Govt lawyers red-faced after FBI spirits Dotcom evidence to US (MegaUpload)

The Government’s lawyers have been ordered to explain how the FBI left the country with evidence in the Kim Dotcom case meant to be kept in “secure custody” by New Zealand police.

High Court chief judge Helen Winkelmann has told the Attorney-General’s lawyer, Mike Ruffin, he has until Monday to explain why FBI agents were allowed to take 135 cloned computer and data storage devices to the United States.

At a legal challenge at the High Court in Auckland yesterday, Dotcom’s lawyer Paul Davison, QC, called the revelation “high-handed” at best and “at the worst misleading”.

Mr Davison and lawyers for Dotcom’s three co-accused want a judicial review into search warrants used during FBI-inspired raids on January 20. Dotcom, Finn Batato, Mathias Ortman and Bram van der Kolk were arrested over allegations of criminal copyright violation through their file-sharing website Megaupload.

Mr Davison said he asked for assurances in correspondence with Mr Ruffin’s predecessor, Anne Toohey, that no evidence would leave New Zealand shores unless on the back of a court decision.

More:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10808032

‘We’ve done nothing wrong’ – Google’s Schmidt on Euro antitrust probe

Schmidt declined to respond on whether his firm would indeed put forward any “remedies” as requested by Almunia, who was clear that a Statement of Objections could be issued within weeks if Google didn’t play ball.

Schmidt claimed that he hadn’t seen any precise examples of which laws his company might have abused and remained steadfast that his firm would be continuing to talk to the competition commissioner and his team.

Earlier, Schmidt told the Big Tent crowd that he was “not aware of anything we’ve done wrong. We’re happy to be educated on the contrary”.

Beyond that, he said “we’re not going to speculate”, which is interesting not least because of the amount of evidence that has been placed in the public domain from complainants who have grumbled to the European Commission that Google does favour its own search results over others.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/05/23/eric_schmidt_google_big_tent/

Dutch Court: online marketplace Marktplaats not liable for copyright infringements

Dutch marketplace website Marktplaats, acquired by eBay, can’t be held liable for copyright infringements, the Dutch Court of Appeal of Leeuwarden ruled yesterday. Stokke, manufacturer of chairs for children, sued Marktplaats because it wouldn’t prevent sellers from placing infringing advertisements of counterfeit Stokke chairs and Marktplaats wouldn’t take enough measures to remove these advertisements.

The Court decided otherwise. Marktplaats offers a facility where every seller can advertise on equal terms. It doesn’t promote certain advertisements from certain sellers, so it doesn’t play an active role as a service provider. According to the Court this means Marktplaats is a hosting service according to the E-Commerce Directive (Directive 2000/31/EC) and the Dutch Civil Code (article 6:196c paragraph 4) and may therefore rely on the legal indemnity mentioned in these legal frameworks This indemnity provision states that – in short – under certain conditions hosting services are not liable for copyrighted content on their websites.

More:
http://www.futureofcopyright.com/home/blog-post/2012/05/23/dutch-court-online-marketplace-marktplaats-not-liable-for-copyright-infringements.html

Kazaa code rises from ashes to help ISPs block pirated material for profit. Can block child porn too! And replace Google’s Ads!

Talk about disruptive technologies. The article also suggests that there’s a commercial incentive needed if one wants ISPs to be dealing with piracy issues. It’s interesting how all these – very different – topics are being put in the same basket: it is probably all zeros and ones right? Pirated files, child abuse images, online advertising…just identify, replace and make some money while doing it…

The people behind a company once accused of being complicit in copyright infringement through peer-to-peer filesharing are now selling software that blocks pirated content—and gives Internet service providers a way to make cash in the process. And soon, a version of the same technology could be used by ISPs to inject their own advertisements into search results—a capability that is sure to raise the ire of proponents of network neutrality.

Global File Systems LLC, a subsidiary of Kazaa owners Brilliant Digital Entertainment Inc. (BDE), have developed software that combines a database of “known bad files” with Web filtering technology at the ISP’s firewall, allowing ISPs to intercept and change links in search results being passed back to a user’s PC—and sending searchers to sites where the user can pay for legitimate copies of the content.

