anyone got similar email. What can be done about this? post your experience...
-------------------------
Dear xyz
This email is being sent to you from Willow TV International, Inc. ("Willow TV"), which owns the exclusive rights to distribute and stream cricket matches in the United States and Canada, as well as the rest of North America, including the ICC Cricket World Cup 2011 and the national cricket matches for Australia, New Zealand, England and South Africa amongst other boards, for the 2010-2011 season ("Copyright Protected Matches"). Willow TV filed a Federal lawsuit against various website owners that we allege illegally sold pirated downloads and video streams of the Copyright Protected Matches. A copy of the abbreviated lawsuit filed in court in available here. Willow TV subpoenaed the records of these various websites and the evidence indicates that you purchased at least one of the illegal streams offered by at least one of these defendants in violation of law.
It is a violation of Willow TV's copyright and the law to purchase or view the illegal stream whether it was knowing or unknowing. Under 17 U.S.C § 501 et seq., anyone who participates in the infringement of a copyright is liable for statutory damages up to $30,000 per infringement, and up to $150,000 if the infringement is willful.
Willow TV will fully pursue this lawsuit to the fullest extent of the law against those who operate businesses and illegally provide pirated cricket matches in violation of their rights; however, it has no interest in pursuing a lawsuit against the viewers and fans of cricket matches, so we would like to deal with the evidence that has been presented to us in the best way possible.
We would like to provide you a way out of the continued exposure to liability that comes with viewing cricket matches illegally through pirated websites.
Complete Release and Waiver of Liability Offer.
Willow TV will provide you with a onetime release of all claims and liability for any and all past illegal downloads or streaming views of cricket matches you may have purchased or viewed from any of the defendants listed in the attached lawsuit. The release will be provided on the condition that you commit to watching any of your future cricket matches legally through www.willow.tv for the next year. The authorized service is currently $14.99/month and allows you, the customer, to watch the live video streaming of all cricket content offered by Willow TV, on its website www.willow.tv (and on its channel on YouTube, and on smartphones, etc.) for a period of one year. Willow TV is the official license holder for various cricket boards worldwide for this period (including Cricket boards of Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, England and others), and it is the only way to watch these matches legally in North America. After the 12 month period, on request, you will receive a release of all past claims and liability from Willow TV for any crickets matches you may have purchased or viewed in violation of Willow TV's exclusive rights to distribute and stream those matches in North America.
If you wish to take advantage of this offer for a full release of liability please visit the website www.willow.tv, and purchase the monthly package of $14.99. (Or you can directly buy it by clicking here). Please use the same email id to which this email is sent, as your login id on willow.tv while making the purchase.
After one year of continued service, the release email will be sent to you on request to legal@willow.tv.
Alternatively, if you have subscribed to the Willow Cricket Channel on DISH Network or DIRECTV, you can email legal@willow.tv with a copy of your bill showing your active subscription, with your first and last name indicated clearly as the subscriber on file.
If you do not wish to commit to viewing cricket matches legally through Willow TV you may contact us and we will provide you with a settlement demand based on the number of your purchases and streaming views of cricket matches that were in violation of Willow TV's rights ($200 per match or $1000 for a package purchased from a pirate site) and a release will be provided after final settlement, or simply do nothing and we will continue our investigation against you and we may be forced to name you as a defendant to the lawsuit. If you are named as a defendant we will pursue the full statutory damages provided in 17 U.S.C § 501 et seq.
