Micro Mart Forum / PC Talk / Micro Mart Forums / Heavy letter from Davenport Lyons on behalf of Atari / Latest Posts

RE: Heavy letter from Davenport Lyons on behalf of Atari

malc_wright — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 20:42:58 GMT

Surely the fact that ISPs are not responsible for the traffic which passes over their lines is the same as the the law that telephone companies are not responsible for the traffic that passes over the telephone line?

That was one of the debating points about trying to hold ISPs responsible for policing the internet, I can't see how D&L can create that responsibility for the provider of a wifi hot spot.

The case should be thrown out.

Though it would be interesting to see if a highly paid Legal council could configure a wireless router in the amount of minutes time £40-50 would procure at their usual charge out rate. They'd probably have to do it inside 2 minutes.

RE: Heavy letter from Davenport Lyons on behalf of Atari

Tom Morton — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 16:53:44 GMT

Well yes... but an end user signs an agreement with the ISP saying they wont use it for illegal activity and that it is not the responsibility of the ISP to make sure they dont. Whereas a free public access point *that hasn't been secured against this* is surely in a much tougher legal position.

I'm not saying it's right. And yeh I agree they are going after the little man because the ISP's are well covered and can hire top lawyers.

RE: Heavy letter from Davenport Lyons on behalf of Atari

ricedg — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 15:00:52 GMT

Good point - why aren't they suing the ISPs?
Surely by the same arguement they are as guilty of aiding the sharing of the copyrighted material?
Except of course they're not guilty of anything and this bunch of chancers wouldn't dream of taking on the ISPs.

They'll obviously need a strongly worded letter in reply.
I suspect that if you stand up to them they will back off to prey on easier meat.
They can't be making much profit, so increasing their expenses won't be attractive.

RE: Heavy letter from Davenport Lyons on behalf of Atari

DaveHand — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 13:20:50 GMT

[quote]If they do take them to court and have an IP, files and other evidence then I would imagine they will win. If they sue for facilitating the distribution of copyrighted stuff they have them over a barrel really because it is true (I believe in civil law ignorance is not a defence).
[/quote]

And the ISP would be as guilty for their complicity?

RE: Heavy letter from Davenport Lyons on behalf of Atari

Tom Morton — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 12:36:02 GMT

[quote][b]malc_wright (09/08/2008)[/b][hr]Just a thought here.

If you provide a 'Free Open Wireless internet access' to your paying guests, as some Hotel chains do, and its quite legal to do so, then the people trying to put pressure on the local wireless access point provider can't win.

So to summarise an open wireless access point is convenient to you the subscriber to an ISP, it's also not illegal to have one, and there's nothing they can prove.

If they recommend you close and encrypt the wireless point send them a proforma invoice for the services of a computer technician to carry out the work, on the understanding that once they pay your proforma invoice as part of the agreement they're entering into by making that payment you will of course get your wireless access point encrypted.

If they insist that you should also have an anti-virus and firewall installed send them an annual agreement so that they can pay for you to have such expensive fripparies installed and kept up to date.

That way if they do decide to take you to court you'll already have a financial counter claim for them to answer too.

My bet is that if the claimants received a counter claim with every letter they sent out they'd soon give up the activity as a fruitless exercise.

[/quote]

Umm I dont think the excuse that it is a free open access point and therefore it's use is not the liability of the supplier just wont fly. Unless you get the user to agree to T&C where you are not liable then it probably leaves the provider in a very risky legal area......

Anyway. Stopping P2P traffic is probably a good idea anyway: and doesn't require any faffing about with PC's or w/e. Just lock down the access point to provide web access (and possibly IM) only. It's a half hour job and makes sure nothing like this ever happens again.

If they do take them to court and have an IP, files and other evidence then I would imagine they will win. If they sue for facilitating the distribution of copyrighted stuff they have them over a barrel really because it is true (I believe in civil law ignorance is not a defence).

RE: Heavy letter from Davenport Lyons on behalf of Atari

TKH — Sun, 10 Aug 2008 17:50:12 GMT

It could also be pointed out that the IP address that they have is that of a router, for which, I believe, they are not required to keep logs from, and if they were, those logs would have to be scrutinised to the minute to get the relevant information.
Also point out that they would be stupid to allow any customer to use p2p across their wifi as it would seriously intefere with other customers usage, and hence their business would suffer.
I basically operate a wide area hotspot, and if I see anyone using p2p, they are kicked off with immediate effect so as not to hinder other users.
Regards
Tim

RE: Heavy letter from Davenport Lyons on behalf of Atari

DaveHand — Sun, 10 Aug 2008 15:46:02 GMT

I really cannot see the company making much headway through the courts. I get the impression that their stance will seem foolhardy once they have lost their first case.

