London Lawyers Demand £600 For One Game

Barence writes "A PC Pro reader has received a demand for a £600 out-of-court settlement from lawyers claiming to have forensic evidence that he illegally downloaded a PC game on BitTorrent. The law firm, Davenport Lyons, is acting on the behalf of German games distributor Zuxxez, creator of the game in question, Two Worlds. The PC Pro reader was given no prior warning to stop file sharing, unlike the usual 'three strikes and you're out' approach adopted by the music industry. The reader says, 'To add insult to injury it [Davenport Lyons] didn't pay enough postage on the letter and I had to collect it from the sorting office at a cost of £1.30. This also used up most of the two weeks that it allowed for a response.'"

Failure on Postage?

[autocracy]

I would call that horribly ineffective service. I hope the court would agree. You should never pay to know you're sued ;)

Here's your warning:

[TheVelvetFlamebait]

Don't do it. Don't engage in the illegal sharing of copyrighted materials. No joke, no troll. It's an expensive offence to commit, due to its often exponential growth in damages, and most people can't afford it. If you can't afford the thousands it takes to settle these cases, then just stop doing it right now. Go on. If you "need" a game, have a look at some of the free (in either sense) games floating around on the internet, or buy some quality second-hand, or older, cheap, but still very good games at your local games store. It's going to be a helluva lot cheaper than paying any settlement, believe me.

Re:Slashdot.co.uk?

[MagdJTK]

Who modded the parent informative?

As of one minute ago, 600GBP = 1173.03USD.

As an Englishman, I also ought to point out that we seem to manage dividing by two when we see prices in dollars, so I don't see why Americans need to moan when the occasional thing is priced in Sterling.

Re:Here's your warning:

[diskofish]

If you read the article, the reader claims he never downloaded the game in the first place, nor can he find an evidence of it.

Re:Here's your warning:

[Anonymous Coward]

Unfortunately, that won't be enough.

Do not make the mistake of assuming that someone's guilty just because they receive a letter from a lawyer. The guy hasn't even been sued yet - not that it would be evidence of his guilt if he were, of course, since as we all know, even homeless people who have never owned a computer at all have been dragged into court over alleged illegal distribution of music.

At the same time, this also shows that even when you don't do anything illegal, you won't be safe from litigation. You can share only legal material on edonkey or whatever, and you may still get SLAPPed with a lawsuit. For that matter, you don't even need to run edonkey or anything. Actually, for that matter, you don't even need a computer. You don't even need a place where you live.

No matter what you do and don't do, you could be the next target, and apparently, merely being targetted is enough for some people to consider you guilty.

Re:Slashdot.co.uk?

[jonbryce]

And Americans tend to swap the currency signs when pricing things for sale over here ...

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Tell them this

[tompaulco]

If you don't think it is worth the money, you just don't buy it. You don't obtain it illegally. I don't think Ferraris are worth the money either, but I can't just go take one from the dealership or someone else that has one. I know we're not supposed to compare physical objects when discussing music, but this is software and comes in a box when purchased legitimately.

Re:Here's your warning:

[Rhapsody Scarlet]

Earlier today I was looking at albums by a certain duo (who will remain anonymous here, it's not relevant to the post) and ended up flabbergasted by the prices. £15-20 each! If I wanted all ten that are available, I'd be talking £150-200, which is easily my entire bank account right now. But within minutes on a torrent search engine, I found all ten in a single torrent with some seeders online. What the hell do you expect me to do?

I want to support them, I really do, and I'll probably buy whichever album ends up being my favourite, but it took me less than two seconds to decide I couldn't square up the price to what I'm getting. I'm looking at a fair stack of anime and manga right now, and I could get the whole fucking lot for £200 with enough change left to get that digital camera I've wanted for a while now. Why is the music so god-damned expensive? They may say it's because of the piracy, but that gets them in a classic catch-22. I'm pirating it because I looked at the price, said "Fuck that" and resorted to BitTorrent where I can get the lot for free! With that kind of competition, there is only one solution: Lower prices.

Re:Slashdot.co.uk?

