A new Sheriff in Town? Recorded letter from 'Tilly Bailey Irvine' on behalf of M&M GM

[mazwell2]

Hi everyone-

Any comments and advice from the community very much appreciated on this. I am in the position to pay their suggested 'fine' as a settlement but I did not d/l or share the file they state and I do not want the implied guilt of a 'quick settlement to get ot all sorted and off my mind' scenario.

I recently received a recorded letter from 'Tilly Bailey Irvine' a firm of UK lawyers representing 'Media & More GMBH & CO KG'. It does not appear to be a 'Part 36' letter as it is requiring a 14 day maximum response time (UK Justice Ministry guidelines state clearly clearly 'not less than 21 days' to respond to a formal part 36 and I cannot see the phrase "Part 36" anywhere on it which is also a requirement of a letter 'intended to have the consequences of a part 36'.

The letter included a copy of a spreadsheet with hundreds of other IP address on it- so I imagine other people will be receiving similar letters.

They allege I used p2p software to download porn: what they have identified I did not.

The company they used to trawl for IP was 'Media Protetcor GMBH' who have a website http://stop-p2p-piracy.com

On their FAQ it states that it is impossible for their technology to identify an IP address incorrectly; or for your wireless connection to be hacked into so that an intruder can use your signal connection to download/ upload i.e. if this were the case then MP GMBH would pick up on that and not identify IP address in their trawl.

The TBI 'offer letter' appears markedly different from the ones being discussed such as the DL/ACS and Andrew Crossley situations.

For example it refers to a major case at the High Court in London (Justice Warren on 28th January 2010) and it says that there will be no more contact between them and myself unless I agree to their undertakings and make the three digit compensation- otherwise they will move straight to court proceedings. Here is the relevant text:

"Legal Consequences
The extensive file sharing activity is causing damage to our client's business. Our
client is therefore left with no alternative but to police its intellectual property rights
and enforce them against infringers.

In the event that it becomes necessary for our client to bring a claim against you for
copyright infringement, the legal costs of those proceedings will be substantial. We
must make you aware that if successful, our client will be entitled to recover from you
damages and a contribution towards its legal costs of bringing the claim to court. You
will also have to incur your own legal costs. We estimate that collectively such costs
would be several thousand pounds. 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."

Next Steps —
payment and undertakings
You can provide the undertaking (referred to at 1 and 2 above) by signing the written
undertakings enclosed with this letter and returning them to this firm, together with
your payment, using the attached payment form. Payment must be made either by
cheque, bank transfer, credit card or SWITCH/DELTA. No other form of payment
will be accepted.
For the avoidance of doubt, these undertakings will represent an agreement between
you and our client and if you act in breach of that agreement, our client will have no
option but to take further action against you. The payment and undertakings must be
made and received by us within 14 days of receipt of this letter.

Next Steps —
commencing proceedings
In the event that either the payment or undertakings are not received within fourteen
days of the date of this letter, we are instructed to commence proceedings without
further notice. "

I am minded to send a brief LOD by recorded delivery but am worried about the phrase of " we are instructed to commence proceedings without
further notice" - this was not used by ACS.

Any advice on what steps to take much appreciated.

[ceedee]

Smells to me like a scam, tbh.
But you might want to read this before making your decision.

[mazwell2]

Thanks for link- will definitely read before doing anything.

[tnk]

This could be a scam but I agree with the advice above.

Which ISP are you with? When did the alleged insident take place

Why not contact TBI directly by phone and ask to speak to someone regarding the case reference on the letter. You don't need to give TBI any information other than the case ref which they will be able to verify if this is at least something they sent or if it is a fake.

If it is something from them then don't say anything other than you are going to consider your position. Then at least you would know if it is a scam or not and you still have the same 14 days to respond

[mazwell2]

Originally Posted by tnk

This could be a scam but I agree with the advice above.

Which ISP are you with? When did the alleged insident take place

Why not contact TBI directly by phone and ask to speak to someone regarding the case reference on the letter. You don't need to give TBI any information other than the case ref which they will be able to verify if this is at least something they sent or if it is a fake.

