backtop


Print 98 comment(s) - last by IvanAndreevich.. on Jul 7 at 6:10 PM


How are you gentlemen!! All your free speech are belong to us. You are on the way to destruction... You have no chance to survive make your time.
Guilty verdict furthers copyright protection organizations dreams of banning free speech

The IFPI, RIAA, MPAA, and their international allies have led a crusade against copyright infringement over the last decade, which has seen record million dollar verdicts handed down against citizens for essentially petty theft.  Now, even as they continue their lawsuits, they eagerly await gaining new sets of legislated tools thanks to the lobbyist money they've been pouring into governments worldwide.  

We previously detailed how the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, set to be debated by the U.S. Congress later this year, currently contains a new crime called "imminent infringement", which is essentially copyright thoughtcrime.

Now courts in the Netherlands have added speechcrime to that list, essentially ruling that is illegal to even talk or write about piracy.  The case began last year when Dutch movie studio Eyeworks sued a Usenet community FTD for "making public" their film 
Komt een vrouw bij de dokter (A Woman At The Doctor).

Typically "making public" means you uploaded a file and shared it.  In some cases, the definition has been extended to posting links to infringed material.  However, in this case FTD's users neither posted copyrighted material nor links to it, they merely would "spot" locations of various films on Usenet and post them to the group (sans-links).

In May, in Dutch Federal court in the Hague FTD was handed a defeat.  The court issued an "ex parte injunction" banning the site's users from "spotting" under threat of punishment.

The FTD's lawyer Arnoud Engelfriet filed an objection (appeal) to the court order.  That objection was heard last week and FTD lost yet again when Dutch court essentially ruled a second time that free speech did not cover talking about or writing about piracy.

Speaking with 
TorrentFreak Engelfriet voiced his frustration, stating, "I am flabbergasted by the court’s reasoning.  It is established case law that publishing hyperlinks or torrents (Mininova, Pirate Bay) is *not* the same as a publication. FTD does less than what Mininova or Pirate Bay does, but according to the court we are more liable than they are?"

The Judge supported his decision citing a case in England involving a Usenet service called Newzbin.  Engelfriet describes, "They say that FTD is doing the same thing, and since the English courts held Newzbin liable for infringement, FTD must be liable too.  This completely ignores the technical differences between Newzbin and FTD. Newzbin is an NZB search engine through which you find codes to directly download from Usenet. FTD is a forum where people ’spot’ movies using messages in ordinary Dutch."

The FTD's unsuccessful defense was that it did not control the servers the material was hosted on and hand no control over potential downloaders and thus was not "making available".  The court said this was inconsequential and that guilt would be determined by establishing "whether the behavior of FTD allows users to download copyrighted files (in an easier manner) and thus makes such files available to the public."  And the court found they did.

Tim Kuik, director of Dutch copyright protection group BREIN cheered the decision, stating, "This is a collaboration between FTD and its users where they knowingly provide access to unauthorized files.  It’s clear that this is more than just talking about files like FTD wants people to believe."

Brein is suing the FTD in a second court case.  That case will go to court in October.  Kuik wants to see FTD shut down entirely and taken off the internet.

FTD may soon have a bit of vengeance, though.  Dutch elections are this week, and due to decisions like this one and the Sweden's multi-million dollar verdict against the owners of 
The Pirate Bay, the Pirate Party is picking up steam.  Writes a party spokesperson, "When reaching landmark decisions that overturn years of jurisprudence, neither the judge nor the issue is served when it turns out that the judge in question is in business with the copyright-lawyer from the party benefiting from this shocking verdict. The fact that this joint enterprise mainly offers courses on 'counter-piracy' at €900 per day, makes the situation appear even muddier still. If the Netherlands wants to avoid looking like a banana-republic where the law is for sale to the highest bidder, it is urgent that parliament takes control of the debate on copyright-reform, and brings it back into the public arena where this discussion belongs."

