See link below with regards to a large scale UK vinyl counterfeiter being prosecuted, although not soul records but it should send a message out to the ones that are involved in doing this.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11941523/Counterfeit-vinyl-salesman-55-1-2million-charging-35-thousands-fake-records.html

Just read it on news site, sold a lot and if he had given a refund would still be selling them. Shot himself in the foot. 
 

16 hours ago, Mark B said:

Just read it on news site, sold a lot and if he had given a refund would still be selling them. Shot himself in the foot. 
 

Exactly what I thought too.

I'm pleased he was given some sort of comeuppance, but as you say he could still be 'trading' had he been sensible, since he knew the records were dodgy from the outset.

I'm actually disappointed that he was only fined about 1/3rd of what he took people for and would guess that's pretty much his profit margin, so all that would say to me if I were that way inclined is: even if I get caught I'll end up with a slap on the wrist, 4 months suspended is hardly a disincentive either for a scam that can clearly net millions if carried out sensibly.

 

 

 

 

Richard Hutter, 55, of Ringwood, Hampshire, sold thousands of fake vinyl albums

A legal error meant he was spared a five-year jail term for money laundering

Another classic case of 'class' issue justice different treatment. Jail not only as punishment (educative) but also to prevent the crime for that time being to re-occur (prevention). So in this very case the 'preventive' factor and the 'educative' one would have make sense. But "faith" (if ever) decided that he didn't deserve that. 

One has to know that in Law the argument of 'error' in procedure cancelling partially or totally in any Justice procedure is there in theory at least to ensure a fair trial 'at charges' but we know that too often it's there to avoid jail for less "common" people. Never forget that Law makers and law working people both know that.

Just like Judges and Politicians salaries are intentionally significant (in it's essence philosophy - it's taught so at Law school) to deter them from corruption temptation. If one is naive it can make sense somehow but if you're not another lecture of that argument is totally fallacious and evidently serves another intention.

Edited April 6, 20232 yr by Tlscapital

21 hours ago, Wally Francis said:

See link below with regards to a large scale UK vinyl counterfeiter being prosecuted, although not soul records but it should send a message out to the ones that are involved in doing this.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11941523/Counterfeit-vinyl-salesman-55-1-2million-charging-35-thousands-fake-records.html

Rock and Pop counterfeits is a HUUUGE market. Read an article in a magazine some time ago where they managed to talk to both manufacturers and distributors of these counterfeits. Talking about millions of euros and 100s of 1000s of records.

Went to a local record fair last sunday. Plenty of dealers that boxes and boxes of  what was labelled "new reissues" where it was more than just obvious they were counterfeits.

26 minutes ago, Tlscapital said:

Richard Hutter, 55, of Ringwood, Hampshire, sold thousands of fake vinyl albums

A legal error meant he was spared a five-year jail term for money laundering

Another classic case of 'class' issue justice different treatment. Jail not only as punishment (educative) but also to prevent the crime for that time being to re-occur (prevention). So in this very case the 'preventive' factor and the 'educative' one would have make sense. But "faith" decided that he didn't deserve that. 

One has to know that Law the argument of 'error' in procedure cancelling partially or totally in any Justice procedure is there in theory at least to ensure a fair trial 'at charges' but we know that too often it's there to avoid jail for less "common" people. Never forget that Law makers and law working people both know that.

Just like Judges and Politicians salaries are sufficient (in it's essence philosophy - it's taught so at Law school) to deter them from corruption temptation. If one is naive it can make sense somehow but if you're not another lecture of that argument is totally fallacious and evidently serves another intention realistically.

I'm not sure where "class" comes into it. The article makes clear there was an error by the Magistrates Court (a lower court) before it reached the Crown Court (the higher court). The Magistrates Courts are limited to what cases they can preside over and what sentences they can impose. If the case is of such seriousness whereby it may mean a long prison sentence is required, it would be referred up to the higher court. Clearly they made some mistake in this process.