Computer users “wrongly accused” of video game filesharing
A British consumer group says lawyers for software manufacturers are wrongly accusing people of putting video games on filesharing services. It argues this seriously brings into question the process used to identify offenders.
Which? Computing, a magazine produced by the Consumers Association, first raised the issue last year after a complaint by readers Gill and Ken Murdoch. They had received a letter from lawyers Davenport Lyons saying they’d illegally shared files for the Atari game Race 07. The couple are aged 54 and 66 respectively and say they’ve never played a video game in the lives. At the time Gill Murdoch said, “We did not even know what ‘peer to peer’ was until we received the letter.”
The letter gave them the opportunity to pay £500 compensation and £25 costs (a total of approximately $850 in U.S. dollars) and threatened they would face a much stiffer penalty if they refused and the case went to court. After the publicity in the magazine, the lawyers dropped their demands without explanation.
Today the magazine reports that more than 20 other readers have come forward with similar stories involving ACS Law, which has taken over clients from Davenport Lyons. It says the firm has sent out almost 6,000 letters relating to the games Two Worlds (produced by Reality Pump) and Dream Pinball (produced by Topware Interactive).
Under the U.K. system, firms collect lists of IP addresses of computers sharing the files on peer-to-peer services, then get an court order to compel internet service providers to hand over the details of the customer matching that address. Which? Computing believes many of those wrongly accused have had their IP address used by people “piggybacking” unsecured wireless connections.
The threats of higher penalties for those who don’t pay up when the letters come are genuine: a woman who opted to let Topware Interactive take her to court over the pinball gGillame was fined £16,000 (US$26,000) in compensation and costs.
While she was presumably genuinely guilty of the copyright offense, it’s clear that at least some of those receiving the letters are innocent victims. And given that the letters sent out by ACS were demanding a total of more than £3 million, there’s a serious problem if even a fraction of those wrongly accused pay up out of confusion or fear.
Related Posts:
