Innocent oldies accused of file-sharing
A CONSUMER MAG investigation has found that innocent computer users are being accused of sharing games over P2P networks – despite the fact they have never played a computer game.
Which Computing was contracted by Gill and Ken Murdoch from Inverness as they were pursued by games firm Atari for allegedly sharing the Race 07 game on their PC.
Both the Murdoch’s have never played computer games, and so were obviously shocked to receive a letter from Atari’s solicitors, Davenport Lyons, demanding money with menaces.
The couple were given the opportunity to pay a £500 compensation fee and a further £25 for infringing the copyright of Atari stating that court costs would be much higher.
After the consumer champion's intervention, the case was dropped – however it is uncertain how many other innocents are being targeted in this way.
Obviously some of these file-sharing cases are valid, yet innocent computer users who are unsure how to protect their computers are unfortunately leaving themselves open to IP address hijacking.
Spokeswhich Sarah Kidner said, ‘It’s outrageous that lawyers are falsely accusing people of illegally file-sharing and we think they should cut out the heavy-handed tactics.”
However, she does warn that consumers need to be aware of the dangers of having their computer address “piggy-backed” and take some basic common sense steps to protect themselves.
The entertainment industry argues that file-sharing costs millions in lost revenue, which is why companies are so keen to jump on those who seem to be acting illegally.
Although there are measures in place to stop this kind of thing happening, many users don’t know how to carry out these precautions – many more don’t even realise they need them.
Some file-sharing sites insert a random IP address into the file in order to ‘pollute’ evidence, something which can offer up other people’s IP addresses by chance – this is one possible way the Murdoch’s could have got involved. µ
L'Inq
Which?
Share this:
ShareBusiness Intelligence Software
Customer Relationship Management (CRM)
Enterprise Accounting Software
Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP)
Enterprise Systems Management


i personally know ultruistic peeps that leave their wireless connections open for anybody to use as they wish, some may say this is inadvisable, but where does it state it's ILLEGAL to share your connection with complete strangers, hmmmmm, i thought so :O) 

so bully boy leaches on society, Davenport Lyons, go and stick your threats along with the raggy end of a pineapple up your corporate backsides !!

im a *cough, mature/silver surfer, (sounds so much nicer than oldies dunnit) that does use pirate bay, oh plzzzzz, plzzzzzzz, if there is a god, send them round to my gaff :O)
Why do people need to play a game in order to share it Inq.?

If I was downloading a movie, there is equally no reason to watch it first is there?

Let's try to drag the journalistic quality level of articles above 'The Sun' or 'Daily Mail' level please?


I know it's hard. But please try. ;-)



The basic problem here is that an IP address is being mistaken as a person's identity. In your article you only list one example which illustrates why an IP address does not identify a person. There are countless other possibilities and they have been well documented. Atari's solicitors should be aware of that and I in my humble opinion it looks quite plausble that this is a case of a deliberate misrepresentation. I hope the Murdoch’s go after Atari and hit them hard.
As i know that the hundreds risk accusation of illegal file-sharing. In case of innocent bystanders being caught in the war between the entertainment industry and those who flout the law by illegally downloading games over the internet.
: psychochief:

im by ur side :)
The judicial system in the United States has long since used such tactics: throw someone in jail, threaten them with unbelievably long prison sentences, know they don't have money for a proper defense and then offer them a plea bargain (for example,only five years if they plead guilty rather than 55 if they go through the full court process).
Amazing how well this works even on obviously innocent persons.
Until the State changes there is no reason to think the corporations will.