ACTA, the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, is a punishing, secretly negotiated copyright treaty that could send ordinary people to jail for copyright infringement. ACTA would establish a new international legal framework that countries can join on a voluntary basis and would create its own governing body outside existing international institution. ACTA has been negotiated in secret during the past few years.
Sounds somewhat worrying to me. ACTA has several features that raise significant potential concerns for consumers’ privacy and civil liberties for innovation and the free flow of information on the Internet legitimate commerce. What is ACTA? document gives details on the agreement. The EU will soon vote on ACTA.
La Quadrature ACTA web page says that ACTA would impose new criminal sanctions forcing Internet actors to monitor and censor online communications. It is seen as a major threat to freedom of expression online and creates legal uncertainty for Internet companies. For some details read La Quadrature’s analysis of ACTA’s digital chapter.
La Quadrature du Net – NO to ACTA video (one side of the view):
The Free Software Foundation (FSF) has published “Speak out against ACTA“, stating that the ACTA threatens free software by creating a culture “in which the freedom that is required to produce free software is seen as dangerous and threatening rather than creative, innovative, and exciting.
ACTA has been negotiated in secret during the past few years. It seem that nobody can objectively tell us what ACTA is going to do. You should oppose it for this exact reason. What exactly it will do is so multi-faceted and so deeply buried in legal speak it requires a book or two to explain.
If you don’t like this you need to do something on that quick. The European Parliament will soon decide whether to give its consent to ACTA, or to reject it once and for all. Based on the information (maybe biased view) I have read I hope the result will be rejection.
Another worrying related thing is Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA). The bill expands the ability of U.S. law enforcement and copyright holders to fight online trafficking in copyrighted intellectual property and counterfeit goods. The bill would authorize the U.S. Department of Justice to seek court orders against websites in U.S. and outside U.S. jurisdiction accused of infringing on copyrights, or of enabling or facilitating copyright infringement. Proponents of the bill say it protects the intellectual property market. Opponents say it is censorship, that it will “break the internet”, cost jobs, and will threaten whistleblowing and other free speech.
I don’t like this SOPA plan at all, because the language of SOPA is so broad, the rules so unconnected to the reality of Internet technology and the penalties so disconnected from the alleged crimes. In this form according what I have read this bill could effectively kill lots of e-commerce or even normal Internet use in it’s current form. Trying to put a man-in-the-middle into an end-to-end protocol is a dumb idea. This bill affects us all with the threat to seize foreign domains. It is frankly typical of the arrogance of the US to think we should all be subject their authority.
749 Comments
Tomi Engdahl says:
EU Court Asked To Rule On Legality Of Downloading From Illegal Sources
http://torrentfreak.com/eu-court-asked-to-rule-on-legality-of-downloading-from-illegal-sources-120925/
As part of a case between several computer media companies and the organization responsible for copying levies, the Dutch Supreme Court is set to seek the advice of the European Court of Justice concerning the right to make private copies. Currently it is considered acceptable for Dutch citizens to download copyrighted material for personal use, even if that content comes from an illicit source such as file-sharing networks. A ruling in the wrong direction could change all of that.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Swedish police raid former Web host for Pirate Bay, Wikileaks
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57524074-93/swedish-police-raid-former-web-host-for-pirate-bay-wikileaks/
Owner of Internet service provider PRQ believes police investigations into his company have to do with sites that deal in illegal file-sharing.
The Swedish police seem to be going straight to the source in their battle against copyright infringement. According to Forbes, the country’s authorities raided the Stolckholm-based Web host PRQ, which is known for hosting some of the most popular outlaw sites on the Internet, including the Pirate Bay, Wikileaks, the North America Man-Boy Love Association, Pedophile.se, and the Chechen rebel site Kavkaz Central.
It’s unclear why police raided PRQ, but its owner Mikael Viborg told the Swedish news outlet Nyheter24 that he believes the investigation had to do with intellectual property violations, according to TorrentFreak. Viborg also said he wasn’t sure which sites the authorities were after.
“Yes, they’re looking for four servers,” Viborg told Nyheter24. “It is the first time since 2010 they have done this.”
Apparently, PRQ no longer hosts the Pirate Bay, but the file-sharing site was coincidentally down today because of a power outage, according to TorrentFreak.
Tomi Engdahl says:
MPAA Boss Admits SOPA and PIPA Are Dead, Not Coming Back
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/10/03/1944259/mpaa-boss-admits-sopa-and-pipa-are-dead-not-coming-back
” ‘When SOPA-PIPA blew up, it was a transformative event,’ said Dodd. ‘There were eight million e-mails [to elected representatives] in two days.’ That caused senators to run away from the legislation. ‘People were dropping their names as co-sponsors within minutes, not hours,’ he said. ‘These bills are dead, they’re not coming back,’ said Dodd. ‘And they shouldn’t.’ He said the MPAA isn’t focused on getting similar legislation passed in the future, at the moment. “
Tomi says:
MegaUpload users will get their day in court
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-57526409-93/megaupload-users-will-get-their-day-in-court/
U.S. District Judge Liam O’Grady will hold another hearing to help him determine what to do with the digital files owned by MegaUpload users.
Federal judge overseeing the MegaUpload case wants to see evidence to help him decide what to do with the files owned by MegaUpload’s former users. MegaUpload’s lawyer will want U.S. officials to testify.
“Megaupload will be filing papers with the court to specially intervene,” Rothken said, “considering that it is only the Internet service provider that, under applicable privacy laws, is the only party that can access the data and coordinate return to consumers.”
Tomi Engdahl says:
Automated DMCA Takedown Notices Request Censorship of Legitimate Sites
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/10/08/0136232/automated-dmca-takedown-notices-request-censorship-of-legitimate-sites
“Microsoft has sent automated DMCA notices to Google demanding the removal of several legitimate URLs from its search results”
“The erroneous DMCA notices are being sent automatically by rights holders, who are increasingly using such techniques.”
Microsoft DMCA Notice ‘Mistakenly’ Targets BBC, Techcrunch, Wikipedia and U.S. Govt
http://torrentfreak.com/microsofts-bogus-dmca-notices-censor-bbc-cnn-wikipedia-spotify-and-more-121007/
Over the last year Microsoft asked Google to censor nearly 5 million webpages because they allegedly link to copyright infringing content. While these automated requests are often legitimate, mistakes happen more often than one might expect. In a recent DMCA notice Microsoft asked Google to censor BBC, CNN, HuffPo, TechCrunch, Wikipedia and many more sites. In another request the software giant seeks the removal of a URL on Spotify.com.
In recent months the number of DMCA takedown requests sent out by copyright holders has increased dramatically, and it’s starting to turn the Internet into a big mess.
One of the problems is that many rightsholders use completely automated systems to inform Google and other sites of infringements.
That these automated tools aren’t always spot on is nicely illustrated by a recent DMCA notice sent to Google on behalf of Microsoft.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Iran blocks MP3, MP4, AVI and SWF files
http://storify.com/smallmedia/iran-blocks-mp3-mp4-avi-and-swf-files
Iran’s Filtering Committee is continuing to find innovative ways of broadening the reach of online censorship in the Islamic Republic. This week they implemented a protocol that prevents audiovisual material hosted on external servers from entering Iran. Small Media reports.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Your tax dollars at work: local cops now paid with federal money to troll IRC
US DOJ issues $2.4 million in new grants for intellectual property enforcement.
