Without any legal basis, Telenor refused to comply.

“This would be the same as demanding that the postal service should open all letters, and decide which ones should be delivered,” said Telenor boss Ragnar Kårhus.

The verdict in the case was due to be delivered October 30th, but was delayed until today.

IFPI has lost the case and Telenor will not have to block The Pirate Bay.

The court ruled that Telenor is not contributing to any infringements of copyright law when its subscribers use The Pirate Bay, and therefore there is no legal basis for forcing the ISP to block access to the site.

“Obviously we are pleased that the District Court has arrived at this conclusion,” said Telenor’s Ragnar Kårhus in a statement.

“At the same time it is important for us to emphasize that this case is not about being in favor of or opposed to copyright, but about whether or not it is reasonable to saddle Internet service providers with a censorship role in respect of content on the Internet,” he added.

Kårhus went on to say that the most important way for IFPI and other rights holders to maintain healthy revenue streams, is to develop business models and services that render the use of sites like The Pirate Bay less attractive to Internet users.

In making its decision, the court also had to examine the repercussions if it ruled that Telenor and other ISPs had to block access to certain websites. This, it said, is usually the responsibility of the authorities and handing this task to private companies would be “unnatural”.

This is a breaking news story and will be updated.

Article from: TorrentFreak, check out our new blog at FreakBits.

Now Di.se reports that music group IFPI has completed new research which it says reveals the extent of file-sharing penetration in this Scandinavian country of 9.2 million citizens.

The IFPI survey claims that some 40 percent of Swedes aged between 15 and 74 engage in illicit file-sharing every day, a statistic which IFPI chairman Louis Werner says is “a very high figure” but one which does not surprise him.

The 40 percent of this group equates to around 2.8 million people. The figure would be even higher, says IFPI, if it had also counted the under 15 year olds who regularly share files.

The higher-than-expected results are being put down to the method employed by IFPI to collect the data. It says that traditionally such surveys are carried out using the telephone, but this time the data was gathered via the web.

The results come nowhere near those revealed by the earlier research carried out by SIFO on behalf of TV operator Viasat – their conclusion was that only 11% of Swedes download copyright works using the Internet.

Currently Sweden had around 7.3 million Internet users in a population of over 9.2 million, a penetration of around 81%.

Article from: TorrentFreak, check out our new blog at FreakBits.

On April 1st the new law became active and immediately there was a dramatic drop in Internet traffic, which many observers put down to file-sharers retreating based on a fear of becoming identified.

Indeed, Henrik Pontén from Antipiratbyrån – the Swedish anti-piracy office – said he was convinced. “The majority of all Internet traffic is file-sharing. Because of that, there’s no other explanation for the decrease in traffic than the IPRED law,” he stated.

Then at the end of April, two ISPs – Bahnhof and Tele2 – both announced they would stop logging Internet activity which would seriously hamper the effects of IPRED on their customers.

But despite the massive opposition to the legislation, despite the fear, the huge drop in Internet traffic, the action of ISPs to limit its effects (and The Pirate Bay team releasing iPredator to neutralize it), so far in the battle against music file-sharers, IPRED is a sleeping beast.

Although the music industry promised to use IPRED to go after pirates, it has been a full 6 months since the legislation was introduced and so far, not a single complaint has been made against a file-sharer.

So does this mean that the feared music industry onslaught against P2P users will amount to nothing? Unfortunately, almost certainly not – they are sitting patiently for the wheels to turn in another case.

Previously five book publishers handed a request to a local court demanding information about the owner of an FTP-server where audio books were stored. Although it was a private FTP and the books couldn’t have been made available to the public, the court ordered the ISP Ephone to hand over the personal details of the individual behind the IP-address. Ephone refused, with their CEO describing the evidence submitted as insufficient. The case is under appeal.

Yesterday IFPI chief executive Lars Gustafsson told DN.se that they are simply biding their time to see the outcome of this earlier IPRED action by the publishing industry before going after music sharers, and offered assurances that IFPI cases will come in the fall.

Although there will probably not be the one hundred case promised earlier, Gustafsson still refused to be pinned down on the exact number, instead promising that the complaints will be issued “on a broad front.”

Article from: TorrentFreak, check out our new blog at FreakBits.

Now, according to a report, the leak has been confirmed by Simon Cowell’s Syco, part of Sony BMG.

The report in Britain’s The Sun tabloid, says that ‘hackers’ targeted computers at Syco and lifted the track and later put it on the Internet, but the author seems a little confused over how these things work.