If it is something from them then don't say anything other than you are going to consider your position. Then at least you would know if it is a scam or not and you still have the same 14 days to respond

It is from them (and they are a major law firm not like the previous cowboys) as I called from a payphone and asked to speak to the person mentioned on the BT class action (put down when they connected) isp names and address action = this one here:

From recorded package that arrived:

MEDIA & MORE GMBH & CO KG (applicant / Intended claimant)

and

BRITISH TELECOMMUNICATIONS PLC (respondent)

and

PERSONS UNKNOWN (intended defendant)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CHANCERY DIVISION INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
Before Mr Justice Warren
This 27th day of January 2010

Upn the Application as set out in Claim Form dated 20 January 2010

Warren forced BT to turn over names of people with a BT ISP Ip address 'identified' by Media Protector people. They had 6 months to do it but obviously turned them over immediately.

I cannot find any info on this on the web either and no serial/ ident number on High Court documents

[tnk]

Do they give you a date of the alledged infringment?

[mazwell2]

Originally Posted by tnk

Do they give you a date of the alledged infringment?

yes

[tnk]

Please don't post exact date but how many months does this go back?

[mazwell2]

Originally Posted by tnk

Please don't post exact date but how many months does this go back?

Lets just say the alleged date is from a period covered by previous law firms- I did think this was possibly a case of pass-the-parcel

[Tezcatlipoca]

Originally Posted by mazwell2

On their FAQ it states that it is impossible for their technology to identify an IP address incorrectly;

Media Protector:

http://cyberlaw.org.uk/2009/01/04/hu...-porn-pirates/

http://torrentfreak.com/anti-piracy-...ploads-080714/

Originally Posted by mazwell2

or for your wireless connection to be hacked into so that an intruder can use your signal connection to download/ upload i.e. if this were the case then MP GMBH would pick up on that and not identify IP address in their trawl.

How would they know that?

They don't know if you are the infringer (is that a word?), or if it's someone else in your house (child, flatmate, whatever), or if it's someone next door or outside with a laptop.

Surely all they have (like all ACS/DL have) is an IP - nothing that actually proves that a specific named individual committed an act of copyright infringement.

---------- Post added at 21:55 ---------- Previous post was at 21:53 ----------

I'd go with ceedee's advice of reading this:

http://ceedee.co.uk/everything-you-n...a-file-sharing


Plus also have a look at the usual info given to people dealing with ACS/DL, as it sounds like the same sort of thing.

http://www.lawdit.co.uk/reading_room...le-sharing.htm

[mazwell2]

Originally Posted by Matt D

Media Protector:

http://cyberlaw.org.uk/2009/01/04/hu...-porn-pirates/

http://torrentfreak.com/anti-piracy-...ploads-080714/




How would they know that?

They don't know if you are the infringer (is that a word?), or if it's someone else in your house (child, flatmate, whatever), or if it's someone next door or outside with a laptop.

Surely all they have (like all ACS/DL have) is an IP - nothing that actually proves that a specific named individual committed an act of copyright infringement.

---------- Post added at 21:55 ---------- Previous post was at 21:53 ----------

I'd go with ceedee's advice of reading this:

http://ceedee.co.uk/everything-you-n...a-file-sharing


Plus also have a look at the usual info given to people dealing with ACS/DL, as it sounds like the same sort of thing.

http://www.lawdit.co.uk/reading_room...le-sharing.htm

These are the most pertinent elements where they claim its impossible to be hacked/ have IP address stolen. Ant techie explnation for a non techie appreciated

*************

Evidentiary Value Of IP Adresses

- Is It Possible That Someone Stole or Forged My IP Address?

With file sharing in the eDonkey2000 network, the use of forged IP addresses and/or the abuse of IP addresses is virtually impossible as a thorough and effective manipulation would require the Internet Service Provider’s participation in those illegal activities and would also imply further complex measures.


- Is It Possible That Another P2P Participant Was Somehow Using My IP Address?

FileWatch will not log any IP data before a direct (peer-to-peer) connection to the P2P participant was established. Extensive authentication mechanism together with the network`s bidirectional communications eliminate the possibility, that a “Hacker� could somehow use the IP address of another P2P participant.

