case, they can not sure what the outcome will be but I have to give it a go.

Every case I've read (so far), where people have requested the proof and denied the claim, Davenport Lyons have just stopped asking them for money/writing to them. When they do that, they forfeit the case (should they ever try and take it to court in the future) because they have not shown due process prior to the hearing. In "propper Inglish" that means because they failed to provide you with written documentation, facts or other info you requested, you have no case to defend (and you win)

Originally Posted by Kymmy

If they didn't have evidence from the ISP you wouldn't have the letter....

Yes but their proof is flawed, as can be seen in the high court ruling used to get the details from the ISP.

[Kymmy]

Originally Posted by photodude

Yes but their proof is flawed, as can be seen in the high court ruling used to get the details from the ISP.

Begs the question then if it was flawed then how did it get the ruling for the IP details???

[Toto]

Originally Posted by photodude

Yes but their proof is flawed, as can be seen in the high court ruling used to get the details from the ISP.

Sorry, the proof is not flawed until there is a legal challenge to D/L's claims AND is upheld, which as yet has not happened.

It may happen in due course, but to say otherwise is just your personal opinion.

[photodude]

Originally Posted by Kymmy

Begs the question then if it was flawed then how did it get the ruling for the IP details???

Simple, the ruling was made on legal process. All Davenport Lyons needed to do, was prove that there appeared to be a case of breach (not prove one), and the details were required to follow up the possible breach. Anybody can obtain a release order with only a small amount of evidence showing they need the account holders details to aquire more evidence. If there was actual physical proof of a copyrights breach, the judgement would not state "appearing that there is a prima facie case", "
which may give rise to a claim for Copyright infringement".

prima facie case
n. Law
A case in which the evidence presented is sufficient for a judgement to be made unless the evidence is contested.

As it was not released in order to be contested, they got the court order, in the same way they got default judgements on those who didn't turn up to court.
It's a dirty trick that even the law society are now looking at, as complaints have been made from some people who's details were released.

[cook1984]

Originally Posted by Alien

There's also this, which is worth reading as well.

Most interesting bit for me was this:

"As Logistep provide their data to the court in spreadsheet format, that should also suffice when offering evidence in defense."

In other words your defence can be created with Excel and a laser printer, and it's at least as good as their "evidence".

I am currently trying to find out the IP address used by Davenport's offices so I can send them some demands for money. Rather than wait for them to sue me, I figure I might as well threaten to sue them and watch them end their own legal war

[Alien]

Originally Posted by cook1984

I am currently trying to find out the IP address used by Davenport's offices so I can send them some demands for money. Rather than wait for them to sue me, I figure I might as well threaten to sue them and watch them end their own legal war

Not sure if this is their actual office IPs, but this may be a starting point for you:
davenportlyons.com: 217.29.195.33-217.29.195.33
Also, logistep's:
logistepag.com: 81.169.145.65-81.169.145.67
www.logistepag.de 81.169.145.71-81.169.145.71
[info gathered 27/9/08]

[photodude]

Originally Posted by cook1984

Most interesting bit for me was this:

"As Logistep provide their data to the court in spreadsheet format, that should also suffice when offering evidence in defense."

In other words your defence can be created with Excel and a laser printer, and it's at least as good as their "evidence".

I am currently trying to find out the IP address used by Davenport's offices so I can send them some demands for money. Rather than wait for them to sue me, I figure I might as well threaten to sue them and watch them end their own legal war

You could just send them an Email, then check the senders IP when they reply
Here is their public list of Email addresses for all the partners in the company
http://www.davenportlyons.com/html/a.../partners.html

According to their own news section, it is David Gore you need to contact .
http://www.davenportlyons.com/html/l...le_shares.html

Hope there are no objections to me posting these links to DL's site, as it is publicly available info. If there is, I'm sure the mods will remove them

[Russ]

None at all, the info is in the public domain.

[photodude]

That's great, thanks Russ
In that case, check this PDF doc link out of the papers in question
http://www.giuristitelematici.it/mod...gistep_doc.pdf

---------- Post added at 09:34 ---------- Previous post was at 08:09 ----------

PS:
I loved the £1 8 , 4 7 3 . 0 0 bill VM/TW sent them for giving details out

And also note that Davenport Lyons admit that the downloader may not be you (on page 3)

[Jbad]

DL have sent me a letter and i am completely innocent of downloading/uploading or sharing the file in question. Although i was probably connected when they say i was.