“A number of trials have shown that, properly priced, it’s possible for the content owners and the ISP partners to take back customers from the pirate operation,” BDE’s Michael Speck, who manages the content management business, told Ars in an interview. He said that the software, called Global File Registry—advertised with the tag line, “What goes up can come down”—offers an opportunity to end “the friction between content owners and ISPs,” and to make content blocking a no-cost or profit-making capability for the ISPs themselves.

Speck said that the other solutions proposed by content owners and some ISPs to stop piracy (such as those that were part of drafts of the failed SOPA and PIPA legislation) require fundamental changes to the way the Internet works. BDE’s approach, he said, “is a software platform integrated into the existing machinery of the Internet,” and doesn’t require changes to the Domain Name Service.

Ironically, Global File Registry is based on Truenames, a file identification technology that was originally part of the Kazaa filesharing service. “It’s the Truenames patents that allow individual items of content to be located within a peer-to-peer or cloud environment,” Speck said. BDE has pursued a number of cloud companies to get them to license the technology, and Speck says that many have bought in, including Skype, Level 3 Communications, and Google (which Speck called “one of our most enthusiastic licensees”).

In the case of Global File Registry, which BDE has worked with Cisco to develop over the past few years, a database of Truenames identifying information is combined with the existing content-filtering capability of firewalls to intercept links to infringing content being returned in search results. The software, which is embedded in the ISP’s firewall, then modifies the data to remove and replace the link. “ISPs already have equipment that can identify ‘bad data’,” Speck said. “We’re only asking the machinery that operates the Internet to do one more thing after it identifies bad data—and that is to convert it to a positive response.”

Speck added that the software doesn’t look at the source of the infringing content or the destination of the search results, so it doesn’t identify users trying to access the content. “It’s only a refinement of the data being delivered,” he said.

Global File Registry is already being deployed, and BDE is initially marketing the software to ISPs in Australia, New Zealand, and France. In addition to the anti-piracy version of the software, Global File Registry is also being packaged for law enforcement customers in a version the company plans to give away as a way to block access to child pornography sites, drawing from data collected by child protection organizations.

But what may be the most controversial version of the Global File Registry product is yet to come. Speck says Global File Systems is preparing a version for the US market that allows ISPs to intercept contextual ads in search results and inject their own advertisements in their place. “At the moment, ISP operators invest in the network, acquire customers, and just open the window to the Internet, allowing other people to push advertising down customers’s throats,” Speck said. “We believe it’s incongruous that ISPs should just open the window and allow them to force-feed advertising,” rather than getting their own advertising revenue, he explained.

Speck calls the software “an ISP packet-adjusted advertising platform,” and says it relies on the same technology as the anti-piracy software. “Relying on that same technology, we have been able to replace a search engine or website’s advertising with the ISP’s own advertising,” he said. But he added that “we’re not suggesting we can forensically remove and replace every advertisement from every webpage”—the technology is specifically targeted at search-based ads “of a certain category.”

When asked how Google would feel about the idea of ISPs swapping their own advertisements for Google’s paid ads, Speck said, “I think they’re excited about the prospect that someone can do that, which is why they’re one of the most enthusiastic licensees of our technology.” But he admits there may be some resistance. “Whenever there is a fundamental shift in a business model, the primary resistance is going to be from the established players.”

Google has not yet responded to an Ars inquiry on the level of the company’s enthusiasm for the interception of its main revenue stream.

http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/05/kazaa-code-rises-from-ashes-to-help-isps-profit-by-zapping-rogue-links/

Anti-Piracy Organization BREIN & Dutch Police Hunt Down eBook Uploader

A Dutch 21-year-old man has posted 4,900 Dutch eBooks and 10 seasons of a certain TV Show on The Pirate Bay.

Dutch anti-piracy organization BREIN has tracked down this uploader and filed a criminal complaint against the individual with the Dutch police.

The Dutch police has interrogated the suspect who has now confessed his crimes. He is risking a fine of 19,500 EUR or a prison sentence of 6 months.

Should the public prosecutor’s office decide not to prosecute the individual, BREIN will go and start a civil litigation procedure.

Not too long ago, Dutch internet service provider UPC told BREIN to go and prosecute uploaders.

Dutch language news article:
http://webwereld.nl/nieuws/110601/brein-stuurt-politie-af-op-uploader.html

Does A Change Of IP Address Change The Illegallity Of A Website? KPN And Tele2 Seem To Think So

And that’s why they refuse to block The Pirate Bay website (again) now that it has changed its IP address. The Dutch providers feel that BREIN just has to take them to court again.

Dutch language news article:
http://webwereld.nl/nieuws/110604/kpn-en-tele2–geen-blokkade-nieuw-pirate-bay-adres.html

The data on Kim Dotcom’s personal computer is encrypted, and he will only hand over passwords if he can also access the data (MegaUpload)

Try “w0rldd0m1n4t10n”

And so it winds on further: in the latest installment to the Aotearoan legal battle, Kim Dotcom’s lawyer that he will only hand over his passwords as part of a “proper judicial process”.

Dotcom, head of Megaupload and accused by the FBI of racketeering and copyright infringement, is resisting extradition to the USA and seeking the return of computers and other property seized when his rented mansion in New Zealand was raided by the Feds and New Zealand police.

More:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/05/22/dotcom_password_court_fight/

MPAA’s Chris Dodd About Piracy: “We’re going to have to be more subtle and consumer-oriented. We’re on the wrong track if we describe this as thievery”

“We’re in a transformative period with an explosion of technology that’s going to need content,” he said.

But Internet companies such as Google, Facebook and Twitter campaigned effectively against the legislation, mobilizing users on grounds that the new rules would impede the free flow of information on the Internet.

“Google chose wisely by making Hollywood the enemy,” Dodd said ruefully.

He said Saturday that the industry will need to take a far more nuanced approach to promoting future antipiracy legislation.

More:
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118054314

See also:

MPAA Head Thinks Piracy Shouldn’t Be Called “Theft”
http://gizmodo.com/5912057/mpaa-head-thinks-piracy-shouldnt-be-called-theft

The Supreme Court won’t reduce the US$675,000 verdict against a Boston University student who illegally downloaded 30 songs and shared them on the Internet

The high court on Monday refused to hear an appeal from Joel Tenenbaum, of Providence, R.I., who was successfully sued by the Recording Industry Association of America for illegally sharing music on peer-to-peer networks. In 2009, a jury ordered Tenenbaum to pay $675,000, or $22,500 for each song he illegally downloaded and shared.

A federal judge called that unconstitutionally excessive, but the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reinstated the penalty at the request of Sony BMG Music Entertainment, Warner Brothers Records Inc. and other record labels represented by the RIAA.

http://calgary.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20120521/verdict-firm-for-student-who-downloaded-music-120521/20120521/?hub=CalgaryHome

Undercover MPAA Agents Expose Alleged Movie Pirates In What Hollywood Describes As The Largest Copyright Related Fraud Case In UK History

A British couple are facing life imprisonment after an MPAA sting operation revealed they were the owners of streaming links site SurfTheChannel. Aside from the use of an undercover agent who gained access to the defendants’ house under false pretenses, the case also involves an unprecedented cooperation between the US and UK governments, in which a defendant in the US was offered a deal after agreeing to cooperate and testify in a UK trial.

For years the US movie industry has tried to bring streaming links site SurfTheChannel.com to its knees.

After a chain of events that reads like a Hollywood blockbuster script, the case is now on trial with husband and wife team Anton and Kelly Vickerman as the defendants.

Much more:
http://torrentfreak.com/undercover-mpaa-agents-expose-alleged-movie-pirates-120521/

See also:

Hollywood sting lands “pirate” pair in the brig

A Gateshead couple are accused of running a site that enabled a billion illegal film and TV viewings a year
http://www.scribd.com/doc/94186395/Vickerman-Piracy-Case-Sunday-Times

Greek Court Orders ISP Blockades of ‘Pirate’ Music Sites

Following in the footsteps of other courts around Europe, a Greek court has ordered the country’s ISPs to start censoring sites that allegedly infringe copyright. The blockades, which were requested by music rights organizations against two specific sites, will be implemented by DNS record tampering and IP address filtering.

