Danish Copyright Censorship Proposal Revealed
Written by Ben Jones on May 17, 2008In February a Danish court forced ISP Tele2 to block its subscribers from accessing The Pirate Bay, following a similar order late last year to block allofmp3.com. A new proposal before the Danish government would mean that such actions would be quick and easy to do, without the need for a single court hearing.
Back in February we reported on the IFPI forcing, via the Danish courts, an ISP to block its subscribers from accessing The Pirate Bay. This case was the third occasion where an industry lobby group had flexed its muscles to block a website, a similar measure was used to block allofmp3.com and mp3sparks.com. However, the legality of these actions under European law, specifically the Infosoc directive, is dubious at best.
Nevertheless, two of the largest opposition parties in Danish parliament think it is a good idea – despite the ineffectiveness of the block – to streamline the process, making it quicker and easier to do. A proposal (Danish) before the government seems to create a tribunal to handle these cases.
Whereas in the past cases have involved a rights holder suing an ISP and forcing a block through the courts, this proposal creates a tribunal to do it instead. This tribunal will apparently consist of members appointed by government ministers, who will then rule on blocks with no judicial oversight. Any sites blocked would have to go through the courts to appeal and the site would remain blocked unless and until successful.
If that was not bad enough, there is also talk of a secretariat that would handle ’simple’ cases, so the appointed tribunal would not even have to hear the majority of cases. Cases would be put to the tribunal by copyright holders that feel they have had their rights infringed by the target site. As with the court cases, though, it’s extremely unlikely that the accused site will be invited or even made aware of any such proceedings, and allowed to state their case.
“This is a wet dream for organizations like IFPI,” is the view of Ole Husgaard, chairman of the Danish Pirate Party. “This isn’t even a law proposal, so there is not all the work usually done in our parliament when passing laws; this can be passed in a month or two. If it is, I would guess that we will have at least 2000 sites on the blocking list within 12 months - without a single court case having been decided, if any get started at all.”
He’s not alone in his pessimism. “It’s blatant censorship of course.” is the opinion of The Pirate Bay’s brokep. “It’s not in the interest of the citizens, so I hope the government understands that if they go against the people like that, they should be replaced. It is also not a huge step before they start censoring other stuff - let’s say political parties that have thoughts about changing the current government.”
As analysis of the Pirate Bay block has found it contrary to EU laws, it’s curious as to the motivation behind this proposal. The only rational one would be bribery – either legal or not – and so the question we are forced to ask is, are Danish politicians cheaper to buy than those in New York?
Previously: Michael Jackson to Take on The Pirate Bay
Next: The Pirate Bay Enters List of 100 Most Popular Webites
42 Responses
Time for some protesting and hacking.
Umm…no?
well as i think the citizens of denmark should request for every government site to be added to the list, there ofcourse doing bad things like propaganda for there country.
lets see how long that system will be in effect :)
simple. no one in Denmark will buy anything until piracy is legal
@ 3#
I have done so 2 times….they don´t respond my letters nor my phonecalls….
I feel it is a sad day to be a danish citizen.
If there really was a party with a resonable stance on IT, they would have my vote for sure.
I checked at last election, and I could not find any.
Yea, it’s a sad day…
In case anyone cares, I did a translation with (hopefully) necessary comments for it to be understandable to non-danes:
Proposal B 137 (as proposed): Proposal for parliament decision on the creation of a compliant tribunal for copyright on the internet.
Proposed the 8th of May 2008 by Hanne Agersnap (SF), Ole Hækkerup (S), Pernille Frahm (SF) og Ole Sohn (SF).
[ed: this is the left wing of the parliament: SF = Socialistic People Party ("Socialistisk Folkeparty"), S = Social Democracy ("Socialdemokraterne")]
Proposal for parliament decision
about the creation of a complaints tribunal for copyright on the internet
The parliament impose the government within the end of 2008, to create a compliant tribunal, who can judge possible violations of copyright on the internet, and eventually impose the telecommunications industry to block links to internet pages, that makes it possible to violate copyright.
The tribunal will continuously put significant rulings on a website and yearly submit a report, which goes through finished cases, to shed light on the state of the law on an array of significant copyright subareas.
The proposers would like to se, that the tribunals secretariat gets the option to quickly make guiding answers on cases, which is estimated to be handled safely by the secretariat, as such an administrative guide is deemed to ease the pressure on actual tribunal decisions, so the number and answer times are fair.
