Swedish Police Say Anti-Piracy Law Has Harmed Ability To Catch Criminals

from the consequences dept

Tue, May 18th 2010 3:00pm — Mike Masnick

We've pointed out many times in the past the "unintended" consequences of certain activities, and it looks like the entertainment industry's worldwide effort to push for more and more industry-favorable copyright laws is causing serious problems elsewhere. Apparently, Anders Ahlqvist, who runs the Swedish IT crime unit is noting that the response to the IPRED law in Sweden (pushed by the entertainment industry to crack down on unauthorized file sharing) means that it's now more difficult for him to do his job. Part of the issue, of course, is that various ISPs responded to the law by seeking to protect their users' privacy by deleting log files. Of course, that probably means it's only a matter of time before the industry pushes for new data retention laws, despite evidence that more data retention can actually make life trickier for law enforcement as well. Still, at some point people need to recognize that the entertainment industry's single-minded focus on "stomping out file sharing" rather than adding value through new business models has some serious costs elsewhere.

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: anti-piracy, encryption, log files, sweden, unintended consequences

47 Comments

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

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

william (profile), 18 May 2010 @ 3:00pm

Well, as long as the "serious costs" is not on them, they won't give a damn. That's how capitalism works. :P
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 May 2010 @ 3:05pm

the serious cost comes from isps who would rather capitulate with law breakers than be responsible corporate citizens. the lack of log files is to allow their users to continue to infringe on copyright with impunity, as the result is that they are also helping other law breakers to hide in the cracks. this isnt the riaas fault, you need to look at the isps who are more willing to help their users evade the law than anything else. at some point people need to recognize that the swedish isp industry's single-minded focus on "profiting from file sharing no matter what" rather than adding value through new business models has some serious costs elsewhere.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- :Lobo Santo (profile), 18 May 2010 @ 3:14pm
  
  Re: Huh
  Hello Coward!
  
  Speaking of blowhards, be careful on that slippery slope of yours; wouldn't want you to fall down it and get hurt.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- bishboria (profile), 18 May 2010 @ 3:24pm
  
  Re:
  "...rather than adding value through new business models has some serious costs elsewhere."
  
  Did you get the appropriate rights to use Mike's words in your reply, or did you just steal them? You criminal!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 18 May 2010 @ 3:32pm
  
  Re:
  Copyright laws are retarded.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- DocMenach (profile), 18 May 2010 @ 3:34pm
  
  Re:
  It's not about ISPs capitulating to lawbreakers. It's about ISPs protecting their users right to privacy. ISPs are not "more willing to help their users evade the law than anything else". That is absolutely ridiculous. ISPs are in the business of providing internet service, just as phone companies are in the business of selling phone service.
  
  Most ISPs fully cooperate with law enforcement when due process is followed. But when MPAA/RIAA goons simply come up with a list of IP addresses and ask for personal user data, the typical ISP response is "go the cops and come back with a warrant or court order".
  
  I would love to know why you put "profiting from file sharing no matter what" in quotes as if you were actually quoting somebody, instead of just pulling an asinine statement out of the air.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 18 May 2010 @ 3:39pm
    
    Re: Re:
    doc, it isnt that simple. swedish isps, in order to avoid giving private information, are willfully deleting logs or turning logging off so that they have no idea who is using their services. they are not trying to support due process, they are aiding and abetting those who need to stay hidden in order to continue to file share. as mike has shown, their actions to dump logs rather than follow the law has other consequences. nobody is forcing them to delete logs, they are the ones doing it.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - DocMenach (profile), 18 May 2010 @ 3:50pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Except that they are deleting the logs in response the the IPRED law, which was written to allow the handing over of users' private info based on only accusations, no actual proof needed. You state that they are dumping the logs rather than following the law. I am curious how dumping or not keeping logs is not following the law. There is no law that says they have to keep logs.
      
      You say "they are aiding and abetting those who need to stay hidden in order to continue to file share." It looks to me like they are protecting the privacy of their users against invasion of privacy based only on accusations.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 18 May 2010 @ 4:31pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        there is no law requiring them to maintain logs, but they were all doing it before. the only reason they stopped was to help people avoid getting caught, which keeps their business model functional. any isp keeping logs would likely lose some customers now (the ones actively infringing). so in the end, they (not anyone else) made a business decision to remove and delete all logs, rather than conform to the laws because they think it would be bad for business. if nothing else, it makes it pretty easy for the swedish government to move to make logging mandatory, as these isps seem intent on helping illegal activity.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 18 May 2010 @ 4:34pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Why is the activity illegal again?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Mike C. (profile), 18 May 2010 @ 7:34pm
        
        Narrow vision abounds...
        And of course, the ISP that chooses to delete or deactivate their logging couldn't possibly be interested in saving the labor costs involved with fulfilling private data requests.
        
