Accused of torrenting copyrighted material

[rammy100 0]

Thank you for sharing your experience Bigbafana - I appreciate it.

 

I understand your position and am grateful for your advice. The really exasperating part of this is I didn't do it and from what I have learnt the person in my apartment (who I believe) also didn't do what I am being accused of. Looking in detail at the letters I have apparently uploaded 2 films (which no-one has ever heard of) for a total of 3 minutes.

 

The entire issue appears to be a racket designed to get lawyers rich, whether they are aggressors or defenders. I am mad that I have to agree to cease and desist from doing something that I didn't do and at not inconsiderable cost.

 

I think the initial panic that everyone experiences (me included) encourages an immediate and costly response to "make it go away".

 

Has anyone here sent their own modified cease and desist letter or just not responded and if so, how has that progressed?

 

Again, many thanks Bigbafana.

[poohsan 2,486]

 

The entire issue appears to be a racket designed to get lawyers rich, whether they are aggressors or defenders.

You really think so? Now that you mention it it seems almost weird that no one has thought that before in the past 84 pages of this thread, though probably due to the overly optimistic and trusting nature of the typical TTer.

[Adam Sweeny 9]

Here's what happens if you go it alone. Don't send a modified letter and you're up for tens of thousands. Send a modified letter and they'll still chase you for the fine amount. Either way those flying solo are the easiest fish to fry and the first to be summoned to court. Enjoy being added to the list of example cases of big wins that they use to scare the next victims.

 

Personally I went with Solmecke because its my best chance of avoiding paying any settlement money or going to court (around 1-2% of theirs do I believe), plus they cover all future letters from other infringements which I know could be coming, all for a 595 Euro one off payment to the "good guys". The correspondence these guys fight back with is impressive, plus they speak english if you need it. They have the best and highest number of references in this thread for good reason.

 

Problem with going with a gunstig lawyer like big bafana did is he's had to pay two lawyer fees already plus a settlement, so that 150E is now 670E and who knows what else is coming. In my opinion it would have been cheaper and safer with the other guys.

 

After 84 pages it seemed like a no brainer to me but the choice is yours. This is not law advice ;)

[BigBafana 9]

@ Adam Sweeny, could you describe your case and outcome? And €595 was a flat rate even in the case that you might want to decide to take a case to court instead of settling?

[Adam Sweeny 9]

I dont want to go to court OR settle, I just want them to fuck off, which is effectively what the reply from the Solmecke lawyers tells them to do in 11 pages of german legal jargon.

 

595E includes all out of court fees. My letter was from waldorf frommer and I havent gotten anything more from them since lawyering up.

[HEM 11,163]

 

My letter was from waldorf frommer

 

They live from this "business".

 

 

and I havent gotten anything more from them since lawyering up.

 

That is most likely because your lawyer has instructed WF only to communicate with them.

[Adam Sweeny 9]

Yes HEM, they do live from it, I think thats already been established 1000x times. Also, my lawyer includes me on any and all correspondence.

[mcarreiro 0]

I searched the whole topic and could not find anything like my case. So, here it goes: I am a foreign PhD student in Berlin - so, I have a quite low income, live on a student building and usually go abroad to do some research.

While I was abroad, I received the first and second threatenings letter from Waldorf-Frommer, concerning, a single file I allegedly uploaded for seven minutes (too little time even to upload the whole file) in september. They demanded a settlement of €490 for it.

I knew about this letter on Christmas - and on December 27th had to leave Germany again.

When I returned, before I could do anything, I received a second letter. On it, they quoted the final day they expected me to answer them: precisely the day I was opening the letter.

I tried to find a lawyer, but Somelcke is way more expensive that I thought: they asked me as much as the fine.

 

I am leaving Germany for good on March 3rd. And I am very, very tempted to simply ignore all this - specially because I simply could not afford something like €400, on fines or on lawyers.

 

I am considering to send the cease and desist letter Duscholux provided on this topic. And then forget about it.

