Leaked IFPI Report Details Anti-Piracy Strategy

hypnosec writes "IFPI has inadvertently made available its own confidential internal report, penned by none other than IFPI's chief anti-piracy officer, which details its strategy against online piracy for major recording labels across the globe. The document, 30-pages long, talks about file sharing sites, torrents, cyberlockers, phishing attacks, expectations from Internet service providers, mp3 sites and a lot more. The document is a global view representation of IFPI's 'problems,' 'current and future threats,' and the industry's responses to them." A few tactics: shutting down music services, requiring file lockers filter uploads or be shut down (interesting, since the DMCA's one good provision is the safe harbor, and proactive filtering could mean losing that protection), lobbying for DNS blocking legislation, pressuring ISPs into extra-legally enforcing their will, disrupting payment processing for pirate sites through blacklists, and providing "training built around 'real world' experiences and challenges rather than focusing on theory" on copyright law to judges and legal bodies.

Comments

Nothing nefarious to see here

[jhoegl]

Move along.

Well...

[BlastfireRS]

I'm sure it'll make an interested read / skim, but it seems like this is all stuff we've known they've been doing for years.

It's a war

[Cryogenes]

and everything is fair in war (within the Geneva convention, of course).

In particular, every act of piracy, hacking and cracking is fair fighting against the media companies. Nobody should have any qualms about it.

Re:It's a war

[SuricouRaven]

The geneva convention is a luxury those with overwhelming force can enjoy.

Re:It's a war

[CodeHxr]

and everything is fair in war (within the Geneva convention, of course). In particular, every act of piracy, hacking and cracking is fair fighting against the media companies. Nobody should have any qualms about it.

This is an interesting concept... can an individual, or organization, declare "war" against a corporation and actively try to do them harm and/or destroy them as an organization? Nothing *illegal*, like murder or blackmail, obviously, but more like intentional character (business practice) assassination and such? It seems that "voting with one's dollars" is about as effective as "voting for elective office", given the number of sheeple. Man, I feel like I'm starting to turn into Dr. Horrible. "The status is not ... Quo."

Re:It's a war

[exilekg]

This is an interesting concept... can an individual, or organization, declare "war" against a corporation and actively try to do them harm and/or destroy them as an organization?

Of course they can, big corporations do this regularly to the smaller corporations. But this "war" wouldn't fit any universally accepted definition of war so I don't know why would you want to declare anything, just do what you want to do. It is really interesting that a lot of people think that the best solution to any problem is to declare war to said problem, either real war or just "war".

Keep giving me ideas!

[oakgrove]

Yay! More ways to download stuff. I was just finishing working my way through this list and now I have 30 pages worth of new knowledge to assimilate. Keep it coming!

Re:This is who the gunman should have attacked

[BanHammor]

Making them martyrs for the "good deed"?

So Annoying

[carrier lost]

A friggin' laundry list of privacy invasion, rights violations and technology crippling.

All because a business model has become obsolete.

Just incomprehensible if you have even a faint grasp of technology, business and capitalism.

</grar>

My suggestion: The Digital Sanity Act

(Not that it will make a difference...)

Re:So Annoying

[cheekyjohnson]

We need a real solution and so far it's policing people who steal content.

No, it seems to be getting rid of due process, suing people en masse and presenting dubious evidence to the courts, invading everyone's privacy, forcing everyone (including non-infringers) to pay taxes for storage media, and using inflammatory terms to describe copyright infringement.

Clearly this is all working well.

Re:So Annoying

[Hatta]

If the people who use your work don't value it enough to fund it voluntarily, then no it probably shouldn't be produced. Why should it?

Re:So Annoying

[SuricouRaven]

The number of infringers is simply too vast to do anything to a significent number while still respecting due process and assumption of innocence. The only way to make it practical is to lower the burden of proof to the point that the process can be almost entirely automated.

Re:So Annoying

[cheekyjohnson]

The number of infringers is simply too vast to do anything to a significent number while still respecting due process and assumption of innocence.

Probably. But when the choices are between "infringe upon people's rights in exchange for security" and "do nothing," I'll pick the latter every time. Given that this is a rather insignificant issue, even more so.

Re:So Annoying

[wierd_w]

That infringement is so endemic suggests some deeper lying pathology, if you ask me.

I would be interested in seeing a corellation chart between extensions of copyright, and prevalence of reported infringement.

Its just a hunch, but I'd almost bet money that they shadow each other very faithfully.

Re:So Annoying

[hawkinspeter]

It's lucky that there's no stealing happening, just copyright infringement.

Re:So Annoying

[rastoboy29]

I like your Act, but I think it still gives them too much leeway to try to own us.

I think the expansion of fair use to cover all non-commercial copying is the only way to go (obviously, as my sig implies).

The various pirate parties are on board with that, as well.