2012 is proving to be momentous year for those looking to censor the Internet on copyright grounds. With nationwide blockades of The Pirate Bay biting in many countries including both the Netherlands and the UK, it was only a question of time before the phenomenon spread further still.

Much more:
http://torrentfreak.com/greek-court-orders-isp-blockades-of-pirate-music-sites-120521/

Google must answer EU antitrust concerns over search, copyright, advertising and how it deals with competitors

An investigation by Europe’s antitrust head Joaquin Almunia looked at whether Google gave preferential treatment to its own services in its search results.

Mr Almunia said the company must now “offer remedies” swiftly.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18143812

and:

“I offer Google the possibility to come up in a matter of weeks with remedies,” said Almunia. “If Google comes up with an outline of remedies which are capable of addressing our concerns, I will instruct my staff to initiate the discussions in order to finalize a remedies package.”

Google wasn’t immediately available to comment.

The EU’s anti-trust chief said it was in the interest of all those involved in the case to reach a “quick resolution” to the four areas of concern he has identified.

The first concern relates to how Google displays links to its own vertical searches for services such as restaurants or news differently to the way it does for links to competitors.

“We are concerned that this may result in preferential treatment compared to those of competing services, which may be hurt as a consequence,” Almunia said.

The second part of the investigation, Almunia said, focused on how Google copies content from competing vertical search services and “uses it in its own offerings…using that material on its own sites without their prior authorization.”

Third, EU regulators want Google to change the deal it strikes with its partners, whereby Google dictates how websites deliver search advertisements. This obliges partners to “obtain all or most of their requirements of search advertisements from Google, thus shutting out competing providers”, and could potentially impact advertising services purchased for example by online stores, online magazines or broadcasters, Almunia said.

Finally, EU anti-trust regulators found that competitors were shut out of Google’s auction-based advertising platform, AdWords, on which advertisers can bid for the placement of search ads on search result pages provided by Google.

The Internet giant will now need to submit an outline of possible remedies to address regulators’ concerns.

More:
http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20120521-705717.html

Anti-Piracy Outfits Launch Attack on BitTorrent Protocol

In recent weeks alarm bells sounded at Poland’s Computer Emergency Response Team when it was discovered that an unknown entity is sending massive amounts of forged data packets and posing a threat to BitTorrent users worldwide. A detailed analysis reveals that anti-piracy outfits may be initiating these attacks to prevent movies from being downloaded. According to security experts, the legality of these attacks is doubtful.

The security researchers, who say these poisoning attacks are happening on a massive scale, observe that they are targeted at specific BitTorrent swarms sharing Russian movie releases.

One of the likely explanations for these poisoning attacks is that anti-piracy outfits are utilizing them to “protect” their clients’ movies. For example, these outfits could overload BitTorrent swarms with corrupt data or “disconnect” messages while masquerading as legitimate downloaders.

This is exactly what the Microsoft funded startup Pirate Pay appears to be doing although other companies may also use similar methods. A company called ICM is currently listed as “protecting” the Russian film that was the subject of the attacks identified by CERT.

The security researchers don’t make any conclusive claims about the origins of the attacks, but they do note that anti-piracy groups are a possible source.

More:
http://torrentfreak.com/anti-piracy-outfits-launch-attack-on-bittorrent-protocol-120519/

Record companies score infringement victory over “Russian Facebook” vKontakte

Russian social media site vKontakte—a platform with 135 million accounts across Russia, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, and Belarus—has lost its court appeal seeking to overturn an earlier ruling against it stating that the company was infringing copyright by allowing file-sharing services to integrate with vKontakte’s user-uploaded media libraries.

On May 17, Russia’s Commercial Court of St. Petersburg reaffirmed a lower court’s January ruling in favor of SBA Music Publishing and Gala Records, a Russian subsidiary of EMI, which claimed that vKontakte was liable for all the copyright infringement taking place on its site. The Facebook-like site (even down to the design) will most likely be required to shutter or severely restrict its file-sharing services.