[TheVelvetFlamebait]

Because anybody who thinks that something intangible is "property" has shit for brains.

Like, for example, your bank balance? Well, if you don't think you own it, I guess you wouldn't mind me using it every now and again.

Or maybe you have shit for brains (what would I know?).

So?

[Hythlodaeus]

What, aside from the lol forgot stamps bit, is the point of this story. Guy infringes copyright, gets sued. So? Are we supposed to be conditioned to find every case of copyright enforcement to be outrageous?

Re:Dont forget to recycle that paper!

[bamwham]

Exactly what I would do. If the letter wasn't certified and didn't clearly arrive with ample assurance that I would have to receive it, I'd just recycle it. Maybe I'd call up one of my friends who went to law school, but only if we had something else to talk about anyway.

OTH it might be amusing to send them a bill for the balance on the postage. I never would pay to receive a letter.

This thing was sent from one country to another, anyone who has sent important documents to another country knows you send them by private carrier not the gdam government service. More so if there is a deadline involved.

Re:Here's your warning:

[radish]

So because you can't afford something it's OK to not pay for it? Try explaining that to your local supermarket. You know what I do when I can't afford something? I live without it.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Here's your warning:

[Nimey]

Would the defendant admit wrongdoing, though?

Re:Here's your warning:

[jedidiah]

In order to take something from the local green grocer I have to DEPRIVE HIM OF IT.

I don't have to do that with the latest PC game.

Might give the studio owner an ulcer because his sense of control is offended but that's about it...

Re:Tell them this

[CogDissident]

Additionally: Many times the demo is fake, or a misrepresentation of the game's quality. For the best example of this, play Dungeon Lords (or better yet, don't. Also don't buy Dungeon Lords 2). They finished exactly as much content in the game as was in the first dungeon+town. Later towns lacked anything except a random structure with a NPC in it, and at least two times during the story the player had to enable no-clip to proceed due to unfinished parts of the game.

Re:Failure on Postage?

[n7ytd]

I wonder... is the fact that they can now prove he received the letter the reason that it was sent postage due? Is this the el-cheapo way to prove receipt without paying for certified/registered delivery?

Re:Failure on Postage?

[jamstar7]

Um, no...

RIAA is suing a guy who's homeless. Where do you hook up a computer in a cardboard box?

Another link...

[JaJ_D]

From: - http://virtuallawatlse.blogspot.com/2007/03/davenport-lyons-pursues-500-file.html [blogspot.com]
and
http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2007/03/28/uk_share_hunt/ [reghardware.co.uk]

The interesting bit is "In relation to your claim that your computer was hacked into, we regret that the security of your computer is not our concern. It is your responsibility to ensure that your computer is protected at all times."

WTF!! Does that mean if someone is stabbed on the street then it's the victims fault that (s)he wasn't wearing a stab-proof vest? Or do we sue car manufactorers for making cars that can go faster than the national speed limits (aiding and abeting a crime)? Or if someone steals your credit cards and uses them then it's your fault for not keeping them secure?!!??

Where do you draw the line?

Jaj

Re:Tell them this

[NeutronCowboy]

The reason you're not supposed to compare physical objects and digital objects is that they're nothing alike. It's like comparing a Ferrari and a dodo to figure out how mass transportation ought to work. It's complete nonsense.

Re:Slashdot.co.uk?

[mrchaotica]

No, your argument is bullshit.

Just because you can create an opinion doesn't make it so. Property is a social contract in ANY sense of the word.

On the contrary, property is the natural consequence of the physical fact that two people can't use the same tangible artifact at the same time. This is exactly the opposite of so-called "intellectual property," which not only naturally duplicates itself and is almost impossible to prevent from duplicating itself, but also only becomes valuable as a consequence of the duplication itself! (For example, would Shakespeare's plays have had any value whatsoever if he had never communicated them to anybody else? No!)

In other words, real property is based on, and compatible with, physical reality. "Intellectual property" is based on lawyers' imaginations and is incompatible with physical reality.

Re:Here's your warning:

[NeutronCowboy]

50% of the drive towards hard-core DRM is the removal of the 2nd-hand market.

