Brisbane Pirate to Pay Nintendo $1.5 Million Gold Coins
News from Luke - Tuesday, 09 February 2010 @ 5:09pm
Nintendo have gone after a Brisbane local after he pirated New Super Mario Bros Wii. and uploaded it to the internet a week before its official release. The Australian Federal court has ordered 24 year old James Burt to pay $1.5 Million for damages.
The legal proceeding resulted in a settlement in which the individual will pay to Nintendo the sum of $1.5 Million dollars by way of damages to compensate Nintendo for the loss of sales revenue caused by the individual’s actions.
Upon the game being uploaded to the Internet, Nintendo was able to employ the use of sophisticated technological forensics to identify the individual responsible for illegally copying the file and making it available for further distribution. On 23 November, 2009, Nintendo obtained a Federal Court search order in respect of the individual's residential premises. This led to the seizure of property from those premises in order to gain further evidence against the individual.
Upon the game being uploaded to the Internet, Nintendo was able to employ the use of sophisticated technological forensics to identify the individual responsible for illegally copying the file and making it available for further distribution. On 23 November, 2009, Nintendo obtained a Federal Court search order in respect of the individual's residential premises. This led to the seizure of property from those premises in order to gain further evidence against the individual.
The video game giant also added some details about the significance of anti-pricay.
Nintendo has been working to combat piracy for approximately 20 years. Piracy is a significant threat to Nintendo’s business, as well as over 1,400 game development companies working to provide unique and innovative games for the Nintendo platform. Fewer sales of Nintendo’s hardware and software systems means fewer resources that Nintendo, its licensees, developers and publishers have to create and market new video game products which is ultimately to the detriment of video game enthusiasts. When there is a decrease in game development, there is also a decrease in the number of jobs in the industry. The existence of piracy jeopardises the strength of the video game industry overall.
So there you have it, don't pirate games people or Nintendo will hunt your ass down!
Discuss in official forum
Latest from Forum
Comrade Questions @ 10:05am 12 Feb
That's kinda retarded isn't it? Why would Nintendo slap the man on the wrist and make a big deal about the punishment and then not actually punish him.
What's more likely is Nintendo knows he'll declare bankruptcy but they settled on that amount anyway. Not issued a smaller amount or none at all. How ridiculous. What kind of message would that send pirates?
White_Pointer @ 9:44am 12 Feb
Kotaku's take on the whole thing: http://www.kotaku.com.au/2010/02/somethings-not-quite-right-about-nintendos-aussie-pirate/
So, that story the other day about [url="http://www.kotaku.com.au/2010/02/nintendo-wins-1-5m-aussie-piracy-settlement/"]an Australian man being ordered to pay Nintendo $1.5 million[/url]? Yeah, something’s not quite right about it. A day after the news broke, there’s [url="http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/games/nintendo-pirate-just-a-shy-gamer-dad-20100210-nrlr.html"]a piece in Australia’s [i]Sydney Morning Herald[/i][/url] profiling the man in question, 24 year-old Queenslander James Burt. It leads with a pic of Burt looking terribly contrite.
There was also [url="http://video.msn.com/video.aspx?mkt=en-au&brand=ninemsn&vid=8e763b61-9cd6-43e3-9fbd-2630713172ee&from=&fg=rss"]a report on Australia’s [i]A Current Affair[/i] program[/url], in which Burt himself is interviewed, again looking like a kicked puppy. The segment wields a heavy tone, warning families not to pirate games, and features Nintendo of Australia’s Rose Lappin coming down from the mountain, laying on a thick anti-piracy message.
Now, this show – and the Australian media in general – normally loves what we call an “Aussie battler”. An everyman being run into the ground by a local government body or big business. It happens with banking stories on an almost weekly basis, even when the person in question has, like Burt, broken a law or guideline. Nine times out of 10, there’d be serious questions raised as to how fair a punishment this was. But here? The media has served as a broadcast tower, repeating Nintendo’s strong anti-piracy message to millions of Australians who would otherwise have been unaware of the issue.
