First French File-Sharer Sentenced To Disconnection Under Hadopi; But Judgment May Be Unenforceable

from the talk-about-waste-of-time dept

As we've noted before, Hadopi has been a colossal failure on just about every metric, and now seems on the way out. But French taxpayers' money is still being wasted on the scheme, which continues to send out huge numbers of warnings. Ironically, given its imminent demise, Hadopi seems to have finally claimed its first disconnection victim, as PC Inpact reports (original in French.) The person involved has been sentenced to disconnection for 15 days, and must pay a €600 fine. Strangely, it seems that he or she shared only a couple of works, so even that brief period seems harsh. However, there is still scope for an appeal, so the sentence is not yet definite.

And as PC Inpact explains, even if it is confirmed, it may be unenforceable: although access to the Web can be cut, Hadopi's rules state that the filtering must not affect email, private messaging, telephone or any associated TV services. Since these are typically all provided together, that may be tricky, or even impossible. Hadopi says it only hands out suspensions: it doesn't concern itself about how -- or even if -- they can be implemented.

So after years of operation, all that the three-strikes approach has to show for the millions that have been spent, are a handful of convictions: one where someone was fined but innocent, and another where the person involved probably can't be disconnected anyway. Great work, Hadopi.

Follow me @glynmoody on Twitter or identi.ca, and on Google+

Filed Under: copyright, disconnection, france, hadopi

France Ready To Shut Down Hadopi As It's 'Incompatible' With Digital Economy

from the well,-duh dept

It's amazing how frequently we still hear from entertainment industry folks or politicians pointing to Hadopi as an example of "success" in a three strikes program. Of course, the reality is that it has been a colossal failure by nearly every measure possible. The industry has had to seriously massage the statistics, but they can't deny the simple fact that it hasn't helped drive sales, which really seems like the key metric. In fact, the latest reports show that music sales -- including digital sales -- have continued to drop. Even more telling: the decline in sales in France has outpaced the decline elsewhere. In other words, nothing about Hadopi worked.

Even when Hadopi finally "convicted" someone, it was someone that everyone agreed didn't pirate songs. In the meantime, French users for services not tracked by Hadopi have skyrocketed. It was only a matter of time before politicians began questioning why they were spending so much money on a system with no real benefit. The result, as we noted a few weeks ago, was a recommendation to kill off Hadopi, though potentially to replace it with other bad ideas.

Either way, it looks like it's almost guaranteed that Hadopi is going away, a failure on nearly every level. What struck me as most interesting, however, is the reasoning given by the politician in charge of internet policy in France:

Fleur Pellerin, the French minister in charge of Internet policy, said during a recent visit to a high-technology complex in Sweden that suspending Internet connections was incompatible with the French government’s hopes of spurring growth in the digital economy.

“Today, it’s not possible to cut off Internet access,” she said. “It’s something like cutting off water.”

Well, duh. And while that's true "today" that was also true when Hadopi was put in place, and many, many people explained that to French officials. So we've got the French government recognizing that the program was a complete disaster. It cost too much, it shut off internet access which goes against any hope of "spurring a digital economy," it put guilt on innocent parties and it did nothing to help sales.

Given all of this, why is it that politicians still take the same RIAA/MPAA ideas seriously when they propose their latest braindead scheme to try to pretend they live in a different, non-digital era?

Filed Under: copyright, france, hadopi, three strikes

French Report Says: Kill Hadopi, But Let Its Legacy Live On

from the some-good,-some-bad dept

When Francois Hollande was running for President of France, he said that he would repeal Hadopi, the three strikes law and agency that enforces it, rolling back this effort which the entertainment industry had celebrated (France was the first to propose and implement such a plan). After elected, his culture minister, Aurelie Filippetti made it clear that she was not impressed by Hadopi and ordered a study of the effectiveness of the effort, led by Pierre Lescure -- a former entertainment industry executive -- to look at possible proposals. His report came out Monday morning and it suggests killing off Hadopi, but is still chock full of other bad ideas. Hadopi the agency would be done away with, but another agency would pick up some of the responsibilities, it's just that they'd greatly decrease the "punishment" aspect. Rather than losing internet access and having to pay up to €1,500, you'd keep your access and fines would be topped at €60.

