Scottish file sharer faces the wrath of media firms and the law

A DEPRESSED NURSE has been threatened with a fine and prison after having been found guilty of sharing karaoke songs.

Controversial though karaoke is, at issue is the fact that she was using them 'illegally', according to a court ruling.

Police, acting on behalf of the BPI and IFPI, raided the home of Anne Muir, 58, in 2008 and found 30,000 files on her hard drive that unfortunately were being made available to others through a peer-to-peer (P2P) network.

Muir, who by all accounts suffers from depression, is the first person to be tried in this way in Scotland, and has faced the sort of treatment that Andrew Crossley of ACS:Law wanted, but failed, to rain down on individuals that were guilty of being associated with an IP address.

Crossley failed in his ambition, and he has also been censured this week. However while Muir faces a possible heavy fine and the threat of prison, the solicitor, who caused misery and confusion in thousands of households, was fined just £1,000 for exposing the details of individuals.

Perhaps the fine would have been higher if it had not been people's data that was at risk, but a soft cover of a pop song. We cannot say, but we can tell you that while nurses can be expected to pay large fines in Great Britain, the same rules do not apply to solicitors.

"The security measures ACS:Law had in place were barely fit for purpose in a person's home environment, let alone a business handling such sensitive detail," said the Information Commissioner before announcing his £1,000 fine and the reason for its low value.

"Were it not for the fact that ACS:Law has ceased trading so that Mr Crossley now has limited means, a monetary penalty of £200,000 would have been imposed, given the severity of the breach," said Christopher Graham to a loud chorus of virtual boos.

Poor Crossley, presumably, so where can the law professional and his music cartels find satisfaction? Well, in attacking a lone women guilty only of a karaoke obsession, which is something that has alarmed more sensitive and informed industry watchers.

This is a travesty. It clearly demonstrates that, when it comes to copyright infringement, "the officers of the court don't understand the law which they are attempting to apply, and are being wilfully misled in an suit clearly guided and controlled by industry interests," wrote Rob Harris, Pirate Party candidate for the West of Scotland today as he flamed the result.

"The Procurator Fiscal in question, Mirian Watson, has stated that the principal evidence used in the case was gathered by the BPI and IFPI, and described Mrs Muir's alleged file-sharing activities as 'tantamount to theft' - a fallacy heard far too often coming from officials who should know better."

Loz Kaye, leader of the party, added, "This case smacks of allowing the courts to be used as private company enforcers, and that fact should have been challenged by Mrs. Muir's lawyer. This is yet another example of the way that less well-off people are disadvantaged in the courts by being denied access to competent legal representation."

Muir will be sentenced at the end of May. µ