It’s been the biggest human interest story of the week down here, but as the circus draws on, something doesn’t feel quite right about it. See, the $1.5 million dollar fine wasn’t handed down by a judge. [i]Burt settled out of court with Nintendo on this[/i]. Would a 24 year-old man who works part-time at a freight company and lives with his parents really shake hands on a settlement that sees him willingly ruin the rest of his financial life? Then spend the week becoming a temporary “celebrity” as his name is publicly dragged through the mud as a criminal?
I don’t think so.
Consider this, then, as a potential scenario: Burt isn’t going to owe Nintendo a cent. Or, at least, won’t owe them anywhere near $1.5 million. As the publisher is so fond of public displays of aggression against game pirates, I think they settled out of court, slapped a gag order on him, let the media parade him around for a week showing how sorry he was and how hard Nintendo has cracked down on a single, lonely “pirate”, and will then let him be, his punishment served, Nintendo’s point, well and truly made.
Or am I just looking at this a little too closely?
There was also [url="http://video.msn.com/video.aspx?mkt=en-au&brand=ninemsn&vid=8e763b61-9cd6-43e3-9fbd-2630713172ee&from=&fg=rss"]a report on Australia’s [i]A Current Affair[/i] program[/url], in which Burt himself is interviewed, again looking like a kicked puppy. The segment wields a heavy tone, warning families not to pirate games, and features Nintendo of Australia’s Rose Lappin coming down from the mountain, laying on a thick anti-piracy message.
Now, this show – and the Australian media in general – normally loves what we call an “Aussie battler”. An everyman being run into the ground by a local government body or big business. It happens with banking stories on an almost weekly basis, even when the person in question has, like Burt, broken a law or guideline. Nine times out of 10, there’d be serious questions raised as to how fair a punishment this was. But here? The media has served as a broadcast tower, repeating Nintendo’s strong anti-piracy message to millions of Australians who would otherwise have been unaware of the issue.
It’s been the biggest human interest story of the week down here, but as the circus draws on, something doesn’t feel quite right about it. See, the $1.5 million dollar fine wasn’t handed down by a judge. [i]Burt settled out of court with Nintendo on this[/i]. Would a 24 year-old man who works part-time at a freight company and lives with his parents really shake hands on a settlement that sees him willingly ruin the rest of his financial life? Then spend the week becoming a temporary “celebrity” as his name is publicly dragged through the mud as a criminal?
I don’t think so.
Consider this, then, as a potential scenario: Burt isn’t going to owe Nintendo a cent. Or, at least, won’t owe them anywhere near $1.5 million. As the publisher is so fond of public displays of aggression against game pirates, I think they settled out of court, slapped a gag order on him, let the media parade him around for a week showing how sorry he was and how hard Nintendo has cracked down on a single, lonely “pirate”, and will then let him be, his punishment served, Nintendo’s point, well and truly made.
Or am I just looking at this a little too closely?
Moondogg @ 2:44pm 11 Feb
A Current Affair actually just ran a story on this. Did anyone else see it? They actually interviewed the guy.
Yeah I saw it, hard for me to believe this is a one off for the guy like he claims it is. But 1.5 does seem a bit harsh.
A Current Affair actually just ran a story on this. Did anyone else see it? They actually interviewed the guy.
Yeah I saw it, hard for me to believe this is a one off for the guy like he claims it is. But 1.5 does seem a bit harsh.
tim_the_tam @ 10:27pm 10 Feb
A Current Affair actually just ran a story on this. Did anyone else see it? They actually interviewed the guy.
watched it! you know whats weird.. i dont know whos side there on
A Current Affair actually just ran a story on this. Did anyone else see it? They actually interviewed the guy.
watched it! you know whats weird.. i dont know whos side there on
White_Pointer @ 6:37pm 10 Feb
A Current Affair actually just ran a story on this. Did anyone else see it? They actually interviewed the guy.
