7 ms·
Disclosure of Pirates’ Identities “Compatible with EU Privacy Laws”
- knallfrosch 3y agoAnd I thought the "pirates" referred to armed people in boats capturing cargo ships, not copyright infringers.
- usrbinbash 3y agoIt started as a scare tactic that goes back all the way to when people "pirated" music by recording radio on tape. The idea was to turn public opinion against copyright infringement by using terminology associated with violent crimes, such as piracy and robbery. Ofc it backfired spectacularly, with the "pirating" community adopting the term and reveling in it. Who could have known that using a term that the general public immediately associates positively with countless novels, movies and other works of fiction, radiating a flair of adventure, swashbuckler charm and the freedom of the carribean seas, would fail to turn public opinion against something :D
- OfSanguineFire 3y agoThe use of "pirate" for copyright infringement goes back to at least the 19th century and was originally used of books. By the time taping off radio started, the term was already well entrenched.
- chongli 3y agoThis is especially weird because there’s another usage of pirate in the form of “pirate radio.” This refers to radio stations that broadcast illegally, without a license. They also have a kind of swashbuckling reputation!
- alibarber 3y agoIn the strictest sense the didn't broadcast illegally because they were at sea outside of the jurisdiction of any country.
- tetris11 3y agoNo doubt, Radio Caroline and Radio London both operated offshore https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_Caroline https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_Caroline
- fluoridation 3y agoApparently this usage goes at least as far back as the 18th century! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_infringement#%22Piracy%22 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_infringement#%22Pira...
- HPsquared 3y agoReminds me of that photo of Winston Churchill with the Tommy Gun, the Germans tried to spin it as him bring a gangster but it just ended up looking "cool". https://rarehistoricalphotos.com/winston-churchill-tommy-gun-1940/ https://rarehistoricalphotos.com/winston-churchill-tommy-gun...
- beej71 3y agoNowadays it's looking a lot more like Robin Hood the outlaw rather than Blackbeard, with movie studios, record labels, and book publishers taking up the roles of Prince John, The Sheriff of Nottingham, and Sir Guy.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- fawnj 3y ago[flagged]
- contravariant 3y agoI don't think it's part of some nefarious plan, the EU is still largely a way for big corporations to promote their own interests.
- jorge-d 3y agoHa yes the EU, that famous authoritarian regime !
- _lvbh 3y agoThat sucks
- PrimeMcFly 3y agoThe hypocrisy here is amusing. Interestingly also that piracy is de facto legal in many EU countries, at least as far as individuals downloading.
- Mindwipe 3y agoNo it isn't.
- kyriakos 3y agoMostly authorities ignore it but probably is not legal.
- treyd 3y agoBecause prosecutors realize it generally looks unpopular and there's much better things they could be doing with their time in favor of the public interest.
- kyriakos 3y agoThey use the same legislation to go after people selling iptv server access but won't go after someone watching pirated movies in his living room.
- PrimeMcFly 3y agoIn many EU countries it's decriminalized, hence me saying it was de facto legal.
- jeltz 3y agoWhat hypocrisy? There are almost no comments here.
- PrimeMcFly 3y agoArticle/story, not comments.
- MauranKilom 3y agoAssuming there is no material misrepresentation of how this system operates, I would find it hard to argue that it is disproportionate to keep record of an IP address that somehow makes publicly available a file with copyrighted contents. I too would, from a pure self-interest perspective, like to share e.g. media with impunity, but for the sake of evaluating this opinion it's not reasonable to assume a position where copyright doesn't exist. I'd be interested in arguments against this opinion.
- Propelloni 3y agoIt is hard to argue against your position. TFA expounds that storing data required to prosecute a crime is proportionate. That sounds reasonable and hard to argue. In my eyes there are two points, however, that could be argued. 1) The data retention duration. France is holding some data sets for 13 years now without a charge forthcoming. I'm no expert on French law (or law in general) but it being a full-fledged liberal democracy with the rule-of-law, I guess there is some kind of a statute of limitation with regards to copyright infringement and I would find it hard to argue to keep the data beyond this point. Mind, the statute of limitations could be long-running (in Germany it usually is 30 years, unless the law says otherwise) 2) Seriousness of the crime. Under EU law data retention in the first place is only allowed in case of serious crimes. What is a serious crime? I think it arguable that copyright infringement is not a serious crime. To be not a serious crime it must fail to be a crime or to be serious. I think both positions can be argued, albeit being serious seems to be easier to unhinge. But I'm not going to argue any of these ;)
- cccbbbaaa 3y agoData connection retention is 1 year in France, not 13. This sounds like something related to taxes (eg. Invoices). (Also, this law was ruled unconstitutional but shenanigans ensued.)
- GTP 3y ago> To be not a serious crime it must fail to be a crime or to be serious. I think both positions can be argued, albeit being serious seems to be easier to unhinge.. AFAIK something qualifies as a crime if the law says you can get a jail sentence for it (and vice versa). So it's not something you can argue in favour or against, you just have to look at the current legislation. But you still got a point for the seriousness, since it's not a violent crime there's room for discussion here.
- eddythompson80 3y agoBut myh GDPR
- bux93 3y agoFinal part of the article: "The Advocate General’s Opinion is not binding on the Court of Justice. It is the role of the Advocates General to propose to the Court, in complete independence, a legal solution to the cases for which they are responsible. The Judges of the Court are now beginning their deliberations in this case. Judgment will be given at a later date."
- smashah 3y agoThe big argument against piracy is that it doesn't allow people to get paid for their work, however, with these recent Hollywood strikes and how people are getting paid $0.08 residuals I don't see how piracy makes anyone any worse off. Arguably donating $50 to a writer and pirating everything is better than paying $100s to these streaming services. Maybe WGA SAG AFTRA should make their own subscription called the "pirate pass" where pirates can pay the people directly for their work without all the overhead. If I was a pirate I'd $50 a month to get a pass.
- Kye 3y agoThe whole point of the strike was to fix this. And they got what they wanted when the studios came back to the table after they saw how completely wrecked Drew Barrymore got in the press and by the public when she scabbed.