Davenport Lyons - threatening letters
In order to see this content you need to have both Javascript enabled and Flash installed. Visit BBC Webwise for full instructions
One of the fundamental principles of English law is that you're innocent until proven guilty, and if anyone should know that it's a lawyer. But it's lawyers who are sending many of you frightening letters which appear to assume you're guilty of something that you might not have done, demanding money, and threatening even worse if you don't pay up.
Frightening letters
The letters are coming from a London-based company called Davenport Lyons, one of the most respected law firms in the UK. So much so, we've even used them here at Watchdog, but then we hadn't received the 18-page letter it sent Barbara Burch, asking for £600 compensation. It accused the mother of two of breaching copyright on a computer game called Two Worlds. "This is not right, I've not done it," Barbara told Watchdog. "I've never heard of the company, I've never heard of the game. It's not possible because I was babysitting for a friend's child at the time, so no, it's not possible."
But the letter from Davenport Lyons was quite convincing, saying that unauthorised use of the game had been traced to Barbara's computer system. Davenport Lyons said it was acting on behalf of the games rights' owner, Reality Pump, and it said it had proof of the date and time of the alleged breach of copyright. But when Watchdog sent Barbara's computer to expert Nigel Pugh from Forensic Footprints, it turned out that the game had never been on her computer at all.
Alan Guest received one of Davenport Lyons' letters, too. This time the firm said it was acting on behalf of another computer game company Atari, and Alan was accused of the illegal use of one of its games. He says: "I was 100 per cent confident I hadn't downloaded it. But, you know at the same time, you never know what can happen if it's your word against their word."
The letter asked Alan for £500 compensation because he'd allowed the games' copyright to be breached. He was also warned that he'd face much higher costs if Davenport Lyons had to take the case further. Alan's partner Heidi was so worried by the content of letter, she thought they ought to pay it, but Alan decided to fight it all the way. "I'm up for it - let them take me to court. I didn't do it, so bring it on - that's what I say." Watchdog had Alan and Heidi's computer checked out, too. And again there was no sign of the game.
Hard-core allegations
It's one thing being accused of uploading computer games when you haven't, but some of the accusations coming from Davenport Lyons are a bit more hard core. It has also been sending letters to people accusing them of breaching the copyright of a gay porn film. The film is so X-rated, we can't even tell you its title, but it certainly surprised the people, including a married couple in their 70s, who Davenport Lyons wrote to about it.
Online piracy
Davenport Lyons says it's writing the letters after being given evidence of illegal use of its clients' work on internet file sharing sites. These are sites where you can download and upload copyrighted material for free. It's online piracy and although Davenport Lyons' tactics seem heavy handed, they're actually acting on the instructions of their clients, the copyright owners.
Digital fingerprints
The accusations rest on evidence from internet tracking data. Every time you connect to the internet you leave behind a digital fingerprint called an IP address. According to Davenport Lyons, Alan and Barbara's IP addresses have been found illegally sharing their clients' works. Using a High Court order, they have then forced Alan and Barbara's internet service provider to hand over their names and addresses.
But Michael Coyle, a lawyer representing nearly 400 people who've had one of the letters, doesn't think using just an IP address as evidence is conclusive enough. He says: "Until you actually inspect the computer itself, there's no way of knowing if an individual has committed an act of copyright infringement, you have to take the hard drive and inspect it. It's nonsense to suggest that someone has committed a copyright infringement simply by an IP address."
That's because while fingerprints are impossible to fake, IP addresses aren't. According to Stuart Taylor from internet security firm SOPHOS, it's relatively simple, and the easiest way to do it is to tap into one of the many unsecured wireless internet connections most of us have these days.
Insecure wi-fi
Driving around a residential street in Hertfordshire, Stuart showed Watchdog how an IP address can be used without the owners' knowledge. With his laptop switched on, he picked up 30 to 40 wireless internet signals, most of which were secure with password protection, but three or four were not. Within seconds he was able to connect to one, and could have started downloading. If he wanted to download or upload anything illegal, he could have done so straight away, without the knowledge of the connections' owner. Was this how Barbara and Alan found themselves in trouble with Davenport Lyons?
Liability
Reality pump, who instructed Davenport Lyons to enforce the copyright of its game Two Worlds against Barbara Burch, sent a written response to Watchdog.
