Jailtime Seems A Bit Harsh For Online Music Store Owners Who Didn't Get All The Right Licenses

from the why-not-just-make-them-pay-up? dept

Most readers here probably know the story of Allofmp3.com -- a Russian website that signed a licensing deal with a Russian music licensing group ROMS. The site was immensely popular because (a) it sold un-DRM'd files (back before that was common) and (b) sold music incredibly cheaply. The recording industry should have taken this as a lesson in how to create a super popular online music store -- but instead it freaked out, and nearly created an international diplomatic incident in threatening Russia with economic sanctions unless it shut the site down. The problem was that since it had the ROMS license, it was legal in Russia. In fact, Allofmp3.com even tried to pay the record labels some money -- which they refused. The record labels, of course, insisted that the ROMS license wasn't sufficient, but no Russian court ever agreed. Eventually the site was shut down, though it lives on at MP3Sparks. However, it's lost a lot of steam because the site has been blocked from accepting most common forms of payment.

Law Professor Michael Scott points us to the news of what appears to be a similar offering in Italy -- except that, in this case, the operators of the site have been sent to jail. The only news that I can find on this is from the IFPI site -- which is obviously a bit biased, but it does look like the owners of the site did get a license from the Italian Authors' Society (SIAE), which they believed was sufficient. A lower court agreed, but the appeals court has sided with the record labels.

But here's the kicker: the operators of the site have now been sent to jail for criminal copyright infringement. Already I have problems with most criminal copyright infringement cases -- because, by any reasonable standard, copyright is a civil dispute -- it's an issue between two businesses. In this case, it's even more egregious because it seems clear that the site wasn't just some random guy selling MP3s he had no right to, but had clearly tried to obtain the correct licenses. However, these days, when to do just about anything with music you need to get numerous different licenses (Peter Jenner, back at MidemNet, claimed that you needed 33 different permissions to do pretty much anything with music in Europe, though others disagreed), it seems fairly ridiculous to throw someone in jail for not being able to figure out every single party that has to sign off on something -- especially when you were lead to believe that you had what you needed via the Authors' Society.

Filed Under: copyright, downloads, italy, jail, licenses
Companies: ifpi

Irish ISP Accused Of Copyright Violations Agrees To Implement Three Strikes

from the settle-me-this dept

Last year, the IFPI sued Irish ISP Eircom for copyright infringement. This was quite a leap. While the IFPI, RIAA and other such organizations had been pushing ISPs to filter file sharing or cut off file sharers via a three strikes approach, this was the first time that an ISP was being sued for being actually liable for the infringement as well. The "evidence" appeared to be some internal emails where Eircom employees joked about piracy. That seemed like a stretch... but rather than go through a full lawsuit, it appears Eircom has settled. Reader eoinmonty points us to the news that Eircom has agreed to implement a three strikes policy as a part of the settlement. Interesting that this comes just days after the neighboring UK announced that it will not require three strikes policies from UK ISPs. Of course, now the IFPI and the record labels have a framework: sue ISPs, and then push them to implement three strikes as a part of the settlement.

Filed Under: ireland, isps, three strikes
Companies: eircom, ifpi

Record Labels Make The Case That Irish ISP Is Guilty Of Copyright Infringement

from the inducing-a-joke dept

A few different readers sent in the latest on the lawsuit that the major record labels have filed against Irish ISP Eircom. While the adversarial relationship between ISPs and the recording industry has been discussed for years, this is the first case in which the labels are directly suing an ISP for copyright infringement. Their argument, similar to the "inducement" rule that the US courts made up (it's not actually in any US law) is that Eircom was actively encouraging piracy. In the case, they used internal emails from Eircom execs where some execs jokingly talked about how piracy was good for musicians because it would reduce money for rock stars to spend on cocaine. Apparently, obviously joking comments are being used to establish intent these days. Either way, this seems like a weak case for the record labels. Plenty of people encourage piracy. It's not going to go away if all those people shut up. The industry needs to stop freaking out over the fact that piracy happens, and start focusing on actual solutions in the market.

