How Much Did The Pointless OiNK Raid Cost UK Taxpayers?

from the if-they-spend-more-do-they-get-it-right-next-time? dept

Fri, Sep 17th 2010 12:08am — Mike Masnick

As you may recall, a few years back, UK authorities took down OiNK, a popular BitTorrent tracker site -- and only after taking down the site did they realize that OiNK's admin, Alan Ellis, didn't appear to have done anything illegal. After testing out a few legal theories, prosecutors finally tried "conspiracy to defraud" the music industry -- a crime that sounds suspiciously like felony interference of a business model. Of course, years later, Ellis was found not guilty, since he didn't actually break any laws.

So how much did this entertainment-industry driven mess cost UK taxpayers? Well, police refused to release that information for a while, claiming that it "could undermine any ongoing and future investigations and cause potential damage to the criminal justice process." Uh, right. About the only way it would do that is when people realized how much money was being wasted on bogus investigations. Eventually, however, it came out that the investigation itself cost about £29,000 -- including £7,800 on overtime (OiNK after dark?) and £4,300 on "travel and subsistence." Of course that doesn't even get into what the actual trial cost taxpayers, which I'm sure is many times greater than that. And, as plenty of people predicted at the time of the raid, none of it mattered, because others stepped in to replace OiNK in no time flat. Perhaps, next time, the police can spend a little more money to realize that they had no case. Or, maybe, not spend the money at all, and let the entertainment industry focus its efforts on actually adapting to a changing market place.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: oink, raids, taxpayers, uk

28 Comments

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

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 17 Sep 2010 @ 12:26am

Considering we invented the Web, the UK is sadly remarkably backward when it comes to IT.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yogi, 17 Sep 2010 @ 12:34am

Wrong again
Mike, you just don't get it.

Defending the entertainment industry's business model is like defending liberty - it's worth it no matter what the cost, no matter what we as a nation(s) have to do. It's not only a matter of principal - it's a matter of our very survival as a civilization.
Yes, we may have to throw privacy, the internet, digital technology, common sense, economic competition, the future and perhaps even personal liberty itself out the window. But how can anyone in his right corporate mind doubt that it is worth it?

Mike, I think you are due for an appointment with Mr. O'Brien at the Ministry of Free Culture.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- PaulT (profile), 17 Sep 2010 @ 12:55am
  
  Re: Wrong again
  I hope my sarcasm detector is working OK, because I detect some in that post. If you were serious, that might have been the dumbest thing I've ever read on the internet!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Yogi, 17 Sep 2010 @ 1:18am
    
    Re: Re: Wrong again
    I guess one of us has to work on his sense of humor. Happily, I don't make a living from satire.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Sep 2010 @ 1:12am

Perspective
Did Techdirt move to the UK or something?
For an American perspective...

£29,000.00 = $45,548.32 on investigation itself
+£7,800.00 = $12,246.80 on overtime
+£4,300.00 = $ 6,751.44 on "travel and subsistence"
---------------------------------
£42,100.00 = $64,546.56 in totally, completely wasted tax money
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- PaulT (profile), 17 Sep 2010 @ 1:26am
  
  Re: Perspective
  "Did Techdirt move to the UK or something?"
  
  It always amuses me when people complain about TD having an international perspective. Yes, things of importance or note sometimes happen outside of your sheltered community and they use currencies other than the "almighty" dollar. Deal with it.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Paddy Duke (profile), 17 Sep 2010 @ 2:00am
    
    Re: Re: Perspective
    As well as having our own currencies, we also appear to use a different form of mathematics: one where ‘including’ doesn’t mean ‘in addition to’.
    
    Just to clarify, over USD $45,000 was spent by the authorities on investigating a case where no crime had been committed.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 17 Sep 2010 @ 2:35pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Perspective
      �including" doesn't mean "in addition to"
      
      True enough. You got me there. I did in fact catch my error, but without there being a way to edit or delete my comment there was little I could do about it.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Sep 2010 @ 1:16am

It's good to know that a review of rape policies in the UK has been scrapped due to funding cuts. But hey, at least they can afford to prosecute innocent people running torrent trackers.

