E-book customer sharing with anti-piracy group BREIN faces political backlash

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I don't know the details of what this BREIN group is proposing, but something really does need to be done to allow small content producers to take advantage of the protection that the law claims to offer them, but in reality doesn't.

Small claims courts.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

Small claims courts.

I'm afraid you're missing the point. The problem is finding out the identity of the uploader. That's what requires the ruinously expensive court case to get the information from the site owner, ISP, etc. That's the process that's currently denied to the small content creator because of the cost involved. A small claims court is fine once you know who the uploader is.

[crich70]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Nobody is suggesting that copyright infringement should be punished by "several decades in jail" - please don't put words into peoples' mouths.

The issue is not the scale of punishments for copyright infringement, but the fact that the entire legal process is beyond the reach of all but the largest companies, and so unwieldy that it's effectively unenforcible. I don't know the details of what this BREIN group is proposing, but something really does need to be done to allow small content producers to take advantage of the protection that the law claims to offer them, but in reality doesn't.

I wasn't putting words in peoples mouths HarryT. Just making the point that some things are criminal and some things are civil and it's not likely that something like this which is civil in nature will be reclassified as criminal any time soon. At one time being a thief could get you executed if Dickens portrayal of some of his characters is accurate. And if someone tried to get a stronger penalty for copyright infringement passed into law I imagine there would be an uproar about it. Not to mention jails are already overcrowded because of how many people are sent to prison for various non-violent crimes. I'm not a lawyer, but I can't imagine many people wanting to add to that problem by changing something that is considered civil to something criminal in nature.

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I'm afraid you're missing the point. The problem is finding out the identity of the uploader. That's what requires the ruinously expensive court case to get the information from the site owner, ISP, etc. That's the process that's currently denied to the small content creator because of the cost involved. A small claims court is fine once you know who the uploader is.

Submit whatever proof you have that someone is violating your copyright to the court and they can order the website to disclose the identity of the violator. And if that's not covered by current law, then change the law.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

Epic lameness trumps all. There are quite a lot of people who are of the opinion that if it is digital, it can be pirated and therefore SHOULD be pirated to save money, whatever the cost.

This.
Way back in the day, I knew people who would buy a $2000 PC AT to run a copy "pirated" from work when they could buy a $300 ATARI ST or Amiga and buy a legal copy of Word Perfect for $200.
And that was all they ran on that PC other than PRINT SHOP which was also available as a cheap native app.

[speakingtohe]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

Chrich70: There is one thing you are forgetting:

The epic lameness of some people.

I've seen people build a desktop computer costing €2000, and then running a cracked version of Windows 7 on it (€89 for a Home Premium OEM), having to re-install / re-crack each time the OS is updated. Couldn't they not have built a computer costing €1911, and then buy Windows along with it?

Even worse. People buying a €1500 notebook, running Windows 8, and then using a cracked version of Stardock Start8 (€5), even though there are similar alternatives such as classic shell.

Think you've hit rock bottom? Think again. I know some people who go to great lenghts, such as searching for 4 hours, to find a full version of an Android application they want, on the internet. The app costs like €1. Those people are "working" HOURS, to save €1.

Epic lameness trumps all. There are quite a lot of people who are of the opinion that if it is digital, it can be pirated and therefore SHOULD be pirated to save money, whatever the cost.

Saving €1, or even €5 or €10 if it takes me a day to do it, then that's a very bad deal, except if you have both no money whatsoever (and no income) and unlimited time.

Too true

[speakingtohe]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Is it?
I don't deny it is trivially easy.
(And, of course, in certain countries "piracy" is part of the mainstream culture.)

But, is *ebook* "piracy" really that prevalent in the countries mounting these internal dragnets?

Just asking, you know.
Some actual proof, instead of vague assertions from self-interested parties (on both ends) would be nice.