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/10/your-tax-dollars-at-work-local-cops-now-paid-with-federal-money-to-troll-irc/
However, civil libertarian and legal experts question if this is a good use of federal money to enhance investigation and prosecution of non-violent crimes, particularly in large urban areas of the country, like Los Angeles, Chicago, New York, and San Antonio.
“We too often see law enforcement overreach and target alleged copyright infringement in the name of protecting public safety when many more clear threats to public safety actually exist,” said Julie Samuels, a staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation. “When this happens, it’s important to ask ourselves if this is really how we want our tax dollars spent. More often than not, the answer to that question is no.”
Marzullo also provided Ars with the 10-page grant application for $200,000 that St. Louis submitted—it cites counterfeit goods as a notable problem in St. Louis.
“We also know that criminal gangs and organized crime are involved with the production and distribution of counterfeit consumer goods because we encountered these networks while investigating intellectual property crimes in the City of St. Louis,” the document states.
However, the document also points out an obvious problem with spending money on IP crime. Most people, particularly in poorer and more gang-ridden areas of the city are likely more concerned with actual violence, rather than a guy on the street selling pirated CDs.
Other agencies, however, that aren’t dealing with as much on the digital side, are more concerned with the confiscation of knockoff clothing, handbags and other items.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Vivendi Label Asks Judge to Close Music Service ReDigi
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-10-05/vivendi-label-asks-judge-to-close-music-service-redigi.html
Vivendi SA (VIV)’s Capitol Records told a federal judge that a new online music service that allows people to buy and sell used digital songs should be shut down.
“You are selling and distributing that recording,” Richard Mandel, a lawyer for Capitol, said of ReDigi to the judge, “In order to do that, you have to make a copy and that is a violation of the reproduction right of the Copyright Act.” Mandel requested a judgment without a trial.
“There is no copy involved,” ReDigi’s lawyer, Gary Adelman, told Sullivan. “The actual file is being transported. That’s how the technology works.”
Mandel argued that songs at issue are not original tracks acquired on iTunes but digital copies of them. Adelman said that instead of being copied, songs “migrate” from users’ computer hard drives to ReDigi’s server.
ReDigi said in court papers that it is protected from liability by the first-sale doctrine, which allows an individual who has lawfully purchased music to sell it to whomever he wishes without being liable for copyright infringement.
Mandel argued that the first-sale doctrine doesn’t apply “if the work distributed is not the one you started with.”
Tomi Engdahl says:
Microsoft is not alone in misusing DMCA takedown notices, however the system Microsoft uses to identify allegedly infringing URLs seems only to add to the mockery that is the DMCA and its goal of censoring the internet.
Source: The Inquirer (http://s.tt/1psqW)
Tomi Engdahl says:
US copyright militia’s Megaupload witch hunt threatens online innovation
The INQUIRER talks with Kim Dotcom’s defence lawyer, Ira Rothken
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2215406/us-copyright-militias-megaupload-witch-hunt-threatens-online-innovation
MEGAUPLOAD FOUNDER Kim Dotcom’s defence lawyer, Ira Rothken has lashed out at US and New Zealand authorities, claiming that their copyright witchhunt and its trail of misconduct have caused lasting damage to online innovation.
“The elephant in the room right here is the tension between copyright nationalism and the need for copyright safe harbouring,” Rothken told The INQUIRER.
“It [the Megaupload case] demonstrates the tension between the Hollywood copyright militia and the policy issues of copyright balance that are needed for internet innovation.
“Ruling in favour of hollywood will reduce the availability of cloud storage sites and cause problems for small businesses and individuals who are in the greatest need for competition in the marketplace.”
“There is no criminal statute for secondary copyright infringement in the US. This is experimental criminal prosecution”
“Now that these procedures are coming under scrutiny they appear to have violated the law at nearly every part of the process. From an illegal search warrant to what we believe is an illegal military style raid, to illegal data sharing with the US, illegal spying and ultimately what we believe is an overbroad takedown of the entire Megaupload enterprise.”
“The circumstantial evidence demonstrates Hollywood has great influence on this case,” Rothken told The INQUIRER.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Owners the right to ask for more and more reckless Google to censor content.
TorrentFreak predicts that removal requirements will increase in the future. At the moment, the “false alarms” will not be penalized in any way, so at worst mistaken public copyright requirements can hamper access to legal services activities.
Source: http://www.tietoviikko.fi/kaikki_uutiset/microsoftin+poistopyynnot+holtittomia++vaatii+googlea+sensuroimaan+luvun+45/a845773?s=r&wtm=tietoviikko/-09102012&
Tomi says:
AT&T Starts Six-Strikes Anti-Piracy Plan Next Month, Will Block Websites
http://torrentfreak.com/att-starts-six-strikes-anti-piracy-plan-next-month-will-block-websites-121012/
A set of leaked internal AT&T training documents obtained by TorrentFreak reveal that the Internet provider will start sending out anti-piracy warning notices to its subscribers on November 28. Customers whose accounts are repeatedly flagged for alleged copyright infringements will have their access to frequently visited websites blocked, until they complete an online copyright course. It’s expected that most other participating ISPs will start their versions of the anti-piracy plan on the same date.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Kim Dotcom Teases Megabox, Reveals Exclusive Artists?
http://torrentfreak.com/kim-dotcom-teases-megabox-reveals-exclusive-artists-120926/
Kim Dotcom is determined to put the major music labels out of business with Megabox. At the same time he promises to give artists full control over their own work and a healthy revenue stream. Today Dotcom released a video on the making of Megabox which unveils some of the service’s features. The video also shows “The Black Keys,” “Rusko,” “Two Fingers” and “Will.i.am” as exclusive artists.
The goal of Megabox is to give the public access to free music and compensate artists through advertising revenue.
This revenue comes from the Megakey application that users have to install.
“Music will be free for users who install the Megakey App. Anyone who does not like the App can just purchase the music,” Dotcom told TorrentFreak previously.
In addition, Megaupload is also expected to return before the end of 2012.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Megaupload Readies for Comeback, Code 90% Done
http://torrentfreak.com/megaupload-readies-for-comeback-code-90-done-120923/
January this year the U.S. Government destroyed Megaupload, but founder Kim Dotcom is a not done with the file-hosting business yet and is preparing to come back with a vengeance. The coding work for the new Megaupload is nearly finished, the servers have been ordered, and investors are lining up. A return of the file-hosting site appears to be looming.
With 50 million visitors per day at its peak, Megaupload was one of the largest websites on the Internet.
From the brief progress update it’s clear that the site is on schedule for launch later this year. In addition, it’s interesting to note that despite the ongoing criminal case, partners and investors are happy to be involved.