More:

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/05/record-companies-score-infringement-victory-over-russian-facebook/

UK ISPs must block The Pirate Bay by May 30

Two of the five U.K. ISPs have already enacted site-blocking to prevent access to The Pirate Bay. More than a quarter of the U.K. population will see the site blocked by May 30.

Site Blocking Measures Appear To Work: The Pirate Bay Changes Its IP Address (But Still In The Same Range)

New IP address: http://194.71.107.80/

The Pirate Bay’s IP Range: 194.71.107.0 – 194.71.107.255

inetnum: 194.71.107.0 – 194.71.107.255
netname: THEPIEATEBAY-NET
descr: The Pirate Bay
country: DE
route: 194.71.107.0/24
descr: The Pirate Bay
origin: AS50066
mnt-by: MNT-STN
source: RIPE # Filtered

The Dutch media report that the Dutch judge has not allowed BREIN to submit new IP addresses so BREIN may have to go back to court for each and every new IP address The Pirate Bay decides to use after a blockade has been implemented.

Dutch language news article:
http://webwereld.nl/nieuws/110547/nieuw-ip-adres-pirate-bay-omzeilt-brein-blokkade.html

Meanwhile, The Pirate Bay’s Alexa Rank in the United Kingdom has dropped to the 50th spot, a rapid decline since 12th May 2012 when it was the 42nd most popular site in that country.

US “Six Strikes” Anti-Piracy Scheme Delayed

The plan was announced under the name ‘Copyright Alerts‘ in July last year and the first ISPs were expected to send out the first warnings before the end of 2011. But this deadline passed silently and as things stand now it looks like the July 1, 2012 deadline is not going to be met by all ISPs either.

TorrentFreak asked the CCI about the upcoming target date, and their response suggests that things may take longer than expected.

“The dates mentioned in the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) are not hard deadlines but were intended to keep us on track to have the Copyright Alert System up and running as quickly as possible and in the most consumer friendly manner possible,” a spokesperson told us.

“We do not intend to launch until we are confident that the program is consumer friendly and able to be implemented in a manner consistent with all of the goals of the MOU. We expect our implementation to begin later this year.”

In other words, it’s taking more time than expected. That said, the CCI did inform us that they have finally selected a third-party company that will be responsible for monitoring BitTorrent swarms. However, the name of the firm remains a secret for now.

More:
http://torrentfreak.com/us-six-strikes-anti-piracy-scheme-delayed-120518/

Indian Supreme Court orders Vimeo, DailyMotion, Pirate Bay, Pastebin blocks, gets DDoSed

An injunction issued by an Indian court in a copyright infringement case has forced Indian Internet service providers to block access to the video-sharing sites Vimeo and DailyMotion, Bittorrent-tracker The Pirate Bay, text-sharing site Pastebin and a number of other websites. In response, members of Anonymous mounted a denial of service attack on the websites of the Indian Supreme Court and the Indian National Congress political party. As of 2pm GMT, both sites are back up.

The temporary restraining order (PDF) was issued by The High Court of Judicature at Madras in response to a lawsuit by the Chennai, India based company Copyrightlabs (whose site appears to have been taken down for maintenance) over the sharing of the movie “3″ online. It orders ISPs to stop sharing of the film “by copying, recording, reproducing, camcording or communicating, or allowing others to to communicate” the contents of the film in any form.

More:
http://arstechnica.com/security/2012/05/indian-supreme-court-orders-pirate-bay-pastebin-blocks-gets-ddosed/

“Loosely Knit” Anonymous denies it is behind The Pirate Bay DDoS attack. WikiLeaks Now Under DDoS Attack Too

Pirate Bay “Confirms Denial” By Loosely Knit Anonymous

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/security/anonymous-denies-it-is-behind-the-pirate-bay-ddos-attack/12191
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/security/wikileaks-has-been-under-ddos-attack-for-the-last-three-days/12219

Previously:

