A summary by Julian Harris, Deputy General Editor Amicus Curiae, of US attempts to control what it identifies as rogue Internet sites engaged in on-line piracy and opposition to such legislative moves

Harris, Julian

English

NEPJ-SPACE

Contents Issue 88 Winter 2011THE WAR AGAINST ON-LINE PIRACYUS attempts to control what it identifies as rogueinternet sites engaged in various forms of on-line piracyreceived a setback after the recent “blackout” protests byWikipedia, the blog service WordPress and many othersites halted progress of two major pieces of draftlegislation. Support for a Senate Bill, the ProtectIntellectual Property Act (PIPA) introduced by SenatorPatrick Leahy, and the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA),backed in the House of Representatives by CongressmanLamar Smith, melted away in the face of a concertedoutpouring of anger from the internet community at whatwere perceived as attempts by politicians to imposedraconian controls over the medium.But although the internet may have won this particularbattle, the regulatory war rages on. US law enforcementauthorities opened up a new front with the decisionannounced on January 19 to charge seven men who runthe on-line file-sharing site Megaupload with an array ofoffences including engaging in a racketeering conspiracy,conspiring to commit copyright infringement, conspiringto commit money laundering, and criminal copyrightinfringement. All concerned are accused by theDepartment of Justice of running an organised criminalenterprise allegedly responsible for the worldwide piracy ofnumerous copyrighted works throughMegaupload.comand other related sites, generating more than $175 millionin proceeds and costing copyright owners more than $500million.The law enforcement authorities in Megaupload and thepoliticians backing PIPA and SOPA are all targetingforeign-based websites, thereby reinforcing the mantleassumed by America as the world’s internet policeman.Megaupload is a Hong-Kong based site and four of theseven men being sought were arrested in New Zealand,including the founder “Kim Dotcom” (aka Kim Schmitz).The individuals, Megaupload, and a second corporation,Vestor Ltd, were indicted by a grand jury in the EasternDistrict of Virginia on January 5.PIPA, supported by 40 senators, seeks to help protectAmerican intellectual property by targeting rogue websitesdedicated to the sale of infringing or counterfeit goodsthrough foreign-based websites acting outside the scope ofcurrent US law. The Act targets the worst infringers byblocking access to the foreign-registered websites. SenatorLeahy has a record of crusading for the protection ofprivacy rights, copyright protections and freedom ofspeech on the internet.Congressman Smith has an established reputation in thefield of IP rights, and was responsible for introducing thePrioritizing Resources and Organization for IntellectualProperty Act of 2008 (PRO-IP Act) which increased civiland criminal penalties for trademark, patent and copyrightinfringement. The PRO-IP Act was used in a caseinvolving a popular hip-hop blog, Dajaz1.com, where thesite was seized over alleged copyright infringement relatingto a number of published songs (the domain wassubsequently returned to its owners after the authoritiescould not substantiate the claims and decided not topursue forfeiture).SOPA’s provisions include the power to authorise the USAttorney General to seek a court order against a US-directed foreign internet site committing or facilitating on-line piracy to cease further activities which constitutespecified IP offences (eg criminal copyright infringement,unauthorised trafficking of sound recordings or videos oflive musical performances, trafficking in counterfeitlabels). On-line service providers, internet search engines,payment network providers or internet advertising servicesmust, on receiving a copy of court order relating to an AGaction, carry out certain preventive measures.Many well-known names on the internet, such asWikipedia, regard increased political interference underwhatever guise as being more harmful to the medium thananything else. There is also general concern that sitespursuing legitimate file-sharing activities will fall foul oflaws intended to curb piracy. Businesses operating outsidethe US resent what they see as American interference, andat home the actions of the authorities in Dajaz1 forexample, where drastic enforcement action was taken butnever justified, have bred mistrust.On the other side of the argument, the politicianssupporting PIPA and SOPA will attempt to amend andreintroduce both measures, backed by powerfulorganisations such as the Motion Picture Association ofAmerica which lobbies for Hollywood and wants to seetough anti-piracy legislation adopted. The US debate hasbeen followed by the European Commission, which iscontributing to the fight against on-line piracy andproposes a revised Intellectual Property Rights Directiveby the end of 2012.Julian HarrisDeputy General Editor, Amicus CuriaeArticlesThe House of Lords Reform White Paper and draftBill 2011 and a simpler alternative 2650 years of the office of Justice of the Peace/Magistrate 5The role the media should be playing in India 10Institute News 14Articles (cont’d)Hybrid threats, cyber warfare, and NATO’scomprehensive approach for countering 21st centurythreats – mapping the new frontier of global risk andsecurity management 24

The war against on-line piracy

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

NEPJ-SPACE