It has been established that the judge serving on 
The Pirate Bay case was a member of copyright organizations and may have financially benefited from the decision.  The Pirate Bay admins are currently appealing the case, hoping for a more unbiased day in court.  Despite the seemingly liberal nature of the Netherlands it has been leading the way in copyright enforcement, banningThe Pirate Bay and other sites entirely.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Breakin' the Law, Breakin' the Law...
By MrBlastman on 6/9/2010 9:09:15 AM , Rating: 5
Piracy is like piracy as piracy was piracy. Piracy is piracy and pirates pirate with piracy. Piracy of music is piracy and piracy. Piracy of movies is like piracy of music. Piracy of games is like pirating pirates. Piracy of rectums is like piracy of speech.

Come get me Netherlands. I just broke yer laws! Well, I'm waiting. Where's the indictment?




RE: Breakin' the Law, Breakin' the Law...
By SunAngel on 6/9/10, Rating: -1
RE: Breakin' the Law, Breakin' the Law...
By MrBlastman on 6/9/10, Rating: -1
RE: Breakin' the Law, Breakin' the Law...
By Iaiken on 6/9/2010 10:11:40 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
Isn't socialism grand?


I find that Ironic since the whole Anti-piracy push (and all the pressure resultant from it) that lead to this debacle originated in the "land of the free".

The US government wanted to keep the whole damned thing secret until it was enacted as law in all of the participating nations. Here in Canada, the request for information on it in wound up going all the way to the supreme court before it was finally OK'd. This lead to the Canadian governments backpedaling (much to the disappointment of the US) for almost a year after the public outcry.

So before you poopoo the Dutch, you might want to look at your own governments desire to be able to search, seize and destroy electronics at customs solely on the suspicion that it contains infringing materials. The US governments toadying to the RIAA and MPAA is where the impetus for this whole mess came from.


RE: Breakin' the Law, Breakin' the Law...
By MrBlastman on 6/9/2010 10:18:14 AM , Rating: 5
While our own Government has not been innocent (when has it ever?), they can not bar our right to talk about things unless they amend our constitution to absolve the first amendment. In order to do that, they'd have to remove the second amendment also.

Good luck with that.


RE: Breakin' the Law, Breakin' the Law...
By reader1 on 6/9/10, Rating: -1
By Digimonkey on 6/9/2010 12:36:49 PM , Rating: 3
They can block whatever discussions they want if you're on their site. That in no way has to do with violating your freedom of speech.

If you wrote an article on a different site about how to block adds, and a site like The Tech Report sued you and won in a court of law, now that would be a violation of your freedom of speech.


By rcc on 6/9/2010 1:54:44 PM , Rating: 3
That's always been the case. Freedom of speech only guarantees that the government won't impede your right to say whatever absurb thing trips your trigger..... within limits.

However, if you stand in someone's house and expound on your opinion that his daughter is a slut.... he has the right to evict you.

Same with a web site. It's not public space, so they are free to put whatever restrictions they like on their forums, etc. If you don't like their restrictions, it's your right to take your custom elsewhere.


RE: Breakin' the Law, Breakin' the Law...
By AssBall on 6/9/2010 11:06:38 AM , Rating: 5
Well said Mr. Blastman. And I'm going to get auto-rated down, but I'll say it anyway.

Let any motherfucker in power that wants to even try to dick with either amendment just try it and and be a personal witness to the shit storm they induce. I'll take a free American redneck over a pushed over conforming Dutchman any day.


RE: Breakin' the Law, Breakin' the Law...
By Dorkyman on 6/9/10, Rating: -1
RE: Breakin' the Law, Breakin' the Law...
By AssBall on 6/9/2010 12:32:06 PM , Rating: 2
Your mother IS ashamed of me!


By quiksilvr on 6/9/2010 1:44:01 PM , Rating: 2
He was referring to the motherfucker comment, I think...


RE: Breakin' the Law, Breakin' the Law...
By mcnabney on 6/9/10, Rating: -1
By Azure Sky on 6/9/2010 1:38:32 PM , Rating: 1
and this somehow suprises you?

most of these "revolutionists" are just big talkers who also believe that if its called the patriot act, it must be patriotic!!!

you know thats a big part of why alot of people voted for it, they just didnt have the time to read and understand the act, so rather then risk not getting re-elected due to people bringing up how UN-patriotic they are(because they didnt vote for it) they just caved in to bush admin and voted it into law.

