France pulls the plug on rogue downloaders

I had better check the videos and music that I have posted here over the past couple of years. There might be content that infringes a ground-breaking law, endorsed by President Sarkozy and his cabinet today, for punishing people for internet abuse.

The new "Creation and Internet" law is a deliciously French construction. The entertainment industry, copyright agencies, the state and internet service companies (ISPs) have teamed up to create a "three-strikes-and-you're-out" system to hit illegal downloaders where it hurts.

If they keep on file-sharing after two warnings, the digital plug will be pulled on them -- and their families and perhaps employers -- for up to a year. 

To police this scheme, a splendidly-named new state body is to be created, at the cost of 15 million euros a year to the tax-payer. This is the HADOPI, or High Authority for Copyright Protection and Dissemination of Works on the Internet.

"There is no reason that the internet should be a lawless zone," the President told the cabinet. Sarko has taken a big interest in artists' rights in recent months -- since his romance and marriage to the model-chanteuse Carla Bruni (her new record is coming out on the Naive label next month).

The scheme has naturally hit a storm of flak from consumer and civil liberties groups. It has also been criticised by the national data protection agency and the European Parliament. Big web companies, including Google, and Dailymotion, the video-sharing firm, refused to sign up to the 40-member industry accord last November.

People in the business say that the technology has made this law obsolete before it even comes into force next January.

Mocking the scheme today, Libération says that families could be stripped of of their internet and broadband-born telephone and television if a neighbouring teenager piggybacks on their wi-fi to load his iPod. Anyway, the law is way behind the times and will be as effective as mopping up an ocean with a sponge, said a Libé commentator. The experts on The Times agree -- see commentary.

Christine Albanel, the Culture Minister, who is responsible for the law, said this is nonsense. The law replaces existing criminal prosecution with gentle persuasion. "It takes an essentially preventive and educational approach", she said.

Over the past two years French courts have convicted 300 people of internet piracy, most of them big-scale fraudsters and none of them minors. The prosecutions have had little impact on the sales of a recording industry in steep decline.

There is some good news for consumers. Under the accord, the industry will drop existing copyright protection on French material, so that music or videos bought legally online can be played on any sort of device -- and potentially copied.

The European industry likes the French scheme and wants the continent to follow. "This is the single most important initiative to help win the war on online piracy that we have seen so far," John Kennedy, head of the IFPI, the worldwide body recording industry body, said after when the project was signed in Sarko's presence at the Elysée Palace.

France, which heavily subsidises the arts and strongly enforces copyright, is said to be the worst hit, with one billion illicit downloads a year by three million internet users. Pascal Rogard, head of the SACD association of song and scriptwriters, told us that the idea is to wake up illicit downloaders and encourage them to go legal. "Most are law-abiding people who would not dare park their car badly, but when it comes to a non-physical property, they do not have the impression that they are stealing," he said.

Here's how the scheme will work -- or not. The detection and enforcement mechanism has all the hallmarks of a good Gallic usine à gaz ('a gas factory', or over-elaborate contraption). 

Offenders will be spotted by entertainment companies and rights agencies on the trawl for file-sharing sites that list their properties. They will then report them to the HADOPI agency which will in turn order the ISPs to act. They will send a warning first by e-mail, then by registered letter, to their misbehaving customer.

Failure to desist will lead the ISP to cut broadband for up to a year if the offender does not confess and sign a promise to stop. The ban will be reduced to two months or more if they do so. ISPs will pool the names of offenders to prevent them signing up with another firm. If they do not comply, they will be fined 5,000 euros for each case.   

Parents must stop their children down-loading after a warning and will lose their access if they fail. The critics, who have raised petitions, are pointing to multiple flaws. Office-workers using company computers will inflict punishment on their employers, for example. The e-mail warnings may be ineffective because they will go to the customer's ISP e-mail address while many people use other e-mail services.

The main criticism arises from the privacy implications and the brutality of "digital banishment". "Nowadays, having access to the Internet is crucial," said Benoit Thieulin, one of the opponents from the Socialist opposition.  One petition says that the new agency will "hunt down individual users, who happen to love culture".

In response to the French scheme, the European Parliament voted to call on the European Commission and member states to "avoid adopting measures which go against human rights, civil rights and the principles of proportionality."

Those involved in the new system say the fears are misplaced. There there will be no systematic filtering of the web, merely targeted searches for P2P (peer-to-peer) participants who are offering their property illegally.

What is novel here is the agreement of the ISPs in the law-enforcement scheme. The providers have been reluctant for years to police the use of their networks, saying it is like holding the post office responsible for what people write in their mail. Pascal Rogard said the providers now have every interest in cooperating because they are now selling content -- in the form of television and music -- as well as the medium of communication.

[Below: A guide to the art of file-sharing]

 

Comments

[Craig McGinty]

I'm sorry but the technology already exists to bypass this misguided attempt at regulation.

The issue here is that the music industry in particular has been unable, or unwilling, to recognise the change the internet has had on its business model.

There are many other ways for them to make money from music fans but because the industry has long enjoyed massive income streams the cold wind of change is beginning to bite, and both musicians themselves and fans will be the ones who benefit.

