UK Law Firm Exaggerates Its $30,000 Win Over Pinball Game Sharer

from the default-judgment dept

Fri, Aug 22nd 2008 4:02pm — Mike Masnick

We wrote about the woman who was fined $30,000 for file sharing a pinball video game earlier this week, noting that the press seemed to be taking the word of the law firm that sued her, Davenport Lyons, as if it were fact. That seemed problematic -- and we should have realized that it was even more problematic than initially noted. TorrentFreak has turned up the fact that this was a default judgment against the woman, meaning that she didn't even show up in court to defend herself. Effectively, the court more or less had to decide this way. Davenport Lyons, of course, implied that she had fought the case and lost -- and thus, everyone else would be better off just paying based on the pre-settlement letters that the firm seems to send out in bulk. But that's not necessarily true. There's no indication how a court would rule if an actual defense were put forth.

Filed Under: copyright, default judgment, uk, video games
Companies: davenport lyons

7 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 22 Aug 2008 @ 8:55pm

Ignoring the fact a lawsuit was filed and a judgement rendered, I do have to wonder what would ever possess an individual receiving a settlement offer under these circumstances to in essence ignore its contents?

Hopefully there is more to the story than what appears in the news. Is the plaintiff really inclined to demand the damages award be paid, or there a side letter that lets the plaintiff gets its "headline" while excusing payment under a confidential arrangement? Personally, I would strongly urge a client to pursue the latter course. It makes the point publicly, but at the same time ameliorates the obvious hardship to the defendant.

BTW, I strongly doubt that the plaintiff is proceeding blindly by failing to recognize the likelihood of negative PR. Such actions by business executives/management are rarely made in a casual manner and are usually employed as a last resort.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 23 Aug 2008 @ 7:19am
  
  Re: …what would ever possess an individual…?
  There are two obvious possibilities. The first is that Miss Barwinska, being Polish, may not have understood the seriousness of the letters she received. That would be unfortunate, but no excuse. The second is that she may not have known about the court case. The Daily Mail reported that Miss Barwinska moved from Leytonstone to Canning Town between the date of the alleged infringement and the date of the judgement. The piece by Channel 4 News suggests that Davenport Lyons had no idea if they’d managed to successfully contact Miss Barwinska. If she moved before Davenport Lyons’ paperwork turned up, she should be able to apply to the court to have the judgement set aside.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Overcast, 22 Aug 2008 @ 10:18pm

Settlements wouldn't be an option - bankruptcy, perhaps, but no way I'd settle. But then I pay for the games I get, torrent games are a mess and a hassle.

Although, DRM laden games are just as bad. Except that you pay for them. Well - maybe once anyway :)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
John Duncan Yoyo, 23 Aug 2008 @ 4:24am

RIAA should pay people to not appear in court
Here is a strategy for success. Pay your most likely adversaries not to show up in court case and pay their fines on the QT. Now you advertise this outrageous fine and scare everyone else.

If paying them doesn't work I guess kidnapping is next.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cixelsid, 23 Aug 2008 @ 4:19pm

How surreal has our world become
I guess justice is served, in the form of polish single mother of two.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Khan, 25 Aug 2008 @ 5:51am

Apparently...
Justice is a dish best served cold.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Aug 2008 @ 10:41am

This just in . . .
Lawyers lie . . . to enrich themselves . . . details at 11:00.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]