TechLuver.com

Feb 05, `08 — Three global record companies, Universal Music Ltd, Sony BMG Music Entertainment (Hong Kong) Ltd and Warner Music Hong Kong Ltd, have launched legal proceedings against China’s top Internet search engine Baidu.com, accusing it of violating copyright by giving access to music files, International Federation of the Phonographic Industry said in a press release on Monday, Feb 04.

* New legal proceedings brought against Baidu
* Copyright infringement actions against Sohu and its associate company Sogou
* Yahoo China in breach of copyright violation judgment

After months of fruitless negotiations, legal proceedings have been filed on Feb 04, against the China’s biggest internet company, Baidu. Separate actions have also been brought against Sohu and its associate company Sogou. Meanwhile, Yahoo China faces fresh proceedings following its refusal to comply with a landmark ruling in December confirming it violated Chinese law by committing mass copyright infringement.

All of the Chinese companies involved operate similar services based on delivering music to their users via “deep links” to hundreds of thousands of infringing tracks on third party sites, with the aim of driving their own advertising revenue. Such services have been confirmed as in breach of copyright by the December judgment of the Beijing Higher People’s Court. Each of them is a driver of copyright abuse in China, where the huge potential for the online music sector is being stymied by copyright theft.

China has potentially the largest online music-buying public in the world with as many broadband connections as the United States. Currently, however, more than 99 per cent of all music files distributed in the country are pirate and China’s total legitimate music market, at US$76 million, accounts for less than one per cent of global recorded music sales.

Monday (Feb 04)’s actions follow in the wake of a decisive judgment against Yahoo China in December 2007 by the Beijing Higher People’s Court. The court’s finding that Yahoo China’s music delivery service is illegal under Chinese law sets a precedent for cases against similar operations in China.

Three record companies have now filed proceedings against Baidu. The new claims have been filed with the Beijing No. 1 Intermediate People’s Court by Universal Music Ltd, Sony BMG Music Entertainment (Hong Kong) Ltd and Warner Music Hong Kong Ltd. The three companies are asking the court to order Baidu to remove all links on its music delivery service to copyright infringing tracks that they own the rights to.

Action is also being taken today against Sohu and its associate company Sogou, which operates a similar service. Sogou makes profits through advertising that appears on the service and through sponsorship. Sogou also actively induces and encourages copyright infringement by means of recommendations and charts, while Sohu provides deep linking services through its associate company.

Sohu is the official sponsor of internet content service (ICS) for the Beijing 2008 Olympic Games.

The legal action is being brought by four record companies: Universal Music Limited, Gold Label Entertainment Limited, Sony BMG Music Entertainment (Hong Kong) Limited and Warner Music Hong Kong Limited. The cases were also filed at the Beijing No.1 Intermediate People’s Court. They follow four prior notices that were sent to both companies from July 2007 onward.

The claims against Baidu, Sohu and Sogou will be served on the respective companies by the court after the Chinese New Year.

Meanwhile, Yahoo China has still not complied with the December ruling made against it by the Chinese appeal court. As a consequence, the plaintiffs in that case have now filed execution proceedings against Yahoo China, asking the court to force Yahoo China to comply with the earlier judgment.

More at International Federation of the Phonographic Industry.

Feb 03, `08 — As Swedish prosecutors fixed their sights last week on The Pirate Bay, an Internet file-sharing service that is a scourge of the movie and music industries, the operators of the site responded by hoisting a defiant, digital Jolly Roger, reports the IHT.

The Pirate Bay, on its blog, called for a celebration saying, “This week we’ve hit some magic numbers. We’re tracking over 1 million torrents. We have had over 10 million simultaneous peers on the trackers. We’re at 2.5 million registered users (and they are active as well).”

The 100th post on the Pirate Bay blog further adds, “In case we lose the pending trial (yeah right) there will still not be any changes to the site. The Pirate Bay will keep operating just as always. We’ve been here for years and we will be here many more.”

The Wires writes, “Peter Sunde Kolmisoppi, one of the four Swedes charged in Sweden on Thursday, said in a telephone interview that the site has set up a clandestine, double-blind operation with its servers spread throughout the world — and out of reach of the Swedish authorities.