Sure, the assertion that there can be “huge kudos” to be gained by the ‘hackers’ in leaking a track like this is absolutely correct, but the article goes on to say that there is a huge financial motive too.

“Dodgy file-sharing websites pay hackers top dollar for stolen tracks as they try to attract more downloaders to the site so they can rake in more money from advertisers,” is the claim from the article.

But everyone familiar with these situations understand, as soon as a track is leaked onto the Internet word gets round very quickly. Soon everyone has a copy and the track is available from dozens of other sites, probably within minutes. It’s very difficult to imagine that paying a hacker “top dollar” would be a worthwhile investment for any site – their offering would be pirated in seconds.

A Syco spokesman confirmed that the label is working with IFPI, BPI and the police to track down the leakers. “We will certainly look to bring charges against those who are responsible. We cannot give any more details at this stage for operational reasons,” he said.

At this point it seems that Syco are doing a reasonable job of containing the leak of the mp3 itself – scanning various sites which have listed the track as available reveals that most have been subject of takedown notices from Sony. At this point it appears that the track didn’t leak via the Scene, as searches on the usual release databases reveal no sign of the song.

Despite the evil hackers and investigations by anti-piracy police and the real police, coupled with rantings by Cowell, anyone can listen to the leaked song on YouTube. Go figure.

Article from: TorrentFreak, check out our new blog at FreakBits.

Now FPM is claiming that a “major offensive” is underway against what it describes as “new forms of illegal file-sharing.” The group is claiming that it has successfully removed from the Internet more than 30,000 links to unauthorized music, which together generated 10 million illicit downloads.

Singling out Mininova as the single biggest host of links on its hitlist, FPM claims to have successfully ordered the torrent site to remove more than 20,000 torrents. Another 10,000 items were removed from online storage sites including Rapidshare and MegaUpload. FPM says that it will now work to have further infringing links removed on a daily basis.

In further action against file-sharing services, FPM claims to have shuttered a further 12 eD2K and Direct Connect servers although no further details have been made available.

Interestingly, Mininova co-founder Erik Dubbelboer was not aware of FPM’s takedown bombardment. He told TorrentFreak that they haven’t received any emails from FPM. So, unless FPM was sending the requests from a different email address not associated with its domain, their claim might be a bit overstated.

Article from: TorrentFreak, check out our new blog at FreakBits.

IFPI and representatives from the movie industry argue that Telenor is willingly infringing copyright by allowing its customers to access the prominent BitTorrent tracker, but Telenor disagrees with this assessment. In a public announcement today Telenor explains why.

“If Telenor were considered complicit in any illegal activities online, we would have to block access to websites and customers on any suspicion of illegal activity. Telenor would then act as some sort of private police or private censorship authority, which would be very worrisome in light of important issues such as freedom of speech,” Telenor writes.

Blocking websites upon request from the entertainment industry is “unacceptable” according to Telenor. The ISP agrees that piracy is a problem and they don’t support customers who engage in these activities, but they are refusing to censor the Internet without a court order.

“Instead of demanding that Internet providers censor the Internet and monitor the content that’s transferred, Telenor believes that the best way to decrease illegal file sharing is to put more effort into making legally downloadable content available.”

The entertainment industries should find ways to monetize legal content in a way that satisfies both the copyright holders and customer. Blocking access to websites instead would “violate principles which constitute important prerequisites for any democracy”.

It is good to see that an ISP like Telenor is willing to go to court to protect their rights and those of their customers, instead of taking the easy route and giving to the wishes of the copyright lobby. Telenor rightfully emphasizes that the entertainment industry should focus on the source of the problem by developing legal alternatives that satisfy the need of their customers, a position also held by EU Commissioner Viviane Reding.

Even if IFPI wins in court, blocking The Pirate Bay is not going to be very effective. There are several ways to get around it and thousands of other BitTorrent sites. On top of that, the new owners of the site plan to get rid of all the copyrighted content indexed by the site.

Article from: TorrentFreak, check out our new blog at FreakBits.

In a letter sent out to several web hosts IFPI argued that the site(s) hosted by the providers make “a large number of” copyright works available to the public, and that the users of the sites are infringing the copyrights of IFPI members. IFPI ended the letter by asking the web host to take necessary actions to make sure that this activity stops, or else “IFPI intends to take necessary measures.”

