The Struggle in Online Copyright Enforcement

Sandra Schmitz

doi:10.5771/9783845265872

The Struggle in Online Copyright Enforcement

Problems and Prospects

Reihe: Luxemburger Juristische Studien - Luxembourg Legal Studies

Band 8 1. Auflage 2015

Kein Zugriff

doi.org/10.5771/9783845265872
ISBN print: 978-3-8487-2428-4
ISBN online: 978-3-8452-6587-2
Nomos, Baden-Baden Nomos, Baden-Baden

Im Shop erwerben

Zusammenfassung

Wie werden Urheberrechtsverletzungen im Internet begegnet? Die Studie zeigt den internationalen, europäischen sowie nationale Rechtsrahmen auf, wobei der Schwerpunkt auf dem Recht der EU-Mitgliedsstaaten Frankreich, Großbritannien und Deutschland liegt.

Bei der Darstellung nationalen Rechts unterscheidet die Studie zwischen Durchsetzungsmechanismen, die sich gegen den Nutzer selbst, und solchen, die sich gegen die rechtsverletzenden Inhalte selbst richten. Als Herausforderung für die Durchsetzung von Urheberrechten im Internet zeigen sich insbesondere die Suche nach dem richtigen Adressaten einer Maßnahme und die Gestaltung eines Durchsetzungsmechanismus, der nicht nur effektiv ist sondern auch den Grundsatz der Verhältnismäßigkeit beachtet. Neben der Erläuterung und Analyse einzelstaatlicher Regelungen auf ihre Kompatibilität mit Grundrechten und europäischem Recht, liegt auch ein Schwerpunkt auf Fragen der Beweiserhebung im Internet, sowie der technischen Umsetzbarkeit und Effizienz einzelner Maßnahmen.