Filed Under: copyright, ireland, isps, liability
Companies: eircom, ifpi

IFPI Says 95% of Music Downloads Are Illegal

from the but-then-they-would,-wouldn't-they dept

The IFPI, the international equivalent of the RIAA, has put out new stats claiming that only 5 percent of all music downloads in 2008 were legal. The group estimated that 40 billion tracks were shared illegally last year, or an average of almost 30 songs for every internet user worldwide. The IFPI says it arrived at that estimate by "collating separate studies in 16 countries over a three-year period," so it's not really clear just how accurate it is -- and of course, the higher the figure, the better, as far as the IFPI's efforts to get governments to be their copyright police are concerned. The IFPI says that global music revenues fell by 7% last year, blaming the drop on falling CD sales, which a 25% increase in digital sales couldn't overcome. The IFPI says piracy is the biggest challenge it faces; given the stats, the real challenge seems to be record labels' inability to move past its legacy business model and adapt to consumers' changing desires.

It's hard to give much credence to the IFPI report, given the way it plays with statistics. For instance, in the press release for the report, the IFPI tries to pin the blame on piracy for a downturn in the "local music sectors" of France and Spain. It backs this up by saying that new French and Spanish artists accounted for a smaller percentage of album releases in 2008 than they had before. What about established French and Spanish artists? And does a lack of new local artists have more to do with downloading, or problems with labels in how they do business, and find and promote new talent? Furthermore, when the album is declining in popularity compared to singles, and new artists more likely to take advantage of this by targeting the singles market, is this even a legitimate metric for this purpose? These IFPI stats should be taken with a large grain of salt, and their intended purpose -- to further the group's goal to get governments and ISPs to prop up record labels' outmoded business models -- should be considered.

Filed Under: downloads, legality
Companies: ifpi

Danish High Court Says ISPs Must Be Internet Policemen; Have To Block The Pirate Bay

from the keep-on-blocking dept

Earlier this year, we noted, with surprise, that a Danish court had ordered Tele2, a large ISP, to block all access to The Pirate Bay website. This followed an earlier ruling requiring Tele2 to block access to AllofMp3.com. It's never been clear why an ISP should take on the responsibility of blocking access to a site, and Tele2 appealed the ruling. Unfortunately, it looks as though the company has lost. The Danish High Court has apparently sided with the IFPI, and says that, indeed, Tele2 must block The Pirate Bay. Of course, this is unlikely to matter. Whenever these blocks are ordered, there are always ways around them, and the attention from the blocks tends to alert more people to the site's existence.

Filed Under: blocking, denmark, high court
Companies: ifpi, pirate bay, tele2

Belgian Court Realizes That ISPs Shouldn't Be Forced To Block File Sharing

from the about-time dept

A year and a half ago, we wrote about a Belgian court requiring an ISP to block all file sharing, and saying that after six months to implement a filtering solution, the ISP would be fined 2,500 euros per day that file sharing still occurred on its network. The court had been convinced by the IFPI that blocking all file sharing was as simple as installing the filtering software from the entertainment industry darling, Audible Magic. Of course, as has been seen over and over again, Audible Magic's "magic bullet" solution isn't particularly good, and certainly does very little to stop file sharing. Apparently, Belgian ISPs have finally been able to convince the judge of that fact, and he's reversed the original ruling, saying that the ISP in question is no longer subject to the fine. Apparently, even the recording industry lawyers had to admit that they misled the court over the efficacy of Audible Magic's filtering software.

Filed Under: belgium, filtering, isps
Companies: audible magic, ifpi, riaa

Danish Man Fined For Sharing Music, But At Around $2/Song

from the seems-a-bit-more-reasonable dept

It looks like the IFPI has won a lawsuit against a guy in Denmark, who was accused of sharing over 13,000 songs. From the brief description on TorrentFreak, it sounds like there was plenty of evidence pinning this directly to the guy (though, it's not clear if there's evidence that he actually shared the files, or simply made them available). Either way, what's more interesting is that the court has fined him approximately $24,400, or a bit less than $2 per song. As the article notes, the court estimated actual losses from the file sharing, and then used a "doubling up" method. So it sounds like the court said each file cost a little less than a dollar and the fine was double that. While the whole issue of suing people for file sharing still seems a bit absurd, you have to admit that approximately $2/song seems a lot more reasonable than the $750 to $150,000 per song that the RIAA pushes for in the US (and in the Jammie Thomas case it actually got $9250). Even so, the guy in Denmark is thinking about appealing the "doubling up" aspect, believing that even that fine is too high, as there's no evidence that his file sharing resulted in any reduction in sales for the recording industry.

