Yar har fiddle de de

being a pirate is alright to be

do what you want cause a pirate is free

you are a pirate!

*sings triumphantly whilst being led to the gallows*

:'(

Dauragon C. Mikado

@MR. FAP★FAP!:
File sharing doesn't work very well(at all) if everyone disables their uploads.

VishusBurn

Hmmm, shovelware for maybe 15 quid a piece (Lol, am I not generous here?)..

So wait, you mean that 400 people would have bought that? Zomg...

Wahrheit

@VishusBurn: How? That would be colossally difficult. Since it is already established that she was illegally sharing. Anyway, a single individual is going up against an american firm who probably have an arsenal of lawyers behind them.

harshalizee

@SSJ4_Macd: I think a few of us did, i whipped one in about 8:45

Dappa

This won't stop anything, soon even the most clueless file sharers will hide behind proxies and use peer guardian etc.

It would be interesting to know the eventual outcome of the 100 users that downloaded it. To see if this was just scare tactics or they really are going to take all and sundry to court over P2P activities?

YAaaaAARRGHHHhhhh MEEeeHAarties Its a pirates life for MEEeeeeeheehee!

Dappa

@MR. FAP★FAP!: Torrents are P2P. Also, you can't completely shut off the uploading in torrents. Anyway, if you need a decent download speed you need to upload generously, that's how torrents work.
On topic: WOW! That must be more than what the game would have ever made. Seriously who decided on that insane figure.

harshalizee

If I were her I would just go kamikaze on the jackasses attempting to use the legal system to rob her. The damage would be significant and would act as a deterrent. This would show that taking direct steps against extortionists is an important and effective weapon in the battle against abuse of the legal system legal.

VishusBurn

It'll probably come down on appeal/if a judge with any common sense notices that this is one of those games that appears every now and again in "The Sun" for free because no one ever buys these games...

creosote

@MR. FAP★FAP!: Torrents are P2P

Anyway, while the woman obviously shouldn't have been pirating, this is the wrong way for the developer/publisher to handle piracy :(

Struct09

@MR. FAP★FAP!:

Aren't torrents peer-to-peer?

Heliophage

@MR. FAP★FAP!: Torrents are a form of P2P

Arnold Rimmer's Garden Strimmer

Kotaku: If some kind of an assistance fund gets set up for people to donate to her, please let us know. I don't support piracy, but she simply doesn't deserve this. If we can lessen this ridiculously disproportionate burden somehow, I would like to do it.

frostcircus

MR. FAP★FAP'S PROTIP:
Remember, it's illegal to upload files, but it is technically NOT illegal to download, since at least so far, these big corporations have no right to snoop around your private property!
So when going on a P2P network, always disable sharing!

Also, P2P sucks, anyway. Torrents, people! Torrents!

MR. FAP★FAP!

@SSJ4_Macd: GAH. Fixing!

Brian Ashcraft

I know how to torrent with style.

Ryumeka

Good job she didn't pirate a good game then.

DUFFKING

OMG somebody actually got caught how many people actually would download a pinball game of all things? Probably more than would buy it

Blazinfire0

They're just cranky because nobody actually bought that game.

4Degrees

I would boycott Topware Interactive for this if there was any chance I would buy one of their games in the first place.

The only games they have that I've even heard of are the "X-blade" game they keep showing here and an X-Com clone.

krisnomicon

Wow. Heard this on the radio this morning, and didnt believe my ears. Of all the games to get caught with, they got caught with "Some Shitty Pinball Game." Damn.

PaddyStardust

What about people that use torrents for this kind of stuff? Technically, aren't they all uploading it?

Wizzard

I like how they figured that 56p would be needed on top of the £16,086.

