Anti Piracy Outfit Proven To Use Illegal Measures By Italian CourtsAdded: Monday, November 30th, 2009
Category: Recent Headlines Involving File Sharing > Current Events
Tags:File Sharing, Anti Piracy, p2p, Torrent, Peer To Peer, court, BitTorrent, .torrent, utorrent, bitcomet, extratorrent.com, Italy
Anti-Piracy outfits are known to use tactical measures, from time to time, to prey upon their targets. Various methods are common, from leeching onto popular torrents and logging IP addresses, to sending out fake movies by paid agents in an attempt to grab user IP's, and even at times spamming torrent comments declaring them as fakes or trojans to try to sway users from grabbing them.
While nothing is really surprising from these groups anymore, an Italian judicial system has decided that uploading "fake" or "misleading" torrents for movies that don't exist in source, such as a 2010 DvDRiP for example, of a movie that isn't released yet, cannot be used any longer as a means of punishing downloaders.
This is something I've urged against for years, that if you download a "fake" and then you receive a copyright letter saying you were downloading copyrighted material, that you actually did not download copyrighted material, because the torrent was fake. So how could they actually charge, fine, or penalize you in any manner for it?
Well for years they've been doing exactly that, sending out notices, by logging IP addresses then reporting them to the particular users internet service providers, whom then in return would send out infringement letters. As ridiculous as it seems, it's been happening for quite some time.
Fimi, an Italian firm for musicians, have long been considered behind most of Italy's push for anti-piracy legislation, along with financial backing from the American RIAA group. They were in front of the Italian Supreme Court recently, for a groundbreaking decision involving such actions mentioned above.
Representatives from anti-piracy outfits all over the world were present, attempting to pressure and/or sway the decision in their favor. Across the courtroom were various pro-p2p activists along with reporters from various news outlets. The decision would be monumental from Rome, as many awaited a ruling.
The anti-piracy groups claimed that "regardless of whether the content was real, the user knowingly downloaded the material in order to attempt to receive copyrighted works without actually paying for them", and that "they should be penalized the same as anyone who actually would download material that is protected under international treaties", which is in fact a fair argument, although makes little sense in the point that they had downloaded protected works, because they did not.
Italy is known for it's ups and downs on this matter, for example, in 2005 Italian courts sentenced two men to a year in jail and fined them several hundred euros for using a computer server at the Turin Polytechnic Institute to store and distribute copies of video games, films and CDs in 1999. In 2003, Silvio Berlusconi's ruling body passed one of the toughest European copyright laws, modeled by the EU's copyright initiatives, passing down stiff fines for commercial pirates and individual downloaders. As recently as 2007, however, the courts in Rome stated that "the unauthorized downloading of copyrighted movies, music and video games is not a crime if the downloader does not profit from the action".
So monumentally, the courts in Italy have been known to rule in both fashions on such issues. As the long and dreadful day in court came to an end, the ultimate decision from the Supreme Court was in favor of the pro-p2p groups, stating that "any individual, whether business, affiliate, or non-profit organization, that is known to upload data or material which is in effect misleading, false, or does not bear real media, can be considered a criminal themselves by attempting to entrap a user or group of online users, into a scheme which is immoral and thus we the court find that any future attempt by a group to commit such actions, can and will not be allowed to be used against any person or persons in any civil, criminal, or penalizing manner", which is a huge victory for those opposing anti-piracy methods.
No doubt this will send shock waves throughout European communities and courtrooms, and give internet service providers the freedom to not send what the courts call "immoral" copyright notices to future downloaders of copyrighted materials, if they cannot be proven to have actually downloaded copyrighted works.
Indeed as judges presiding over courtrooms worldwide get younger, and more and more individuals begin to spread the knowledge of our modern digital age, people will begin to understand how file sharing actually works. In this case, fortunately, it seems there were people presiding over the courtroom whom actually understood the BitTorrent protocol, and felt the need to set the record straight about such measures from anti-piracy.
I urge each person, in an attempt to stay safe, to avoid torrents that sound "too good to be true" and especially if they're not uploaded by a trusted member of the torrent community. Safety is always a priority, and although this decision is great news in Italy, its still not a global initiative. I'm sure various pro-p2p movements will begin to use this as arsenal, but until then, be safe.
