Your Ad Here Your Ad Here
Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Uk prosecutions

  1. #1
    Bit disturbing, the news in the papers today, 23 people have agreed to pay between 2000 and 4500 each to avoid being taken to court for illegal downloading by the BPI or what ever it is, 2 more have chosen to fight it in court. The BPI is said to have a list of more than 2 million names on file ready to prosecute in the near future.
    How much of this is true?
    Is there any way of stopping them finding out who you are when sharing files?
    Not trying to make out that I am innocent here but 99% of my downloading is old and obscure music that is not available for legal download or purchase, am I any safer than the rest?

  2. ** REGISTER to REMOVE This Ad On The Site!! **
    Your Ad Here Your Ad Here
  3. File Sharing   -   #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2003

    Illegal filesharers pay thousands of pounds in compensation : 4:3:2005

    > 23 settlements from all over the UK

    > Filesharers pay up to 4,500 in settlement

    > BPI announces another 31 cases across 8 different P2P networks

    UK record companies’ trade association the BPI (British Phonographic Industry) today announced that 23 UK internet users have agreed to pay thousands of pounds in compensation for distributing music illegally via peer-to-peer networks on the internet.

    The BPI said it will also bring 31 new cases against filesharers from across the UK as it steps up its campaign against illegal filesharing. And in a broadening of the campaign the new actions will span eight different filesharing networks. Further cases will follow.

    BPI Chairman Peter Jamieson said, “Unauthorised filesharing is against the law. It effectively steals the livelihood of musicians and the record companies who invest in them. We will not hesitate to protect the rights of our members and the artists they represent.”

    BPI General Counsel Geoff Taylor said, “We are determined to find people who illegally distribute music, whichever peer-to-peer network they use, and to make them compensate the artists and labels they are stealing from.

    “These settlements show we can and we will enforce the law. No one should be in any doubt that we will continue to do so.”

    Illegal filesharers discover the cost of “free music”

    The 23 settlements announced today arise out of the 26 cases announced by the BPI in October 2004. Three cases are still in negotiation and legal action may follow.

    The settlements include internet users from all over the UK – 17 men and six women. The average settlement is more than 2,000 – more than a month’s salary for the average UK worker. Two illegal filesharers are paying more than 4,000 each to settle their cases.

    BPI General Counsel Geoff Taylor explained, “We have no desire to drag people through the courts. So we have attempted to reach fair settlements where we can.

    “We hope people will now begin to get the message that the best way to avoid the risk of legal action and paying substantial compensation is to stop illegal filesharing and to buy music online, safely and legally, instead.”

    Further litigation to follow in UK covering all popular P2P networks

    The BPI announced that it will be going to the High Court today seeking orders for the disclosure of the identities of a further 31 illegal filesharers on a range of peer-to-peer networks, including KaZaA, eDonkey, Grokster, Soulseek, DirectConnect, Limewire, Bearshare and Imesh.

    Although impressive developments in legal download services saw an estimated 9 million download sales in the UK in 2004, there are still millions of individuals in the UK who persist in trading files illegally.

    Said Taylor, “If illegal filesharers think that they can avoid getting caught by staying away from the most popular networks like KaZaA, they’re wrong. We are going to continue bringing cases against people who distribute music illegally, whichever filesharing network they use, for as long as it’s necessary. Legitimate music services can only prosper if we continue to fight the theft of music on the internet.”

    Turning the tide

    The BPI’s action against illegal filesharing in the UK is part of a global campaign by the record companies who invest in new music, seeking to turn the tide on internet piracy.

    Research shows that illegal activity on the once most-popular filesharing network Fast Track – on which KaZaA runs – has plummeted, with the number of users in January 2005 down 45% from its peak in April 2003.

    While some more determined illegal filesharers are migrating to other networks, the combination of superior legal services and the threat of legal action means that despite increasing broadband penetration, authorised services are growing at a faster rate than illegal services.

    With thousands of cases launched against the users of other illegal networks, illegal uploaders are learning that there is no place to hide; the number of eDonkey servers is down by 61%, BitTorrent servers and users are down 66% while the Direct Connect network has also seen a decline in the number of servers.

    2 milion on file, seems a bit much, thats 3% of the uk population.
    Last edited by callum; 03-05-2005 at 10:50 PM.

  4. File Sharing   -   #3
    namzuf9's Avatar Poster
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    The Armpit Of The Universe.
    Lets see how far they get with the few that have decided to fight in the courts.
    How far are they going to get without physical evidence?

    Of course the best defence would be one that was used quite recently in a few speeding offences (caught by gatso speed cameras) A high profile example here

    "it was'nt me"

    The only piece of evidence they have to tie these people to the illegal distrubution of copyright material is an IP address.

    Was it the accused that was guilty, was it one of his siblings/parents/flatmates or even that buzzword that is thrown about when talking about computer crime, a HACKER?

    I hope that the few that are going to fight it in the courts have tossed away their hard drives to remove any physical ties to the horrid accusation of filesharing and then asked the BPI to provide evidence that it was actually them that "shared" the files they are so damn worried about.

    And of course if none of the above works, no doubt the stuffy, age'd judge would fail to understand the complexities filesharing anyway.

    BRING IT ON BPI.....
    Last edited by namzuf9; 03-06-2005 at 04:59 AM.


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts