I got done for filesharing

At the moment there are a lot of lawerys sending out this stuff. It is usualy addressed in the way 'Dear Sir/Madam'.

It quotes a judgement and how much the sueing firm were awarded. It them bases the costs for the lawyer on this judgement. In my friends case the judgement was for 20,000€.

They never point out that the costs awarded to the lawyer are sometimes worked out as a '%' of the award.

I am not sure who starts these things, the company looking around, the snooping program company who then contact the lawyer and get paid or even if the lawyer uses the snooping company and then contatcs the copy right holder.

My friend now has legal representation to look into this. I will post as I find out more but he has been dealing with this since august. I get the feeling these things can take a long time (the lawyers have upto 3 years from the 1st jan following their first letter).

OK - IFPI is the international organisation that represents a lot of the big record companies in piracy cases - just wondered if they were behind this, as I know a few guys that work there. Do check and let me know if it is them if this rolls on any further.

German P2P lawsuits hit roadblock


This has the ruling in English, a colleague of my husband was just sent an 8000 Euro fine because his daughter downloaded 1500 songs from Limewire

Yet another new one after the fireman:

Urteil: DSL-Anschlussinhaber haftet nicht für Urheberrechtsverletzungen

Try contacting the EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation) eff.org they specialise in this sort of thing.

They are an American organisation but they do have a european office.

Hi Hazza,

Any developments?

My friend went the legal (his lawyer sent a letter etc) way as well and there has been no responce from the lawyers who sent him the original letter.

As you say, 1000's of peple have received this kind of letter. Makes you wonder what would happen if they were forced by law to take everyone to court. I imagine the legal system would get sick of the 100's of cases, one after. the other. Makes you wonder if there is a little lawyer call centre/sweatshop filled with law student on their praktikum year just sifting through all this stuff and churning out photcopied letters.

No developments. The reply letter was sent on 7 Jan, but I haven't heard anything since.

I'll update with developments here if and when anything happens.

You could try the American tactic of naming whichever company was your provider as a co-defendant. You did no more to encourage the "piracy" than they did, and they have a lot more cash to fight with.

woof.

Storm in a tea cup, 'ave a butcher's here Hazza:

http://www.rasch-vs-djs.de/

The lawyer looks pretty much like a con-man (which lawyer doesn't ) He owns ProMedia, the company that gets the personal details from downloaders so it smells like mouldy Phish.

The ones I work for

Ok, Sara, their vests are white and wigs louse-free

When talk turns to lawyers I am reminded of the Rowan Atkinson stand-up piece where he plays the Devil and is just organising Hell's newcomers into groups:

"Fornicators and adulterers, if you could make a line in front of that small guillotine in the corner. Next on my list are robbers, liars, thieves and pillagers. If you could form a line over there, thank you. Oh, and lawyers, you're in that group too."

Is it the downloading of a file or the uploading of a file that happens when you install a filesharing program that is illegal. Or is it both?

I ask because there are websites out there now that host links to downloadable files (films, tvseries etc) whereby no uploading occurs (no P2P program needs to be installed). I am wondering whether heavy downloading or uploading is what is monitored and passed on.

I think as of the 1st jan this year it is also illegal to download the file so both.

The firms I know of use a torrent client to connect to your torrent client, see what you have shared there.

I do not know how they can verfify the files you have shared (you could have a word document called <song, artist name> are what they think they are.

If they have to download the whole file, they are also breaking the law perhaps. (as of 1st jan :-)

I am not sure if there are any ways for anyone to snoop legally into what you are downloading from websites, I am also unsure if there are any ways for them to snoop on what is streamed to your computer (youtube etc).

Downloading files with filenames like "238821" is possible. No sharing happens though from the downloader's side. All that can be monitored I believe, is the size, name and from where presumably. I mean what's to say that a youtube posted home video isn't being download??

As I understand it, it is illegal to do both depending on the circumstances. It is illegal to download content that you do not own. However, what would happen if you owned the film "Batman" and then downloaded it? Bit of a grey area.