Thank you for your anticipated cooperation. Willow TV
Defend it personally?...its a helluva lot cheaper to pay the $14.99 a month ($180 total) and get to watch your cricket matches legally now at the same time, and make the demand letter go away.....if ya subscribe for the $14.99, U are not admitting any guilt, and ya sure can't get a lawyer for $180 to defend you...and your chances of winning a civil suit and a demand letter settlement on your own are slim to none...obviously if Willow TV has your name and sent U a demand letter, they know about you, have some evidence and records seized, have their own attorneys, and know of your violating their exclusive rights...its sucks, but it must be real.....During the DTV demand letter days, most ppl thought, realized and recognized that it was cheaper to settle than to pay for a lawyer and "possibly" try and beat it, and worry for 1-3 years...so figure out if U prefer the $180 and still watch cricket, or very possibly pay very costly settlement charges....its a no brainer to me....just don't admit to anything now, pay the $180 (14.99 a month- 12 months) and subscribe, watch legal Willow TV for a year, then let them sent ya a release letter....unless you're a gambling man and would rather take your chances of incurring costly charges (based upon how long U had a package and how many games U watched) versus $180 and still get to watch your cricket..
and if its an oversight by Willow TV, and if ya subscribed via Dishnet or DTV, then simply show em the proof...
U may call this extortion, but when the man has your name and has ya by the gonads, sometimes it best not to admit to anything but just comply with their wishes and make this go away...and make sure ya save this current letter and your new subscription receipts for 12 months...then it all goes away very cheaply and they should mail ya a release from further civil actions...and they cannot come back at ya again, since they made this offer and U complied..
NN is a dumbfuk and can't do the simple math, and would rather have everybody and you pay more in the long run and worry forever....rather than use some common sense, simple math, and take the line of least resistance and cheapest way out..
I did NOT say "to pay for a lawyer". When a person defends himself, and says, YOU (Willow TV) were aware of illegal sites, and YOU (Willow TV) deliberately did not do anything about it to warn me. That would be the start of a good rally point for others to join in against Willow TV.
The law about buying of stolen property has been established for centuries. The buyer loses the product, that's it.
"and your chances of winning a civil suit and a demand letter settlement on your own are slim to none"...
Sure NN...have somebody go up againt a large company who has ya by the gonads, and a legal staff and try and beat them by yourself WITHOUT an attorney...and then get real ignorant and plead...duh, "I didn't know"....U are fkn dumber than rocks NN, admin, or whoever the feck you are....ignorance is not grounds to win any case..and no court is dumb enough to even entertain that defense, nevermind it become a rallying point for others..
................................................................................ .................... NN said...
"The law about buying of stolen property has been established for centuries.The buyer loses the product, that's it. "
NN , are U really that ignorant...ever hear of "receiving stolen property", a felony arrest and criminal charge?
Either way , in this Willow TV matter, stolen property is not the issue, and they have nothing in common....but copyright laws are the issue, as simply stated and referred to in the original post and email received... NN replies are totally fkn wrong and not even on the right track...but NN, your ignorance is entertaining to all of us...I like seeing stupid ppl lke U try and give intelligent replies and make a complete azz out of themselves..
Sam's watching cricket has to be proven. That is more difficult than proving that he bought a stolen watch, which would still be in his possession. The so called crime is at the very worst stealing and probably much less. Get your information about society right. Everybody in society watches TV without knowing or caring whether the signal is "legal or illegal". On the other hand, not many people go about buying a second hand property if there is suspicion that it is stolen property.
You can watch anything that comes to you via Internet, because you as a citizen do not have to find out about the origin of the signal. It is the business of your service provider and the site to make sure it is legal.
LK dumba*ss as usual, without knowing how it was sold or what information was collected for sale, you are being a stupid old man.
If OP had sent money by money order, with just emai address and if someone is using a diffrent email address than their usual, good luck in finding the physical location of the end user, the OP has stated all that he got is an email.
Secondly if the seller has represented himself as an authorized seller for Willlow TV, then good luck in going after the end user.
They do these intimidation tactics to get any money they can, it is not as though they came to your house and found a receiver with charlie card - which you are not supposed to have.
When you are ignorant STFU and dont pose yourself as an expert only to make a Jackas*s of yourself
Copyright infringement is determined without regard to the intent or the state of mind of the infringer; "innocent" infringement is infringement nonetheless
First of all, that email he received was NOT just plain LUCK that happen to find him , U idiot...he, the end user obviously supplied it to the illegal distributor of Willow TV who confiscated their records, ya fkn dummy...