“The Pirate Bay is not in Sweden,” the 29-year-old Kolmisoppi said. Where are the servers?

“It’s a distributed system. We don’t know where the servers are. We gave them to people we trust and they don’t know it’s The Pirate Bay,” Kolmisoppi said. “They then rent locations and space for them somewhere else. It could be three countries. It could be six countries. We don’t want to know because then you’ll have a problem shutting them down.” More at IHT, theWired.

Feb 03, `08 –This Slashdot article reports on a new Italian copyright law, in which the Italian parliament may have mistakenly legalized sharing music over P2P networks.

The new copyright law, passed by both houses of parliament, would allow Italians to freely share music over the Internet as long as it is free of charge, at low resolution or “degraded,” for scientific or educational use, and only when such use is not for profit.

Excerpts of the Slashdot article:
According to Italian lawyer Andrea Monti, an expert on copyright and Internet law, the new Italian copyright law would authorize users to publish and freely share copyrighted music (p2p included). As Monti says in the interview, those who wrote it didn’t realize that the word “degraded” is technical, with a very precise meaning, which includes MP3s, which are compressed with an algorithm that ensures a quality loss. The La Repubblica.it article in Italian, and Google translation is here. More at Slashdot.

Feb 01, `08 — Four men who run one of the most popular file-sharing sites in the world have been charged with conspiracy to break copyright law in Sweden, the BBC reported on Thursday.

Pirate Bay does not store music and video files on its own servers, but instead helps users share them on the internet. The website acts as a directory of the files used by the BitTorrent file-transfer protocol.

“It’s not merely a search engine. It’s an active part of an action that aims at, and also leads to, making copyright protected material available,” public prosecutor Hakan Roswall told Reuters. “It’s a classic example of accessory — to act as intermediary between people who commit crimes, whether it’s in the physical or the virtual world.”

Pirate Bay told the news agency that the people running the site cannot be held responsible for how its directory services are used. The website is said to have between 10 and 15 million users around the world and is supported by online advertising.

Police seized computers in May 2006, temporarily shutting down the website.

Prosecutor Hakan Roswall said the website was commercially exploiting copyright-protected work because it was financed through advertising revenues. According to the Pirate Bay website, its users are currently downloading close to a million files.

On the site, a statement says: “In case we lose the pending trial (yeah right) there will still not be any changes to the site.

“The Pirate Bay will keep operating just as always. We’ve been here for years and we will be here many more.”

In an interview with the BBC’s technology programme Click last year Pirate Bay co-founder Peter Sunde said: “I think it’s okay to copy. They get their money from so many places that the sales is just one small part.”

The other three men facing charges are Carl Lundstrom, Frederik Neij and Gottfrid Svartholm Warg. If convicted, the four men could face a maximum of two years in prison.

The website had up until 2006 based its servers in Stockholm, but moved some to the Netherlands after a raid in May of that year by Swedish police, who seized equipment and held three people for questioning “on suspicion of breaking copyright law or abetting the breaking of copyright law,” authorities said. The site was taken down for a day, but was soon up and running again.

Moves against the site have been backed by entertainment industry groups, including the Motion Picture Association of America and the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry. More at BBC News.

Dec 30, `07 — This Slashdot article highlights the latest strategy of the RIAA to sue consumers who have ripped their legally purchased CDs on to a PC.

“With this past week’s announcement by Warner to release its entire catalog to Amazon in MP3 format with no Digital Rights Management, you would think that the organization that represents them, The RIAA, would begin changing its tune.

Instead, they are pressing on in their campaign against consumers by suing individuals who merely rip CDs they’ve purchased legally. ‘The industry’s lawyer in the case, Ira Schwartz, argues in a brief filed earlier this month that the MP3 files Howell made on his computer from legally bought CDs are “unauthorized copies” of copyrighted recordings.”

The Washington Post article further writes, “”I couldn’t believe it when I read that,” says Ray Beckerman, a New York lawyer who represents six clients who have been sued by the RIAA. “The basic principle in the law is that you have to distribute actual physical copies to be guilty of violating copyright. But recently, the industry has been going around saying that even a personal copy on your computer is a violation.”

