Broadband News
News, views and analysis
OiNK founder escapes pen(alty) in UK piracy trial first
17 Jan 2010 | 23.13 Europe/London
The man in the dock in Britain's first prosecution over alleged illegal file-sharing has been found not guilty of Conspiracy to Defraud. Alan Ellis, who founded music website OiNK, heard the verdict at Teeside Crown Court late this week.
When a police raid shutdown OiNK in 2007, the site had 200,000 members and had facilitated 21 million music downloads. Having emerged three years earlier, it started off being hosted from a PC in a Middlesbrough flat before demand saw that responsibility shifted onto a commercial server in Amsterdam. Mr Ellis, who set up and maintained the site, lost his job following a televised arrest on piracy-related charges.
A major talking point in the trial was why the 26-year-old had around £180,000 in a Paypal account - and why he had been receiving around £11,000 each month from OiNK users. While the site asked for people to donate, doing so wasn't a prerequisite for membership nor file-sharing. Ellis said the cash was being used to pay for server rental, with the "surplus" cash being saved up to buy his own. At the time of the police raid, he had £20,000 in savings spread across ten different bank accounts.
OiNK was closed down following a joint investigation by music industry bodies the BPI and International Federation of the Phonographic Industry spanning two years. At the time the shared house Ellis lived in was raided, a spokesman for Cleaveland Police said: "This extremely lucrative and creative scheme consisted of a private file-sharing website being set up. Membership was by invitation only. The site allowed the uploading and downloading of pre-release music and media to thousands of members." Interpol co-ordinated the police responses in the UK and Holland.
Because the website was designed for torrenteers, it didn't host any pirated material itself - merely trackers. The prosecution had described it as as "cash cow" designed "to promote, encourage and facilitate criminal activity." Giving evidence, Ellis told Teeside Crown Court he'd set it up to further his skills and, ironically, boost his employability. He had been a full-time software engineer.
Back in 2007, Mr Ellis prophesied that his case could "change the Internet as we know it." "My site is no different to something like Google," he told The Telegraph. "If Google directed someone to a site they can illegally download music they are doing the same as what I have been accused of."
During the course of the trial, professor Birgitte Andersenok from the University of London gave evidence, stating the classic defense that Internet file-sharing harms neither the music industry nor its sales; the BPI, of course, disagrees. "This is a hugely disappointing verdict, which is out of line with decisions made in similar cases around the world, such as The Pirate Bay," read a statement from the industry body. "The defendant made nearly £200,000 by exploiting other people's work without permission. The case shows that artists and music companies need better protection."
According to solicitor Simon Rose, a partner at law firm Morgan Rose involved in the defense, Mr Ellis was "delighted" with a verdict that was a "huge weight off his shoulders." "He was accused of dishonestly conspiring with others to endure other people's copyright interests," Rose told the BBC. "The jury have made a very quick decision on this and they have decided that he wasn’t acting dishonestly. The BPI has put out a statement saying it flies in the face of other cases, but it just doesn’t. This case is unique. It turns on its own facts and the jury have found that he wasn’t dishonest."
The jury's verdict was unanimous, clearing Ellis of conspiracy to defraud and allowing him to walk free. Upon leaving the court, he declined to comment.
OiNK OiNK
When a police raid shutdown OiNK in 2007, the site had 200,000 members and had facilitated 21 million music downloads. Having emerged three years earlier, it started off being hosted from a PC in a Middlesbrough flat before demand saw that responsibility shifted onto a commercial server in Amsterdam. Mr Ellis, who set up and maintained the site, lost his job following a televised arrest on piracy-related charges.
A major talking point in the trial was why the 26-year-old had around £180,000 in a Paypal account - and why he had been receiving around £11,000 each month from OiNK users. While the site asked for people to donate, doing so wasn't a prerequisite for membership nor file-sharing. Ellis said the cash was being used to pay for server rental, with the "surplus" cash being saved up to buy his own. At the time of the police raid, he had £20,000 in savings spread across ten different bank accounts.
OiNK was closed down following a joint investigation by music industry bodies the BPI and International Federation of the Phonographic Industry spanning two years. At the time the shared house Ellis lived in was raided, a spokesman for Cleaveland Police said: "This extremely lucrative and creative scheme consisted of a private file-sharing website being set up. Membership was by invitation only. The site allowed the uploading and downloading of pre-release music and media to thousands of members." Interpol co-ordinated the police responses in the UK and Holland.
Because the website was designed for torrenteers, it didn't host any pirated material itself - merely trackers. The prosecution had described it as as "cash cow" designed "to promote, encourage and facilitate criminal activity." Giving evidence, Ellis told Teeside Crown Court he'd set it up to further his skills and, ironically, boost his employability. He had been a full-time software engineer.
Unique case
Back in 2007, Mr Ellis prophesied that his case could "change the Internet as we know it." "My site is no different to something like Google," he told The Telegraph. "If Google directed someone to a site they can illegally download music they are doing the same as what I have been accused of."
During the course of the trial, professor Birgitte Andersenok from the University of London gave evidence, stating the classic defense that Internet file-sharing harms neither the music industry nor its sales; the BPI, of course, disagrees. "This is a hugely disappointing verdict, which is out of line with decisions made in similar cases around the world, such as The Pirate Bay," read a statement from the industry body. "The defendant made nearly £200,000 by exploiting other people's work without permission. The case shows that artists and music companies need better protection."
According to solicitor Simon Rose, a partner at law firm Morgan Rose involved in the defense, Mr Ellis was "delighted" with a verdict that was a "huge weight off his shoulders." "He was accused of dishonestly conspiring with others to endure other people's copyright interests," Rose told the BBC. "The jury have made a very quick decision on this and they have decided that he wasn’t acting dishonestly. The BPI has put out a statement saying it flies in the face of other cases, but it just doesn’t. This case is unique. It turns on its own facts and the jury have found that he wasn’t dishonest."
The jury's verdict was unanimous, clearing Ellis of conspiracy to defraud and allowing him to walk free. Upon leaving the court, he declined to comment.