Numanoid

The woman must pay damages of £6,086.56 and costs and disbursements of ¥10,000." Wow tahts mean making her pay it 2 currenceys :P

And wait did i tip you guys off to this at 8am(ish) british time

SSJ4_Macd

It doesn't make it completely clear, but I think it was for the fact that the woman was uploading, instead of just downloading. Those who start torrents/filesharing seem more likely to get prosecuted.

d_unique

That must have been at least 15 times what the game cost to make...Biggest pay day ever for Topware

Arnold Rimmer's Garden Strimmer

I remember reading about this group. The law firm working on this pulled extremely questionable acts in mainland Europe, chasing down people who they claimed were illegally sharing certain games. The funny thing is, half the time they didn't bother checking their facts, and basically sent out threatening letters demanding an immediate settlement to people that weren't even involved.

Once they screwed up enough, they moved their act to Britain. Nice to see legalese scum always survive somewhere.

zebber

Holy crap.

JFAN13

Awesome. Don't go after the people are sharing thousands of MP3's, or movies, or games. Go after one lady, who shared a pinball game. The settlement is for more than the game ever made money wise.

ChimDeathmonkey

I miss being a kid when it all seemed so innocent. One friend would buy the game and we'd have almost as much fun trying to figure out how to get each other copies so we could all play it together. If we hadn't done that, we'd just take turns sharing titles we bought.

Some games though... some games we each wanted to own our own copies of.

[gasp!]

While I don't condone the act, I do think companies overestimate the damages actually incurred. Much illegal sharing occurs simply because it can. Without the sharing, many people just won't bother at all. And sometimes, there's no other way to find materials as publishing still has a long way to go before it catches up with free distribution of this sort.

Either way, attacking consumers for something so wide-spread, even if it is illegal, seems a pretty poor approach to eliciting change in their behavior. Other mechanisms like raising the price of titles to offset the costs of piracy just promote piracy itself by punishing legal purchasers.

Besides... is $30k even paying for the lawyers? And has all the effort to stop game piracy over the last 20 years actually improved anything?

I dunno... just seems high time to take a step back and try to come up with a new approach when none of the old negative reinforcement tactics are working.

dv8godd

I downloaded that game. It was shit. I deleted it.

vincevl

Yiegad, did you just change the title from GBP to USD? Afraid that USA readers would have problems doing conversion or what?

Barts

@SSJ4_Macd: Qoute from the article:
"The High Court in London has ordered internet service providers (ISPs) to release several thousand names and addresses of suspected file sharers, the firm said.

The most recent case followed a Government-brokered deal between the UK's music and film industries and ISPs to tackle illegal file-sharing. "

Now you know.Probably, her ISP sold her out.Just wow.

harshalizee

lol @ all the self-righteous anti-pirates
seriously, get off your high horse

Omegasoap

@harshalizee: It may be i still feel that the only way the company knew it was her uploading this was if they garnered that information via a) the ISP which altough the provide the service i do not feel they have the right to view what i am sending/uploading (imagine the outcry if the mail service did this) i what is tantamount to invation of privacy or b) they d/l it themselves from her and traced her which i am a bit doubious of (again not sure on the legality of that)

SSJ4_Macd

I believe a part of the reason for such a high sum is to scare the other would-be downloaders. It's like hanging one person as a warning to the others.

The sad thing is that most casual gamers(those who would play a pinball game like this and not much more) are less aware of the repercussions than those who are into it all.

Personally I hope they drop the charges since the sum is outrageous in my opinion.

PixelRambo

Well it's good to see pirates getting punished for illegally copying stuff. Hopefully more will get catched soon.

Llost

really she should only have to pay the retail price of her copy and anybody's copies she uploaded, maybe double it at most.

That's just ridiculous

JellyDoodle

I am all for the fine. If you know somethings illegal, DON'T DO IT!

Acebuckeye13

@harshalizee: Sorry never read the article linked read it on teh bbc website this morning about 6 hours ago every detail not so fresh in my mind..but now i know and in this case it would seem knowing is not half the battle :(

SSJ4_Macd

Are you kidding me? They got $30K from one person, for uploading a PINBALL game? And one which wasn't very good at that?

Does this judge even realise how much a game like that would make on average? Pinball games are niche. If they made $30K in profit on a game like that they could consider it a success.

Elliuotatar

@baysideSxoc: I didn't see anything on this article about them asking for three hundred pounds to avoid the legal procedures within the article. I even reread it a few more times after you mentioned this. If that is true, then the woman was stupid and should have settled.

However, I think that the fee is ridiculous. That much for a pinball game seems a bit ridiculous. While admittedly I think that pirating isn't helpful to the industry and of course isn't legal stunts like this aren't winning the industry any points. Why can't they make the fees within reason to what is stolen? This is just strong arming people. Yes, she was wrong, but was she that wrong to deserve that large of a payout? Seems unlikely to me.

Dullshimmer

We need more seeders!

Quicksilver4648

ha,haaaaaaahahahahaaaaa...ah...:(
*cancels torrent d/ls*

Naif

Oh yeah, the hacker community is going to be so pissed to see one of their most proeminent member go away like this

Ragarnok

@proust: What? It's called a punishment you idiot. She broke the law, stopped the company from getting money from those that chose to illegally download it rather than just buy it and ofcourse put it on a torrent so they have to go through the trouble of taking it off of there (not sure how hard that is) just because she wanted to copy a pinball game for those who can't be bothered to play. It's a punishment so she got a tough one, nothing wrong with that.

Llost

@baysideSxoc:

Sorry information missing from that article. BBC article gives more details. Such as the £300 promise.

baysideSxoc

This is totally right. Read the article and you'll see they sent a letter asking for £300 with a promise of no further legal action. This woman refused, then was found guilty when she fought it and now has to pay more.

She should of taken the £300 fine and learnt the error of her ways! Pirates deserve all they get after the feeble excuses given in the 'why people pirate' discussion. I think the warning fine before is good will guesture they needen't have to make. It's less harsh than jumping in with the fine straight away.

baysideSxoc

Poor woman. Depressing how inhuman people have become.

proust

@VishusBurn: Yeah why not? It's not fair in the sense that she's totally proportionally punished for the exact degree of downloads taken and cash lost etc. but it's a punishment to deter people from breaking the law, the courts are trying to manage the crimes of a country, it's not like when a kid is bad and you can just give them a slap on the wrist.

She broke the law and she's getting punished for it, unless she's getting a lifetime in jail I don't care about the severity.

Llost

@Llost:
So you actually believe that it's fair to make her pay $30,000 in "damages" because someone downloaded a pinball game off of the internet using an internet connection in her name?

What kind of fucked up moral compass do you navigate by?

VishusBurn

If my understanding is correct, the reason a fine such as this is so high is to compensate topware for all future loss of profit due to this file being shared. Therefore if I were to re-upload this game again, surely as the publisher has already been compensated for future loss of profit it would be unfair for topware to be compensated twice for lost profit. It would seem fair that the maximum punishment I should face is a part of the original fine. Which of course would render it uneconomic for companies to peruse this beyond the initial claim because it would only benefit the original uploader and of course the lawyers.

I can appreciate that the high fine may be intended to scare off future people from file-sharing, rather than compensating the ip holder. However in all honesty is the judge naive enough to believe that it will have the intended effect?

Finally, and maybe its just me here, but it bugs me when the lawyers costs are greater than the damages awarded to the victim. It would seem fairer that the lawyers should be paid a portion of the payout. It just seems wrong to me that the lawyers should benefit more from a case than the victim of a crime.

Knasher

@Heliophage, Struct09, harshalizee:
Not really. Technically they fall under the same umbrella, but torrents are usually considered a whole different beast compared to, say, a service like KaZaa or LimeWire, etc.
When someone writes "P2P", it's generally assumed that they're referring to actual P2P file sharing clients like things on the Gnutella network or whatever.
...at least that's the way it used to be. And Google still agrees with me!