Kapitel Ausklappen | EinklappenSeiten
1–20 Titelei/Inhaltsverzeichnis 1–20
21–49 Introduction 21–49
- A. Defining Copyright
- B. Defining Copyright Enforcement
- C. The Problem: When Copyright and Technology Clash
  - I. Ordinary Users Easily Become Infringers
  - II. Changed Concept of Ownership
  - III. Do Consumers Understand the System and Vice Versa?
- D. The Research Topic: Copyright Enforcement on the Internet
- E. Macrolevel Approaches to Fight Online Copyright Infringements
  - I. Unilateral or Multilateral Enforcement: Strengthening Enforcement within and outside of National Borders
  - II. Multilateral: Proposal for New Trade Agreement ACTA
  - III. United States: SOPA and PIPA – Initiatives to Strengthen Enforcement Globally
  - IV. EU: IPRED2
  - V. Copyright Enforcement in the EU: No Uniform Approach in Member States
- F. Limits of the Research
- G. Terminology
- H. Sources
- I. Outline of the Research
49–195 First Chapter: Legal and Technological Background 49–195
- 49–115 A. The Status Quo – or How Did We Get to Where We AreToday? 49–115
  - I. Copyright in a Digitalised World
    - 1. A Short History of Copyright and Copyright Enforcement in the Offline World
    - 2. Copyright Challenges in an Online Environment
      - a) Technological Progress
      - b) Failure of Technological Protection Measures
      - c) Lack of Understanding Intellectual Property Rights
      - d) User-Generated Content and a Participatory Internet
      - e) Necessity to Reform Copyright Law?
    - 3. Scope of Online Copyright Infringement
      - a) Difficulties in Determining the Scope of Online Copyright Infringements
      - b) The Impact of Illegal Downloads on Sales Figures
  - II. The History of File-Sharing: From Peer-to-Peer Technology to Sharehosting and Streaming
    - 1. Peer-to-Peer File-sharing
    - 2. File Hosting Services
    - 3. USENET
    - 4. Streaming
    - 5. File-Sharing as of Today
  - III. Existing Model Regimes for Online Intermediary Liability
    - 1. Early Responses to File-Sharing: Legal Action against the Innovators
    - 2. The Development of Limited Liability
      - a) The Leading Model Regimes Relating to Intellectual Property
        aa) The US Digital Millennium Copyright Act
        bb) The E-Commerce Directive 2000/31/EC
        cc) The US and EU Regimes: Similarities and Deficits
      - b) The Necessity to Go Beyond Notice and Take down
- 115–195 B. The Technological and Legal Challenges of Online Copyright Enforcement 115–195
  - I. The Technological Challenges
    - 1. Technological Context
      - a) The Evolution of the Internet in a Nutshell
      - b) IP Address Allocation
      - c) Domain Name System
    - 2. The Difficulties to Identify an Infringer That Result from Technology as such
      - a) “On the Internet, Nobody Knows You’re a Dog”
      - b) Dynamic IP Addresses
      - c) Anonymous Web Browsing
    - 3. The Difficulties to Delete or Block Access
    - 4. The Role of Technology in the Assessment of Interferences with Fundamental Rights
  - II. The Legal Challenges: The Fundamental Rights at Stake
    - 1. Sources of Fundamental Rights
      - a) International Level: The International Bill of Human Rights
        aa) The Universal Declaration of Human Rights
        bb) The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
      - b) European Union Level: The European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union
        aa) The European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms
        bb) Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union
        cc) The Relationship between the Convention and the Charter
    - 2. The Fundamental Rights of User at Stake
      - a) Freedom of Expression in the Form of Freedom to Seek, Impart and Receive Information
        aa) Freedom of Expression in General
        bb) The Right to Receive and Seek Information
        cc) The Right to Impart Information
        dd) The Right to Internet Access
        ee) Justification of Interference
      - b) Privacy Rights
        aa) Privacy Rights in General
        bb) Right to Respect for Family and Private Life
        cc) Right to the Confidentiality of Communications
        dd) Right to Protection of Personal Data
        ee) Justification of Interference
      - c) Procedural Rights
        aa) Right to a Fair Trial
        bb) Presumption of Innocence and Right of Defence
        cc) Principles of Legality and Proportionality of Criminal Offences and Penalties
        dd) Ne Bis in Idem Rule
    - 3. The Fundamental Rights of Internet Service Providers at Stake