Piracy is a drop in the bucket compared to the legal 2nd hand market. Gamestop's percentage of revenue from used products was 32% last year, with 44% of its overall profit coming from there.

Publishers would love to get their hands on that market - even if it is not the same market as the new market.

Re:Hmm

[blueg3]

Actually, all standard computer forensics software support ext2/3, at least, and every forensic examiner I've met could tell you if the subject was running Windows or a Unix.

Never mind that using "rm" to delete all of the downloaded files has bought you almost zero protection.

Re:Slashdot.co.uk?

[Moridineas]

Ahh, a textualist and originalist--you must be a huge fan of Justices Thomas and Scalia and despise Souter, Breyer, Ginsburg, etc?

However, I don't think your analysis is correct. The copyright clause is, as you cite, part of section 8. Section 8 enumerates the powers of congress. The text you managed to find (the copyright clause) clearly allows congress to "Secure for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries." There is very little to interpret in that part of the clause, it's clear.

On the other hand "To promote the progress of science and useful arts" is up for much greater interpretation. How exactly does one promote the progress? You and I might have very different ideas about how to do this. Congress might have other ideas. Congress has the clearly enumerated mandate to do so, and the way to do so.

So what exactly is unconstitutional?

Re:Slashdot.co.uk?

[Anonymous Coward]

the only thing that belongs to any of us are our thoughts.

as long as you keep them to yourself. but once you release those thoughts to the wild (so to speak) in the form of words, or music, or art, they CEASE TO BE YOURS.

there's nothing social or contractual about it, that's just a fact of nature. you don't own those thoughts any more than the sun owns the light it emits. once those things are out there, you can't call them back, any more than the sun can call back its light.

if you value your ideas so much that you don't want anyone else to use them, then keep them to yourself where they'll be safe.

Re:Self serving much?

[Feanturi]

Umm, standing up for the law is one thing, but you seem quite convinced the guy did what they claim, when none of the so-called "evidence" has been provided to the public. This is why we argue about such things, because if we didn't, people like you would have most of the planet in jail based on the possibility they may have done something without any proof.

Re:Here's your warning:

[wootcat]

You are depriving the game studio of the compensation for that PC game. Yes, thousands of others ponied up the cash to buy the game, but why should it be them and not you who helps pay for the work that went into producing that title?

Re:Failure on Postage?

[Tacvek]

A similar trick I've personally seen used for a sheriff's sale, where a member of that sheriff's department wanted to ensure that he would be the only bidder present, and that the owner would be unable to redeem his property: Legal notice of sale has to be posted in a public place. So... the legal notice was posted on a building at the fairgrounds. Which are technically "public" but in fact were locked and inaccessable for the whole notification period.

I'm pretty sure that in those cases any interested party could get the sale reversed as invalid under an equity ruling. The posting may meet the legal requirements, but the posting alone does not make the sale valid. Rather the lack of posting makes the sale invalid. The sale could be contested on the point of not being a public sale, as the public was not capable of being aware of the sale. The notice being posted may however prevent the ability to receive damages beyond the injunction forcing the re-sale.

Re:Failure on Postage?

[Forum-Matter]

Lack of sufficient postage was not an oversight - it was a strategic move. By paying for the delivery, proof of receipt is not in question. Sons of bastages!

Re:Slashdot.co.uk?

[Red Flayer]

Why do you limit yourself to one valid basis for the social contract of property rights?

The problem with your logic is that it presumes that for intellectual property to exist, it MUST mirror real property; and that because the foundation of the concept does not mirror, it invalidates the concept of IP.

There is no logical reason (though there are philosophical ones) why we can't have an IP social contract in addition to a RP social contract; furthermore, we can say that due to the fundamental differences between RP & IP, the social contracts should be different (and guess what, they are!). The concepts can be parallel without being equal, and this removes the constaint of needing equivalent bases.

Also, property is not defined by the fact that only one person can utilize it at the same time. Otherwise there would be no concept of ownership in absentia. If you own land in Montana, but reside in New York... do I have every right to use your land in Montana, since I am not depriving you of the use of that land?