MR. FAP★FAP!

@Llost:
So do you think it would be fair to have you car seized by the government for running a stop sign? Should we break peoples knee caps for J-walking?
Should we put peoples dog to sleep if the owners fail to pick up the droppings?

Lets just start making examples out of everybody, eh?

Punishments should fit the crime.

VishusBurn

@Llost: Glad you aren't a judge.

wicko

@VishusBurn: One that spells caught, catched.

wicko

@MR. FAP★FAP!:
Actually Bittorrent is by definition a P2P file sharing protocol.
It's just not the same P2P protocol that's used by programs like kazza, napster, bearshare, ect..

VishusBurn

She may not have competent lawyers at her side. Just appeal and take it to a higher court. Right? I know nothing, but i believe she can try that.
It's a ridiculous price to pay for a game like that. Where are the Crytek lawsuits?

hoezee

"Miss Chokesondick - more like Miss Makes-me-sick! Hahaha!"

Sorry, but South Park was the only thing I could think of.

amazinglarry

Awesome.

Imagine spending a few months working on a game, and find out people are giving away free copies. You wouldn't be a little upset?

It's true that you gotta love gaming to be in the industry, but they gotta make some money.

I'm guessing this woman wasn't some criminal mastermind, but what she was doing was illegal, and she was unfortunate enough to get caught.

@VishusBurn: Ah, so because it's relatively easy to commit software piracy, that means the punishment should be less harsh?

balls187 upside yo head

@wicko: Well you should only be glad if you're either a criminal or a supporter of criminals.

@VishusBurn: Not really, that's a completely innapropriate punishment since no monetary damage was caused. If you crashed and damaged other stuff and maybe another persons car then I would. J-walking isn't really a problem though, it doesn't harm anyone but the actual jay walker so I'd most likely give them a small fine or something.

Not everyone but you've got to consider the circumstances, just as they said the internet is having an increasing level of illegal downloads so they're trying to create a deterrant. Unfortunate for her but I couldn't care.

And I believe it pretty much does, it's got a little bigger a fine than necessary but you break the law and you get punished.

Llost

Tilt!

Cus

@MR. FAP★FAP!: Sorry, but you're wrong. Peer 2 Peer is a form of network topology: your computer is directly connected to other computers in the network (aka peers), opposed to Client-Server topology, where your computer is connected to a server that handles network requests.

Torrents are Peer2Peer, but much less centralized like services such as gnutella or edonkey, etc.

balls187 upside yo head

@Llost:
First off; Practically everyone is a criminal if you look hard enough.
BTW, who's that in your sig? Did you obtain permission by the owner of that intellectual property to upload it all over the internet? You pirate criminal you.

Secondly; while downloading media protected by copyright laws may currently be considered illegal, it is in no way an actually "monetary damage".
It is a potential loss of a potential sale cannot be considered an actual monetary loss. Nothing was taken. Nothing was lost.

@balls187 upside yo head:
No I'm saying that she shouldn't be unfairly punished simply because because the legal system hasn't caught up with technology.

VishusBurn

Fighting women and kids since ...

Mayu-mayu

I'd be surprised if they spent 29,000 making that junk.

polarenvy

@VishusBurn: It's sasuke, he's a character and your allowed to do fanart of characters. I didn't ask the artist to do it but I doubt she/he asked kishimito (the real artist). There's a difference between stealing commercial products and using a picture you found on the internet. I agree with being subjective and fair but I'm just a little tougher on criminals than you'd be.

it did cause potential monetary damage since those who downloaded it off of her could then not purchase it. It's the same as how PC game sales and anime sales are lower when people just download, stream or rip the anime/games from illegal sites. An illegal copy of a product to be sold was passed along for free. If I copied DVD's and sold them for £1 outside shops I'd be lowering there sales.

