Dutch Filmworks Takes Quest to Identify Alleged Pirates to the Supreme Court

[Matrix]

 

Film distribution company Dutch FilmWorks is continuing its legal battle to identify BitTorrent pirates. The company is now taking its case against Internet provider Ziggo, where it requests the personal details of subscribers connected to 377 IP-addresses, to the Supreme Court.

 

 

Piracy settlement letters have become a serious threat in countries all round the world.

 

Until now, Dutch Internet users have been spared from this practice but local movie distributor Dutch Filmworks would like that to change.

 

Two years ago the company received permission from the Dutch Data Protection Authority to track the IP-addresses of BitTorrent users who shared pirated movies.

 

However, that was only the first hurdle. The next step was to identify the subscribers behind the IP-addresses and Dutch Internet provider Ziggo didn’t want to share any customer data without a court order.

 

The case went to court, where the movie company requested the personal details of 377 account holders whose addresses were used to share a copy of “The Hitman’s Bodyguard”.

 

This didn’t go as planned for Dutch FilmWorks. In February, the Central Netherlands Court denied the company’s request for data and last month the Court of Appeal reached the same conclusion.

 

Both courts concluded that Dutch Filmworks’ plans lacked transparency and it’s not clear what the movie company plans to do with the personal data it obtains. Dutch Filmworks said that it could either warn subscribers or request damages, but the criteria remain a guess.

 

It also remains unclear how large the proposed settlements will be. An initial figure of €150 per infringement was mentioned in the past, but this number could also be significantly higher.

 

The movie company is unhappy with both verdicts and told the Dutch newspaper NRC that it will take the matter to the Supreme Court. This means that the 377 account holders from ISP Ziggo remain at risk.

 

In theory, it’s not impossible to obtain an order compelling Dutch Internet providers to hand over personal details of accused pirates. However, the previous verdicts make it clear that Dutch Filmworks has to come with a concrete plan.

 

Ultimately, the Supreme Court must find a balance between the privacy rights of subscribers and Dutch Filmworks’ intellectual property rights. When there’s too much uncertainty for accused subscribers, their rights tend to weigh stronger.

 

Source

[Guest]

4 hours ago, Mach1 said:

In theory, it’s not impossible to obtain an order compelling Dutch Internet providers to hand over personal details of accused pirates.

That's because of GDPR.

[steven36]

10 hours ago, Edward Raja said:

That's because of GDPR.

It's not  because of GDPR , it's because of  EU Copyright Reform

 

Internet service providers (ISPs) have previously relied on safeguards provided by an existing EU directive known as the “E-Commerce Directive,” which exempts ISPs from liability for infringements taking place on their services of which they have no knowledge or control.  Another important safeguard provided for in the E-Commerce Directive and heavily relied on by ISPs is that there is no obligation on them to actively seek facts or circumstances indicating illegal activity.

 

Platforms consequently rely on notice-and-takedown procedures whereby a right holder can alert the platform to infringing activity and request that access to it be removed. A consequence of the copyright reform directive will be that those falling within the directive’s definition of online platforms may no longer be able to rely on these exceptions and will become liable for the infringing activity of their users. The original draft of the copyright reform directive, which was rejected by Parliament in July 2018, provided that online platforms would have to put measures in place to prevent infringing content being available on their services, such as the use of effective content recognition technologies.

 

Article 13 is an “unprecedented step towards the transformation of the Internet from an open platform for sharing and innovation, into a tool for the automated surveillance and control of its users.”

 

Article 13 (now known officially as Article 17) is happening. The European Parliament voted – by 348 votes to 274 – to pass its new, comprehensive copyright directive.

 

It's the same in the USA  as far ISPs  can be held  labile 

 

The difference is in the USA The Entertainment industry  sue the ISP for ton of money because suing small fish is not profitable. After you get so many warnings the ISP has to disconnect  you or they can be held labile  It started out as  a volunteer program called 6 strikes made up by Hollywood owned ISPs.  It's been a known fact since 2012 in the USA  if you dont want  to get in trouble with your ISP  you use a vpn with a kill switch or a torrent to direct  link provider , seed box  or just use file host .  Its time for pirates  to wake up and  learn how to protect themselves  the ISP can no longer protect you just to keep you as a customer even if they didn't  volunteer for 6 strikes they  have to  disconnect you to protect themselves . As far as taking Pirates to court in the USA it don't always work many times Judges rule a IP  is not a person , So it's more easy and more profitable to sue the ISP  for not disconnecting you for sharing. 

 

Article  17 is new in the EU  they  still yet to learn what is profitable and whats not they still were the USA  was in the  late 1990s and  2000s and they will be stuck in the past in the 2020s  after 10 years they will figure out they is no money in suing pirates . You can't draw blood out of a turnip and you can't make a person with no money buy your media they will gets some rabbit ears and watch free TV and listen to the radio  like we use to do before the internet if they can't afford it . If there nothing Free on the internet  then offline piracy becomes a problem again.   

 

You got many  people in France  who have been anti ads long before the internet existed and a internet without ads means  walled gardens  and paywalls were  you  have to pay for everything . But still they open source programs were we can  peer to peer without web browsers  back when I 1st came online  BitTorrent  was not king other p2p programs  were   that didn't require a web browser . If  the EU gets there way it will be the end of the internet as we know it  .  

 

The problem  with the GDPR is it's a privacy  law  it has nothing to do with copyright  it punishes websites that use ads and things and in the end it going just  hurt the EU's people because many websites that can't afford  the fines or to comply  just blocks them. It just depends on what privacy laws the USA gets  and how much its like the EU privacy laws will they comply or just keep  blocking them . The way things  are now more sites  will be blocking them soon if things don't change.