      - a) Freedom to Conduct Business
      - b) Freedom of Expression
    - 4. Fundamental Rights of the Intellectual Property Rights Owners
      - a) Right to Intellectual Property
      - b) Right to an Effective Remedy
    - 5. In Brief: The Balancing of Fundamental Rights
195–517 Second Chapter: User-Targeted Responses 195–517
- 195–243 A. The Peer-to-Peer File-Sharer as the Addressee of Enforcement Measures 195–243
  - I. The Idea of Enforcement in Peer-to-Peer File-Sharing Networks
  - II. Peer-to-Peer File-Sharing: Scope, Specific Functioning and Consequences
    - 1. Peer-to-Peer File-Sharing Networks in General
    - 2. The Third Generation of Peer-to-Peer File Sharing Networks
    - 3. Peer-to-Peer File-Sharing in Numbers
    - 4. The Copyright-Infringing Act
      - a) Uploading Regularly Goes Along with Downloading
      - b) Parts of a Protected Work Enjoy Protection
      - c) Non-Applicability of the Private Copying Exception
    - 5. Explaining the Demand for Enforcement Schemes Focussing on Peer-to-Peer Networks
  - III. Technological Challenges in Detecting and Identifying File-Sharers
    - 1. In General: Collecting Digital Evidence
    - 2. The Necessary Evidence
    - 3. The Identifiable
      - a) The Copyright Infringement
      - b) The IP Address
    - 4. The Identifier
      - a) How Data Is Harvested
      - b) Reliability of Data Harvesting/Evidence
        aa) Manipulation of File-Sharing Clients
        bb) Mistimed and Mismatched Logs
        cc) Misreporting by Trackers
        dd) Problems Belonging to the Sphere of the Subscriber: Unsecured Computers and Wi-Fi Connections
      - c) Evasion of Detection: Migration to (More) Secure Peer-to-Peer Networks
        aa) Anonymous Peer-to-Peer Networks
        bb) Friends-to-Friends Networks
        cc) VPN Clients, Proxies and TOR
      - d) The Burden of Proof
  - IV. Resume
- 243–517 B. National Enforcement Measures Against Users 243–517
  - I. Legal Framework under European Union Law
    - 1. Copyright Law Providing for Remedies against and Sanctions of Individual End-Users
      - a) IPR Enforcement Directive 2004/48/EC
      - b) Information Society Directive 2001/29/EC
      - c) EU Telecoms Reform Package
      - d) Rome II Regulation
    - 2. Data Protection Law and Information Rights
      - a) Data Protection Directive 95/46/EC
      - b) E-Privacy Directive 2002/58/EC
      - c) Data Retention Directive 2006/24/EC
        aa) The Scope of Application of the Data Retention Directive
        bb) The Declaration of the Invalidity of the Data Retention Directive: Joined cases C-293/12 and C-594/12 Digital Rights Ireland and Seitlinger and Others
    - 3. Liability Exemption for Access Providers under the E-Commerce Directive 2000/31
    - 4. Relevant Jurisprudence of the CJEU
      - a) Disclosure of Traffic Data: C-275/06 Promusicae
      - b) Disclosure of Traffic Data to Third Parties: C-557/07 LSG-Gesellschaft zur Wahrnehmung von Leistungsschutzrechten
      - c) Legitimacy of National Disclosure Legislation : C-461/10 Bonnier Audio v Perfect Communication Sweden
      - d) Prohibition of General Monitoring Duty: C-70/10 Scarlet Extended v SABAM
      - e) Practical Impact of the Decisions
  - II. Copyright Enforcement in Member States through Criminal Sanctions: Graduated Response Schemes
    - 1. France: the Graduated Response Scheme of the HADOPI Laws
      - a) Copyright Enforcement in France in General
        aa) The Origin of Copyright in France
        bb) The Private Copying Exception
        cc) Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights upon Initiative of the Rights-Holder
      - b) Setting the Framework for a Graduated Response Scheme
        aa) Loi Relative au Droit d’Auteur et aux Droits Voisins dans la Société de l’Information – Loi DADVSI
        bb) Loi Favorisant la Diffusion et la Protection de la Création sur Internet – Loi HADOPI I
        cc) Loi Relative à la Protection Pénale de la Propriété Littéraire et Artistique sur Internet – Loi HADOPI II
        dd) Summary
      - c) Outline and Functioning of the Current Graduated Response Scheme
        aa) The Missions and Powers of HADOPI
        bb) How the Graduated Response Scheme Works
        (1) Gathering of Information of Infringements
        (2) The Warning Procedure
        (3) Consequences: Referral to the Prosecutor’s Office and Criminal Proceedings
      - d) The Status quo
        aa) The Graduated Response Scheme in Numbers
        bb) The Unsatisfying Results of HADOPI
      - e) A Sustainable Model Regime? The Order of 8 July 2013 and the Lescure Rapport
