Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Belgian ISP Scores Victory In Landmark P2P Case

Posted by timothy on from the you-can't-make-us-do-that dept.

secmartin writes "Belgian ISP Scarlet scored an important victory in the first major European test of copyright law. The interim decision forcing them to block transfers of copyrighted materials via P2P has been reversed, because the judge agreed with Scarlet that the measures the Belgian RIAA proposed to implement proved to be ineffective. A final decision is expected next year."

76 comments

  1. Not a victory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Thats not a landmark victory, thats a "your honor their idiots their idea doesn't work" "your right don't waste your time."

    All they got there was a "That doesn't work" not a "you can't do that"

    1. Re:Not a victory by cpicon92 · · Score: 2, Funny

      you're honore, i ca'nt spelle

    2. Re:Not a victory by Bragador · · Score: 0

      Hahaha!

      It's funny 'cause it's true!

      :P

    3. Re:Not a victory by Kingrames · · Score: 3, Informative

      In this day and age, that is an epic victory to be sung by bards for all of eternity.

      --
      If you can read this, I forgot to post anonymously.
    4. Re:Not a victory by MrNaz · · Score: 2, Funny

      1. Find a mirror.
      2. Repeat while looking at yourself: "You're an idiot and your spelling and grammar is atrocious."
      3. Do this exercise and then read these instructions.

      You are now closer to being able to contribute to your country's literacy rate.

      --
      I hate printers.
    5. Re:Not a victory by OeLeWaPpErKe · · Score: 1

      You mean, until someone designs something that does work ? What are we talking ? 3 months ? 6 months ?

      Okay, this is a very diffucult problem, a very very difficult problem. So let's be optimistic and say 2 years.

    6. Re:Not a victory by Kjella · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Thats not a landmark victory, thats a "your honor their idiots their idea doesn't work" "your right don't waste your time."

      All they got there was a "That doesn't work" not a "you can't do that"

      Don't abuse the troll mod, this isn't trolling. After reading the TFA I tend to agree as it says "The court has now ruled in favor of Scarlet, staying the fine until the final ruling in this case which is expected about a year from now." Basicly, they haven't been able to make the filtering work and since they've been at it for years I doubt they will a year from now either, but this ruling doesn't say they need not implement a filtering system, only that they won't be fined until there's a filtering system that works. I don't think one can be made to work, but who knows what a judge might decide next year - "This is a POS but it's better than nothing"? A good ruling yes, but the last word has not been said.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    7. Re:Not a victory by Zontar+The+Mindless · · Score: 1

      WTF? Tried to mod this Insightful and got 'Redundant'? Posting to undo...

      In any event, parent may not be able to spell worth diddley, but is NOT a troll. IMO, poster is dead on.

      --
      Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
    8. Re:Not a victory by Bu11etmagnet · · Score: 1

      4. Profit !

      --
      Life is complex, with real and imaginary parts.
    9. Re:Not a victory by mpe · · Score: 1

      You mean, until someone designs something that does work ? What are we talking ? 3 months ? 6 months ?

      Much longer than that, decades would be a more reasonable estimate.

      Okay, this is a very diffucult problem, a very very difficult problem. So let's be optimistic and say 2 years.

      The kind of thing needed simply does not exist outside of Sci Fi novels. It would need an actual AI which is more intelligent than the average human. Even if you create something to do the job it's likely to object to being your slave PDQ.

  2. Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    I hope "ISP" means waffles and "P2P" means syrup!

  3. Belgian RIAA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Since when does the Recording Industry Association of America have anything at all to do with Belgium?

    1. Re:Belgian RIAA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Think I can solve this with a Twitter analogy:

      Slashdot has an insane user called Twitter, he comes out with a lot of weird shit, just like the RIAA. Then a user called freenix appears and spouts the same weirdness, as do a bunch of other users. They all have different names and UIDs than Twitter but, if it talks like Twitter, if it doesn't post anything other than support for Twitter, it's safe to assume that it is Twitter.

