I think I'm being sued...

Always check the senders address/return address for a signed-for letter if it turns up out of the blue. If you can't be sure who it's from, don't sign for it and ask the postman to take it away from your property.
The only effect this will have is to increase charges and delay the matter. The solicitor will probably use a tracing agent to confirm residence (more fees), post again then apply to the court.



And in my case, a process server wouldn't even get down the drive.
And what will that achieve? If a process server cannot carry out his task he and/or the solicitor simply apply to the court for a form of substituted service. This could be anything from simply posting the document, with the court agreeing that it is deemed service, to advertisement in the national and/or local press with lots of other options in between. More charges - guess who pays.

Taking avoiding action against a process server will only delay matters and increase charges. It will not cause the problem to go away.
 
had you?

did you lose?

settle out of court?


What the hell did you nick, or more likely sell, to get MS's attention?:eek:

It was for selling a machine on ebay with a OEM licence which was taken from another machine, they wanted £1300 in total, but I told them where to go ;)

They have people looking all the time on ebay for this kind of stuff, I was one of the unlucky ones.
 
The solicitor will probably use a tracing agent to confirm residence (more fees), post again then apply to the court.

Taking avoiding action against a process server will only delay matters and increase charges. It will not cause the problem to go away.

Again, in my case a 'tracing agent' wouldn't have an effect. I've been in the game far too long to have some sloppy PI Magnum wannabe spoiling the game. And I'm old enough and ugly enough with enough experience and contacts to make sure ol' Mr Magnum gets enough of a nudge in the back to convince him it's not worth his while even trying :)

Re. your second point, if a court agrees merely posting a document is deemed service, then they're saying that a person lives at a certain address and is liable to prosecution just because they've posted a letter to it? That's not right surely?
 
Again, in my case a 'tracing agent' wouldn't have an effect.
I don't understand? A tracing agent wouldn't need to visit you to confirm residence.



And I'm old enough and ugly enough with enough experience and contacts to make sure ol' Mr Magnum gets enough of a nudge in the back to convince him it's not worth his while even trying :)

Re. your second point, if a court agrees merely posting a document is deemed service, then they're saying that a person lives at a certain address and is liable to prosecution just because they've posted a letter to it? That's not right surely?
You've been watching too many ancient american b movies ;)

If it can be demonstrated to the court that someone is avoiding service, by whatever means, then the court decides the most appropriate form of substituted service.

Its pointless giving a process server grief. He's only the delivery boy! If he is obstructed then he reports this to the court. And judges take a very dim view of people obstructing process servers, even non-court process servers.
 
It was for selling a machine on ebay with a OEM licence which was taken from another machine, they wanted £1300 in total, but I told them where to go ;)

They have people looking all the time on ebay for this kind of stuff, I was one of the unlucky ones.

so they didn't pursue it at all?
 
I don't understand? A tracing agent wouldn't need to visit you to confirm residence.

If it can be demonstrated to the court that someone is avoiding service, by whatever means, then the court decides the most appropriate form of substituted service.

Its pointless giving a process server grief. He's only the delivery boy! If he is obstructed then he reports this to the court. And judges take a very dim view of people obstructing process servers, even non-court process servers.

It's really not in my best interest to be getting any deeper into such a discussion so let's leave it at that yeah :)
 
The best analogy to the downloading game to try before buying i can think of is actually a piece of UK law.

The "distance selling act", you want to see what something is like you order it and it arrives if you dont like it you send it back and are refunded. In the end if you dont like the product you dont pay for it. Its a pity the same thing doesnt exist for software.

If this is the case why not just use online retailers for games and then return them if you don't like them quoting the DSA? All above board and legal. Or is it really that rather than try before you buy most people that pirate software actually have no intention of buying?
 
Guilty until proven innocent?

Not even close, if you don't show up to the legal process even after repeated requests for you to do so then the court can rule in absence of you. That isn't the same as starting off with the assumption that you are guilty until you are proven innocent, you could be found innocent in absentia but it is much less likely given that you won't have any evidence to rebutt what the other side are claiming (and it must have been strong enough to get to court in the first place).

The point is that you had a chance to represent your (in)actions as legitimate and you chose not to. If for a second we suppose you were out of the country and had no chance to receive the summons' then when you return you could almost certainly appeal the decision but if it is simply that you ignored it then you are straight outta luck - the judicial process does not wait on your convenience.
 
Not even close, if you don't show up to the legal process even after repeated requests for you to do so then the court can rule in absence of you. That isn't the same as starting off with the assumption that you are guilty until you are proven innocent, you could be found innocent in absentia but it is much less likely given that you won't have any evidence to rebutt what the other side are claiming (and it must have been strong enough to get to court in the first place).

The point is that you had a chance to represent your (in)actions as legitimate and you chose not to. If for a second we suppose you were out of the country and had no chance to receive the summons' then when you return you could almost certainly appeal the decision but if it is simply that you ignored it then you are straight outta luck - the judicial process does not wait on your convenience.

You're not telling me anything I don't know - it's common sense that it happens like you've stated above. Someone with little legal knowledge would be able to work that out.

What baffles me is that an individual with a bit of nous and know-how could commit an offence under an assumed identity, go to ground and with the right amount of tinkering with the system a little, the prosecution will run it's full course. Of course the disposal isn't important as it relates to a person who doesn't even exist.
 
You're not telling me anything I don't know - it's common sense that it happens like you've stated above. Someone with little legal knowledge would be able to work that out.

Apologies for that but if you are going to make one line comments that don't relate to reality without putting in any indication you are being facetious then don't be too surprised that they get commented on.

What baffles me is that an individual with a bit of nous and know-how could commit an offence under an assumed identity, go to ground and with the right amount of tinkering with the system a little, the prosecution will run it's full course. Of course the disposal isn't important as it relates to a person who doesn't even exist.

Dunno but maybe most people don't set out to commit offences so don't have prepared assumed identities.
 
Apologies for that but if you are going to make one line comments that don't relate to reality without putting in any indication you are being facetious then don't be too surprised that they get commented on.

I said what I did to highlight just how absurd and unfair the system can be under certain circumstances.

The majority of the time it works well, and fairly.
 
If this is the case why not just use online retailers for games and then return them if you don't like them quoting the DSA? All above board and legal. Or is it really that rather than try before you buy most people that pirate software actually have no intention of buying?
Games are software.

Look at the comments..

So we have learnt today. If you are using t*****ts don't get new releases, wait a few months so they are nearly dead. Only grab from respected groups. That way those won't be tracked any more and they will be on to the newer releases. That and private t******s.

Most importantly, buy products, don't steal them :)
And torrent isn't a banned word...
 
If whoever trying to scare people with these letters is going to succeed and make money even withough actually going to the court at all as some people might just pay them whatever they want, that might trigger something we haven't had yet.

Just imagine these companies setting up torrents and monitoring every second movie, game, album. That could be a very well profitable business.
 
It was for selling a machine on ebay with a OEM licence which was taken from another machine, they wanted £1300 in total, but I told them where to go ;)

They have people looking all the time on ebay for this kind of stuff, I was one of the unlucky ones.


how did they even find this out?
 
Back
Top Bottom