"Having an unsecured wireless network makes you liable for all the harm done using that network, because you set the cause for the harm done. It's comparable with installing a bath yourself in a bathroom located on a first floor flat. If it then leaks and water goes into the flat below, causing damage to property, you will be liable for all the damage caused." "We believe that letters are only sent to people who are liable for the copyright infringement of our product."
Shocked and disappointed
Games company Atari defended its decision to protect games from illegal copying but said Davenport Lyons was no longer acting on its behalf.
Atari says: "The costs and lost revenue caused by the widespread illegal copying of games causes much damage to our industry, directly affecting the many talented creative people developing the games, and also our customers. Taking action to defend our rights is necessary, but it is very important to us that any action taken is fair and appropriate. We believed that Davenport Lyons' methods were totally reliable and accurate. We were shocked and extremely disappointed when we found that they had incorrectly accused one household of illegal copying. As a direct result we told Davenport Lyons to take no further action on our behalf."
Davenport Lyons' response
"Intellectual property theft is a serious matter and these claims are by their nature complicated. Our letters reflect this and are legally correct. We write to account holders whose IP address has been used to upload our client's copyright material onto file sharing sites, and who therefore have a strong case to answer. However, we are happy to take on board people's comments and are reviewing the content of our letters with a view to making them clearer and easier to respond to."
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~35~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
I have recieved a letter asking for £500 for a £7.99 album I have apparantly been proved to download. What rubbish !
Complain about this comment
It is no secret that illegal file sharers add around 33% fake IP addresses to protect their users. This was not done to criminalize innocent users, it was done because the pirates figured that nobody would be stupid enough to send out such letters in the first place, knowing that so many would end up in the hands of people who had done nothing wrong.
Until a method of discovering which of these fakes belong to innocent users Davenport should be banned from sending any such letters.
[Personal details removed by Moderator]
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Pretty surprised this hasn't come up before as there are many people leaving their wireless networks open to hackers, as well as using the old WEP security keys which is significantly insecure too.
The main thing that I think this report leaves out is the fact about dynamic and static IP addresses - if someone turns off their modem for 24 hours or so (dependent on ISP) then they will be given a new IP address when they reconnect. The old one is then put back into the 'pool' for the ISP to give to others.
This is something that the report ignored and I think should have contained this information.
Complain about this comment
I think that your broadcast concerning Davenport Lyon's was lame in the extreme. You are charged with standing up to the bully-boys and this is just a shameful roll-over. By your own admission, you seem to have a conflict of interest here since the company Davenport Lyons is apparently used by your corporation which is unfortunate. Wrongful accusation of fraud or illegal downloading is surely something which an innocent could get ensnared in accidently. It is entirely bizarre to believe that all internet users will be au fait with issues concerning security and your presenter was far too self-righteous.
Note that I have never been in conflict or correspondence with this company. As a citizen, I feel that this matter deserved a more robust inquisition and your team appeared to be apeing Paxman on laxatives.
Complain about this comment
The description of what happened seems to suggest that the IP address was used to upload the file at a certain time.
Does anyone at the law firm realise that IP addresses change every 24 hours or so on ADSL broadband?
It is also very easy to fake an IP address so it would seem to be a very weak argument to force £500 out of people.
It is almost as bad as when the TV licencing people think that anyone who hasn't got a licence at their address is cheating by default.
Complain about this comment
Due to the threats, I thought this was a poor scam! I've never seen that porn, what should I do? I'm worried now....
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Hi - I work in IT - and know that there are websites out there where you can actually fake your ip address. If you go into Google and type in 'random ip address generator' there are companies that can disguise your actual ip address when connecting to websites by making them think that your ip address is something else. May be worth thinking about - for example my ip address may be generated as some totally innocent person's ip address (if I were dishnonest or looking at stuff/downloading/uploading stuff that I shouldn't be. Hope this may be useful to people. Cheers!
Complain about this comment
@ Sandeross
Yes you might get a new IP addy but the one you used for the crime is time and date logged...This what they use....
Complain about this comment
Oh and its not illegal to leave a wi-fi connection un-encrypted...
Complain about this comment
I live in a house. It has a door which is not locked all the time because I need to go to the garden, dispose of the refuse and do household chores. At night and when I am out of the house I lock the door.
