EU actions against online music piracy: how far can they go?

Koen DE BOOSER

Kristien DENTENEER

Sam KINDS

Dorien MEEUS

Kwan Jau SIU

Ward VAN DE VELDE

2001 IFPI’s SongBird tracks Napster

2000 - 2001

2000

2005

Peer to Peer technology

Piracy in general

Not internet specific

October 1998: Green Paper

April 2004: Directive

Same level of protection in the entire European internal market

2008: European Anti-piracy Plan

Fight more effectively

Observatory

Communicate with actors

Awareness-raising activities

Enforcement of existing laws

Cooperation

Viviane Reding

Neelie Kroes

2009:

Member states: own laws

EU: Internet ban not an option

privacy!

Hadopi law: ‘3-strike’ procedure

After two warnings, disconnection of Internet

Punishment implemented by a judge

Similar procedure as France

Internet service providers (ISPs) will be legally required to take action and disconnect Internet users

Downloading music and movies currently legal

Government wants to make it illegal, under the condition that the music industry provides alternatives

Not punish individual downloaders but websites and firms that offer these illegal files

End of 2009:

Pressure member states

EU U-turn

Ban under certain conditions

Musicians Metallica v. Napster

Radiohead: free album

ConsequencesFameLive performanceRecord sales

Record Labels Reactions:

Decoy

File sharing Marketing

P2P info

Consequences

Record sales

Abundant

Mission:

Promoting the value of recorded music

Safeguarding the rights of record producers

Expanding commercial uses of recorded music

Affiliated with RIAA

Development of the legal infrastructure forthe electronic music market

Strategy: 3 major objectives: Preserve local culture Fight against organized crime Encourage growth of investment and jobs

Litigation works: consumer attitudes are changing

Cooperation of ISPs Business partners of the future Example: 2008 Eircom

Governmental actions negative effects of piracy for the governments

Belgian association of authors, composers and publishers

SABAM vs. Tiscali Tiscali (ISP): deny access to sites offering illegal music Set an example to all Internet providers in Belgium Court of first instance: expert block the access to P2P networks = feasible? technical solutions --> feasible! blocking all P2P networks (= drastic) filtering technique customer organizations (such as Tik vzw) are against:

- decline in speed- privacy issues

BAF = Belgian Anti-piracy Federation dual approach: organize information campaigns undertake legal actions against pirates

BEA = Belgian Entertainment Association a cooperation agreement with BAF and SABAM

Stichting Brein (Dutch) investigates online and offline piracy takes civil actions provides information and expertise

for legal actions by legal authorities cooperates with MPA and IFPI

Which consumers are especially involved in downloading illegal music?

Why do illegal downloaders engage in such a behavior?

In what way do illegal downloaders get there music files?

Potential solutions regarding illegal downloading and sharing (from consumer’s point of view)?

(hier komt nog mijn deel)

Different groups: different opinions

everybody wants what is best for him/her

Government: matching all this needs in policy

utopia...

Involved parties should give in on their claims

Possible solution: incentives for legal downloading

Easily accessible platforms

Reasonable prices

Good quality

Safe files

EU has not yet gone far enough in its

actions against Internet piracy...