Im sad to say I am american, our govt caters to the mpaa/riaa and anybody else who has the money to pay the right people off....

i just need to win the lotto and move to a nice island someplace where I wont have to deal with this crap :P


By Lazarus Dark on 6/9/2010 9:41:07 PM , Rating: 3
It was my understanding that the DMCA does limit free speech, in that it is illegal under the DMCA to actually discuss how to break copy-protection.

Or did I remember that wrong?


By wrekd on 6/9/2010 10:25:51 AM , Rating: 5
What? The land of the free?
Whoever told you that is your enemy.


By dtm4trix on 6/10/2010 3:40:46 AM , Rating: 3
As an American i totally agree with you on this. Our government is in the back pocket of big business. Our politicians are as corrupt as they come. It is big business and the top 2 percent of the richest people in this country who determine policy. And now with a recent supreme court ruling regarding election campaign contributions big business has solidified its hold over the government. No politician will dare oppose this for fear that the lobbyists will back the incumbent's challenger who may be willing to play ball. It's a sad state of affairs in this country today, with the left and the right, and those who think they are totally free are dead wrong.


RE: Breakin' the Law, Breakin' the Law...
By reader1 on 6/9/10, Rating: -1
RE: Breakin' the Law, Breakin' the Law...
By themaster08 on 6/9/2010 10:27:39 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
money is more important than freedom.
Tell that to the poor souls working at the Foxconn plant making Apple products.

Some light reading for you, my friend (that is, of course, if your cloak of ignorance doesn't phase out the link):-
http://www.dailytech.com/Employees+at+Apples+Helli...


RE: Breakin' the Law, Breakin' the Law...
By Donkeyshins on 6/10/2010 12:11:04 PM , Rating: 3
At the risk of agreeing with reader1, I don't believe he's espousing the belief that money is more important than freedom, but rather that in many ways, it is the current state of affairs in the US. Unfortunately in most cases, those that have the money make the laws.


By Donkeyshins on 6/10/2010 12:40:37 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
At the risk of agreeing with reader1, I don't believe he's espousing the belief that money is more important than freedom, but rather that in many ways, it is the current state of affairs in the US. Unfortunately in most cases, those that have the money make the laws.


Belay that...I just read some of reader1's comments down the page. I don't think he was being as insightful as I gave him credit for. My bad.


RE: Breakin' the Law, Breakin' the Law...
By Spivonious on 6/9/2010 10:20:40 AM , Rating: 4
What does socialism have to do with freedom of speech?

wikipedia-
quote:
Socialism is an economic and political theory based on public ownership or common ownership and cooperative management of the means of production and allocation of resources.


By Kurz on 6/9/2010 2:53:23 PM , Rating: 4
The fact of the matter is Private citizens rights are not protected. Under USA and Capitalism (Though we have fallen from our graces) We are protected by the document that is the consitution.

Capitalism is all about protecting private property rights.
While Socialism is all about spreading the wealth.
Spreading resources. Seizing property for the good of the people.

Without Freedom, Property, its hard to have a successful society.


RE: Breakin' the Law, Breakin' the Law...
By raumkrieger on 6/9/2010 10:25:24 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Not as long as I'm an American. We have freedom of speech here.


What is this freedom of speech you speak of? Last time I checked certain words still get censored and certain topics get you a visit from your friendly neighborhood Man in Black.

George Orwell accurately predicted the future. He was just a few decades off.


By The Raven on 6/9/2010 11:00:39 AM , Rating: 2
Though I see your point, there is always going to be a difference between censoring specific language which is deemed indecent and censoring ideas (like poitical speech, or speech about piracy for that matter). Yes, most people can't distinguish the difference between the 2 but courts of law should be able to.

But these US bashers are right about one thing. We gave up our some of our rights when we valued creativity and convenience OVER freedom.


