A MUST READ AND VERY HOT READ, Slyck interviews the MPAA ***(Texas nails Sony BMG. Again)*** P2p file sharing is legal, says France,

Texas nails Sony BMG. Again

p2p news / p2pnet: The eyes of Texas are already upon Sony BMG as it looks for damages following a, "technological version of cloak-and-dagger deceit against consumers by hiding secret files on their computers," as attorney general Greg Abbott recently described Sony's DRM rootkit spyware invasion farce.

Now Abbott has expanded his lawsuit, "alleging that a second form of anti-piracy technology used by the label violates the state's spyware and deceptive trade practices laws," says the Associated Press.

And this time, SunnComm's wholly ineffective MediaMax DRM application is the subject.

The new allegations involve "an unrelated CD copy-protection technology known as MediaMax," which was loaded on 27 Sony BMG titles.

"We keep discovering additional methods Sony used to deceive Texas consumers who thought they were simply buying music,'' Abbott is quoted as saying.

But, "BMG officials said in a statement that they are working with Abbott's office and believe they can prove they have responded appropriately to his concerns," says AP.

Would said officials include Thomas Hesse, the head of Sony BMG's global digital business, one wonders?

He recently characterized Sony BMG's attempt to secretly penetrate customers' computers via music CDs loaded with hidden spyware as a "slight" issue.

"The security issues with MediaMax are not uncommon and are completely addressed by a software update which we already have made available, as is standard practice when problems with consumer software are identified,'' the statement said.

Texas can recover up to $100,000 in damages for each violation of the spyware law and $20,000 in damages for each violation of the deceptive trade practices law, says AP, adding:

"Individuals whose computers were affected by the anti-piracy technology also can recover damages."

http://p2pnet.net/story/7396

 

LOOKS LIKE THE FRENCH CAME OUT OF THE DARK AGES

P2p file sharing is legal, says France

p2p news / p2pnet: In a major upset to the entertainment cartels which have been trying to sue people into buying 'product,' France has become the first country in the world to, "propose the legalization of P2P downloading," as the Association of Audionautes sums it up.

"The French Parliament voted last night to allow free sharing of music and movies on the Internet, setting up a conflict with both the French government and with media companies," says Bloomberg News.

"If the amendment survives, France would be the first country to legalize so called peer-to-peer downloading, said Jean-Baptiste Soufron, legal counsel to the Association of Audionautes, a French group that defends people accused of improperly sharing music files.

"The law would be a blow to media companies that increasingly use the courts worldwide to sue people for downloading or sharing music and movie files."

The government can overturn the amendment, either by re-opening debate or if the Senate votes it down when the bill moves to the upper house. French Culture Minister Renaud Donnedieu de Vabres has asked that parliament re-open debate on the amendment today, says Bloomberg, quoting Agence France Presse.

Audionautes, founded by founded by French high-school and college students, says if the amendment goes through, the French Code of Intellectual Property will feature article L-122-5 stating authors won't be able to stop the online dissemination of their works in any format provided downloads are meant for private use only; and, there's no direct or indirect commercial exploitation.

Thes provisions were proposed by Audionautes and the Artist-Public Alliance.

Definitely stay tuned.
http://p2pnet.net/story/7391

 

ANOTHER VIEW POINT ON THE ABOVE

French parliament votes to legalise P2P online file sharing
Posted by Seán Byrne on 22 December 2005 - 15:16 - Source: Bloomberg European News

While many countries have made it illegal to distribute copyrighted material over the Internet, the French Parliament has actually voted to allow the free sharing of music and movies online, which was approved by 30 to 28. If their amendment succeeds in surviving, France would become the first country to legalise peer-to-peer file sharing.

On the other hand, if this law takes effect, this would be bad news for the entertainment companies that sue users across the globe since they would effectively be prevented from doing this with users in France. They already estimate that the piracy of TV shows and movies will cost them $5 billion in lost revenue this year alone. Unfortunately, while there are royalty taxes present on blank media, there is nothing covering these for file sharing services.