      The same is true of the Belgian RIAA: if it talks like the RIAA and litigates like the RIAA, it's safe to assume that it is the RIAA.

      Think about it, the RIAA is made up of the world's most powerful record labels. They may have registered different names, but they're the same beast underneath. :)

    2. Re:Belgian RIAA? by josiebgoode · · Score: 1, Informative

      RTFA, this is not RIAA, this is SABAM (Belgian Society of Authors, Composers and Publishers).

    3. Re:Belgian RIAA? by Godji · · Score: 1

      A Twitter analogy? This guy is totally getting popular.

    4. Re:Belgian RIAA? by mce · · Score: 3, Informative

      Think about it, the RIAA is made up of the world's most powerful record labels. They may have registered different names, but they're the same beast underneath. :)

      Yes and no. Of course the RIAA and its Belgian "counterpart" SABAM are strongly linked through their members, but they're not just "the RIAA registering under a different name". SABAM was founded in 1922, and represents not only the recording industry (let alone only the US one), but also independent authors, composers, etc. In fact, one of my grandfathers - who was a composer - was one of the founding members. The problem is that in reality the small guys have no say whatsoever in this game, be they producers (with which I mean: authors & performers) or consumers of music. Only big money rules and that usually is in the hands of people who themselves don't contribute anything culturally substantial at all.

      --
      Linux user since early January 1992.
    5. Re:Belgian RIAA? by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      SABAM (Belgian Society of Authors, Composers and Publishers).

      Eh? That would spell BSACP, not SABAM.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    6. Re:Belgian RIAA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      According to Perez Hilton's web site (yeah I know), EMI is losing quite a bit of money. If that trend doesn't reverse soon, see the RIAA and MPAA simply becoming marginal organizations as they membership erode. In the current economical conjuncture, I doubt any reversal in the short run. After all, we have pharmaceuticals instead of melodies curing our ailing moods.

    7. Re:Belgian RIAA? by PastaLover · · Score: 1

      The name is an acronym in two languages: "Société des Auteurs Belge - Belgische Auteurs Maatschappy", basically meaning belgian society of authors. I presume composers and publishers were tacked on later so now they stick with the old name for brand recognition (ha!) but add others in a subtitle.

    8. Re:Belgian RIAA? by Dan541 · · Score: 1

      This is slashdot, accuracy is irrelevant.

      --
      An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
    9. Re:Belgian RIAA? by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      And Belgians wonder why people make fun of them.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    10. Re:Belgian RIAA? by PastaLover · · Score: 1

      We're the masters of the surreal and proud of it.

    11. Re:Belgian RIAA? by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Ceci n'est pas du surrealisme.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  4. Complaint by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The abolition of the "story" tag has changed the whole feel of the site and ruined my interwebbing experience. Not happy :(

  5. Re:common sense: 1 by The+Master+Control+P · · Score: 3, Insightful

    0/10, plagarized; Original work is required for passing grade.

  6. Belgian RIAA by TubeSteak · · Score: 5, Interesting

    We're going to need a better term than
    "[name of country that is not America] RIAA"
    Since the last "A" stands for America

    I propose RIA* and MPA*
    [/Serious]

    Collectively, they can be referred to as **A*

    --
    [Fuck Beta]
    o0t!
    1. Re:Belgian RIAA by Aerynvala · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I vote we call them the Borg. They have that whole assimilation/destruction, adherence to bland uniformity in common.

      --
      http://transformativeworks.org/
    2. Re:Belgian RIAA by ethana2 · · Score: 5, Funny

      I call them the Music and Film Industry Associations. Simple and to the point. MaFIA.

    3. Re:Belgian RIAA by jnnnnn · · Score: 5, Funny

      Let's just go with ****. After all, every time I hear about them I want to swear.

    4. Re:Belgian RIAA by FrankDrebin · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Hear hear. I also suggest we pronounce the * correctly as "hole".

      --
      Anybody want a peanut?
    5. Re:Belgian RIAA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or just the entertainment industry would work fine...