Notes for the suggestion:
There is currently unclear matters of law in this area. The proposers wishes, that a tribunal alike the Compliant tribunal for domain names. In such a tribunal, both the offended and the alleged offender shall be heard, and the issue must be decided by a judge.
In cases of violation of copyright on the internet, the offended has in many cases given up about going directly to the offender. They’ll instead contact the telecommunication companies and ask them to close the connection to the allegedly illegal internet sites. That means, that the enquiry does not come from an authority, but from the right holders - and that the other part is not heard. If the telecommunication companies does not do as follows, they’ll get sued in County Court. Here they’ll most often get ordered to block access to the internet pages, where the violations occur.
Alternatively it is possible for the telecommunication companies to choose to block for every single internet page, that the right owner wishes blocked. But it is not an advantage regarding the state of the justice security, as the possible offenders has neither been reviewed by an authority or a judge, and the opponents points of view has not been heard.
In other cases of atrocities on the internet, the telecommunication industry works with public authority regarding blocking illegalities. This regards child pornography, racially offensive remarks, and threats. Here the telecommunication companies get a list from the police with IP-addresses to block. It is respected by all companies, who block these addresses. It is the telecommunication companies, who judge the legality, but the police or PET wishes blocked [ed: The Danish Security and Intelligence Service ("Politiets Efterretningstjeneste")]. But also here could a tribunal eventually afterwards take out cases for review.
The proposers deem, that the proposal is expense neutral, in that there’ll be savings for the County Court, as some County Court-cases are moved to the proposed tribunal and it’s secretariat. If the proposed tribunals secretariat is joined physically and partially administratively with one or more of the already existing tribunal secretariats, the large-scale benefits will furthermore assure, that it is expense neutral.
Written statement
Hanne Agersnap (SF):
As spokesperson for the proposers I hereby propose:
Proposal B 137: Proposal for parliament decision on the creation of a compliant tribunal for copyright on the internet.
I refer by the way to the remarks, which accompany the proposal, and recommends it to the Partliament’s willful treatment.
I guess they don’t like young voters…
Wtf is happening to SF, they are like turning so fucking blue and df-minded.
A very sad day to be dane.
I agree that if any party with proper IT-politic they would have my vote asap.
WTF…
Those people should really reconsider their position (or atleast this text) as politicans.
I think this topic should be ended by the EU court, to get a clear line, weather the ISP should be ‘policeman’ or not.
Bah, that sucks!
Heck! I heard the Danes were having a lot of problems with extremists and terrorists… but didn’t know that included the content industries too.
Its really sad how these are even worse than the extremists, at least those idiots believe in something and thats why are doing such crazy things in the name of god, where as these content industry gangsters are just doing it for money/greed.
Sad…. stay strong my Danish neighbors… stay strong.
http://www.ezee.se/
How long will it be before the various anti-piracy agencies lobby the governments of the world to put them in charge of the internet? You know that’s what they really want.
http://piratpartiet.dk/
The next election will be a big realisation.
So the Danish say it’s ok to piss of Muslims by publishing the Mohammad cartoons, but then do this? WTF? Typical paid political bullshit.
I wonder what the danish think of they government now
Danes, you should be ashamed of your government.
How long before a tribunal is set up to censor “extremist” political parties like Piratpartiet…or De Grønne?
Shakespeare said it best: “Something is rotten in the state of Denmark”.
Let us start a torrentsite which also hosts political thoughts and see if they dare to ban that, if they do they are not a demokraty and have failed bigtime, if they don’t they have also failed.
Let me remind you before you start bashing the government of Denmark. This proposal, which in my humble opinion is full of shit, has been put forth by the 2 biggest parties NOT in the government, They do not represent the government. They have been gaining votes trying to claim they are “good people”. I sincerely hope for the benefit of my own country that this will butcher the 2 parties vote counts and that they will have to exclude the people behind this proposal, as it is utter stupidity that fuels such a proposal. It is a sad day indeed for Denmark but they are not representing the majority!!
The MPAA Sells 50 Year Old Films and older Again And a Again
1st is Cinema then VHF Then to Tv Sky Digital
and others and dvd oh now in hddvd now
and then the Director dies so no copyright
but they go no sell it $$$$$$$$$$$
if i could i open i torrent site
Directors die torrents
Well again, it’s just about their crap.
I have no tv, never go to the cinema to watch their pathetic movies, I watch independant ones on my computer, I have already downloaded all the classic movies I like, and the music I listen to is never broadcasted on the radio.
