£60,000 confiscation order against film pirate

Assets Recovery Agency (ARA) Financial Investigators, working in partnership with Essex County Council Trading Standards, Cambridge County Council Trading Standards, Federation Against Copyright Theft (FACT) and British Phonographic Industry (BPI) and have secured a Confiscation Order worth £60,681 against Peter William Axford of Kilmartin Road, Ilford, Essex, who is a convicted counterfeiter.

Investigations into Mr. Axford’s activities began in November 2002 when Essex Trading Standards received complaints from members of the public in relation to the sale of counterfeit DVDs at car boot sales in the county. A joint investigation was launched with the Federation Against Copyright Theft (FACT) and the British Phonographic Industry (BPI). Inquiries identified Mr. Axford as being involved in the illegal copying, distribution and sale of counterfeit DVDs in the Essex area.

On 10th July 2006 at Blackfriars Crown Court, Mr. Axford pleaded guilty to making for sale infringing copyright works, producing infringing copyright works, copying infringing copyright works, offering for sale infringing copyright works, and offering for sale counterfeit goods which bore a registered trademark. He was sentenced to 30 months’ imprisonment.

At Blackfriars Crown Court yesterday, HHJ Marron certified that the benefit derived from Mr. Axford’s activity amounted to £122,066.20, and ruled that the recoverable amount is £60,681. Mr. Axford has 18 months to pay this amount back to the Agency, or face 18 months’ imprisonment in default.

Jane Earl, Director of the Assets Recovery Agency, said: “By using a joined-up approach, we can take the cash out of counterfeiting. The Assets Recovery Agency works with a range of agencies and organisations to make sure crime doesn’t pay- this case is no exception. I look forward to even more success through cooperation in the future.”

Kieron Sharp, FACT Director General, added: “I am pleased that this multi-agency operation has resulted in a conviction and a confiscation order. The primary motivation for those involved in film piracy is the criminal profits and, by hitting them with prison and a financial penalty, we can send the message that this kind of activity carries a higher risk than previously.

I would like to thank the ARA, Essex County Council Trading Standards, Cambridge County Council Trading Standards and the BPI for their assistance in this case.”

Categories

Latest News

News

PIPCU pulls no punches when warning about illegal streaming

• Using a device to stream or watch TV, sports or films without an official subscription is breaking the law • Making unauthorised streams of TV, sports or films available is also illegal • This year, Umar Shazad was ordered to pay legal costs of more than £12,000 for re-streaming Sky Sports content illegally The … Continued

Arrests News Partnerships Premier League Prosecutions

Cornwall man admits sale of illegal TV streaming services

Following an investigation by Cornwall Council Trading Standards into illegal television streaming services, a man admitted copyright and fraud charges at Truro Magistrates Court on Wednesday 20th November 2019. Steven Underwood (also known as Steven Isaac), previously of Killiers Court, Illogan, near Redruth faced two charges under the Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 and … Continued

Arrests News Partnerships Premier League Prosecutions

London retailer convicted of fraud and copyright offences

A retailer in London has been convicted at the City of London Magistrates’ Court for selling illegal streaming devices (ISDs) which gave access to unauthorised Premier League broadcasts and other content. Mr. Ammar Al-Silawi, age 39, was found guilty on two charges of copyright and two charges of fraud, having been found to sell ISDs … Continued

News

Kent licensees ordered to pay over £10,000 for illegally screening Sky Sports

On Friday 13th September, Mr. Jared Macdonnchadha, Mr. Richard Rodal and Ms. Karen Turner of the Red Bull were convicted in their absence of three offences each of dishonest reception of a television transmission, in this case, Sky televised football matches, with the intent to avoid payment of the applicable charge. Sky Sports is only … Continued