The RIAA’s legal crusade against its customers is a classic example of an old media company clinging to a business model that has collapsed. Four years of a failed strategy has only “created a whole market of people who specifically look to buy independent goods so as not to deal with the big record companies,” Beckerman says. “Every problem they’re trying to solve is worse now than when they started.”" More at WashingtonPost.

Brussels — On Thursday, Dec 20, the Protocol Freedom Information Foundation (PFIF), a non-profit organization created by the Software Freedom Law Center, signed an agreement with Microsoft to receive the protocol documentation needed to fully interoperate with the Microsoft Windows workgroup server products and to make them available to Free Software projects such as Samba.

Microsoft was required to make this information available to competitors as part of the European Commission March 24th 2004 Decision in the antitrust lawsuit, after losing their appeal against that decision on September 17th 2007.

After paying Microsoft a one-time sum of 10,000 Euros, the PFIF will make available to the Samba Team under non-disclosure terms the documentation needed for implementation of all of the workgroup server protocols covered by the EU decision.

Although the documentation itself will be held in confidence by the PFIF and Samba Team engineers, the agreement allows the publication of the source code of the implementation of these protocols without any further restrictions. This is fully compatible with versions two and three of the GNU General Public License (GPL). Samba is published under the GNU GPL which is the most widely used of all Free Software licenses. In addition it allows discussion of the protocol information amongst implementers which will aid technical cooperation between engineers.

Under the agreement, Microsoft is required to make available and keep current a list of patent numbers it believes are related to the Microsoft implementation of the workgroup server protocols, without granting an implicit patent license to any Free Software implementation.

No per-copy royalties are required from the PFIF, Samba developers, third party vendors or users and no acknowledgement of any patent infringement by Free Software implementations is expressed or implied in the agreement. More at Samba.

Beijing, China — Dec 20, `07 –The international recording industry today hailed a landmark Beijing court ruling confirming that Yahoo China’s music delivery service violates Chinese law by facilitating mass copyright infringement.

Yahoo China, part-owned by one of the world’s biggest internet companies, Yahoo, runs an operation enabling users to search for, play and download pirate music without ever leaving its website. Yahoo China’s appeal against a guilty verdict in April was today dismissed by the Beijing Court.

The decision is made under new Chinese copyright laws which entered into force in 2006. The Court separately ruled on a similar case against internet company, Baidu which had been brought under the previous Chinese copyright laws. The ruling confirmed that Baidu participated with and assisted third party sites in transmitting infringing music, but under the old laws Baidu was not liable for copyright infringement.

Music search services such as Yahoo China’s and Baidu’s, which “deep link” users to hundreds of thousands of pirate tracks, are a huge drain on efforts to develop a legitimate music market in China. Despite enormous market potential, music sales in China totalled US$76 million in 2006, less than one per cent of the global recorded music market.

Over 99 per cent of all music downloading in China infringes copyright, and services such as Yahoo China and Baidu account for the bulk of the problem. More at IFPI.

Los Angeles — Dec 19, `07 — In a significant victory for the major Hollywood studios, a federal judge in Los Angeles has terminated an ongoing lawsuit against the operators of TorrentSpy.com in favor of all six of the Motion Picture Association of America’s (MPAA) member companies.

The court imposed the harshest sanction against the TorrentSpy defendants because of their brazen, continuous, and systematic destruction of evidence and subversion of the judicial process. The ruling means that TorrentSpy operators are liable for copyright infringement.

The District Judge Florence-Marie Cooper of the Central District of California found that the defendants, Justin Bunnell, Forrest Parker and Wes Parker, had lied to the court and had systematically destroyed evidence. She also found that TorrentSpy is responsible for copyright infringements. A further court session next year will determine what penalties will be imposed - the extent of damages and any other sanctions, such as closure of the TorrentSpy website.

In its decision, the court ruled that “although termination of a case is a harsh sanction appropriate only in extraordinary circumstance, the circumstances of this case are sufficiently extraordinary to merit such a sanction.” The court found that the evidence was “not deleted or modified negligently, but intentionally in direct response to the institution of this lawsuit.” Observing that defendants “already had been subjected to lesser sanctions in this case”, including a fine for $30,000 for violation of a court order, the court concluded that the “harsh sanction” of terminating the defendants’ case was the only appropriate remedy.

