DEA (Angleterre) BT TalkTalk loose appeal. DEA anti file sharing code. Slightly Right of Centre: Sky blocks Newzbin, important legal and technical questions need answering. Expanding the blocking order for Newzbin to cover other ISPs seems a no-brainer, but fundamental differences in the way each ISP manages its network are small details that may have serious consequences for other unrelated websites. Yesterday I started to see reports on twitter that Sky's broadband service was blocking access to Newzbin, an overseas website which rights holders acting for the film industry forced BT to block with an injunction coming into force last month. The reports of a Sky block would be no surprise, a representative of the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) told a round table meeting hosted by Communications Minister Ed Vaizey last week that legal action against other ISPs was ongoing (my report from the meeting here).
Today trefor.net spotted an official announcement from Sky confirming the block: "We have received a court order requiring us to block access to this illegal website, which we did on 13th December, 2011" Important legal and technical questions. Open Digital Policy Blog: New round of ministerial meetings on digital copyright enforcement partially opened-up. Update: read a report from the meeting here . Open Digital has been invited to attend a new round of ministerial meetings on digital copyright enforcement, hosted by Ed Vaizey at the Department for Media, Culture and Sport.
This time the attendee list will be wider, bringing representatives from across the industry. The first meeting is scheduled for this Wednesday, 7th December, and will feature representatives from: Featured Artists Coalition Google EMI Music UK & Ireland BPI (British Phonographic Industries) Publisher's Association Warner Music Music Publisher's Association Yahoo! Ofcom UKIE (UK Interactive Entertainment) ISPA (Internet Service Providers Association) PRS (Performing Rights Society) Talk Talk Open Digital Policy Organisation Open Rights Group Universal Music Beggars Group UK Music Premier League BSkyB MPAA (Motion Picture Association of America) Virgin Media Sony Music IAB (Internet Advertising Bureau) Consumer Focus Officials from the DCMS.
Judge Claims UK ISP Judicial Review of Anti-Piracy Law Has Prospect of Success. The judge who last month granted two broadband ISPs, BT and TalkTalk UK, permission to appeal (here) against an earlier ruling that rejected (here) their attempts to win a Judicial Review (JR) of the controversial Digital Economy Act (DEA) has said that the internet providers now have a "real prospect of success".
The Act seeks to identify and possibly even disconnect ("suspend") those suspected of "illegal" internet copyright infringement (piracy) from their broadband access. The ISPs claim that it also fails to comply with several EU laws regarding privacy and threatens the role of internet providers as "mere conduits" of information. Out-Law, an online legal information service, notes that the full text of the October 2011 appeal hearing has now been published and appears to offer a surprising amount of support for the aforementioned ISPs.
Lord Justice Lewison said: Lord Justice Lewison explained:
Site-blocking.pdf - Powered by Google Docs. Ofcom says no to web-blocking. Slightly Right of Centre: Behind the scenes in the government's digital economy soup factory. You will have to pay an appeals fee of £20 if you want to challenge a copyright infringement warning letter you receive under the Digital Economy Act. The fee will be refunded if the appeal is successful. This was the surprise announcement made this morning, as the government made its welcome response to the Hargreaves review into copyright reform.
I welcome the government response to Hargreaves, but that's not the story I want to tell. Web blocking (under Section 17) of the Digital Economy Act has been ruled out by Ofcom (pdf) (see update below) as unworkable, but Ed Vaizey tried to sweeten this for rights holders by saying that it had "not said no to site blocking forever" (not sure I agree with the minister's take) and went on to mention the Newzbin ruling which allows court-ordered blocking of websites infringing copyright when an ISP already has an existing blocking mechanism installed. Aside: note how large sections of the Ofcom report into website blocking have been redacted.
ACS:Law cases thrown out, law firm seeking costs. Clarinette: "RT @SaskiaWalzel: answers to ..." « Deck.ly. House of Commons Hansard Written Answers for 16 Feb 2011. Open Rights Group | ACS:Law and overstated proof. February 09, 2011 | Peter Bradwell Yesterday afternoon saw the latest twist in the protracted story of ACS:Law. They have been engaged in a campaign to intimidate and extort money from thousands of people with little evidence and even less proper due process. Last week, with their flimsy cases facing scrutiny in court, ACS:Law wound themselves up, disappearing in a puff of smoke like cartoon villains. But Judge Birss, of the Patents County Court, insisted that the cases must continue. And so the case drags on. However, the evidence used against alleged infringers, as things stand, is weak.
ACS:Law got away with their letter writing, according to the Judge, by 'materially overstating the untested merits' of their proof. A similar method is applied in the file-sharing provisions of the Digital Economy Act. But instead of leading to court action, as in the case of ACS:Law, under the provisions of the Act the subscriber is contacted directly by their ISP. ACS:Law and MediaCAT close their doors, ending filesharing claims | Technology. ACS:Law is understood to have ceased trading. Photograph: Claudio Bresciani/Scanpix/PA Photos A law firm that sent out hundreds of letters to people it accused of illegally sharing copyrighted files has shut down, days before a key court decision on whether it defendants could claim damages from it. ACS:Law, which had sent out "speculative invoicing" letters to people accused of illegally downloading content on behalf of its client MediaCAT - and threatening court action if they didn't pay - apparently closed on Monday 31 January.
MediaCAT is understood to have closed down as well. The closure marks the end of a tumultuous chapter in rows over filesharing and piracy in Britain. But instead it turned into a three-way row between ACS:Law, the alleged infringers and internet service providers from whom user details had been demanded. MediaCAT had signed up a number of copyright owners who gave it permission to pursue people it accused of file-sharing based on data it had collected.
Digital Economy Act under challenge. Two internet service providers have launched a court challenge to the copyright enforcement provisions of the Digital Economy Act 2010, while OFCOM has now closed its consultation on the Initial Obligations Code. In the May edition of our IT and E-commerce Bulletin we reported on the UK Digital Economy Act, which introduces a regime under which internet service providers are initially required to assist copyright owners in taking steps to deter online copyright infringement, including peer to peer file-sharing, by notifying subscribers whose connections are alleged to have been used for copyright infringement. Subsequently a regime may be introduced under which ISPs are required to take technical measures, such as throttling, filtering or suspension, against some subscribers’ internet connections. 1. They should have been notified in draft to the European Commission under the EU Technical Standards Directive (98/34/EC, as amended by 98/48 EC), but were not. 2. 3. 4.