Two convicted computer game counterfeiters have been forced to pay £78,000 after an investigation by the North West Regional Asset Recovery team.
The ruling was made using powers included in the 2002 UK Proceeds of Crime Act.

Pay £78K or go directly to jail
vnunet.com, 06 Apr 2006
Two convicted computer game counterfeiters have been forced to pay £78,000 after an investigation by the North West Regional Asset Recovery team.
The ruling was made using powers included in the 2002 UK Proceeds of Crime Act.
Paul Gibbons, 29, and Barry Terence Warren, 47, had already been sentenced to four months' and six months' imprisonment respectively.
The court estimated that Warren's financial benefit from criminality was £11,414.52, but only a nominal amount was confiscated because he had no available assets.
Gibbons's benefit was assessed at £284,710.12, and he has been ordered to pay £78,873.44 from his available assets, including the equity from his home and the price of a motor vehicle.
Gibbons was ordered to pay back this amount within six months or serve two years' imprisonment in default.
Games industry watchdog the Entertainment & Leisure Software Publishers Association (ELSPA) said that the convictions would hopefully act as a deterrent to other people thinking of creating or selling counterfeit games.
"This case demonstrates the enormous financial risk faced by those who sell counterfeit computer and video games," said Michael Rawlinson, deputy director general of ELSPA.
"Any profit made through this kind of illegal activity can be claimed back under the Proceeds of Crime Act, and it shows anyone tempted to become involved that counterfeiting doesn't pay."

UK's largest police force works with the Federation Against Copyright Theft

Pirated software could hold spyware, vendor cautions
Investigators ensure businesses 'Keep IT Real'
Pirate trader shut down after 12-month investigation

First Looks Editor Ian Williams gets hands on with the Sony Ericsson Xperia X1

Google's announcement this week that it plans to step into...
Do you agree?
Have your say on this article