Anonymous, CCC, Cypherpunk, DDoS, Hacker, Hadopi, MegaUpload, Parti Pirate, WikiLeaks, 4Chan, 5e Pouvoir
http://vrritti.com/2012/02/11/anonymous-ccc-cypherpunk-ddos-hacker-hadopi-megaupload-parti-pirate-wikileaks-4chan-5e-pouvoir/

Despite blanket media coverage of Wikileaks and Julian Assange, there has been little discussion of the fact that Assange is merely one leader within a large and complicated social movement: Wikileaks, Karl Marx and You
http://vrritti.com/2011/01/12/despite-blanket-media-coverage-of-wikileaks-and-julian-assange-there-has-been-little-discussion-of-the-fact-that-assange-is-merely-one-leader-within-a-large-and-complicated-social-movement-wikileaks/

Finnish Court: Open WiFi Owner Not Liable for File-Sharing Copyright Infringement

In a landmark ruling, a Finnish District Court (*Ylivieskan käräjäoikeus*) has today clarified the legal status of WiFi owners for internet file-sharing in the light of various pieces of EU legislation.

Finnish Anti-Piracy Centre, a coalition of entertainment industry rights-holders, had sued a Finnish woman for copyright infringement, demanding compensation of circa 6000 euros for internet file-sharing conducted with the Direct Connect (DC++) protocol through her internet connection.

This alleged copyright infringement had taken place in a specific 12-minute period in July 14 2010, a date when a summer theater play with an audience of around hundred people was held at the premises of the former school
owned and resided by the lady.

The applicants were unable to provide any evidence that the connection-owner herself had been involved in the file-sharing. The court thus examined whether the mere act of providing a WiFi connection not protected with a password can be deemed to constitute a copyright-infringing act.

Crucially, the applicants also sought an injunction to prevent the defendant for committing any similar acts in the future. Had the injunction been granted, the legal status of various open WiFi providers would have turned out extremely difficult, as rights-owners would have been provided with a powerful legal weapon to shut them down in cases of similar, arguably insignificant infringements by incidental visitors and customers.

More:
http://www.turre.com/2012/05/finnish-court-open-wifi-owner-not-liable-for-file-sharing-copyright-infringement/

Dutch Advocate-General at Supreme Court Advises Implementation of Both a Ban on Downloading From an Illegal Source AND a Copy Levy

Dutch Supreme Court can choose to follow his advice. Advocate-General Toon Huydecoper is also of the opinion that the European Court of Justice should be the first Court to offer its opinion about matters such as these, including whether the current Dutch Private Copying Levy regime is in accordance with the Berne Three Step Test.

Dutch language news article:
http://webwereld.nl/nieuws/110527/hoge-raad-overweegt-downloadverbod-pl-s-heffing.html

Previously:

Dutch Advocate General proposes to submit prejudicial questions to the ECJ about the private copying levy
http://vrritti.com/2012/05/17/dutch-advocate-general-proposes-to-submit-prejudicial-questions-to-the-ecj-about-the-private-copying-levy/

IMAGiNE Member Pleads Guilty to Criminal Copyright Infringement

Last month the feds arrested four alleged members of the prominent BitTorrent release group IMAGiNE . One of them has struck a deal with the US Government and pleads guilty to one of the charges. The remaining three plead not guilty. Recent documents filed at court further reveal that the MPAA was the tipster that initiated the investigation.

More:
http://torrentfreak.com/imagine-member-pleads-guilty-to-criminal-copyright-infringement-120516/

Fredrik Neij, one of the founders of The Pirate Bay, takes his case to the European Court of Human Rights

Pirate Bay is mostly used to share illegal, copyrighted content, which is stimulated by its founders (hence the pirate reference in it’s name). It is now up to the European Court to decide if Neij’s share in offering the Pirate Bay service is protected under the right to receive and impart information under article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

More:
http://www.futureofcopyright.com/home/blog-post/2012/05/15/pirate-bay-founder-takes-case-to-european-court-of-human-rights.html

Dutch Advocate General proposes to submit prejudicial questions to the ECJ about the private copying levy

Advocate General Huydecoper of the Dutch Supreme Court proposes to submit prejudicial questions to the European Court of Justice about private copying levies. If the Supreme Court agrees with this, the ECJ will decide if the private copying exception is in compliance with the Berne three-step test, which is also laid down in the European Copyright Directive (2001/29/EG).