Tomi Engdahl says:
File-Sharers Buy 30% More Music Than Non-P2P Peers
http://torrentfreak.com/file-sharers-buy-30-more-music-than-non-p2p-peers-121015/
One of the most comprehensive studies into media sharing and consumption habits in the United States and Germany reveals that file-sharers buy 30% more music than their non-sharing counterparts. The result confirms that file-sharers are actually the music industry’s best customers. In addition, the research reveals that contrary to popular belief, offline “copying” is far more prevalent than online music piracy.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Post-ACTA Agreement CETA Moving Forward With Similar Provisions
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/10/15/2348250/post-acta-agreement-ceta-moving-forward-with-similar-provisions
“From eff.org: ‘The shadow of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) is back in Europe. It is disguised as CETA, the Canada-European Union and Trade Agreement. A comparison of the leaked draft Canada-EU agreement shows the treaty includes a number of the same controversial provisions,”
Tomi Engdahl says:
Canada-EU Trade Agreement Replicates ACTA’s Notorious Copyright Provisions
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/10/ceta-replicates-acta
The shadow of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) is back in Europe. It is disguised as CETA, the Canada-European Union and Trade Agreement. As reported by EDRI, a rather strange and surprising e-mail was sent this summer from the General Secretariat of the Council of the European Union to the Member States and the European Commission. The e-mail explained that the criminal sanctions provisions of the draft CETA are modeled on those in ACTA.
A comparison of the leaked draft Canada-EU agreement shows the treaty includes a number of the same controversial provisions, specifically concerning criminal enforcement, private enforcement by Internet Service Providers (ISPs), and harsh damages. These provisions are particularly problematic, and were the key reasons why the European Parliament rejected ACTA. However, given the lack of transparency associated with the CETA discussions (both Canada and EU insist that the draft text remain secret), the concerns that CETA may replicate ACTA appear to be very real despite denials from some members of the European Commission.
CETA is a trade agreement designed to strengthen economic ties between Canada and the EU through “free” trade and increased investment. However, hidden within this treaty are provisions that were essentially lifted from ACTA word-for-word. And just like its close cousins, ACTA, KORUS, and TPP—and other trade agreements that are applauded by the entertainment industry for carrying expansive intellectual property provisions—CETA is being negotiated in secret.
The copyright lobbies have consolidated on the use of foreign and international forums as an indirect means of pushing policies—a strategy known as policy laundering—like those ones in CETA that might never win direct approval through the regular domestic political. The move from fora like the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) or the World Trade Organization (WTO) to bilateral and regional trade agreements confirms it.
Policy laundering takes advantage of the fact that the institutions nations have created for ensuring democratic control and input into the bureaucratic policymaking process have not yet been instituted into most international bodies and negotiation venues. And of course, the entertainment lobby applauds this. It is well known for instance, that provisions of the US DMCA were the result of policy laundering. This should not be the way we build 21st century agreements.
Tomi Engdahl says:
How a single DMCA notice took down 1.45 million education blogs
Massive takedown over 20-item questionnaire was “ham fisted,” says lawyer.
http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/10/how-a-single-dmca-notice-took-down-1-45-million-education-blogs/
Web hosting firm ServerBeach recently received a Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) violation notice from Pearson, the well-known educational publishing company. The notice pertained to Edublogs, which hosts 1.45 million education-related blogs with ServerBeach, and it focused on a single Edublogs page from 2007 that contained a questionnaire copyrighted by Pearson. ServerBeach informed Edublogs about the alleged violation, and Edublogs says it quickly took down the allegedly infringing content.
Instead of calling the matter settled, though, ServerBeach took Edublogs’ servers offline last Wednesday, temporarily shutting off all 1.45 million blogs, according to Edublogs. ServerBeach confirms taking all of the Edublogs offline, telling Ars that the outage lasted for “roughly 60 minutes before we brought them back online and confirmed their compliance with the DMCA takedown request.”
As you might expect, ServerBeach and Edublogs have slightly different accounts of how it all happened.
Edublogs pays $6,954.37 to ServerBeach each month for hosting, and it was delighted with the company’s service—until last week.
With Edublogs being based in Australia and ServerBeach based in the US, the time difference led to some middle-of-the-night fireworks at Edublogs. “Basically our sysadmin and CTO watched, in horror, live as our Web servers were shut down one-by-one and then we spent the next hour e-mailing, calling, and generally freaking out (it was around 3am for me; they are in the US) and through that we were able to get back up,” Farmer told Ars via e-mail today. “If they hadn’t been there, and we hadn’t done that, it [the shutdown] would have been indefinite!”
In his blog, Farmer explained that the infringing material from 2007 was a reprint of “Beck’s Hopelessness Scale,” a 20-item self-evaluation questionnaire published in 1974 which Pearson sells for $120. The teacher who wrote that blog post apparently uploaded the questionnaire as a file (still available in Google’s cache) to Edublogs’ servers, then included a link to the document as part of a blog post containing a lesson plan related to suicide and self-harm.
Still, taking down entire servers containing a million and a half blogs over an alleged copyright violation on just one page was an overreaction, according to intellectual property attorney Evan Brown. He confirmed that DMCA rules don’t require anything close to such a response—particularly when the customer was working to take down the infringing content itself.
“It’s pretty hard to believe that a hosting provider would be quite this ham-fisted as to take an entire network offline over one piece of content,” Brown told Ars via e-mail. “The DMCA certainly does not require such drastic measures. Quite the contrary, actually. The statute requires copyright owners to identify with some particularity the content alleged to infringe and for intermediaries to remove or disable access to that content. There’s nothing in there requiring whole sites to be taken down over one piece of infringement.”
Tomi Engdahl says:
Pirate Bay Moves to The Cloud, Becomes Raid-Proof
http://torrentfreak.com/pirate-bay-moves-to-the-cloud-becomes-raid-proof-121017/
The Pirate Bay has made an important change to its infrastructure. The world’s most famous BitTorrent site has switched its entire operation to the cloud. From now on The Pirate Bay will serve its users from several cloud hosting providers scattered around the world. The move will cut costs, ensure better uptime, and make the site virtually invulnerable to police raids — all while keeping user data secure.
The Pirate Bay was raided back in 2006 and there are rumors that the police might try again in the near future.
The Pirate Bay is not oblivious to this looming threat. They have backups in place and are shielding the true location of their servers. Nevertheless, should the site lose all its servers it might take a while to get back online.
This is one of the reasons why The Pirate Bay decided to move the site into the cloud yesterday. The switch resulted in five minutes downtime and was hardly noticed by the public, but it’s a big change for the infamous BitTorrent site.
Hosting in the cloud also makes the site easier to scale, it reduces downtime, and is also cheaper.
“Moving to the cloud lets TPB move from country to country, crossing borders seamlessly without downtime. All the servers don’t even have to be hosted with the same provider, or even on the same continent,” The Pirate Bay told TorrentFreak.
The Pirate Bay is currently hosted at cloud hosting companies in two countries where they run several Virtual Machine (VM) instances.
“If one cloud-provider cuts us off, goes offline or goes bankrupt, we can just buy new virtual servers from the next provider. Then we only have to upload the VM-images and reconfigure the load-balancer to get the site up and running again.”
“All communication with users goes through TPB’s load balancer, which is a disk-less server with all the configuration in RAM. The load balancer is not in the same country as the transit-router or the cloud servers,” The Pirate Bay told us.
“The communication between the load balancer and the virtual servers is encrypted. So even if a cloud provider found out they’re running TPB, they can’t look at the content of user traffic or user’s IP-addresses.”