At home I have a computer. It is a Mac. Other people have computers which come in different models with different processors, packages and instructions. Unlike houses, the doors in and out of computers are not standard and are not locked all the time. People understand houses because they live in them. People understand dangerous animals because they bite them. People buy computers because they promise communication with the outside world on their terms. People distrust lawyers, journalists and bankers because they do not always work within logical,fair or consistent paradigms. Morale of this homily: people expect fair-play and are often disappointed. Solution:guard dogs should do their job, bark and protect the home against intruders. Where possible, they should bite and not just deliver a halototic kiss...
Complain about this comment
It's about time these copyright infringers got caught. Let's face it, the majority of people are doing it and this sort of activity is causing severe lost of revenue for companies. It is like going into a shop and stealing.
Complain about this comment
It is about time too! Some people have been complaining to this program for more than a year about this.
Complain about this comment
I also received one of these letters accusing me of uploading and making available a porn film called Euro Domination 5. As a happily married pensioner of 64 years old I ask you!. After plowing through the documentation I spotted one or two items that are either missing or incorrect.
It would appear that although they have my full postal address they do not have my name! The letter and documentation is addressed by name to “Provider, Royal Mail Holdings PLC” If they do not use my name or appear to know it how on earth can they carry out any threats of court actions?
For me they list that the upload was done using three different IP Addresses, but all at the same time! As I understand it, my ISP issues me with single new IP address dynamically each time I reconnect to the internet (NOT THREE). As I use an ADSL Network Router that IP Address remains allocated to me till I switch off the router or disconnect it from the telephone line. The router is left switched on for weeks at a time. This throws some doubts on their data gathering reliability.
Doing a Google search on the name Davenport Lyons brings up some interesting facts about this company. After reading the comments about them and their ways of doing things I am certainly not going to be paying them a settlement. I will wait till they try to take me to court and fight it there.
Needless to say I have not seen this video, downloaded it or uploaded it.
It would have been most useful had Watchdog named the Lawyer who is representing the 400 people who received these demand letters, as I would like to make that figure up to 401 with my name.
Complain about this comment
The only way to proove that downloading and uploading of these games took place on a particular computer is if davenport lyons have a mac address to that computer [Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator] a mac address is like a chassis number to your computer
Simon
Complain about this comment
I too received a letter not long ago accusing me of downloading an album back in may 2008 and so called making it available to others on a p2p site and demanding £500 and to pay up within 21 days. I too use a wireless connection..
Complain about this comment
recieved letter asking for £565.00 for downloading psp game in march 2007. sought legal advice,advised to pay as genuine frim who specialise in this field(or told).So wondering how i go about it from here as i have paid in full.
Complain about this comment
I was unfortunate enough to get one of these letters through the post regarding pornography, i found it agressive and judgemental,iam not guilty of these allegations and found myself very threatened by the letter, now i find on your programme they are a
reputable company, how did anyone at any period in history increase their reputation by associating themselves with porn? I am appalled at the levels people will stoop to when cash is in short supply, the british public should be protected against attacks such as this,
general public are always the last in the distrubution ladder.
Complain about this comment
Well I had a letter back in October regards to apparently downloading and uploading an Atari game. I know for a fact i didnt do it and i never use p2p. So i decided to pay up as i didnt know what to do. I do have the game in question but i purchased it 3 hours after i had apparently done the deed. Im disabled and on benefit so its been difficult. Ive since had my internet disconnected because I dont want it happening again and shall not use the internet at home ever again. I can only use the internet for emails and to go here if i borrow a computer from my family. Sorry for the long comment.
Complain about this comment
I also recieved a letter or you could say a booklet about copy right, asking to pay £525.00 compensation.Also in this booklet davenport wants me to sign a document saying i agree to what states in the letter.That i downloaded a film.In the booklet the under takings is DIGIPROJECT Gesellschaft zum schutze digitale medien gmbh who are sueing me.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
I am currently unemployed and unable to find any work at the moment. I own my own home and as such have had to take lodgers in to make ends meet. I recieved a letter from said lawyers stating that i had illegally downloaded a music album and that my ip had be tracked or logged at the time. I havent downloaded the album, have no means to pay this amount (£500) especially in december and cannot prove that I didnt download the album. I phoned said lawyer and stated that it may have been someone in my household at the time as they have full access to my internet (as im a generous person) or maybe the encryption wasnt on at the time as id had technical problems with everyone connecting to the wireless router previously in the year (i cant remember if these times coincide as it was May this year). I was told that its my internet my responsability. I cant believe that i have to pay £500 for someone in my household or maybe someone else, downloading off my internet. Id happily have all the pc's in the household sent away or even just mine!!! Im struggling to make ends meet and keep my house let alone pay threats like that!! Anyway, what ever happened to pocession is 9/10's of the law, and inncocent until proven guilty? PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE can maybe someone from the watchdog team look into it or provide me with some help.. Many thanks
Justin Parker
Complain about this comment
I too have been falsely accused by Davenport Lyons of downloading porn that had scenes of strangulation, asphyxiation and urination before being cut by the BBFC.