RE: Breakin' the Law, Breakin' the Law...
By amanojaku on 6/9/2010 10:43:00 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
Not as long as I'm an American. We have freedom of speech here.
That logic is flawed because:

1) Your American citizenship won't protect you if you break the laws in another country
2) There is no such thing as free speech in the US; say "bomb" in an airport


RE: Breakin' the Law, Breakin' the Law...
By MrBlastman on 6/9/2010 10:50:38 AM , Rating: 2
Americans break the laws of foreign countries all day long here, within our borders. I don't see all of America being put in front of judges for all of these crimes. This is why we have our own country, our own laws and our own national borders here.

If we set foot within a foreign countries borders, however, then, if we commit a crime against their laws while in their country, it is a completely different story and their laws do in fact apply.


RE: Breakin' the Law, Breakin' the Law...
By zmatt on 6/9/10, Rating: 0
By MrBlastman on 6/9/2010 3:20:43 PM , Rating: 3
What are you talking about? I don't think you read my post and understood what I was saying.

At least, I hope so. I really hope you aren't implying our Government should try us for breaking other countries laws.


By The Raven on 6/9/2010 11:07:24 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
2) There is no such thing as free speech in the US; say "bomb" in an airport


That is way out of bounds bro.
That is like saying there is no food in my fridge because I can't eat the plastic that the turkey is in.

And look up the first amendment on wikipedia and you'll understand how bad that statement is. There are certain words that are protected for safety's sake. There are also words that are considered indecent. But you can feel free to use either of them in the privacy of your own home and in other places (like movie sets lol).


RE: Breakin' the Law, Breakin' the Law...
By wiz220 on 6/9/2010 12:08:41 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
Isn't socialism grand


Quit throwing around Fox News buzz words that you don't understand. This isn't socialism it's FACISM! The government is working for and with corporate interests. Even if much of Europe is socialist it doesn't mean that this particular case represents socialism.


RE: Breakin' the Law, Breakin' the Law...
By MrBlastman on 6/9/10, Rating: -1
RE: Breakin' the Law, Breakin' the Law...
By ninus3d on 6/9/2010 2:58:00 PM , Rating: 2
Fox news was most likely thrown in because it has a lot of similar wordbuzzes and "logic" not to unsimmilar to what you said yourself.
I furthermore believe the freedom of speech is a policy of democracy and not capitalism so why do so many attack SOCIALISM when freedom are decreased?

I believe the ONLY "freedom" you loose in a socialistical influenced market is the taxation...
I have to pay taxes for the public services the government provides, private enterprise exists as a competition to the service provided by the government and my freedom as an individual is affected how?


RE: Breakin' the Law, Breakin' the Law...
By MrBlastman on 6/9/2010 3:25:09 PM , Rating: 1
I can clearly tell that the Europeans are becoming enraged at all the attacks towards Socialism when then they have to resort to nitpicking wikipedia entries in order to somehow try and separate their nations economies from the oppressive systems they have in place to impose upon their citizens freedoms. It makes me chuckle.

We might not be perfect here in America (we aren't) but I'd much rather have a free society protected by our constitution any day.

Oh, and by the way, the United States is not a democracy, if you want to nitpick. We are a Republic. True and pure democracies eventually lead towards oppressive practices in order to cater to all of its citizens whims.


By ninus3d on 6/9/2010 3:33:56 PM , Rating: 2
I don't quite know what you refer to by the wikipedia quote thingie, however I dont really get enraged though you may not have directly refered to me on that one.
To me the different system are choices that either of has far from proven to be the best as of yet, they both have huge flaws.
I support a mixed market purely out of humanitarian reasons but regardless of a pure capitalistic or socialistic system, freedom of speech is not affected by it.
OTHER elements is what plays in for individual freedom and I'm getting a bit shocked that so many mixes that up.

I know, republic, i was throwing democracy more or less as a generalization there (I have to point out though, republic is a bit generalising word as well as there are a ton of ways to implement that, as well ;)


RE: Breakin' the Law, Breakin' the Law...
By gamerk2 on 6/9/2010 4:12:43 PM , Rating: 1
What "opressive systems" are you refering to? I'd argue the US is far more oppressive; for instance, they don't have a situation where an insurance company says "Nope, we won't cover that".