However, as this amendment must go through the upper house, either the government can still overturn it or the senate can vote it down. At present, the parliament is also still debating on a bill that would put the 2001 EUCD directive into French law, which along with the government’s articles would make P2P the equivalent of counterfeiting, where violators could be fined up to €300,000 and face up to 3 years jail. The new amendment to this bill would replace the government’s articles.

Thanks to gabek for letting us know about the following news:

Dec. 22 (Bloomberg) -- The French Parliament voted last night to allow free sharing of music and movies on the Internet, setting up a conflict with both the French government and with media companies.

If the amendment survives, France would be the first country to legalize so called peer-to-peer downloading, said Jean-Baptiste Soufron, legal counsel to the Association of Audionautes, a French group that defends people accused of improperly sharing music files.

The law would be a blow to media companies that increasingly use the courts worldwide to sue people for downloading or sharing music and movie files. Entertainment companies such as Walt Disney Co., Viacom Inc. and News Corp.'s Fox say free downloading of unauthorized copies of TV shows and movies before they are released on DVD will cost them $5 billion in revenue this year.

``The deputies used this vote to show their independence from the government, but they don't know what they are doing,'' Nicolas Seydoux, chief executive of French cinema company Gaumont SA, said in an interview on France Inter radio. ``We are not trying to ban anything, just to make sure the work of others isn't stolen.''

Some further details can be found here (in French).

While the entertainment industries would be totally against this proposed amendment, in fact if coupled with a levy on Internet Service Providers in the same way as blank media is taxed, the artists would still get compensated. In fact, not only would they get compensated for every recurring ISP payment, but also for every disc a consumer purchases to burn their downloaded tracks or movies from. On the other hand, the levy would end up being flat and the levies collected are not distributed based on the Artists of the songs the user downloaded, so while this may help less well performing artists, it would effectively penalise well known artists.

The worst companies that would be affected by this amendment would be those who sell downloadable music or movies. For example, while research has shown that many consumers sample music online to debate on their next CD purchase, this is unlikely to be the case when it comes to purchasing downloadable tracks, since while consumers can see a difference between downloading songs and buying CDs, many will wonder what’s the difference between the songs that can be freely downloaded and the songs that must be purchased to download.

gabek added: Well, it's not completely done yet. The bill adopted last night still has to pass by the other chamber of the Parliament facing huge opposition from the actual government and the entertainment lobbies. Even if it is adopted in Senate (2nd chamber), it will still be contradicted by an incoming EC regulation. Nevertheless, the main idea is to legalize P2P downloads against the payment of a monthly fee of about 15 euros. For that price, an user will be allowed to download films, games, music etc. It also send a strong warning to the French government who attempted to have a private bill adopted, that would have been the most repressive legislation in the western world. Well fellows, that's good news, and I'll drink to that. Champagne !
http://www.cdfreaks.com/news/12832

 

i would like to hear ye comment's on those articles

get out the Champagne

 

more info another view point on Texas Expands Suit Against Sony BMG

Texas Expands Suit Against Sony BMG
By Nate Mook, BetaNews
December 22, 2005, 12:44 PM

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott has expanded his state's lawsuit against Sony BMG that was filed in November over the use of illegal spyware in its XCP copy-protection mechanism. The new charges allege that Sony's other DRM software, SunnComm MediaMax, installs even if a user declines the license agreement.

In the initial filing, Abbott sued under Texas' Consumer Protection Against Computer Spyware Act of 2005, and sought civil penalties of $100,000 for each violation of the law, attorneys' fees and investigative costs. The additional allegations invoke the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act.

"We keep discovering additional methods SONY used to deceive Texas consumers who thought they were simply buying music," Attorney General Abbott said in a statement. "Thousands of Texans are now potential victims of this deceptive game SONY played with consumers for its own purposes."

Under the Texas Deceptive Trade Practice Act, Abbott can ask Sony to pay $20,000 for each violation of the law.

Abbott has also sent a letter to Texas retailers asking them to take all 52 CDs with SunnComm's MediaMax software off store shelves immediately. He also warned that the retailers could be just as culpable as Sony for continuing to sell the CDS.