The evidence defendants destroyed included forum postings with references to copyright infringement and other incriminating statements; site directories referencing copyrighted works and subcategories clearly referring to pirated content; and user IP addresses.

MPAA members filed lawsuits against various P2P sites including TorrentSpy, early last year, because such websites enable users to download complete films from the internet. TorrentSpy defended itself and brought a motion to dismiss the action, on the basis that it does not host copyrighted works itself. In June of this year, TorrentSpy was forced to log visitor details. In response, the torrent search engine blocked access for US internet users. More at MPAA (in pdf).

WASHINGTON — Nov 25, ‘07 — BRIAN BERGSTEIN of The Associated Press reports an excellent article on Business Software Alliance bullying over small business firms in North America.

“Michael Gaertner worried he could lose his company. A group called the Business Software Alliance was claiming that his 10-person architectural firm was using unlicensed software.

The alliance demanded $67,000 — most of one year’s profit — or else it would seek more in court. “It just scared the hell out of me,” Gaertner said.

An analysis by The Associated Press reveals that targeting small businesses is lucrative for the Business Software Alliance, the main copyright-enforcement watchdog for such companies as Microsoft Corp., Adobe Systems Inc. and Symantec Corp.

Of the $13 million that the BSA reaped in software violation settlements with North American companies last year, almost 90 percent came from small businesses, the AP found.

The BSA is well within its rights to wring expensive punishments aimed at stopping the willful software copying that undoubtedly happens in many businesses. And its leaders say they concentrate on small businesses because that’s where illegitimate use of software is rampant.

But software experts say the picture has more shades of gray. Companies of all sizes inadvertently break licensing rules because of problems the software industry itself has created. Unable or unwilling to create technological blocks against copying, the industry has saddled its customers with complex licensing agreements that are hard to master.

In that view, the BSA amasses most of its bounties from small businesses because they have fewer technological, organizational and legal resources to avoid a run-in.

In Gaertner’s case, employees had been unable to open files with the firm’s drafting software, so they worked around it by installing programs they found on their own, breaking company rules, he said. And receipts for legitimate software had been lost in the hubbub of running his company.

“It was basically just a lack of knowledge and sloppy record-keeping on my part,” said Gaertner, who got a settlement that cost him $40,000.

These cases get costly because the BSA considers software pirated if a company can’t produce a receipt for it, no matter how old it is. Then the BSA generally demands at least twice the retail price of software deemed out of compliance. Plus it charges the “unbundled” prices of software that generally comes together at a discount, like Microsoft Office.

However, software-management gurus say the BSA could do far more to assist companies — which are, after all, its members’ customers.”Instead of just being the software police, be the police in the sense of helping old ladies across the street,” said Barbara Scott, a software consultant for Redemtech Inc. “The BSA could become more of a partner with organizations that they’re hammering as well.”

Gaertner, who worried his BSA encounter would crush his business, wants to rid himself of the Autodesk, Microsoft and Adobe software involved in the case.”It’s not like they have really good software. It’s just that it’s widespread and it’s commonly used,” he said. “It’s going to be a while, but eventually, we plan to get completely disengaged from those software vendors that participate in the BSA.“” More at AP.

Paris — Nov 23, ‘07 — French web users caught pirating movies or music could soon be thrown offline.

Those illegally sharing files will face the loss of their net access thanks to a newly-created anti-piracy body granted the wide-ranging powers. The anti-piracy body comes out of a deal agreed by France’s music and movie makers and its net firms.

The group who brokered the deal said the measures were intended to curb casual piracy rather than tackle large scale pirate groups.

In a landmark speech Nicolas Sarkozy said: “The rights of authors, the preservation of creativity, the recognition of the rights of each artist, of each performer… was an important commitment of my presidential campaign. “The deal was a decisive moment for the future of a civilised internet” he further added.

Net firms will monitor what their customers are doing and pass on information about persistent pirates to the new independent body. Those identified will get a warning and then be threatened with either being cut off or suspended if they do not stop illegal file-sharing.

The agreement between net firms, record companies, film-makers and government was drawn up by a special committee created to look at the problem of the net and cultural protection.

