This is a red herring. There won't be any legal action!
Just because ACS Law and Gallant Macmillan have sent letters, they are just words on paper designed to frighten and intimidate their intended recipients.
For a start, there would have to be evidence amounting to substantially more than an IP address and these legal firms (which I use in the loosest sense of the word) would have to be very sure that their cases for civil action would succeed.
I cannot imagine the courts taking a favourable view of two legal firms, which have now established themselves as the next thing since the ambulance chasing brigage, attempting to haul innocent individuals into a civil court case without evidence.
If they lose - and without evidence, there is a substantial likelihood of that happening - they will leave with their tail between their legs, mounting legal costs and their reputation (or lack of) in a worse state than now.
With some hope, they will disappear down a hole in the next few months, with their reputation in tatters unless embarrassment and ridicule get the better of them first.
Stay strong. Remain vigilant. And fight it! But don't pay!
Wow, if this practice is "legal" I ought to just create some business, and send out lawsuit threatening letters so that people can give me money for not suing them in some future complaint. I'll call it "insurance" or even better "protection"!
The meaning of “serious” would have to be that it follows up most or all of its threats. To let most of them go, and only chase up a few, is not what one would call “serious”.
thread on my isp's forum on acs law and as so far it looks like they have broken the NPO order by not passing on the data on how many of plusnets customers was taken to court vs those fined
Folks,
This is a red herring. There won't be any legal action!
Just because ACS Law and Gallant Macmillan have sent letters, they are just words on paper designed to frighten and intimidate their intended recipients.
For a start, there would have to be evidence amounting to substantially more than an IP address and these legal firms (which I use in the loosest sense of the word) would have to be very sure that their cases for civil action would succeed.
I cannot imagine the courts taking a favourable view of two legal firms, which have now established themselves as the next thing since the ambulance chasing brigage, attempting to haul innocent individuals into a civil court case without evidence.
If they lose - and without evidence, there is a substantial likelihood of that happening - they will leave with their tail between their legs, mounting legal costs and their reputation (or lack of) in a worse state than now.
With some hope, they will disappear down a hole in the next few months, with their reputation in tatters unless embarrassment and ridicule get the better of them first.
Stay strong. Remain vigilant. And fight it! But don't pay!
Wow, if this practice is "legal" I ought to just create some business, and send out lawsuit threatening letters so that people can give me money for not suing them in some future complaint. I'll call it "insurance" or even better "protection"!
I think the legal term is "Racketeering", pay us the money or we'll burn down your business/take you to court.
The meaning of “serious” would have to be that it follows up most or all of its threats. To let most of them go, and only chase up a few, is not what one would call “serious”.
This is just a variation of the old Ambulance Chasers Scam.
Pay us this money or else we will take you to court.
Very much like the PPC (Private Carparking Scam)
These are the one I know about but I'm sure others know of many more which are just the same.
If only they could be charged with 'taking money with menance'
maybe if they made available more than just vol 1 of ministry of sound on spotify then there would be no need to illegally download there tracks.
come on media guys, sort your 21st century sales model out before trying to turn all your customers into crim's
http://community.plus.net/forum/index.php/topic,85908.0.html
thread on my isp's forum on acs law and as so far it looks like they have broken the NPO order by not passing on the data on how many of plusnets customers was taken to court vs those fined