Data Protection Laws Prevent Recording Industry From Sending Pirate Warning Letters
from the oops dept
An increasingly important theme around here is how various laws to regulate the internet are often in conflict with each other. Privacy law is leading to less competition, for example. And from TorrentFreak, we have another, somewhat amusing example. The incredibly aggressive Dutch anti-piracy group BREIN has yet another hare-brained scheme to try to prevent copyright infringement: forcing ISPs to send threatening letters to those accused of large scale infringement.
However, the large Dutch ISP, Ziggo, (which has a long history of protecting user rights) went to court to argue that it cannot pass along the warning letters, as it would be a violation of the GDPR. And the courts have now agreed.
This time, a Ziggo subscriber was accused of offering over 200 e-books to the public through an open directory. BREIN hoped that the ISP would forward a notice to the associated account holder or share their personal details.
This week, the Utrecht court ruled that the ISP is not required to cooperate with this request. Without a license from the Dutch Data Protection Authority, linking the IP-address to the subscriber information would violate privacy law. For the same reason, it can’t share the subscriber details directly with BREIN either.
Even if Ziggo was allowed to process the data, BREIN wouldn’t have won the case. The court concluded that there’s insufficient evidence to show that the subscriber willingly made the books available for others to download. It’s possible that they were simply put online for personal use, without proper protection.
“Contrary to what BREIN states, it is not certain that the IP address holder himself has infringed copyrights,” the court writes in a press release.
There’s something quite amusing here, of course, since the legacy entertainment industry always seems to pop up in support of these kinds of laws, in the belief that it will somehow harm their mortal enemies in the internet industry…
Filed Under: copyright, data protection, gdpr, privacy, warning letters
Companies: brein, ziggo
Comments on “Data Protection Laws Prevent Recording Industry From Sending Pirate Warning Letters”
Another “anti-privacy” issue again
Not a typo, when you try to go after pirates, it is possible that in order to do so, you may have to invade privacy.
From questionable undisclosed DRM behavior of FlightSimLabs to sport streaming app la liga needing to record to verify the stream is legit (this latter item also ran afoul with GDPR, by the way).
It is really treating as if the device we use in our private property is a public place like a store or a bank.
One day we may see the copyright industry lobbying to have Chinese-styled surveillance on the internet.
Re:
They have already done that, just look at article 17 in the EU Copyright Directive – the only way to accomplish that is to monitor users.
Re: Re:
“hey have already done that, just look at article 17 in the EU Copyright Directive – the only way to accomplish that is to monitor users.”
I keep saying the only good thing about article 17 is that it’s so hamfisted the first time someone actually tries to enforce it the ECJ will be smacking it down the same way they did the german Störerhaftung which tried to make providers of internet access liable for malfeasance committed on their networks.
That the GDPR is in direct conflict with copyright enforcement isn’t hard to understand – copyright in itself can not be enforced in any legal paradigm which meaningfully honors personal privacy.
Re: Re: Re:
The court route is no good, because the damage is being incurred for several years. Even if the court strikes down the law eventually, the perpetrators will just iterate another version. There’s a 26 page long list of unconstitutional laws created in the past (in Germany): https://www.bundestag.de/resource/blob/274408/55f0885b7fb0f4a39cdc69a96ecb664d/Kapitel_10_06_F__r_nichtig_oder_verfassungswidrig_erkl__rte_Bundesgesetze-pdf-data.pdf
Regarding Störerhaftung, I’ll gladly trot out the story of Grandma Without PC who was ordered to pay up because she couldn’t name the actual infringer. This was a long time after Störerhaftung was supposedly abolished. Injustice brought on by the courts, who are tasked to enforce immoral codes.
Re:
In a sense, they already do. Many a fishing expedition by entities like Dallas Buyers Club LLC has been sunk because ISPs didn’t cooperate at the levels that plaintiffs wanted, or simply didn’t store the data to start with. It’s not surprising that vested interests in copyright have pushed for initiatives designed to tighten the thumbscrews on ISPs.