2nd...again ignorance is not an excuse and won't hold water in any court...and I'm sure the end user was aware of it, otherwise he would have just paid the normal $14.99 monthly legal subscription rate via DTV or Dishnet...and never went through a middleman company that most likely offered Willow TV at a much cheaper rate..
3rd...Civil court only need to prove "preponderance" of the evidence..that is more likely than not, that the end user commited a copyright violation...NO hard evidence is required such as in criminal court..and "demand" letters are for civil court NOT criminal courts, ya fkn knucklehead...
NN, Suckazz...you're a real trip, and are 2 ignorants mofo's that really know jackshit about anything...so KMA and hit the road...You've seen your best days come and go here..and I'm done explaining simple common sense things to U idiots..
I posted ONLY because the originator needed REAL help and I saw NN's bullshit reply that would only hurt the man...and your reply posts Suckazz, was even dumber than NN's...I will not post until somebody really needs some help, otherwise U 2 or admins can have fun talking to each other...bye...and kiss my azz
LK: How many times have gone to a shop and asked if the product they are selling is legal? They CANNOT go after individuals who were sold an illegal product. The law is very clear about it -I f aperson unknowing comes into possesion of illegal proerty, he is NOT charged with a criminal offence - He simply loses the money he paid for it and the object is taken away from him. Don't indulge in scare tactics - this is not like what you used to do - sell files on your site. That WAS criminal, and even then the people who bought those files from you were not charged.
STFU goatfucker..LK posted to direct the OP from your moronic reply to some sensible advice. I put my two cents in when your alter-ego Sukass open his-her foul mouth. Why you are still around is beyond me. 22k ignorant replies must keep this site alive for some stupid reason. Yeah you are correct..you are too good to be part of the brown bunch you are part of the goatfuck bunch.
Ignore this, marketing tactics to get some quick bucks it is typical lawyer BS, it would cost them more to pursue you than the potential payout; they are fishing for money from people who are easily scared; they figure if they can get even 10% of people to pay it was worth the cost of a legal letter.
Nydas posted on Thursday, January 12, 2012 - 02:14 GMT
LK: How many times have gone to a shop and asked if the product they are selling is legal? They CANNOT go after individuals who were sold an illegal product. The law is very clear about it -I f aperson unknowing comes into possesion of illegal proerty, he is NOT charged with a criminal offence - He simply loses the money he paid for it and the object is taken away from him. Don't indulge in scare tactics - this is not like what you used to do - sell files on your site. That WAS criminal, and even then the people who bought those files from you were not charged.
Btw.......Nydas, how do you know that Sam_patel is BROWN?
Yes. I also think it's illegal if you don't know it's stolen. Something aboutignorance doesn't equal innocence.
It is illegal to own property that you know is stolen, this is known as "embezzlement".
It is illegal to buy stolen property whether you know it is stolen or not when you buy it. My dad was arrest once for Possession of stolen property for a TV and a gun he bought from a guy from work who dealt in stolen poperty but my dad didn't know it was stolen and it didn't matter he still got locked up for a while.
Again..this is NOT about STOLEN PROPERTY...its about COPYRIGHT laws and infringement of those laws......stay on track...
roja...Big companies have large legal staffs on hand all the time, paid salaries...they get paid no matter what they do...and this is definitely not a MARKETING ploy used by the SALES department...and no LEGAL department and the attorneys would sign any letters and mails or participate in any illegal SALES department activity and tactics, and risk their livelihood....there are specific ethics that attorneys are bound by..
U seriously don't beleive that a mass illegal emailing tactic was used and emailed to everybody on a bought mailing list?...if that were true, then innocent ppl would have no need to have any concerns and would simply throw them in the garbage, nevermind post here at Ecoustics asking "what to do"....a little common sense is in order..