Llost

+ Watch video

VishusBurn

@polarenvy:
Actually you would be surprised at the amount of work that goes into game even as simple as this.
Read this here Kotaku article from a while back about the average pay rates for various positions in the game development process.

In any case; seeking $30,000 against an individual for downloading a $30 game is ridicules.

VishusBurn

@VishusBurn: See, that's one of the reasons I'm against software piracy. Not because of morals (though I do have moral qualms about doing it myself). In addition to wanting to support companies who make games I want, I am FRIGHTENED to think of what'll happen when government is just enough in touch to come up with a legal solution. I get the feeling this is going to be resolved in a manner that neither you nor I care for.

RawSteelUT

@RawSteelUT:
I for one have faith in humanity and that with proper education about licensing to the public and a more open rapport between developers and consumers; the situation can reach a balance so that developers can always recoup their development costs and turn a profit, while consumers will always pay a fare price for software that they desire.

VishusBurn

@Llost:
"it did cause potential monetary damage since those who downloaded it off of her could then not purchase it."

Downloading a piece of media does not prevent an individuals ability to an purchase official license. It may influence their decision though, sometimes for the better.

"illegal sites" FYI, Torrent sites like this aren't illegal in any way.

"If I copied DVD's and sold them for £1 outside shops I'd be lowering there sales." If the people that you were selling them to were under the impression that they were purchasing actual licensed copies of the media contained on those DVD's then I would agree.
Other wise I would say it's up to those individuals to decide for themselves if they wanted to purchase an official license of not. Granted the availability that you provide might help motive them into watching a unofficial copy; that availability is ever present. Any PC in the world with an internet connection can be made to download unofficially distributed media in the time it takes to smoke a cigarette.
At the end of the day the decision to pay for the development of software/media lies with every individual who would choose to use it.

VishusBurn

@Llost: No, its a matter of your sense of judgement. Sounds like you'd be an advocate of the Death Penalty.

wicko

Nice!

robinandtami

whooo yeah! lets bring on the "justice"! whoo...oh wait...this is bullshit.

demonknightinuyasha

lol of all games to be sued for pirating.

maraxusofk

Sharing is caring! However, whenever file sharing with multiple anonymous partners always use a proxy and peer guardian to reduce the odds of digitally transmitted lawsuits.

RonJeremy4Pres

@VishusBurn: So your pretty much saying it's okay to sell illegal stuff? Are you a bootleg DVD seller yourself cos you do seem to justify people breaking laws it seems. 'Other wise I would say it's up to those individuals to decide for themselves if they wanted to purchase an official license of not.'. Assuming you were making the laws you'd just let everyone copy anything and mess up the industries of the world it sounds.

'At the end of the day the decision to pay for the development of software/media lies with every individual who would choose to use it.'
It is there choice but it shouldn't be. I don't care if your some saddo who can't afford to buy everything you want so you feel justified in illegally downloading stuff, that doesn't make it right. Saying they might buy the stuff legally after downloading it is the same logic as me saying they might not buy it legally because they have downloaded an illegal copy. So in the end if I trust your own logic I have to believe it'll lower there sales which was the problem and why she was punished harshly so that's that.

Llost

@wicko: Er yeah..... I am. So what?

Llost

@Llost: "It's sasuke, he's a character and your allowed to do fanart of characters. I didn't ask the artist to do it but I doubt she/he asked kishimito (the real artist). There's a difference between stealing commercial products and using a picture you found on the internet."

Wrong, wrong and wrong.

Just because you "found" the image on the internet doesn't give you the right to freely distribute it, just as hearing a song on the radio doesn't give you the right to freely distribute the song. That's why image selling web sites watermark even their thumbnails, to prevent piracy. But just because a site doesn't watermark their images doesn't mean they are free for you to use.

Try building a website using images from disney.go.com and see how long it takes to get a cease-and-desist notice.

