Media Centre
Fraud Updates
PCB News
Fraud Updates 2005
21 April
It has recently been reported that the British Phonographic Industry (BPI) has succeeded in obtaining a Court Order compelling Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to reveal the identity of 33 file-sharers. The file-sharers are alleged to have uploaded more than 72,000 copyrighted music files on to the internet.
The BPI has also revealed further details about file-sharers targeted by previous legal actions. Around a third of the file sharers were parents whose computers had been used by their children. The illegal downloading of copyrighted music may have cost the British music industry more than £650m over the past 2 years, according to research commissioned by the BPI.
The BPI court order demonstrates the potential of the use of orders and injunctions against third parties to obtain information about fraudsters. It is possible to obtain a Court order forcing a third party to provide details about the identity of a fraudster. In addition, the Court can require a bank to provide all information relating to a fraudster's account including bank statements and money transfers.
13 April
It has recently been reported that the British Phonographic Industry (BPI) will be commencing legal proceedings against 33 file-sharers as part of its strategy to reduce the downloading of copyrighted music. The BPI has already commenced action against 57 UK file-swappers and recovered more than £50,000 in damages.
The BPI move forms part of a wave of new legal actions aimed at almost 1000 individuals in 11 countries. The actions target major "uploaders", file-sharers who place thousands of songs on to the internet without the consent of the owners of the copyright. The strategy of targeting uploaders appears to be having some success. The number of music files downloaded in Germany fell by 35% in 2005.
The BPI cases demonstrate the potential of the use of strategic litigation to fight fraud and breach of copyright. By using targeted litigation, it may be possible to attack fraudsters, recover losses and provide a deterrent to anybody considering similar crimes. For example, a freezing order may not only assist in the recovery of losses but may also discourage other potential fraudsters.
| June 2005 | March 2005 |