    - 2. UK: The Graduated Response Scheme of the DEA 2010
      - a) Copyright Enforcement in the UK in General
        aa) The Origins of Copyright in the UK
        bb) The Fair Dealing Exception
        cc) Enforcement of IP Rights upon Initiative of the Rights-Holder
      - b) Paving the Way for a Future Graduated Response Scheme
        aa) Digital Britain Report
        bb) Digital Economy Act
        cc) The Regulatory Codes that Accompany the Digital Economy Act
        (1) Online Infringement of Copyright Initial Obligations Code
        (2) Online Infringement of Copyright (Initial Obligations) (Sharing of Costs) Order
        (3) Technical Obligations Code
        dd) Summary
      - c) Outline and Functioning of the Graduated Response Scheme
        aa) The Role of the Ofcom
        bb) How the Graduated Response Scheme (should) Work
        (1) Gathering of Information of Infringements
        (2) The Warnings: Applicant, Content and Proceedings
        (3) Consequences
      - d) The Status Quo
      - e) The DEA’s Future in Limbo
    - 3. Graduated Response Schemes: Concerns Relating to Technology and Fundamental Rights
      - a) Dealing with Technological Matters
        aa) The Identifiable
        (1) Determination of a Copyright Infringement
        (2) Fact that IP Address Identification Does Not Necessarily Identify the Actual Infringer
        bb) The Identifier
        (1) Concerns in Relation to Reliability of Data
        (2) Responses to Evasion of Detection
        cc) Enforcement of Internet Suspension or Restriction
        dd) No Prescribed Standard for Securing Internet Access
      - b) Compliance of the Graduated Response Schemes With Secondary EU Law
        aa) Compliance of Graduated Response Schemes with Secondary EU Law in General
        bb) Compliance of the Data Processing with Secondary EU Law
        (1) Questions of Applicability of Data Protection Law: IP Address as Personal Data
        (2) Processing of Data
        (3) Disclosure of Personal Data
        (4) Processing of Sensitive Data
        cc) Compliance of Internet Suspension or Restriction Orders with Secondary EU Law
        dd) Compliance of Cost-Sharing with Secondary EU Law
      - c) Conformity with the Fundamental Rights of Internet Users
        aa) Sanctions Interfering with a User’s Right to Freedom to Expression in the Form of Freedom to Seek, Impart and Receive Information
        (1) Interference
        (2) Justification of Interference
        bb) Collecting and Processing of Communications and Personal Data Interfering with Privacy Rights
        (1) Interference with the Right to Respect for Family and Private Life
        (2) Interference with the Right to the Confidentiality of Communications
        (3) Interference with the Right to the Protection of Personal Data
        (4) Justification
        (5) In Specific: Data Retention Requirements for Access Providers
        cc) Interferences with Procedural Rights
        (1) Right to a Fair Trial
        (2) Presumption of Innocence
        (3) Principles of Legality and Proportionality of Criminal Offences and Penalties
      - d) Conformity with the Fundamental Rights of Internet Service Providers
        aa) Freedom to Conduct Business of Traditional Access Providers
        bb) Freedom to Conduct Business of Providers of Free Wi-Fi Services
        cc) Freedom to Conduct Business of Commercial Wi-Fi Operators
        dd) The UK Graduated Response Scheme Violates the Rights of Access Providers
      - e) Achieving a Fair Balance of the Contravening Interests
  - III. Copyright Enforcement in Member States Through Private Litigation
    - 1. Germany: Abmahnungen
      - a) Legal Framework for Private Copyright Enforcement in Germany
        aa) Liability for Copyright Infringements
        (1) Direct, Contributory and Vicarious Liability
        (2) Störerhaftung: Liability as a Disturber
        (3) Application of the Liability Concepts to the Subscriber of an IP Address
        bb) Remedies for Copyright Infringement
        (1) Damages
        (2) Cease and Desist
        cc) Information Rights
        dd) The Abmahnung
      - b) Outline and Functioning of Pre-Litigation Settlement
        aa) Gathering of Information on Infringements
        bb) Disclosure Orders
        cc) Pre-Litigation Correspondence: Request to Cease and Desist and Claim for Damages
      - c) The Status Quo: How Abmahungen (almost) Became a Profitable Tool for Rights-holders
        aa) Information Requests Are not Thoroughly Assessed
