Mother Who Banned File-Sharing Still Held Responsible

[p2p rules]

A mother who doesn’t understand computers and forbade her children from downloading and sharing music on the Internet has been held responsible for their actions. A court in Germany ruled that parents simply banning file-sharing is not enough, and this has to be followed up to check compliance.

This court case was about recovering the legal costs for bringing the copyright claim, which are calculated based on the value of the alleged infringements. The claim was for 1,000 violations at 50 euros per track (a value set by the court) which comes to a total of 50,000 euros.

According to Aldor Nini who helped with this article, based on the above the women will have to pay 2615 euros (less VAT) to the record companies’ lawyer, 1368 euros to the court, and up to 2,615 (less VAT) to their own lawyer.

torrentfreak

[]-[êll.Ôñ.ËÀR'][']-[.]

Yet another easy target ...... I bet half the people involved in the case wouldnt have a clue what they were looking for either.

[GhostShip]

This is not only wrong but likely illegal, its clear frrom the case itself that the mother did not commit the infringement and thus she has not got to pay a cent, the law is clear , only those who commit the act are liable not those who pay for the line, she made it clear to others that the line was not to be mis -used and it was also clear that her limited understanding of file sharing meant she didnt actively take part in aiding or colluding with her children to commit infringement.

Its pretty clear whats happened here, this lady has no money for a decent lawyer and has been defrauded of cash by these "ambulance chasing" infringement lawyers who if challenged by a real lawyer would quickly be sent packing.

I,m pretty sure this lady didnt challenge their so called "evidence" nor question how this company obtained her details and bypassed her rights under european data protection laws that state they have to inform her of data gathering that is then linked to her personally, the justice organisations it seems are full of criminals and not just the ones who face the judge.

[Forested665]

only those who commit the act are liable not those who pay for the line, she made it clear to others that the line was not to be mis -used and it was also clear that her limited understanding of file sharing meant she didnt actively take part in aiding or colluding with her children to commit infringement.

While she is not responsible in 90% of the cases you seem to have forgotten she is their mother. If they are minors the parents are still held responsible for their childrens actions (less they are given up to state custody if such a thing exists in germany).

she made it clear to others that the line was not to be mis -used

Should her children be of accountable age then this would free her from all responsiblity of that particular netcrime.
The real questions to be asked here are How old are the children? and What is the evidence against them.

[GhostShip]

You seem to have missed the point Forrester, they didnt sue the children as they should have in civil or criminal law, but the mother, who they are fully aware commited no offence.

[Bluey_412]

and...

50 euros per song/track....?
how much would those songs/tracks retail for in a store?

Some serious rip-offs goin on there, i'm sure