But, on top of that, there are other policies that Lescure suggests that seem pretty bad as well, including extending the copyright levy (the "you must be a criminal tax") to cover smartphones, tablets and any other connected device. He also suggested turning search engines and ad networks into copyright cops, asking them to cut off those deemed to be involved in large scale infringement. We've discussed in the past why this is an idea that won't work and will likely stifle innovation while locking in some of the more dominant players (like Google), but governments do seem to like it.

The report does have a few good things to it: including getting publishers to finally release their content as ebooks, allowing more non-commercial remixing and such. In the end, it's a mixed bag, or as the French publication Le Point noted: l'Hadopi est morte, vive L'Hadopi (Hadopi is dead, long live Hadopi).

Of course, this is also just a report, with no binding aspect to it. The government may choose to ignore the whole thing or to pick and choose some parts to implement. Either way, it does make the key point that, for all the money the French taxpayers have put towards Hadopi, it's been a near total waste: "While illicit file sharing has dropped, legal paid services have not benefited as was hoped." It all goes back to the same point we've argued for years. The industry keeps thinking their goal is to get rid of piracy, when we've been saying that the real goal is to figure out ways to make more revenue. They -- incorrectly -- seem to feel that the first leads to the second, even as there is almost no proof to support that conjecture in the long term.

Filed Under: aurelie filippetti, copyright, copyright levies, follow the money, france, francois hollande, hadopi, pierre lescure

French Politicians Worry That Free Creative Commons Works Devalue 'Legal' Offers

from the what??? dept

As Techdirt noted last year, France has a regrettable habit of dreaming up really bad ideas when it comes to the Internet, most famously with the three-strikes scheme, now known there by the name of the body the oversees it -- Hadopi. Guillaume Champeau points us to a piece in the French newspaper Libération, which contains yet more appalling possibilities (original in French).

The article concerns Pierre Lescure and his team, who have been charged by the French government with coming up with ways to help the world of culture in France adapt to the Internet economy. One idea, kindly suggested by the French recording industry, is to replace Hadopi's court procedures for those accused of unauthorized file sharing with an automatic fine of 140 euros after three strikes. That is, from being guilty until proven innocent, as now, under the proposed scheme those accused would simply be found guilty without any further discussion. And then there's this:

In parallel, no de-penalization for non-commercial sharing, but a desire to "increase the value" of free licences of the Creative Commons kind. The Lescure team believes that letting works circulate freely (as they do now...) would hinder the development of legal offers, particularly VOD [Video On Demand].

Yes, apparently the way to "increase the value" is to no longer allow Creative Commons content to "circulate freely" because it might compete with other business models. Lescure has now taken to Twitter (kudos that at least he's on Twitter) to state that what was reported bears "almost no relation to what we are preparing." But he doesn't explain what exactly they are planning, nor does he deny that their plans involve Creative Commons licenses.

We shall have to wait to see what he has in mind. But it would be hard to find a better symbol of the French establishment's attitude to the Internet and its extraordinary new possibilities than trying to make people pay for works that could be shared freely (because their creators want that), on the grounds that it might hinder a service that turns the Net into television.

Follow me @glynmoody on Twitter or identi.ca, and on Google+

Filed Under: creative commons, devalue, france, free, hadopi

HADOPI May Be Succeeding -- In Driving French Customers To Dotcom's Mega

from the don't-say-we-didn't-warn-you dept

Last week, Techdirt reported on the news that falling numbers of P2P users are being trumpeted as a victory for HADOPI's "three strikes" approach in France, but that it is a hollow victory, since sales of recorded music are still dropping in that country. The French site Numerama points out something else interesting happening there (in French), as revealed by the following tweet from Kim Dotcom:

#Mega Top 5 premium membership countries: 1. France 2. Spain 3. Belgium 4. United States 5. Germany - Thanks a lot for buying!