    6. Re:Belgian RIAA by Calydor · · Score: 2, Funny

      Holeholeahole? What does that mean?

      --
      -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
    7. Re:Belgian RIAA by PlasticArmyMan · · Score: 5, Funny

      We are the RIAA. Lower your firewalls and surrender your harddrives. We will add your bank balance and soul to our own. Your life will adapt to service us. Court cases are futile. Etc. :)

    8. Re:Belgian RIAA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lots of targets for creampie?

    9. Re:Belgian RIAA by Splab · · Score: 4, Funny

      I like the way the register puts them - Record industry Ass. of *. Perhaps we should use (_*_) to denote all countries?

    10. Re:Belgian RIAA by Godji · · Score: 5, Funny

      Barely Original Recordings Group?

    11. Re:Belgian RIAA by mattb112885 · · Score: 2

      My vote is for PITA

    12. Re:Belgian RIAA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The summary changed it into "the Belgian RIAA", but TFA said "Belgium's equivalent of the RIAA".

      Both are wrong.

      The middle two letters of RIAA say it's an "industry association", which SABAM is not (at least not in theory). In the case of music, you want the IFPI for that.
      The first letter limits it to "recording", which SABAM is definitely not - they represent authors of all kinds: composers, but also photographers and even architects.

      With that out of the way, they're a bunch of sleazebags at least as bad as the RIAA. You won't find a bar owner in Belgium who likes SABAM. You won't find many *artists* in Belgium who like SABAM, because they even charge for allowing someone to perform his own creations in public, and little of that comes back to the source.

      For a fine example of SABAM's workings, look up Atomium on wikipedia and read the section on copyright. In this case it's about the architect's intellectual property, being the design of a building.

      A detail that the wiki article doesn't mention, but one of the linked articles does (in Dutch): bloggers who put up a photo of the Atomium on their blog have received invoices of 91 euros per photo from SABAM. That's per year as well, if they want to keep the photo up.
      Even with the climbing dollar, that's still over $100 per photo per year.

    13. Re:Belgian RIAA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The middle two letters of RIAA say it's an "industry association", which SABAM is not (at least not in theory). In the case of music, you want the IFPI for that.
      The first letter limits it to "recording", which SABAM is definitely not - they represent authors of all kinds: composers, but also photographers and even architects.

      With that out of the way, they're a bunch of sleazebags at least as bad as the RIAA. You won't find a bar owner in Belgium who likes SABAM. You won't find many *artists* in Belgium who like SABAM, because they even charge for allowing someone to perform his own creations in public, and little of that comes back to the source.

      To further put this in perspective: the SABAM, while technically a private collective, is sort of the government-designated monopoly as far as performance rights are concerned.

      Organise a small concert by a few amateur bands who only play their own songs and are not affiliated with the SABAM, or a party where you will only play CC-licenced music? You still need to formally declare to the SABAM a detailed list of all "performed works" and pay them per "performance" - not for the performance rights, of course; instead, it's an equivalent "processing fee".

      They don't hold back in those cases where they can collect actual performance rights fees, either.

      Are you a mobile DJ who uses, as many do nowadays, a music-on-hard-drive system? You need to pay them an additional yearly licence fee for the right to operate it, and you ideally need to keep a substantial portion of the original CD's and/or records (and/or your credit card statements, if you buy music online) in your car to avoid potentially costly disputes in case a SABAM "inspector" shows up at one of your gigs.

      Are you a bar owner with such a system? You'd better either have the original CD's in the office upstairs, or invoices to prove that the music was bought by your bar, as opposed to by you personally, in case the SABAM pops in.

      And so on and so on.

    14. Re:Belgian RIAA by Mikkeles · · Score: 1

      'My vote is for PITA'

      People for the Inhumane Treatment of Artists or People for the Ingestation of Tasty Animals?

      --
      Great minds think alike; fools seldom differ.
    15. Re:Belgian RIAA by MindlessAutomata · · Score: 1

      Well, this is type of RIAA is just Belgian's culture. You have to respect and understand that.