Filed Under: copyright, denmark, file sharing, fines
Companies: ifpi

Why Did Italian ISPs Redirect Pirate Bay Traffic To IFPI Site?

from the that-doesn't-seem-right dept

We've already talked about how Italy's plan to have ISPs block all access to The Pirate Bay has failed by getting more people to visit the site. However, TorrentFreak points out another oddity in this whole ordeal. For the sites that did redirect The Pirate Bay, they pointed people to an IFPI-owned website. That seems highly questionable. Why should ISPs direct traffic intended for one private site to another private site -- allowing that second private organization to collect IP address info from folks intending to go to The Pirate Bay? If they really had to block the site, why not point them to a gov't explanation or, at the very least, a neutral site. Handing The Pirate Bay's traffic over to music industry lobbyists makes very little sense.

Filed Under: ban, isps, italy, promotion, redirect
Companies: ifpi, pirate bay

IFPI Admits It Screwed Up; Claims Mistakes Happen

from the yes...-but... dept

Last week, we noted how the IFPI had sent a nastygram to a music blogger, forcing him to take down a song -- even though the musicians behind the song wanted it posted. After the band contacted the IFPI, someone from the IFPI sent an apology to the site in a way that doesn't suggest it's really all that sorry:

IFPI was contacted by a member of the label who confirmed you were given permission to post the file on your site.

We were unaware of this agreement but now that it has been notified to us please feel free to upload the file.

Due to the volume of infringing content we find online there will be instances where legitimate files are picked up as infringing. We hope this matter shows that once we have the correct information we do not want to stop the promotion of music online.

In other words, "mistakes happen," and the responsibility isn't ours for making the mistake -- but it falls on the individual bloggers who may or may not be able to alert the musician in question and get them to call our legal dogs off. Of course, most laws concerning takedown notices require the folks issuing the takedown to properly express the wishes of the copyright holder. It would appear that the IFPI did not do that in this case, and an after-the-fact apology seems rather weak, given the weight that a legal threat from the IFPI could hold to an individual blogger without a legal team behind him.

Filed Under: dmca, false notice, takedowns
Companies: ifpi

IFPI Forces Music Offline, Even Though Copyright Holder Wanted It Shared

from the all-about-the-musicians,-huh? dept

When challenged on what they're doing, organizations like the RIAA and the IFPI will often claim that they're just trying to help musicians. That's obviously untrue, as they represent the record labels -- who have a long history of an antagonistic relationship with the musicians they work with. We're seeing more and more cases where this conflict is being made quite clear as the RIAA and IFPI attacks fan actions that the musicians in question would prefer be left alone. Reader Xavier sends in this example of a music blogger who received a cease and desist from the IFPI that not only contained numerous mistakes, but was disputed by the musician himself.

When the blogger received the cease-and-desist (which named the wrong song, but pointed to a specific URL on his blog), he sent the band a note via their MySpace page, to which the lead singer of the group responded:

"You definitely have my blessing as one of the 4 holders of the copyrights to that specific recording. I actually think this is bogus. Anyways thanks for posting that on your site. It was lovely to see it out there doing the rounds. We didnt take it to radio so your helping with the pollenation of the nation."

Of course, the blogger was (rightfully) worried that the IFPI might have his hosting company take down the site and/or charge him with a lawsuit, so he took down the song anyway. Nice to see the IFPI looking out for the best interests of the musicians, huh?

Filed Under: ifpi, music, music bloggers, takedown, travis
Companies: ifpi