Archive for the ‘Three Strikes’ Category
Collapse of the NZ ‘three strikes case’ shows pirates how to circumvent the law – use someone else’s internet connectionPosted: 2012/10/19 in Copyright, Education / Awareness, Enforcement, Illegal File Sharing, Jurisprudence, Litigation, Public Policy, Stats / reports, Three Strikes
The Center for Copyright Information has revealed more details about its “six strikes” system, which it calls the Copyright Alert System (CAS). In a blog post published Thursday morning, the program’s head, Jill Lesser, announced that the CAS “will begin in the coming weeks.”
Lesser added that it will use an analysis system called MarkMonitor to identify infringing activity. That system “uses both trained professionals and automated processes to identify illegal downloading of whole movies, TV shows, and musical recordings, and the system is designed to eliminate false positives.” Finally, the CAS has given further details on its review process that will take place at the “mitigation stage” (strikes five through six), which will be administered by the American Arbitration Association.
‘No cutting off people’s internet based on secret evidence’ – Consumer group calls for MPAA to publish its methodsPosted: 2012/10/18 in Copyright, Education / Awareness, Enforcement, Illegal File Sharing, New Business Models, Public Policy, Stats / reports, Tech Evolution, Three Strikes
Will Consumer Focus also ask ISPs, Google or Facebook to disclose QoS, DPI, Walled Garden (includes cutting off connections), Anti-Spam, Anti-Malware, Anti-Phishing, Ad Injection and User Profiling methods? As well as associated privacy risks and whether there’s a level of systemic error?
Ofcom should force rights-holders into publishing most of the details about how their systems for identifying cases of online copyright infringement work, a consumer watchdog has said.
In a letter (6-page/1.71MB PDF) to the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), Consumer Focus said that it would seek “full transparency in relation to how evidence is gathered” so that internet subscribers would be able to challenge allegations that they have infringed rights-holders’ copyrights under planned new anti-piracy procedures being developed by Ofcom.
The MPAA represents the six major film studios: Walt Disney, Paramount, Sony, Twentieth Century Fox, Universal and Warner Bros.
Online piracy is most typically tracked by monitoring the IP addresses of internet users, which is assigned to your connection each time you go online. This usually occurs while related connections are being used to upload and or download “illegal” files over public P2P (BitTorrent) file sharing networks. But as various court cases (ACS:Law, GoldenEye etc.) and other technical reports have shown, such data is prone to error.
- First Alert: The subscriber is notified that his or her account may have been misused or involved in copyright infringement. The alert also contains information about avoiding copyright infringement and provides information about legal sources of content on the Internet.
- Second Alert: Similar to the first alert, with the educational messages underscored.
- Third Alert: Almost similar to the first and second alert. However, the subscriber will also be notified through a pop-up notice, landing page or other obvious click-through mechanism to ensure that he or she is aware of the notice.
- Fourth Alert: Similar to the third alert. It also requires the subscriber to acknowledge receipt.
- Fifth Alert: The ISP may take one of the ‘mitigation measures’ to stop future copyright infringement. The ISP might also decide to renounce the mitigation measures at this point until it receives a further notice of copyright infringement associated with the same subscriber’s account.
- Sixth Alert: The ISP will implement a mitigation measure.
One internet user who faces penalties under the controversial “Skynet” law for pirating music has asked for a formal hearing in front of the Copyright Tribunal to decide their case.
A Justice Ministry spokesman confirmed that the Recording Industry Association of New Zealand (Rianz) had now asked the tribunal to punish eight people who had received their third and final “enforcement” notices for pirating music, under the year-old regime.
Seven of the accused have asked the tribunal to consider their cases based only the paperwork. But the eighth had taken up their right to be heard in person by the six person tribunal, the spokesman said.
The nation’s major internet service providers by year’s end will institute a so-called six-strikes plan, the “Copyright Alert System” initiative backed by the Obama administration and pushed by Hollywood and the major record labels to disrupt and possibly terminate internet access for online copyright scofflaws.