U all watch too much TV and read too much Ecoustics staff posts and replies and are starting to belive that these type tactics are common and done by legitimate companies and people?...gimme a break, get real...
obviously Sam the originator of this thread got a letter for a valid reason and is asking a valid question, seeking a valid reply that makes some logic....stay on track and make some sense ppl..
This document contains one section of the U.S. Copyright Act (found in Title 17 of the United States Code). This page was last updated in October 2005. All of the sections of the Copyright Act are listed on the Index page.
For more information on copyright law, please see the Copyright Section of BitLaw.
(1) With respect to any secondary transmission that is made by a satellite carrier of a performance or display of a work embodied in a primary transmission and is actionable as an act of infringement under section 122 [17 USC 122], a television broadcast station holding a copyright or other license to transmit or perform the same version of that work shall, for purposes of subsection (b) of this section, be treated as a legal or beneficial owner if such secondary transmission occurs within the local market of that station. (2) A television broadcast station may file a civil action against any satellite carrier that has refused to carry television broadcast signals, as required under section 122(a)(2) [17 USC 122(a)(2)], to enforce that television broadcast station's rights under section 338(a) of the Communications Act of 1934 [47 USC §338(a)].
Gray Ghost says: "My dad was arrest once for Possession of stolen property for a TV and a gun he bought from a guy from work who dealt in stolen poperty but my dad didn't know it "
That is total BS. They probably proved it in court that your dad knew it, and that he also was dealing as this fellow's agents. THAT'S WHY THEY LOCKED HIM UP. And most likely it was at least his second offense; They rarely lock people up for knowingly buying 100 worth of stolen goods, considering they often DO NOT lock up people for actually stealing that much property - not for the first offense. So keep YOUR experience to yourself - they are not relevant to this issue. The only issue is the law and this letter Sam got is pure extortion.
Nice to see you Papi! I am still around..These guys love to lie so it's not surprising. I mean look at these crooks, Nydass and Sukass thinking being in possession of stolen merchandise will not get you trouble. I guess everyone can use that argument. Get pulled over by the cops and they find a crack pipe and Meth in you car.."Not mine Officer..I didn't know..It's my friend's.. "Oh don't worry it's your first offense" say the Officer.."You are free to go" Stupid fool they will arrest you,book you and then release you til you goto court even if it's $100 worth..It's a misdemeanor and under some circumstances a felony.. even if it's your first offense it's up to a judge to determine what the penalty will be. Jail time,Fine,Probation. A Judge will....not some idiot moron on a message board who thinks they know the law.
Quote: Nydas............So keep YOUR experience to yourself - they are not relevant to this issue. The only issue is the law and this letter Sam got is pure extortion.
NydASlearn to read first would help
Sam as you said above didn't receive the letter..........he C/P the letter from another site
sam patel
Silver Member Username: Sam_patel Post Number: 202 Registered: Jun-06 Sam_patel posted on Wednesday, January 11, 2012 - 01:23 GMT
nilaychampion New Member posted: Jan. 10, 2012 @ 4:34p
Willow Tv sent out this email today.
Anyone else received that email. What people are thinking? ---------------------------- Willow TV: Legal Notice and Offer of Settlement
Dear Xyz
This email is being sent to you from Willow TV International, Inc. ("Willow TV"), which owns the exclusive rights to distribute and stream cricket matches in the United States and Canada, as well as the rest of North America, including the ICC Cricket World Cup 2011 and the national cricket matches for Australia, New Zealand, England and South Africa amongst other boards, for the 2010-2011 season ("Copyright Protected Matches"). Willow TV filed a Federal lawsuit against various website owners that we allege illegally sold pirated downloads and video streams of the Copyright Protected Matches. A copy of the abbreviated lawsuit filed in court in available here. Willow TV subpoenaed the records of these various websites and the evidence indicates that you purchased at least one of the illegal streams offered by at least one of these defendants in violation of law.
