More than 70 per cent of all computer software used in Ireland last year was illegal, the High Court was told yesterday. Software piracy in Ireland cost the computer industry $30.6 million in 1996 while software publishers and distributors lost an estimated $13 billion due to piracy in 78 countries worldwide in 1995.
The cost of software piracy was spelled out to Mr Justice Peter Kelly by lawyers for Microsoft Corporation, one of the largest developers of computer software in the world.
Yesterday the judge granted Microsoft an order restraining a Dublin company and its managing director, servants or agents, from infringing its copyright and registered trademark, and from passing off any of Microsoft's computer programmes as their own.
The injunction applies until the hearing of an action taken by Microsoft against Office 2000, Terenure Road East, Dublin, and its managing director, Mr John Lilly.
The court heard that Microsoft, which employs 1,000 people in Ireland, has been actively involved in combating software piracy worldwide. It is one of eight companies in "The Software Alliance" which has taken actions against alleged pirates in other European countries.
Mr Lilly told the court that he accepted that he was guilty of infringement and wished to apologise to the Microsoft for his actions which he undertook not to repeat.
The court heard that Mr Kieran McHugh, a computer salesman, had, on the instructions of Microsoft's solicitors, contacted Mr Lilly's company to enquire about purchasing computer software and hardware. In an affidavit, Mr McHugh said Mr Lilly had offered to sell him two progammes and had told him that there were two ways of doing this. They could be loaded onto the computer for £20 but would not be entered on the invoice and no licence would be involved. Alternatively, one programme could be bought for £70 and another for £140 and they would be licensed. Mr McHugh said Mr Lilly had told him that the programme would not be legal if it was bought for £20 without a licence. He said Mr Lilly had said he "would not enter it on the invoice so there would be no proof of him selling the software to me".
Mr McHugh said that Mr Lilly had told him that it would be like going to a friend's house and putting his copy on your computer. He said Mr Lilly had told him: "It is done all the time".
Mr McHugh said he believed the defendant was offering to load the software onto the hard disk of the computer for £20 as an inducement to buy his computer system. Last August, he had contacted Mr Lilly who offered to sell him a computer with programme for £859 plus VAT, Mr McHugh said. He said that Mr Lilly said he could "knock 60 quid off the price" by loading a copy version of the software onto the hard drive.
Last September Mr McHugh said he bought a pre-loaded computer from the defendants. He said the two software programmes provided were unlicensed.
Mr Lilly told the court he accepted that this incident took place. He said his was a small company and if the plaintiff was granted damages he could be put out of business. Mr Justice Kelly told him that the question of damages was for another day and it was up to the plaintiffs to decide if they wanted to pursue this. He told Mr Lilly that if he breached the order made against him he could be charged with contempt of court and would be liable for a jail sentence.