This tactic seemed to work, as many torrent sites operated by Swedes closed their doors or were shut out by their host. However, the Swedish provider Portlane is not planning to cave in to IFPI’s threats and have filed a complaint at the Swedish Market Court.

“My client feels IFPI’s letter is one sided, lacking in nuance and very threatening. Portlane does not believe it should be forced to break a contract with a client because of hearsay,” Portlane’s lawyer Jonas Forzelius told Dagens Nyheter.

Forzelius argues that IFPI is breaking the law because they send out the warning letters for financial gain, something not allowed under Sweden’s marketing law, regardless of the copyright issues that are at stake here.

“What IFPI says is ‘close these sites’, and what is the purpose of that? Of course scaring as many ISPs as possible to stop providing these services in order for IFPI to increase their own sales. Not everyone can afford to process against IFPI with its financial resources, even if they feel IFPI’s claims are wrong.”

In several earlier cases, the Market Court has made it clear that these warning letters must be written in a way that corresponds with marketing ethics. Since IFPI always claims that they are losing millions of dollars (or kroner) thanks to piracy, their warning letters would be unlawful.

Thus far, the Commercial Marketing Court had tried seven cases of warning letters, not related to file-sharing. In all cases except one they were found unlawful and the judges banned the letters with fines of half a million crowns if they were sent again. IFPI await the same fate, meaning that the threats will stop.

Article from: TorrentFreak, check out our new blog at FreakBits.

Despite the fact that the Pirate Bay verdict is to be appealed, the decision is still being used as ammunition by the various anti-piracy outfits, and they have already taken out several trackers across Sweden. More recently, IFPI has discovered a new, more convenient and possibly more effective way to (try to) shut down the remaining torrent sites.

Instead of targeting the tracker owners, IFPI is going directly to the hosting providers with a request to take the sites offline. One of the providers that has received a letter from IFPI is DCP Networks, who rent servers to TorrentBytes – one of the larger BitTorrent trackers.

In their letter IFPI argues that the tracker they host is making “a large number of” copyright works available to the public, and that the users of the site are infringing the copyright of IFPI members. IFPI ends the letter by asking DCP Networks to take necessary actions to make sure that this activity stops, or else “IFPI intends to take necessary measures.”

IFPI lawyer Magnus Mårtensson told DN.se that the letter received by DCP Networks is not something strange or unusual. IFPI has contacted several other hosting providers and site owners Mårtensson said. What they aim to do here is extend the (yet to be appealed) verdict of “assisting copyright infringement” and apply it to hosting providers as well.

At the moment TorrentBytes seems to be (back) online, indicating that the hosting provider may have not yet given in to IFPI’s demands. Although the Pirate Bay verdict doesn’t apply to anyone but the convicted and their unique circumstances, it is likely that some hosting providers will agree to IFPI’s request, fearful of a costly legal procedure.

Article from: TorrentFreak, check out our new blog at FreakBits.

But did The Pirate Bay Four receive a fair trial? Today, an event on Swedish national radio SR threw everything into doubt – and it’s barely believable, like something straight out of Hollywood.

The copyright industry likes to have the outcome of processes clear before engaging them so it’s perhaps unsurprising that SR today revealed that the judge Tomas Norström is in league with it on many fronts. The judge has several engagements – together with the prosecution lawyers for the movie and music industries.

Swedish Association of Copyright (SFU) – The judge Tomas Norström is a member of this discussion forum that holds seminars, debates and releases the Nordic Intellectual Property Law Review. Other members of this outfit? Henrik Pontén (Swedish Anti-Piracy Bureau), Monique Wadsted (movie industry lawyer) and Peter Danowsky (IFPI) – the latter is also a member of the board of the association.

Swedish Association for the Protection of Industrial Property (SFIR) – The judge Tomas Norström sits on the board of this association that works for stronger copyright laws. Last year they held the Nordic Championships in Intellectual Property Rights Process Strategies.

.SE (The Internet Infrastructure Foundation) – Tomas Norström works for the foundation that oversees the .se name domain and advises on domain name disputes. His colleague at the foundation? Monique Wadsted. Wadsted says she’s never met Norström although they have worked together.

Commenting on the revelations, Pirate Bay spokesman Peter Sunde brokep said, “Spectrial Cliffhanger in S01 with the verdict – S02 started with the judge being biased. Reality beats fiction yet again!”

There are several renowned lawyers and judicial commentators that are attacking Tomas Norström’s decision to take the case, in spite of having a clear conflict of interest.

“I wouldn’t have taken the case,” says former judicial ombudsman Rune Lavin.