I have not downloaded this movie nor do I know who has. I have contacted the police, my ISP and DL about this issue. If DL is correct and my network was used to download this file (although Watchdog made it very clear this may not have happened)I am very concerned about this unauthorized use of my wireless access point. Needless to say these false allegations and the tone of the letter have made things very stressful for me and my family.
I have a question for DL, if they were trying to stop these types of downloads why do they wait 6-7 months to contact people about them. Surly the best way to stop illegal downloads is to act right away?
Complain about this comment
Obviously, I've no idea if this is the case here, but it seems some copyright enforcement companies do little more to obtain their supposed "evidence" of copyright infringement than capture the list of IP addresses returned by bittorrent trackers as potential sources of the copyright infringing file.
Unfortunately bittorrent trackers got wise to this and some now add "bogus" semi-random IP addresses to their list of sharers - these IP address are generated so that they are within the ranges allocated to genuine (and likely totally innocent) ISP customers.
Article here -
[Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]
Complain about this comment
The analogy from Reality Pump about the bath is both factually and legally wrong.
A closer analogy would be that if you lent your car to someone and they ran over and killed somebody it's their fault not yours -- even more so if they stole it.
The only exception would be if you handed them the keys and said "Go on, off you go and kill someone".
The Copyright Act says that to be guilty you have to either infringe it yourself or authorise somebody else to infringe it -- note, "authorise" not "fail to prevent".
Having an unsecured router cannot make you guilty of copyright infringement unless you hang up a big sign in the window saying "My router's unsecured, feel free to use it to illegally download copyright material"
Complain about this comment
Daven-Port Lyons haven't got a leg to stand on. The whole point of wi-fi was that it was supposed to be open (remember the war paint symbols). You are NOT liable for other people using your network, that is a get out used by ISP's but legally holds no water. Why anyone would do anything but laugh at one of their stupid letters is beyond me. Well they can cook my sock.
Complain about this comment
I think that it should be clearer that IP addresses don't uniquely identify a computer - in most cases they get allocated to your computer by the ISP when you switch on and deallocated when you switch off. ISPs have a limited number of IP addresses and they may well allocate the one you just had to someone else after you have switched off. The next time you switch on you may well get a different IP address.
Tying up who got what IP address when is not easy for the ISP and mistakes are easy to make as your report showed.
If you pay more - quite a lot more - to your ISP you can get a reserved "static" IP address which is indeed unique to your computer.
Complain about this comment
i have also received a letter from Davenport Lyons, and i am one of the lucky ones that have been represented by Michael Doyle. i was accused of downloading a game by Atari. I have suffered regarding the stress and worry about this, especially from my wife, but i can only imagine the outcome if they had accused me of downloading/uploading gay porn. they have alledgedly sent out 25,000 letters following a much heralded success, in an uncontested case i might add. 25000, £500 is one mighty business case. I am sure that this is the true reason for doing this, not trying to stop the p2p piracy. [Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
DL are applying to the High Court to force the ISPs to release personal details relating to the IP address based on a Criminal case, and then they pursue a Civil one. How can this be allowed in the UK?
DL are asking people to prove themselves non-guilty within their letters. If you have not downloaded/uploaded a game/film/song/etc, how can you prove that? Unless you don't have a computer, or an internet connection, it is impossible to present evidence about not having done it.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
"Davenport Lyons says it's writing the letters after being given evidence of illegal use of its clients' work on internet file sharing sites."
1.There is no "evidence" unless they have the pc in their possesion to prove the illegal software is on their system.
2. The MPAA have been trying the same tactics for years with little or no success.
3. Some "free to play" games use file sharing programs to allow the software to be downloaded.
4. As far as I am aware a cease and desist letter MUST be sent to the offending person from their ISP before it can be taken further. This tells the "offender" to stop sharing the software and to remove it from his system.
There was no mention in the program to state if this had been done.
5. and finally.
An IP address can be faked or masked and anybody with a minimum use of google can do it.
