By Drew Wilson
Rightsholders Sue ISPs for Selling Internet Access
Leave a reply
Tag Archives: copyright
South Korea Three Strikes Law Under Re-Examination Pressure
By Drew Wilson
The three strikes law concept has been falling on hard times in these last few months. The only country we haven’t heard about much that has implemented a three strikes law is South Korea. Now we have. Apparently, the laws have resulted in numerous takedown requests, multiple suspensions and little in the way of results when it comes to stopping piracy. Human rights organizations are calling on the government to re-examine the laws due to, in part, possible violations of human rights.
Hailed as the be-all, end-all solution to stopping Internet piracy, rightsholders from major multinational corporations have been trying to push the three strikes law in multiple countries over the last few years. A few countries caved from the the lobbying pressure and implemented such laws to keep the foreign corporations happy. It seemed that implementation meant that the laws were successful for these rightsholders as they pressured other countries to follow suit because of this new “international standard” for stopping piracy. Yet, what were the results of these laws? Did it slow down piracy in the end? Are music sales exploding on the charts? Unfortunately, it seems that everywhere such a law or policy was implemented, failure ensued.
TorrentLitigation Adds Insight into File-Sharing Lawsuits
By Drew Wilson
The lawsuit campaign against individual file-sharers is probably one of the older online anti-piracy efforts record labels and movie studios have used. While the anti-piracy efforts employed today are more complex, there are still plenty of file-sharing lawsuits going around. That is where TorrentLitigation comes into the picture. It’s a website not only devoted to shedding light on file-sharing lawsuits, but also aims to support those on the receiving end of a legal notice and asking for help.
Whenever the subject of file-sharing lawsuits come up in discussion, there tends to be a strong reaction to the litigation tactics employed by different rightsholders with respect to the sharing of copyrighted material online. One might react with opposition to these lawsuits, saying something like the litigation tactics has been damaging between rightsholders and customers generally. Another reaction might be strong support for the lawsuits because one feels that it’s one of the few things rightsholders can do to protect their intellectual property. A third reaction could be of confusion because the subject in question employs two very complex and different subjects – those being copyright law and technology. Putting it all into perspective can be a rather tricky proposition, but that is one of the functions of TorrentLitigation.
Returning New Zealand Soldier Fined Under Skynet Law
By Drew Wilson
Another person in New Zealand was fined under the New Zealand Three Strikes Law (or Skynet). This time, it was a member of the armed forces accused of downloading unauthorized works. He was fined $255.97 after receiving his third strike notice. The problem? He was serving his country in Afghanistan when the alleged infringement took place.
One of the many general criticisms of the three strikes law anywhere is that it would snag innocent people. In New Zealand, the Three Strikes law is guilt upon accusation, so it could even fine innocent people. That’s what happened to a soldier who was serving a tour in Afghanistan. He returned to New Zealand only to find that he received his third strike for copyright infringement. He was subsequently fined $255.97 because his guilt was simply presumed.
Opinion: Combining Several Bad Ideas Won’t Stop Piracy
By Drew Wilson
Last week, a report suggested that the government agency HADOPI was gearing up to combine website blocking, three strikes laws, search engine demotion and the cutting off of forms of revenue as a means to try and put the squeeze on piracy. Drew Wilson offers his opinion on the matter.
One thing I’ve been noticing lately is the fact that a number of implementations and variations of a three strikes law have been going sideways. The US six strike policy through the Copyright Alert System become a security disaster for users, the French variation shows that after implementation of the three strikes law only saw the continued slide of music sales, and the New Zealand variation has become little more than a money losing prospect. I think that when the music industry pushed the three strikes law, they hoped that one variation or another would prove to be some sort of magic bullet to fix all the industry woes. Now that every single one of these variations are starting to go sideways, the industry is becoming desperate and are wanting to prop this policy up with something – anything – just to try and prove that this policy is worth pursuing in other countries.
Time Warner Cable Hacked for Six Strike Participation
By Drew Wilson
The Copyright Alert System rolled out last week and the system has a lot to be desired in terms of protecting the users security (among other things). Many are unhappy about it and, recently, one group hacked an ISP over it.
Time Warner Cable’s support website was defaced last week. The defacement was carried out by a group calling themselves “Nullcrew”. From Web Pro News:
US Six Strike Policy – A Security Disaster for Users?
By Drew Wilson
Last week, we pointed to a report that the US Copyright Alert System was beginning to roll out this week. Now that it has, we’ve seen how alerts will be sent to users and it’s far worse than we originally thought.
Ars Technica able to obtain screenshots of what an alert looks like for Comcast users. What we originally thought was that the alerts would be sent via e-mail to the subscribers. We thought this because that was how DMCA notices are sent out. Instead, they will be injected into the users web browser session and shown when the user receives a strike. An excerpt from Ars Technica:
IIPA Wants Italy on Piracy Watchlist for Having Privacy Laws
By Drew Wilson
We’ve been covering the different countries the IIPA (International Intellectual Property Alliance) wants on their piracy watchlist. So far, the submissions were either demanding everything and the kitchen sink, had a host of problems in their logic or both. The submission about Italy is no exception to this. We explore why.
The biggest thing that stuck out for us when it came to why the IIPA wants Italy on the special 301 report is the fact that Italy has privacy laws. Enforcement of copyright laws can occur with user privacy – particularly with a notice-and-notice regime. Unfortunately, it seems that the IIPA wants to trash the privacy laws in favor of laws found in the United States. This is unfortunate, but considering who we’re dealing with, not entirely surprising. Here’s one mention of the privacy laws:
IIPA Wants Mexico on Watchlist Even After it Signed ACTA
By Drew Wilson
We’ve been covering the various countries that the IIPA (International Intellectual Property Association) wants to see on the Special 301 report. A surprising request is that Mexico be included on that list. It’s not what was included in the submission that is the most surprising, but what isn’t.
Last year, to the surprise of many, Mexico signed the controversial Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA). Some suggest that this was to get into the controversial Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement (TPP) which is an agreement for even further tightening of copyright laws around the world. In addition to that surprise move, Mexico is famous for having the longest copyright term in the world (100 years after the creators death). You’d think that these moves would put Mexico in the good books for foreign copyright holders. You’d think wrong. The IIPA, in spite of all of these moves to please such entities, it once again, demanding that Mexico be placed on the Special 301 report (PDF) anyway.
IIPA Wants Egypt on Piracy Watchlist for Not Being Stable Enough
By Drew Wilson
There are a number of countries the International Intellectual Property Alliance wants on the US Special 301 priority watchlist. The watchlist is put together by American corporations and published on a government website after. We’ve been covering the reasons why other countries are being requested to put on the watchlist and, today, we are looking at why the organization thinks Egypt should be on the list.
We’ve been covering why the IIPA wants certain countries on a piracy watchlist. While the Special 301 watchlist is generally a discredited source of information, it does present a preview of what various rightsholerds will be lobbying for in the world. The IIPA wants Greece on the watchlist because websites aren’t blocked fast enough. The organization also wants Spain on the watchlist because authorities aren’t rubber-stamping takedown requests. Michael Geist noted earlier that the IIPA wanted Canada on the watchlist because the Canadian government offered compromises in the copyright reform legislation that offered something for consumers. So, why is Egypt on the watchlist? Here’s the first sentence of the submission (PDF):