        bb) A Narrow Interpretation of “Non-Complex” Cases
        cc) Optimisation of Pre-Litigation Correspondence
        dd) False Allegations – The Redtube.com Case
      - d) Steps Taken to Prevent that “Piracy Turns into Profit”
    - 2. UK: Out of Court Settlement by Pre-Litigation Letters: A fundamentally Different Approach?
      - a) In Brief: Legal Framework for Private Copyright Enforcement in the UK
        aa) The Service of Disclosure Orders in the UK – Right to Information and Norwich Pharmacal orders
        bb) Remedies for Copyright Infringement in the UK
      - b) Lessons Learned from Germany: The Phenomenon of Cease and Desist Letters in the UK and Speculative Invoicing
        aa) Introducing the Antipiracy Industry in the UK
        bb) The History of Speculative Invoicing in the UK
        cc) Putting the Rule to the Test: Piracy Cannot Be Turned into Profit
        (1) Golden Eye v Telefonica UK: Facts of the Case
        (2) The Conditions for Granting Norwich Pharmacal Relief in Relation to Peer-to-Peer File-Sharing Cases and Speculative Invoicing
        (3) Establishment of Genuine Intent to Seek Redress for Arguable Wrongs
        (4) Disclosure Order Must be Necessary to Pursue Redress
        (5) Proportionality of a Disclosure Order
        (6) Control of the litigation
        dd) Summary
        ee) The UK Application Departs from the German Approach
    - 3. Pre-Litigation Letters: Concerns Relating toTechnology and Fundamental Rights
      - a) Dealing with Technological Matters
        aa) IP Address Subscribers Must Not be Equalled with Actual Infringers
        bb) Obligations to Secure a Wi-Fi Connection under Private Law
        cc) Concerns in Relation to Reliability of Data
      - b) Compliance of Information Disclosure with Secondary EU Law
      - c) Conformity with the Fundamental Rights of Internet Users
        aa) Collecting of Personal Data Interfering with Privacy Rights
        bb) Disclosure of Personal Data Interfering with Privacy Rights
        cc) Right to Fair Trial of Alleged Infringers
      - d) Achieving a Fair Balance of the Contravening Interests
517–719 Third Chapter: Content- or Intermediary-Targeted Responses 517–719
- 517–565 A. Online Intermediaries as the Addressees of Enforcement Measures 517–565
  - I. The Idea of Enforcement via Online Intermediaries
  - II. The Services and Activities of Online Intermediaries that Are Targeted: Scope, Specific Functioning and Consequences
    - 1. File-Hosting Services, Indexing Sites and Link Directories
    - 2. Streaming
    - 3. File Hosting and Streaming Websites in Numbers
    - 4. The Copyright-Infringing Act
      - a) The Legality of the Provision of File Hosting Services
      - b) The Illegality of Making Available Links to the General Public
      - c) The (Il)Legality of Unauthorised Streaming
      - d) The (Il)Legality of Consumption of Streams
    - 5. The Reasons for Targeting these Services
  - III. Technological Challenges
    - 1. Filtering and Blocking Techniques
      - a) Internet Protocol Address Blocking
      - b) Domain Name System Name Blocking
      - c) Uniform Resource Locator Site Blocking
      - d) Deep Packet Inspection-Based Blocking
      - e) Hybrid Systems – The Example of CleanFeed
    - 2. Circumvention Tools
      - a) Circumvention Tools available to Website Operators
        aa) Change of IP Address and/or Additional Domain Names
        bb) Proxy Services, Anonymising Services and Virtual Private Networking
        cc) Mirroring
      - b) Circumvention Tools available to Users
        aa) Encryption
        bb) Proxy Services, Anonymising Services and Virtual Private Networking
      - c) The Efficiency of Blocking
  - IV. Resume
- 565–719 B. Enforcement Measures Directed at Intermediaries 565–719
  - I. EU Legal Framework
    - 1. Liability of Intermediaries in General: The E-Commerce Directive 2000/31
    - 2. Copyright Law Providing for Injunctions
      - a) Information Society Directive 2001/29/EC
      - b) IPR Enforcement Directive 2004/48/EC
      - c) Data Protection Framework: E-Privacy Directive 2002/58
    - 3. Relevant Jurisprudence of the CJEU
      - a) Injunctions in General: Case C-324/09 L’Oréal v eBay
      - b) Injunctions against Access Providers: Case C-70/10 Scarlet Extended v SABAM
      - c) Injunctions against Host Providers: Case C-360/10 SABAM v Netlog
      - d) Injunctions Specifying the Means of Access Blocking: Case C-314/12 UPC Telekabel Wien v Constantin Film Verleih
      - e) Summary of the Case Law of the CJEU
    - 4. Jurisprudence of the ECtHR