It is also illegal to upload a file if you do not have the rights to distribute it. Very few people would have the rights to distribute blockbuster films for instance.

This is why, to my knowledge, the only people to have been sued are those that were distributing copywrited material. To sue people just for downloading is much less clear cut, and it seems they would rather go after the distributors (of which there are many) first.

EU Court Delivers Blow to Copyright Holders
European Union countries can refuse to disclose names of file sharers on the Internet in civil cases, the EU's top court said on Tuesday in a blow to copyright holders trying to fight digital piracy. The European
Court of Justice ruled on a dispute between Spanish music rights holders association Promusicae and Spain's top telecoms operator Telefonica. Telefonica argued that, under a national law based on EU rules,
it only had to disclose the name of an Internet subscriber for criminal actions, not civil ones. "Community law does not require the member states, in order to ensure the effective protection of copyright,
to lay down an obligation to disclose personal data in the context of civil proceedings," the court said in a statement.

OTOH, it seemes the music and copyright companies are getting wise..

Anti-Piracy Group Violates Swiss Law to Track File Sharing
An anonymous reader writes "Another fight appears to be brewing in Switzerland over how file sharers are identified. Logistep, a company that specializes in anti-piracy by collecting computer evidence against file sharers for use in lawsuits, seems to have taken an end run around Swiss law in order to try and settle cases out of court. 'Under Swiss law, the identity of a subscriber to an ISP (Internet service provider) can only be revealed during the course of a criminal case, not a civil one, Schaefer said. The IP (Internet Protocol) address of a computer controlled by the subscriber is considered "personal" information. In order to try to claim damages from people suspected of trading songs or movies, Logistep has asked Swiss prosecutors to open criminal cases, Schaefer said. As the criminal cases progresses, Logistep receives information from prosecutors that identifies the file sharer.'"

Which brings us back to this story:

File-sharing is a "petty offense," say German prosecutors
German prosecutors have begun denying requests to force ISPs to identify the subscribers behind IP addresses, saying that the alleged file-sharing was a "petty offense."
According to German-language Heise Online, the court said that the labels did not explain how a "criminally relevant damage" could have arisen from the alleged file-sharing.
Under German law, if the IFPI or anyone else wants to get subscriber data from an ISP, it needs to go through the public prosecutor's office. Unlike the US—where the RIAA can file a John Doe
lawsuit, obtain an ex parte subpoena, and finger the suspected infringer without his or her knowledge of the lawsuit—German law has no provision allowing for civil proceedings to obtain ISP subscriber info.

I'm guessing future P2P/File sharing charges are going to be filed as Criminal charges, so the labels can get you Info. However the labels would have to show
"Substantial damage", for such a criminal case to proceed and not get kicked outta the system.

@Hazza
Just goes to show that unless they file criminal charges against you, they can't get you IP address and contact info or proceed with a court case.
But somehow they did. From the above stories it would seem that what they did was illegal. I'd consider having your lawyer send the other lawyer
a bill for his and your wasted time and expenses and tell'em to FookOff in Legaleese. They lost the case, but are still trying to get you to pay (Threats/extortion)

They actually filed criminal charges against me a year ago. After I told them the situation about it being a Hot-spot, they dropped the criminal charges and a year later they sent the civil proceedings.

So perhaps they didn't do anything illegal at the time.

However, I'll still talk to my lawyer about sending them a bill, based on the fact that they knew it was a Hotspot and that recent judgements have shown that I am not responsible for the content, but pursued me anyway.

And the psychological damage they have caused you, don't forget to bill them that, must stretch to hundreds of thousands

The regular procedure is that they file criminal charges against you. Of course it won't stick, and the case gets dropped (eingestellt). But this is only done so that they can get the IP address of the person in question. Then they go after you with a civil suit. That's how they they got your info and why the original criminal proceedings were then dropped.