November 30th, 2009Posted by: Date:
Monday, November 30th, 2009
|Good news indeed for the Italian "Sharing is Caring" community. Let's hope and look forward to a day when such rulings cross borders for all in the p2p world.|
Thanks again, OBS, for another timely and informative article.
|posted by (2009-11-30 16:58:13)|
|Thanks Obs for another informative read. This should have done years ago, what they where doing could have fallen under many illegal activities. False advertising, spying, Or even by uploading a name of a copyrighted movie, as the name is also copyrighted not just the movie. It is also nice of you to point out that if something is too good to be true it usually is. I feel sorry for some of the younger users or newbies that fall into that trap. For those of you that fall in to that category, Use the chat here, there is always someone one that will be helpful and informative. Sharing is caring so have fun and stay safe.|
|posted by (2009-11-30 18:05:29)|
|thx obs good read|
|posted by (2009-11-30 18:17:54)|
|Thanks for the info,useful like always.|
|Actually, Snakey, the title of a film, book, or series cannot be copyrighted. You could go out tomorrow and publish a book and use the title "Gone With the Wind" or "War and Peace." And the world always needs another movie called "Blown Away." Four are listed at this time at IMDB.|
A name can become trademarked, however. If usage of the name in general population becomes common practice to refer to a particular object, then the owner of that object can apply for a claim on trademark rights.
Therefore, "copyright" does not apply to a name. Instead, it applies to the body of work that the name is attached to.
So, in the example of this article, when an anti-piracy group uploads a file with a recognized name, but the file is fake, the person downloading the file only did so because of that name (which is not copyrighted). Since the file itself is fake, there IS NO copyrighted material being downloaded. So, to pursue the downloader for copyright infringement when nothing copyrighted was ever downloaded is, in itself a scam, and a conspiracy to commit fraud for the sole purpose of entrapment.
The groundbreaking movement here is the fact that the Italian judiciary system was not swayed by the money and mouths of "the powers that be," and instead actually took the appropriate stance and upheld the rights of its citizens.
This is a small victory in the grand scheme of things, but, if enough lawmakers listen and heed the imminent signs, then maybe they will not be buried in the dust of the "old school" lobbyists and step into the light of a new digital age populated by a global Internet community hell-bent on knowledge and shouting to the ethernet universe - "Sharing is Caring!"
*stepping off soapbox*
|posted by (2009-11-30 19:56:14)|
|Point taken and good to know, but you never need to step off your soap box, as the more people that step on the more we are heard!! Keep shouting Qu137Ch405 and people will finally start to listen.|
|thx obs, knowledge is power. Qu137 u look good on the soapbox,oh and don't forget to take the soapbox hat off too :)ET the place to be!|
|posted by (2009-11-30 20:19:17)|
|Nice read! Cheers|
|posted by (2009-11-30 21:33:01)|
|Ringraziamenti Obs per un altro informativo colto|
|posted by (2009-11-30 22:03:45)|
|cheers mate.. music to my ears... ! i wonder if its gonna sway my way!|
|posted by (2009-11-30 23:57:11)|
|thats freakin awesome hope that comes out to the states but i doubt it since alot of people use it to make profit & in the end screw us over|
|posted by (2009-12-01 02:37:06)|
We are always thank you for providing such a useful information....LOL
|thank u man,,,italy rules, our latin brothers and sisters, keep on,,we will prevail..!!!!|
|heheee...one by one,,all countries will follow this example|
|posted by (2009-12-01 10:14:28)|
|I d/l a torrent and opened it one day. It sent my IP address to my ISP, gave them the title of the d/l and they shut off my internet. They charged me $25.00 and told me one more time will void our contract resulting in immediate termination of internet to that address for life. Just one more reason to use TRUSTED UPLOADERS. Glad to find a site like ET that promotes that.|
|posted by (2009-12-01 15:56:00)|
|Egad!!!! Some judges sitting in a Supreme Court who actually know what is going on in the world. Wonders will never cease. If the title of copyrighted material is not part of the copyright as was posted by Qu137Ch405 then the act of downloading a file with the name of something that is copyrighted in my view is cannot in itself be claimed to be illegal. It may be a review or a preview of the the copyrighted material.|
How long does copyright last anyway. Does it expire when the issuing company remove it from their distribution lists for example. I have a collection of movies that have not been available for several years including some porn from 1910.
The identification of a user by their ip address would work if you have a static DSN butt what about those who have to use a dynamic DSN (or pay extra) as is the case with my internet connection.
|posted by (2009-12-04 16:27:08)|
|I got a warning once from my isp for downloading a dvd rip.which in fact was a fake.These outfits are a bunch of ***************||
Most Popular Stories