EU Passes Dangerous IP Law

carrotcake

this has already been posted on the politics board, but probably hasn't been seen by a lot of posters on here. delete if necessary.


from http://www.ipjustice.org/CODE/release20040309_en.shtml

EU Passes Dangerous IP Law, Despite MEP’s Conflict of Interest
“Midnight Knocks” by Recording Industry Executives Get Go-Ahead


Civil liberties in Europe were handed a severe set-back today as the European Union Parliament passed a controversial directive that will treat average consumers who accidentally infringe a single copyright with the same harsh penalties formerly reserved for large commercial counterfeiters.

The EU Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement Directive creates powerful new enforcement measures to be applied throughout the EU that permit Hollywood and recording industry executives to civilly prosecute consumers for minor and non-commercial infringements of intellectual property rights.

The directive’s most controversial issue, Article 2, which widened its scope to include any non-commercial infringement, passed in the EU plenary with a final vote of 307-185. Never did the parliament provide any justification or public policy rationale for why average consumers who make a single private copy should be treated as if they were peddling counterfeit pharmaceuticals by European law courts.

The enforcement directive creates a broad new “Right of Information” which requires Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to disclose personal information about their customers to recording industry executives for civil prosecution of Peer-2-Peer (P2P) file-sharing and other activities. Similar subpoena powers, created under the notorious US Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) have been abused by the US recording industry to obtain personal information on thousands of US consumers and have resulted in financial settlements from those consumers, including 12-year girls who live in public housing and 70-year old grandparents. Under this directive, the personal information of European citizens must be forcibly disclosed to companies such as Vivendi-Universal who can now harass and financially extort European consumers as well. And the EU directive applies to all types of intellectual property infringements, not just copyrights.

It also provides for Anton Pillar orders or “midnight knocks” that permit private citizens’ homes to be raided by recording industry executives, and Mareva injunctions, which freeze consumers’ bank accounts and other assets without the need for a court hearing.

ISPs are concerned about the directive because it allows for their equipment and servers to be confiscated and destroyed without the need for a court hearing for the allegedly infringing activity of their customers.

“Traditional civil liberties, fairness, balance, and proportionality have all be thrown to the wind in the over-zealous rush to pass this dangerous directive,” said Robin Gross, Executive Director of IP Justice, an international civil liberties organization that promotes balanced intellectual property laws.

During the 9 March final vote, UK Green Party MEP Sir Neil MacCormick commented on the inherent conflict of interest for the directive’s Rapporteur, French Conservative MEP Janelly Fourtour, who will directly profit from the new EU law she rushed through the parliament without a usual “Second Reading” debate. Fourtour’s family owns the world’s largest entertainment company, Vivendi-Universal, and has today been granted powerful new enforcement provisions to prosecute consumers for minor and non-commercial infringements.

“How can a member of parliament be in the official position to shepherd through a law in which she personally stands to gain millions of Euros?” asked Gross, a civil liberties attorney. “Such a glaring conflict of interest calls into question the entire legitimacy of the EU Parliament’s law-making capacity,” she added.

A set of key amendments proposed by Italian Radical MEP Marco Cappato to narrow the directive’s scope to only commercial infringements in order to protect consumers from the law’s excesses did not pass in the final vote. The European Council is expected to approve the directive on 11 March and Member States will have 24 months in which to implement its provisions in their own countries.

More Information:

Campaign for an Open Digital Environment (CODE):
http://www.ipjustice.org/CODE

Text of EU IP Rights Enforcement Directive:
http://www.ipjustice.org/CODE/021604.html
http://register.consilium.eu.int/pdf/en/04/st06/st06376.en04.pdf
http://www.ipjustice.org/CODE/st06376.en04.doc

IP Justice's Top 8 Reasons to Reject the EU IP Rights Enforcement Directive:
http://www.ipjustice.org/CODE/release20040302_en.shtml#top8

8 March Consumer Rally Against Directive:
http://www.ipjustice.org/CODE/rally.shtml

IP Justice is an international civil liberties organization that promotes balanced intellectual property laws. IP Justice defends consumer rights to use digital media worldwide and is a non-profit organization based in San Francisco. IP Justice was founded in 2002 by Robin Gross, who serves as its Executive Director. To learn more about IP Justice, visit the website at http://www.ipjustice.org.

looks like europe is no longer safe from the riaa's and mpaa's heavy-handed tactics :mad:

Placebo

whens this being put into action, honestly dont really use p2p, but still......

Mutant_Fruit

i think the world is overreacting a bit (says the semi-legal downloader).

Suing someone who downloads the barney theme the same as you'd sue someone who downloaded 100,000 mp3's just isn;t right, and it looks like they can do that now. Its all mad!

BKtje

Im more concerned that someone stands to earn millions from this and was able to put this through so quickly.