My work involves monitoring the P2P networks (not for breach of copyright but other worthwhile causes) including Edonkey/Mule and the Torrents.
We have to go to great lengths to successfully bring a case to court and get a successful prosecution/conviction. This is just a brief comparison between how we gather or evidence and how Logistep gather theirs.
We use accredited software and we are fully accredited to operate and gather evidence using it. The software is operated manually, the time is continually synched and every step of the process is recorded from the screen ready to produce in evidence and play back in court (sounds lame but any judge/jury can understand the evidence when it is presented in this way)

Intelligence will give us a “hash” for a certain file that we have an interest in (hash is the unique value that is generated when a file is put on the P2P, this value will never change even if the file is renamed)

We connect to the P2P network with the software and search for the “hash”

Once found we start to download the file

We look in and record the contents of the “shared” folder

We identify a target and drop ALL other connections until we have the target on a “one to one” connection

We download the COMPLETE file from the target over this one to one connection

Now we look up the target IP and, in a timely fashion, (not a year or more) contact the relative ISP and request the targets details. In the case of VM we would also request the “UBR” (Universal Broadband router) as this will eliminate a cloned VM modem which plagues the VM network…ever wondered why you have to keep rebooting your VM modem?? ( IP indicates subscriber is Mr X living in Southend, UBR say subscriber on Tyne and Wear UBR = Possible cloned modem = investigation dropped.

UBR details are not gathered by DL

This is not how Logistep gather their “evidence”. They do not use accredited software. Their software is automated and they do not download the COMPLETE file, in fact they only try to download a few bytes, and this is NOT on a one to one connection. The way they gather their evidence even captures the IP’s of P2P users that don’t even have the file or did Logistep hash and make the original file available renamed as something that we would download?? Before we realized we would have downloaded their “copyrighted material”…..has anyone looked for the file they allegedly downloaded?? Don’t tell me you can no longer find it and I wouldn’t mind betting that it was never available complete….. This just wouldn’t stand up in a UK Criminal Court of Law but will it stand up in a UK Civil Court?? I believe DL now realizes this and this is why they haven’t taken anyone that will contest their evidence to court. They just rely on scaring people into paying them the odd £500 here and there to recoup their loses to the ISP’s that have charged them for releasing subscriber details…well they wont be getting my £500..

[cook1984]

Originally Posted by photodude

You could just send them an Email, then check the senders IP when they reply
Here is their public list of Email addresses for all the partners in the company
[url]http://www.davenportlyons.com/html/about_us/partners.html[/url

Thanks. I already have a handle on their IP addresses, and hopefully a return email will confirm them.

Originally Posted by Jbad

We use accredited software and we are fully accredited to operate and gather evidence using it.

What software is that? You should be able to tell us because if it stands up in court it must be open to scrutiny by the defence.

We connect to the P2P network with the software and search for the “hash�

Once found we start to download the file

Interesting method but flawed in one obvious way. The file hash may never change, but the file name might. Thus, someone might innocently download a file called "Cake Recipies.txt" that was originally called "Bomb making instructions.doc" and you would target them based on the hash.

We look in and record the contents of the “shared� folder

I'm glad I disabled that.

We identify a target and drop ALL other connections until we have the target on a “one to one� connection

I'm glad Winny / Share / Perfect Dark / Freenet / Tor was invented to prevent that from identifying the source of the file.

We download the COMPLETE file from the target over this one to one connection

There are already versions of eMule / Azureus that do not transmit all parts of a file to a single IP address, so it looks like people are already on to you. Presumably failure to download the whole file = investigation dropped?

Thanks for confirming that valuable bit of self-defence.

IP indicates subscriber is Mr X living in Southend, UBR say subscriber on Tyne and Wear UBR = Possible cloned modem = investigation dropped.

Presumably whatever you are looking for is so terrible that concerns about hacked/open wifi connections are not enough to drop the investigation then? That must mean you are working on criminal cases.

Thanks for letting all the terrorists / paedos know that all they need is a cloned modem to deflect any attention.

Presumably anyone up to no good is using Peer Guardian or similar. Do you have some sort of arrangement with them not to block your IP address?

or did Logistep hash and make the original file available renamed as something that we would download?? Before we realized we would have downloaded their “copyrighted material�…..has anyone looked for the file they allegedly downloaded??

LOL, you are accusing them of renaming the file and tricking you into downloading it, but apparently that danger isn't enough to stop your own investigation.

[Toto]

Originally Posted by Jbad

Now we look up the target IP and, in a timely fashion, (not a year or more) contact the relative ISP and request the targets details. In the case of VM we would also request the “UBR” (Universal Broadband router) as this will eliminate a cloned VM modem which plagues the VM network…ever wondered why you have to keep rebooting your VM modem?? ( IP indicates subscriber is Mr X living in Southend, UBR say subscriber on Tyne and Wear UBR = Possible cloned modem = investigation dropped.

UBR details are not gathered by DL

I was kind of thinking your post was of interest, and then I read the above.

I'm going to assume you've never actually attempted to get this information from Virgin Media, or any other ISP, simply because you can't request the uBR in a court order. You are asking for customer details based on a tracked event which has provided you with an IP address, that is all you can reqeust under the data protection act, which is what a court order actually is in these cases.

You also make an assumption that VM "don't" check for a possible clone using the uBR, that's why you ask for it? So how would you know if that IP on that uBR was a cloned modem, if at all?

I'm not having a go here, but I am uncertain you fully understand what you are talking about.

But thank for the insight into your investigations.