---------- Post added at 22:39 ---------- Previous post was at 22:00 ----------

OK- thinking about my LOD- two questions:

1) do I say something about not expecting to receive another letter from them;
2) Do I respond to any further communication from them having sent the LOD by registered post and keeping the documentation/ proo-of-posting (and a copy of the letter)

Again advice much appreciated on this.

[haydnwalker]

Evidentiary Value Of IP Adresses

- Is It Possible That Someone Stole or Forged My IP Address?

With file sharing in the eDonkey2000 network, the use of forged IP addresses and/or the abuse of IP addresses is virtually impossible as a thorough and effective manipulation would require the Internet Service Provider’s participation in those illegal activities and would also imply further complex measures.


- Is It Possible That Another P2P Participant Was Somehow Using My IP Address?

FileWatch will not log any IP data before a direct (peer-to-peer) connection to the P2P participant was established. Extensive authentication mechanism together with the network`s bidirectional communications eliminate the possibility, that a “Hacker” could somehow use the IP address of another P2P participant.

It is possible that someone else was using your connection at the time - however, this isn't always a defense depending on your ISPs Terms and Conditions (some state that you are responsible for everything that happens on your connection).

They cannot distinguish WHICH computer it was on your connection doing the alleged infringing (especially if you have a NAT Router with Firewall [most are these days]). But again that brings me back to your ISPs terms and conditions

[mazwell2]

Originally Posted by haydnwalker

It is possible that someone else was using your connection at the time - however, this isn't always a defense depending on your ISPs Terms and Conditions (some state that you are responsible for everything that happens on your connection).

They cannot distinguish WHICH computer it was on your connection doing the alleged infringing (especially if you have a NAT Router with Firewall [most are these days]). But again that brings me back to your ISPs terms and conditions

Is this why BT are the 'easy target' that these law companies continue to extract IP's from ?

Well I just cannot see that argumnet standing up in court- if that is what is comes to. Luckily someone on another forum in PM offered pc-technical help with that (on trashing 'techical- forensic analysis) and best friends partner is a Barrister who has done a lot of HRA cases (including as high as ECHR) and such like so I'd not have to pay for legal counsel and representation.

[ellie2]

Originally Posted by mazwell2

Is this why BT are the 'easy target' that these law companies continue to extract IP's from ?

Well I just cannot see that argumnet standing up in court- if that is what is comes to. Luckily someone on another forum in PM offered pc-technical help with that (on trashing 'techical- forensic analysis) and best friends partner is a Barrister who has done a lot of HRA cases (including as high as ECHR) and such like so I'd not have to pay for legal counsel and representation.

PAH- the only way they can KNOW it was from a specific computer (and even then a sophisticated hacker can get around this) is if they infected a movie/ file (and therefore a computer) with malware so that when it was clicked to open it would transmit a text file with said IP/ PC details back to File Watch.

Of course that is an illegitimate evidence collection technique (the same procedure hackers use to hijack wireless connections/ piggy back signals/ remotely control a computer etc).

It's also inadmissible in court- another reason why no DEFENDED cases have ever appeared before a Judge.

*But* File Watch and TBI are banking on the idea that if they select only those that their malware indicate did D/L the movie (wireless hackers notwithstanding) will- in the face of brutal court papers/ technical documentation and a settlement offer- cave in and pay up (a la DL before).

Don't do it. The case- should it ever get that far and it won't - will be thrown out of court once FW reveal their true actual illegitimate method of data collection.

Get off a concise denial that you nor anyone else D/L'd the file and listen to that lawyer partner of your friend.

CALM DOWN !!

[lymmranger]

........apart from an extremely agressive first approach these guys are no different to Davenprt Lyons and ACS. (They are only interested in getting your cash!)

As such their claim should be treated exactly the same. As the account holder (I presume) you are held totally responsible. (in their eyes)

In reality you have to have either been personally responsible or authorised the action. (in which case seek legal advice)

If the above is not the case then reply and deny. Remember to keep your response simple - any additional information you supply will/may be used against you.

I can also reccomend you visit the chatroom at "beingthreatened"

By the way welcome to the game