      - a) Access Blocking: Yildirim v Turkey
      - b) Criminal Liability of Intermediaries: Neij and Sunde Kolmisoppi v Sweden
      - c) Civil Liability of Intermediaries: Delfi v Estonia
      - d) Summary of the Case-Law of the ECtHR
  - II. Enforcement upon Initiative of Administrative Authorities
    - 1. France: No Competence of Administrative Authorities to Order Access Blocking to Illegal Materials
    - 2. Germany: Regional Initiatives and Legislative Attempts to Provide for Access Blocking Have Limited Success
      - a) “Düsseldorfer Sperrverfügungen”
      - b) The Fate of the “Zugangserschwerungsgesetz”
      - c) No Positive Future for Access Blocking by Administrative Authorities in Germany
    - 3. UK: The Fate of the Website Blocking Provisions of the DEA 2010
      - a) Legal Framework foreseen in the DEA 2010
      - b) Sections 17 and 18 of the DEA 2010: Unnecessary?
    - 4. Resume: No Blocking of Copyright Infringing Content to Be Ordered by Administrative Authorities
  - III. Enforcement upon Initiative of the Rights-holders via Access Providers
    - 1. UK: Injunctions to Block Access against Access Providers
      - a) The Legal Framework: Section 97A CDPA 1988
      - b) Setting the Precedent: Twentieth Century Fox v BT
        aa) Excursus: From NewzBin1 (Twentieth Century Fox v NewzBin) to NewzBin2 (Twentieth Century Fox v BT)
        bb) The Injunctions against BT in NewzBin2
      - c) Applying the Precedent
      - d) Injunctions under Section 97A CDPA 1988: A Pyrrhic Victory for Copyright Owners
    - 2. Germany: No Injunctions against Access Providers
    - 3. Access Blocking by Access Providers: Concerns relating to Technology and Fundamental Rights
      - a) Technological Concerns in Relation to Access Blocking
      - b) Compliance with Secondary EU Law
      - c) Conformity with Fundamental Rights of Internet Users
        aa) Interference with Users’ Rights to Seek, Receive and Impart Information
        bb) Interference with the Users’ Privacy Rights
      - d) Conformity with Fundamental Rights of Access Providers
      - e) Striking a Fair Balance between the Contravening Interests
  - IV. Enforcement upon Initiative of the Rights-Holders via Host Providers
    - 1. Germany: Obligations of Host Providers to Prevent Similar Infringements
      - a) The Legal Framework
        aa) Telemediengesetz
        bb) Störerhaftung
        cc) The Scope of Monitoring Duties of Host Providers
      - b) Liability of File-Hosting Services in General
      - c) Notice and Stay-Down: Scope of Specific Monitoring Duties of File-Hosting Services
      - d) Extensive Monitoring in Practice
    - 2. France
      - a) Legal Framework: Loi pour la confiance dans l’économie numerique
      - b) Scope of Any Blocking Obligation: Take down and Stay Down?
      - c) Limits of Notice and Take down and the Shift to Content Blocking by Search Engines
    - 3. Host Provider Obligations: Concerns Relating to Technology and Fundamental Rights
      - a) Dealing with Technological Matters: The Difficulties to Identify Similar or Identical Infringements
      - b) Compliance with Secondary EU Law
      - c) Conformity with Fundamental Rights of Host Providers
        aa) Freedom to Pursue Business and Property Rights
        bb) Right to Impart Information Created by Third Parties
      - d) Extensive Monitoring and a Fair Balance of Rights
719–747 General Conclusions 719–747
- A. Problems Encountered in Copyright Enforcement
  - I. Copyright Enforcement on the Internet is a Struggle to Find the Right Target
  - II. Copyright Enforcement on the Internet Puts Disproportionate Weight on Intellectual Property Rights
  - III. Copyright Enforcement Discourages Innovation and Creativity
  - IV. Copyright Enforcement on the Internet Targets End-Users Rather than Commercial Infringers
  - V. No Evidence of Effectiveness of Current Initiatives
  - VI. Access Blocking is Playing Cat and Mouse
- B. Prospects
  - I. The German Cease and Desist Letter Regime: Not so Bad as it May Seem
  - II. Search Engines as Law Enforcement Officers: Limiting Visibility of Illegal Materials
  - III. A Promising Alternative: Follow the Money
  - IV. In Parallel: Protecting Copyright and Users
    - 1. In Specific: Remove Obstacles to the Provision of Cross-Border Digital Content Services
    - 2. In Specific: Education of Users and Promotion of Legal Offers
  - V. Exciting Time with Pitfalls
747–789 List of References 747–789
789–800 Table of Cases 789–800

Durchsuchen Sie das Werk

Geben Sie ein Keyword in die Suchleiste ein