Now, of course, as Techdirt always emphasizes, correlation is not causation, but it's pretty suggestive that at precisely the same time that P2P use is dropping in France, its citizens should turn out to be the biggest premium users of Dotcom's Mega service. This is, after all, precisely what we and everyone else have been predicting: that people would simply move from P2P services where they can be observed, to others -- like Mega's file-hosting site -- where they cannot.

This interpretation is supported by the other notable fact to emerge from Dotcom's tweet: that after French users, it is Spaniards who are signing up for Mega's premium membership in droves -- another group who have had a punitive copyright infringement law imposed on them recently. This means that in about a year's time, we can probably expect the Spanish department tasked with implementing Ley Sinde to publish figures showing that the number of P2P users is falling -- omitting to note, of course that they, like their French counterparts, have simply moved to alternatives instead.

Now, some will doubtless use these trends to argue that Mega should be shut down just as Megaupload was. But the correct inferences to draw are that HADOPI and Ley Sinde are just an expensive waste of time, and that people don't expect to get everything for free, as the popularity in France and Spain of Dotcom's paid-for Mega service shows. It's just a matter of the recording and film industries offering the public what they want, in a form they want, at a reasonable price. Is that really too much to ask?

Follow me @glynmoody on Twitter or identi.ca, and on Google+

Filed Under: copyright, france, hadopi
Companies: mega

Jealous Of Copyright Trolls, Entertainment Industry Looks To Move Three Strikes From 'Disconnect' To 'Fines'

from the of-course-that's-the-plan... dept

We were just talking about how three strikes hasn't done anything to actually increase sales. Instead, as many, many people predicted, sales have continued to decline. Of course, perhaps treating your biggest fans as criminals is not a particularly wise strategy. But, then again, the big entertainment legacy players aren't exactly known for wise or thoughtful strategies.

With France, the biggest supporters of a "three strikes (accusations) and we kick you off the internet" plan facing pushback from the government, it appears that the industry folks have hit on their latest ridiculous strategy. Rather than kick people off the internet, why not take a page from copyright trolls, and force them to cough up money. Yes, indeed, it appears that the entertainment industry is looking to turn "piracy" into a "business model" by forcing people they accuse (not convict) of infringement to pay up in large masses. Except, rather than using shady dealings via questionable court procedures, they're just hoping to roll it into existing three strikes plans:

UPFI, (Union of Independent Phonographic Producers), said that it agreed with the opinion of French music rights group SACEM that a disconnection regime should be replaced with warnings along with fines of 140 euros.

PCInpact contacted Jerome Roger, Director General of UPFI, who confirmed the group is indeed in favor of such fines.

This leaning towards cash penalties is also endorsed by Warner Music President Thierry Chassagne. In recent comments Chassange suggested that not enough punishments have been handed out under Hadopi and that a deterrent is necessary.

In other words, if kicking people off the internet isn't getting them to give us more money... how about we skip that middle step and just force them to give us money. It is, clearly, taking a page straight out of the copyright trolling handbook.

According to French publication Numerama, this new direction is basically a done deal in France. And, of course, once it shows up there, expect the same sort of things to start popping up around the globe quickly. The industry doesn't spring stuff like this in just one place alone. There's a global strategy behind it.