Denis Olivennes, head of the French chain store FNAC, who chaired the committee said current penalties for piracy - large fines and years in jail - were “totally disproportionate” for those young people who do file-share illegally.

In return for agreeing to monitor net use, film-makers agreed to speed up the transfer of movies to DVD and music firms pledged to support DRM-free tracks on music stores.

The deal was hailed by the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI), which represents the global interests of the music business.”This is the single most important initiative to help win the war on online piracy that we have seen so far,” it said in a statement.

French consumer group UFC Que Choisir was more cautious.It said the agreement was “very tough, potentially destructive of freedom, anti-economic and against digital history”

Los Angeles, CA — Nov 20, ‘07 – Sony BMG Music Entertainment has signed a licensing deal with Yahoo that clears the way for people to upload files with music or video content by the record company’s artists to Yahoo, the companies said Tuesday.

Financial terms of the deal were not disclosed. Like similar deals, the agreement calls for Sony BMG to receive a cut of advertising revenue, Yahoo said. The deal also covers the distribution of music videos via Yahoo player applications and widgets that computer users can place on other Web sites.

The agreement marks the first time Sunnyvale-based Yahoo has reached a deal with a major recording company over licensing content in user-created videos. Sony BMG, home to recording artists such as Britney Spears, Bruce Springsteen and Slayer, reached a similar licensing deal with Google Inc. last year. That agreement also includes Google subsidiary YouTube.

Sony BMG is a joint venture of Sony Corp. and Bertelsmann AG. The Sony BMG-Yahoo deal reflects the popularity of computer user-created videos, which often include copyrighted content.

Last month, a coalition of major media and Internet companies issued a set of guidelines requiring Web portals that host user-generated videos — as Yahoo does — to use filtering technology to block clips with unauthorized content from being posted.

Independently, Yahoo is deploying video identification and filtering technology early next year, the company said.

Nov 07, ‘07 — SlySoft is claiming to have that “impenetrable” copy protection technology BD+ cracked. 

SlySoft team member, Tom, at SlySoft forum proudly declares victory against BD+ with  their latest version of AnyDVD HD 6.1.9.6 beta. He also takes time to write a “loving” note to Twentieth Century Fox.

In his words:

“6.1.9.6 2007 11 07

• New (Blu-ray): AnyDVD ripper copies BD+ titles
• New (Blu-ray): Removed “BD+ not supported” warning, as all available BD+ titles can be copied with AnyDVD ripper, or can be watched on HTPC without HDCP using PowerDVD 3104 and AnyDVD. Reports indicate, that burned BD+ titles work on PS3 and standalone players as well.
• Note to Twentieth Century Fox: As you can see, BD+ didn’t offer you any advanced security, it just annoyed some of your customers with older players. So could you please cut this crap and start publishing your titles on HD DVD? There are thousands of people willing to give you money.
• Note to people considering to invest in HD media: Please buy HD DVD instead of Blu-ray. HD DVD is much more consumer friendly (e.g., no region coding, AACS not mandatory). Don’t give your money to people, who throw your fair-use rights out of the window.
• New (HD DVD & Blu-ray): Support for more MKBv4 titles
• Some minor fixes and improvements
• Updated languages”

More at Slysoft.Forum.

Viacom, Microsoft and other media companies unveils copyright guidelines just as earlier reports have indicated. Here is the formal declaration from Viacom, which sounds like a joint leader in the pack with Microsoft. Internet and Media Industry Leaders Unveil Principles to Foster Online Innovation While Protecting Copyrights. LOS ANGELES & NEW YORK-October 18, 2007 -Several of the world’s leading Internet and media companies today announced their joint support for a set of collaborative principles that enable the continued growth and development of user-generated content online and respect the intellectual property of content owners.

The principles serve as a comprehensive set of guidelines to help user-generated content (UGC) services and content creators work together towards their collective goal of bringing more content to more consumers through legitimate channels. The principles acknowledge a collective respect for protecting copyrights and recognize that filtering technologies must be effective and are only a part of what is necessary to achieve this goal.

The companies supporting these principles include CBS Corp., Dailymotion, Fox Entertainment Group, Microsoft Corp., MySpace, NBC Universal, Veoh Networks Inc., Viacom Inc. and The Walt Disney Company.