Former Director of Public Prosecution Sven-Erik Alhem said, “You cannot hide controversial facts. The attention this gets only leads to unnecessary questioning of bias in Swedish courts. Of course the judge should have informed people of the situation prior to the process and thereby allowed the involved parties to decide if it was suitable or not.”

Lawyer Leif Silbersky made a comment all Pirate Bay supporters want to hear, “If the lawyers [for the defense] act on this immediately, this could mean a re-trial.”

Peter Sunde’s lawyer Peter Althin says he has already put in a request for a re-trial. “In my appeal, I will claim the court was biased and that the appeal court should cancel the verdict and re-submit the case to the district court,” he said.

And the judge himself? “Every time I accept a case I make an assessment on whether I am part of it or not. But I have not felt that I am biased because of those commitments,” he said.

During the trial it was the judge, Tomas Norström, that was responsible for ensuring that the trial was fair and that the lay judges did not act in their own interests.

Previously one of the original lay judges in the case had to step down when his involvement in a music rights group became known;

“Three lay judges were appointed,” said Judge Norström one week before the trial. “On a question from me to the lay judges on whether they had any involvement in copyright associations or similar, or if they are or have been artists one of them answered Yes.”

That lay judge was removed. It’s anyone’s guess why the judge didn’t think the same should apply to him.

Whether or not Tomas Norström allowed his personal interests to get in the way of a fair verdict is open for debate, but there can’t be an intelligent human being reading this news that doesn’t feel that it would’ve been better for everyone if he simply backed away from this case and let someone else take over. He has compromised the entire case and verdict.

Rick Falkvinge of Sweden’s Pirate Party said the revelations were indicative of “corruption on a completely unforgivable level.”

This is a breaking news story, check back for updates.

Thanks to Billy

Article from: TorrentFreak, check out our new blog at FreakBits.

In February, when the Pirate Bay trial was in full swing, a group of hackers managed to deface the Swedish IFPI site. Today, the international IFPI site is the new target and is suffering from a DDoS attack. At the time of writing the website is completely inaccessible.

The attacks are part of Operation Baylout which also encourages people to send black faxes to the MPAA’s anti-piracy office and movie industry lawyer Monique Wadsted. Thus far, we have no confirmation that any fax machines have been taken down.

The Pirate Bay’s Peter Sunde told TorrentFreak in a comment: “I feel peoples’ frustration. I hope they do something more permanent instead, like making sure the idiots that give power to the media industry lose their own power. We need to cut out the companies abusing copyright at the expense of society’s well-being. But this is not a permanent fix so it’s just pointless.”

Pointless or not, according to the Reg, some 250 hackers are gathering in AnonNet’s IRC channels to discuss their battle strategies and future plans.

Mooncup, one of the root administrators at AnonNet confirmed this and told TorrentFreak: “They seem to be doing it to demonstrate to the record industry that the Internet is our domain and they can keep the fuck out of our business or face the consequences,” he explained.

“They [IFPI] represent most of the record companies, therefore attacking them represents an attack on all of the people who try to stop websites like The Pirate Bay without really understanding what they are really about,” Mooncus added, noting that AnonNet itself is by no means involved in the attacks.

IFPI was contacted for a response, but we haven’t heard back from them at the time of publication.

Update: IFPI.se is also down.

Article from: TorrentFreak, check out our new blog at FreakBits.

“It must be assumed that it is already in accordance with current Danish law that in principle it is possible to close an Internet connection that has been used to infringe copyrights,” says Peterson. “But the law does not take into account the very significant conflicting interests that will prevail in such a case,” he added.

The problem is the unbalanced approach to a potential disconnection. In Denmark an Internet user’s interests are not considered when making a decision to close a site or connection – they are not even involved in the process and therefore have no opportunity to defend themselves. Furthermore, should a connection or site be closed in error, there is little chance for claiming compensation. “It’s obvious that this runs counter to some basic legal principles,” says Petersen.

One of the problems lies in the way the Danes implemented the EU 2001 ‘Infosoc directive‘, which differs greatly from the manner in which other EU countries have handled it. Under Danish law, ISPs can be made responsible for the copyright violations of their subscribers, which is why ISPs can shut down a customers Internet connection or close a website so easily.

Now, according to Comon.dk, in the latest draft report from the Ministry of Culture Conference on piracy, having previously ignored the problems the Danish government has now included the concerns of Professor Petersen, as it tries to decide whether or not to introduce new legislation against users who share copyright material on the Internet.

The draft is also set to look at some of the demands being put forward by the IFPI and other similar groups, including their 3 strikes initiative. Another IFPI proposal is that individuals should be made responsible for whatever happens on their Internet connection, whether they carried out any infringements or not. This suggestion was put forward after legal action by IFPI against two women failed last year, with the pair successfully arguing a ‘wireless defense’. The women said they had no knowledge of the alleged infringements and therefore shouldn’t have to pay any damages. The court agreed and acquitted them of all charges.

To avoid this type of outcome in future cases, the IFPI wants to change the burden of proof so that instead of the rights holder having to prove that an individual engaged in piracy, it is up to the individual to prove that he didn’t and that the responsibility for infringement lies with a 3rd party.

The final version of the report will be published in the spring.

Article from: TorrentFreak, check out our new blog at FreakBits.

Ragnar Kårhus of Telenor said that they follow the law, and not the demands of the music industry. He doesn’t see what law would require them to block sites. “This would be the same as demanding that the postal service should open all letters, and decide which ones should be delivered,” he says.

Previously, a Danish judge ruled last year that Tele2 had to block its users from accessing The Pirate Bay. IFPI argued that Tele2 was assisting in mass copyright infringement, and that access to the site therefore had to be blocked. IFPI is now using this decision in an attempt to force ISPs in other countries to do the same.

However, Kårhus points out that there is a huge difference between the situation in Norway and Denmark. There is no court ruling in Norway, he argued, and a letter from the rights holders is not sufficient. “It is important that these kind of decisions should be made after handling in the judicial system – namely the police and a court of law,” Kårhus said.

Interestingly, the Norwegian Minister of Education said recently that the music industry should embrace the Internet instead of fighting it. “All previous technology advances have led to fears that the older format would die. But TV did not kill radio, the Web did not kill the book, and the download is not going to kill music,” he said.

It is uncertain whether IFPI will follow though with their threats and go after Telenor in court. It wouldn’t be the first time that legal threats have been used as a mechanism for applying pressure.

Article from: TorrentFreak, check out our new blog at FreakBits.

Some are showing support by getting up in the middle of the night and translating the case for others. Some have been outside the court in the cold, while others have released a documentary. Many millions have been following every development online and posting words of support feverishly to blog and forum.

A few individuals took more direct action yesterday, much to the dislike of The Pirate Bay. They attacked the website of the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI) in Sweden yesterday, defacing it, and leaving a message there for the trial prosecutor;

Stop lying HÅKAN ROSWALL!:

The ruthless hunt conducted by the IFPI, Anti-Piracy Office, Warner Bros., and all the other companies with a pawn in the game has now resulted in a trial in which four innocent men are accused of copyright infringement. This is a declaration of war against anti-piracy outfits and the industry players behind them, and we urge the public to boycott and lynch those responsible. IFPI is just the beginning. To be Continued.

The New Generation

When the RIAA website was hacked last year, the news was met with glee by thousands. No doubt this news will be well received too but one person who isn’t particularly happy about it – at least in the context of the court case – is Peter Sunde, aka brokep.

“Our case is going quite well as most of you have noticed. In the light of that it feels very bad that people are hacking web sites which actually puts us in a worse light than we need to be in,” he said.

The defacement included a note saying “To be Continued..” and Peter reports that he has heard rumors that there could be further attacks against the international page of the IFPI and the domain previously owned by Peter, IFPI.com.

Indeed, at the time of writing, both sites are unavailable, in addition to the Swedish site. There are no messages (possibly indicating a DDoS) but they are both down.

While all this might be a great distraction for those who believe the music industry only gets what it deserves and deserves what it gets, Peter is calling for calm;

“If anyone involved in the acts going on is reading this – please stop, for our sake. We don’t need that kind of support.”

The IFPI site currently carries this message; “Welcome to the IFPI Svenska group. This page is temporarily taken out of service.”

Stay tuned today for our coverage of the trial’s Day 4.

Update: IFPI.se, .org and .com are back online.

Article from: TorrentFreak, check out our new blog at FreakBits.

Per-Eirik Johansen has been in the music industry for many years, and was noted for his ability to develop some prominent artists. At one point elected as chairman of the IFPI, it was during Johansen’s time as a director at EMI that he bore the brunt of a backlash against the copy protection his company put on CDs.