  7. So.. by Aerynvala · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If people use public transportation to move 'stolen' goods, does that mean stores should have the right to sue the transit authorities running the bus systems? Because that's pretty much what that case amounts to.

    --
    http://transformativeworks.org/
    1. Re:So.. by sortius_nod · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, if you knowingly allowed someone to transport stolen goods on public transport you'd be liable as the operator (depending on how high up it went). Unfortunately audio/video files aren't really that tangible, and the network operators "should" be able to know what's going on.

      It's more of an ethical victory rather than a victory of common sense - to monitor and block users traffic really sits on the edge of being ethically "good".

      I do see this as a nice stab in the eye of the MaFIA, but it really is only that. They'll heal and come back with more gusto next time, they've got more money than any ISP has, so really it's not a case of IF they can get this kind of crap to fly, but merely WHEN.

    2. Re:So.. by catxk · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Add to the argument that the amount of illegal goods in the public transportation system is substantial, lets say more than 20 percent of everything transported, and also that there is tech available that allowed the transport company to identify commuters carrying the illegal goods.

      Now you have an interesting argument, albeit still worthless as you will now try to come to a conclusion for a real case (piracy) based on "facts" derived from a fictional case (transport company).

      --
      Don't be crazy anymore!
    3. Re:So.. by secmartin · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Well, if you rob a bank the driver of your getaway car is likely to land in jail. The main argument in this case is that there are ways for the ISP to know the content transferred is illegal. The ISP says all solutions they tried were ineffective, thus countering this argument.

      Incidentally, I think this is one of the main reasons many ISPs are no longer offering Usenet access; if they are offering their customers newsgroups with the name "alt.binaries.warez" it's hard to argue they don't realize it contains copyrighted material. With P2P transfers that argument is easier to make, especially if the software uses encryption.

    4. Re:So.. by atomic+brainslide · · Score: 2, Insightful

      the grandparent assumes that someone has already determined what goods are stolen and what ones aren't when they are being transported. the concept of fair-use in most sane copyright legislation makes the determination of a violation nontrivial.

      just like in real life, no one can stop you from transporting stolen goods without first determining whether those goods were indeed stolen or are merely borrowed, purchased, bartered, found, inherited, etc.

      i suspect that this is the crux of the legal case here. ISPs aren't able to determine what content is in violation of copyright because most copyright has special cases and exceptions that depend on usage; something the ISPs are unable to determine from their perspective.

      --
      check out my comic: Essential Tremors
    5. Re:So.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, if you rob a bank the driver of your getaway car is likely to land in jail.

      Your analogy is inappropriate. A closer comparison would be if the work crew who built the road went to jail because a bank robber drove on it.

    6. Re:So.. by jonaskoelker · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Add to the argument that [...] there is tech available that allowed the transport company to identify commuters carrying the illegal goods.

      There isn't. Suppose I wear a hood plus striped shirt and carry a bag of money that says "loot". When the police officer on board starts questioning me, I show him the contract that documents my employment as a courier for Sillybank.

      In the case we're talking about: the problem isn't detecting peer-to-peer. The problem is detecting copyright infringement.

      You can have two identical bit streams where one infringes copyright and the other doesn't. It all depends on the humans at the ends of the bit streams, and the senders' agreements (or lack thereof) with the copyright holder.

      (case in points: WoW, ubuntu, Creative Commons movies).

    7. Re:So.. by nahdude812 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Except that in your corollary, the goods aren't stolen: they're indistinguishably perfect counterfeits which you are giving away for free.

      --
      Slay a dragon... over lunch!
    8. Re:So.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Well, if you rob a bank the driver of your getaway car is likely to land in jail."

      Yes, because that guy driving was driving speficaly for the purpose's of helping you rob the bank.

      If, however, you dived onto a train or a bus, its hardly the fault of the rail network is it?

      Its not a question of knowledge either. We "know" that a lot of illegal goods must be shiped ver public transport.
      But that dosnt justify screening every passenger.

