HADOPI, ACTA, Digital Economy Bill: From Human Rights to Economic Rights. There is increasing debate and discussion about regulatory moves in the internet sphere that have direct implications for the kind of society we want to live in and the rights we can expect to have: freedom of speech balanced against rights to privacy; centralized data gathering and storage by governments versus rights to control over personal information; rights to protection of intellectual property balanced against rights of fair use; rights to freely communicate versus protecting, for example, minors from abuses such as child pornography; and the emerging recognition of the need to break down the digital divide with a right of access to the world wide web through universal broadband access.
I have been arguing for some time that there are natural balances to be struck between these rights and proposed regulatory measures, whilst well-intended, aren't addressing them satisfactorily. France invented the graduated response with HADOPI; What does that mean exactly? Enforcement of Copyright Holders' Rights Must Strike a Fair Balance with Other Fundamental Rights Rules ECJ : Seattle Copyright Watch : Washington Intellectual Property Lawyer : Licensing Attorney Tonya Gisselberg. The European Court of Justice (ECJ) recently ruled on this issue involving the intersection of protecting copyrights and protecting the freedom to conduct business, the protection of personal data and the freedom of information (paraphrased): Consistent with EU Directives and the European Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, are Member States permitted to authorize a national court to order an ISP to install a system for filtering all electronic communications on its network, particularly those using peer-to-peer software, for the purpose of identifying electronic files containing musical and other works in which the applicant seeking the order claims to hold rights, and to block the transfer of such files?
(Opinion paragraph 28). prohibits national authorities from adopting measures which would require an ISP to carry out general monitoring of the information that it transmits on its network.... (Opinion paragraphs 35 and 36). Urts cannot order ISPs to filter P2P, ECJ rules. European court rules that ISPs can't be forced to block pirated content.
Affaire SABAM : Grande victoire contre le filtrage généralisé en Europe ! Dans son arrêt rendu ce jour, la Cour rappelle, tout d’abord, que les titulaires de droits de propriété intellectuelle peuvent demander qu’une ordonnance soit rendue à l’encontre des intermédiaires, tels que les fournisseurs d’accès à Internet, dont les services sont utilisés par les tiers pour porter atteinte à leurs droits.
En effet, les modalités des injonctions relèvent du droit national. Toutefois, ces règles nationales doivent respecter les limitations découlant du droit de l’Union, telle notamment l’interdiction prévue par la directive sur le commerce électronique selon laquelle les autorités nationales ne doivent pas adopter des mesures qui obligeraient un fournisseur d’accès à Internet à procéder à une surveillance générale des informations qu’il transmet sur son réseau. À cet égard, la Cour constate que l’injonction en question obligerait Scarlet à procéder à une. Public Affairs » Scarlet wins in European Court. Scarlet Extended SA has won its protracted legal battle in the European Court, against a Belgian Court ruling forcing it to impose network level content filtering to prevent copyright infringement on peer-to-peer networks.
Background to the case The case, SABAM v Scarlet Extended SA, first went to court in Belgium in 2004. It quickly became seen all over Europe as a test case for the efficacy of the Electronic Commerce Directive, which purported to protect ISPs as “mere conduits” from liability for the traffic on their networks and prevented Member States imposing a general duty to monitor their networks on ISPs. The Belgian court ordered Scarlet to begin filtering traffic on its network in 2007, following a report from a court appointed expert that, despite numerous technical obstacles, the feasibility of filtering and blocking the unlawful sharing of electronic files could not be entirely ruled out.
The European Court’s ruling Implications of the ruling. A study in Scarlet: today's Court of Justice ruling. Came out at the same time as the two rulings on supplementary protection certificates for patents, which the IPKat was busily flapping over ().
But now it's time to leave patents and attend to copyright. ), he observed that the careful way in which the Court of Justice phrased its ruling rather suggests that the door remains open for the making of less drastic and more balanced orders. TechCrunch Europe. European Court of Justice rejects web piracy filter. EU Court of Justice rules it illegal to block “illegal” file downloading #Scarlet #SABAM. The EU Court of Justice has ruled that it is illegal to block copyright infringing file downloading on the basis of the freedom to conduct business, the right to protection of personal data and the freedom to receive or impart information.