Just so everyone remembers:

You're more likely to get away with rape than file sharing!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
mike allen (profile), 17 Sep 2010 @ 1:20am

nothing will stop filesharing when the entertainment industry get that it will have to adadpt its model. until then even the draconian D.E.A in the UK will resort in many being kicked of the web illegally. sharing is caring.
Yogi if not saecasum must be dumber than the average bear.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 17 Sep 2010 @ 3:43am
  
  Re: DEA
  See, that’s another term that means different things on each side of the Atlantic. :)
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Sean T Henry (profile), 17 Sep 2010 @ 7:16am
  
  Re:
  The war against file sharing is like the war against drugs no matter how long you fight it people are still going to use pot.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 17 Sep 2010 @ 7:26am
    
    Re: Re:
    With only one small difference: drugs can be bad for your health. File sharing can't.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Sep 2010 @ 2:01am

International laws are wacky!

For aspiring comedy bloggers, watch this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IfHr6vaeBhI
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Sep 2010 @ 2:44am

Maybe about 10 to 20 years they give up.

Piracy is going nowhere but up(no not the sea kind of piracy).

I always marvel at how some people think they have a choice in the matter.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Planespotter (profile), 17 Sep 2010 @ 3:07am

"However, the force admits the true total cost is likely to be significantly greater than disclosed because it did not keep records of normal hours spent on the case, or the involvement of other forces."

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/09/15/oink_costs/

So that �29k /$45k is only additional costs, and the day to day costs (read greater) of the whole investigation aren't included.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- isabel (profile), 17 Sep 2010 @ 4:32am
  
  Re:
  the really horrible thing about this, is that they tried to screw a man's life up in the process, glorifying in leading him out in handcuffs - they really have no moral values at all, all because of people's natural desire to share music and things that they love.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
bob, 17 Sep 2010 @ 5:03am

Cops?
Perhaps, next time, the police can spend a little more money to realize that they had no case.

In the UK as here it's not the cops that make the case it's the prosecutors who make the case.

It wasn't the oink local police precinct detective sargent who suddenly awoke one day and decided to bust oink.

It was political pressure from the recording industry who cost the tax payers all the expanses for this whack a mole failure.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Delboy, 17 Sep 2010 @ 6:17am
  
  Re: Cops?
  Agreed.
  Since the action failed should us Britons be persuing damages against the entertainment industries.
  
  29K approx. plus the trial costs.
  
  I'm sure if it were the other way around they would be seeking damages & costs.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 18 Sep 2010 @ 1:07pm
    
    Re: Re: Cops?
    Recently a UK filmmaker, Ray Gosling "admitted" to a mercy killing on TV. The police spent £45000 investigating this - and concluded he had made it all up. He was then prosecuted for wasting police time. Seems to me like someone in this case should be facing a similar prosecution.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
abc gum, 17 Sep 2010 @ 5:30am

Has Alan Ellis filed the civil suit yet? That could add to the total.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- mike allen (profile), 18 Sep 2010 @ 8:58am
  
  Re:
  he could sue for false arrest.The court would have to award damages based on how much gewould lose in his life time from the lose of his business.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jay (profile), 17 Sep 2010 @ 5:42am

Suggestion
A link to the money might do well to help the argument:

http://www.zeropaid.com/news/90740/oink-raid-cost-uk-taxpayers-45347-usd/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Whisk33, 17 Sep 2010 @ 5:46am

Small Cost
I actually was expecting it to be much much higher... it seems wrong, or just incredibly more efficient than I was expecting...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Overcast (profile), 17 Sep 2010 @ 7:16am

Well, perhaps the Music Industry should be investigated for it's 'damage' to the Sheet Music industry?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheet_music
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Sep 2010 @ 9:47am

So What ?
in the grand scheme of things, this is almost nothing in terms of monetary investment. the title makes it seem like millions were spent. Hate to be a devil's advocate here, but its hardly worthy of a story
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 17 Sep 2010 @ 10:58am
  
  Re: So What ?
  I take it you don't have to pay taxes? If you do, would it be ok with you if, in these times of economic uncertainty, your police was wasting money for no useful purpose at all? I guess it's ok as long as it isn't "millions".
  
  And besides, do you know for how long I have to work to raise 29000£? That's A LOT of money.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Mad Hatter (profile), 18 Sep 2010 @ 6:44pm

Oink and the Cops
I spent some time trying to get information out of the cops about this case. They seemed to be terrified of answering any questions on the phone, in fact I could hear two of the talking when one put the phone down, and they sounded so scared it was ridiculous. They also refused to supply me the information I wanted, and tried to pretend that some of it didn't exist.

Oh, and they tried to refer me to the IFPI, and when I pointed out that the IFPI shouldn't know what was in the arrest warrant, they seemed to get more nervous.

I don't think that the cops were at all happy with the IFPI, in fact I got the impression that the cops believe that the IFPI was lying to them. Curious, that.

If you want to read what I wrote at the time I made the call click here.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]