Easy enough to find the proof. I am sure you could do it. I was curious so I looked at a site and was astonished at the number of Dutch (NL) books available. My understanding was that there were not that many Dutch ebooks published.

And the majority seemed to be recent. It is almost as if the threat implied has been taken as a dare and the Dutch people are uploading anything they can.

Helen

[TadW]

What'sproof for privacy? IP addresses?

There are "specialized" companies out there who use proprietary automated tools to fish for random IP addresses from torrents etc. What do they do with that information? They turn piracy into profit through "speculative invoices", making a fortunate by forcing cash from alledged file-shared who don't have the time nor knowledge to fight back. IMHO, it has absolutely nothing to do with law enforcement. Rather, it's a scam.

[6charlong]

I’m probably being simplistic, but is there no way to identify files with DRM without actually opening each and every file? If it can be done, couldn’t a simple webcrawler find files without DRM, compare hits to a database of books that should have it, and send an automated takedown notice to the host site? If a site refuses the takedown then start legal action.

Something like this would only work in some jurisdictions though, leaving the larger problem to international relations, which is a government responsibility.

[speakingtohe]

Originally Posted by 6charlong

I’m probably being simplistic, but is there no way to identify files with DRM without actually opening each and every file? If it can be done, couldn’t a simple webcrawler find files without DRM, compare hits to a database of books that should have it, and send an automated takedown notice to the host site? If a site refuses the takedown then start legal action.

Something like this would only work in some jurisdictions though, leaving the larger problem to international relations, which is a government responsibility.

People sell books without DRM. Because they do not have DRM does not mean it is okay to pirate them. And no a simple webcrawler could not do what you suggest.
The books would have to be downloaded and checked on an individual basis.

Helen

[Soldim]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I'm afraid you're missing the point. The problem is finding out the identity of the uploader. That's what requires the ruinously expensive court case to get the information from the site owner, ISP, etc. That's the process that's currently denied to the small content creator because of the cost involved. A small claims court is fine once you know who the uploader is.

What it comes down to, as usual, I show much privacy one can ask law-abiding citizens to give up to be able to catch the culprits.

Personally, I prefer a watermark system over the current DRM since DRM inconveniences me -- I have to remove it every time I purchase a book. A watermark shouldn't bother me if I shift between kindle and epub format. Since I don't distribute ebooks I purchase beyond our own ereaders I shouldn't have anything to fear from the watermark system. However, since publishers could request purchaser information without having to go through court there's a reasonable chance some marketing chap will get a semi-brilliant idea one day and push the request button anyway. So I really prefer to decide myself with whom and when my data gets shared.

And of course, the professional uploaders will be able to circumvent watermarking in no time, all being back at square one.

[meeera]

Originally Posted by Soldim

Personally, I prefer a watermark system over the current DRM since DRM inconveniences me -- I have to remove it every time I purchase a book. A watermark shouldn't bother me if I shift between kindle and epub format. Since I don't distribute ebooks I purchase beyond our own ereaders I shouldn't have anything to fear from the watermark system.

Well, maybe. I have concerns about it: if you are hacked, or your Dropbox (or whatever offsite backup solution you use) is hacked, bam, all your watermarked books could be released with no way for you to "prove" that it wasn't you.

[crich70]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

Chrich70: There is one thing you are forgetting:

The epic lameness of some people.

I've seen people build a desktop computer costing €2000, and then running a cracked version of Windows 7 on it (€89 for a Home Premium OEM), having to re-install / re-crack each time the OS is updated. Couldn't they have built a computer costing €1911, and then buy Windows along with it?

Even worse. People buying a €1500 notebook, running Windows 8, and then using a cracked version of Stardock Start8 (€5), even though there are similar free alternatives such as classic shell.

Think you've hit rock bottom? Think again. I know some people who go to great lenghts, such as searching for 4 hours, to find a full version of an Android application they want, on the internet. The app costs like €1. Those people are "working" HOURS, to save €1.