The fact that you can make that statement is even funnier when you realize the US has been Socalist for well over a century now [Minimum wage, 40 hour work week, disability pay, etc. All mandated by the government].


RE: Breakin' the Law, Breakin' the Law...
By MrBlastman on 6/10/2010 8:51:50 AM , Rating: 2
That is about the most ignorant statement I think I've heard you make in a while.

quote:
for instance, they don't have a situation where an insurance company says "Nope, we won't cover that".


You're right, they _do_ cover everything... eventually. IF you live long enough, you'll get medical care. Their system purposely makes certain patients wait extended periods of time hoping they'll die off so they don't have to provide medical service.

Here--they (the doctors and hospitals) have an obligation to help practically everyone if they need medical care. Eventually, those who can pay do pay for it one way or another (increased premiums or medical costs) but at least people get service.

quote:
US has been Socalist for well over a century now


It has? Since when? Lets see:

1. I can still own my own company.
2. I still file my own taxes every year to declare how much I owe.
3. I still can choose where I work and what career path I take.
4. I can choose whether I go to college or not and what to major in, regardless of my previous performance in school.

Hmm, those all sounds like the tenets of a free society and capitalism. Shall I name more?


By ninus3d on 6/10/2010 4:55:33 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
It has? Since when? Lets see: 1. I can still own my own company. 2. I still file my own taxes every year to declare how much I owe. 3. I still can choose where I work and what career path I take. 4. I can choose whether I go to college or not and what to major in, regardless of my previous performance in school.


The tenents of socialism don't prevent that either.
You CAN implement it that drastically but I cant see anyone who'd be interested in that these days, just as you COULD privatize police and firemen in a capitalistic model as well, but yet again no one is really interested in that.


RE: Breakin' the Law, Breakin' the Law...
By The Raven on 6/9/2010 4:18:42 PM , Rating: 2
I think what Mr. B was drawing from this is that with both Socialism and Fascism the individual's freedom is decreased significantly or eliminated altogether. (If you don't believe me just ask one of the 400K people who starved to death in 1892 tzarist Russia, the 15 million victims of the Holocaust, or the millions who were executed in mid-20th century China.)

My point is that though he is factually wrong, his defense of freedom is spot on.

quote:
I believe the ONLY "freedom" you loose in a socialistical influenced market is the taxation... I have to pay taxes for the public services the government provides, private enterprise exists as a competition to the service provided by the government and my freedom as an individual is affected how?


There is no 'private enterprise' in socialism. It all belongs to everyone. So the freedom you lose is is the freedom of choice that you mention. Why don't people get this? Socialism might be a great idea if we all thought alike as it aims for peak efficiency. But freedom gives us more innovation which can also create efficiencies. I don't know if I said that right, but I think you can catch my drift.


RE: Breakin' the Law, Breakin' the Law...
By erple2 on 6/9/2010 8:12:22 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
There is no 'private enterprise' in socialism. It all belongs to everyone.


Wait a second. Are you confusing Socialism with Communism?


By kalak on 6/11/2010 8:54:31 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Wait a second. Are you confusing Socialism with Communism?


Yes, He is.It's a common misunderstanding. From web:

Both socialism and communism are based on the principle that the goods and services produced in an economy should be owned publicly, and controlled and planned by a centralized organization. Socialism asserts that the distribution should take place according to the amount of individuals' production efforts, however, while communism asserts that that goods and services should be distributed among the populace according to individuals' needs.

Another difference between socialism and communism is that communists assert that both capitalism and private ownership of the means of production must be done away with as soon as possible in order to make sure a classless society, the communist ideal, is formed. Socialists, however, see capitalism as a possible part of the ideal state and believe that socialism can exist in a capitalist society. In fact, one of the ideas of socialism is that everyone within the society will benefit from capitalism as much as possible as long as the capitalism is controlled somehow by a centralized planning system.