If I were the judge on this case an IP address would NOT be sufficient evidence and I hope for the innocent people who recieved these letters the judge does just that!!
Complain about this comment
I am yet another innocent victim of these letters.
The Watchdog report it made clear that Wireless networks are easily breached. It's a shame Watchdog didn't add that there is also no legal requirement to secure them.
I do not understand how someone can hold the bill payer liable for this? Surely it’s a case of if you authorised the download and upload of the copyrighted material then you are liable.
As for the comparison made to a bath installation that then suggests that if we all had our Internet networks installed by a professional or the ISP contractor then we could hold them responsible for any copyright infringement that took place using our IP? I’d love to see what the big ISP’s would say to that suggestion!
There was also another fact left off the BBC report. Where many members of a house can share a PC then investigation of a Hard Drive is still no proof that the bill payer committed the offence or even allowed the offence to take place!
Complain about this comment
I'm being pursued by Davenport Lyons on behalf of Atari, but it's now gone all quiet. Not sure whether that's due to Atari backing down or my emphatic denials and desire to see them in court. In my case I have no Wifi but around the dates they gave, my ISP was having real problems, crediting my account with downloading 30+GB per day! They quickly accepted that was a physical impossibility. Clearly something had gone wrong with their metering, so they probably hadn't a clue who was downloading what on which IP address.
Whats more, DL have failed to correctly identify my ISP, despite several tries at suggesting different names, they still haven't got it right!
Complain about this comment
Having an unsecured wireless network makes you liable for all the harm done using that network, because you set the cause for the harm done.
Ok then what if you have your ISP cable modem cloned, how do you stand then?it is a fact that internet service providers modems can be cloned with out the the bill payer ever knowing, also wireless security can be hacked with in the space of ten minutes.!!!!
Complain about this comment
The solicitors should not be allowed access to personal details on the basis of something as flimsy as an IP address. This is easily spammed, and some secured wireless networks can easily be hacked into (never mind unsecured ones). Anyone savvy enough to want to do something which might be illegal would not be stupid enough to use their own network connection!
I had my laptop taken in a raid by police last year, and after 7 months of asking for it to be returned, I finally threatened them with the IPCC and I was contacted within a week to arrange return as there had never been anything illegal on it. It did not work when returned, so the IPCC has been asked to investigate this and many other procedural faults. I obviously can't say any more, as I may be taking the police to court for compensation.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
My wife who is 48 has been accused of infringement by this law firm. She does not play games and has no idea what filesharing is yet she is harrased and threatened by Davenport Lyons. Surely she doesnt fit the "profile" of a filesharer.
Complain about this comment
Is your moderator asleep????
Why are half the comments not on the board?
Even some written half hour after the show finished..
COME ON WAKE UP
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
I think the responses to this report highlight something I've been banging on about for years. A PC is NOT a piece of domestic equipment in the same way as a television set. Most people who set-up wireless networks in their home have no idea what they're doing or how to keep them secure. I was interested to read the comment about cloned cable modems. I'll have to look into that. But going back to the report. Setting a network password as suggested in the report is the absolute bare minimum you should do. So for the unitiated here goes.
Set your admin password to something other than password.
Use the standard security models that come with your router. WEP is getting on a bit now, but you can use stronger if your model supports it.
Now for the tricky bits.
Set-up an access control list on your router. When you connect wirelessly your router will know the MAC address of the machine connecting. Most I've come across allow you to view the addresses of all connected devices and then specify the MAC addresses of devices you trust. If someone else tries to connect, even if they know your WEP Key and password,
it'll get rejected.
Last but not least. The report showed a list of networks, some with security, some not. The name shown (I seem to recall they connected to Brent1 or something similar) is called the SSID. Once you've got all your devices talking to your router correctly you can actually turn off the transmission of this so it doesn't even show in the list. This is the single most important thing you can do, everything else can be hacked, but if your router isn't broadcasting they won't even find it.
Good luck.
Complain about this comment
Very disappointing that ISP's would just give out Barbara and Alan's personal details to a firm fishing (presumably they asked for hundreds of names, and not just one or two). Would be interesting to hear what the Information Commissioner makes of this practice.
Complain about this comment
@ Chronocompo's
That's great advice all be it totally pointless in following when Torrent sites have confirmed that they throw in bogus IPs.
No matter what you do this is not preventable. You just have to have an ISP account to qualify! You can spend thousands on internet protection and security but your IP can be one of the 'bogus' ones.
