TorrentFreak Email Update |
| Planned BitTorrent Pirate Punishments Spark Protest Posted: 23 Mar 2012 01:56 PM PDT
In an attempt to deter online piracy, a third-party company will collect the IP-addresses of alleged infringers on BitTorrent and other public file-sharing networks. The ISPs will then notify these offenders and tell them that their behavior is unacceptable. After six warnings the ISP may then take a variety of repressive measures, which include cutting off the offender's connection temporarily. After the initial announcement things went quiet, but that changed last week when the RIAA and the Center for Copyright Information confirmed that all major ISPs will start warning BitTorrent users this summer. This renewed attention resulted in wide press coverage, and also sparked massive protests. Activist group Demand Progress quickly switched back to SOPA-style campaign mode and launched a petition asking ISPs to cut out of the deal. “They’re selling us out,” the group writes. “Just weeks after Internet users from across the globe came together to beat SOPA, the major ISPs are cutting a deal with Big Content to restrict web access for users who are accused of piracy.” The call didn’t go unheard, and within 24 hours more than 60,000 people signed the petition. Today this number has swelled to more than 90,000 and the end still isn’t in sight. Earlier this week the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) also expressed its concerns over the so-called ‘graduated response’ system. They highlight that the agreement puts the burden of proof on the alleged file-sharers, which doesn’t seem fair considering the many wrongful accusations that can occur. “One key problem is the arrangement shifts the burden of proof: rather than accusers proving infringement before the graduated response process starts against a subscriber, the subscriber must disprove the accusation in order to call a halt to it,” EFF writes. “Worse, accused subscribers have to defend themselves on an uneven playing field. For example, they have only ten days to prepare a defense, and with only six pre-set options available. Of course, there’s no assurance that those who review the cases are neutral, and the plan sorely lacks consequences for an accuser who makes mistaken or fraudulent claims.” The EFF informed TorrentFreak that they plan to launch an activism campaign in the near future to raise awareness of these issues. How ‘bad’ the graduated warning system turns out to be largely depends on what punishments Internet providers intend to hand out. Needless to say, a temporary reduction in bandwidth is less severe than cutting people’s Internet access. At TorrentFreak we are interested in finding out which third-party company will be hired to monitor people’s BitTorrent downloads, and how solid their evidence gathering methods are. This is important, because the RIAA’s previous partner MediaSentry used rather shoddy techniques which resulted in many false accusations. The RIAA’s current partner DtecNet also has shortcomings as they fail to understand how BitTorrent works. As we move closer to the July deadline more details should emerge. At the same time the online protests are also expected to increase, both through public initiatives and various advocacy groups. While it’s doubtful that they will ever get the same exposure as the SOPA revolt, there is no doubt that these protests will be noticed. Source: Planned BitTorrent Pirate Punishments Spark Protest
| ||
| Google Strikes Back After MPAA Objects To Hotfile Intervention Posted: 23 Mar 2012 06:08 AM PDT
Worried that a negative judgment might have lasting effects for sites such as YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, and Wikipedia, Google explained the the studios are wrong when they say that Hotfile doesn’t deserve protection under the safe harbors of the DMCA. "Without the protections afforded by the safe harbors, those services might have been forced to fundamentally alter their operations or might never have launched in the first place," Google wrote in its brief. But the MPAA objected to the search engine’s intervention, describing its brief as a “systematic effort by Google, itself a defendant in ongoing copyright infringement cases, to influence the development of the law to Google’s own advantage.” “Although Google purports not to take a position regarding summary judgment here, Google unmistakably seeks a ruling against Plaintiffs. Google’s motion should be denied,” the studios conclude. Now Google has responded and roundly rejects the MPAA’s opposition. The search engine denies that it wants the court to rule one way or the other, but is instead trying to highlight the importance of the DMCA’s safe harbors “and the broad consensus that has developed among courts called upon to apply those provisions.” Google says that its intention for filing the amicus brief is not to directly assist Hotfile or indeed further its own interests, but to help highlight the importance of the court’s decision on the wider Internet. “Google’s aim in seeking to participate in this case is to underscore the importance of the Court’s decision to a wide array of legitimate and socially beneficial Internet services, and to the overall climate of free expression online,” Google’s counsel writes. Google says that its filing is “classic amicus curae” – assisting in a case of general public interest, supplementing the efforts of counsel, and drawing the court’s attention to law that escaped consideration. It adds pointedly that the MPAA has not attempted to use relevant DMCA case law to have the brief dismissed. “It is telling in that regard that Plaintiffs’ Opposition does nothing to refute the actual legal and policy arguments in Google’s proposed brief,” Google notes. “Rather than oppose Google’s arguments on the merits, Plaintiffs try to silence Google.” It will be interesting to see the outcome of the conflict here between the MPAA and Google and whether it remains localized in the Hotfile court room or spill over to other affairs. While Google’s points regarding the effects of this case on the wider Internet are noble, it seems unlikely that they aren’t considering their own interests too. Nevertheless, that doesn’t make their stance any less valid. The IFPI also took up an aggressive stance (1,2) against Google recently but it’s difficult to see how rightsholder conflict with the world’s most influential Internet company will yield the results they’re looking for. Source: Google Strikes Back After MPAA Objects To Hotfile Intervention
|
Last year the MPAA and RIAA 
The heat in the year-long copyright infringement lawsuit between the MPAA and Hotfile stepped up a level recently after | You are subscribed to email updates from TorrentFreak To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
No comments:
Post a Comment