South Korean Prosecutors Reject Charges Against Thousands Of Uploaders

from the no-mass-infringement-cases dept

Mon, Sep 21st 2009 3:19am — Mike Masnick

Last month, we noted that a group of mostly Japanese porn publishers tried to bring charges against 10,000 people under South Korea's harsh new copyright laws, claiming that they were guilty of uploading copyrighted material. More recently, those same publishers announced plans to increase the number sued to nearly 65,000. Well, that plan may not be getting very far as Michael Scott alerts us to the news that South Korean prosecutors have rejected the charges against those 10,000 uploaders, instead saying they would just charge 10 "habitual offenders," though those offenders may face jail time.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: prosecution, south korea, uploaders

9 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Kazi, 21 Sep 2009 @ 3:39am

Re:
Is Andrew Hall somehow related to copyright? No.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 21 Sep 2009 @ 3:51am

Selective Enforcement
Ahhh, the old selective enforcement ploy. Simply pass overly-broad draconian laws and then use selective enforcement rather than admit any problem with the law itself. Helps keep everyone scared and in line. Same old same old.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 21 Sep 2009 @ 11:54am
  
  Re: Selective Enforcement
  Helps keep everyone scared and in line.
  
  They're just working towards reunification with North Korea.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Alex, 21 Sep 2009 @ 5:25am

laws?
Is this another version of 'us riaa/hollywood enforcing it's laws on another country'? People need to learn about Proxies....and usenet....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Dark Helmet (profile), 21 Sep 2009 @ 6:43am
  
  Re: laws?
  You ARE aware that the story said Japanese porn producers.....right?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - ChurchHatesTucker (profile), 21 Sep 2009 @ 12:20pm
    
    Re: Re: laws?
    I have to wonder if their response would be different had it been Korean porn producers.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 21 Sep 2009 @ 5:30am

Except for the China, U.S., U.K. and France who would send thousands to prison other then dictatorships?

It is a ridiculous situation the actual state of affairs in the IP world.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Luci, 21 Sep 2009 @ 3:09pm
  
  Re:
  Well, one problem, there? In the US it's a civil offense, not a criminal one, so, yeah. No jail time. Nice try, though.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 21 Sep 2009 @ 6:06pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Well, one problem, there? In the US it's a civil offense, not a criminal one, so, yeah. No jail time. Nice try, though.
    
    The United States No Electronic Theft Act (NET Act), a federal law passed in 1997, provides for criminal prosecution of individuals who engage in copyright infringement, even when there is no monetary profit or commercial benefit from the infringement. Maximum penalties can be five years in prison and up to $250,000 in fines.
    
    Now you may disagree, but I'd consider five years in prison to be "jail time". "Nice try", yourself.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]