Complain about this comment
@Voiceyourself
Good point, nothing is foolproof. The process I described will only stop people doing what the security 'expert' on the programme did.
However, you can make things less likely by doing two other things. Firstly, you often get ISPs offering you a static IP address. Unless you have a really good reason for having one, don't. Secondly, either turn off your router or unplug it from the phone line fairly frequently, this will cause it to re-login and because you haven't got a static IP address you'll get a new one allocated each time you do it. Obviously doesn't guarantee that what Voiceyourself wrote won't happen, but certainly will reduce the risk.
Another benefit is that unplugging your router and getting it to re-logon often restores your broadband speed if it's degraded as well. (does mine anyway).
But I would point out that nothing I put in my original comment actually costs anything so no need to spend thousands, just learn about what you've already got and use it effectively.
Complain about this comment
re comment 43...
FYI...the informationer commissioner's office have taken the details and 'logged' it but that was it. no follow up was done.
Complain about this comment
I to have been asked for £500 plus £5.20 towards legal costs (I think)
I also haven’t downloaded anything, but the letter says I downloaded
It the week I was on holiday.
It’s a record called Scooter-jumping all over the world .WHAT’S ALL THAT ABOUT I’M 55 YEARS OLD
Would I really need that? In my record collection
Complain about this comment
I noticed in the story that a FON hotspot was shown - FON is a service which allows anyone to share their broadband service using one of FON's routers, or, more recently, BT's Home Hub router includes it built in I believe. While this has a plus side (you can earn money if other people use yours, plus you can use any other FON hotspot around the world for free), what happens if someone else uses it for illegal downloading?
it would be great if Watchdog could cover something like that in more detail too.
Complain about this comment
"Having an unsecured wireless network makes you liable for all the harm done using that network, because you set the cause for the harm done."
I suppose having your car stolen while you are scraping the windscreen (as happened recently) by someone who then injures a pedestrian is also your fault?
Complain about this comment
I AM SO GLAD THIS LAW FIRM DAVENPORT LYONS HAVE BEEN ON THE PROGRAM BECAUSE I HAVE BEEN GETTING THREATENING LETTERS FROM THEM SINCE MARCH 2007 DEMANDING £349 SINCE THEN IT HAS GOT TO THE STAGE WHERE THEY ARE THREATENING TO COME AND TAKE OUR COMPUTER HARD-DRIVES CHECKED FOR ANY EVIDENCE OF COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT WHATSOEVER, APART FROM THE ORIGINAL WHICH WAS "TOPWARE INTERACTIVE". AS I HAVE ANGINA I DREAD THE POST COMING IN CASE THERE IS ANOTHER THREATENING LETTER FROM THEM. THIS HAS CAUSED UNTOLD STRESS AND ANZIETY, AND AT ONE POINT I THOUGHT I WAS GOING TO HAVE A BREAK DOWN. WE SEAKED ADVISE FROM A SOLICITOR IN THE BEGINNING WHO SAID IF WE HADN'T DONE ANYTHING WRONG WE HAD NOTHING TO WORRY ABOUT, WRITE BACK TO THEM AND TELL THEM TO LEAVE ME ALONE, BUT STILL THE LETTERS COME. I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO ANY MORE. I GET SCARED TO TURN ON THE COMPUTER SOMETIMES JUST FOR NORMAL INTERNET BROWSING, SO MOST OF THE TIME IT SITS IDLE. I ASK MY SON TO BE VERY CAREFUL WHAT HE DOES, BUT WE ALSO KNOW WE HAVE HAD OUR COMPUTER HIJACKED IN THE PAST, SO WHO KNOWS WHAT HAS HAPPENED. WE DO HAVE A SECURE PASS-WORDED WIRELESS CONNECTION NOW, BUT WE DID NOT AT THE TIME, AS WE DID NOT KNOW HOW TO DO THIS, AS OUR ISP DID NOT TELL US.
Complain about this comment
i have received a letter from a group of solicitors based in london in which they are requesting £500.00 plus in damages concerning a certain singer
i have found this to be very disturbing as i do not know of this person/persons listed in the suit
i contacted the technical department of my internet provider and had to ask them to explaine to me what it meant that i had been downloading music/films they explained the working of this which in all truth and honesty has left me even more confused, although i did find out that my internet connection is not secured and that anyone could gain access to my interent and have downloaded music/films or anything thing else for that matter
is there anyway in which you could help me with this situation as i am at my wits end i can not possibly afford to pay this summons
Complain about this comment
The only proof is if the hard-drive is forensically examined, but the lawyers can't afford to do this to everyone's computer, as they will lay themselves open to counter-suits for compensation. When my laptop was taken for examination, it took SEVEN MONTHS before it was returned with NOTHING illegal ever having been on the PC. The excuse was that the independent company used to examine the hard-drive was over busy, and I was told 7 months is actually quite quick!
