Ebook News from hoopla, 3M Cloud Library, and eBooks/Piracy Ruling in the UK

[trainboy]

A news roundup post on infoDOCKET.com alerted me to three stories:

1. Audiobook Titles from Hachette and Simon & Schuster Coming to hoopla

2. 3M Cloud Library Adds New Features For Librarians and Web Users

3. UK: Publishers win landmark case against ebook pirates

Links to roundup post:
http://www.infodocket.com/2015/05/26/news-roundup-28/

[Nate the great]

Actually, the publishers did not win a landmark case. It was all just smoke and mirrors:
http://the-digital-reader.com/2015/0...s-google-next/

[cfrizz]

"(This has led the UK down a rabbit hole of blocking the proxies, and them blocking the sites which list the proxies, and then blocking the sites which list the sites which list the proxies, and then blocking the sites which list the sites which list the sites which list the proxies ... )"


:r ofl:

[HarryT]

I really don't agree with your interpretation of the situation, Nate. The purpose of these blocks is to reduce the likelihood of the casual user coming across the pirate sites, not to stop the serious criminal, and they are effective at doing that. On a number of occasions I've been innocently following legitimate-looking links, and I'm happy to get a "Site Blocked" response, rather than unwittingly download illegal content.

[Terisa de morgan]

If I'm going to a totally legitimate site and I find a 'Blocked site', with all the actions they must do to remove that blockage, I wouldn't be happy. Sorry,

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Terisa de morgan

If I'm going to a totally legitimate site and I find a 'Blocked site', with all the actions they must do to remove that blockage, I wouldn't be happy. Sorry,

I don't think any "totally legitimate sites" have been blocked, unless you're going to argue that sites like TPB are legitimate? Can you give an example of a blocked site that you'd consider to be legitimate? I believe that downloaded pirated material for personal use is legal in Spain, but it's not legal in the UK.

[murg]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I don't think any "totally legitimate sites" have been blocked, unless you're going to argue that sites like TPB are legitimate? Can you give an example of a blocked site that you'd consider to be legitimate? I believe that downloaded pirated material for personal use is legal in Spain, but it's not legal in the UK.

This must explain why so many UK people go live in Spain.

[MikeB1972]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I don't think any "totally legitimate sites" have been blocked, unless you're going to argue that sites like TPB are legitimate? Can you give an example of a blocked site that you'd consider to be legitimate? I believe that downloaded pirated material for personal use is legal in Spain, but it's not legal in the UK.

How about the Radio Times?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-23699681

Highest profile one I can remember from the top of my head.

Lots of incorrect DMCA takedown requests are submitted as well.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by MikeB1972

How about the Radio Times?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-23699681

Highest profile one I can remember from the top of my head.

That, as the article you link to clearly states, was an error, not a deliberate action. The fact that errors occur does not negate the legitimacy of blocking sites which facilitate piracy.

[MikeB1972]

Originally Posted by HarryT

That, as the article you link to clearly states, was an error, not a deliberate action. The fact that errors occur does not negate the legitimacy of blocking sites which facilitate piracy.

I agree, however, there should be more proof required before something is blocked, with some kind of punishment for repeatedly abusing the system.

Or you get more problems like Total Wipes automatically reporting every site with the word download appearing in it.

Total Wipes DMCA takedown stats (Essentially about 900 a week with at least half of them being non infringing)
https://www.google.com/transparencyr...s-Music-Group/

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Nate the great

Actually, the publishers did not win a landmark case. It was all just smoke and mirrors:
http://the-digital-reader.com/2015/0...s-google-next/

Your article is incorrect, Nate. You state:

Here's a key detail the FT missed: there was no need for the PA to get an order from the High Court to block those sites.

The fun thing about the UK is that the gov't maintains a list of sites to block. Originally that list was supposed to be limited to child pornography, criminal activities, and other terrible things, but now that list has grown to include sites which have even a tertiary link to piracy (see the links above) or even sites with no connection to any crime or infringement whatsoever.

The UK Publisher Association could have had those sites blocked just by getting them placed on the appropriate list. There was no need to get a court order.

This is wrong, plain and simple. The "blacklist" you refer to is that of the Internet Watch Foundation. This is specifically and solely there to block child pornography and sites which contain images which are criminally obscene under UK law. It does not block any other type of site.

Blocking other sites requires a court order; it is not (unlike DMCA takedowns) an arbitrary process. Evidence of copyright violation has to be presented to the court.

[Nate the great]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Your article is incorrect, Nate. You state:



This is wrong, plain and simple. The "blacklist" you refer to is that of the Internet Watch Foundation. This is specifically and solely there to block child pornography and sites which contain images which are criminally obscene under UK law. It does not block any other type of site.

Blocking other sites requires a court order; it is not (unlike DMCA takedowns) an arbitrary process. Evidence of copyright violation has to be presented to the court.

Then how did this happen:
http://ccc.de/en/updates/2014/ccc-censored-in-uk

And this:
https://torrentfreak.com/largest-pir...k-isps-140910/

And this:
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20...atsoever.shtml

And this:
http://bsdly.blogspot.ca/2013/12/the...ds-access.html

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Nate the great

Then how did this happen:
http://ccc.de/en/updates/2014/ccc-censored-in-uk

And this:
https://torrentfreak.com/largest-pir...k-isps-140910/

And this:
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20...atsoever.shtml

And this:
http://bsdly.blogspot.ca/2013/12/the...ds-access.html

You're conflating two entirely separate things:

1. Sites which are blocked by court order. This includes the major pirate torrent sites and their proxies.

2. Default blocking of adult content, which most ISPs introduced a while ago. This can be disabled by the user and, indeed, when you go to a site which is blocked by such a filter (eg porn sites), with my ISP at least you get a page telling you precisely how to disable the filter. This is adult content, not pirated material. It has nothing to do with piracy.

From the first link you posted:

Since July 2013, a government-backed so-called opt out list censors the open internet. These internet filters, authorized by Prime Minister David Cameron, are implemented by UK’s major internet service providers (ISPs). Dubbed as the "Great Firewall of Britain", the lists block adult content as well as material related to alcohol, drugs, smoking, and even opinions deemed "extremist". [2]

Users can opt-out of censorship, or bypass it by technical means, but only a minority of users know how to bypass those filters.

This last sentence is nonsense, as I said above: if you try to access a blocked site, you'll be told how to unblock it. In the case of my ISP, the process involves contacting the ISP with proof that you're over 18, and requesting that the block be lifted.

The first and third of your links are referring to these adult content blocks, for which the block can be lifted; the second (blocking of pirate site proxies) is court order stuff, which cannot.

[Nate the great]

Originally Posted by HarryT

The first and third of your links are referring to these adult content blocks, for which the block can be lifted; the second (blocking of pirate site proxies) is court order stuff, which cannot.

Except the sites listed weren't pirate site proxies. Also, the sites blocked yesterday weren't pirate sites, either.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Nate the great

Except the sites listed weren't pirate site proxies. Also, the sites blocked yesterday weren't pirate sites, either.

They were sites which facilitated copyright infringement by linking to pirated material. You may recall that the founders of "The Pirate Bay" went to prison for this offence, even though TPB did not itself hold pirated material.

The screenshot below, taken from my iPad, shows what happens when you access a site which is blocked by adult content filters. I'm sure you'll agree that it's nonsense to suggest the most users will be unable to understand how to bypass this block?