        Take a look at Time Warner's response to the latest copyright obnoxiousness. It apparently takes an entire team 3 months to process 20,000+ accounts. Given that IPRED forces the release of private data based on accusation instead of court verified proof, it's not beyond belief that the RIAA/MPAA would submit at least that many requests over a 90 day period.
        
        It IS a business decision, but not the one you are assuming.
        
        /never assume
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 19 May 2010 @ 12:13am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        You contradict yourself. First you say there is no law requiring them to maintain logs. Then you say "made business decision to remove and delete all logs, rather than conform to the laws". So, does the law require logging or not? If it does not require logging, then the isps are conforming the laws.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Niall (profile), 19 May 2010 @ 4:41am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        You are playing games with wording here. A fuller phrasing might be: "made business decision to remove and delete all logs, rather than conform to the laws (that require any logs retained by ISPs to be handed over on request of accusers without need for a warrant [my extrapolation])"
        
        So no law requiring it, just if they exist, they have to be handed over on the flimsiest of excuses. So it's a valid business decision to not maintain them at all if you have any actual belief in privacy - and EU data laws are *very* strong on personal data privacy - without contradicting the lack of a law mandating collection of logs.
        
        As for the wording, it's called context. It's (context) the element of communication that allows us (me, you, mike, the dog next door) to communicate with each other (the dog next door, mike, you, me) without having to explicitly say everything (aforementioned conversation) that has been referred to before (previous paragraph). It (context) makes communication vastly faster and more efficient than including the explicit references at every point.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 19 May 2010 @ 7:10am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        if they truly believed in privacy, they wouldnt have been logging before. that they chose to stop logging exactly when ipred comes along to fight piracy pretty much shows where they stand. a lack of log files actually makes their business harder, because in order to do that, they pretty much have to give up capped access, usage limits, logon limits, etc. it would appear to be a bad business decision (they are now operating their network blind), but one chosen to pander to the file traders so they dont move to another isp. i suspect that mandatory logging will come around soon enough.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 19 May 2010 @ 9:40am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        [citation needed]
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 18 May 2010 @ 4:32pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        My right to privacy trumps their fight on piracy. True story.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Brendan (profile), 18 May 2010 @ 11:34pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        I like this slogan. I will try to use it more often, and I recommend others do as well.
        
        My right to privacy outweighs your fight against piracy.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Karl (profile), 18 May 2010 @ 7:23pm
  
  Re:
  Yes, because anyone who is concerned that corporations have more right to invade your privacy than the government, is "evading the law."
  
  And ISP's who take those concerns into account are not "responsible corporate citizens," they're "capitulating with law breakers."
  
  And those ISP's are not trying to protect privacy, they're "profiting from file sharing no matter what." (Ignore the fact that, usually, higher traffic means less profit for ISP's.)
  
  Yeah, that's accurate. Also, I love Big Brother.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Niall (profile), 19 May 2010 @ 4:42am
    
    Re: Re:
    The same way that mobile phone companies are 'profiting' from crime because criminals use mobile phones, especially from within jail...
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Brendan (profile), 18 May 2010 @ 11:30pm
  
  Re:
  Maybe if the vast majority of the population doesn't believe in your silly laws, they should be repealed altogether - like prohibition.
  
  Drinking alcohol was against the law. That was a dumb law. People ignored it, correctly. It was repealed.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 18 May 2010 @ 11:44pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Remember when women weren't allowed to vote and then some women expressed an interest in voting and they were told to shut their pretty little mouths because voting is for men and men alone.
    
    Good times. I wonder why that changed?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Niall (profile), 19 May 2010 @ 4:43am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Heck, what about the times when you had to own a certain amount of land to qualify to vote?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Spanky, 18 May 2010 @ 3:58pm

rerererererere
I'm sure someone has already mentioned this, but why do responses like this always come from "Anonymous Coward"? Its not like the site wants your identity info or anything - just pick a handle so people can respond to you.