Complain about this comment
I have been getting the letters since March 2007, virtually an identical story to those listed.
Despite my please of innocence the letters are continuing and the amount of money requested has increased.
Complain about this comment
i have also recieved a letter from davenport lyons, accusing me of downloading music although the house was empty at the time the offence allegedly took place.
i have written back to davenport lyons informing them that i am seeking legal action but after 2 weeks they still haven't replied.
Complain about this comment
Which? Have now reported the offending Solicitors to the Solicitors Regulatory Authority.
[Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]so if you wish to read it then go to which and read the one titled “Which Challenges ‘bullying’ letters” dated 10th Dec. At the end of the report there is an email address that we can use to write to Which? and report our stories.
Complain about this comment
@48, I also noticed the Fon hotspot - My understanding is that BT Fon routers use tunneling to segregate the Fon hotspot users' traffic from that of the account holder, so Fon users don't share the BT account holder's IP address.
I note some comments mention WEP - it should be noted that WEP is fundamentally flawed and can be cracked in about 2 - 3 minutes; restricting access by MAC helps very little as MACs can be spoofed, and 'hidden' SSIDs are detectable when the network is in use.
WiFi users should now be using the current WPA2 standard which is secure against hacking providing a reasonably long key made up of random characters is used.
Complain about this comment
@13
Poor comparison.
A shoplifter will recieve a £50 fine and a slap on the wrist not a demand for £500-£600 or the threat of losing your home. I hope you dont recieve one of these letters. It seems anyone can recieve such demands if they use the internet. Innocent or guilty. That was the point of this programme.
Complain about this comment
Hi there i have had a letter to for downloading scooter( i would never let this artists music anywhere near my house as rock is best ). i have looked alot into this company and and been given the advice on line to not respond to them as they have not taken anyone to court before apart from the pinball wizard stuff. anyway from what i have seen is the only album people have downloaded is this scooter which to be is odd. in a nutshell this is just bullying people and they in turn should be taken to court.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
There's a very good article entitled "Why My Printer Received a DMCA Takedown Notice" - well worth looking for in your favourite search engine !
Complain about this comment
[Personal details removed by Moderator]
Perhaps write a letter denying their allegations and offering them the opportunity to carry out a forensic inspection of your hard drive. This should prove too time consuming and expensive and they will soon give up.
Some comments above also imply that the IP address alone is not sufficient evidence, making it an even more futile exercise for the companies.
Complain about this comment
we have recieved a letter from them as we are supposed to of downloaded a scooter album we have not paid as we dont have the money to do so, they are now taking us to court and we are very distressed over this.
Complain about this comment
also nobody seems to explain what happens after recieving these letters when you dont pay. How far will these people go?
Complain about this comment
I have also received a letter accusing me of downloading material. Very annoyed and angry with the letter, both the tone and the content. Written back advising that I have not downloaded any material and received a further letter which continues to accuse me and states that further action may be taken. Very pleased and relieved to see the Watchdog programme this week and hope that Watchdog will continue to fight our cause. very pleased that Which are now also involved.
Complain about this comment
During the programme shown this week it was noted that Atari were shocked to discover that 1 family had been falsely accused of sharing one of their games. This was probably me. What happened was that my ISP gave Davenport's my address as the subscriber attached to several IP addresses confirmed as sharing a particular game. However, when I checked with my ISP that my router's MAC address was actually attached to those IP addresses at those particular times they confirmed that it wasn't. They then confirmed this to Davenports and the action against me was dropped. If you think you've been incorrectly identified then you should get Davenport's to provide you with the MAC address of the router connected to the IP address. You could try asking your ISP the same question, but mine weren't exactly forthcoming with it because they'd been made to give the original information to Davenports through the legal process and giving incorrect info is a big deal. Good luck!
Complain about this comment
Maybe Watchdog could clear this up?
A persons IP Address is classed as personal data.
Did Davenport Lyons obtain a court order in each case to obtain these's IP address?