It is a violation of Willow TV's copyright and the law to purchase or view the illegal stream whether it was knowing or unknowing. Under 17 U.S.C § 501 et seq., anyone who participates in the infringement of a copyright is liable for statutory damages up to $30,000 per infringement, and up to $150,000 if the infringement is willful.
Willow TV will fully pursue this lawsuit to the fullest extent of the law against those who operate businesses and illegally provide pirated cricket matches in violation of their rights; however, it has no interest in pursuing a lawsuit against the viewers and fans of cricket matches, so we would like to deal with the evidence that has been presented to us in the best way possible.
We would like to provide you a way out of the continued exposure to liability that comes with viewing cricket matches illegally through pirated websites.
Complete Release and Waiver of Liability Offer.
Willow TV will provide you with a onetime release of all claims and liability for any and all past illegal downloads or streaming views of cricket matches you may have purchased or viewed from any of the defendants listed in the attached lawsuit. The release will be provided on the condition that you commit to watching any of your future cricket matches legally through www.willow.tv for the next year. The authorized service is currently $14.99/month and allows you, the customer, to watch the live video streaming of all cricket content offered by Willow TV, on its website www.willow.tv (and on its channel on YouTube, and on smartphones, etc.) for a period of one year. Willow TV is the official license holder for various cricket boards worldwide for this period (including Cricket boards of Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, England and others), and it is the only way to watch these matches legally in North America. After the 12 month period, on request, you will receive a release of all past claims and liability from Willow TV for any crickets matches you may have purchased or viewed in violation of Willow TV's exclusive rights to distribute and stream those matches in North America.
If you wish to take advantage of this offer for a full release of liability please visit the website www.willow.tv, and purchase the monthly package of $14.99. (Or you can directly buy it by clicking here). Please use the same email id to which this email is sent, as your login id on willow.tv while making the purchase.
After one year of continued service, the release email will be sent to you on request to legal@willow.tv.
Alternatively, if you have subscribed to the Willow Cricket Channel on DISH Network or DIRECTV, you can email legal@willow.tv with a copy of your bill showing your active subscription, with your first and last name indicated clearly as the subscriber on file.
If you do not wish to commit to viewing cricket matches legally through Willow TV you may contact us and we will provide you with a settlement demand based on the number of your purchases and streaming views of cricket matches that were in violation of Willow TV's rights ($200 per match or $1000 for a package purchased from a pirate site) and a release will be provided after final settlement, or simply do nothing and we will continue our investigation against you and we may be forced to name you as a defendant to the lawsuit. If you are named as a defendant we will pursue the full statutory damages provided in 17 U.S.C § 501 et seq.
Thank you for your anticipated cooperation. Willow TV
PAPI: CAN ANY ONE OF YOU CLAIM THAT YOU HAVE NEVER PHOTOCOPIED COPY RIGHTED MATERIAL? THE LAST TIME AND ANY TIME I VISITED ANY LIBRARY IN NORTH AMERICA OR UK, THERE WERE AVAILABLE ANYTHING FROM 1 -12 PHOTOCOPIERS AND AT LEAST 2-20 PEOPLE WERE PHOTOCOPYING, ALL FROM COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL.
PAPI: CAN ANY ONE OF YOU CLAIM THAT YOU HAVE NEVER COPIED TAPES AND CDS AND DVDS? THE LAST TIME AND ANY TIME I VISITED ANY ELECTRONIC STORE IN NORTH AMERICA OR UK, THERE WERE AVAILABLE ANYTHING FROM 10 - 100 VARIETIES OF TAPE, VIDEO TAPE, CD-DVD COPIERS AND AT LEAST 2-50 PEOPLE WERE BUYING THESE, ALL UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT THE GOODS BEING SOLD WERE LEGAL GOODS AND THEIR PORTRAYED AND ADVERTISED USE WAS WHAT THEY WOULD BE DOING.
