The Solicitors Regulatory Authority (SRA) has confirmed that they are still investigating the controversial solicitors firm ACS:Law UK and have yet to reach a conclusion. The law firm has been accused of using bad practices for the way in which it sent threatening demands for money (settlement) to those "suspected" of using their broadband ISP connection to share (P2P) unlawful copyright files with others.


During June 2009 the UK Internet Service Providers Association ( ISPA ) said that they were "not confident in [ACS:Law's] ability to identify [ILLEGAL] users", a position matched by consumer magazine Which? that subsequently raised a complaint with the SRA. ACS:Law claims that "the information we get is completely accurate," though it was forced to drop an unknown number of cases prior to Christmas.


ACS:Law tracks alleged abuse by monitoring the Internet Protocol ( IP ) address of online users, which is assigned to your computer each time you connect to the internet and made public on P2P networks. However this is not an effective way of determining a computer user’s true identity.

An IP can easily be faked, hijacked, redirected and generally abused or used in ways that the systems employed by such trackers cannot detect. Furthermore the owner of a particular connection/IP, such as in case of a hotel, business or shared public Wi-Fi network (secure or not), may not be the individual responsible for the actual act itself.


Those targeted typically receive letters in the post that accuse them of wrongdoing (here) and can demand the payment of a settlement fee that may often be worth hundreds of pounds. People who refuse to pay are usually warned that this could lead to legal action, which in reality rarely ever happens.

Suffice to say that more than a few consumer groups, ISPs and affected individuals feel that the way in which ACS:Law has conducted itself is unreliable, profiteering and "bullying". Many of those affected feel wrongly accused. There have also been cases of some people who do not even have internet access receiving such letters.

ACS:Law have also been caught sending out dubious questionnaires to broadband ISP customers whom they "suspected" of being involved with unlawful file sharing activity. Sadly what many of those targeted did not realise was that the questionnaires could be used to bolster ACS:Law's case against them (original news). The situation got so bad for ACS:Law that Andrew J. Crossley was recently forced to issue a public letter in response to the complaints against his firm.


We suspected that more than a few people and organisations would disagree with some of Crossley's points, with the possible exception of no.2. Indeed most of the copyright enforcement measures being introduced or enforced by law firms, unjustly or not, concern those who upload (share) material over P2P rather than just download it.

Peer 2 Peer (P2P) file sharing clients do both downloading and uploading at the same time. Sadly this often occurs without the end-user fully understanding that by downloading a music track or film over P2P they could also inadvertently be sharing it with hundreds or possibly even thousands of other people.

Some earlier reports had claimed that the SRA would reach a final conclusion on the matter by the end of July 2010, although no such outcome has been forthcoming and clearly the investigation is still on-going. This should not be a surprise because the SRA took well over one year to reach a conclusion against a similar law firm, Davenport Lyons (original news). DL were subsequently referred to a disciplinary tribunal.