Calling it "fanart" doesn't give it a pass around copyright law. While most artists and companies don't pursue it (and sometimes encourage it) the truth is that they could, if they wanted to, take legal action against people who create likenesses of their intellectual properties without permission. There is a "fair use" law which covers parody, cartoons, satire and whatnot but it's a fuzzy law so unless it becomes a question of the First Amendment the people with the most money tend to win (in America anyway).

And yeah, 30,000 for that game is just going to make people angry, not scared. They really couldn't find someone sharing Crysis? I think they're trying to scare the casual people away from file sharing, before it becomes endemic, and are leaving the Big Fish (Pirate Bay etc. etc.) for later. I think they're too late, just like the RIAA is too late to stop MP3 sharing.

Zazu_Yen

29,000$ is a bit out-of-this-world but I'm all for fining people sums like 1,2 or 3k$ for offenses like this and upwards of 100k$ for people actually profiting from the sale of counterfeited/copied copyrighted material.

I guess the law system isn't made for smaller fines but if the sword of damocles was always hanging over your head that you may be hit with a 2k$ fine (because hey, you even know someone who was) then maybe we wouldn't have such a problem with P2P software.

The real problem is that the government refuses to make a law that bans peer-to-peer networks. The ONLY thing you find on peer-to-peer is pirated stuff. that`s all they were ever meant to do.

So until someone makes them illegual we won't see any improvement.

interstate78

@Zazu_Yen: I never said I wasn't illegally taking it, my point was that this is an almost useless law. Unless I'm profiteering from the picture then it's hardly a problem. Who is this all glory needing artist that will need compensation if they're not credited? I know it's not right to take the picture but in the end it's insignificant. Compare that to making a copy of a product people have put lots of money and man power into which will lose money because you illegally sell it and give it away for free for absolutely no reason with no care for that company possibly going bankrupt as a result and you've got a pointless argument. It's no comparison. Why you can stand here and lecture me on a picture while promoting illegal copying which destroys industries and the creators of the content while my picture 'distribution' (not really distributing it) harms no one.

Llost

@Llost:
Actually you are distributing on every machine that loads a webpage that you comment on. For me to be able to see it; it has to have been downloaded in one way or another to my machine like every other element on a webpage.

The fact is that by choosing to upload a picture that is copyrighted(not actually sure if it is or not; I haven't looked) you would be breaking the same laws that you are condemning this woman for.

There once was a time, not all that long ago actually, that transferring music over the internet was unpractical and video was unthinkable (especially streaming).
During this time pictures were the focal point for legal control and that harmless little picture could have ended you up in thousands of dollars in legal debt.
Just to put things in perspective.

VishusBurn

@VishusBurn: Unless you buy absolutely everything you enjoy then I don't care how much you spend. I don't mind people fairly going around the law slightly (like just testing stuff to see if they like it) but when you just download anything and miss buying half of it then it's just taking it without paying for it. It's nice to have hindsight but just because it's nice doesn't mean it's right.

Anyway we know eachothers opinions so that's that. I'm just accepting of harsh punishments on crime because I want to see it actually lowered.

Llost

@Llost:
Make whatever conclusions you wish. I've stated my opinions about idealist consumer rights and I won't repeat myself.

Keep in mind that while I do choose to download anything that so peeks my interest, I also choose to spend around $300 a month on various movies that I've already seen, games that I've usually have already played, and music that I've already heard simply to support the people who created it and I never regret any of my purchases because I know exactly what I'm getting before I even open the package.

VishusBurn

wow thats a harsh price to pay for some crappy low budget game.

kenjara

Sucks to be her.

Someone link the charity pot when/if it's created.

Oh, and legal fees for file sharing cases and the like should have a set maximum you can be charged.

The maximum wouldn't be 30k u.s. dollars either.

Narb

@Zazu_Yen: great post.

U win der interweb biscuits

:)

Onizuka-GTO

Seems fair to me. It's not like she didn't know she was breaking the law. We need more people to follow the law.