If not, "Davenport Lyons" and also the "Internet provider" are in breach of the ICO's "Data Protection Act". Both companies could be prosecuted under this act under this UK LAW.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
@icemrsbloggs
If you did not download/upload this file then you have nothing to worry about. Apparently once you have written back to Davenport to protest your innocence they then send another much nastier letter demanding money. You can right back again and defend yourself again and eventually they dont bother responding. They have never taken anyone to court that has been in attendance to defend themselves.
Use a search engine and look at all the forum posts currently running about this topic. There is alot of friendly help and reassurance out there.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
With the ever increase of keeping you anonaminity on-line to stop governments and groups spying on all of us, IP spoofing is becoming common place and now being picked up by the mass populous, a proxy server is a very quick and easy way to avoid detection, then if you add encryption tunnels or VPN's into the equation the ISP's powers to snoop on packets via DPI (Deep Packet Inspection) and determine IP addresses using is utterly useless. Then you have many of these tracker sites injecting false IP addresses on purpose so are we still innocent until proven guilty?
how many innocent ppl are going to be accused of crimes they haven't committed before the governments restrict the content industry instead of giving them free reign of shaping laws? has anyone seen the new wish list being prepared by the RIAA/MPAA (they are the same members (sony, ect) as the BPI, IFPI, ect)called the ACTA, (Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement)Let the ISP spying commence!
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
You are quite correct ukcannonfodder. The copyright industries, a la record companies, have far too much power over government, which appear to placate to their every whim. Expect many more accusations when the ISPs start mass mailing threats based on questionable evidence from these companies.
Davenport Lyons are using the legal system to identify people, then intimidating them with "pay up or else" ultimatums. It's analogous to what the RIAA [Recording Industry Association of America] are doing in the USA; And of which the courts are starting to realise. However, both the courts and the government should be protecting citizens from this malicious prosecution.
On the subject of ACTA, [the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement] which as we all know, is simply a surreptitious attempt to enact anti-file-sharing legislation without the need to go through democratic process in the host countries, was conceived and lobbied by the copyright industries a la the entertainment cartels. And now we have the disturbing prospect of this so called treaty being conducted and approved in secret, behind closed doors.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Hi
Please note this is an individual opinion, not a legal decision - if I am wrong, please correct me.
The moderator decided my previous post could be inflammatory. Therefore, I will try to post again.
Under English law the accused (defendant) is deemed innocent until proven guilty. The burden of proof (i.e. proof of guilt) is down to the accuser to show.
If a person is accused of downloading files from the Internet, surely the accuser has to prove that this was done? If the accuser does not have access to the accused's computer, how can this be done to the satisfaction of a court of law? I have a computer with a wireless connection. Should it be unprotected without a password, any person passing by could stop outside my house, download whatever he/she wants and go away, without me being any the wiser (My connection is protected).
As I understand the law, people who try to accuse other people of downloading files without paying royalties have to prove the files were downloaded onto the computers of the accused persons. They cannot prove this without having access to the computers used by the accused persons. Surely a Court Order is needed to obtain possession of the computer? Is this correct?
Therefore, I would suggest that anybody accused of illegal downloads should ask the accuser to see a copy of a Court Order before parting with their computer. If such an Order is not produced, I suggest they tell the accuser to go away. Again, is this correct?
I am not a lawyer, but am interested in the law and its application.
Perhaps a lawyer will correct me if I am wrong?
I would suggest legal advice is sought if you are subject to such a claim as that demonstrated above.
Regards
Austin
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
austintr,
The moderators are particularly zealous on this site, so it's no surprise that posts have to be a model of piety in order to successfully display.
Complain about this comment
I have also received a letter accusing me of downloading material
a friend of mine check out my pc and said that someone has or was stealing my internet connection from me.now got a friend to come around to SECURE this for me after showing him the letter from davenport lyons
help me guys
Complain about this comment
As a recipricant of one of these demands I decided after much research and legal advice to ignore the letter completely.
Today (11th March 2009) I have received a follow up letter from them. In this letter they tell me that they have decided not to take any further action and they also “apologise for any inconvenience or distress this matter may have caused”.
No real valid reason has been made for their back down on this matter in my instance, but I am wondering if others have received a similar back down from them might look to see if this has happened to them also? I wonder though what the real reason for their back down is.
If this is the case I wonder if those that did pay up will get a refund of their money
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
View these comments in RSS