Re:So Annoying

[carrier lost]

Just added your blog to my daily reads.

Looks good!

Re:So Annoying

[carrier lost]

What you are saying is that if we can't control the copying of content then it should not be produced?

That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying, "If you can't make money by releasing copies of your work, don't release copies."

This is not at all the same as "can't control copying" or "not be produced"

Limit your movies to theaters and your music to live performances if your DVDs and CDs are ending up on bittorrent

There are masnicktons of people giving stuff away AND making money. It just requires an innovative business plan.

Hollywood and the recording industry don't want to change business plans. They want governments to violate civil rights and cripple technology so that they can go on using their old business plans.

Provide training...

[bool2]

To ensure the judges get the "right" result instead of focusing on theory.

.

Ok I'm paraphrasing quite liberally there but am I the only one that finds the kind of access these .*AA's have to the judiciary more than a little disturbing?

Or is this just the latest manifestation of the corporatocracy that's dominating western politics.

Re:This is who the gunman should have attacked

[cpghost]

IFPI, RIAA or MPAA are just front ends of our Copyright Taliban. Attacking them is absolutely pointless, because nothing prevents the enemy from acting independently of the *AAs: everywhere there's a Court, they can sue; everywhere there's a politician, they can bribe; everywhere there's an ISP, they can blackmail; and everywhere there's a 85 years old granny without computer, they will sue nonetheless.

To fight this hydra, we need to change the laws that it crafted and that it keeps abusing. That's where the real fight ought to be: right into the field of politics. E.g. expose Obama and his president of vice Biden as the puppets of the MAFIAA (that they are), and do the same for the politicos of the other side where appropriate as well. Publicly shame them for their shameless buying into corporatocracy. It may not help much, but at least, that's where the fight belongs.

Re:They forgot something

[cpu6502]

The ISPs stopped providing Usenet..... supposedly to cutoff child porn but now I'm wondering is RIAA was behind the scenes & just using the porn as a false flag to eliminate a piracy vehicle.

Re:Hooray! Where do I get a copy?

[Samantha Wright]

I believe it's this PDF.

Hanging a few of them becoming mainstream meme

[boorack]

Slightly off-topic, yet still relevant as **AA/IFPI** is one of (many) similiar parts of out corporate world.

As Nouriel Roubini and few other well known commentators (economists) noticed, hanging a few bankers is rapidly becoming mainstream meme. Hanging a few **AA crooks, hanging few big-pharma crooks, hanging few Monsanto crooks etc. might follow soon. While it is an exaggeration, it correctly reflects popular mood of everyone feeling screwed by those corporate fucks and desire to properly prosecute and jail some more sociopatic corporate offenders.

What (still) didn't seep into mainstream is translating this popular mood into actions. People feel bad about being abused by corporations, yet they still watch murdoch-media crap, still buy overpriced corporate-crapola-music CDs, still buy in Wall-Mart, still invest their money into Wall-Street rigged game, still believe into "democrats vs republicans" lie and still do not leave home to protest against abuse (except for some OWS folks).

I hope that with 'hang a few bankers' meme some actionable change will come. When people will stop watching fox news en masse, stop buying crap from **AA crooks en masse, change habits and start buying, investing local, it will severly impair corporate grip on us. People know what's going on and going into action about this is the last step that finally might bring some change (as opposed to Obama's "home and change" lies) - come on folks, get up your lazy butts :)

Re:how are "filters" supposed to work?

[wierd_w]

Don't be silly.

The media empires of the world do NOT want you cutting your own MP3 files *at all*.

The filter will work exactly as they intend, byt blocking all mp3 files that are not signed by their PKI private key.

This will force you to buy mp3s of songs you own the discs to, because you only have a license to listen to the contet on the discs, not to copy it. Your home-cut MP3s are "illegal" in their eyes.

Re:Hooray! Where do I get a copy?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think it is that PDF. The one you link to doesn't show any of the data in the report.

The title of the leaked report appears to be "online_piracy_global_perspective_and_trends_mumith_ali .pdf" [sic]

It was hosted at the following location: www.ifpi-la.org/panama2012 which has been ripped down sharpish, but at the time of writing is still in Google's cache.

Anyone found the original yet?

I have no moral qualms about "piracy"

[Anonymous Coward]

There was a time where I didn't pirate anything. This wasn't because I ever had any moral qualms about it, NOBODY in the world has any right to tell me what large numbers I may or may not store on my computer. Rather, I didn't pirate because I recognized copyright as a useful component of a civilized society.

Now, however, I see that the big content producers are unwilling to reciprocate that civility. I will stop pirating when Big Content stops bribing members of government, subverting the justice system, and pressuring ISPs into spying on me. Big Content does not have a natural right to the large, entertaining numbers they have registered at the copyright office. Civilized behavior is a two way street, I'm sick of being suckered into walking it alone.