UK Court Orders BT To Block Access To Usenet Site Hollywood Hates

from the this-won't-end-well dept

It's been quite a week for UK copyright law, hasn't it? Today alone we've reported on UK courts deciding that they're qualified to rule on US copyright law and that merely clicking a link to open a web page can be infringement. To top it all off, the UK high court ruled that BT must block access to Usenet service provider Newzbin2. This is an incredibly questionable decision that plunges the UK into blatant government censorship. And, of course, the entertainment industry (who you would think would know better than to celebrate censorship) is thrilled beyond belief.

The ruling itself is quite troubling:

"In my judgment it follows that BT has actual knowledge of other persons using its service to infringe copyright: it knows that the users and operators of Newzbin2 infringe copyright on a large scale, and in particular infringe the copyrights of the studios in large numbers of their films and television programmes," said Justice Arnold in his ruling at the high court in London.

"[BT] knows that the users of Newzbin2 include BT subscribers, and it knows those users use its service to receive infringing copies of copyright works made available to them by Newzbin2," Arnold added.

There are many problems with this. First of all, an ISP should never be responsible for the actions of its users, and yet that's what the court is saying here. Furthermore, Usenet, which has been around for ages (and, of course, predates the web) does have non-infringing uses as well. Sure, many people do now use it to infringe, but it's pretty ridiculous to blame BT for allowing access to one service that provides access to Newzbin2, because some of its users infringe on copyrights. Furthermore, it's not even "Newzbin" that is making this content available, as the judge wrote. It's users who are making the content available.

Considering the sites that the entertainment industry has declared infringing -- including the Internet Archive, Vimeo, SoundCloud, Vibe.com and tons of blogs and forums, this is a very worrying sign indeed. Basically, if the entertainment industry is scared of your online site or service, and too clueless to figure out how to use it, you can be booted off the internet in the UK. Scary stuff.

Filed Under: censorship, copyright, uk
Companies: bt, mpa, mpaa, newzbin

MPAA Still More Focused On Those Darn 'Pirates' Rather Than Making Money

from the good-luck-with-that dept

It appears that the MPAA's whac-a-mole game of pointlessness continues. As a whole bunch of you have been submitting, the MPAA's international arm (just chop off the last "A" in the name and you get the MPA) is asking a court in the UK to issue an injunction forcing ISP BT to block everyone's access to Newzbin. Newzbin, of course, is a Usenet aggregator, that was found liable for infringement via its service, in large part because the site's staffers actively promoted that you could use the service to infringe. This was no surprise, as courts don't look kindly on encouraging people to infringe. What then followed was a bizarre and convoluted mess, in which Newzbin reappeared -- though it's not entirely clear how or who was behind it.

So, now, the MPA has decided that it's easier to just try to block access to it. Apparently the UK already has a "Great Firewall" type of system that requires ISPs to block access to sites deemed to be child porn sites, and the MPA says that it should be simple to start censoring "pirate" sites that it doesn't like as well. Of course, if you don't see the slippery slope there, you probably missed the story about how a list of "pirate sites" to be blocked, which was put together for ad giant GroupM with help from MPAA members Viacom and Warner Bros., included such evil sites as the Internet Archive, Vimeo and SoundCloud. How long until the MPAA asks them to be blocked from the UK as well? Of course, this is what happens when "fighting piracy," rather than "helping studios adapt and make money" is your number one priority. You end up with an entire "content protection" division with multiple vice presidents... but no "here's how we adapt and make money" division. And all those "content protection" lawyers have to have something to do, so why not press for blanket censorship? It sure beats working...

Filed Under: access, censorship, mpa, mpaa, uk
Companies: bt, mpa, mpaa, newzbin

Motion Picture Academy Threatens Costume Shop For Offering An Oscar Costume

from the trademark-fun dept

The Motion Picture Academy is notorious not just for its incredibly aggressive stance when it comes to copyright, but also to trademarks -- especially when it comes to the Academy Awards, better known as The Oscars. I've heard stories of them threatening/suing people for holding Oscars parties with mock Oscar statues. So it comes as little surprise to see the following story, sent in by Lawrence D'Oliveiro, that the Academy is threatening a small costume shop in New Zealand for daring to offer costumes that look like the Oscar statue. As if they don't have anything better to be focusing on? The Academy and misguided trademark lawyers will of course chime in and insist that they must do this or risk the statue becoming "generic" such that the trademark goes away, but it still seems like a bullying approach. Why not just work with the shop to offer a "licensed" version? It's not like having such costumes around the world causes any actual harm to The Oscars. In fact, it helps to promote them...

Filed Under: costumes, oscars, trademark
Companies: mpa

Can A Link, By Itself, Be Copyright Infringement?

from the someone-please-explain dept

A report in Billboard Magazine mentions that the IFPI and the MPA (the global versions of the RIAA and the MPAA respectively) have successfully been able to get ISPs in Mexico to take down 35 blogs which they say contributed to music and movie piracy. Specifically, they charge that the blogs had thousands of "infringing links." Of course, that leads to a rather obvious question: what the hell is an "infringing link"? Is it a link to infringing content? If so, then Google and pretty much any search engine is equally guilty. Simply linking to something, by itself, is not and should not be considered infringement.

Filed Under: blogs, copyright infringement, links, mexico
Companies: ifpi, mpa, mpaa, riaa

MPAA Cheers On Totally Useless Piracy Crackdown

from the pat-yourself-on-the-backs-now dept

The MPAA (or, rather, its international arm, the MPA) is proudly cheering on the "success" of "Operation ZoomOut," a 10-week crackdown of movie piracy in Asia. The group talks about how various retail outlets were shut down, raids on counterfeiting shops seized a bunch of DVD-burners and counterfeit movies -- and that the overall number of counterfeit DVDs coming out of Asia declined. That's great. Except for a few small facts. You can bet that if the demand is out there, plenty of others will jump in and fill the gaps pretty damn quickly and (more importantly) none of this stopped the same movies from being available to download online.

And that, of course, is the number one problem with ridiculous and costly publicity stunts by groups like the MPA. They're useless and have no actual impact on the problem. They're trying to deal with a digital issue by using an analog solution. Once a single digital copy gets online, it really doesn't matter how many DVD-burners you seize. The movie's out there, and copies are being made at an unstoppable rate. These types of raids may make for fun headlines and gives the MPA a chance to go back to the movie studios, show them they're "doing something" and ask for more money. But it hardly does anything to deal with the new digital reality. That would require actually understanding both technology and business models -- both of which seem to be well beyond the MPA (and the MPAA's) skillset.

Filed Under: counterfeiting, crackdown, piracy
Companies: mpa, mpaa