The worst case scenario is that The Pirate Bay loses both its transit router and its load balancer. All the important data is backed up externally on VMs that can be re-installed at cloud hosting providers anywhere in the world.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Pirate Bay moves to the cloud to confound copyright cops
Police left with very little to seizehttp://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/10/17/pirate_bay_cloud_move/
The Pirate Bay went down for about five minutes on Tuesday night as the group retired almost all of its servers and shifted onto the cloud.
“So, first we ditched the trackers. Then we got rid of the torrents. Now? Now we’ve gotten rid of the servers. Slowly and steadily we are getting rid of our earthly form and ascending into the next stage, the cloud,” the group said on its Facebook page.
“The cloud, or Brahman as the Hindus call it, is the All, surrounding everything. It is everywhere; immaterial, yet very real. If there is data, there is The Pirate Bay.”
The service is now hosted on virtual machines in two countries, using separate cloud networks, and it has the ability to switch to a new provider pretty much instantly as needed.
The move may also throw a bit of a wrench in plans by AT&T and other US network operators to implement a “six strikes and you’re out” policy on piracy, which is due to take effect by the end of the year. Tracking IP addresses of Pirate Bay users is going to be key to the RIAA and MPAA’s enforcement efforts, and that task looks to have become significantly harder with the latest Brahman bootstrapping.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Internet providers set to crack down on illegal file-sharing
http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/262315-internet-providers-set-to-crack-down-on-illegal-file-sharing
AT&T, Verizon, Comcast and other major Internet service providers are set to implement a copyright alert system aimed at cutting down on illegal peer-to-peer file sharing of copyrighted material “over the next several weeks,” according to the head of the organization overseeing the new anti-piracy program.
Under the new copyright alert system, Internet service providers (ISPs) will send a series of alerts to subscribers whose accounts may have been used to illegally distribute music, movies or other entertainment content via file-sharing. If the subscriber does not respond to the first set of alerts, which will include educational material on protecting copyrights and the consequences of illegal file-sharing, the Internet service provider may temporarily slow down their Internet speeds, direct them to an online tutorial when they try to access popular websites or implement other penalties–called “mitigation measures.”
Internet service providers are preparing to implement their alert systems in November, according to someone familiar with CCI’s thinking, and they will vary slightly from company to company. It was expected to rollout earlier this year but Lesser said it’s taken some additional time for Internet providers to fit the alert systems within their infrastructure.
Critics of the effort have previously raised concern about Internet providers terminating people’s Internet connection or access to certain websites if they don’t respond to the alerts.
Under the alert system, copyright owners like a record label or film company will flag an Internet provider if they believe an IP address is illegally pirating their content on a peer-to-peer file-sharing network. The ISP will then determine which subscriber account matches up with the IP address, or the set of numbers used to identify a device, and send an alert to the subscriber notifying them that their Internet account may have be used for illegal file-sharing.
“The hope is the causal user and the user that doesn’t realize the implications of what they’re doing will respond to the system, and we’ll see a decrease in the use of peer-to-peer networks for copyright infringement and we’ll see an increase in legal services,” Lesser said.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Megaupload Is Dead. Long Live Mega!
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/10/megaupload-mega/
What Mega and Megaupload do have in common is that they are both one-click, subscriber-based cloud platforms that allow customers to upload, store, access, and share large files. Dotcom, and his Mega partner Mathias Ortmann say the difference is that now those files will first be one-click-encrypted right in a client’s browser, using the so-called Advanced Encryption Standard algorithm. The user is then provided with a second unique key for that file’s decryption.
It will be up to users, and third-party app developers, to control access to any given uploaded file, be it a song, movie, videogame, book, or simple text document. Internet libertarians will surely embrace this new capability.
And because the decryption key is not stored with Mega, the company would have no means to view the uploaded file on its server. It would, Ortmann explains, be impossible for Mega to know, or be responsible for, its users’ uploaded content — a state of affairs engineered to create an ironclad “safe harbor” from liability for Mega, and added piece of mind for the user.
“If servers are lost, if the government comes into a data center and rapes it, if someone hacks the server or steals it, it would give him nothing,” Dotcom explains. “Whatever is uploaded to the site, it is going to be remain closed and private without the key.”
Dotcom’s belief is that even the broad interpretation of internet law that brought down Megaupload would be insufficient to thwart the new Mega, because what users share, how they share it, and how many people they share it with will be their responsibility and under their control, not Mega’s.
Dotcom says that according to his legal experts, the only way to stop such a service from existing is to make encryption itself illegal. “And according to the U.N. Charter for Human Rights, privacy is a basic human right,” Dotcom explains. “You have the right to protect your private information and communication against spying.”
Julie Samuels, a staff attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, says that while the new Mega may present an interesting development for internet users, it doesn’t answer the issues raised by the unique and, by her lights, questionable interpretation of Internet law used in the case against Megaupload. “It’s likely to change the cat-and-mouse game that goes on in terms of this issue on the Internet,” Samuels says. “But it’s still a cat-and-mouse game.”
Tomi Engdahl says:
Six-Strikes “Independent Expert” Is RIAA’s Former Lobbying Firm
http://torrentfreak.com/six-strikes-independent-expert-is-riaas-former-lobbying-firm-121022/
Next month the file-sharing habits of millions of BitTorrent users in the United States will be monitored as part of an agreement between the MPAA, RIAA, and all the major ISPs. To guarantee the accuracy of the evidence that will be used for the accusations the parties agreed to hire an impartial and independent technology expert. However, their commitment to this promise is now in doubt as the hired experts have turned out to be a former RIAA lobbying group.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Jailbreaking now legal under DMCA for smartphones, but not tablets
Arbitrary rulings illustrate fundamental brokenness of the DMCA.
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/10/jailbreaking-now-legal-under-dmca-for-smartphones-but-not-tablets/
The Digital Millennium Copyright makes it illegal to “circumvent” digital rights management schemes. But when Congress passed the DMCA in 1998, it gave the Librarian of Congress the power to grant exemptions. The latest batch of exemptions, which will be in force for three years, were announced on Thursday.
The new batch of exemptions illustrate the fundamentally arbitrary nature of the DMCA’s exemption process. For the next three years, you’ll be allowed to jailbreak smartphones but not tablet computers. You’ll be able to unlock phones purchased before January 2013 but not phones purchased after that.
It will be legal to rip DVDs to use an excerpt in a documentary, but not to play it on your iPad.
None of these distinctions makes very much sense. But Congress probably deserves more blame for this than the Librarian of Congress.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Feds Reject Legalizing DVD Cracking, Game Console Modding
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/10/dmca-exemptions-rejected/
Copyright regulators rejected on Thursday proposals to make it lawful for people to copy DVDs for personal use or to jailbreak videogame consoles to run custom software.
The ruling hands yet another loss to digital rights groups who are waging an ongoing campaign to chip away at the scope of a law that limits citizens’ rights by treating copyright owners’ encryption techniques as sacrosanct.
The regulators said that the controls were necessary to prevent software piracy and differentiated gaming consoles from smart phones, which legally can be jailbroken:
On the plus side, the regulators re-authorized jailbreaking of mobile phones.