    9. Re:So.. by catxk · · Score: 1

      Indeed, that makes the parent's analogy even more flawed.

      --
      Don't be crazy anymore!
    10. Re:So.. by catxk · · Score: 1

      I see your point, but then the entire case is stupid (well, I guess that's no surprise). According to the summary, the case is about "block transfers of copyrighted materials via P2P". If what you say is true, and I guess it is, then the case itself is flawed and I don't even know what we're talking about. Or why.

      --
      Don't be crazy anymore!
    11. Re:So.. by Dan541 · · Score: 1

      But if the robber uses public transport the transport company should also be held accountable because there are way for them to know what people are carrying.

      --
      An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
    12. Re:So.. by Skye16 · · Score: 1

      I suddenly have the irresistible urge to write "loot" on a bag full of stacks of paper in vaguely bill-shaped form.

    13. Re:So.. by mpe · · Score: 1

      You can have two identical bit streams where one infringes copyright and the other doesn't. It all depends on the humans at the ends of the bit streams, and the senders' agreements (or lack thereof) with the copyright holder.

      As well as there being situations where such permission isn't actually required or where the ownership of the copyright is in contention.

  8. Hi, Belgian here... by Paaskonijn · · Score: 5, Informative

    I'm afraid you've been misinformed.

    There's no real victory here. At least, not what we on Slashdot would call a victory. The judgement still stands. The only thing that's been revoked is the penalty of 2500 euro per day the ISP does not actively block illegal downloads on its network.

    The judge explicitly asked Scarlet to keep looking for "a technical solution to suit the decision of the court".

    The final decision (and our last chance at a real victory) is scheduled for October 2009.

    1. Re:Hi, Belgian here... by secmartin · · Score: 1
      I believe that's said near the end of the article:

      "The court has now ruled in favor of Scarlet, staying the fine until the final ruling in this case which is expected about a year from now.

      Let's all hope the final decision throws out Sabam's arguments; if ISP's are ruled to be responsible for the content passing through their network, that might signal the end of the internet as we know it...

    2. Re:Hi, Belgian here... by shnull · · Score: 0

      luckily by that time the LHC will be back online and we will all have had the pleasure of being sucked into a big black hole ... again ...

      --
      beware he who denies you access to information for in his mind, he already deems himself to be your master (SMAC-ish)
  9. WTF Scarlet? by KasperMeerts · · Score: 1

    I live in Belgium and Scarlet is my ISP but I honestly had absolutely no idea this was going on.

    Damn, damn, damn, I thought I was safe from this American bullshit here.

    --
    As long as there are slaughterhouses, there will be battlefields.
    1. Re:WTF Scarlet? by Paaskonijn · · Score: 3, Informative

      You're not very familiar with Sabam, are you? They've been acting "all American" for as long as I can remember.

    2. Re:WTF Scarlet? by AmonTheMetalhead · · Score: 0

      Considering it's members are American companies that's hardly supprising. Wonder if Telenet is in the same hot waters....

    3. Re:WTF Scarlet? by NaughtyNimitz · · Score: 3, Informative

      Oh man, don't get me starting about SABAM. I compose my own music for websites (using garagaband!) and EVERY TIME i get a letter from them asking me what source/author i used so they can bill me. I really really really hate them.

    4. Re:WTF Scarlet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a Belgian DJ, I can say I hate them too. They introduced a licensing fee for DJing with digital copies of your legally owned music. So if I perform with mp3s instead of with vinyl or cds, I yearly have to pay 250 euro (+ VAT) extra, besides the regular fees for public performances. And I still have to be able to prove I'm the legal owner of the music (cds which I ripped, music I bought from iTunes,...).

    5. Re:WTF Scarlet? by shnull · · Score: 0

      me too, haven't heard anything about it, which is typical for belgium imo, all the news you get is politics and finance ... you are free to think that you are free

      --
      beware he who denies you access to information for in his mind, he already deems himself to be your master (SMAC-ish)
  10. Ruling not really that great by jvkjvk · · Score: 1

    If the only reason that it is stopped is that the proposed method is not effective, well, that's not good.