The European Copyright Directive provides a limited list of allowed limitations and exceptions for the use of copyrighted works without consent of the copyright holder. Member states can choose which limitations and exceptions they want to implement in their national laws. The three-step test sets boundaries to those limitations and exceptions. Limitations and exceptions are only allowed in (1) certain special cases (2) that do not conflict with the normal exploitation of the work and (3) do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the right holder.

In the underlying case, the question arises whether only copies from works obtained from ‘authorized’ sources should be taken into account in the calculation of the private copying levy, or also copies from works obtained from ‘illegal’ sources. If works from illegal sources should be taken into account, the private copying levy will be higher. The Advocate General states that in order to answer these questions, it is necessary to submit a few prejudicial questions to the ECJ.

Much more:
http://www.futureofcopyright.com/home/blog-post/2012/05/16/dutch-advocate-general-proposes-to-submit-prejudicial-questions-to-the-ecj-about-the-private-copying.html

Massive DDoS attack keeps The Pirate Bay offline for over a day

The Pirate Bay has been down for about the past 24 hours, and says it has been hit by a “quite big” distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attack. The controversial website for torrent downloaders confirmed the attack on its Facebook page, saying “We don’t know who’s behind it but we have our suspicions.”

http://arstechnica.com/security/2012/05/massive-ddos-attack-keeps-the-pirate-bay-offline-for-over-a-day/

Ofcom to Publish UK ISP Internet Piracy Initial Obligations Code in June 2012

The UK governments Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) has confirmed that Ofcom is expected to publish its final Initial Obligations Code of Practice proposal for tackling internet copyright infringement (piracy) by customers of broadband providers in June 2012.

Today’s confirmation came as part of DCMS’s official response to the January 2012 proposals from the Film Policy Review Panel (FPRP), which included several recommendations for tackling internet piracy (e.g. “illegal” P2P file sharing).

More:
http://www.ispreview.co.uk/index.php/2012/05/ofcom-to-publish-uk-isp-internet-piracy-initial-obligations-code-in-june-2012.html

The Russian based “Pirate Pay” startup is promising the entertainment industry a pirate-free future. With help from Microsoft

the developers have built a system that claims to track and shut down the distribution of copyrighted works on BitTorrent. Their first project, carried out in collaboration with Walt Disney Studios and Sony Pictures, successfully stopped tens of thousands of downloads.

Hollywood, software giants and the major music labels see BitTorrent as one of the largest threats to their business.

More:
http://torrentfreak.com/microsoft-funded-startup-aims-to-kill-bittorrent-traffic-120513/

Rick Falkvinge (aka Dick Greger Augustsson or Dick W. Augustsson) Rallying The Mob Against Copyright Industries

Don’t ever accept the resigned position that the copyright industries determine law. They don’t. They’ve gotten away with wishlists because politicians haven’t cared. They do care when tens of thousands of people make noise, and we can do that. We know absolutely well that we’re capable of that and much more.

If the copyright industry collapses – who cares?

More:

http://torrentfreak.com/why-are-people-resigning-before-the-copyright-industries-will-120513/

See also:
http://vrritti.com/?s=falkvinge&submit=Search

Pirate Bay’s Alexa Rank For UK And NL Continues To Drop After Blocking Measures

In the UK, The Pirate Bay website – before the blockade – was more popular than the websites of Virgin Media, NatWest and The Sun. That no longer seems to be the case.

back then:

now:

http://www.alexa.com/topsites/countries;1/GB

In The Netherlands The Pirate Bay website was the 27th most popular website before the blockade and the name change from thepiratebay.org to thepiratebay.se. It then dropped to the 41st spot and is now the 43rd most popular website in The Netherlands. As such it is no longer more popular than the websites of Microsoft, Apple or Amazon.

back then:

now:

http://www.alexa.com/topsites/countries;1/NL