Mutant_Fruit

Out of interest, where does all the money go, after illegal downloaderd get sued?

Tazzle

Into the copyright holders pocket :P

Ryaner

Correct me if I'm wrong but doesnt

Peer-2-Peer (P2P) file-sharing and other activities.

basically mean that they can scan and monitor anything we do and simply say they trying to find people who are DLin copyright material.

ISPs are concerned about the directive because it allows for their equipment and servers to be confiscated and destroyed without the need for a court hearing for the allegedly infringing activity of their customers.

Who else sees ISP's becoming very strick over this one?

El_MUERkO

hurrah! Police state here we come! They just legalised a private version of carnivore, I wonder which EU ministers got a fat backhander for that.

bizmark

It also provides for Anton Pillar orders or “midnight knocks” that permit private citizens’ homes to be raided by recording industry executives, and Mareva injunctions, which freeze consumers’ bank accounts and other assets without the need for a court hearing.

ISPs are concerned about the directive because it allows for their equipment and servers to be confiscated and destroyed without the need for a court hearing for the allegedly infringing activity of their customers.
.

So does this mean a company can freeze your bank accounts if they bleave your breaking there copywrite ?

I dont like the sounds of this at all one step towords a police state run for the benfit of large companys

I wonder which EU ministers got a fat backhander for that

This gal and her family seems to be the biggest benefactor

French Conservative MEP Janelly Fourtour, who will directly profit from the new EU law she rushed through the parliament without a usual “Second Reading” debate. Fourtour’s family owns the world’s largest entertainment company, Vivendi-Universal

basically mean that they can scan and monitor anything we do and simply say they trying to find people who are DLin copyright material

i asume mister large company will use data that will be provided by the isp

Placebo

whats your problem gib?


I dont like this law, i dont really download music but some one monitering your activity is dodgy.

bizmark

Thread cleaned up
Warning still stands gib

gib

Are you THAT embarrassed about your illiteracy bizmark that you have to remove my post? Having a look at your other posts on this board, you simply just know fúck all about the English language. You are a disgrace to this board and your country.

Placebo

Irelands national Language is Irish not English, dumbass.

stormkeeper

And I supposed you used your one post just to post off something criticising someone else gib? Oh please, that is the single lamest excuse to get an account on boards, that I've seen to date. :rolleyes:

bizmark

Gib banned
And if i was embarrassed about anything i would edit my first post and delete you’re off topic mess as well but that’s common sense for you

back on topic now please lads/girls

stormkeeper

Back on topic:

Hmm... That is quite worrying really, isn't that totally disregarding human rights? Next thing you know, they'll be bringing TCP in, and we're all doomed

Edit: Heh, changed topig to topic, I think that is a Freudian slip, which shows you what I think of the people who let this law pass :mad:

Lex_Diamonds

Democracy is being rolled back all over western europe and the US. Democracy in its current form just isn't convenient for what govts want to do these days. The spanish elections were certainly a spanner in the works and I applaud the result.

griffdaddy

i'd actually love to see this law or indeed the copyright laws persued by the riaa implemented. i'd be really impressed if my gaf got raided because A)it'd be cool: 'mr griffin you're wanted for downloading 500 drum and bass songs' you could tell all your friends your a hacker (or paedophile)
seriously though, the physical logistics of this kinda crap just make it near impossible and in my opinion its more of a stop them by scaring them tactic

Moriarty

The RIAA have already sued hundreds of people in the states because they were filesharing. True they won't get everyone, but you might be one of the few they do get.

mr_angry

I decided to work out how much I would owe if all the material on my computer was to be considered copyright infringement. Given a single instance of copyright infringement can result in a maximum penalty of €150,000, I could (ahem) technically owe:

*drum roll*

€480,000,000.

Half a billion dollars! Needless to say, I have a strong electromagnet ready for the day the RIAA come calling to my door...

bizmark

Originally posted by mr_angry
I could (ahem) technically owe:

*drum roll*

€480,000,000.

Half a billion dollars! Needless to say, I have a strong electromagnet ready for the day the RIAA come calling to my door...

I nearly spat tea all over my key board when i read that

Id owe around 31.5 million :ninja:

Mutant_Fruit

EDIT: Don't drink tea when you read this post.

Ok... assuming all the music on my computer was illegal (but its all legal :-p) i'd owe a mere......

2,392,650,000

Not that much..... (assuming max fine per item)


Personally though, i think this whole thing is very dodgy. It doesn't really make people want to trust their governments, when these type of things get pushed through so quickly, without proper checks done on it.

People will just start moving on to bigger badder filesharing apps, which are harder to track. This is definately not the way forward. The only way forward is to offer cheap downloads of copyrighted material. Only when that is done will they be in a position to offer a real alternative to getting sued.