Has Copyright owners actions affected your choice?

[one eyed jack]

...but saying what you want to say anonymously will give them something to look at and think about.


Nah...Not really

Reason being, anonymity means anyone who hasnt received these letters could make it up and no doubt it will be along the lines of....

"...receiving this letter drove me to the brink of suicide and financial ruin. My wife is threatening to divorce me because I downloaded a (insert title here) on the internet "...

Nothing bar knowing the person is sincerely who they say they are will move me to respond sympathetically. Why all the secrecy??? If I was accused I would want the person to know my face and know my name but thats the kind of man I am. I dont believe in throwing fists from around corners.

Look a man in the eye if you have to square up with him.

[bpaw]

"Look a man in the eye if you have to square up with him."

Fine words, and sincere if I guess I know you.

The problem is you isn't GEIL. You are not accused.

How does GEIL get more information from their accused if they don't provide more information?

Trawl the forums! Check names and nicknames, words said. All sorts! All this can be used as evidence.

Don't trust your accusers.

So yes, there may be people who might want to slag off GEIL, but there are people who are suffering at this moment. I have corresponded with people recently who have been accused from GEIL, and I tell you that this situation is a freaking travesty that innocent people are targeted.

Believe it or not if you like.

[bpaw]

Another reason why I ask for victims to remain anonymous.

This scam that is being operated by GEIL is also followed up by another scam.

The telephone number they ask you to ring is 0871 990 6500.

That is a Premium Rate number and the charges to ring the number did not appear on their initial letter of claim or their website. Since then, they had to add the call charges on the letter and their website because of an anonymous complaint.

Seeing that Mr Becker is well versed in Telecommunications, you would think he knows the regulations when operating a Premium Rate telephone service.

He operates a well educated scam.

What is not said as regards the call charges is that GEIL may probably get about 70% in their bank balance of the cost of calls to their number. Research 0871 numbers if you don't believe me.

That is a scam built on a scam.

[one eyed jack]

Another reasoned argument against it being a scam, subscribing to your terminology of "educated scam" would lead me to believe it was wise to make his move as cost effective and as profitable as possible in as much the same way any corporate company like Microsoft would.

They know people will call them all day for support but if the venture doesnt pay for itself it will be out of pocket and one thing you can be sure with anyone handling a venture such as this, they dont want to be out of pocket as those they are representing

That would make them very stupid, ergo, "educated" which in turn would diminish the scam aspect you are alleging

Companies use it to finance support systems. I guess thats why premium rate lines were set up

[bpaw]

Wow! Good spin! That would make Peter Mandlelson jealous!

One problem though:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/p ... letter.pdf

The above is the original letter approved by the Court lacking call charges which is against Premium Rate regulations.

There are 09 numbers all over media related ben-dover websites which give call charges. Mr Becker knows the regulations so no excuse for a mistake.

That is an educated scam.

[one eyed jack]

As long as the information on those premium rate lines are pertinent to the issues at hand i cant find a fault with it.

If ti was manned by personnel it would have to be paid for. In truth i cant speak about it because I dont know the ins and outs of this but i can see a logical and cost effective reason for a premium rate line if you are expecting a high volume of calls with those refuting the claims.

[bpaw]

"If ti was manned by personnel it would have to be paid for. In truth i cant speak about it because I dont know the ins and outs of this but i can see a logical and cost effective reason for a premium rate line if you are expecting a high volume of calls with those refuting the claims."

The "if you are expecting a high volume of calls with those refuting the claims." is interesting because if they are refuting the claim, then there is a chance they didn't do it, but have to pay Premium Rate to call it.

Although I know you don't believe that there are any innocent people.

I have done my research, and there is something about this which seems to fit in with the individuals and the company.

I do require to call Microsoft every now and then, and I have never had to call a 0871 number. Sky have a 0871 service, but also a 08442 number (free) for their customers.

Many of the other 0871 numbers I have seen also include a non-Premium Rate number which is part of the Premium Rate Regulations.

Also many of the 0871 numbers I have seen by companies are not taking Legal action or suggesting Legal action, but a more information / help line for the services they offer. That way, a punter makes a choice if they wish to make a call.

Oh yes and not putting call charges on the letter is still against Premium Rate regulations even if the calls are mentioned when the number is called. It can't be both ways. If their claim is copyright infringement then they should accept it when they break the rules.

At least their rule breaking is provable with evidence.

[Hickster]

@OEJ

I am finished with this Thread, this is my last post, if you want to contact me you know my email Terry. If you are not convinced merely by my emails you never will be convinced that this is a corrupt system, and the person running it KNOWS it is corrupt.

I wrote an email to the AITA (At your suggestion) after Jerry had left and Maskell had taken over, and I received little more than a Golden Eye Press release, complete, and I couldn't believe this a "Cut and paste" reference with regard to the HMV analogy, that I had also seen Crossly, and Gallant use, very amusing.

BTW Maskell also asked me to appear in a "Face to face" interview in front of a filmed audience, that is something you asked me to do isn't it? how strange. I get the feeling I am being smoked out here!

All the best

Hicks!

PS @Bpaw we have work to do.... Some interesting info has emerged with regard to GEIL breaking the Court rules!

[Hickster]

@OEJ

http://acsbore.wordpress.com/2013/03/07 ... volvement/

[one eyed jack]

Its clear to me that you dont understand how AITA works. Many of its members do act independently outside the association and it seems you are trying to put this all in as one by making two plus two equal five.

On another note the offer I gave you (re: my documentary) was to cross examine Julian about the this venture which was one of good will on my part and I was surprised Julian offered to take me up on it

When I asked why and why he didnt just respond to you directly here on a forum he felt the media form of what i was doing would have a wider audience in that he was confident that he was involved with no wrong doing that could be actionable against him.

My motive was to show this in my documentary as part of the things we (producers) are up against being in this business. its not all wine women and song. There is a lot of bullshit, talent, politics, external factors that affect our day to day running of a business many deem to be objectionable buy virtue of what it is,

I explained my line of reasoning to Pete Johnson of ATVOD as well to which he understood why I would want this recorded but I had to be specific about the questions I was to engage him with ahead of time

I did hope that you wouldve taken me up on the offer but was not surprised that it was met with derision and suspicion as to my motives. After all, film makers have had a history of stitching up those to further their own agendas but i promise you (which is why i indicated here on a public forum) this was never my intention to stitch you up or edit you in an unfavourable light

I, to the best part of my knowledge do not have a reputation for telling lies nor have I ever ripped off anyone and I certainly wont be starting this via a documentary where Im trying to tell it like it is. That is how I have always been and the documentary project is an extension of that.

I'd rather the viewer determine if I or you were in the wrong. If anything I was hoping it would be a platform for debate.

I have no idea what Jason Maskell was doing with regards filming you but it was certainly not part of my project. Just because we are (were?) members of the same association doesnt mean we are all in bed together on every issue. Like the other association i am a member of there is quite often disagreements on how things should be done and my beleif is that AITAs distancing itself from this didn't reflect the broad view of its members seeing that producers made up a small percentage of AITAs membership.