In other news, I see so many comments to stories like this, that the entertainment industry "just doesn't get it", whether its the internet, capitalism, consumers, etc. Believe me, they get it. Greedy people are usually very smart.

We all see the unintended consequences, and wonder why the entertainment industry doesn't. They do. We see Rupert Murdoch doing the same things he's suing others for, and marvel at the hypocrisy. He don't care.

When you realize that all this is about greed and profit, and that these people have no morals, that they're cowards who only care about themselves,you'll begin to understand it. Illogic and hypocrisy don't matter. Only money does. That's when it all makes sense.

Sorry, you all know this already. Just pisses me off, is all.

There are people in prison who deserve to breathe the air more than these guys.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 18 May 2010 @ 4:33pm
  
  Re: rerererererere
  spanky the standard answer is debate the ideas, dont worry about who is who. click reply to this comment and it all sorts itself out. as for greedy and hypocrisy, think about isps who decided to stop logging specifically to maintain or even improve the bottom line in their business. they know it helps people who infringe, but they choose to do it anyway just for a bottom line result. isnt that a tragedy?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 18 May 2010 @ 4:43pm
    
    Re: Re: rerererererere
    Remember when the recording industry were titans and now it's the internet industry. Change sure is funny.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 18 May 2010 @ 5:30pm
    
    Re: Re: rerererererere
    Coming from the TAM who routinely resorts to ad hominem, whines about anonymity while being anonymous, and just a few posts ago based his entire argument around not knowing who a person was.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - abc gum, 18 May 2010 @ 6:03pm
    
    Re: Re: rerererererere
    "just for a bottom line result. isnt that a tragedy?"
    
    I'm sure that everyone will agree, the **IA is not guilty of this at all. Because they are upstanding citizens in the community and are only concerned with the welfare of those around them. Furthermore, the captains of industry should be proud of what they have done. Just look at the Gulf of Mexico, what a fine example of fulfilling their coprporate responsibility.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - btrussell (profile), 19 May 2010 @ 3:00am
    
    Re: Re: rerererererere
    Isn't it a tragedy that hollywood still has people smoking cigs in their movies that are then broadcast for the children to see?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
NAMELESS.ONE, 18 May 2010 @ 4:17pm

Hollywood commits inducment to pedophilia and terrorism
in same fashion as napster and others induce crimes by way of activity or indirect nature SO DOES HOLLYWOOD.

As i said in earlier posts if HOLLYWOOD and your GOVT were thinking of the children then they would legalize P2P and then the coppers could go after the bad bad criminals like terrorists and pedophiles...BUT NOPE they are in there lil indirect way INDUCING more crime by there actions of adding p2p to crimes and infringements and need ot have police divert resources to kids rather then real criminals

THINK OF THE CHILDREN LEGALIZE p2p
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Pieter, 18 May 2010 @ 4:19pm

Encrypt
Soon, people will figure out secure means of P2P communication. When this happens, you will have all the authorities worried, because now they can't track people anymore. They can't just monitor regular packets anymore. Encryption can now be a red flag for further monitoring. There is very little of it, but if all your comms are encrypted, you loose that ability to check for someone who is hiding something. They are making their own life more difficult. Corporates will still use encryption, and ISP's wont be able to break the encryption because they won't know if you are talking to a bank or not. Imagine being told we are removing all security because we cannot monitor your communications, then we also see all your banking transactions. But trust us, we just send everything to the record companies to go through. Just in case ;-)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
NAMELESS.ONE, 18 May 2010 @ 4:31pm

Securing p2p
sorry you are wrong as long as they use VUSE and utorrent on masee that cant happen the very people that own those things are the same people out to gt you.
SO a true user of p2p makes his own tools.

PROB there is hollywood all they do to shape you is anyhting not matching the headers of there stuff gets traffic shaped , capped and throttled

LOOK HOW SAD CANADA has become as an example of them trying ot punish us for not giving in to there laws...and it still won't happen.

AND if you read the article it has little to do wiht encryption persay and everything to do with the nature of the crimes cops are being forced to police.
a kid with a music tune times 500 million and 5 terrorists sending encrypted messages using a modified torrent client whch makes it look like a bit torrent stream or data send/receive.

