Netflix First, BitTorrent After

May 7, 2013 by · Comments Off
Filed under: Announcements & Events, Digital Media, Mobile Phones, P2P technology, Entertainment Industry, File-Sharing Programs, Networks & Services, Movies, MP3, Digital Audio & Games 

Netflix First, BitTorrent AfterA recent statement from Netflix’s Chief Content Officer Ted Sarandos reveals that legal alternatives for movie enthusiasts are the best way to fight against online piracy. Why? Let’s see…

In an interview with Stuff, the man who’s been the head (for 13 years) of Netflix’s content acquisition department said that:

“I think people do want a great experience and they want access – people are mostly honest. The best way to combat piracy isn’t legislatively or criminally but by giving good options.”

“One of the things is we get ISPs to publicise their connection speeds – and when we launch in a territory the Bittorrent traffic drops as the Netflix traffic grows,” Sarandos continued.

However, it’s already common knowledge that not all of BitTorrent’s activity is about piracy; Netflix’s growth in traffic doesn’t necessarily mean that people stopped from downloading their favorite movies or TV shows, but at least a healthy percent chose legal services over illegal ones.

“The key thing is that BitTorrent is a Internet protocol, like HTTP. It moves data better than any other protocol. It’s an award winning technology used by Facebook, twitter, Wikipedia, Blizzard, genetic researchers and the scientists that are working on the Large Haldron Collider. Any company moving large data sets uses BitTorrent,” Christian Averill (Director of Communications at BitTorrent) told Josh Wolford of the WebProNews.

While people are free to download and upload both legal and illegal content via peer-to-peer, it becomes more and more obvious that Netflix and services alike make a valid point: give people what they want, when they want it (and this is probably the most important aspect of it), and everyone will be happier, including rightsholders.

Take the example of the HBO-produced TV series “Game of Thrones”. For two years in a row, the show had broken several records on BitTorrent’s networks, not because people were looking for illegal copies of it in particular, but because the different timelines of availability or the lack of it altogether. But this may change, as requests from thousands of people made the pearl of all premium cable services consider launching a movie streaming service without the strings of having cable subscription.

“One of the side effects of growth of content is an expectation to have access to it. You can’t use the internet as a marketing vehicle and then not as a delivery vehicle,” Sarandos concluded.

Maybe if content owners, creators, and all those anti-piracy activists would understand that, things would be easier and this unnecessary war against online piracy would finally come to an end or at least to a common ground.

Tags: , , , , , ,

The Belgian Fiasco: Sabam Vs. ISPs Make The Headlines

May 6, 2013 by · Comments Off
Filed under: Announcements & Events, Entertainment Industry 

The Belgian Fiasco: Sabam Vs. ISPs Make The HeadlinesSociété d’Auteurs Belge – Belgische Auteurs Maatschappij (also known as SABAM) is the Belgian association representing rightsholders (that is authors, composers and publishers) that reportedly sued some of the country’s ISPs for making a buck out of their internet packages without paying royalties to copyright holders. Well, that sounds interesting!

According to a report by PCWorld:

Sabam wants the court to rule that Internet access providers Belgacom, Telenet and Voo should pay 3.4 percent of their turnover in copyright fees, because they profit from offering high speed Internet connections that give users easy access to copyright protected materials, the collecting organization said in a news release Tuesday.

Since 2000, revenue generated from copyright levies imposed on physical media have declined by 54 percent, Sabam said. This “huge loss” has not been compensated by collections from online services like iTunes, YouTube and Spotify, it added.

ISPs over the years have profited from the switch to online media consumption and they have offered unlimited Internet access with very high download speeds in advertising campaigns, Sabam said. “The Internet access providers have never paid copyright levies for this activity. They hide behind their status as intermediary, without taking responsibility for the information transmitted over their networks,” the organization said.

However, the profit derived from Internet subscriptions in part comes from the intensive use of protected repertoire, Sabam said. Therefore the ISPs should start paying levies, it said. Because negotiations showed that the ISPs are not willing to start paying those levies voluntarily, Sabam decided to sue the three biggest Belgian ISPs in the Brussels Court of First Instance on April 12.

One question that makes total sense would be: if internet service providers are bound to pay royalties to rightsholders, does this mean file-sharers who download copyrighted content without permission get a guilt-free-pass, since all of their activity on the internet is already covered by their respective ISP? It’s not likely for rightsholders to adhere to such a solution, but instead choose the old fashion way – that of suing individuals who infringe copyright.

Furthermore, will this case be a starting point for other countries to force their internet service providers into paying up? It could be, as we’ve seen in the past with the “three strikes program”, but only time will tell for sure. What is sure is that the United States, for example, would have to rewrite the entire DMCA for that to happen.

However unlikely it is for ISPs to pay royalties to rightsholders in other countries, they are worried about a new kind of trend emerging out of these actions.

Tags: , , , , , ,

USTR’s Watch List Updated: Spain Is Removed, While Ukraine And 40 Other Countries Are Under Attentive Scrutiny

May 2, 2013 by · Comments Off
Filed under: Announcements & Events, Entertainment Industry 

USTR’s Watch List Updated: Spain Is Removed, While Ukraine And 40 Other Countries Are Under Attentive ScrutinyThis year’s report (known as the “Special 301”) has been released by the Office of the United States Trade Representative. Ukraine seems to be at the top of the notorious list, marked as a “Priority Foreign Country”.

The lucky countries that made it out of the “Special 301” are Spain and Bulgaria. They’re not off the hook completely, however, as the USTR is still to conduct reviews on both of them. The list continues to reveal that Canada’s grade has been modified, from “Priority Watch List” to “Watch List.”

“In June 2012, the United States welcomed the passage of the Copyright Modernization Act, which, among other things, is designed to implement Canada’s obligations under the WIPO Internet Treaties and to address the challenges of copyright piracy in the digital age. In March 2013, Canada also introduced the Combating Counterfeit Products Act to strengthen IPR enforcement, which included provisions that would provide ex officio authority to Canadian customs officials to seize pirated and counterfeit goods at the border,” the report noted.

Israel, Egypt, Mexico, and Brazil made it to the “Watch List” as well.

Not so lucky were Algeria, Argentina, China, Chile, Indonesia, India, Pakistan, Russia, Thailand, and Venezuela, all tagged under the “Priority Watch List.”

“Obtaining effective enforcement of IPR in China remains a central challenge, as it has been for many years,” this year’s report reads.

It continued by stating that “over 90 percent of the revenue generated by U.S. films in China comes in the form of box office revenues, compared to 25-30 percent in the United States. This difference is partly due to widespread piracy of motion pictures over the Internet and on optical discs.”

Last but not least, the US government found that various trends are blossoming, including the “emergence of Media Box piracy, whereby ‘boxes,’ often with capability to play high definition content, are loaded with large quantities of pirated works. These boxes may be sold with preloaded content, but can later have new content uploaded for a relatively low fee.”

The MPAA was quick to respond. While pointing out that Ukraine and Thailand are still in need of better copyright laws (Thailand’s been advised to take a stand against camcording pirates), the MPAA congratulated Spain for a job well done.

“MPAA welcomes the efforts of the Spanish Government to enforce copyright protection and looks forward to concrete results in the months ahead.”

See the full report here.

via: HollywoodReporter

Tags: , , , , , ,

Splinter Cell Style In Philippines’ Movie Theaters; Undercover Agents To Spy On Camcorders

April 30, 2013 by · Comments Off
Filed under: Announcements & Events, Entertainment Industry, Movies, MP3, Digital Audio & Games 

Splinter Cell Style In Philippines’ Movie Theaters; Undercover Agents To Spy On CamcordersYou may be familiar with the popular stealth-based game “Splinter Cell” or you may not, but here’s the thing: covert agents will keep their eyes peeled, or better said their night-vision goggles (no joke about it), for people who use camcorders in movie theaters.

Turn off your phones, ready your pop-corn and soda, and beware of creeps who look like spies ripped from a James Bond movie.

“This is a warning kasi ‘yong alam nila ‘yong napapanood lang nila sa mga napalabas na,” Ricardo Blancaflor, Director General at IPOP (Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines), said.

“But now, because of night vision, passive ‘to so hindi nila makikita ‘to,” he continued.

“I just wanna warn them, hihigpit kami ngayon.”

We’re not entirely sure what he said, and we don’t trust Google translate, but “warning” and “night vision” are certainly English words capable of goose-bumping any moviegoer, pirate or not.

The initiative comes after Blancaflor attended last year’s World Intellectual Property Day to discuss the country’s efforts to stop the production of counterfeited goods (such as CDs). While the general idea was that Philippines did a rather good job on that end, this year’s reports show that the number of counterfeited CDs is going up once again.

“Right now, hindi na tayo ang major source,” Atty. Joji Alonso of the Motion Pictures Anti-Film Piracy Council (MPAFPC) said.

“Bumaba na tayo.”

As far as the movie industry is concerned, in 2008 the number of pirated flicks coming from the Philippines was 45, dropping to 21 the next year, 20 in 2010, 1 in 2011, and slightly going up in 2012 (4).

Optical Media Board’s Chairman Ronnie Ricketts said:

“I’m trying to bring it out and spread it out that we’re doing not just operation, information, but at the same time you feel them. You just don’t go force by force, sometimes you go behind them, sideways, and it’s what’s happening.”

He’s referring to the fact the country’s government has been offering supportive programs and scholarships to various vendors, so that they stay away from illegal trades. The programs’ financial support came from the DBP (Development Bank of the Philippines), assisted by the Commission on Higher Education (CHED).

However, those caught trading illegal goods are vendors who do not qualify for DBP’s and CHED’s programs.

“Slowly na kasi kahit papaano naa-address,” Blancaflor said.

“So it’s not a case of wala kang nagawa, it’s a case of so much has been done pero marami pa ring kulang.”

Despite these concerns, the USTR (United States Trade Representative) removed Philippines from its notorious markets list; a victory for the government’s anti-piracy programs, but for how long remains to be seen.

Stay tuned to find out more!

Tags: , , , , ,

Universal Music Wins Appeal In A Copyright Lawsuit Against Grooveshark. The DMCA Does Not Apply, The Court Ruled

April 25, 2013 by · Comments Off
Filed under: Announcements & Events, Digital Media, Mobile Phones, P2P technology, Entertainment Industry, File-Sharing Programs, Networks & Services, Movies, MP3, Digital Audio & Games 

Universal Music Wins Appeal In A Copyright Lawsuit Against Grooveshark. The DMCA Does Not Apply, The Court RuledOn the 23rd of April, 2013, a New York court of appeals ruled against Grooveshark, in a painful copyright lawsuit that involves Universal Music Group.

Nearly 2 years ago, on November 2011, Universal Music files suit against Grooveshark, blaming the service of infringing copyright. To make things worse, Sony Music and Warner joined in, also filing suit the next month.

Grooveshark had hoped that the Digital Millennium Copyright Act will provide with safe harbor; this Tuesday a New York court of appeals ruled that, due to an “anomaly” in the copyright law, the music service is liable of copyright infringement. To be more specific, the DMCA states that “safe harbor” does not apply for songs that were licensed before February 15, 1972.

Back in 1971, the US Congress mended the copyright laws by turning them into a federal matter. However, creations that were licensed before 1972 are to be regarded under the grasp of the common law and statues of US’ individual states.

“…any rights or remedies under the common law or statutes of any State shall not be annulled or limited by this Title until 2067,” the law states.

Having this “anomaly” as their trump, Universal Music pointed to the fact that Grooveshark is responsible for infringing copyright. “Buddy Holly, The Carpenters, Cat Stevens, Chuck Berry, The Jackson Five, The Mamas and the Papas, Marvin Gaye, The Supremes, The Temptations, and The Who,” are just some of the songs Universal gave as an example in their 2010 filing.

While a previous court ruled in favor of Grooveshark, the NY court of appeals begged to differ. Their 17-page-long decision noted that:

Had the DMCA never been enacted, there would be no question that UMG could sue defendant in New York state courts to enforce its copyright in the pre-1972 recordings, as soon as it learned that one of the recordings had been posted on Grooveshark. However, were the DMCA to apply as defendant believes, that right to immediately commence an action would be eliminated. Indeed, the only remedy available to UMG would be service of a takedown notice on defendant. This is, at best, a limitation on UMG’s rights, and an implicit modification of the plain language of section 301(c). The word “limit” in 301(c) is unqualified, so defendant’s argument that the DMCA does not contradict that section because UMG still retains the right to exploit its copyrights, to license them, and to create derivative works, is without merit. Any material limitation, especially the elimination of the right to assert a common-law infringement claim, is violative of section 301(c) of the Copyright Act.M

In response, the music service argued that “if UMG’s interpretation of the DMCA were adopted, that act would be eviscerated.”

“Grooveshark has no easy way to distinguish which user-submitted sound recordings are covered by federal copyright versus state copyright. However, its legal liability depends [on] this difference. … Without universal protection from the DMCA’s safe harbor ‘notice-and-takedown’ scheme, Grooveshark may be required to pre-screen user uploads to assess whether the file is a pre-1972 sound recording or not, and then it may have to handle those files differently,” Eric Goldman of the Forbes wrote.

Despite this point of view, the judges in charge with the case wrote:

“It is not unreasonable, based on the statutory language and the context in which the DMCA was enacted, to [conclude] …that Congress intended for the DMCA only to apply to post-1972 works.”

“We reject defendant’s argument that the very purpose of the DMCA will be thwarted if it is deemed not to apply to the pre-1972 recordings,” they added.

Will YouTube (which is based on the same business model as Grooveshark) share the same fate? It’s not likely, since Google’s video service had signed a private contract which stipulates that Universal Music can take down its own copyrighted content at any point.

More on this as soon as we find out!

Tags: , , , ,

« Previous Page — Next Page »