Please keep us posted on what happens.

I got a letter regarding a criminal case, which then got dropped. The info that was publicized through this first accusation (which I didn't respond to) was then taken by Rasch and Kollegen and used to start a civil case (Hazza referred me to his lawyer, and that is what the lawyer told me on the phone, if I understood him correctly).

@Hazza,

Bit of a bump but is this still ongoing or have the sackless lawyers giving you the hassle taken you to court yet?

Or are they just hoping you will give in and settle?

Nothing yet. I'm hoping I don't hear anything else. The statute of limitations is up at the end of 2009 for my case, so if they haven't taken it to court by then, then they never can.

But if they intend drop it, then I don't expect to hear anything from them telling me.

Makes me feel better about stuff Hazza! When you go self-employed it's amazing how the the fuck-ups and dramas appear as if by magic. I'm pretty stoical generally it but can get tiresome!!

With my case I took the route of not responding at all, and after a couple of "this is your last chance to pay" letters, I haven't heard anything more, either.

When did the last letter arrive?

My friends solicitor has commented to him on a few occasions that the company taking him to court are just arguing over small things without providing any proof etc.

My friend thinks that this is just so he will get charged for the reply to beat him into the cheaper option and just pay up. He expects the next letter to offer a lower price to settle out of court.

From all the stuff my friend has read on the net (various forums etc) there seems to have been no case taken to court as yet so it could be that the various blood scum sucking lawers involved are just trying to get as much cash as possible before someone/somewhere high up says 'thats enough'..

Then again, if a case goes to court and they win then i expect a lot more cases to get taken to court, starting of course with those that can be sued for the highest amount.

@PES the last letter came something like three months ago.

I know someone that has just received a lawyer’s letter from Hamburg with a demand to pay 4000 Euros for illegally downloading music from a shareware site. It listed all the songs downloaded.
The person whose internet account it is didn’t even do the downloading themselves – was a friend of their's. Is there lawyers that anyone knows of that specialize in this sort of thing?
Should they pay this demand?

I don’t know much about this I have always loaded my own CDs or bought from iTunes store.

Topics merged by admin

Hopefully that person has legal insurance.
I've heard about these in news stories on German TV. I think in most cases the recipients ended up paying something to settle.

I think there's a thread on TT about someone who received such a notice while running an open hotspot.

Hamburg, you say? You've been Rasched.

For the answers to all your questions, see: Clemens Rasch vs. DeeJays & den Rest der digitalen Welt

I'm afraid that ignoring the letter isn't going to help. The best bet will probably be a compromise amount, since the damages they are claiming are generally much too high. The fact that "your friend" didn't do the downloading himself unfortunately makes not a jot of a difference.

The lawyer I spoke to told me that chances are very high that they will never take you to court if you just ignore them. On the other hand, it is a gamble because if they do take you to court and win, you may have to pay more than they are asking now.

I'd leave the country if I were you.

My friends lawyer said much the sames as Ruthie's.

The firms taking poeple to civil court can take upto 3 years to bring the case to court and in these cases they will.

If they go to court and loose, no one will bother to take the letters seriously - they will just reply - see you in court.

As such, they will wait (if ever) to go to court to try to scare as many people into paying as possible.

@Highland - my friend has legal insurance, he was not coovered as it was withing the first 3 months of the policy and the person he spoke to said as this was something he had done he may not be covered. So read the small print of your legal insurance policy.

The whole legal issue is up in the air at the moment. Not a lot of legal people are happy at the way these firms started criminal procedings just to get the personal details of the people downloading.

@BB The first thing your friend has to do is get on the net and look the topic up. There is literaly MB's of info on this. There is also an edited ünterlassungserklarung wiht out the bit that admits you did it and promises not to use the program for the next however many years.

For 4000 I would contact a lawyer.

For that amount I would contact a lawyer.

I don't know if this has already been posted, or if it's useful, but: Victims of WiFi Theft Not Responsible For Illegal Uploads