Filed Under: copyright, copyright trolls, education, fines, france, hadopi, three strikes

Three Strikes May Decrease File Sharing, But If Sales Keep Dropping, Who Cares?

from the and-so-it-goes dept

A year ago, we asked what could possibly be the "value" in "cracking down on piracy" if that didn't then lead to increased sales. It's an issue that we've dealt with time and time again. We ask people a simple question: would you rather stop piracy or make more money? Most people note that the latter is the real goal. If the former does not lead to the latter then what good does "stopping piracy" actually do? The answer is none at all. The latest data out of France shows that, despite Hadopi (the administrators of the 3 strikes program) claiming some sort of victory because stats on file sharing are down, the bigger issue is that the sale of recorded music keeps declining. Digital Music News, who normally supports the the "anti-piracy" side of things, has some slides from French labels that show that sales keep decreasing, even as Hadopi highlights a big drop in file sharing and the use of cyberlockers. But all that really matters is this one: This is the key point that we've been making for well over a decade now. "Fighting" piracy is not the same as making more money. The focus should be on figuring out ways to make money. Even if we believe that copyright infringement is a bad thing, if efforts to stop it are both expensive and ineffective, why continue? It makes absolutely no sense. Instead, let's focus on the areas of the industry that have shown that they are expanding and where there's lots of money to be made for those who embrace them.

Oh, and for what it's worth, you have to imagine that the "declines" reported in file sharing and cyberlockers severely undercounts those things too, as using some rather basic tools can let people hide that sort of information from being collected -- and the efforts by Hadopi to "educate" the public likely educated them about how to use VPNs. It does not appear to have educated them to go back to buying at the same levels as the artificially inflated rates in the past.

Filed Under: file sharing, france, hadopi, music, sales, three strikes
Companies: hadopi

Hadopi Says French National Library Needs Unprotected Works... To Put Its Own DRM On

from the locking-up-culture dept

In the past, many have noted that proprietary formats for content almost guarantee that certain works will be lost to history. Backwards compatibility becomes a problem, and before long content that could be accessed by tons of programs may be impossible to open just a few years later. For libraries and archvists this is a huge problem -- and it's made even worse when you add DRM to the mix. It appears that even the "anti-piracy" folks in France recognize this, but only to a limited extent.

According to the French publication, Numerama, Hadopi (the agency in charge of stamping out infringement in France), has published an opinion in which it suggests that content creators give the French National Library (Bibliothèque Nationale de France or BNF) works without any DRM on them. As they quite rightly note, in order to better make sure that the culture is preserved and that future archives are accessible, a lack of DRM makes much more sense. They even note that just providing a DRM'd copy with the keys to decrypt it, or with circumvention tools, really isn't sufficient for proper archiving.

That said, the report also then appears to fret about the BNF leaking these unprotected works out into the world. The suggestion seems to be that (wait for it...) the BNF then create its own DRM to lock up the unprotected works that it needs to keep them from getting locked up. In other words, the whole plan is pretty useless anyway.

This is just an opinion, and not binding in any way. So apparently the French government is still considering what sorts of requirements it intends to put on submissions to the BNF, but once again it seems like an overly aggressive "fear of piracy" may actually lead to some bad technical decisions for the sake of "protecting" some works against infringement.

Filed Under: access, archives, copyright, drm, france, hadopi, library, locked up
Companies: bnf, hadopi

French Hadopi Scheme Gutted; Other Bad Ideas To Be Introduced Instead

from the three-strikes-is-out dept

France's Hadopi graduated response approach, also known as "three strikes", occupies a special place in the annals of copyright enforcement. It pioneered the idea of punishing users accused of sharing unauthorized copies of files, largely thanks to pressure from the previous French President, Nicolas Sarkozy, who seems to have hated most aspects of this new-fangled Internet thing. Sadly, other countries took up the idea, including the UK with its awful Digital Economy Act, New Zealand, Spain and, more recently, the US.

Hadopi hasn't been going too well. Despite putting out some dodgy statistics, the Hadopi agency hasn't really been able to show that the three-strike approach is doing anything to reduce the number of unauthorized downloads. In the two years that Hadopi has been running, only one person has been brought to court -- and he was innocent, but fined anyway.