[JulieT]

It is extraordinary how France creates these structures with new bureaucracies to try to regulate everything. We are so far behind the times. And the taxpayer has to pay for a new "gendarme de la toile" as Tf1 news called it tonight.
It is the fault of Carla Bruni!

[John Styx]

Actually Charles, the pictures you post on your blog would be violations of the French copyright law, had not the EUCD directive been transposed through the DADVSI act into the French internal law. We don't hold the doctrine of "fair dealing" and case law never recognized a right of quotation for pictures.

[Dominique]

Technology allows cars to drive 250km/h! So? we should allow erveryone to drive fast because technology allows to "bypass" the law?

Should we allow taxpayers to bypass taxes because technology allows it? should we allow robery because technology allows it? should we allow false currency because technology allows it? should we allow people to kill because technology allows it?

You make laws according to principles. Not according to what technology allows.

[Yogi]

Well at least HADOPI is a cute name.

[David Powell]

Dominique is right or course, as she so often is. And France is right in strongly protecting copyright.

However, complete control of copyright is a fairly recent thing, and has surely resulted in some anomalies in our society.

Paul McCartney, I read, is worth over 800 million pounds, J.K. Rowling is worth a similar amount. Now while I don't begrudge them their money, it seems to me that control of copyright is perhaps being misused, and the vast sums of money involved has severely distorted the market. Publishers of all kinds are looking for the next 'blockbuster'.

The internet is changing this, and it is now possible for a lesser known band to promote its music and make a living, and there is an attempt, (worthy but the jury is out on whether it will be successful) to allow writers to publish their work on line.

How much is a good tune worth?

More than five times a surgeons salary? More than fifty times more than a midwife?

There is some thing wrong in these ratios, and maybe the internet will be the medium which changes this.

[john walker]

Charles, With all due respect, this is really superficial reporting: Precisely /how/ will an ISP identify an /individual/ as a suspect? Because you download "too much"? Because you use a bit torrent client? Surely you understand that there is much content distributed through bit torrents (P2P networks) that is /not/ copyright protected?? So, what recourse does an individual have if improperly accused? To the courts? To...the EU? (That's for laughs.) The devil is in the details, and you haven't even asked the right questions...yet.

[I reported exactly what Pascal Rogard, the boss of the main copyright agency told us by phone. Here it is verbatim: "The rights holders will have at their disposal software to monitor their works (the songs/movies they own) on the internet and in particular on P2P sites. They will know if their works are being pirated but not by whom, so there is no breach of privacy.... The rights holders will then file a complaint with the Hadopi (agency) which will open proceedings....." Sorry if I wasn't clear, but that seems straightforward enough to me. As for whether it's workable, that's another question. CB]

[john walker]

Charles, Thank you for your reply. My apologies for a long post, but I am surprised at the lack of curiosity of journalists, you & the Times included: you are passing along at face value a conclusion (a claim) by a very biased participant. As a journalist, shouldn't you question the /how/? How would this agency determine if individual X had downloaded copyrighted material? What rights would an individual would have to challenge this in court? (According to the French media, the proposal would /not/ allow a citizen to appeal to the courts...and the new agency is not part of the judicial system.) In short: what happens if someone is falsely accused?

[The French media are wrong if they're reporting that today. I haven't seen it. The Council of State struck down the agency's judicial powers a week or so ago for the reasons you raise.The internet agency will now have to go to a court to get an order, with the usual constitutional protections applied. As I mentioned in the story, there is widespread scepticism about whether this will all work. CB]

[Monika]

I wonder how parents shall be able to control this kind of behaviour of their children except by preventing access to the computer at all.

[Seamus McCauley]

So French downloaders who are caught by this strange law will need to invent an endless stream of short-term lodgers on behalf of whom they can register new ISP accounts. A bit of a hassle, I suppose, but hardly insurmountable. I look forward to French courts becoming filled with expert witness epistemologists trying to prove that these lodgers did not exist.

[John Gregory Flinn]

Being able to download something would be useful!
I don't know how far ADSL (and at what speed) has progressed throughout France - but it has'nt got to us, nor is there any forecast.
Anyway, one can usually click a tab which prevents file-sharing.

I think DAVID POWELL makes a fair point about how absolute control may become questionable.
The internet provides an unrivalled service for the entertainments industry to broadcast its 'intellectual property'. And now they have this "Creation and Internet" law to police 'abuse' as well!.
Do they pay for internet access for their products and services?
As technology is devised to evade such detection and better enable free-loading the industry will indubitably call for more laws etc.,

Meanwhile elsewhere, I understand establishing copyright/patents is generally a lengthy and expensive business in France.
Would the surgeon/midwife in DP's post receive the same attention were they to invent techniques beneficial to their patients?

[Julio]

The question of that law proposal having no chance of being enforced surely had no bearings to the people who came up with it.

It's not about tackling the issue it's about 'seeming' to be tackling the issue.

The courts are already filled with un processed complaints , but who cares ?

The law will be dismantled by the relevant EU bodies , Who cares ?

France is broke we're told yet a new Kwango is being rammed through the oh-so courageous assemblée (they made their voice heard the last time around though) , resulting in a new tasty and rich layer of bureaucracy , but who cares ?

Let's party like it's 1999 !

[Barrie Dee]

Censorship !!
Censorship !!
Censorship !!

Anonomyze !!
Anonomyze !!
Anonomyze !!