Dalren

@Llost: "Why you can stand here and lecture me on a picture while promoting illegal copying which destroys industries and the creators of the content while my picture 'distribution' (not really distributing it) harms no one."

Putting aside your argument of "my breaking the law is better than your braking the law" I don't remember promoting illegal copying. I remember stating that its a fact, and it's too late to try and put that particular cat back in the bag, but I certainly didn't say pirating is acceptable way of obtaining goods.

I work in the software industry, I've worked on games that have been pirated. I've downloaded pirated copies of my own work! It's convenient to keep them on the terabyte archive and leave the CD's in a box in the garage. If I were to spend another year of my life working on a game would I distribute it freely? Hell no! I'd go with digital distribution and make it Hell to crack. I fully believe in people getting payed for there hard work, I enjoy making a living programming for that fact.

If the pirates ever truly won no one would make games, they couldn't afford to. They'd have to go out and get real jobs with living wages and reasonable work hours. The horror!

"I'm just accepting of harsh punishments on crime because I want to see it actually lowered."

Right, like how the RIAAs outrageous lawsuit against a Bronx social worker (Elektra V. Barker) put a dent in MP3 sharing. It didn't.

|_| ---> =^..^=
bag ---> cat

It's too late. But the music industry (with more than a little help) is finding a solution, make the finding and buying of music people like easy, convenient and reasonably priced. I hear a song I like and I can go to iTunes, buy it for less than a dollar and have it on my iPod in less than 5 minutes. Much faster and easier and with a guaranteed quality higher than I could expect with Kazaa. Hmmm, there might be a lesson there.

@Onizuka-GTO: mmmm, biscuits!

Zazu_Yen

@Zazu_Yen:
"If the pirates ever truly won no one would make games, they couldn't afford to. They'd have to go out and get real jobs with living wages and reasonable work hours. The horror!"
Did you seriously just say making games isn't a real job? Are you seriously that stupid?

Dalren

@RawSteelUT: I'm just terrified that that there's a good portion of an entire generation who think it's okay to download anything they can get away with.

Jonn

@Dullshimmer:

yeah sorry it was in the BBC article over the same case. The one listed here doesn't give all the details.

baysideSxoc

@Dalren: "Did you seriously just say making games isn't a real job? Are you seriously that stupid?"

Are you seriously that immune to sarcasm? Did I not say I write software for a living and that making games is part of what I do? Seriously?

Zazu_Yen

@VishusBurn: Well I'll pay him/her back the £0 of stolen pictures people somewhat technically downloaded then. Since the picture wasn't on sale and was on a site not from the artist (so impossible to tell if it was meant to be free to everyone or not) it's hard to say I took it without permission since I couldn't ask for permission.

Yeah and if the law took a firm stance on the picture front I'd probably avoid saving these pics too.

Llost

@Zazu_Yen: If you can show how my picture being on the internet caused real life damages that should be compensated to the artist then I'll agree with you. I'm not saying it's okay to have this picture, ethically it's wrong but it's such an insignificant thing that harms no one that there can't be a proper complaint levelled at it. It's like trying to stop a child from wearing a shirt that only has a sticker of the nike logo, it's wrong but who's going to literally pull the sticker off and tell nike to sue the kid? No one because it's so insignificant no one cares. Illegally downloading DVD's and games does destroy industries so creating harsh punishments AND catching more perpetrators stops it from occuring as much. I can't help if they don't try and go for more people but I do support harsh punishments. AS a software developer yourself surely you understand why it's necessary to deter this kind of freely available to illegally download style of using the internet. I watch anime where the industry is practically on the rocks just because most people would rather freely download it than buy a copy of a fairly priced DVD. I have friends who will buy consoles they barely use, exercise equipment they stop using after a month etc. but won't pay for a £30 or £40 boxset of 26 episodes. I'd rather be on the side of the companies when it comes to this. It's stupid to be on any other side since that's what got us in this whole pirating mess in the first place.

Llost