So what ? Let’s open some indie trackers those businessmen will never sue, and let’s cultivate ourselves.
Nobody needs their propaganda and their cheap “consume the same written-by-5yo crap over and over” “culture”.
Their idiocy is the greatest chance for most of us to completely free ourselves from their influence over our brains.
they really dont care about there people if they block entirer sites, theres so much they will miss out on that isnt vialating any copyrights, but this only goes in favor for the people that once could sell dvdrips when internet was slow and stuff wasnt easy to come by, but least it gives them jobs again i suppose
As always in Denmark, when they are talking about stuff like this, the media’s are silent totally silent about this! I first found it on a independen news site, with news for geeks! It is sicking, to see that SF (Socialistic Folkparty) do stuff like this! They should for one hate the industry..
http://www.opendns.org/ to get around ALL their blocks (unless they block that as well!)
Make your DNS servers for your router/internet conenction equal:
208.67.222.222
208.67.220.220
There is a lot of help on the internet for you to find out how to change your DNS servers, use google (unless it is blocked for linking to copyrighted information - try “adobe serial”.)
The problem with censorship is who decides what the public should have access to.
It starts with good intentions. Technology and infrastructure is put in place to block evil content such as vile porn, suicide sites and child exploitation.
Then it is used to unhold court rulings and to block lies that are published to injure and ridicule.
Then it is used to block extreme parties on the left and right.
Then it is used to block religious extremist.
Then the Messiah returns and it is used to block him and so on.
Who decides?
I am an adult it should be me who decides what media I consume.
http:www.Dargens.com
Lets get real. No matter how much they want to block a site 3 sites will spawn with info on how to get around the block…
And theres always Mininova… well… as for the time being there is…
@ 26
It’s not about finding alternatives, it’s about telling those mofos lobbyists to keep their filthy hands off our freedom dammit!
This seems direct censorship w/out the right to be heard by a constitutionally appointed judiciary is it not ?
Offcourse everyone has a right to be heard so blocking a site before the case comes to the court seems fishy…..
Isnt the legislature overstepping its boundaries by doing all this which is going to be against the natural rights of a person ? (expression / free speech etc.)
Someone enlighten me…
I think these are weak half measures.
Anyway, I love to rant here how these fags are so gay and so on..
Hah, one more proof on that SF is a party consisting of nothing but pure and naive idiots.
SF would never get my vote - and with that new proposal, they can be sure that they’ll never ever change my mind.
I thought S was clearer in mind towards censorship and such, but I guess not.
It’s a good thing that S and SF aren’t the majority in the parliament.
I don’t know where Venstre and Dansk Folkeparti are regarding piracy and censorship, but I guess they’ve more ease in mind than the opposition.
Morten Skyt wrote:
Yea, it’s a sad day…
In case anyone cares, I did a translation with (hopefully) necessary comments for it to be understandable to non-danes:
Proposal B 137 (as proposed): Proposal for parliament decision on the creation of a compliant tribunal for copyright on the internet.
Proposed the 8th of May 2008 by Hanne Agersnap (SF), Ole Hækkerup (S), Pernille Frahm (SF) og Ole Sohn (SF).
[ed: this is the left wing of the parliament: SF = Socialistic People Party ("Socialistisk Folkeparty"), S = Social Democracy ("Socialdemokraterne")]
Proposal for parliament decision
about the creation of a complaints tribunal for copyright on the internet
The parliament impose the government within the end of 2008, to create a compliant tribunal, who can judge possible violations of copyright on the internet, and eventually impose the telecommunications industry to block links to internet pages, that makes it possible to violate copyright.
The tribunal will continuously put significant rulings on a website and yearly submit a report, which goes through finished cases, to shed light on the state of the law on an array of significant copyright subareas.
The proposers would like to se, that the tribunals secretariat gets the option to quickly make guiding answers on cases, which is estimated to be handled safely by the secretariat, as such an administrative guide is deemed to ease the pressure on actual tribunal decisions, so the number and answer times are fair.
Notes for the suggestion:
There is currently unclear matters of law in this area. The proposers wishes, that a tribunal alike the Compliant tribunal for domain names. In such a tribunal, both the offended and the alleged offender shall be heard, and the issue must be decided by a judge.