YA see i just figured out how too FOOL you, with 1 minute of thought.Seriously i have had 4 cops tell me they have better things to do then police kids downloading a music tune. THERE just is toomuch other more dangerous crime out there to worry about music and movies and tv and software.
THATS THE FACTS
Do not believe me go ask ten cops , my take is if they are honest 90% will say what i just wrote.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bengie, 18 May 2010 @ 4:36pm

Civic Duties?
"the serious cost comes from isps who would rather capitulate with law breakers than be responsible corporate citizens. "

Well, in the USA, it is the "Civic Duty" of the populace to replace the government if it is no longer "for the people or by the people". As far as I can tell, the RIAA/MPAA has nothing to do with being good for society and everything to do with greed yet the government thinks the RIAA/MPAA has more rights than actual people..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 18 May 2010 @ 6:54pm
  
  Re: Civic Duties?
  bengie, i trust this means you never listen to label music, never download it, never enjoy it, never to into clubs or bars playing it, turn off the sound on your tv and generally entirely avoid the hated **aa business models that you so loath. i bet you dont though. secretly, you love the stuff, if you couldnt download it you would be buying it. enjoy glee? that makes the **aas plenty of money. dont you just hate yourself?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - RD, 18 May 2010 @ 7:10pm
    
    Re: Re: Civic Duties?
    "enjoy glee? that makes the **aas plenty of money. dont you just hate yourself?"
    
    Enjoy it very much. Its also COMPLETELY FREE, as it airs on FREE TV. Glad it makes them money, but it doesnt come from ME in any way. No, I dont hate myself, I only hate greedy scumbag corporate shill apologists who clamor for more and more for their selfish ends at the expense of The Public IN CONTRAVENTION OF THE SPIRIT OF THE CONSTITUTION.
    
    Fuck you and the TAM you rode in on.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 18 May 2010 @ 7:11pm
    
    Re: Re: Civic Duties?
    Why even bother "trusting" if in the end, you're going to stick to your preconceived notions about everyone who peruses this website? In other news, Glee is overrated.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 18 May 2010 @ 7:34pm
    
    Re: Re: Civic Duties?
    If I couldn't download it I wouldn't buy it.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 18 May 2010 @ 8:52pm
    
    Re: Re: Civic Duties?
    TAM adds "psychic" to his list of imaginary qualifications.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Groove Tiger (profile), 19 May 2010 @ 12:04am

I think the real question here is: why are the police wasting their time in petty crimes such as pedophilia, money scams, terrorist and assassination plans on the web, etc, when they should be trying to crack down on them pirates!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 19 May 2010 @ 12:11am
  
  Re:
  Pirates? Like those guys capturing ships on the high seas? I think you meant to say, "when they should be trying to crack down on them copyright infringers!"
  
  Copyright infringers. Worse than the devil, they are.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - The Groove Tiger (profile), 19 May 2010 @ 10:37am
    
    Re: Re:
    Yo ho ho, a copyright infringer's life for me...
    
    Doesn't sound sufficiently derogatory to me! How about, let's call them... zombie ninja vikings.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 19 May 2010 @ 8:24pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      What do I have to do to be called a zombie ninja viking? Because I will do it.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Cowherd, 19 May 2010 @ 2:48am

> You contradict yourself.

No, the laws he refers to (in the part you quoted directly) are the laws requiring the logs be turned over. The statement that there are no laws requiring the keeping of logs is correct, and not contradictory.

They can choose whether or not to keep logs, but, if they do, they must be willing to turn them over to the authorities or fight the requests for them to do so. It's easier and cheaper to just not bother logging, and you've also removed the very real possibility of having to have a legal fight with a wealthy industry that's not averse to underhand tactics. No-brainer, really.

It's like my car's MOT - if you have a spare tyre in your car it must be road legal, but there is no requirement to have one at all. Mine was worn, so I just left it at home when I got my MOT done, and put it back when I got home.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Niall (profile), 19 May 2010 @ 4:47am
  
  Re:
  +1
  
  Yay that was better than my original response :)
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Texas Auto Insurance (profile), 19 May 2010 @ 5:27pm

Blame it on something
So, the Swedish police now use this as an excuse for their inability to catch criminals? Come with something better than that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Texas Auto Insurance (profile), 19 May 2010 @ 5:32pm

Second thought
Could you imagine the backlash if the police dept in let's say..New York came up with this? Auto Insurance in Texas Texas Commercial Insurance
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 19 May 2010 @ 8:25pm
  
  Re: Second thought
  SPAMMER!!!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
negars un a boat, 6 Jul 2012 @ 9:02pm

idgaf
i will pirate all the shit I want
[ link to this | view in chronology ]