The flipside is that all this data collection demanded by the copyright industry would be trivial to leverage against them – which wouldn’t be difficult, considering all the artists and photographers they refuse to attribute, and all the licenses for operating or software they refuse to get.
Re: Re: "Chinese-styled" has pulled everyone's chain!
In 1970 i was getting my 91U-20 EENT on-the-job training at the new (built 1968) Letterman Army hospital in San Francisco. After I was transferred, they built the Western Lab (see jpg) with as many square feet as the Hospital, partly below ground (the ground falls 50 feet toward the bay) without any windows, and a connecting covered bridge. In 1979, the nurse on my old ward told me the new building was for bio-warfare. All is gone, Lucas-Digital has leased the whole area for 99 years from the National Park Service.
https://s.hdnux.com/photos/01/07/15/47/18667973/7/ratio3x2_900.jpg
Re: also..
when movie companies demanded VPN companies to log user data. Disgusting.
Re: Re:
I think the adjective you’re looking for is ‘predictable’. 😉
Re: Re: Re:
I second that.
Re:
“Not a typo, when you try to go after pirates, it is possible that in order to do so, you may have to invade privacy.”
There’s no “may” about it. In order to find out for sure whether a person just legitimately downloaded a book, synched their personal data to cloud storage, or leeched a copy of a movie indexed from a torrent site you first need to violate the privacy of the suspect with the same unavoidable logic as when you’re trying to find out whether the contents of someones pocket are legitimate or not.
And the basis copyright cult outfits have to go on are still about as solid as it was in 2008 when the EFF published a study regarding how often university laser printers were sued for infringement.
Copyright enforcement remains a grifter’s game with fraudulent outfits relying on bought judges to provide the outcomes they want based on “evidence” which is the equivalent of a child’s crayon drawing.
Re: Re:
Copyright enforcement remains a grifter’s game with fraudulent outfits relying on bought judges to provide the outcomes they want based on “evidence” which is the equivalent of a child’s crayon drawing.
I don’t know. Some of what the kids in my class produce is much better quality.
Re: Re: Re:
“Some of what the kids in my class produce is much better quality.”
In the end copyright is still the game of rent-seekers trying to inflate the value of a “product” far beyond its worth.
And does so using the same mechanism as churches in ancient times monopolizing the right to think and write using heresy law and burning at the stake.
At some point the copyright cult will be overthrown the same way every institution to summarily punish people for promulgating ideas was.
Blinky got Parkinson's
Chinese-styled surveillance on the internet ?
Previously, the little green light on my USB™ plug only blinked when the browser responded to my carriage return. As of Windows™ 11, dumped into this ten year old desktop just this year, the blinking is ALL the time.
Must be the Chinese
Re:
It’s definitely the Chinese. Microsoft is now owned by the Chinese government.
Re: Re:
Hmmm…I noticed something sus there…
that is said without evidence. It originated in Wuhan, but so far, I fail to see any evidence that the Chinese Government created it.
Re: Re: Re:
What about here?
Re: Re: Re:2
“The zoonotic transfer theory just didn’t make sense.”
Oh, really? Ever seen a documentary on Chinese wet markets? You simply have to marvel at the fact that zoonotic transfers don’t happen regularly.
Re: Re: Re:3
I didn’t say anything about the quality of the evidence, just pointed to it.
Re: Re: Re:4
That’s not evidence of biowarfare. That’s just evidence that chinese labs have done the exact same due diligence that EU and US labs have, sampling potential future zoonoses from the wild.
The entire chinese lab leak theory is an attempted reversal of cause and effect. It’s the literal claim that laboratories studying animal diseases are responsible for plagues simply because – as their job dictates – they have samples of those animal-born pathogens.
It’s an extraordinary claim which requires more evidence by far than metaphorically pointing at a veterinarian and shouting that they have samples of animal-carried pathogens and thus must be bioterrorists.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:5
whooosh
Re: Re: Re:5
That’s not evidence of biowarfare.
I never said it was, I was only suggesting that it was used as evidence by the writers of the article Autie posted a link to.
Re: Re: Re:3
I’m in agreement that the Wuhan market angle is unlikely. From the bottom of the article:
Earlier in February, an early version of Covid-19 that appeared to have been grown in a laboratory was discovered in samples from a Chinese biotechnology firm.
The variant has mutations that bridge the gap between bat coronavirus and the earliest Wuhan strain, so it may be an ancestral version of the virus. The samples also contain DNA from hamsters and monkeys, suggesting that the early virus may have been grown in animal cell lines.
There’s also this evidence. One has to wonder whether these early cases of the virus are more likely to have come from Wuhan wet market workers or Wuhan lab technicians.
Re: Re: Re:4
You do realize that identical samples would exist in any bio lab dealing with, say, veterinary or wildlife concerns? Since the scientific consensus is that Sars-CoV-2 originated in bats it is predictable that every laboratory investigating wildlife diseases will possess Sars-CoV-2 precursors.
That’s not an indicator that covid was grown in a lab, it just implies that chinese laboratories dedicated to pandemic research work pretty much exactly the same as US or EU ones.
And for those of us who aren’t gormless morons eager to track conspiracy theories rather than the last twenty years of science, it has to be said that scientists examining, in labs just like this, animal-carried pathogens, have looked at what they found and said that there’s a real danger that these viruses will leap species barriers. Exactly like how they rang the warning bell on Sars-Cov-1 and the H1N1 virus.
Twenty years ago epidemiologists were discussing exactly this – that animal viruses investigated in labs implied we were one short step from a pandemic. And now full-blown idiots bereft of history try to point at those exact samples used in those studies and try to build a conspiracy case out of it.
Yes, chinese labs have sars-cov-2 precursors. So do EU and US labs. It’s their literal job to have and study those precursors. The results of which is why every biologist has shouted that the next pandemic was coming from the rooftops.
Re: Re: Re:2
So you admit there’s no evidence.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:3
*whooosh*
Re: Re: Re:3
For your assertion? Correct.
Re: Re: Re:
“It originated in Wuhan, but so far, I fail to see any evidence that the Chinese Government created it.”
The claim that Sars-CoV-2 was a chinese bioweapon/escaped a chinese lab is one of those extraordinary claims pushed by people willing to ladle up a conspiracy theory in liéu of evidence.
Compounded by the fact that we’ve tracked this virus down to the bats still carrying the non-zoonose version the metaphorical picture we’re looking at here is that of a bunch of cops standing around a corpse underneath an 18-wheeler, debating the footage of the evident vehicular accident, taken from three angles by CCTV cameras, while a wingnut in a tinfoil hat stands right outside the crime scene tape hollering about how a nearby hill would have been the prime location for a guy with a rifle.
The “Covid was chinese biowarfare” yarn is bullshit on “Jewish Space Lasers” level.
Re: Re: Re:2
with a hatred of the China’s economic place and power.
Re: Re: Re:3
Links.
Re: Re: Re:3
[Citation needed]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:
So you pick on one inaccuracy in an entire article that backs what was asserted? Way to deflect, PRC shill.
Re: Re: Re:2
Dude, I have nothing but contempt for the PRC (especially since I have Taiwanese friends and I greatly fear what the PRC is going to do to that island). That doesn’t mean I’m going to believe batshit evidence-optional conspiracy theories about them.
Enjoy your flag for trolling.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Re:3
Enjoy your flag for both your comments for the same offense, which you actually committed.
Re: Re: Re:4
[Pronects facts not in evidence as always]
Re: Re: Re:5
What’s “pronecting”?
Re: Re: Re:5
The trolling bully said about himself.
Re: Re: Re:3
Since you’re the one targeting others for your offense, let me flag you back.
Re: Re: Re:2
“So you pick on one inaccuracy in an entire article that backs what was asserted?”
Yeah, of course i nitpick on a deceptive article written for the specific purpose of grinding an axe.
And if it’s the “washington examiner” where the editor comes straight from Fox news, which is owned by a fundie christian far in the alt-right camp, and the article itself is written by a hack with a long, long history of looking at anything not in the GOP camp and braying “leftist” then yea, there’s plenty of reason to sift it.
It’s not the only outright falsehood in that op-ed and it’s peppered with false assumption, hyperbole and strawman rhetoric besides.
Re: Re: Re:2
“So you pick on one inaccuracy in an entire article that backs what was asserted?”
No, the entire article was so full of outright falsehood, strawmen assertions and projection that the only thing which was remotely credible in it was the author’s name.
Boil it down and what you get is essentially “China does horrible shit and therefore I’ll now blame the leftist democrats for the stuff the conservatives did”
That doesn’t make me a chinese shill so much as it makes you a gormless illiterate bereft of factual history.
Now, the fact that western corporations all queue up to kiss the Imperial Pooh Bears ringpiece is a problem, to be sure. But it’s not one you can point to Gates – or even less, the democrats – for, which is what the article implies.
Even less so there’s plenty of very real genocide and inhumane policies we can blame China for without having to jump down a conspiracy nut rabbit hole and try to pretend an epidemiological lab possessing pathogen samples of zoonosis precursors is in any way, shape or form strange.
You want to feed your anti-china sentiments I humbly hold that there are plenty of very real issues – like the actual genocides being performed in Tibet and Xinjiang – that you could go with rather than the tired old “<Those people> spread plague” fairy tales.
Re: Re:
[Addendum]
Also, the “article” in question scans more like a confused alt-right hatchet job than an op-ed from a journalist.
I mean “Woke two-step”? Last i checked, “woke” people are very much not in favor of Chinese ultra-authoritarianism or the outright fascist ideal referred to.
Plenty of one-liners in that “opinion piece” seem lifted straight from alt-right echo chambers – while trying to blame the “woke” for alt-right libertarianism.
No, the only thing that article shows was; Every accusation, a confession.
And no wonder – The Washington Examiner is owned and operated by a fundamentalist evangelist who supports the usual alt-right ideals and the article itself is written by Jared Whitley, who has made a name for himself on being the Josh Hawley or Ted Cruz of media. That opinion piece is Tucker Carlson material, not journalism.
Re: Re: Re:
Okay. If you don’t like that link, then take your pick.
Re: Re: Re:2
“If you don’t like that link…”
The entire premise is a straw man to begin with. Factually correct but provides the wrong conclusion.
Correct statement; “Every corporation with a potential market niche in China has been bending over backwards to accommodate the chinese government”
Correct yet unhelpful and misleading assertion; “Corporation X/CEO Y caters shamelessly to China”
China makes up a market of 1,4 billion people, a significant proportion of which is currently migrating into the affluent middle class which can afford luxury services. More than 1/6th of the global market. Western corporations given even a whiff of opportunity will gladly fall in line and pucker up to kiss the Imperial Pooh Bear’s ringpiece.
China, of course, wants to keep that market for chinese business – which is why gradually, as services like Baidu, WeChat, Weibo, Douyin, Kuaishou etc became serviceable the screws were gradually tightened on western platforms trying to operate in that country until they were forced to leave, or caved completely to chinese demands.
What this points to is a fundamental problem with corporations in general and the capitalist market turning out to give zero shits about ethics. The only thing it tells us about Gates is that he’s a perfectly normal american businessman whose first obligation is to his own wallet.
This is not a new problem in large business. Ford received medals from Hitler for his great work in distributing anti-semitic pamphlets through his dealerships. Disney was just about the only studio owner in Hollywood to warmly welcome Leni Riefenstahl. Hugo Boss was the main supplier of SS uniforms during WW2. IBM supplied the machines the third reich used to administrate the endlösung.
It’s less than helpful to point at a single tree in this forest of horrors and say “That’s the problem we should be concerned with”.
Re: Re: Re:3
[Addendum]
Even so the main issue with that link is that it’s a hatchet job in general which could be summarized as “China does horrible stuff, therefore let’s blame leftist democrats for the shit conservatives were 100% responsible for”
The “wuhan warfare” bling at the end is just the most obviously rancid tell that you’re reading what might as well be a Parler talking point.
Re: Re: Re:3 But, But,
What About Hillary?
Re: Re: Re:3
The entire premise is a straw man to begin with.
ORLY?
It’s not just Europe
The background check wishlist for gun control laws proposed by the anti-gun movement in the USA would absolutely require at least a partial repeal of medical privacy laws to have any hope of working.
Aside from the fact doctors would be required to breach medical ethics when it comes to patient privacy, it would create huge new databases of private medical information that would be subject to data breaches.
Re:
We’ve already seen lists of gun owners misused by domestic terrorists.
Re: Re:
I think you mean LEAs. Oh, right.
Re:
“The background check wishlist for gun control laws proposed by the anti-gun movement in the USA would absolutely require at least a partial repeal of medical privacy laws to have any hope of working.”
Just another “Only In America” thing, I guess. Everywhere else gun safety just sort of works. Although there is still gun violence in europe almost none of it is committed by those who actually have a firearms license.
Although I could make a case that in europe a primary contributor for the relative scarcity of gun murder is that we don’t have the idea of the gun being the solution to all ills ingrained in our cultures. It just isn’t seen as a tool to use to deal with your s.o. walking out on you or losing your job.
when are people going to wake up and smell the coffee? the entertainment industries will not be content until they have taken complete control of the Internet! as usual these industries sat back, thumbs up asses, brains in neutral because they expected to be able to continue to con millions of $ out of people having to buy disks. it wasn’t even conceived, just like mp3 players and home recorders, that the Internet would ever ‘take off’. now those industries are using whatever tactic it can dream up and whatever method that can be thought up to try to get in the race! the problem is, certainly in the USA that there are too many corrupt politicians, too many corrupt court officials and too many corrupt security services heads. they are aiding these industries in every way possible as well as in ways we are never made aware of. just remember, once we have lost the Internet, especially to a bunch of self-serving, self protectionist cunts such as these, we’ll never get it back! and the very purpose it was invented, to give everyone the right to look for and access information, from anywhere on anyone will be gone forever!!
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re:
Disney is actually providing their whole film library in form of “disney+” service over the internet. But of course it cannot compete against your pirate movie collection, which can use content from all major hollywood studios. So their service has less content, in fact 1/N, where N is number of hollywood studios available in the usa.
Basically they need to sell their crown jewels with very cheap price, because of the competition in the internet.
Re: Re:
Goddammit, TP, the comments section was already clogged before you decided to stink up the place!
Re: Re:
“Basically they need to sell their crown jewels with very cheap price, because of the competition in the internet.”
This is how progress and capitalism works, yes. Free markets tend to have zero tolerance for artificial scarcity and when corporations try to introduce such a business model, the market reacts by ignoring the restrictions imposed.
History is rife with lessons as to why “Intellectual Property” should be considered Imaginary property. Copyright is a grifter’s game the enforcement of which will always be kicked to the curb by the citizenry as soon as said enforcement becomes inconvenient.
Re: Re: Re: I'd go further.
I would make a further argument that “Intellectual property” shouldn’t even be considered property, because–as Cory Doctorow has pointed out–you’re making a case for the maximalists by using it, since “people who get their property stolen” sounds more worthy of sympathy than “entities who get the contours of their monopolies infringed upon”.
Re: Re: Re:
Maximalists have zero tolerance for the practices where users are choosing their content from the full set of companies providing content instead of limiting it to single company. Only illegal activity can use the full power of the content industry, and all legal entities will need to limit their exposure to the content of single company (which he licensed). Basically the freeriding pirates is the problem, where users do not license the content at all and thus fail to limit the content scope to single company only.