Queensland Mario piracy man fined $1.5M

Renai LeMay
10 February 2010, 8:09 AM


It's-a-bloody-big-fine-Mario!


Nintendo has successfully sued a Queensland resident for uploading to the internet a copy of its Wii game New Super Mario Bros a week before its Australian release in November last year.

The Queenslander — named by multiple media outlets as James Burt — has been ordered by the Federal Court to pay Nintendo $1.5 million, according to a statement by the Japanese games manufacturer of the Mario and Zelda titles.

“This legal proceeding was commenced to protect the creative rights and innovation of game developers, and to combat the growing international problem of Internet piracy,” said Nintendo in a statement. The $1.5 million fine consists of damages to compensate Nintendo for what it said was its loss of sales revenue caused by Burt’s actions.

Nintendo said it used “sophisticated technological forensics” to identify Burt. The company obtained a Federal Court search order on 23 November to inspect Burt’s residence. “This led to the seizure of property from those premises in order to gain further evidence against the individual,” Nintendo said.

In a wider sense, Nintendo said it would pursue anyone who breached its intellectual property rights “using all means available to it under the law”.

The company said game piracy was a “significant threat” to its business, as well as that of game developers producing games for its consoles. “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,” the company said.

“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.”

Delimiter


Post your comment



Comments

RSS feed Email alert

Rikiller (New user):

Solution: Make prices more reasonable

10 February 2010, 8:37 AM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Phred (User):

Quoting Rikiller:
Make prices more reasonable

That or use Sony's model, games go Platinum once they have met their target development costs and the price drops to a more reasonable price.

10 February 2010, 9:10 AM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Tin (Regular user):

Sounds to be a fair answer to me. They'd spend less money chasing pirates that way - the cheapskates can know they'll be able to buy it cheaper in 2 months (or so) and will either wait, or pirate then buy later.

Legal action costs money. They'll be lucky to recover the legal costs from this guy, so ignoring the piracy by discouraging the bulk of it in the first place is the sensible option.

10 February 2010, 12:01 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Big Yellow Chicken (New user):

Oh Mama Mia, thats a bigga fine.

10 February 2010, 8:39 AM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

todd_h86 (User):

About time a company found the right way to prosecute someone regarding piracy! To me, if I download something, I wasn't go to buy it anyways, hence my copy of the game isn't a 'lost sale' as there wouldn't have been a sale anyway, but by fining the original uploader of the content, who had intent to pirate the game is a good decision, one that I hope other companies follow.

10 February 2010, 12:09 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Halcon (Advanced member):

However, the move to fine this guy 1.5 Million is just an hypocrisy, because the games producers want "soft targets" this way the public is being mislead once again.
While this man has not gained a monetary profit, am think the the fine should have been a lot less.
I do not condone piracy, but the issue is that games costs a lot of money, these games should be sold to a reasonable price, then the company that produce the game will reap the earnings.
Moreover, these companies are totally arrogant if they want to impose a high price tag on its products.
Everything that is out of reach to the public will attract the attention of the pirates anyway, so the only way to combat this is making it more affordable, try other initiatives to stimulate the people to buy more for less and more important reward the loyalty of the users, with these initiatives is possible for these companies to earn a well deserved reputation otherwise, a negative impact will have dire consequences that will not be solved neither in short or mid-term.

10 February 2010, 1:45 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

todd_h86 (User):

Quoting Halcon:
While this man has not gained a monetary profit, am think the the fine should have been a lot less.

I'd take it over the couple million that mum in the US got fined for sharing 12 songs.... I really don't think he will have to pay 1.5 million, that would seem unreasonable and it wouldn't surprise me if it drops by a large amount as has happened in other cases in the USA and the UK, judge has had another ruling and dramatically dropped the charges - the previously mentioned mother ended up with a $55000 fine instead of 4.8 million or some other rediculous number.




10 February 2010, 2:51 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

apt.pupil (User):

Good.

about time they started making more examples.

Maybe after hundreds more idividually targeted lawsuits, and hundreds of million dollars in legal fees, someone will get the message:
A) Don't pirate. it could end up costing you dearly
B) Spend less money on legal suits, and focus on more ways to encourage people getting the games- aka download(and make the game a tad cheaper to boot for online purchases)

Games are priced as such, because they go through a lot of channels- lots of people not only work to develop the game, but to produce the packacging and medium, to ship it to international warehouses, and then onto the retailers. Everyone who chipped in to bring the game to the shop and sell it out deserves their 2 cents of it all.

I also know that retailers have a generally higher markup than cost, but this markup is set by Nintendo/Sony/Microsoft as an RRP, and will not give as much money as- say selling a mobile phone outright

11 February 2010, 12:53 PM (2 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

anonymous user Anonymous user