"These CDs open the door for malicious hackers to target consumers' computers. Hackers may be using the SONY files to install viruses, malware or even commit identity theft," Abbott said. "Retailers that continue to sell these CDs may be just as liable under the law as Sony."

The Electronic Frontier Foundation is also suing Sony BMG over both the XCP rootkit software and SunnComm's MediaMax. "Sony BMG is to be commended for its acknowledgment of the serious security problems caused by its XCP software, but it needs to go further to regain the public's trust," said Corynne McSherry, EFF Staff Attorney.

The expansion of the Texas lawsuit against Sony follows news that SunnComm's MediaMax copy protection software does not properly protect a directory it installs. Thus, a restricted user account could replace the executables within the MediaMax directory with malicious code, which would then be executed by an administrator upon inserting a CD.

Sony attempted to issue a patch for the vulnerability, but the patch was found to be insecure as well by Princeton researchers Alex Halderman and Edward Felten. Halderman and Felten had previously discovered that SunnComm's software installs even if a user rejects the EULA.
http://www.betanews.com/article/Texas_Expands_Suit_Against_Sony_BMG/1135273495

 

Slyck interviews the MPAA

Dean Garfield

p2p news / p2pnet: The MPAA is on a rampage, censuring entire governments and generally behaving as though it’s a nation-state unto itself with Dan 'Jedi' Glickman as its head

Here, Slyck's Nick Parker chats to the MPAA's Dean Garfield »»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»

Slyck Interviews the MPAA
By Nick Parker - Slyck

Without compromising our position on P2P, we took the view that perhaps it was time we heard what the MPAA had to say for themselves instead of only reading their views in court submissions. At the direction of Dan Glickman and with the kind assistance of Kori Bernards, Vice President of Corporate Communications for the MPAA, we secured an exclusive and remarkably frank interview with the very authors of MPAA policy to hear their views at first hand.

Dean Garfield has the impressive title of Vice President and Director, Legal Affairs, Worldwide Anti-Piracy at the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), a graduate of Princeton and New York University School of Law. To file-sharers, Dean is truly the devil incarnate. Prior to joining the MPAA, he was Vice President of Legal Affairs at the Recording Industry of America Association (RIAA) where he managed several intellectual property cases, including the infamous litigation against Audiogalaxy, Grokster, KaZaA, Launch, and MusicCity. A principled man who has devoted much of his time to founding the Parental Advisor Board and supporting the community, Dean has given much of his time pro bono to matters concerning the imposition of the death penalty.

BitTorrent

Slyck: With your outreach to Bram Cohen, it appears that you are trying to bridge the gap between file-sharing developers and content providers. How do you think this interview can bridge the gap between file-sharers and the MPAA?

Garfield: “Stereotypes are often borne out of silence and a lack of understanding. This dialogue, as well as our work with Bram and others, is aimed at creating greater understanding through conversation and action.

"The motion picture industry is working aggressively to take advantage of wide array of digital distribution platforms and to provide consumers a wide array of legitimate options for enjoying movies and television shows. Slyck is a great venue for sharing our plans for the digital future and gaining feedback."

Legislation

Slyck: Do you feel that the future of your industry will better be served by legislative means only or through negotiated compromise and cooperation to eliminate the sources of first run high quality pirated material?

Garfield: “Even in the movies it is rare that silver bullets truly work. Our strategies for addressing the promises and pitfalls of the digital age are and have to be multi-faceted. In some instances our solution will be legislative in others it will be based on negotiated compromise. It is worth noting that those two principles are not mutually exclusive. It is often said that the legislative process is like making sausage - - it is a messy compromise. Even where we go down the legislative route there is always a lot of dialogue and compromise."

Thinking that this implied a reluctance on their part to litigate, we then asked; Does the MPAA feel its legal actions, on behalf of its member companies, helps or deters transition P2P users to legal alternatives?

