In the only file-sharing case to go to trial in the US, a jury in Minnesota has found Jammie Thomas-Rasset, guilty and ordered to her topay $1.9 million (£1.2m). Her first trial ended without a verdict.
A spokeswoman for the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) said the companies are willing to settle out of court for a much smaller amount. Most people targeted by the RIAA had settled for around £1,500 each. The massive damage award, which increased from $9,250 per song in the first trial to $80,000, might sounds could actually work against the RIAA and further entrench those who support file sharing.
With Thomas-Rasset and the defense team talking hard about continuing the fight and with such a huge fine it looks certain that the battle was won by the RIAA but that the war is far from over.
Companies including Sony, BMI, Universal and Warner Music say they are now concentrating on working with internet service providers to crack down on the worst offenders of file-sharing.
Showing posts with label illegal file sharing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label illegal file sharing. Show all posts
Friday, June 19, 2009
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Irish ISPs Say No To Three Strikes
The Irish internet service providers (ISPs) are reported by outlaw.com as having rejected claims that they are responsible for users' copyright infringement. The ISP Association of Ireland claim that there is no legal basis for the music industry's demands, fronted by the International Federation of the Phonographic Industries (IFPI) that they disconnect copyright-infringing internet users.
The IFPI had pursued Ireland's biggest ISP, Eircom, through the courts in relation to users' alleged copyright infringement. Some days into the court case Eircom agreed to the three strikes deal. Then Ireland's IFPI-affiliated music industry lobby group, the Irish Recorded Music Association (IRMA), wrote to other ISPs demanding that they block a list of websites it believes facilitate piracy.
However the ISP Association of Ireland (ISPAI) has said that its members will not submit to IRMA's demands and that its activities are protected by law.Although, Eircom is a member of the ISPAI, it will comply with IRMA's demands.
So as usual it’s as clear as mud!
The IFPI had pursued Ireland's biggest ISP, Eircom, through the courts in relation to users' alleged copyright infringement. Some days into the court case Eircom agreed to the three strikes deal. Then Ireland's IFPI-affiliated music industry lobby group, the Irish Recorded Music Association (IRMA), wrote to other ISPs demanding that they block a list of websites it believes facilitate piracy.
However the ISP Association of Ireland (ISPAI) has said that its members will not submit to IRMA's demands and that its activities are protected by law.Although, Eircom is a member of the ISPAI, it will comply with IRMA's demands.
So as usual it’s as clear as mud!
Wednesday, August 06, 2008
US Education Establishments Forced to Play Copyright Cops
In the US a bill has been passed in the House that will empower the secretary of education to withhold federal financial aid money to schools that do not develop and implement solutions to reduce the amount of illegal downloading. The bill now just needs presidential signature.
Schools and Universities now must inform students that they could face civil or criminal charges if they are found to be illegally downloading copyrighted material. They must also develop a file sharing policy and inform the Education Department on the steps taken to prevent and detect illegal file-sharing.
On one hand the schools point out that this is a non funded exercise that they must find funds to cover and on the other hand the bill is welcomed and fully supported by the Copyright organizations such as the Copyright Alliance, the National Music Publishers' Association and the Motion Picture Association of America.
The MPAA claimed that piracy on university campuses accounted for 44% of the movie industry's annual losses to piracy. A claim later found to be grossly inflated and withdraw. The RIAA published a list of top piracy schools but faced serious court setbacks when it tried to develop a site to handle automated settlements. The MPAA also distributed a software toolkit for detecting file-sharing, but was forced to discontinue its distribution when it was discovered that they themselves had broken copyright by failing to adhere to its General Public License under its distribution.
Currently there are no penalties for failing to comply with the requirements but the structure is now in place to implement them and then schools and universities could be denied funding.
The problem is that this is merely just shifting the problem down the line and not addressing any of the core issues. Threatening to withhold funding against an institution who has to combat any illegal peer sharing at their cost is similar to asking ISPs to be responsible for what everyone does on their service. It’s ironic that the bill reaches this stage at a time when the world is watching China and what it allows and doesn’t on the Internet.
Schools and Universities now must inform students that they could face civil or criminal charges if they are found to be illegally downloading copyrighted material. They must also develop a file sharing policy and inform the Education Department on the steps taken to prevent and detect illegal file-sharing.
On one hand the schools point out that this is a non funded exercise that they must find funds to cover and on the other hand the bill is welcomed and fully supported by the Copyright organizations such as the Copyright Alliance, the National Music Publishers' Association and the Motion Picture Association of America.
The MPAA claimed that piracy on university campuses accounted for 44% of the movie industry's annual losses to piracy. A claim later found to be grossly inflated and withdraw. The RIAA published a list of top piracy schools but faced serious court setbacks when it tried to develop a site to handle automated settlements. The MPAA also distributed a software toolkit for detecting file-sharing, but was forced to discontinue its distribution when it was discovered that they themselves had broken copyright by failing to adhere to its General Public License under its distribution.
Currently there are no penalties for failing to comply with the requirements but the structure is now in place to implement them and then schools and universities could be denied funding.
The problem is that this is merely just shifting the problem down the line and not addressing any of the core issues. Threatening to withhold funding against an institution who has to combat any illegal peer sharing at their cost is similar to asking ISPs to be responsible for what everyone does on their service. It’s ironic that the bill reaches this stage at a time when the world is watching China and what it allows and doesn’t on the Internet.
Wednesday, July 02, 2008
Textbook Piracy
The Chronicle of Higher Education reports on the increasing number of college students that are downloading illegal copies of textbooks using the same file-trading technologies used to download other media. Textbook Torrents, is one of the sites being used and is reported as promising, ‘more than 5,000 textbooks for download in PDF format, complete with the original textbook layout and full-color illustrations.’ They even incite students to start scanning their textbooks, "Scan as many of your other textbooks as you can, and put them up here for others to benefit from. There aren't very many scanned texts out there, so let's change that." Also on the site's forums users often list the books they would like to see uploaded.
The AAP’s director of digital policy, Edward McCoyd is reported saying on illegal files that, ‘In any given two-week period we found from 60,000 files all the way up to 250,000 files.’
Scribd, a document-sharing Web site that opened this year is also mentioned. Scribd promises to remove any content that is uploaded without the copyright holder's permission and banning users that repeatedly abuse that rule.
So far, publishers have largely acted on an ad hoc basis and targeted the sites making the material available, rather than the students themselves.
What we are seeing is de javu. We saw the same in music with the early Napster and Kazza services and although they were different, the drive was the same. If the content isn’t available someone will make it available. If you overprice or value it someone will do it cheaper. If you lock it up and restrict access and usage, someone will free it. Today Academic text is were the most digital content and activity is and it interesting that the problems are now starting to be very visible in this sector. What does this say of the other publishing sectors, particularly Trade?
Scanning a book isn’t a simple task and takes time and effort but when the content isn’t there in the format required, some people will do it themselves, and then they will share it. The current dearth of trade digital content has to be addressed and the existing channels fully supported. We also can't expect consumers to always understand and respect territorial restrictions in a global digital environment.
We can’t expect consumers to buy ereaders in the current content vacuum, as the potential consequences may be bigger than the investments that some are apprehensive about today.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)