CJCEScarletVSabam
Get flash to fully experience Pearltrees
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.
HADOPI, ACTA, Digital Economy Bill: From Human Rights to Economic Rights
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).
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
Courts in the EU may not order ISPs to filter out copyright-infringing file-sharing from their networks, the European Court of Justice has said.
urts cannot order ISPs to filter P2P, ECJ rules | Intellectual Property
ISPs cannot be legally obliged to monitor their customers' electronic communications and block the unauthorised transmission of copyrighted content, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) has ruled, in a landmark decision that will come as a blow to rights holders. The ruling came in the Scarlet Extended case , which began life in the Belgian courts in 2004 and was escalated to the ECJ. Belgian rights holders group SABAM was looking to impose content filtering requirements on ISP Scarlet to prevent illegal downloading and distribution in the country. "EU law precludes the imposition of an injunction by a national court which requires an internet service provider to install a filtering system with a view to preventing the illegal downloading of files," the court ruled on Thursday.
European court rules that ISPs can't be forced to block pirated content
Sabam v Scarlet
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.
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. This case has its origin in a dispute between Scarlet Extended SA, an internet service provider, and SABAM, a Belgian management company which is responsible for authorising the use by third parties of the musical works of authors, composers and editors. In 2004, SABAM established that users of Scarlet's services were downloading works in SABAM’s catalogue from the internet, without authorisation and without paying royalties, by means of peer-to-peer networks (a transparent method of file sharing which is independent, decentralised and features advanced search and download functions).24 November 2011 Last updated at 12:48 GMT Blocking general access to peer-to-peer sites was ruled to be in breach of EU laws The European Court of Justice has ruled that content owners cannot ask ISPs to filter out illegal content. The ruling could have implications for the creative industries as they attempt to crack down on piracy. The court said that while content providers can ask ISPs to block specific sites, wider filtering was in breach of the E-Commerce Directive. A Belgian court had previously ruled that a local rights holder could force an ISP to filter content.
European Court of Justice rejects web piracy filter
EU Court of Justice rules it illegal to block “illegal” file downloading #Scarlet #SABAM | trefor.net
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. This is a major milestone in the online Intellectual Property/Copyright saga and must surely bring into question the recent Newsbin2 judgement in which BT was required by a court to block access to the website that promotes the unlawful distribution of copyrighted material.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.
EU Court of Justice: Censorship in Name of Copyright Violates Fundamental Rights
Der Europäische Gerichtshof (EuGH) hat am Donnerstag entschieden, dass eine Filterung und Überwachung von Internet-Zugängen nicht mit dem EU-Recht vereinbar ist. Anlass war ein Rechtsstreit zwischen der belgischen Verwertungsgesellschaft SABAM und dem Internetanbieter Scarlet. 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.
Gericht verbietet Filter gegen Musiktausch
24/11/11, 12u28 © belga. dm UPDATE Europese lidstaten kunnen internetproviders niet verplichten een filter in te bouwen tegen illegale downloads via zogenaamde "peer-to-peer"-netwerken. Dat heeft het Europees Hof van Justitie beslist in een Belgische zaak tussen Scarlet en auteursmaatschappij Sabam.
Sabam verliest zaak in strijd tegen illegaal downloaden - Internet
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 ISP s 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.
SABAM: A Turning Point in EU Internet Law?
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. Analyse. Dans cette procédure née en Belgique, les ayants droit réclamaient la mise en oeuvre d'un filtrage généralisé de toutes les communications électroniques aux frais des seuls intermédiaires techniques. Rendue par une juridiction européenne, la décision qui vient d’être publiée va impacter toute l’Europe dont la France avec la Hadopi et les projets de Nicolas Sarkozy et des ayants droit de bloquer les sites de streaming.
SABAM : la Cour de Justice met fin à la spirale du filtrage en Europe - Actu PC INpact
Suite à l’arrêt de la CJUE Sabam Scarlet qui vient imposer plusieurs conditions drastiques à la mise en place du filtrage, la Quadrature du net évoque « une décision historique », « cruciale pour le futur des droits et libertés sur Internet ». Jéremie Zimmermann dans les locaux de l'Hadopi, face à Eric Walter Pour l’initiative citoyenne, « à l'heure d'une large offensive contre le partage de la culture en ligne, cette décision montre que les mesures de censure exigées par l'industrie du divertissement sont un moyen disproportionné et illégitime de faire appliquer un droit d'auteur dépassé ». Quelles conséquences attendre de cette décision tout juste rendue ? « Le jugement de la CJUE aura des conséquences cruciales sur le droit de l'Internet dans toute l'Europe, en particulier à l'heure où le Parlement européen entame ses travaux sur le vote de consentement à l'ACTA et que la Commission travaille à la révision de la directive d'application du droit d'auteur (IPRED) ».