    What if they do as instructed by the courts and decide to use an effective method? Will the courts allow them to do it then?

    As we all know, the only effective measure for site filtering is a white list. Perhaps in this case, only trackers that host non-copyrighted content, a method to get your site white listed (and certify you won't distribute copyrighted material) etc. Of course it's draconian. People under the filter won't get to much of the web. But isn't that some people's ultimate vision - total control over the web (and I don't mean you)?

    So although I hope it's still shot down, even on this count I was hoping for actual common sense, not a mere technicality. After all, engineers are good as solving technicalities if the Will to solution is there. Perhaps we should be more careful which problems we solve...

    1. Re:Ruling not really that great by aadvancedGIR · · Score: 1

      Yes, engineers are good at solving problems, but on wich ones are you going to bet?
      1) a couple of ones who are ordered to block all illegal trafic and may lack motivation due to ethical concerns.
      2) hundreds of thousands higly motivated to get their pr0n.

  11. Well.. what did you expect by Noctris · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I actually work in the media area and have negotiated contracts with these guys.. A couple of nice examples: They actually sued an artist over using his OWN song on his OWN website, cause the artist had a contract with them, so sabam should do all his copyright related stuff and he never asked them for permission to put his own intellectual property on his own website... Their contracts still speak of "Phonograph" (yes.. like Thomas Edison did) when they mean "songs" or "tracks".. And they think they can tell isp's how to do their stuff ? Damn.. they still prefer a fax over an e-mail..

    1. Re:Well.. what did you expect by QJimbo · · Score: 1

      They actually sued an artist over using his OWN song on his OWN website, cause the artist had a contract with them
      Not that unreasonable, if they gave him an advance and told him to write music for them, it usually means they own everything he writes to be used in a possible album. If he put a song on his site he actually recorded for the label, such action is even more expected, e.g. Who paid for the recording studio time? Who paid for the session musicians? Who paid to have it produced?

    2. Re:Well.. what did you expect by Skye16 · · Score: 1

      Which is why it is best to triple the time it would normally take to put your music out, get a real job, save your money up, and own your own god damned property after YOU pay for everything.

      Of course, this is coming from the dude who refused to have a professional photographer take pictures at his wedding because he is adamantly opposed to the concept of the "work" being *theirs*, so take that bit of hypocrisy with you and chew on it a bit.

    3. Re:Well.. what did you expect by Ciggy · · Score: 1

      Of course, this is coming from the dude who refused to have a professional photographer take pictures at his wedding because he is adamantly opposed to the concept of the "work" being *theirs*,...

      No Problem...point them towards this as obviously your wedding is your copyright?...but then again, it would probably only be such if your wedding took place in Belgium.

      --

      A rose by any other name would smell as sweet;
      A chrysanthemum by any other name would be easier to spell
    4. Re:Well.. what did you expect by Noctris · · Score: 1

      Err.. i think you need to read up.. that is not important ( and in this case, it was actually an artist who did not reside under a big record company but did it himself).. SO.. with that extra information.. how can it be "OK" for a rights organisation, with whom HE is a customer, sues him over using his own music...

  12. Re:common sense: 1 by badkarmadayaccount · · Score: 1

    Oh, good - I thought I was the only one cheking for consistency in troll posts. Cheers!

    --
    I know tobacco is bad for you, so I smoke weed with crack.
  13. At least we have scored something ... by yvesdandoy · · Score: 1

    here in Belgium !!!

  14. Is that a digital hole or an analog? by freaker_TuC · · Score: 1

    In case it's the analog hole, i don't mind .. can be copied anyways!

    --
    --- I am known for the ones who want to find me on the net. Is that a privacy risk or a privilege? One might wonder..
  15. P2P never die by gluliverk · · Score: 1

    P2P will never die

    --
    JMule user, enjoy it : http://www.jmule.org