Another difference between socialism and communism is centered on who controls the structure of economy. Where socialism generally aims to have as many people as possible influence how the economy works, communism seeks to limit that number to a smaller group.


By ninus3d on 6/10/2010 7:05:53 PM , Rating: 2
I'm sorry, WHAT? :P
I live in country currently governed by social democracy and in this country I created and ran 2 companies that together provided me with "daily bread" for together 6 years!

quote:
There is no 'private enterprise' in socialism.

It was a government office that aided me for free in all i needed to know and do (in terms of documentation, filing, requirement for certain types of company forms like AS or limited responsibility etc, legal rights and requirements etc) because I couldnt afford a bussiness lawyer, and I even got a government sponsorship once I had proven that I had a product and a consept that would turn a profit...

Do you see how bizarre your suggestion gets here?
I can at best accept that socialism as a generalisation for the tens of different ways to use it has SOME WAYS you can implement it that limites certain freedoms, for example you can make it illegal to have private enterprise competing against state in certain areas like healthcare or education because for example you say that healthcare should be equal for everyone.
But I do by no means accept the so typical american generalisation that socialism = communism, they are VASTLY different.
I am lucky to live in one of the worlds richest country, its a very socialistic country called Norway, and although HIGHLY socialistic (free education, free healthcare, equality as a core, EVERYONE working or not has the right to income defended by LAW, EVERYONE is guarantered a high quality of life again by LAW) and based on polls less than 4% of the population supports communism.


RE: Breakin' the Law, Breakin' the Law...
By Ammohunt on 6/9/2010 1:40:22 PM , Rating: 2
Hmmm weren't the Nazis the National Socialist party? Weren't they Facists as well? Do they even teach WWII anymore in school?.


RE: Breakin' the Law, Breakin' the Law...
By ninus3d on 6/9/2010 2:53:14 PM , Rating: 2
Wow, your comment...
It has an AWE INSPIRING logical fallacy :O


RE: Breakin' the Law, Breakin' the Law...
By The Raven on 6/9/2010 4:27:17 PM , Rating: 2
Without using 100% in his statements, it is not fallacy. But that is if you want to split hairs. Oh wait, you are.


By ninus3d on 6/9/2010 6:01:02 PM , Rating: 2
What??? REALLY?
You think its splitting hair to suggest that fascism and socialism dont go hand in hand as "proven" by the suggestion that since the nazigermany's political party was called the national socialist party and were practicing fascist policies, socialism and fascism is the same?

Whoa.


By ninus3d on 6/9/2010 6:05:59 PM , Rating: 2
And what the heck is this "100%" nonsense?
His claim was complete ludicrious and strongly uneducated and he further ridicule the argument by making a suggestion that his thoughts would have been proven under any education that incorporated ww2..
Its a fallacy of grose generalization and and a exceptionally dumb conclusion.


RE: Breakin' the Law, Breakin' the Law...
By jeff834 on 6/9/2010 5:15:44 PM , Rating: 2
Socialism? Last I checked it's corporations that are pushing for all sorts of anti-piracy legislation. Sounds like capitalism to me.


By IvanAndreevich on 7/7/2010 6:10:12 PM , Rating: 2
Nooooo...

- Capitalism is an economic system in which the means of production are privately owned; supply, demand, price, distribution, and investments are determined mainly by private decisions in the free market, rather than through a planned economy; and profit is distributed to owners who invest in businesses.

- Fascism, pronounced, is a radical and authoritarian nationalist political ideology.Fascists seek to organize a nation according to corporatist perspectives, values, and systems, including the political system and the economy.


By Blessedman on 6/10/2010 7:27:56 AM , Rating: 2
I am curious, if a dutch citizen joins this conversation, even though this site is not hosted in dutch domain, can they be dragged to jail or fined?


By snyper256 on 6/10/2010 9:59:58 AM , Rating: 2
Wow.. the world is going insane.


"You can bet that Sony built a long-term business plan about being successful in Japan and that business plan is crumbling." -- Peter Moore, 24 hours before his Microsoft resignation














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki