David Gerard said on Tuesday, 19 August 2008

The only problem is that no trace of the case’s existence can be found.

www.rocknerd.co.uk/2008/08/19/woman-fined-16000-in-apparently-nonexistent-court-case/

Asterix said on Thursday, 21 August 2008

What a load of rubbish, she was prosecuted for uploading but no prosecution for the downloaders? I think there's a wee touch of scaremongering going on here. I suppose they produced concrete evidence that it was definately her who uploaded the file and proof of the uploaded file itself, somehow I don't think so. If it was that easy we'd be hearing of prosecutions every single day. As far as I'm aware there is no law that it's illegal to download anything, copying a disc and uploading it is different but as far as law goes she could only have been prosecuted for the 'illegal' copy only. Then they would have to prove its not just copied as a backup which a lot of people do.

Obelix said on Thursday, 21 August 2008

If I owned an original cd which I wanted to rip and put on my mp3 player (perfectly legal allegedly) and decided it was quicker to download the tracks rather that go find the cd and rip it, name the tracks and so on, would I be breaking the law? I purchased the cd which is a licence to listen to the files whewre and when I want. I can also upload the files incase I have computer failure and know they are safe. Uploading isn't against the law nor is downloading or making a backup of software or media you have purchased. What's the difference if I rip my own cd or download the same files from somewhere else?

Getafix said on Thursday, 21 August 2008

I purchased a game recently and the disc was accidently cracked. I contacted the maker of the game and they said I would have to purchase a new one at full price. As it was the play disc and not the install disc with all the game data on it, I downloaded a copy of the play disc from a torrent site. Like my good friend Obelix, I own the original so did I break the law as well or was I entitled to download what I already own, which was a Godsend as far as I see. The reason for the lack of and the lies about apparent prosecutions is because there can't be a trial without a relevant law coupled with irrefutable evidence against the accused.

Vitalstatistix said on Thursday, 21 August 2008

How do they know it was actually her who uploaded the file, was there a witness produced that was there at the time of upload or did they just prosecute the account holder? That's like prosecuting you if someone steals while wearing your gloves. Account holders can't be held responsible for others stealing their wireless connection & using it for illegal purposes. They can be advised to encrypt it but there isn't a law to say you must do this. People with networks shouldn't worry, there's no way anyone can know who uploaded or downloded what using your connection and you can't be banned by your ISP because of a guess. If they want to stop illegal downloaders then its THEY who have to do the work implementing software or hardware that stops it. Why should you do the work, you are paying them for a service. The ISP's are going to get knowhere fast if they keep banning their source of income. If you ban one you have to ban ALL.

Dogmatix said on Thursday, 21 August 2008

The government first of all ASKED the ISP's to look out for illegal downloaders and ban them after a few warnings. The ISP's didn't like this because it's a loss for them if they do along with the extra work involved to carry it out. Now the government is making it a law so the ISP's will comply. Great innit, no law so let's make one up. I don't think they are thinking this through, there are a lot of ramifications when people start getting prosecuted or banned and I see a lot of counter suits being filed. You can't be prosecuted or banned for something that they can't possibly prove was actually done by you. Reasonable doubt comes to mind and if you are not there to witness the offence or able to produce a witness to prove you were at your computer at the time of the offence then there is reasonable doubt...and a LOT of it. It's a form of spying which I believe is still illegal!

Dogmatix said on Thursday, 21 August 2008

The government first of all ASKED the ISP's to look out for illegal downloaders and ban them after a few warnings. The ISP's didn't like this because it's a loss for them if they do along with the extra work involved to carry it out. Now the government is making it a law so the ISP's will comply. Great innit, no law so let's make one up. I don't think they are thinking this through, there are a lot of ramifications when people start getting prosecuted or banned and I see a lot of counter suits being filed. You can't be prosecuted or banned for something that they can't possibly prove was actually done by you. Reasonable doubt comes to mind and if you are not there to witness the offence or able to produce a witness to prove you were at your computer at the time of the offence then there is reasonable doubt...and a LOT of it. It's a form of spying which I believe is still illegal!

Pete said on Thursday, 21 August 2008

"I purchased a game recently and the disc was accidently cracked. I contacted the maker of the game and they said I would have to purchase a new one at full price. As it was the play disc and not the install disc with all the game data on it, I downloaded a copy of the play disc from a torrent site."

What company? Why didn't you exercise your legal right to return it to the retailer? Why do I think you are making one of the lamest excuses of the many lame excuses for stealing games? Why is Jeremy Clarkson allowed to breathe? Why?

Gluteus Maximus said on Thursday, 21 August 2008

The point, Pete, is that Getafix bought the game and not the disk. So he's entitled to have it. The person who was prosecuted shared the game, not the disk, which she wasn't entitled to do. So she was prosecuted (and rightly so) for copying someone else's property and supplying it to someone who wasn't entitled to it.

Underdog said on Thursday, 21 August 2008

Jeremy Clarkson is a GOD and you have no reason to be so horrid to a person who many would like to be....... Have you got a jet on your front lawn? Ha

This is all down to the over the top prices that greedy software houses keep charging. They produce better games than a few years ago but they don't have to put more effort in to the program as now they have computers to do the work for them, and many are just re-hashed games from 20 years ago.
I've down loaded copies of programs before and if I like the program, I buy it, if I don't then I remove it from my system. If we all did this, then only the worthy programs will survive, which is how it should be.
The fine was disproporsionate (pardon spelling) to the crime and was not in the intrest of the public good but as it's in the eye of the media at the moment, the court was swayed.

Getafix said on Thursday, 21 August 2008

Pete, what I meant to say was that I accidently cracked the disc but the manufacturer had no obligation to replace it although I thoughy they would out of goodwill. I paid for the game so was entitled to play it and I refused to pay for it again hence the download. It wasn't a lame excuse, in fact, it wasn't an excuse at all. Would you pay itunes again for a cd you downloaded and accidently deleted or would you want a free replacement?

Asterix said on Thursday, 21 August 2008

Underdog is right, how many times has the same game been released with the next new console. I think Nintendo are releasing the same games now they released 20 yrs ago. The consumer has no comeback if they buy a game and its crap and the same for a movie or a cd which are always hyped up and made to look much better than they actually are. We can't return something if we don't like it so we have to believe the manufaturers flannel and hope they are right. Underdog also is right when he says he downloads for evaluation, I do that too sometimes when I'm not sure if a game is as good as they say, if it is then I buy it, if its crap then I don't. The software companies hate this because they can't sell us crap we can't return anymore.

Caesar said on Thursday, 21 August 2008

Around 10 Mario games released on 8 different Nintendo consoles. Not a lot of originality going on there....or is there too much?? Granted these games are classics, but they belong in that "classic" era. Computing power has moved on so why hasn't developers imagination? I paid £40 for a game my son THOUGHT was good and he played it once, I tried to trade it in at a popular GAME store 3 weeks later and I was offered £10. I said, you are selling it pre-owned for £36 and he said £10 is all I can offer. Kids are being completely ripped off where games are concerned and I don't blame them for downloading illegally. There has to be strict guidelines put in force where selling of games are concerned because the GAME store is in effect 'stealing' from us and getting away with it. With current trade in prices you are better keeping your game and stop these companies making a profit on the same game twice or even more.

PaulGreyhead said on Friday, 22 August 2008

At the end of the day it is illegal.
Would you walk in to a games store and steal a game?
Would you walk in to a music store and steal a CD?
Downloading illegal/pirate software and/or music is stealing. Simple as that.
No matter what excuse you use, whether you want to try it out or see if you like the artist, it is just that: an excuse.
Why not PAY for things like many of us do?