The plan, now four years in the making, includes participation by AT&T, Cablevision Systems, Comcast, Time Warner Cable and Verizon. After four offenses, the historic plan calls for these residential internet providers to initiate so-called “mitigation measures” (.pdf) that might include reducing internet speeds and redirecting a subscriber’s service to an “educational” landing page about infringement.
The internet companies may eliminate service altogether for repeat file-sharing offenders, although the plan does not directly call for such drastic action.
Here’s how the program works:
On the first offense, internet subscribers will receive an e-mail “alert” from their ISP saying the account “may have been” misused for online content theft. On the second offense, the alert might contain an “educational message” about the legalities of online file sharing.
On the third and fourth infractions, the subscriber will likely receive a pop-up notice “asking the subscriber to acknowledge receipt of the alert.”
After four alerts, according to the program, “mitigation measures” may commence. They include “temporary reductions of internet speeds, redirection to a landing page until the subscriber contacts the ISP to discuss the matter or reviews and responds to some educational information about copyright, or other measures (as specified in published policies) that the ISP may deem necessary to help resolve the matter.”
Sohn said copyright scofflaws are not going to be dinged each time internet-snoop MarkMonitor detects infringement on peer-to-peer file-sharing networks.
“Each strike is not one infringement. Each strike is dozens or scores or hundreds of infringements,” Sohn said in a telephone interview.
Lesser explained that, when the first infringement is detected, “you will get an alert.”
But after that, strikes will only be counted every seven days. “There’s a grace period between each alert,” Lesser said.
“The goal was to come up with a program that was educational in nature, not with the intention of being punitive,” she said.
A spokeswoman for MarkMonitor said the San Francisco company has a policy of not publicly discussing its clients.
None of the ISPs involved responded for comment. The RIAA did not respond for comment.
Chris Dodd adds: “Six strikes” enforcement by ISPs will be “educational,” “not a law”
Five large U.S. Internet providers will begin to warn and punish alleged copyright infringers as part of the “six strikes” anti-piracy schemePosted: 2012/09/28 in Copyright, Education / Awareness, Enforcement, Illegal File Sharing, New Business Models, Stats / reports, Tech Evolution, Three Strikes
Soon, five large U.S. Internet providers will begin to warn and punish alleged copyright infringers as part of the “six strikes” anti-piracy scheme. While details are still scarce, TorrentFreak is informed that MarkMonitor will be responsible for tracking down alleged infringers, and that an independent expert review of the evidence gathering technology has been completed. ISPs have also been making progress and several are now ready to start sending out warnings, although none of them wants to go first.
Last year, New Zealand amended its Copyright Act to prohibit illegal downloading and file sharing, by introducing a ‘three strikes’ system. Since then, research has shown that downloading of unauthorized content has decreased by 50%. Now the first cases under this ‘three strikes law’ are brought before the New Zealand Copyright Tribunal.
Mediacom, one of the larger Internet providers in the United States, disconnects and bans alleged internet piratesPosted: 2012/09/26 in Blocking, Copyright, Education / Awareness, Enforcement, Filtering, Illegal File Sharing, New Business Models, Stats / reports, Three Strikes
The Internet provider rigorously terminates the Internet access of subscribers who receive two DMCA notifications and after a third notice customers are permanently disconnected and banned for life.
Myth No. 1: You can’t compete with “free.”
Myth No. 2: Piracy doesn’t harm sales.
Myth No. 3: Anti-piracy laws don’t work.
University of Idaho Law Professor Annemarie Bridy reviewed the plan to see whether it respects basic consumer protection norms. The results were just published online and the report includes harsh critique as well as some positive notes.
A 40-year-old Frenchman living in rural eastern France has become the first person ordered to pay a fine under France’s controversial anti-piracy three-strikes law known as Hadopi.
On Thursday, a judge ruled that Alain Prevost (Google Translate) must pay €150 ($194) for failing to secure his Internet (presumably WiFi) connection and for ignoring the three warnings sent by the Hadopi agency. He has become the first person to be convicted under Hadopi; his is the first of 14 cases brought against French Internet users who reach the third strike.