In 2004, five thousand people lobbied EMI to remove this DRM, with news site nrk.no calling Johansen’s office 27 times over two broken interview promises on the issue. Eventually he conceded, “I have neither the desire nor the ability to give out discs without copy protection,” while indicating that only EMI London could make such a decision.

“We always listen to consumers,” he objected. “I can inform you that over the last five months, in EMI we have sold about 400,000 CDs with copy protection in Norway. In the same period we have received 28 complaints from consumers.”

“What we are talking about is a tiny, tiny little thing,” he said. But did he really believe that it was so insignificant?

No longer working for EMI, in an interview with Joakim from Norway’s Dagbladet, Johansen – unrestrained from the shackles of a forced corporate line – speaks freely, noting that while he took a salary from EMI he felt obliged to defend their stance.

He now believes the music industry’s fight against piracy has been useless and says he disagrees with the assertion that illicit file-sharing is the same as theft. Referring to an earlier EMI anti-piracy initiative, Johansen noted, “The message of that campaign is that there is a reason why we have copyright, and I agree.”

“But the main thing is that a whole generation already violates copyright, and the only thing we can do now is find better solutions,” he says pragmatically.

Now, as the 49 year-old manages his own label, Johansen looks back on some good times with EMI, particularly those where he discovered and developed new artists. But times have changed. “Now that companies’ earnings have gone down, and you cut down on people, people no longer have the resources to drive this work,” he said.

Johansen still has optimism for the industry, pointing out growth in the live concert market and showing enthusiasm for new models to make money from music. “I am extremely optimistic. There has been a revolution, and in the wake of this, it is very chaotic. Today there is an entrepreneurial spirit that is both healthy and exciting. We do not know how the industry will look in a year or two, but I am convinced that the future looks promising.”

Noting that as a whole the music industry hasn’t fallen in value, Johansen says it is the recording section that has suffered most after it did nothing for too long and failed to adapt their business model to the new era.

“No one has ever won a battle when fighting against new technology,” he said.

Time to embrace it then.

Article from: TorrentFreak, check out our new blog at FreakBits.

Peter Sunde, co-founder of The Pirate Bay told TorrentFreak that they are seriously considering suing the IFPI for unfair competition. “They have had a monopoly on distribution and we’re breaking that monopoly, and in turn they sue people that allow access to our distribution method,” he said.

Meanwhile, all other BitTorrent sites are still accessible in Denmark, and thus far the IFPI hasn’t announced it will go after any of them. This, together with the fact that there are several tricks to get around the block, make their legal strategy look like a personal vendetta against The Pirate Bay instead of an effective measure against piracy.

Before The Pirate Bay takes action against the IFPI, they will first await the outcome of the Supreme Court appeal that the three ISPs – DC, Telia and Telenor – announced earlier this week. If the appeal is unsuccessful, and when they find the perfect lawyer to represent them, The Pirate Bay will sue IFPI.

The IFPI seems to be looking forward to yet another confrontation. “Peter Sunde is welcome to sue us,” Jesper Bay, the head of the Danish IFPI told Comon.dk in a response to the news. Ironically, one of the websites explaining how to get around the Danish blockade carries Jesper Bay’s name.

For now, the Pirate Bay team has another court case to focus on. In two weeks their trial in Sweden kicks off, where the IFPI will also be one of their opponents. To be continued.

Update: Initially we reported that all Danish ISPs have to block the Pirate Bay. This is not the case. The latest court decision is a preliminary injunction against DMT. This means that it is only binding against ISPs owned by DMT (thanks Ole).

Article from: TorrentFreak, check out our new blog at FreakBits.

Thanks to Eircom entering into this entirely voluntary agreement, there is no need for them or the music industry to worry about any official intervention into the methods used for accusing and disconnecting subscribers. The music industry simply accuses alleged copyright infringers (via DtecNet, the RIAA and BPI anti-piracy partner), and the ISP simply disconnects them on an agreed Terms of Service violation.

A worrisome development, to say the least. The agreement bypasses the need for any legal ruling on the issue of a government-applied ‘3 strikes regime’. So, although the government may decide against this type of action for the general public, Eircom just put it firmly on the table, completely voluntarily, for all of its subscribers.

There will be no need to take alleged copyright infringers to court. The music industry knows from the US model that doesn’t work anyway, because it involves all that messy ‘defense’ stuff that people who are wrongly accused usually have the right to. Rather than face the hell of a trial (which at least they have a chance of winning), customers will be presumed guilty rather than presumed innocent. The will be no due process on the way to the punishment disconnection.