The principles, which are attached and available in full at www.ugcprinciples.com, call for a broad range of constructive and cooperative efforts by copyright owners and UGC services. They include:

• Implementation of state of the art filtering technology with the goal to eliminate infringing content on UGC services, including blocking infringing uploads before they are made available to the public;
• Upgrading technology when commercially reasonable;
• Cooperating to ensure that the technology is implemented in a manner that effectively balances legitimate interests, including fair use;
• Cooperation in developing procedures for promptly addressing claims that content was blocked in error;
• Regularly using the technology to remove infringing content that was uploaded before the technology could block it;
• Identification and removal of links to sites that are clearly dedicated to, and predominantly used for, the dissemination of infringing content; and,
• Promotion of content-rich, infringement-free services by continuing to cooperatively test new technologies and by collaboratively updating these principles as appropriate to keep current with evolving developments.

The ease of uploading video content on the Internet has led to the creation of millions of original works by new creators – works that range from scripted programs, to virtuoso musical performances and to humorous skits and social parody. It also has resulted in the proliferation of uploaded content that infringes copyrighted works.

The companies backing these principles believe that they can collectively find a path that fosters creativity while respecting the rights of copyright owners. Distributors of copyright-infringing content stifle both technological innovation and artistic creation in ways that ultimately will hurt the consumer and hinder the digital economy.

These principles also reflect a strongly-held commitment to work cooperatively and constructively across industries to address the challenge of developing new modes of distribution while protecting intellectual property and, with a shared goal of promoting a rich, legitimate, and compelling environment for consumers of online content. While the supporters‘ current practices may not strictly adhere to each and every principle, they are all committed to fully implementing these principles by year‘s end.

The companies believe that adopting such principles is essential to achieving the enormous potential opened up by the Internet through UGC services. Widespread adoption of these principles will encourage innovation, enable new creative expression and further the goal of eliminating infringing content from UGC services. It will allow innovative business models to develop. Most importantly, it will benefit consumers by encouraging further cooperation between the creators of content — from the largest entertainment company to the individual artist — and the companies that distribute their works.

The supporters urge others to embrace these principles. While recognizing that adhering to these principles may require each company to yield some from positions it has held, at the end of the day the supporters believe all will benefit from such compromise. The supporters look forward to further discussions with other parties to attain their support.

More at Viacom and at UGC Principles

October 18, ‘07 — Reuters and The WSJ are reporting on a group of Media companies, Microsoft, Viacom, NBC, CBS, News Corp’s Fox and MySpace, Walt Disney Co and others, that have agreed to a set of guidelines aimed at protecting copyrights online. Notably absent is Google, which had been in discussions about possibly joining the group.

The guidelines are meant to address copyright-related issues that have flared up as user posting of content — particularly video — to the Web has boomed. The agreed-upon principles include using technology to eliminate copyright-infringing content uploaded by users to Web sites, and blocking any infringing material before it is publicly accessible, says the person familiar with the matter.

Google on Monday unveiled technology it has been testing to automate the identification of copyrighted material on its YouTube video-sharing service. It said the technology cannot yet prevent infringing content from being posted initially, though it can pull flagged content off the site “in a matter of a few minutes.”

To curb video piracy and to prevent itself from copyright violation lawsuits, Google is introducing ‘YouTube Video Identification’. A YouTube page explaining video identification says, ”Thanks to the continued cooperation of content owners large and small, YouTube is able to develop, test, and implement increasingly effective content management tools. Today, we are proud to launch, in beta form, our latest innovation in online video: YouTube Video Identification.

Like our other content policies and tools, YouTube Video Identification goes well above and beyond our legal responsibilities. And like those other tools and policies, Video Identification aims for three main goals: accurate identification, choice for copyright holders, and a great user experience.”

YouTube further elaborates, “YouTube Video Identification will be available to all kinds of copyright holders all over the world, whether they want their content to appear on YouTube or not” and “No matter how accurate the tools get, it is important to remember that no technology can tell legal from infringing material without the cooperation of the content owners themselves. This means that copyright holders who want to use and help us refine our Video ID system will be providing the necessary information to help us recognize their work.”

More at YouTube