Last year, the newly formed Center for Copyright Information (CCI), along with major ISPs across the US and representatives from the recording and film industries, agreed to come up with a six-stage warning scheme that would progressively impose warnings—and eventually penalties—on alleged online copyright infringers. Collectively, once deployed, the system could cover 75 percent of all American Internet users.
The Copyright Alert System, as it’s formally known, was originally slated to deploy by the end of December 2011, a date that was then pushed back to July 2012. Now the CCI’s head, Jill Lesser, tells Ars the group is on track to launch by the end of the year. However, Lesser provided scant new details about the program.
“We are still very much intending to launch this year, but in no way was missing a July deadline a missed deadline,” she said in a recent interview. “This isn’t the American version of the French system, and it isn’t a baseball game.”
French anti-piracy agency Hadopi only sued 14 people in 20 months. The anti-P2P authority sent out over 1.1 million warning lettersPosted: 2012/09/06 in Copyright, Education / Awareness, Enforcement, Illegal File Sharing, Litigation, Public Policy, Stats / reports, Three Strikes
Of 3 million IP addresses “identified” by Hadopi, 1.15 million were found to be pirating content and sent a warning letter (the first phase). Of those 1.15 million, 102,854 were given a second warning, and of those, 340 received a third strike. If the third strike is ignored, Hadopi can take legal action, and as of July 1, only 14 offenders have had a case filed with a French court as a result of Hadopi, and none have yet been to trial.
Two prominent anti-piracy companies that are expected to participate in the U.S. six-strikes anti-piracy scheme are already monitoring thousands of torrent filesPosted: 2012/08/30 in Copyright, Education / Awareness, Enforcement, Illegal File Sharing, New Business Models, Stats / reports, Tech Evolution, Three Strikes
Statistics obtained by TorrentFreak show that BayTSP and Peer Media have been increasing their activities in recent months. The BitTorrent activity of these two companies is three times greater than that generated by all customers of a smaller ISP such as Sonic.net
For years companies such as BayTSP and Peer Media have been hired by movie studios and record labels to track the IP-addresses of file-sharers so these can be reported to their Internet providers.
In the U.S. this process is about to change as it will soon be formalized with the upcoming “six-strikes” anti-piracy scheme. Under this mechanism customers of five large ISPs will receive so-called copyright alerts.
While the Center for Copyright Information has yet to announce the names of the companies that will do the “spying” for the six-strikes system, TorrentFreak recently learned that both BayTSP (recently acquired by Irdeto) and Peer Media will be involved. In this light, we thought it would be interesting to see what these companies have been up to recently.
More than a year after the MPAA and RIAA announced their groundbreaking anti-piracy deal with U.S. Internet providers, the first warning letters are yet to be sent out.
Somewhere in the near future the Center for Copyright Information (CCI) will start to track down online ‘pirates’ as part of an agreement all major US Internet providers struck with the MPAA and RIAA.
The parties agreed on a system through which copyright infringers are warned that their behavior is unacceptable. After five or six warnings ISPs may then take a variety of repressive measures, including temporary disconnections.
An agreement between four music companies and Eircom (Ireland’s principle telecommunications provider) for a graduated response potentially leading to the disconnection of copyright infringing subscribers, is to be reinstated.
The agreement between EMI Records (Ireland) Ltd, Sony Music Entertainment Ireland Ltd, Universal Music Ireland Ltd and Warner Music Ireland Ltd and the telecomms company calls for a week-long disconnection for subscribers who receive three warnings, and complete disconnection after four warnings. But this agreement was halted by the Irish Data Protection Commission last December after Eircom mistakingly sent around 300 warning letters to innocent subscribers.
The Data Protection Commission claimed that the agreement breached data protection and privacy laws – but this ruling was challenged in court by the music companies. Now Mr Justice Charleton at the Commercial Court has quashed the Commissioner’s ruling.
The judge decided that although the Commissioner’s December ruling was based on a privacy argument, the Commission had failed to demonstrate the privacy issues; and, according to the Irish Times, “the motivation behind the commissioner’s condemnation of any music company protecting its own interest against illegal downloading was not clear.”
For their part, the music companies claimed “the notice would effectively unwind their agreement with Eircom and argued it was an unlawful and irrational attempt to reopen data protection issues already determined by the courts in their favour.”
