Largely the effort has been to convince the courts that current laws are applicable to the cases in question, from the shutting down of Napster in 2001 through to the most recent criminal case in Sweden involving The Pirate Bay. The utilization of existing law brings quicker results, but only in the short term and at significant expense.

New laws, created and based on the desires of the music industry, are a much better solution for them in the longer term, providing faster routes to site closures and more cost-effective solutions to deal with individuals.

With this in mind, lobbying by the music and movie industries has continued apace, even in countries where existing law still yields results.

For example, in the UK existing copyright law was used effectively against Usenet-indexer Newzbin recently, and it is used regularly to reveal the identities of tens of thousands of alleged file-sharers so they can be pursued for settlements. But why spend millions suing sites or individuals out of existence (along with all the bad publicity that brings) when one can get the government to block them at hugely reduced cost?

One only has to look at the UK’s Digital Economy Bill for a clear example where lobbying has been used to massively cut the cost and possibly even the need for future litigation. Don’t like a site like Newzbin in the future? Forget costly injunctions. Write a couple of letters to the right people and it’ll be blocked. Don’t like The Pirate Bay or Rapidshare? Same applies.

Sometimes, however, current law simply isn’t up to the requirements of the mainstream entertainment industries at all and yields zero results.

The IFPI and music rights outfit TONO discovered this recently after their second attempt at forcing the ISP Telenor to block The Pirate Bay ended in failure. They could have taken the case on to the Supreme Court but clearly they know the law isn’t on their side and have announced they have given up on the current legal action.

“We have no plans to try more file sharing cases in court before we are confident that we have a basis in Norwegian law,” said TONO’s Cato Power this week.

TONO haven’t given up on lobbying though. If the law is no good, they say, it’s time to get it changed, and that could be soon.

Norway’s Ministry of Culture is gathering together a group including the Norwegian Publishers Association, the Consumer Council, Gramo (music rights group), and ISPs Telenor and NextGenTel. Their job will be to provide solutions to restrict illicit file-sharing and encourage an increased usage of legal services by June 1st 2010.

Of course, TONO will take the opportunity to champion a 3 strikes-style solution similar to that present in the heavily lobbied-for Hadopi law currently lying in wait in France, or the newly-passed Digital Economy Bill in the UK.

Furthermore, all the signs are that in the coming years the music industry will maintain its aggressive lobbying until it gets this type of mechanism implemented in all its major markets.

“The passing of the Digital Economy Act in the UK recognises that if a country is to have world-class creative industries, then it also needs laws that will effectively protect their rights from the crippling problem of digital piracy,” said IFPI chairman John Kennedy yesterday.

“The move by the UK creates momentum for the graduated response approach to tackling piracy internationally,” he noted, adding, “We hope this will prompt more focus and urgency for similar measures in other countries where debate is underway.”

For those readers who are still unsure what “similar measures” are – site blocking, warning letters sent to file-sharers and if they don’t work, Internet disconnections. New laws coming to you soon.

Source: TorrentFreak, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing and anonymous VPN services.

Telenor refused to comply and was taken to court. In November 2009 the verdict was handed down – the courts decided that the ISP had no obligation to block the world’s most infamous torrent site.

The IFPI wasn’t about to give in so easily, with CEO Marte Thorsby insisting the court had ruled incorrectly. Music performing rights outfit, TONO, confirmed the case would go to an appeal.

In early February the Borgarting Court of Appeal announced that the appeal had been rejected as there was no basis under Norwegian law for the claim. IFPI and TONO said they would consider their options, i.e make a decision as to whether or not they would take the case to the Supreme Court.

Yesterday, in a surprise announcement – it’s not like the entertainment industries to give in so easily – IFPI and TONO said they will not take their appeal to Norway’s highest court.

“We wanted to get a legal clarification on whether under Norwegian law it is possible to order ISPs to block access to The Pirate Bay,” said TONO in a statement. “Now we have two clear decisions that there is no legal authority under Norwegian law for such blocking requirements.”

Following the November ruling, TONO said that it was possible that the authorities had not implemented the EU Copyright Directive properly in 2005, a line they continue to stand by.

“We interpret both [court] decisions as suggesting that questions have been raised about whether the EU Copyright Directive was adequately implemented in Norwegian law,” TONO added.

Marte Thorsby of the IFPI said that continuing with legal action would be a waste of time and money, and joined TONO in their calls for clearer legislation.

“The Court of Appeal wrote in its ruling that the limits of complicit liability are unclear, and we expect that the ongoing revision of the Copyright Act will close this legal ‘hole’,” said Thorsby.

Source: TorrentFreak, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing and anonymous VPN services.

Their demands were simple enough – stop your customers from accessing The Pirate Bay voluntarily or we will make you do it by force.

Telenor boss Ragnar Kårhus refused to comply and the entertainment groups made good on their promise and took the ISP to court. In November the verdict was handed down. Although initially things looked promising for the studios, in the end it didn’t go well.

The Asker and Bærum District Court clearly stated that Telenor was contributing to copyright infringement by providing infrastructure which allowed customers to access The Pirate Bay, and that it was also passively contributing due to its refusal to act when its services were used for illicit file-sharing.

But this wasn’t enough. Since these contributory acts were not directed at specific customers or their actions, or the actions of the Pirate Bay itself, the court ruled that Telenor operated consistently, treating both legal and illegal use of their network in the same manner. This meant that Telenor acted within the law and the court refused to force the ISP to block The Pirate Bay.

Marte Thorsby of the IFPI insisted that Telenor was acting unlawfully and believing that the court had ruled incorrectly, Cato Power from music performing rights outfit, TONO, said they would take the case to appeal.

The Borgarting Court of Appeal has just announced it has rejected their appeal, as there is no basis under Norwegian law for the claim.

After the November ruling, Power said that it was possible that the Norwegian authorities had not implemented the EU Copyright Directive properly in 2005. This rejection by the Court of Appeal appears to confirm his fears.

“The Court of Appeal’s decision confirms what we have previously stated, that the licensees in Norway are right to address this area,” he said in a statement.

Marte Thorsby for the IFPI said there is a need for clarification.

“The Court of Appeal wrote in its ruling that the limits for contributory responsibility are unclear and that the Culture Ministry must clarify this when they go through the copyright law again,” she said in a statement.

“This is, in other words, is a ‘no man’s land’ in current law, and that means people are free to facilitate illegal activities in the Norwegian [ISP] network,” she added.

The Ministry of Culture has already announced a review of the Copyright Act and there are suggestions that this current gray area will be clarified then.

In the meantime, although they insist they are currently examining their options, it is expected that the studios will take the case to the Supreme Court.

Source: TorrentFreak, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing and anonymous VPN services.