Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Saturday June 17 2017, @09:33PM   Printer-friendly
from the and-now-the-policing-begins dept.

Submitted via IRC for TheMightyBuzzard

The European Court of Justice handed down a ruling against The Pirate Bay yesterday, one which could have implications far beyond the torrent site. Platforms such as Google and YouTube, which play an active role in the way content is presented, could be seriously affected, experts warn.

After years of legal wrangling, yesterday the European Court of Justice handed down a decision in the case between Dutch anti-piracy outfit BREIN and ISPs Ziggo and XS4ALL.

BREIN had demanded that the ISPs block The Pirate Bay, but both providers dug in their heels, forcing the case through the Supreme Court and eventually the ECJ.

For BREIN, yesterday's decision will have been worth the wait. Although The Pirate Bay does not provide the content that's ultimately downloaded and shared by its users, the ECJ said that it plays an important role in how that content is presented.

"Whilst it accepts that the works in question are placed online by the users, the Court highlights the fact that the operators of the platform play an essential role in making those works available," the Court said.

With that established the all-important matter is whether by providing such a platform, the operators of The Pirate Bay are effectively engaging in a "communication to the public" of copyrighted works. According to the ECJ, that's indeed the case.

"The Court holds that the making available and management of an online sharing platform must be considered to be an act of communication for the purposes of the directive," the ECJ said.

Add into the mix that The Pirate Bay generates profit from its activities and there's a potent case for copyright liability.

Wait, you mean the EU is even more in the pocket of corporations than the US? Huh...

Source: https://torrentfreak.com/pirate-bay-ruling-is-bad-news-for-google-youtube-experts-says-170615/


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by Wootery on Sunday June 18 2017, @10:01AM (6 children)

    by Wootery (2341) on Sunday June 18 2017, @10:01AM (#527410)

    Sure, it's a different offence in the eyes of the law, but the word can be used in a metaphorical sense. You don't need intellectual property law for that guy stole my idea to make sense.

    People who nitpick about it "not really being stealing" are generally just lazily ducking the hard work of defending copyright infringement.

    We see the same thing with, say, Jews aren't a race, so antisemitism isn't racism. Well, sure, but it's still wrong.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 18 2017, @11:36AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 18 2017, @11:36AM (#527428)
    Nope. THIEVES cries are made specifically to invoke emotional response. Laws are not "metaphorical." As for "intellectual property", monopoly is not a property [torrentfreak.com] regardless of how some want to spin it.
  • (Score: 2) by Pino P on Sunday June 18 2017, @09:12PM

    by Pino P (4721) on Sunday June 18 2017, @09:12PM (#527592) Journal

    Sure, it's a different offence in the eyes of the law, but the word can be used in a metaphorical sense.

    The metaphorical sense frames the argument in a way that misleads jurors about the law's letter and spirit, as Judge Kathleen Williams of a U.S. district court in Florida ruled [torrentfreak.com]. If you mean "copyright infringement", say "copyright infringement".

  • (Score: 2) by urza9814 on Monday June 19 2017, @03:04PM (3 children)

    by urza9814 (3954) on Monday June 19 2017, @03:04PM (#527943) Journal

    People who nitpick about it "not really being stealing" are generally just lazily ducking the hard work of defending copyright infringement.

    People who claim it is stealing are engaging in intentional abuse of language in order to score political points. It's propaganda. There is a perfectly good word for this act, it is "copyright infringement".

    You don't need intellectual property law for that guy stole my idea to make sense.

    Yeah, we've all heard someone say that, and usually the response is either "Yeah, so why aren't YOU doing it?" or "Don't be stupid." People would generally recognize that copyright infringement isn't something deserving of the massive fines and jail sentences being handed out. So the industry refers to it as "stealing" because people accept that theft should be punished -- because it causes injury to someone else. But with copyright infringement that isn't necessarily the case.

    • (Score: 2) by Wootery on Monday June 19 2017, @04:07PM (2 children)

      by Wootery (2341) on Monday June 19 2017, @04:07PM (#527970)

      But in a sense, copyright is a broadening of the concept of theft. It expands the domain of ownership rights and entitlements, and rightly so. You may be right that use of the word 'stealing' can be for cynical reasons, but it's not always.

      because it causes injury to someone else. But with copyright infringement that isn't necessarily the case.

      Copyright infringement is, generally speaking, wrong. So is theft. There exist exceptions in both cases.

      • (Score: 2) by urza9814 on Monday June 19 2017, @04:50PM (1 child)

        by urza9814 (3954) on Monday June 19 2017, @04:50PM (#528001) Journal

        because it causes injury to someone else. But with copyright infringement that isn't necessarily the case.

        Copyright infringement is, generally speaking, wrong. So is theft. There exist exceptions in both cases.

        I don't see your point. Are you saying that everything that is "wrong" is automatically theft? I never said it wasn't *wrong*, I only said it was a different act with a different kind of impact. By your logic trespass is just theft, rape is just theft, murder is just theft, kidnapping is just theft, all crimes are just theft and we can simplify the entire legal code to one single law. But the rest of the world generally understands these issues with a bit more nuance than that. Except when it comes to copyright infringement, where major corporations spend millions intentionally trying to confuse people with factually incorrect propaganda.