In cases of violation of copyright on the internet, the offended has in many cases given up about going directly to the offender. They’ll instead contact the telecommunication companies and ask them to close the connection to the allegedly illegal internet sites. That means, that the enquiry does not come from an authority, but from the right holders - and that the other part is not heard. If the telecommunication companies does not do as follows, they’ll get sued in County Court. Here they’ll most often get ordered to block access to the internet pages, where the violations occur.
Alternatively it is possible for the telecommunication companies to choose to block for every single internet page, that the right owner wishes blocked. But it is not an advantage regarding the state of the justice security, as the possible offenders has neither been reviewed by an authority or a judge, and the opponents points of view has not been heard.
In other cases of atrocities on the internet, the telecommunication industry works with public authority regarding blocking illegalities. This regards child pornography, racially offensive remarks, and threats. Here the telecommunication companies get a list from the police with IP-addresses to block. It is respected by all companies, who block these addresses. It is the telecommunication companies, who judge the legality, but the police or PET wishes blocked [ed: The Danish Security and Intelligence Service ("Politiets Efterretningstjeneste")]. But also here could a tribunal eventually afterwards take out cases for review.
The proposers deem, that the proposal is expense neutral, in that there’ll be savings for the County Court, as some County Court-cases are moved to the proposed tribunal and it’s secretariat. If the proposed tribunals secretariat is joined physically and partially administratively with one or more of the already existing tribunal secretariats, the large-scale benefits will furthermore assure, that it is expense neutral.
Written statement
Hanne Agersnap (SF):
As spokesperson for the proposers I hereby propose:
Proposal B 137: Proposal for parliament decision on the creation of a compliant tribunal for copyright on the internet.
I refer by the way to the remarks, which accompany the proposal, and recommends it to the Partliament’s willful treatment.
————————————
Deep. Very deep. Thanks for the input.
The biggest argument against TPD is the child porn, if anything they support it being there.
Also us torrenters have come to rely too much on its tracker, and is too much of a central point of failure.
http://www.painfullback.com/
This proposal is clearly written by
an IT illiterate.
It specifically says “to force the
telco. industry to block LINKS to any
INTERNET SITE” making copyright infringement possible !!!
So it HAS to be a link to be blocked,
and it only has to give the possibility of infringement to be a
candidate for the block list.
If this proposal passes .. well ..
speechless here
This proposal is clearly written by
an IT illiterate.
It specifically says “to force the
telco. industry to block LINKS to any
INTERNET SITE” making copyright infringement possible !!!
So it HAS to be a link to be blocked,
and it only has to give the possibility of infringement to be a
candidate for the block list.
If this proposal passes .. well ..
speechless here
“..eventually impose the telecommunications industry to block links to internet pages, that makes it possible to violate copyright”
This is certainly random censorship, as most Internet sites link to copyrighted material in some way, much of it being what its authors are offering, or linked pages contain links to other pages and so on. Every site thus would be required to be blocked. Stupidity at its finest.
The status quo at present would be that a certain amount of films are still sold in Sweden. These actions are intended not only to penalize “offenders” but also to force the public to buy all the products. If they collectively refused to do so, it would make the censorship worthless. Maybe that would create a big market for cheap pirated copies.
As long as artists still support the Big 4 music producers, the public will continue having trouble from them. Again, if artists would go independent online, or use other labels, most of these problems would disappear in time. Also if people stopped buying their product, artists would be forced to abandon them for other distribution methods or labels. Artists who contract with RIAA cronies do so either with blatant disregard for their fans welfare, or they are in agreement with the way they treat them and feel they do some good. These artists don’t deserve respect, and need to be taught a lesson through public sanctions.
What if a site talks about another site which offers copyrighted material but doesn’t provide links? Or what if a site discusses music or lists albums or songs? These would all require blocking also since it could give people ideas on what to search for. All file storage sites would need blocking. All FTP sites. Search engines themselves contain links to copyrighted material. Google would be blocked.
I don’t know what I need to avoid sharing because the cartels never publish a list such as they sent to Comcast. So who knows, and how can they blame anyone for sharing them?
Talk about fuxxing pointless! The first person to set up another proxy server outside Denmark, the whole thing is blown away in an instant.
“Something is rotten in the state of Denmark.”
QFT
damn this fucking sucks.. I am from Denmark and I fucking hate these rules we have man.. I wanna move to Sweden or something.. thats better
3 references to this post
Responses are closed
All remaining responses will continue to be archived. Use the TorrentFreak forums if you want to discuss something.