In due course the fine and case was rightly dropped, however there were 70 other similar cases dropped, often involving senior citizens who have never heard of peer-to-peer file sharing.
But what caught my attention was the law firm’s response in making these accusations, according to Michael Coyle, an intellectual property solicitor with law firm Lawdit, “more and more people are being wrongly identified as file-sharers. Most commonly problems arise when a pirate steals someone else's network connection by "piggybacking" on their unsecured wireless network” While prosecutors argue that users are legally required to secure their network, Mr Coyle dismisses this. "There is no section of the Copyright Act which makes you secure your network although it is commonsense to do so" he said.
For some time now I have been warning home users about the consequences of not securing their home WiFi properly, or even purposely sharing WiFi Internet access with anyone in range. In this case it was a computer game being shared without the WiFi network owners knowledge, which resulted in a scary letter from a law firm. But what if their neighbours or a complete stranger was using the Internet connection to file sharing illegal pornography, it would probably result in a knock on the door by the police, subsequent removal of all computer equipment from the address and an arrest. Interestingly the lawyers were certainly thinking about blaming the wifi networks owner, I wonder if the network was intentionally by the owner shared whether they could be found liable, regardless of that I don't think it's the smartest move to purposely share your home WiFi network outside your home..
All food for though, whether stealing your personal information, or your neighbours are committing file sharing piracy or worst, you should make sure your home WiFi is secured for just your own usage, and avoid all the inconvenience and hassle.