As said, the bill-payer has no legal requirement to encrypt a wireless connection or install a whole range of monitoring/restrictive apps on public access computers - so it becomes absurd to lay the blame at their feet.

If copyright infringement were a criminal offense rather than merely a civil one - none of these cases would make it as far as court. However, with civil cases being won by a majority probability (ie 51% chance of guilt = guilt) rather than insurmountable proof/evidence of personal guilt required by criminal cases - there is a good chance that if DL choose their victims wisely, they might just have a small streak of success.

RE: Heavy letter from Davenport Lyons on behalf of Atari

malc_wright — Sun, 10 Aug 2008 14:55:37 GMT

Hi Dave

Another thing that asking D&L to pay up in order to put in place applications on your system at their behest, in order to protect their clients copyright, is that should it proceed to court you have a monetary counter claim, so if for example the proforma invoice for the services of a competent computer technician is around £40 to £50, and D&L refuse to pay that, then clearly the value of the copyright infringed material is worth less than £40 to £50.

There are also very few jurors or members of the legal profession out there who would hand on heart say they're fully competent to completely lock down a wireless access point so that any determined third party can't break into it. Particularly if a wireless router were provided to the court for the plaintiffs council to configure whilst the court watched on.

RE: Heavy letter from Davenport Lyons on behalf of Atari

DaveHand — Sun, 10 Aug 2008 01:24:53 GMT

They do quote a date & time, an IP and the file in question. Also, a client was mentioned - libtorrent (or something similar).

I guess they have obtained the name and address through the ISP after probing a torrent swarm (unless they have got it completely wrong with their evidence gathering).

RE: Heavy letter from Davenport Lyons on behalf of Atari

Spedley — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 18:33:34 GMT

It sounds like scam to me.

Non of it adds up, the £600, the lack of proof (i.e. dates, times,ip address and files shared, they probably don't even know your IP address) and the out of court settlement.

Don't ignore it, get in touch with an official body to confirm it but I wouldn't worry about it.

RE: Heavy letter from Davenport Lyons on behalf of Atari

malc_wright — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 17:31:55 GMT

Just a thought here.

If you provide a 'Free Open Wireless internet access' to your paying guests, as some Hotel chains do, and its quite legal to do so, then the people trying to put pressure on the local wireless access point provider can't win.

So to summarise an open wireless access point is convenient to you the subscriber to an ISP, it's also not illegal to have one, and there's nothing they can prove.

If they recommend you close and encrypt the wireless point send them a proforma invoice for the services of a computer technician to carry out the work, on the understanding that once they pay your proforma invoice as part of the agreement they're entering into by making that payment you will of course get your wireless access point encrypted.

If they insist that you should also have an anti-virus and firewall installed send them an annual agreement so that they can pay for you to have such expensive fripparies installed and kept up to date.

That way if they do decide to take you to court you'll already have a financial counter claim for them to answer too.

My bet is that if the claimants received a counter claim with every letter they sent out they'd soon give up the activity as a fruitless exercise.

RE: Heavy letter from Davenport Lyons on behalf of Atari

DaveHand — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 15:21:01 GMT

But how far should one go?

It would be possible to remove the torrent client for ubuntu - but then, aren't there web/http trackers? (not to mention the occasional legal torrent)

And what about youtube, google books and radio playlists?

As far as I can see, the only way to ensure no copyright is breached on a public access computer is to remove the computer.

RE: Heavy letter from Davenport Lyons on behalf of Atari

Tom Morton — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 15:15:17 GMT

[quote][b]Grenville Grimace (09/08/2008)[/b][hr][quote][b]DaveHand (09/08/2008)[/b][hr]My friends (who run a cafe with a wireless network and public access computer) have been sent a very official sounding letter demanding payment of £600 to avoid court regarding the participation in the distribution of copy-written material.

I was just wondering if anyone has had any experience of this type of demand and whether it can be safely ignored until it turns into a summons?[/quote]

Do not throw away or ignore the letter.
Do not rely on accurate expert advice from anonymous posting boards.

[b]Book an appointment to see an appropriate person at your local CAB, ASAP.[/b]

By all means look around on the net to see exactly what others are saying about these letters.
You friends are certainly not alone. Looking through the links already provided is proof enough.[/quote]

Good advice that. I would definitely send them a letter back demanding proof of some description - as mentioned they need more than just an IP / MAC

That said also DOUBLE CHECK the wireless - make sure it is secured either with encryption or, if it is a free access point, some form of login. Don't allow unadministered access ;)

Perhaps block all but the internet and IM ports.

