L00b Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 ACS:Law loses first file-sharing cases, to the surprise of...no-one The outcome is down to a rather elementary procedural mistake, which just goes to confirm my initial assessment of ACS' abilities...i.e. not very much at all The claimant’s right to be a claimant at all is somewhat unclear on the face of the pleading. A copyright case can be brought by the owner of copyright or an exclusive licensee but the Particulars of Claim does not allege the claimant is either of those. The allegation is that the claimant ‘represents’ such persons. There is a plea that the claimant has an agreement with the Rights Owner to identify, pursue and prosecute instances of copyright infringement but no plea that the claimant owns the copyright or has an exclusive licence. EDIT - in clear English, for lay persons: the claims (cases) should have been brought by the copyright owners or exclusive licensees (movie studios, etc.), not by ACS (who doesn't own, nor isn't licensed under, their respective copyrights). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quisquose Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 I can't even think why they even thought it was a good idea to take the 8 alleged offenders to court. Last throw of the dice perhaps? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agrajag Posted December 13, 2010 Share Posted December 13, 2010 I can't even think why they even thought it was a good idea to take the 8 alleged offenders to court. Last throw of the dice perhaps? They have done something like this before, with the Isabella Barwinska case. It has been said that the only reason they took that case to court was that they somehow knew that she wouldn't turn up (a Polish national who they knew had left the country?). Because she didn't turn up, they won the case by default. This generated some positive headlines for them, which was probably what they were trying to achieve here. Eight people out of the thousands of letters they send out? Probably eight carefully selected people they were pretty sure wouldn't turn up either. Rather than the "last throw of the dice", let's hope it's the "last nail in the coffin". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dude111 Posted December 14, 2010 Share Posted December 14, 2010 The key point is that one of their advisor actually reveals they have very little legal basis in his analysis of their legal model.Nope they dont!!! They get the info ANYWAY THEY CAN (legal or not) and if more ppl knew the info was NOT GOTTON LEGALLY,they could get out of it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walkertelecoms Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 Ok so ACSLAW seem to have gone quiet, so who's GCB LTD that's sending letters of the same ilk stating they're replacing ACSLAW and likewise sending scary letters and demands for money? There is NOTHING about them online and neither GCB LTD or their supposed contact phone number brings up any information in any search engine (so far). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alchresearch Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 There is NOTHING about them online and neither GCB LTD or their supposed contact phone number brings up any information in any search engine (so far). Plenty of info on here: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?290069-ACS-Law-GCB-Limited&p=3255704 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walkertelecoms Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 Thanks for that, very interesting reading. I especially liked the part about THEIR OWN copyright infringement posting out information from BBC NEWS websites, that are themselves covered by copyright BBCMMX strewth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pcspb1 Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 Ok so ACSLAW seem to have gone quiet, so who's GCB LTD that's sending letters of the same ilk stating they're replacing ACSLAW and likewise sending scary letters and demands for money? There is NOTHING about them online and neither GCB LTD or their supposed contact phone number brings up any information in any search engine (so far). See HERE ... People have started to receive a letter pack from a company called GCB Ltd, C/O Mclean Reid Mclean Reid are a Chartered accountants and quite what their connection with this is, is not clear. According to the Law Society there’s no registered law firm under the name GCB Limited or Mclean Reid, but the Holborn address given matches that of Hobson & Arditti – another 1-man law firm which covers a range of legal services: HERE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walkertelecoms Posted January 14, 2011 Share Posted January 14, 2011 Again, great info! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L00b Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 And it's curtains for ACS' pending actions. Predictably. Reportedly, GCB Ltd have also stopped their letters. "I am getting the impression with every twist and turn since I started looking at these cases that there is a desire to avoid any judicial scrutiny" Judge Birss Expect fireworks from Judge Briss in his forthcoming judgement, he's rather masterly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.