Epic lameness trumps all. There are quite a lot of people who are of the opinion that if it is digital, it can be pirated and therefore SHOULD be pirated to save money, whatever the cost.

Saving €1, or even €5 or €10 if it takes me a day to do it, then that's a very bad deal, except if you have both no money whatsoever (and no income) and unlimited time.

I wasn't saying that all piracy would stop if the books were legally available and the prices were lower. Just that those two things account for some of the reasons why people do it.

[speakingtohe]

Originally Posted by crich70

I wasn't saying that all piracy would stop if the books were legally available and the prices were lower. Just that those two things account for some of the reasons why people do it.

Ebook piracy is pretty wide spread though and you don't need a bank loan to buy a book or two a week. Those who used to buying and now pirate ebooks would be hard put to claim financial hardship. Plus in many first world countries at least there is a very good library selection available in most locations.

Helen

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by HarryT

The problem with the current system is that copyright infringement is, in most cases, a civil, rather than a criminal, offence, and that means that "justice" is outside the reach of everyone except the largest of companies. If I find that someone has uploaded a pirated copy of my software to a web site, then even if I know the username of the uploader on the site, there's absolutely nothing that I can do about it. I can't afford the legal costs to go to court to get a court order to force the site to reveal the identity of the uploader, or the cost of a private prosecution to do something about it even if I did know their identity.

I don't know what the answer is, or whether this BREIN group has any good ideas to solve the problem, but from the viewpoint of the content creator (and don't make the mistake of thinking that all content creators are large companies - they certainly aren't) there is a very real problem with the current judicial system.

What would you want to do to the uploader, from the viewpoint of the content creator?

Part of the problem with groups like BREIN is that nothing gets back to the content creator. It's not even clear to me what BREIN is saying that it intends to do with the information.

Originally Posted by Alexander Turcic

Not sure, but I remember following a case where a few individuals had been allegedly uploading tens of thousands of non-fiction books/textbooks on Usenet. Links:

http://torrentfreak.com/major-book-p...oaders-130612/

http://www.contrapositivediary.com/?p=2925

But this isn't a case of rampant piracy. The first article mentions nothing about people downloading the textbooks. The second article makes some very good points about this being an inside job, because it would be very unlikely of someone outside of the publishing world getting their hands on so many high quality digital versions of textbooks.

Originally Posted by HarryT

Nobody is suggesting that copyright infringement should be punished by "several decades in jail" - please don't put words into peoples' mouths.

The issue is not the scale of punishments for copyright infringement, but the fact that the entire legal process is beyond the reach of all but the largest companies, and so unwieldy that it's effectively unenforcible. I don't know the details of what this BREIN group is proposing, but something really does need to be done to allow small content producers to take advantage of the protection that the law claims to offer them, but in reality doesn't.

OK, not several decades, how about: 87 Months in Prison for Copyright Infringement: Fair Sentence or Utter Madness?

Originally Posted by Katsunami

I've seen people build a desktop computer costing €2000, and then running a cracked version of Windows 7 on it (€89 for a Home Premium OEM), having to re-install / re-crack each time the OS is updated. Couldn't they have built a computer costing €1911, and then buy Windows along with it?

Even worse. People buying a €1500 notebook, running Windows 8, and then using a cracked version of Stardock Start8 (€5), even though there are similar free alternatives such as classic shell.

Think you've hit rock bottom? Think again. I know some people who go to great lenghts, such as searching for 4 hours, to find a full version of an Android application they want, on the internet. The app costs like €1. Those people are "working" HOURS, to save €1.

Epic lameness trumps all. There are quite a lot of people who are of the opinion that if it is digital, it can be pirated and therefore SHOULD be pirated to save money, whatever the cost.

Saving €1, or even €5 or €10 if it takes me a day to do it, then that's a very bad deal, except if you have both no money whatsoever (and no income) and unlimited time.

Reminds me of this: