TorrentFreak's Latest News

EU Parliament Adopts DSA Without Banning 'Dumb' Upload Filters and Site BlockingErnesto Van der Sar, 21 Jan 09:49 AM In recent years the European Co

EU Parliament Adopts DSA Without Banning 'Dumb' Upload Filters and Site Blocking Ernesto Van der Sar, 21 Jan 09:49 AM In recent years the European Commission has proposed and adopted various legislative changes to help combat online piracy. This includes the Copyright Directive which passed in 2019. A year later, the EU proposed more copyright regulations as part of the Digital Services Act, which was up for a vote this week. Big Tech and Takedowns The Digital Services Act (DSA) is the official successor to the E-Commerce Directive. The new package aims to bring EU legislation into line with the current state of the digital age, which has changed dramatically over the past several years. The official text includes new rules for big tech and also touches on some copyright issues. These include several passages that can change how online services handle takedown notices, without being held liable for user uploads. Not all copyright holders were pleased with the first draft, as some believed that it didn't go far enough. They proposed to further increase liability for online services providers, for example, to ensure that infringing content can't reappear online after it's been removed. Others believed that the DSA proposals already went too far. For example, several digital rights groups called for a ban on voluntary upload filters that can't take context, such as fair use, into consideration. EU Parliament Adopts DSA This suggestion was turned into an amendment by the LIBE Committee which was on the line yesterday when the European Parliament voted on the final text of the Digital Services Act. The DSA itself was approved by a broad majority. However, the amendment which would have effectively banned dumb upload filters, did not pass. With 242 votes in favor and 434 against, the proposal was rejected. This decision came as a major disappointment to the Parliament's Committee on Civil Liberties, including Pirate Party MEP Patrick Breyer. "Internet corporations use unreliable upload filters against supposedly illegal content – with much collateral damage. The majority won't even limit automated censorship to content that is manifestly illegal irrespective of its context," he tweeted. Site Blocking Ban Strands The LIBE Committee also submitted an amendment that should put an end to court orders that require ISPs to block websites, including pirate sites. These broad blockades can potentially harm free speech, it argued, adding that content should be removed from the source. This proposal didn't get approval in Parliament either. The overwhelming majority, 524 of all MEPs, voted against the anti-blocking amendment while only 146 were in favor. These setbacks aside, the LIBE Committee also booked some major successes. For example, an amendment to protect people's right to use and pay for online services anonymously passed with a small majority. This anonymity right doesn't apply to porn platforms, however. These will face stronger regulation with the requirement to verify the phone numbers of uploaders and commenters. The DSA text adopted by the European Parliament is not final yet. It will serve as the starting point for the trilogue negotiations with the European Council and Commission, which could result in further changes. From: TF, for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more. Record Labels Face Sanctions Over 'Destroyed' Piracy Evidence Ernesto Van der Sar, 20 Jan 09:36 PM Under US copyright law, Internet providers must terminate the accounts of repeat infringers "in appropriate circumstances." In the past such drastic action was rare, but with the backing of legal pressure, ISPs are increasingly being held to this standard. Billion Dollar Lawsuits Several major music industry companies including Artista Records, Sony Music Entertainment, Universal Music, and Warner Records, have filed lawsuits against some of the largest U.S. Internet providers. This also includes Bright House, which is owned by Charter. Through legal action, the music companies hope to win hundreds of millions of dollars in damages. These are not just theoretical claims as a federal jury handed down a billion-dollar award in a lawsuit against Cox Communications two years ago. Bright House would like to avoid this fate at all costs. The ISP previously hit back accusing the record labels, the RIAA, and their anti-piracy partner MarkMonitor of sending inaccurate and deceptive takedown notices. This is in violation of the DMCA, the ISP argued. A few months ago the Florida federal court dismissed this counterclaim. While the court didn't rule on the alleged evidence shortcomings, it pointed out that Bright House didn't terminate any subscribers as a result, so no real harm was done. 'Destroyed Evidence' This dismissal came as a disappointment to Bright House, which hopes to have some leverage when the case goes to trial. However, the ISP is not giving up on contesting the evidence just yet. In a new filing submitted a few days ago, the company asks the court to sanction the record labels for allegedly destroying piracy evidence. The motion for sanctions and curative measures is heavily redacted but it's clear that Bright House believes that crucial evidence was destroyed. This information was central to (part of) the piracy notifications on which the repeat infringer claims are based. "While 110,000 of these notices provide the foundation for Plaintiffs' $1 billion damages claims against Bright House under Plaintiffs' theory of the case, [REDACTED]," Bright House writes. Most exhibits are redacted as well, which makes it hard to grasp exactly what was deleted. The readable parts suggest that evidence related to the reliability and accuracy of notices that were sent out between 2012-2015 is no longer available. This information applies to MarkMonotor's piracy tracking system as well as Audible Magic's services, which are used to verify that shared files are indeed copyright infringing. "Bright House sought this information from Plaintiffs, RIAA, MarkMonitor, and Audible Magic during fact discovery. But it is no longer available, in material part, because [REDACTED]," Bright House writes. Scantions and Surative Measures The record labels previously argued that takedown notices themselves are sufficient to prove direct infringement, but the ISP clearly disagrees. "Plaintiffs' destruction of evidence has unduly prejudiced Bright House's ability to challenge Plaintiffs' direct infringement case — the bedrock of the entire lawsuit. In these circumstances, curative measures and sanctions are warranted." If the court agrees that sanctions are appropriate, it doesn't automatically mean that the missing evidence can't be cited during an eventual trial. This also became apparent when record labels were previously sanctioned in the Cox case. However, in addition to sanctions, Bright House also requests curative measures, which could be more helpful if they're granted. The ISP specifically calls for the exclusion of evidence, special jury instructions that highlight the alleged errors, as well as permission to present information and raise arguments regarding the loss of evidence during trial. — A copy of Bright House's motion for sanctions and curative measures is available here (pdf) From: TF, for the latest news on copyright battles, piracy and more. ©2022 TorrentFreak | Office 21338 PO Box 4336 Manchester, North West M61 0BW United Kingdom Web Version   Preferences   Forward   Unsubscribe     Powered by Mad Mimi®A GoDaddy® company