Garfield: “We think that it helps to move P2P users away from the illegitimate systems. When people understand that the risks and costs of engaging in this conduct are significant many of those people will stop. Not everyone does change their behavior and right now we are having the unintended effect of helping to move people from one illegal service to another. LimeWire has recently soared in popularity, because of the closure of other illegal P2P services. That is not lost on us. We are working on strategies to address that problem.

"Moreover, as we roll out more and more legitimate alternatives we will also have a greater impact. We also know that many people, not Slyck readers but others, don’t often recognize that downloading and posting movies via some P2P groups is illegal and some parents don’t know what kinds of things their kids are doing on line. It is our hope that these suits will raise community awareness to piracy and its consequences and I think our legal actions help to achieve that goal."

Statistics

Given that few would support commercial piracy, and given the poor publicity over the use of DRM, how much of their problem is directly caused by commercial piracy?

Garfield: “We are studying that issue, but do not have a real answer. Identifying the scope of the commercial versus the open source problem is no easier than discerning real data on p2p usage. There are a number of companies that report various statistics, but it is not clear that any of those numbers are derived from anything more scientific than sticking a finger up in the wind.”

DRM

But the impact of Sony’s use of spyware/rootkit based DRM has affected its stock values and resulted in widespread rejection of DRM as a valid anti piracy measure. What is the MPAA’s position on this?

Garfield: “We are committed to making sure that the digital distribution of content is a reality. Doing that will require some assurances that content that is distributed digitally is not immediately re-distributed around the world in an indiscriminate way. We do not support the insertion of spyware into DRM technologies.

"One way to look at this issue is through an analogy. At present, when you purchase a car there is computer technology in the car that keeps track of your average speed, but that technology is accepted and is viewed as net value add. However, if that technology were to automatically report the fact that you speed to the authorities then people’s perspective would change. DRM is the same. The technology is a part of a balance that is struck with the consumer. The creative community distributes high quality digital content and the consumers accept that they can’t randomly and wantonly redistribute that high quality digital content. As a part of that bargain, we have to make sure that we do not take advantage of consumers and ensure that we continuously listen to their feedback.”

We felt it ironic that the MPAA were advocating education through litigation whilst at the same time referring to a compact (or “bargain”) between themselves and the viewing public. Given the high costs and abysmally low rate of recovery, we asked if they had a duty to give best value to the movie viewing public:

Garfield: “No doubt about it. The motion picture industry is focused on telling stories that enrich people’s lives. We want to tell stories about fantasmigorical pirates not spend much of our resources on fighting piracy. It should come as no surprise to you that every studio is committed to making movies and television shows that people love and are willing to see. Some times we are successful, but when we are it is not from a lack of trying. No one gets up in the morning and says today ‘I am going to make a really bad movie.’ ”

We then asked if their primarily concerns lay with the distribution of high quality copies or new and pre release films, and the affect this has on the secondary market (DVDs etc)?

Garfield: “Source piracy - broadly defined - is one of our principal concerns. We are working on creative ways to address camcording which is a huge source of pirated material. There are also a host of other issues that matter to us. Dealing with and educating people about P2P piracy, in the United States and around the world, is high on the list. We are also concerned with making sure we are (sic) understand and make use of the latest technological advances. Our work with Bram and Ashwin (Bram Cohen’s business partner) are a part of a larger effort to find ways to collaborate with innovative technologists. Our industries ultimate goal is to get product to people in the way they want it and as technology advances, we will work to make sure that happens while also working to protect the quality movies that people expect from our studios.”

But what of the alternatives to DRM, such as the emerging watermarking technology that is now being adopted by TiVo/Microsoft, which gives a clear and relatively foolproof audit trail back to the original copy, would you be prepared (in principle) to endorse its use as a standardized counter piracy measure to your members?

Garfield: “We readily admit that we are not the oracle with answers to all quandaries. To the extent that there are new and viable technological solutions we are open to evaluating and discussing them. The type of watermarking technology that you described does have some problems because it creates an incentive for us to track down people and seek to take legal action against them. That is not the ideal position that we want to advance. We view technology as creating new options.”