This concludes a long running (2007) Scarlet-SABAM court case in which Scarlet, a Belgian ISP was ordered by a national court to implement technical measures to block all P2P traffic that infringes rights held by the Belgian Society of Authors, Composers and Publishers (SABAM). The ruling also supplements a previous legal opinion on the subject by a EU High Court Judge that was not in itself binding in law. EU Court of Justice: Censorship in Name of Copyright Violates Fundamental Rights. Paris, November 24th, 2011 — The European Court of Justice just rendered a historic decision in the Scarlet Extended case, which is crucial for the future of rights and freedoms on the Internet.
The Court ruled that forcing Internet service providers to monitor and censor their users' communications violated EU law, and in particular the right to freedom of communication. At a time of all-out offensive in the war against culture sharing online, this decision suggests that censorship measures requested by the entertainment industry are disproportionate means to enforce an outdated copyright regime.
Policy-makers across Europe must take this decision into account by refusing new repressive schemes, such as the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA), and engage in a much needed reform of copyright. “As the war on culture sharing is fiercer than ever, this ECJ ruling comes at a timely moment. Cp110126en. Gericht verbietet Filter gegen Musiktausch. Der unzulässige Austausch von Musikdateien zwischen Internet-Nutzern darf nicht verhindert werden, indem den Internet-Anbietern systematische Filter auferlegt werden, urteilte der Europäische Gerichtshof am Donnerstag in Luxemburg.
Die Kontrolle des Internets dürfe nicht vorgeschrieben werden, weil dies auch zur Sperrung von zulässiger Kommunikation führen könne, heißt es in einer Mitteilung (PDF) des EuGH. Zudem seien solche Filter eine unzulässige Belastung der Internet-Anbieter. Langjähriger RechtsstreitDas Gericht entschied damit gegen die belgische Urheberrechtsorganisation SABAM. Diese hatte den Provider Scarlet in einem seit 2004 andauernden Rechtsstreit dazu zwingen wollen, Filter gegen den Datenaustausch einzurichten. Ein belgisches Gericht verpflichtete den Internet-Anbieter 2007 unter Androhung eines Zwangsgelds, Urheberrechtsverletzungen seiner Kunden, die das SABAM-Repertoire betreffen, abzustellen und den Musiktausch zu unterbinden.
Sabam verliest zaak in strijd tegen illegaal downloaden - Internet. 24/11/11, 12u28 © belga.
SABAM: A Turning Point in EU Internet Law? One of the most striking - and disturbing - trends of recent years has been the assumption by the copyright industries that protecting their intellectual monopolies outweighs the rights of the public.
This can be clearly seen in the French HADOPI and British Digital Economy Act, where the identities of alleged file-sharers may be handed over by ISPs simply upon accusation by the copyright holders - no court orders required. "Innocent until proven guilty" goes out of the window simply because the music and film industries have resisted keeping up with the changes that the Internet has brought to practically every sector. They seem to regard themselves as exempt from the march of progress, and deserving of special laws that protect their old business models based on assumptions that no longer hold.
One of the most strident in their demands for this kind of total surveillance is the Société belge des auteurs, compositeurs et éditeurs (SABAM). SABAM : la Cour de Justice met fin à la spirale du filtrage en Europe - Actu PC INpact. La SABAM réclamait du FAI Scarlet le blocage/filtrage des communications électroniques transitant dans ses mains. Un traitement généralisé, global, touchant toutes les données, et ce, afin de traquer du MP3 pirate… Dans son arrêt, fondamental, la CJUE vient de porter un coup d’arrêt à la folie sécuritaire des ayants droit en leur rappelant l’existence d’autres libertés et droits fondamentaux. Affaire SABAM : la Quadrature applaudit une décision historique - Actu PC INpact. Will copyright owners see red over Scarlet?
Press statement and FAQ: Scarlet/Sabam Ruling a vital victory for Internet freedoms. Court of Justice of the European Union 24 November 2011, Scarlet vs SABAM, C-70/10 Today the Court of justice of the European Union ruled that a proposed measure ordering an Internet service provider to install a system of filtering of all electronic communications and blocking certain content in order to protect intellectual property rights was in breach of European law. This result is hugely important, as it protects the openness of the Internet.
The alternative would have been a decision which would ultimately have put all European networks under permanent surveillance and filtering. This would have had major negative consequences for both fundamental rights and the online economy in Europe. The Belgian collecting society Société belge des auteurs, compositeurs et éditeurs (SABAM) applied for an interim relief against the Internet service provider (ISP) Scarlet Extended SA. Is this a victory for citizens and Internet freedoms? Yes. What effect does it have on the music industry? No. LexUriServ. Affaire C-70/10 Scarlet Extended SA.