CyberLaw Blog

Archive for July 24th, 2008

(Via Techdirt.)

Viacom Ignores Promise: Sends Bogus Takedowns To YouTube: “You may recall that back before it sued YouTube, Viacom sent the company 100,000 takedown notices, many of which turned out not to violate Viacom’s copyrights. At first, Viacom tried to brush it off as totally innocent collateral damage, but after the EFF filed a lawsuit pointing out that false positives violate the part of the DMCA where each takedown must swear that the sender is the legitimate copyright holder, Viacom not only backed down, but promised to be much more careful with its takedowns. Specifically, it promised to actually review each video before sending a takedown.

However, it now appears that Viacom may not be living up to that promise. Consumerist notes that Viacom has taken down an independent filmmakers’ movie to which it has no copyright claims whatsoever. The animation in question was the woman’s senior project, and was not a Viacom property at all.

The video remains up for now, but Viacom now gets access to all the viewership stats on a video property it has no rights over, and the filmmaker, Joanna Davidovich, is rightfully worried that the movie is going to get taken down by a big media company who has no right to it at all.

Update: Viacom has now apologized and admitted its mistake, claiming that the video had been included in a Viacom film festival, and Viacom didn’t realize that they did not retain the copyrights to the material. While the filmmaker in question is satisfied with this result, it’s still quite questionable. Viacom still filed a false takedown notice after specifically promising that it would not. Filing false takedowns, even done with good intentions is still a violation of the DMCA and can be quite chilling to content creators.

Facebook libel case damages won: “A businessman wins £22,000 in libel and breach of privacy after his personal details were printed on the Facebook website.”

See also the Times coverage.

(Via BBC News.)

Max Mosley delighted at ‘Nazi sex’ privacy victory: “Max Mosley, the Formula One boss, has declared himself delighted after winning record damages in a privacy action against the News of the World.”

Read the judgment in full.

(Via Law News from Times Online.)

Facebook faker ordered to pay thousands in libel damages: “

Grudge judged

The High Court has today ordered a man who concocted a Facebook account to attack a former school friend to pay £22,000 in damages.…

“

(Via The Register - Public Sector.)

Here we go again…. I think the whole Government initiative, the newly launched Consultation Paper on legislative options to address illicit P2P file-sharing and the development of the proposed code of conduct needs to be carefully thought by taking into account fundamental human rights such as access to information as well as privacy of communications. If any Internet users commits a crime and share pirated content then the entertainment industry should pursue legal action on such users. That is the only solution. It does come at a cost but cutting access or termination of accounts is a rather dubious and not an acceptable solution. The ISPs should not act as self appointed prosecutors, and judges, and only courts of law can decide if a user has committed a crime.

Consultation on legislative options to address illicit P2P file-sharing
Starting Date: 24-07-08 Closing Date: 30-10-08
This consultation is intended to set out and gather views on a proposal for a co-regulatory approach that could be adopted in order to facilitate and ensure co-operation between Internet Service Providers (ISPs) and rights holders to address the problem of illicit use of Peer-to-Peer (P2P) file-sharing technology to exchange unlawful copies of copyright material. This takes forward Recommendation 39 of the Gowers Review of Intellectual Property which addressed the issue of illicit use of P2P. The consultation also identifies and seeks views on other potential options and calls for evidence on issues related to illicit use of P2P.

BERR Press release: New measures to address online file-sharing
Consultation Document: Consultation on legislative options to address illicit peer-to-peer (P2P) file-sharing

Leading ISPs agree to warn illegal file-sharers: “The UK’s six major internet service providers (ISPs) have agreed to write to 1,000 of their subscribers a week on behalf of the music and film industries warning them not to engage in copyright-infringing file-sharing.”

See also the BBC News coverage: Net firms in music pirates deal

The Times coverage: Music companies to police illegal downloads: No sooner had Britain’s six biggest internet service providers (ISPs) agreed to monitor illegal file sharing than the web was abuzz with suggestions to get around the scheme.

Wired News coverage: British ISP File Share Smackdown Targets Accounts, Not Users

Slyck.com coverage: BPI and ISPs Agree to challenge P2P Piracy in the UK

Regulating U.K. Web Erotica: “In the U.K., there has been much discussion over how adult entertainment should be regulated on the Internet. Parliament has been considering some controversial legislation that would make it a felony to download what some British politicians have been loosely describing as ‘extreme pornography.’”

(Via XBIZ.com | News & Articles.)

Net firms in music pirates deal: “Six of the UK’s biggest net providers are believed to have signed up to a government-backed plan to tackle illegal file-sharing.”

(Via BBC News.)

Downloading illegally? Look out, they’re watching you: “It is easier for the authorities to find out if you - or your children - have
been illegally downloading music than you think. When Virgin Media started
writing to some of its customers saying that they had been downloading
illegally, it was able to include the date and time of the activity as if it
were issuing a speeding ticket.”

(Via Law News from Times Online.)