Written by Jie Chen
MAGE RETRIEVED FROM http://www.metalinjection.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/illegal-downloading.jpg
Several month ago, I found a website called KickAss Torrent. It’s a website that provide drama, film torrent downloading online. Compare to streaming site, it not only provide the opportunity to watch the video, but also offers more access to the video downloading. However, downloaders are at risk of losing privacy and involving the copyright infringement. As we know, the torrent websites are based on the peer-to-peer file sharing system using the BitTorrent protocol. It allows files to uploaded and downloaded from a specific site. As copyright holders are anxious to identify the responsibility holder for the copyright infringement, the situation of video torrents downloading becomes more complicated and the world is debating who is the real responsibility untaken for this issue. Law,which is the most effective tool for protecting their right, measures and judges rationally the responsibility holder in a certain way. In the following, I will emphasize on the legal aspect of judging the responsibility holders and explain the French HADOPI law as an example.
HADOPI law was found in France on 2010. Its aim is to protect artiste’s creative work online; it applies a graduated response to defeat the copyright infringement. The “three strikes approach” is the main approach of this law and it requires the collaboration of Internet provider (ISPs) and copyright holder. The ISPs have to identify whether their users’ online activities against the copyright law from their IP address. Once ISPs find out a subscriber involves in illegal downloading, they will send an email notice to warn the downloaders. If subscribes download illegal again in six months, they will receive a notice email and a registered letter. If they be caught again for illegal downloading in one year after second notice, their case will be send to the court and they will face the criminal charge. However, it is difficult to function in the reality (Ranaivoson & Lorrain 35). First, technology users are able to use tools to avoid the detection. Also, only a few people being caught although a large s population ware doing the same thing. In the addition, this law also against Internet user’s privacy and personal data (Ranaivoson & Lorrain 36, and 39).
Canada’s new copyright law also use ISPs in their adoption of “notices-and -notices” system. Many Canada’s Internet users begin to get email notices from their Internet providers (Geist). As it seems similar to the action of HADOPI law, I will discover that later on my podcast discussion.
For specific case about the state law HADOPI and other country laws that protecting the copyright and the debate about illegal downloading responsibility holder, you are welcome to listen to my podcast for more details.
Ranaivoson,Heritiana, and Lorrain, Anne-Cathrine. “Graduated response beyond the copyright balance: why and how the French HADOPI takes consumers as targets.” Info 14.6(2012):31-44. Web. 23, Oct, 2015.
*Notice the Difference? New Canadian Internet Copyright Rules for ISPs Set to Launch.* Geist, Michael. 22, December, 2014.