On the downside, they denied it for tablets, saying an “ebook reading device might be considered a tablet, as might a handheld video game device.” We don’t suspect Apple or Google would sue anybody for jailbreaking their tablets, as they never sued anybody for jailbreaking mobile phones even before regulators first approved jailbreaking in 2010.
That said, when the only difference between a Galaxy Note and a Android tablet is an inch and a radio that can handle voice and data channels, it’s a pretty odd line to draw.
Tomi Engdahl says:
How a Supreme Court ruling may stop you from reselling just about anything
Wiley v. Kirtsaeng may be the IP case of the decade—affecting all from eBay to libraries
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/10/a-supreme-court-clash-could-change-what-ownership-means/
On Monday, the US Supreme Court will hear arguments in a case that pits a major textbook publisher against Supap Kirtsaeng, a student-entrepreneur who built a small business importing and selling textbooks.
“First sale” is the rule that allows owners to resell, lend out, or give away copyrighted goods without interference. Along with fair use, it’s the most important limitation on copyright. So Kirtsaeng’s cause has drawn a wide array of allies to his side. These include the biggest online marketplaces like eBay, brick-and-mortar music and game retailers, and Goodwill—all concerned they may lose their right to freely sell used goods. Even libraries are concerned their right to lend out books bought abroad could be inhibited.
“This case is an attempt by some brands and manufacturers to manipulate copyright law, to control the distribution and pricing of legitimate, authentic goods,” said eBay’s top policy lawyer, Hillary Brill. “When an American purchases an authentic item, he shouldn’t have to ask permission from the manufacturer to do with it what he wants.”
“When we purchase something, we assume it’s ours,” said Overstock.com general counsel Mark Griffin. “What is proposed by [the content companies] is that we change the fundamental notion of ownership rights.”
The Supreme Court has considered the issue of “parallel importation” or “gray market” goods once before, in Costco v. Omega. However, the case resulted in an unusual 4-4 split and no published opinion.
The companies and institutions affected by the resale-rights issues brought up in Kirtsaeng have certainly snapped to attention. They’ve formed a wide-ranging coalition called the “Owners’ Rights Initiative,” emphasizing to the public that the right to re-sell, lend out, and give away books, movies, and music is under threat. Members include Internet commerce companies, library associations, book-sellers, Goodwill Industries, and Redbox. The ORI website shouts in bold red: “You bought it, you own it—you have a RIGHT to resell it!”
The Kirtsaeng battle is a reflection of digital commerce today. Online marketplaces happily ignore borders, and have created a world in which almost any scrappy student could be another Supap Kirtsaeng, shattering long-standing pricing schemes by movie and book companies. That reality has made some very well-established US corporations very unhappy, and they know how to use courts to fight back.
Even their equally well-heeled corporate opponents are aware this fight may have to ultimately turn to Congress—no matter which way the Supreme Court decision turns out.
Copyright battles that pit technology companies against content owners are becoming a fixture of the Internet age. But those fights can seem abstract and distant to those without a vested interest. It’s a rare IP lawsuit that so clearly reaches into every social class—but Kirtsaeng is one of those cases.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Yesterday the Dutch district court of The Hague ruled against hosting provider XSnetworks in a civil case filed by the content protection foundation BREIN. The court ruled that the hosting provider acted unlawfully by not immediately removing the evidently unlawful site Sumotorrent and not promptly disclosing all identifying details of the operators to BREIN. The provider may not reinstall the illegal site and is liable for the damages that arose from keeping the site online in spite of warnings and motivated notices from BREIN.
Now the court holds XSnetworks liable for the damage caused by its unlawful refusal to cooperate. It must repay the -still to be assessed- damage caused by Sumotorrent after that refusal. The court ruled that Sumotorrent is ‘evidently’, i.e. clearly, illegal, and XSnetworks should have known that.
Source: http://www.anti-piracy.nl/nieuws.php?id=282
Tomi Engdahl says:
Megaupload successor will launch in January
Mega will launch on first year anniversary of Megaupload raid
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2220342/megaupload-successor-will-launch-in-january
ENTREPRENEUR Kim Dotcom will launch the follow up to the Megaupload digital locker website on the one year anniversary of his home being raided and it being shut down.
Megaupload was shut down and its domains seized on 19 January this year. Since that time Kim Dotcom, its founder and CEO has been fighting charges and planning his comeback, with Mega.
There have been some details about Mega released already, and Dotcom promises that it will be like Megaupload except with more privacy protection for users.
Tomi Engdahl says:
RIAA Failed To Disclose Expert’s Lobbying History To “Six-Strikes” Partners
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/10/29/1750246/riaa-failed-to-disclose-experts-lobbying-history-to-six-strikes-partners
“A month before the controversial ‘six strikes’ anti-piracy plan goes live in the U.S., the responsible Center of Copyright Information (CCI) is dealing with a small crisis.”
RIAA Failed To Disclose Expert’s Lobbying History to “Six-Strikes” Partners
http://torrentfreak.com/riaa-failed-to-disclose-experts-lobbying-history-to-six-strikes-partners-121026/
A month before the controversial “six strikes” anti-piracy plan goes live in the U.S., the responsible Center of Copyright Information (CCI) is dealing with a small crisis. As it turns out the RIAA failed to mention to its partners that the “impartial and independent” technology expert they retained previously lobbied for the music industry group. In a response to the controversy, CCI is now considering whether it should hire another expert to evaluate the anti-piracy monitoring technology.
Starting next month the MPAA, RIAA and five major Internet providers in the United States will start punishing persistent BitTorrent pirates,
The scheme is being coordinated by the Center for Copyright Information (CCI) who agreed to hire an impartial and independent expert to review the evidence that will be used to accuse suspected subscribers.
However, earlier this week the news broke that the touted independent technology expert, Stroz Friedberg, is not so neutral. In fact, the company is a former RIAA lobbying firm.
The lobbying job earned the company more than half a million dollars ($637,000), which makes it hard to view the company as “independent and impartial” as the agreement between the copyright holders and ISPs requires.
Tomi Engdahl says:
10,000 Artists Sign Up for Pirate Bay Promotion
http://torrentfreak.com/10000-artists-signed-up-for-pirate-bay-promotion-12110/
While the major record labels and movie studios do what they can to shutter The Pirate Bay, thousands of lesser known artists are eager to become featured on the site’s homepage. Since the start of the “Promo Bay” initiative in January, 10,000 independent artists have signed up to be promoted by the world’s largest torrent site. Those who were lucky enough to be featured have enjoyed a healthy career boost and in some cases earned thousands of dollars from file-sharing fans.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Paulo Coelho Supports The Pirate Bay
http://torrentfreak.com/paulo-coelho-supports-the-pirate-bay-090415/
If anti-piracy lobbyists are to be believed, all content creators hate The Pirate Bay and other torrent sites. The truth is obviously more balanced. In fact, some of the most creative minds are BitTorrent users themselves, including best selling author Paulo Coelho, who offered to travel to Sweden to testify in favor of The Pirate Bay.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Voters boot three SOPA-sponsoring Hollywood allies from Congress
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/11/voters-boot-three-sopa-sponsoring-hollywood-allies-from-congress/
Sponsor of 1998 Copyright Term Extension Act loses her seat in close race.
