European Parliament Rejects IFPI Plan To Make ISPs Copyright Cops

from the good-for-them dept

There's been a huge lobbying campaign going on throughout much of the world to get local governments to put pressure on ISPs to require them to kick those accused of file sharing off of the internet. It had been worrisome that these efforts actually seemed to be getting some traction in both France and the UK despite vehement opposition from many people. It appears that the opposition has started to get its point of view across. The EU Parliament has now rejected a plan to criminalize file sharing and to implement a "three strikes and you're off the internet" policy. The vote itself isn't binding, but suggests how the EU Parliament feels. While France has already put in place such a law, there was some feeling that France would push to make similar laws enforced European-wide. This vote should put a damper on those plans.

Filed Under: copyright cops, europe, european parliament, france, ifpi, isps
Companies: ifpi

EU Court Tells ISPs They Don't Have To Hand Over Downloader Names

from the privacy-and-such dept

We were just noting how Europe seemed to recognize that having ISPs simply hand over the IP addresses of individuals could be a violation of privacy, and along comes the EU's top court to confirm that stance. The European Court of Justice has come down with a decision stating that entertainment industry companies cannot force ISPs to hand over IP addresses, though local governments could put in place rules that would compel them to do so. It seems rather interesting that just as the entertainment industry is pushing for increased ISP liability, the courts are recognizing the sorts of privacy issues this raises. It makes you wonder how the courts will feel when the entertainment industry tells ISPs they need to monitor every file transferred to make sure it contains no unauthorized material.

Filed Under: downloads, eu, europe, file sharing, privacy

Is Your IP Address Your Personal Information?

from the seems-like-a-stretch dept

Some European politicians in charge of "privacy" issues have decided that your IP address should be considered personal info, along the lines of your name or address. This has various implications for how sites like Google store IP addresses -- but also should raise some questions about what sorts of information should be considered private. We've already talked about why you should just assume that any information you put online is already public info, but an IP address isn't exactly something that you "put" online. It's something that automatically identifies where you're coming from and is a necessary part of internet communications. While it is true that an IP address can often be used to trace back the identity of an individual, it seems a little odd to think that a bit of information that your computer announces to every site you visit should somehow be considered private. By it's very nature your IP address is rather public -- and if you want to "hide" that information there are various anonymity tools and proxy servers to do so. It seems like a rather artificial construct to suddenly claim that an IP address, which is used to announce where you're coming from, now needs to be considered private information.

In fact, this whole discussion raises an important (and all-too-often-ignored) issue: personal information and privacy isn't exactly a binary situation, where information either is, or is not, private. There's a whole spectrum -- and it depends very much on the circumstance. Your name is personal info, but most people are public enough with it. Your credit card information clearly is "private," but you share it with plenty of merchants as part of the transaction that you're making. Your phone number is personal information that you may keep private in some cases, but are willing to make public in others. So, the privacy of personal information varies a great deal based on the context and use -- and it seems a bit forced to suddenly declare that a particular piece of information is personal, and therefore must be kept private.

Filed Under: europe, ip addresses, privacy

Europe Wants A Single Market For Online Content... But Why?

from the details,-details... dept

The European Commission apparently thinks that the big thing holding back the rise of a European online content industry is the lack of a single centralized marketplace for digital content that also includes DRM and other anti-piracy safeguards. It's not surprising why they might think this, but they're wrong. It's a politician's solution, rather than a business person's. It's based on the false belief that copyright is a tug-o-war between content creators and consumers that needs balance on either side. That's simply not true. Saying that it is sets up the economics of a zero-sum game where every winner has a loser. However, that's not true with digital content, with its infinite availability, every winner doesn't need to be a loser. You can set up business models that expand a market, rather than limit it. And, of course, the worst way to try to set up such market is to centralize it and make it the government's job. It has all the hallmarks of a totally boondoggle of wasted government money and effort. Instead, why not let various other business models get tested in the marketplace to see what works?

Filed Under: europe, marketplace, online content

Antitrust Law Is Supposed To Protect Consumers, Not Competitors

from the blast-from-the-past dept

Opera has filed a complaint in Europe accusing Microsoft of violating antitrust laws there. The arguments in this complaint appear to be very similar to the arguments in the original antitrust case against Microsoft a decade ago, which some states are still pushing here in the United States. I don't know much about European antitrust law, but it's a little hard to take Opera's policy argument seriously. Mozilla has reported that Firefox's market share is 28 percent in Europe, a number that has been growing steadily for most of this decade. And Apple recently joined the fray by launching a Windows version of its Safari browser. There is, in short, no shortage of competition in the browser market, and that's been reflected in the steady erosion of Microsoft's market share. Now, it is true that the situation is somewhat unfair to Opera. Microsoft's ability to bundle Internet explorer with Windows obviously gives it a big advantage (as does Apple's ability to bundle Safari with Macs and iPhones). But antitrust law was never designed to make the market "fair" in this sense, and as Firefox demonstrates, those disadvantages are far from insurmountable. Antitrust law is about protecting consumers, not competitors. As far as I can see, there's nothing stopping consumers who are dissatisfied with Internet Explorer from downloading Firefox, Safari, or Opera. Indeed, a quarter of European Internet users have done just that. Perhaps the money Opera is currently spending on lawyers would be better spent on figuring out why Mozilla has been so much more successful than Opera at attracting new users.

Filed Under: antitrust, europe, ie
Companies: microsoft, opera

Small Companies Look To Move Antitrust Suits To Europe

from the come-to-Europe-for-the-history,-stay-for-the-regulatory-smackdowns dept

Following the EU's decision to smack down Microsoft for antitrust violation, we had already noted how this could mean trouble for other successful tech companies. Of course, that just means it's an opportunity for less successful companies. The Financial Times notes that small companies that have been unable to get much traction in their attempts to brand their bigger, more established competitors as monopolists, may now try to move those cases to Europe, where they hope to receive more favorable rulings. That seems a bit extreme and, one would hope, unlikely to succeed in most cases. Still, we have seen more questionable IPOs moving to Europe, so why not more questionable antitrust cases as well?

Filed Under: antitrust, europe
Companies: ibm, microsoft, psi

Why The Rest Of Tech Industry May Not Be Happy About The EU/Microsoft Decision

from the they're-coming-for-you-next dept

While some in the tech industry are cheering the EU's decision to stick to its antitrust fines and penalties against Microsoft, it may not be such a good thing for the industry as a whole. We were already wondering how the decision benefited customers in any way, and Fortune Magazine is noting that this could spell trouble for other successful American tech companies, who have caught the eye of EU antitrust regulators. Intel, Apple and Google are all being looked at carefully -- and with the success against Microsoft notched away, it could be tougher for these other firms to win. If there really is a monopoly problem, making competition nearly impossible, you can make an argument for the government to step in. However, most of these cases look more like European regulators just looking to see how they can punish American tech firms for being successful. Obviously, this doesn't matter nearly as much for smaller firms and startups -- but should those firms become successful and start to grow rapidly, they too could face the same challenges in Europe.

Filed Under: antitrust, eu, europe
Companies: apple, google, intel, microsoft