It can't hurt.

RE: Heavy letter from Davenport Lyons on behalf of Atari

wyliecoyoteuk — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 14:41:54 GMT

Grenville is right, Do not take advice from here (apart from the advice to get proper advice of course) ;D

Seems that anyone who has used Limewire or similar P2P apps is a target.

Or some who have not - apparently, many of the people who have received this letter have no filesharing history whatsoever.

In addition, the only 3 cases on record as won were because nobody turned up.
There are suggestions that the defendants in question were dead or had moved house, making those cases look like an attempt to "legitimise" the action.

It looks like a Quasi legal "phishing " operation, trying to scare people in to paying up to avoid court action, without any real evidence.
Apparently in the past, a Laser printer was accused of downloading Indy :)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/jul/01/internet.copyright

EDIT: Of course, none of my Laser Printers have such poor taste :D

RE: Heavy letter from Davenport Lyons on behalf of Atari

Grenville Grimace — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 13:46:37 GMT

[quote][b]DaveHand (09/08/2008)[/b][hr]My friends (who run a cafe with a wireless network and public access computer) have been sent a very official sounding letter demanding payment of £600 to avoid court regarding the participation in the distribution of copy-written material.

I was just wondering if anyone has had any experience of this type of demand and whether it can be safely ignored until it turns into a summons?[/quote]

Do not throw away or ignore the letter.
Do not rely on accurate expert advice from anonymous posting boards.

[b]Book an appointment to see an appropriate person at your local CAB, ASAP.[/b]

By all means look around on the net to see exactly what others are saying about these letters.
You friends are certainly not alone. Looking through the links already provided is proof enough.

RE: Heavy letter from Davenport Lyons on behalf of Atari

ricedg — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 12:28:28 GMT

Did a Google on Davenport Lyons - look here on the Consumer Action Group site http://tinyurl.com/6rpfjm

RE: Heavy letter from Davenport Lyons on behalf of Atari

DaveHand — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 12:10:07 GMT

Yeah, it would make sense to visit the CAB.

Part of me would like to see what happens when a 40 yr old woman is accused of d/l a racing sim :P - but they probably have enough on their plate as it is.

RE: Heavy letter from Davenport Lyons on behalf of Atari

wyliecoyoteuk — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 12:02:00 GMT

There is certainly a lot about this on the net.

General response is that it is a legally dubious operation, under no circumstances pay up, write back and demand legal proof (an IP address is not legal proof).
Also phone your ISP or the Citizens advice bureau.

RE: Heavy letter from Davenport Lyons on behalf of Atari

DaveHand — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 11:56:01 GMT

I'm pretty sure it's not an [i]illegal[/i] scam - although it did cross my mind what a scam like this could be worth if it were easy enough to retrieve a name & address from an IP through the ISP.

Currently reading this thread - http://forums.bit-tech.net/showthread.php?t=154167

There does seem to be quite a bit of info on this out there. I think the first letter must have been sent 18 months ago.

RE: Heavy letter from Davenport Lyons on behalf of Atari

FreakShow! — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 11:55:24 GMT

Contact Atari directly (look up phone numbers yourself, don't use whats on the letter) and tell them you think you might have recieved a fraudulent letter on this matter.

That is if they are innocent (No offense to them, if it was a paying customer that did that then they may want to look into blocking certain internet traffic types).

RE: Heavy letter from Davenport Lyons on behalf of Atari

wyliecoyoteuk — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 11:49:24 GMT

I would be very careful and check it out.
The sum involved actually sounds a little low, it could be a scam.
There are lots of unscrupulous people out there trying to take money for worthless guarantees.
My company received a letter requesting £250 for "data protection act registration"- it was a fraud.
Likewise there are people who request fees for "telephone selection registration" or "fax selection registration"- another fraud.

[url=http://www.slyck.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=31051&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=200&sid=5dccff61638f3538568764241f43ed34] this link mentions a similar letter[/url]

Heavy letter from Davenport Lyons on behalf of Atari

DaveHand — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 10:23:43 GMT

My friends (who run a cafe with a wireless network and public access computer) have been sent a very official sounding letter demanding payment of £600 to avoid court regarding the participation in the distribution of copy-written material.

I was just wondering if anyone has had any experience of this type of demand and whether it can be safely ignored until it turns into a summons?