Slashdot Mirror


Seller of Counterfeit Video Games Gets 30 Months

wiredmikey writes "The FBI reported this week that Qiang 'Michael' Bi, of Powell, Ohio was sentenced to 30 months in prison for selling more than 35,000 illegally copied computer games over the Internet between 2005 and 2009. According to a statement of facts read during Bi's plea hearing, agents executed a search warrant at Bi's house and found multiple CD duplicators and more than 1,000 printed counterfeit CDs. Some of the CDs were still in the duplicator. During their investigation, agents learned that Bi would buy a single copy of a game, illegally duplicate it and sell the copies on eBay.com and Amazon.com. He also set up a website for customers to download the games they bought. Bi accepted payment through eBay and PayPal accounts in his name and in others' names."

13 of 165 comments (clear)

  1. Amazing... by nametaken · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It still blows my mind that people can be capable enough to run a little outfit like this, and yet be so amazingly dumb. You know you're going to get caught when you sell this stuff from the US, under your own name, on big name websites.

    1. Re:Amazing... by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 4, Interesting

      So he gets 6 months for *selling* *35,000* games, but Jammie Thomas-Rasset gets 1.X Million for copying 24 songs?

      --
      My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
    2. Re:Amazing... by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'd like to, but I lack the money to open a bank.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    3. Re:Amazing... by harlows_monkeys · · Score: 4, Informative

      Thomas-Rasset got what she asked for. She was sharing a couple thousands songs in reality, although they only sued over 24 of them. They offered to settle for a few thousand dollars, which is a pretty fair price considering the number she was actually sharing. However, she decided to reject that and go to trial, even though she had not even a remote chance of winning (hell, she couldn't even hope for jury nullification, since it is a civil case and a nullification would just be overturned on appeal). The minimum statutory damage award is $750 per infringed work, or $18000 in this case. If, somehow, the court decided that she was an innocent infringer (basically someone who had no reason to believe they were infringing copyright), that can be cut down to $200 per work, or $4800 in this case. There's pretty much no chance of that, so realistically she was looking at a minimum of $18000.

      So, the best case she was looking at by going to trial was 3-4 times worse than settling, and that depending on the jury feeling sufficiently sympathetic to go as low as they could on the damages. And then she was pretty blatant about lying in court, she tried to blame her kids, and it came out that she tried to destroy evidence. So much for any chance of the jury being sympathetic...

    4. Re:Amazing... by The+End+Of+Days · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I tell you what, if the entitlement crowd, a group of people distinguished by the fact that they refuse to do any work but want rewards anyway, manages to get up off their asses and actually start a revolution, I'll join in sheer amazement. I suspect, however, that it might be a little too difficult and you'll all just call for the rest of us to do it for you while you try to benefit for free.

  2. Misplaced focus by macraig · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So this guy gets 30 months for physically duplicating AND SELLING stuff, while Jammie Thomas et al get smacked with million-dollar fines for downloading a few handfuls of unpaid tunes for their own personal enjoyment? Maybe THIS guy should be the one getting smacked with million-dollar fines, considering he might have made millions from what he was doing.

    1. Re:Misplaced focus by PatPending · · Score: 4, Informative
      Not just 30 months; there's also this:

      Bi also forfeited $367,669 in cash, representing the proceeds of the crimes, as well as his house, a 2006 Lexus SUV and computer and electronic equipment.

      --
      What one fool can do, another can. (Ancient Simian Proverb)
  3. Ratted out by company email software by PatPending · · Score: 4, Informative
    According to the story in TFS,

    Agents and officers with the FBI Cybercrime Task Force, and U.S. Postal Inspectors are credited with the success of the case.

    Er, no--credit monitoring software at the company he worked for!:

    New monitoring software at Nationwide Insurance spelled the beginning of the end for an employee who had been counterfeiting and selling computer games for five years. The software alerted Nationwide officials to a spreadsheet that Qiang "Michael" Bi had sent from his personal e-mail account to his Nationwide e-mail account. The spreadsheet listed eBay accounts, credit-card numbers and false identity information that Bi used in a lucrative counterfeiting scheme.

    The spreadsheet listed more than 50 eBay and PayPal accounts, all with different names. Bi told investigators he used other people's information on the accounts because eBay and PayPal had suspended his accounts and do not allow a new account with the same name and address as a suspended account.

    --
    What one fool can do, another can. (Ancient Simian Proverb)
  4. Re:They dont catch any terrorists, or drug smuggle by icebike · · Score: 4, Informative

    That and the fact he was ratted out by his employer for using company email addresses to move his secret lists of accounts.

    Lets face it, the cops were handed this case on a silver platter.

    Go here.
    Arrest him.
    Confiscate 300K in ill-gotten funds.
    Have a beer.

    --
    Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
  5. Re:ICE This Week by c6gunner · · Score: 3, Funny

    Who would want a government capable of solving all problems simultaneously and in the right sequence to satisfy every citizens priorities.

    Apparently "god" does it in "heaven". Which is one of the reasons I don't accept such stories; I find it difficult to believe that even an omnipotent being would simultaneously be able to please a group of democrats and a group of republicans. Needless to say, I expect even less from a human government.

  6. Re:ICE This Week by PFI_Optix · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Are you really implying that copyright law shouldn't be enforced because there are worse things going on in the world?

    There are serial killers out there, but I sincerely hope the police make some sort of effort at catching the guys who stole $4,000 worth of tools from my father-in-law last week.

    Whatever your opinion on copyright law, you've got to admit that copying another person's work and SELLING IT without them getting a cut is a dick move and shouldn't be tolerated.

    --
    120 characters for a sig? That's bloody useless.
  7. Re:ICE This Week by CRCulver · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Whatever your opinion on copyright law, you've got to admit that copying another person's work and SELLING IT without them getting a cut is a dick move and shouldn't be tolerated.

    It is a dick move only because Western European society in the early modern era starting seeing it as a dick move. In Ancient Rome, an audience member would transcribe a poet's recital, have dozens of copies made by amanuenses, and then sold in the marketplace with no money going back to the poet. There's not a single instance of anyone complaining. Martial lampooned a guy who would put his own name on these copies, but plagiarism is distinct from mere copying. There continue to be cultures all over the world to this day where people don't understand copyright at all. Try explaining it to them, and they'll think you're a lunatic. If successive generations see increasingly less value in copyright, we're only returning to a state before what would see a freakish aberration of several hundred years.

    Yes, various cultures have also believed it was noble to own slaves or perform human sacrifice. But I think that the nature of this issue, whether respecting copyright is objectively moral or a mere government fiat with the hope of encouraging production*, ought to be carefully examined instead of simply assuming without question that copyright must exist.

    (This, incidentally, was the view of the American Founding Fathers. They had an acute sense of natural rights -- endowed by the Creator and only recognized by the government -- but did not consider copyright among them.)

  8. Dont feel too bad for this guy by Satanboy · · Score: 3

    He made over $700,000 on these counterfeited games.

    He actually turned in over $360,000 IN CASH after being caught.

    He was not a petty guy just making some copies for his friends etc.
    So yeah, seriously, don't try and compare this guy to any fair use idea whatsoever, it's just going to hurt the whole fair use argument if you use him as an example.

    It's guys like this that make it hard for the rest of us who just want to backup a game or install on another PC.