There will likely be no easy legal challenge to a user’s disconnection. Eircom will simply change its Terms of Service to include new tougher clauses which allow them to terminate the service if the connection is ‘abused’, although arguably the old TOS allows for this already. The warnings it will hand to its customers leading up to this point will be considered enough notice, as per the new TOS.

Anyone who shares an Internet connection with friends or family, or any business that has file-sharing staff (or wireless piggy-backers etc) will mean that the entire line goes down if anyone infringes, even a child. In disconnections of this type it will mean that the bill payer is being made responsible for something which happens on his connection without his knowledge.

As a carrier, ISPs are not responsible for the activities of their subscribers. The music industry disagrees. Eircom were set to challenge this in court – but with this new agreement that opportunity has been lost. The Big Four labels also insisted that anti-piracy filtering technology could be installed at Eircom, and argued that it would work. The chance to dispel this myth has been lost too.

Perhaps even worse, this might just be the beginning. The IFPI will use the Eircom agreement to force other, smaller ISPs in Ireland to reach the same agreement with them. If they succeed, IFPI will have achieved a “3 strikes” regime in a country without need for the messy business of the government getting involved with regulation, which it would otherwise be reluctant to do.

In no way does this agreement stop the music industry from getting someone disconnected AND taking a civil legal action against them.

This agreement will do nothing to change the habits of those who wish to share files. It will, however, encourage people to find a way around the measures introduced by IFPI and Eircom so the never-ending cat and mouse game continues.

Article from: TorrentFreak, check out our new blog at FreakBits.

Quantifying its ‘losses’ in court, the four labels claimed illegal downloading costs the Irish music industry 13.8 million Euros every year, and since Eircom has 40 per cent of the ISP market, it must be held responsible for causing the industry losses of between 4 and 5 million Euros. Further details about the case are available in our previous report.

The case, which was due to run for 4 weeks, was cut short this evening after just eight days. According to an RTE report it has ended after a fairly shocking and unexpected development. The ‘Big Four’, headed by the IFPI, have reached an “amicable” settlement with Eircom.

In an agreement believed to be a world first, EMI, Sony BMG, Universal and Warner will start tracking the IP addresses of alleged infringers and supply the details to the ISP. Eircom has agreed that it will ultimately disconnect infringers from the Internet.

Essentially, Eircom has agreed to implement a “3 Strikes” regime against its own customers. On the first allegation the customer will get a warning. On the second allegation they will be informed that if they do not stop their activities, disconnection will follow. On the third, it’s Internet blackout time.

The Chairman of EMI said he now expects other ISPs to follow suit – serious pressure will be brought down on them immediately.

Article from: TorrentFreak, check out our new blog at FreakBits.

One of the key statistics that is hyped every year, is the piracy ratio of downloaded music. Just as last year, IFPI estimates that 95% of all downloads are illegal, without giving a proper source for this figure. Interestingly, those who take a closer look at the full report (pdf), will see that only 10% of the claimed illegal downloads are seen as a loss in sales.

Contrary to the RIAA’s arguments in court, the BPI and IFPI don’t believe in the “every pirated download is a lost sale” myth. Matt Phillips, BPI’s Director of Communications wrote in an email to TorrentFreak: “No, we don’t think every illegal download is a lost sale (and never, ever, have, if my memory serves me correctly). The estimates for lost sales revenue is [sic] not calculated on this basis.”

To come up with a ‘best guess’ of the real losses for the UK market, the music industry have commissioned Jupiter Research. For two years in a row, Jupiter estimated the losses are to be about equal to the revenue that comes from digital sales. If we combine this with the ‘only one in 20 downloads is paid for’ guesstimate, only one in 10 illegal downloads is seen as a loss in sales.

Of course we will be very reluctant to draw conclusions from research that is commissioned by the music industry itself, however, it would interesting to know what the effect is of those downloads that are not seen as a loss. Could they perhaps used by consumers to discover new music, and generate revenue in the long run?

What is clear from the report is that ‘pirates’ have shown the music industry what consumers really want. The music industry is slowly starting to recognize that they have to compete with piracy, by offering high quality products. In the 2009 report, for example, IFPI proudly reports that many services now sell DRM-free music, while they themselves are the reason why these restrictions were implemented in the first place.

In the report IFPI writes: “An important development in 2008 was the licensing of more online stores to sell downloads without digital rights management (DRM), meaning consumers can play the music they acquire on any portable device. In January 2009, Apple announced it had signed deals with leading record companies to offer eight million DRMfree tracks at flexible price points. The move is expected to significantly boost download sales.”