PAPI: YOU MUST HAVE BEEN BORN IN THE ARCTIC AND LIVED THERE NOT TO KNOW THIS.
nydas, why do you compare ; some one photocopying something , to a person who paid for a stream to watch an event.
The person who photocopied a document left no paper trail ..
whereas the person who paid a website other than willow.tv left a paper trail , via his/her credit card--regardless of subass' remark of a money order - which is laughable
nydas, as I understand , you are always the victim..
quote:
YOU (Willow TV) deliberately did not do anything about it to warn me.
The company who streamed it, if they were doing it illegally then then should be the ones to be prosecuted. No one has cared to answer the simple question: How many of and and how often do you question the legality of something that is being sold to you? My answer is "Practically never" That is what the consumer market is designed. Seller come up and are regulated by Government, and punished if they do not comply with the laws. NOT the end user Now don't avoid the question. DO YOU question the legality of anything that is sold to you and what percent of time? STOP AVOIDING THE ISSUE. ANSWER IT.....ANSWER IT!!!
There are over 200 Internet sites offering you TV. There are over 100 sites offering you video clips of all sorts You tube is one of the biggest.
Now don't avoid the question. DO YOU question the legality of anything that you are viewing from these sites and what percent of time? STOP AVOIDING THE ISSUE. ANSWER IT.....ANSWER IT
nydas , when a person watches a movie on the internet that is still in the theaters, he/she knows full well that they should be paying to view the said content...stop being a victim and be responsible for your actions.
Chaff: I do not agree with you at all. There are movies "in the theatre" that are reruns and re-re-re-runs, and you can buy DVDs of the movies as well.
Therefore, "when a person watches a movie on the internet that is still in the theaters, he does NOT know that he should be paying to view the said content.."
Therefore, "when a person watches a movie in the theatre , he does NOT know that the movie is being shown legally "
Therefore, "when a person watches a movie on this DVD that is still in the theaters or not , he does NOT know that he should be paying to view the said content, or that it is a legal copy, except for the copyright notice and notice of infringement that come on, which he does not know whether is was put by a legitimate owner or put there to scare him".
Stop evading the simple question - How often do YOU, CHAFF, question the legality and the authorship of a video clip on the internet or a full half hour episode oF XYZ serial ,,,,, HOW OFTEN DO YOU QUESTION?
Sam Patel: I came across this information which might also be of some help.
Chilling Effects
A joint project of the Electronic Frontier Foundation and Harvard, Stanford, Berkeley, University of San Francisco, University of Maine, George Washington School of Law, and Santa Clara University School of Law clinics.
Do you know your online rights? Have you received a letter asking you to remove information from a Web site or to stop engaging in an activity? Are you concerned about liability for information that someone else posted to your online forum? If so, this site is for you.
Papi Bronze Member Username: Yassou Post Number: 70 Registered: Apr-11 Yassou posted on Friday, January 13, 2012 - 22:00 GMT
Nalin......give the man a break..no one send him a letter or suing him. he came here to post a C/P letter from another site. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "no one send him a letter" Papi Learn English grammar first "he came here to post a C/P letter from another site." How do you know he did not also get a letter? they send same letter to all and not customized, shows how stupid you are
I have contacted my states Senators, Congressmen, Attorney General and the local media.
Looks like they have a big interest in IP laws and how companies interpret them/use it to get their way with the lawmakers due to the chatter about SOPA act. I have belive most of the people I've contacted that the will look into this matter either by contacting the company's lawyers directly or issuing a subpoena to the comapany's C level executives to a public hearing to defend their position. Le't see how this plays out and it sure appears that Willow TV has a tough fight ahead not only in the court room but also in the press as well as in the congress. Let's hope they thought this through and have all their ducks in a row and not jumped the gun and got greedy with a potential (but shady) way to acquire more customers.