As we reported, with Sarkozy gone, the new French President and his team are looking for ways to cut the cost of this scheme. Numerama has details of a recent presentation from the French Minister of Culture and her advisor, Pierre Lescure, about the future of Hadopi (original in French) that confirms the "three strikes" approach is likely to be dropped:

[Lescure] strongly suggests that the graduated response will be abandoned, because it is considered illegitimate and ineffective. "It is likely that a significant proportion of Internet users who have stopped P2P downloads have turned to other types of unmonitoried methods (streaming, direct download) rather than legal offerings, whether free or paid," writes Mission Lescure. Sending out e-mails may be not stopped, but it seems certain that the criminal sanctions will be shelved.

That's probably as close as the French government will ever come to admitting that Hadopi is a failure. Unfortunately, it seems that it will be bringing in three other bad ideas instead:

To put pressure on intermediaries. It is necessary "to make hosts more accountable by forcing them to remove promptly illegal content and to prevent their reappearance, and by strengthening international cooperation in order to punish sites that refuse to comply";

De-list illegal offerings. It is necessary "to reduce the visibility of illegal offerings by acting on the listing in search engines, if necessary through legislation";

"Turn off revenue sources for infringing sites (the "Follow the money" approach), by making intermediaries (advertisers, online payment services) liable."

We've seen all these idea elsewhere -- the first time in ACTA, the second in efforts to make Google skew its search results, and the last in SOPA. They're all terrible in their own ways, but it's good to see France apparently realizing that punishing the public is even worse.

Follow me @glynmoody on Twitter or identi.ca, and on Google+

Filed Under: copyright, france, hadopi, intermediary liability, search engines, three strikes

First HADOPI Victim Convicted, Not For His Own Infringement, But Because His Wife Downloaded Songs

from the soon-to-be-ex-wife dept

Well, here's a nice contrast: just when a judge in the US has ruled that users there have no obligation to lock down their wifi connections, a court in France decides the exact opposite. What makes the story even more significant is that the individual concerned is the first person to be convicted under France's 3-strikes law, generally known as HADOPI.

Not all of the facts of the case have been released, but we do know that he received and apparently ignored the statutory three warnings from HADOPI, and then was summoned to court, where things started to get interesting. As TorrentFreak reports:

the man told the court today that he is incapable of downloading and did not commit the infringements. Supporting his claims he brought into court the person actually responsible for the file-sharing.

That person turned out to be his wife (actually, soon to be ex-wife), who admitted that she had downloaded some Rihanna songs. But as Guillaume Champeau of Numerama pointed out to TorrentFreak, ironically this did not get him off the hook -- on the contrary:

"By saying he knew she was downloading infringing content, but didn’t prevent her from doing so, he self-incriminated."

That's because under the HADOPI law, it is the owner of the Internet connection who is held responsible for any infringement committed with it, so it's the husband, not the (ex-)wife who has ended up being fined 150 euros (about $200) for negligence. That's admittedly less than the 300 euros ($400), with 150 euros suspended, that the French prosecution wanted, and far less than the maximum possible 1,500 euros ($2000) fine. But it's still a stiff price to pay for something he didn't do.

Indeed, he seems to have taken the judgment hard: Guillaume Champeau points out that HADOPI's first victim has now said that he intends to cancel his Internet subscription completely (original story in French). It's hard to see how this kind of result is going to help the growth of digital music in France, and the whole episode is a neat encapsulation of all that is wrong with HADOPI's approach.

Moreover, this case must reinforce the view that HADOPI is a colossal waste of money. In two years of existence, HADOPI has sent out 1.15 million first warnings, 102,854 second notices, and 340 "third strikes". And yet all French government has to show for the 12 million euros it costs to run HADOPI each year is the conviction of one innocent man.

Follow me @glynmoody on Twitter or identi.ca, and on Google+

Filed Under: france, hadopi, indirect infringement, secondary infringement, three strikes, wifi