When the new Congress takes office in January, Hollywood will have lost at least four staunch allies in the House of Representatives. Three co-sponsors of the Stop Online Piracy Act lost their seats in Tuesday’s election. A fourth declined to run for another term.
Still, losing at least four allies in the House of Representatives can’t have been a positive development for the motion picture industry.
Tomi Engdahl says:
BitTorrent Pirate Ordered to Pay $1.5 Million Damages For Sharing 10 Movies
http://torrentfreak.com/bittorrent-pirate-ordered-to-pay-1-5-million-damages-for-sharing-10-movies-121101/
Since early 2010, hundreds of thousands of people in the U.S. have been sued for downloading and sharing copyrighted content on BitTorrent.
Nearly all of these cases end up dismissed or settled, but one involving Kywan Fisher from Hampton, Virginia, has turned into a financial disaster.
A federal court in Illinois has handed down the largest ever damages award in a BitTorrent case. In a default judgment defendant Kywan Fisher from Hampton, Virginia is ordered to pay $1,500,000 to adult entertainment company Flava Works for sharing 10 of their movies on BitTorrent. The huge total was reached through penalties of $150,000 per movie, the maximum possible statutory damages under U.S. copyright law. It’s expected that the verdict will be used to motivate other BitTorrent defendants to settle their cases.
“Defendant’s conduct was willful to the extent that he copied or distributed Flava Works, Inc.’ intellectual property at least 10 times and caused the videos to be infringed or downloaded at least 3,449 times.”
The verdict will be welcomed by Flava and the many other copyright holders involved in BitTorrent lawsuits in the United States.
While the guilty verdict is no surprise considering the failure of Fisher to appear before court, the $150,000 in damages per movie, which translates to $435 per alleged download, definitely raises eyebrows.
Tomi Engdahl says:
A month after download law, consumers spending less on music: survey
http://www.japantoday.com/category/national/view/a-month-after-download-law-consumers-spending-less-on-music-survey?utm_campaign=jt_newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_source=jt_newsletter_2012-11-07_AM
On Oct 1, knowingly downloading copyrighted music and video in Japan became punishable by up to two years in prison and a 2 million yen penalty.
The law was passed in June after the Japanese music industry, the second largest in the world after the U.S., reported continued financial losses, with analysts suggesting that just one in 10 downloads were legal.
Since the law came into effect, there have certainly been some changes, and many Internet users have become reluctant to click that download button for fear of receiving a hefty fine, meaning that the law has been a success in a way.
According to a recent statistical survey, however, since the law was passed, sales of music in Japan have continued to fall and consumers are actually showing less interest in music than ever before.
Is this the effect of the new download restrictions? Has Japan’s new draconian law actually had a negative effect on music sales? Or has the Japanese government simply noticed that music sales continue to fall and mistakenly pinpointed illegal downloads as the cause?
It’s interesting to see that, although one or two people suggest that the tough new law has put them off buying new music, the vast majority of responses suggest that – just maybe – the reason music sales have fallen so much recently is due to a general lack of interest and that new albums are simply not particularly good value for money.
It would seem that the public’s perception of the music industry has changed, and that fewer and fewer people are willing to invest their hard-earned cash in music that they simply use to fill the silence rather than sit and listen to for pleasure.
Perhaps the enormous rise in illegal downloads is a sign that people are interested enough in music to take it for free, but not so in love with what’s on offer that they’d willingly pay the asking price. There seems to be a general vibe on Japanese online message boards that, with the option to download removed, few people are interested in today’s music enough to pay, and so would rather not bother entirely.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Copyright terror: Man sentenced to 15 years in jail for selling 6 counterfeit discs
http://rt.com/usa/news/king-couinterfeit-selling-ip-630/
The Justice Department isn’t exactly winnings its war on intellectual property theft — the attorney general says so himself. Until then, though, that doesn’t mean they are going to start going soft.
A Mississippi man was sentenced to 15 years behind bars and another three under supervised release this week after pleading guilty to selling five counterfeit DVDs and one bootleg music CD to an undercover agent.
Patrick Lashun King, 37, was sentenced by Judge Lamar Pickard of Copiah County Circuit Court after he pleaded guilty to six counts of selling pirated material, charges that he was lobbed with after an undercover agent attempted to purchase just a half-dozen homemade copies of music and movies the defendant wasn’t authorized to have up for sale.
King’s sentencing is the second of two piracy cases resolved in Mississippi court as of late that resulted in hefty sentences for the accused. On October 31, Antwun Sharell Jones of Meridian, MS was sentenced to two years for selling a single pirated movie.
“Anyone who is selling counterfeit goods in Mississippi should be well aware by now that he or she will be arrested and will face a serious prison term,” State Attorney General Jim Hood remarked of the so-called successes.
The prosecution says Buckles, “highlights the fact that the individuals engaging in these activities are frequently serial criminals for whom IP theft is simply the most convenient and profitable way they could steal from others.”
Meanwhile, a Texas man was also sentenced this week to 15 years in prison. Jason Shern was sentenced to a decade and a half after pleading guilty in the 2011 murder of a Central State University football player.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Verizon Will Reduce Speeds of Repeated BitTorrent Pirates
http://torrentfreak.com/verizon-will-reduce-speeds-of-repeated-bittorrent-pirates-121115/
At the end of this month the controversial “six-strikes” anti-piracy system will kick off in the U.S., and today two of the participating Internet providers have been discussing what measures they will take against repeated BitTorrent pirates. Verizon plans to notify alleged pirates via email and voice-mail, and will throttle the connection speeds of repeated infringers. Time Warner Cable will warn subscribers through popups and restrict users’ Internet browsing by directing them to a landing page.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Cable companies say they won’t disconnect accused pirates
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57550782-38/cable-companies-say-they-wont-disconnect-accused-pirates/
Verizon and Time Warner Cable say they won’t pull the plug on customers as a result of piracy complaints from Hollywood movie studios and record labels as part of the “six strikes” program.
Tomi Engdahl says:
One week left before US faces clamp down on piracy
Major ISPs combine on six strikes policy
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/11/22/us_piracy_crackdown_cci/
As Americans settle in for the Thanksgiving weekend of food and family, filesharing traffic traditionally shows a modest rise. But those downloading content may look back on this holiday as the last golden weekend of piracy if the major ISPs have anything to do with it.
Next week AT&T, Cablevision, Comcast, Time Warner Cable and Verizon will be signing up to a monitoring system run by the Center for Copyright Information (CCI). This organization will check for the IP addresses engaged in peer to peer or torrent downloading of copyrighted material and alert ISPs.
The CCI hasn’t responded to El Reg requests for information about how its system will work, but the Internet Society organized a debate on the topic earlier this month in which some members participated. From that, inquires in the industry, and leaked documents on one ISP’s plans, here’s how it will work in practice.
The system ISPs subscribe to uses a six strikes policy of piracy warnings, but it’s up to each provider how they handle them.
All parties freely acknowledge that this system will only catch the unskilled pirate. Users of TOR and VPN services may well escape detection and streaming services don’t seem to be picked up by the system. But the CCI representatives say they hope it’ll put a dent in the culture of piracy that has become so accepted in some circles.