Clearly to be effective, such a measure would entail a more controlled release situation, and that would entail a leap of faith by both sides of the equation. For instance, would the MPAA be prepared to relax its grip on file-sharers in return for a system such as this which will allow greater control over commercial piracy?

Garfield: “If Slyck’s recent reports about the number of people using public P2P systems is to be believed, we do not have much of a grip on the file-sharing world. That being said, we truly are open to new solutions. We cannot, however, close our eyes to the demand side of the problem. We are working to be responsive to the changing cultural expectations for the on-demand ubiquitous availability of content. At the same time, we are working to make sure that people respect the creativity and hard work that goes into making television shows and movies.”

The Future

Bearing in mind the gulf between the two sides, we then asked where the MPAA would like to see these discussions lead.

Garfield: “A big part of our goal is to gain a greater understanding of the cultural changes that we are witnessing. For example, we are still trying to learn more about what people want for entertainment, how do the want it, and how we strike a balance that is fair and gives people choice.”

Dean had said that there was a bargain to be struck between end users and the movie industry, but at the same time there is also a bargain to be struck with the greater general public. We asked, was there scope for further discussion, room for some future accommodation between the parties?

Garfield: “Absolutely. There is a lot that is uncertain about the world, but one thing is certain: we don’t have all the answers. We are open to listening and learning from others and welcome the opportunity to do just that.”

Summary

We are obviously extremely grateful to the MPAA for meeting us halfway and giving us this unique and quite frank insight into their way of thinking.

It isn’t easy to analyse all that has been said, as many answers can be read between the lines. Quite clearly the MPAA are monitoring the P2P community through Slyck and other sites, and are quite aware that many file-sharers are migrating to Limewire. Regarding Bit Torrent, the MPAA seem to regard Bram Cohen’s involvement more in terms of a resource, an approved source of distribution. They still seem to be hell bent on the counter productive issue of pursuing “education” through punishment, although they are inviting us to offer alternative ways of controlling distribution.

And perhaps that is a role that we should be pursuing. As the MPAA themselves acknowledge, they do not appear to have much of a grip on the file-sharing world. The sheer weight of numbers of people file-sharing continues to grow, the financial threats against file-sharers appears to be having little effect and the world of domestic file-sharing seems unfazed by the diminutive prospect of ending up in the courtroom. Yet what realistic alternative to litigation do they have?

In the course of the interview the issue of watermarking was discussed. This allows an audit trail leading back to the source of every copy that is made of media. Interestingly, Dean said that he wasn’t keen to adopt any system that would give them an incentive to track down people and seek to take legal action against them.

It is becoming clear to us that the advent of high definition material will present new opportunities to the movie industry, and that consumer demand is likely to result in such material becoming the primary market. VCR sales are diminishing as people expect higher quality, just as people will eventually come to regard DVD quality as being second rate.

The proposed introduction of ICT (Image Constraint Tokens) with blue-ray and HD-DVD formats as part of the Advanced Access Content System (AACS) offers a way forward, a means of limiting the quality of secondary copying. ICT would enable a user to still see content, but not in its original resolution. This way, analogue displays and other unauthorized devices can still receive and play content, just not in a rich HD format. Reported originally as a bone of contention with the movie industry, it surely offers a workable compromise between freedom of the individual and a profitable and therefore active movie and tv industry.

Similar methodology could be apply equally to recorded music with, say, bit rates constrained to 128 kb/s for secondary copies, and far higher bit rates applicable to retail downloads. If watermarking technology was integrated, then perhaps software encryption/decryption may be preferable to the cost and effort of doing the same job in hardware.

As the MPAA claim to do so, we at Slyck keep an open mind as to the future. One thing for sure, with the growing acceptance of file-sharing and the numbers of users growing swiftly towards a critical mass, something is going to have to give under all this pressure. Having taken the initiative to propose future discussion, Slyck is in a unique position to influence what happens in the months and years ahead and pursue our goal of P2P for all.

(Thursday 22nd December 2005)
http://p2pnet.net/story/7397
Logged