 

I would like hear your guys about this. Could you please comment my situation, please?

[Hutcho 2,227]

I would probably also ignore it if I was leaving in a few months. Maybe send them a modified Unterlassungserklaerung, you can download these online, and this will avoid a default judgement against you. I know a number of people who live in Germany permanently who have just done this and they haven't heard anything back yet, so you'll certainly make it until March.

[witchcild 2]

I thought I would add my experience to this.

 

I have had two separate groups of letters from Waldorf Frommer. These over lap in time so it would appear WF have no system for tying multiple infractions at the same address together. (So I assume they are using a very limited electronic or, more likely, paper based system)

 

I have had three letters related to each infraction, none of which were signed for. An initial, very long, letter with a form for me to sign and return. A second from an individual at WF saying the deal I was offered had elapsed. And a third reminding me about the first.

 

All this happened in October and November 2014, I have not replied to WF in any form and I have had no further letters from them.

 

These people send these letters out on mass, in the hope some people will settle, which will cover the cost of the whole scheme, and some people will pay up the full amount, which will be their profit. In my case at least, these were very minor infractions and if they went to court would be due fines in the order of tens of Euros, no more. So it does not financially benefit WF to peruse me any more than they already have. All they know is they sent letters out and got no reply, whilst others are paying lawyers, or replying themselves, WF have no reason to go after the quite little fish like me.

[Hutcho 2,227]

To give out advice suggesting you should not return a modified Unterlassungserklaerung is probably a bad idea. Without doing that, they can get a default judgement against you quite easily and will be able to enforce it with no great efforts.

[HEM 11,163]

Our "friends" @ WF have discovered a new source: Ahnungslose Filmpiraten / Saftige Abmahnungen für "Popcorn Time" (in German)

[Hutcho 2,227]

Well, by the looks of it, this is just a client that is using the bit torrent network behind the scenes. So it's the same really.

[padjo 55]

I am using a vpn , but forgot for 10 minutes to enable it while downloading a bittorent , got a Waldorf letter and sent back a modified UE. Lets see.

I think i might look into this as a second default barrier. http://www.wikihow.com/Stay-Anonymous-While-Using-Bittorrent anyone else willing to try or know anything about it _

[Hutcho 2,227]

You could also use Vuze as your client, which allows you to specify a specific network interface to use. You then select your VPN, and it won't let you do anything without being connected.

[aurablue 18]

I recently received a letter fromWaldorf Frommer too, dated on the 21st jan about a film I've never heard of being uploaded for 3 minutes in the early hours of New Years day. We had guests that day staying in the flat while my housemate and I were away. The guests knew the score with downloading because it was made very clear but none claim to have been in during this time and were out partying that night... Also they don't know anything about the film. They are being cooperative and have their lawyers looking into it.

 

Anyway, I was told the law changed on this very recently. Apparently the liability does shift to the downloader and not the internet contract holder. Can anyone verify this?

 

As for the fine, I'm willing to pay some hackers to mess up the WF system instead. Anyone in? 50 people may yield great results. :lol:

[Guest]

 

As for the fine, I'm willing to pay some hackers to mess up the WF system instead. Anyone in? 50 people may yield great results.

 

wouldnt that put you in the same "Scum" classification as WF...

[aurablue 18]

probably... According to some... It was a joke anyway. Amd you didnt post anything useful. Nice one!

[Biglaa 147]

I've not heard of a law change in that regard. If it was that way, then what's to stop the connection "owner" declaring it was some random person (insert name) and washing their hands of the liability? I know plenty of people I would have liked to drop it on! :-p

[biffer 35]

There hasn't been any change in law, but the interpretation by the courts have changed significantly in the last months. While not so long ago in most cases the "owner" of the internet connection was held liable to a greater or lesser extent, there has been a shift towards more user friendly court rulings recently.

 

More and more, the courts realise that it's all a big legal scam by some lawyers and the film industry, and they are increasing requirements for them to substantiate their claims while at the same time lowering the requirements for the defendant to fight those claims.