This ruling allows the music industry to rekindle their ‘three-strikes’ campaign against copyright infringers – something they have already said they will do.
Several music rights groups including the Recording Industry Association of Japan say they have developed a system capable of automatically detecting unauthorized music uploads before they even hit the Internet. In order to do that though, Internet service providers are being asked to integrate the system into their networks.
The system works by spying on the connections of users and comparing data being uploaded to the Internet with digital fingerprints held in an external database. As can be seen from the diagram, the fingerprinting technology employed is from GraceNote, with intermediate systems provided by Copyright Data Clearinghouse (CDC).
Once a match is found, rightholders want ISPs to automatically block the allegedly infringing content. But according to one report, there may even be requests to send out warning letters to uploaders. If implemented this would amount to the most invasive “3 strikes” style regime anywhere in the world.
The system is being promoted as a benefit to ISPs, in the sense that once installed (and licensed at a cost of around $600 per month) they can potentially avoid being held liable for copyright infringements carried out by their customers.
Center for Copyright Information will start to track down ‘pirates’ as part of an agreement all major U.S. Internet providers struck with the MPAA and RIAAPosted: 2012/06/19 in Copyright, Education / Awareness, Enforcement, Filtering, Illegal File Sharing, Litigation, New Business Models, Stats / reports, Three Strikes
“The Content Owner Representatives [MPAA / RIAA] or any other member of the Participating Content Owners Group may use such reports or data as the basis for seeking a Subscriber’s identity through a subpoena or order or other lawful process. For the avoidance of doubt, the Parties agree that the Content Owner Representatives may share such reports with the other members of the Participating Content Owners Group..”
The government agency that administers France’s controversial 3 strikes anti-piracy scheme is mulling taking its message to the youngest minds in the countryPosted: 2012/06/18 in Copyright, Education / Awareness, Illegal File Sharing, New Business Models, Public Policy, Stats / reports, Three Strikes
According to a letter it sent today to rightsholders, Hadopi is proposing a stand at the Kidexpo exhibition in Paris later this year where it will spread its message directly to 150,000 children.
The MPAA and RIAA, helped by all major Internet providers in the United States, will begin to warn and punish copyright infringers in the months to comePosted: 2012/06/06 in Copyright, Education / Awareness, Illegal File Sharing, New Business Models, Public Policy, Stats / reports, Three Strikes
London’s High Court yesterday helped Golden Eye International, a firm that holds numerous film copyrights and is linked to the UK’s Ben Dover porn brand, to finalise the format of its controversial P2P internet piracy settlement letters. Thousands of O2′s broadband ISP customers (those accused of copyright infringement) can now expect to receive the letters, albeit not without some crucial limitations.
The outcome follows Golden Eye’s submission of a Norwich Pharmacal Order (NPO) to collect the personal details associated with 9,124 internet connections, which was cleared at the end of March 2012 (here). Crucially the court ruled that Golden Eye could only send the letters if a made a series of critical changes to the format and wording. The firm has also confirmed that it will not send letters to individuals who “simply downloaded one film“.
According to yesterday’s proceedings, GoldenEye will need to send two letters. The first will act as a general notice to inform the connection owner that copyright infringement has been detected on their internet connection and ask them to respond within 28 days (Golden Eye had wanted 14 days). The court has also prevented Golden Eye from wrongly asserting that the bill payer may be liable for any copyright infringement that occurs on their connection. Likewise the letter must not threaten to “slow down or terminate” the suspects broadband connection.
In other words the bill payer will not automatically assumed to be guilty, which could open the door to an ‘open wi-fi network’ defence. Golden Eye, after effectively asking customers to incriminate themselves, will then send a second letter (assuming they decide to pursue it) that is designed to individually negotiate the settlement sum (Golden Eye had wanted to demand £700 from everybody). People who admit, in the first letter, to the alleged infringement will also be asked to disclose information about their P2P filesharing activity.
According to the ALPA and Gaumont, illegal downloads of movies (presumably only international films) saw a 50 percent reduction in the last year.