No-one’s expressly ruled in cutting off internet access, but no-one’s ruling it out altogether either. Legal action against persistent offenders is also an option, but there will be a right of appeal for piracy alerts.
What does seem clear is that the media industry is looking to move away from a legislative approach against individual offenders towards working with the ISPs to deal with the problem at source.
So far it’s only the big providers that have signed up to the CCI system, but if it shows signs of success other ISPs might join up. The big five control an awful lot of US users, but there are still plenty of local ISPs who don’t seem to be part of the new system.
“An IP address is not an individual,” he said. “In order to engage due process you need to identify who the offender is. Demonstrably these content providers don’t appear interested in finding that out, just who has the Visa or MasterCard capable of settling this online and being done with it.”
Creeping legality
If the CCI is successful it will deter a lot of casual piracy. The people that make illicit money in the trade won’t be harmed, since they only need a single good copy to burn onto DVDs that are sold in bars and markets around the world. Tech-savvy pirates will still be able to evade detection, for the moment at least.
Ever since the invention of peer to peer networking the media industry has been struggling to play catch-up with piracy. It chose the legal route to crush Napster, Limewire et al, and gained nothing in the process other than a fat legal bill. Now it’s going after the problem at source, and the coming campaign is going to be very interesting.
Don’t expect this to happen quickly – all parties are going to be careful to tread carefully. But this time next year the downloading situation could look very different for vast numbers of Americans.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Police Raid 9-Year-Old Pirate Bay Girl, Confiscate Winnie The Pooh Laptop
http://torrentfreak.com/police-raid-9-year-old-pirate-bay-girl-confiscate-winnie-the-pooh-laptop-121122/
An anti-piracy company has found itself in the middle of a huge controversy. CIAPC, the company that had The Pirate Bay blocked by ISPs in Finland, tracked an alleged file-sharer and demanded a cash settlement. However, the Internet account holder refused to pay which escalated things to an unprecedented level. In response, this week police raided the home of the 9-year-old suspect and confiscated her Winnie the Pooh laptop.
Very soon in the United States, letters will be sent out to Internet account holders informing them that they should stop sharing copyrighted material on BitTorrent.
The message in the US from mainstream rightsholders is designed to be educational, but more aggressive companies carry out the same process but with a sting in the tail – a request for cash-settlement to make potential lawsuits go away.
One such request for cash landed on the doorstep of an Internet account holder in Finland during the spring. Known locally as TTVK, Finnish anti-piracy group CIAPC sent the man a letter informing him that his account had been traced back to an incidence of online file-sharing.
To stop matters progressing further the man was advised to pay a settlement of 600 euros, sign a non-disclosure document, and move on with his life. He chose not to give in to the demands of CIAPC and this week things escalated as promised.
Tomi Engdahl says:
US FBI set up Dotcom in Megaupload raid
Double cross taints the evidence
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2227395/us-fbi-set-up-dotcom-in-megaupload-raid
DIGITAL LOCKER MAGNATE Kim Dotcom has been buoyed by news that the US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Department of Homeland Security mishandled the case against Megaupload.
The New Zealand Herald newspaper discovered evidence Megaupload and Dotcom might have been raided for reasons outside of their control that won’t stand up in court.
The newspaper uncovered evidence of a search warrant filed against Megaupload in 2010 that Dotcom says forced it to preserve some allegedly “pirated material”.
The Herald says that when the FBI made its application to seize the website it used the fact that it stored this same content as support for its claims.
Dotcom says it’s all very bad form on the part of the US government, and thinks it might be the wedge that derails its charges against him and his website.
Tomi Engdahl says:
More and more condemns piracy
Finns’ attitudes towards piracy appear to have changed. According to a recent survey, the number of copyright piracy to keep evil than similar studies in the past.
Piracy also widely condemned, because only 5 percent of the total population and 10 percent of young people find it acceptable. In 2009, a study in which three young people adopted the unauthorized music and movie sharing network.
On the other hand, many still accept downloading pirated material, even better dating attitudes are changing. In 2009, approved the pirated material charging 42 per cent of young people, now 31 per cent.
“Based on the data, as well as the attitudes of the young people’s behavior will change in trend. Fewer and fewer of them keep uploading and sharing acceptable and fewer and fewer have made says that, ”
“The study shows that piracy due to the attitudes or feel that the law would, but the fact that free the temptation is so strong. There needs to be softer ways. Illegal supply must be moved from the Internet, it is wrong to the families of the legislature to leave it alone upon conscience, ”
Kaira keep the legal status of online services is excessive, “Pirate Services are stealing their content and concepts of legal services. What sense is there in that legitimate online service created by the entrepreneur has to compete with its own service with the pirated version? ”
Source: http://www.tietokone.fi/uutiset/yha_useampi_tuomitsee_piratismin
Tomi Engdahl says:
US & EU celebrate ‘Cyber Monday’ by seizing 132 websites
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/11/27/websites_seized_for_selling_counterfeit_goods/
Law-enforcement authorities in the US and the European Union celebrated “Cyber Monday” – the internet’s shopping-frenzy equivalent to brick-and-mortar stores’ Black Friday – by shuttering 132 websites for selling counterfeit merchandise.
“These websites were stealing from legitimate websites and copyright holders and the people who make these products,” US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) director John Morton told a conference call announcing the busts, reports AFP.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Megaupload closure reduced the movie theater audiences
Last week published a scientific economic research argues, however, that piracy accused the service shutdown is not necessarily beneficial to the contents of the legal distributing the movie theaters, but in fact, the closure has impacted negatively on ticket sales.
Munich, Ludwig-Maximilian University and the University of Copenhagen School of researchers looked at the movie theater ticket revenues the development of a five-year period.
According to researchers, the file-sharing service to effect the closure of cinemas ticket sales were a whole is negative
When the effects were examined in more detail the general popularity of the movie, the researchers discovered that the hit movie ticket sales benefited from the closure of Megaupload, but little or Medium to premium movie ticket sales suffered from shutdown of the service.
possible explanation is that the pirate-service closure reduced the flow of information consumers.
Source: http://www.tietoviikko.fi/kaikki_uutiset/megauploadin+sulkeminen+vahensi+elokuvien+teatterikatsojia/a859701?s=r&wtm=tietoviikko/-28112012&
Tomi Engdahl says:
Obama signs Safe Web Act into law
http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/270943-obama-signs-safe-web-act-into-law
President Obama signed into law on Tuesday a bill that would reauthorize the Federal Trade Commission’s authority to clamp down on Internet fraud and online scammers based abroad.
expands the FTC’s powers so it can share information about cross-border online fraud with foreign law enforcement authorities.
The bill was originally passed by Congress in 2006 and was set to expire next year. With the president’s signature, the measure is reauthorized through September 2020.
Since the bill was first enacted, the trade agency said it has conducted more than 100 investigations into cross-border fraud and scams.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Movie Studios Ask Google To Censor Links To Legal Copies of Their Own Films
http://tech.slashdot.org/story/12/12/04/2144221/movie-studios-ask-google-to-censor-links-to-legal-copies-of-their-own-films
“Several large movie studios have asked Google to take down legitimate pages related to their own films, including sites legally hosting, promoting, or discussing them. Victims of the takedown requests include sites where the content is hosted legally (Amazon, CBS, iTunes, Blockbuster, Verizon on demand, and Xfinity), newspapers discussing the content in question (the BBC, CNET, Forbes, The Huffington Post, The Guardian, The Independent, The Mirror, The Daily Mail, and Wired) as well as official Facebook Pages for the movies and TV shows and even their Wikipedia entries.”