Besides the usual anti-piracy ramblings on how ISPs should help to disconnect pirates from the Internet, the report documents another interesting trend. The music industry clearly recognizes that they’ve done something wrong in the past, and is now promoting unlimited download services, either ad supported or for a low monthly fee. If done right, this ‘piracy inspired’ model might just be the future of music consumption, or at least a worthy competitor to piracy. But then again, they will find something else to complain about sooner or later.

Article from: TorrentFreak, check out our new blog at FreakBits.

The national board for youth affairs (Ungdomstyrelsen) awards money to organizations, in order to ensure that they have access in influence, to promote the next generation of politicians; indeed possibly the current generation. At least two of the board members of Ung Pirat are listed on the Pirate Party’s list of candidates for June’s EU elections.

Not everyone has been pleased about the government funding though, with the IFPI chief among them. IFPI’s Swedish director Lars Gustafsson wasn’t happy at all, saying “It is surprising. Ung Pirat works in principle to encourage something illegal. That they then receive money from a state institution is remarkable.”

This is of course, the same Gustafsson who last year urged ISPs to spy on its customers, which is of course completely illegal – not that hypocrisy from the IFPI is anything new. The board dismissed the complaints though, with Director-General Per Nilsson saying “It is our understanding that they want to change legislation around copyright issues and that is an opinion that they are entitled to.”

UP, at just over two years old, has seen a fantastic growth rate. It is now the third biggest political youth organization in Sweden, behind those of the Moderate and Social Democrat parties, and ahead of the Christian Democrats – all parties with representatives in the Swedish Parliament.

Per Nilsson recognized this as well, saying, “It is positive that the organization in a short time has managed to build a large nation-wide activities on issues involving many young people.” With this money and constantly growing support, it’s quite likely that come the next election, the Pirate Party will be voted into parliament.

“The growth of the Young Pirates in Sweden heralds the coming of a new dimension in European politics,” Ung Pirat’s Mattias Bjärnemalm told TorrentFreak, “The communication revolution has made the life of the younger generations into something altogether different from how their parents grew up, and now that cultural change will alter the very core today’s political landscape.” We wish them all the best of course.

Article from: TorrentFreak, check out our new blog at FreakBits.

The legal action, under the Copyright and Related Rights Acts 2000, claims the ISP knowingly facilitated the infringements of its customers and is therefore liable for their actions. Willie Kavanagh, Managing Director of EMI records in Ireland said of Eircom: “With the greatest of respect” it was “well aware” that its customers used its networks to infringe copyrights “on a grand scale”. In response, Eircom (correctly) believes that as a carrier, it is under no obligation to monitor the content of traffic on its network.

Being heard by Justice Peter Charleton, the trial started yesterday in Court 7 at the Commercial Court and is listed to run for the next four weeks. Michael McDowell SC, a former politician now representing the ‘Big Four’ in the case, said Eircom should be forced to stop its customers from illegally downloading music. According to reports, he quickly began his attempts to portray Eircom in a bad light.

McDowell read out an internal email from 2001, written by Eircom’s head of Internet, Denis Curran, which noted that the issue of “MP3 piracy” should be the subject of discussion at a forthcoming management meeting. All fine so far, but Curran wrote “Piracy is a loaded term. Could we say ‘sharing‘- ‘piracy’ implies there’s something wrong with it.”

Clearly not realizing his off-the-cuff comments would be aired worldwide eight years down the line, Curran added “Think of it as helping the health and good living of rich cocaine sniffing rock stars by leaving them with less free money to spend on sex and drugs.”

McDowell didn’t stop there. Not wanting to miss an opportunity to imply that Eircom supports piracy, McDowell noted that only this week, the ISP was seen to be advertising its services on The Pirate Bay. Of course, Eircom would have no idea that this was the case, as they will have out-sourced their advertising to an agency.

In attempting to quantify the ‘losses’ incurred by the ‘Big Four’ at the hands of Eircom, McDowell noted that illegal downloading costs the Irish music industry 13.8 million Euros every year, and since Eircom has 40 per cent of the ISP market, it must be responsible for causing the industry losses of between 4 and 5 million Euros.

It will be no surprise if the rest of the statistics provided by the ‘Big Four’ and IFPI are equally vacuous.

The case continues.

Article from: TorrentFreak, check out our new blog at FreakBits.