Update – the BPI's "rolling programme" keeps rolling

In October 2004 we published a Law-Now article which reported that the BPI (British Phonographic Industry) had commenced a rolling programme of legal action against "major filesharers". The full article, which includes a commentary on the legal basis for the BPI's legal action, can be accessed by clicking here.

Just after our previous article was published, the BPI obtained a Court Order against four ISPs: BT Openworld, Wanadoo, Telewest and NTL. All four ISPs complied with the Court Order and provided the identities of the filesharers to the BPI. It was discovered that four of the IP addresses were used by two filesharers and therefore 28 filesharers became 26.

On 4 March, it was confirmed in the press that 23 of the 26 defendants had agreed to settle the BPI's claims against them. Each defendant agreed to pay the BPI several thousand pounds in damages and agreed to injunctions preventing them from illegally uploading music again. The defendants, 6 women and 17 men, were based in various locations throughout the UK and were aged between 22 and 58. The remaining 3 defendants are yet to settle with the BPI and it may be forced to issue proceedings in order to settle the claims.

Not wanting to rest on their laurels, the BPI immediately announced that they would be making a further application to the High Court, seeking orders for the disclosure of the identities of a further 31 illegal file sharers on a range of peer-to-peer networks, including Kazaa, Soulseek, DirectConnect, eDonkey, Grokster, Imesh, Limewire, and Bearshare.

On 11 March 2005, the Court granted the BPI the orders applied for. Six UK ISPs should by now have supplied the names and addresses of the 31 individuals alleged to "have uploaded large numbers of music files on to peer-to-peer filesharing networks" (BPI press release).

The BPI confirmed that it will again "write to the individuals concerned, setting out the details of their infringements and offering them the opportunity to settle the case before proceedings are issued".

What will be interesting, and what may occur in relation to the three defendants yet to settle from the first round of legal action, is whether the BPI will actually proceed to take legal action against any of the file sharers. For the reasons set out in our previous article, such action would be complicated and, if the defendants are well funded, a potentially very expensive affair.

If you would like any further information on music or other filesharing, or to discuss any IT Law or Intellectual Property issues affecting your business, please contact Susan Barty on +44 (0)20 7367 2542 or at [email protected]@cmck.com, or Phillip Carnell on +44 (0)20 7367 2430 or at .