Tomi Engdahl says:
Whoops: Movie studios ask Google to censor links to legal copies of their films and related content
http://thenextweb.com/media/2012/12/03/whoops-movie-studios-ask-google-to-censor-links-to-legal-copies-of-their-films-and-related-content/?fromcat=all
Several large movie studios have asked Google to take down legitimate pages related to their own films, including sites legally hosting, promoting, or discussing them. We’ve written about the ridiculousness of automated Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) requests before, including Microsoft asking Google to censor BBC, CBS, CNN, Wikipedia, the US government, and even its own Bing links, but this latest episode takes the cake.
In early November, a few dozen DMCA notices were sent by a company called “Yes It Is – No Piracy!” on behalf of several major movie studios, including Lionsgate, 20th Century Fox, BBC Films, Summit Entertainment, Sony Pictures, and Walt Disney Pictures. TorrentFreak lists some of the problems with the takedown requests, courtesy of Google’s Transparency Report.
Victims of the takedown requests include sites where the content is hosted legally (Amazon, CBS, iTunes, Blockbuster, Verizon on demand, and Xfinity), newspapers discussing the content in question (the BBC, CNET, Forbes, The Huffington Post, The Guardians, The Independent, The Mirror, The Daily Mail, and Wired) as well as official Facebook Pages for the movies and TV shows and even their Wikipedia entries.
We have no problem with companies asking Google to censor webpages in its search engine because they are either illegally hosting or linking to copyrighted material. That being said, automated requests that don’t get a final check from human eyes result in mistakes, and it’s frankly quite sad that Google has to sift through them all. Unfortunately, this isn’t the first time this has happened, and it likely won’t be the last.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Hollywood’s Total Piracy Awareness Program Set for January Launch
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/12/online-pirates-beware/
Beginning in a few weeks, the nation’s major internet service providers will roll out an initiative — backed by Obama and pushed by Hollywood and the record labels – to disrupt and possibly terminate internet access for online copyright scofflaws without the involvement of cops or courts. But that doesn’t mean Hollywood is done filing lawsuits or lobbying Congress.
“It doesn’t mean you give up on litigation,”
Chief among the topics was the so-called “Copyright Alert System,” an ISP search-and-disrupt operation that was originally set to begin by year’s end, but was delayed by Hurricane Sandy. The rollout is now set for next month, confirmed Marianne Grant, an MPAA vice president.
“We will be up and running in January,” Grant said. “This is going to make a difference. It won’t solve everything.”
Software makers sided with the film industry on the scope of the piracy problem, and, befitting their geekier nature, had actual hard data to back their gloomy conclusions.
Anaman said internet service providers, and Google, remove about 2 million links to copies of pirated Microsoft products every month.
Tomi Engdahl says:
Staffer axed by Republican group over retracted copyright-reform memo
Big Content doesn’t like the GOP advocating for copyright changes.
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/12/staffer-axed-by-republican-group-over-retracted-copyright-reform-memo/
The Republican Study Committee, a caucus of Republicans in the House of Representatives, has told staffer Derek Khanna that he will be out of a job when Congress re-convenes in January. The incoming chairman of the RSC, Steve Scalise (R-LA) was approached by several Republican members of Congress who were upset about a memo Khanna wrote advocating reform of copyright law.
The release and subsequent retraction of Khanna’s memo has made waves in tech policy circles. The document argues that the copyright regime has become too favorable to the interests of copyright holders and does not adequately serve the public interest. It advocates several key reforms, including reducing copyright terms and limiting the draconian “statutory damages” that can reach as high as $150,000 per infringing work.
The memo was widely hailed by tech policy scholars and public interests advocates. However, it raised the ire of content industry lobbyists
Tomi Engdahl says:
Influential GOP group releases, pulls shockingly sensible copyright memo
Reversal suggests a generation gap within the GOP.
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/11/influential-gop-group-releases-shockingly-sensible-copyright-memo/
The memo, titled “Three Myths about Copyright Law and Where to Start to Fix it,” is a direct assault on the relentlessly pro-copyright worldview dominating Washington for decades. “Most legislative discussions on this topic are not premised upon what is in the public good or what will promote the most productivity and innovation, but rather what the content creators ‘deserve’ or are ‘entitled to’ by virtue of their creation,” the memo says. That’s a problem, it argues, because the Constitution says the point of copyright is to “promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts”—not merely to line the pockets of incumbent copyright holders.
The memo also contends “copyright violates nearly every tenet of laissez-faire capitalism,” granting content producers a “guaranteed, government instituted, government subsidized content monopoly.” Excessive copyright protection, it claims, “leads to what economists call ‘rent-seeking’ which is effectively non-productive behavior that sucks economic productivity and potential from the overall economy.”
The memo concludes with policy recommendations, and it reads like a copyright reformer’s wish list. It calls for reducing statutory damages, which under current law can go as high as $150,000 per infringement. It advocates expanded fair use and penalties for false copyright claims. And it proposes a complex new scheme for copyright renewals that would reduce the maximum term of copyright to 46 years. Under current law, copyright protection for individual authors lasts for the life of the author plus another 70 years.
How did such a sensible document emerge from one of the most powerful groups on Capitol Hill? The memo was authored by a young Republican Study Committee staffer, Derek Khanna. Khanna has been active in Republican politics since high school.
Khanna has exactly the kind of resume you’d expect for someone with tech-savvy views on copyright law. He lists “C++, Backtrack, Python, Sql, Java, Dreamweaver/Photoshop, statistical modeling,” as interests, as well as “building computers and beta testing software.” Best of all, Khanna tells us that he’s an “avid reader” of Ars Technica.
The significance of Khanna’s memo is best understood in the light of January’s defeat of the Stop Online Piracy Act. As we pointed out shortly after SOPA’s defeat, Hollywood long enjoyed closer ties to Democrats than Republicans.
The defeat of SOPA was overwhelmingly the work of Khanna’s generation. Thousands of youthful redditors and Wikipedians called their representatives in Congress.
Khanna’s memo has received widespread (and overwhelmingly positive) attention from the tech blogosphere.
Tomi says:
TVShack’s Richard O’Dwyer sent home with £20,000 fine
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/12/07/tvshack_fine/
Richard O’Dwyer, the Briton who ran one of the world’s most popular pirate websites, must cough up £20,000 after avoiding extradition in a bargain with US authorities.
Prosecutors said O’Dwyer, now a student, earned $230,000 (£143k) from TVShack; he previously said he banked £15,000 a month from the website.
O’Dwyer set up TVShack.net in 2007, and provided links to video streams and online storage lockers at websites including DivxDen.com, NovaMov.com and VideoWeed.com. He encouraged users to contribute material, with a how-to guide, advising that “only full movies and full TV episodes are accepted”.
After the TVShack domain was seized by the US authorities in June 2010, O’Dwyer set up again at TVShack.cc and carried on
O’Dwyer’s supporters maintain he broke no UK criminal law.