Publishers win legal block over file-sharer
24.02.10 | Philip Jones
In what was described as a "shot across the bow" of digital pirates, six global publishers, including John Wiley, Cengage and McGraw-Hill, have obtained an injunction against Swiss-based Rapidshare ordering the company to prevent illegal file sharing of the 148 copyright-protected works cited in the lawsuit.
The judgment was handed down by a German court in Hamburg on 10th February, and became effective on 17th February. The court ruled that Rapidshare must monitor its site to ensure the copyrighted material was not being uploaded and prevent unauthorised access to the material by its users. The plaintiffs in this case have alleged that Rapidshare encourages, facilitates, and profits from such behaviour. The company will be subject to substantial fines for non-compliance with the ruling. According to reports, the three-judge court warned that violations could cost the company up to €250,000 on top of the €7.2m in legal fees for the plaintiffs.
Tom Allen, chief executive of the Association of American Publishers, said: "This ruling is an important step forward. Not only does it affirm that file-sharing copyrighted content without permission is against the law, but it attaches a hefty financial punishment to the host, in this case Rapidshare, for noncompliance. Consider this a shot across the bow for others who attempt to profit from the theft of copyrighted works online.”
Allen warned that unchecked copyright infringement could have serious consequences for our culture at large: “Without the ability to earn a living from their work, authors will not have the incentive to create books in the first place. Moreover, publishers won’t be able to develop powerful content resources and educational tools." He added that "distinguishing credible, quality information from that which is unreliable and untrustworthy would become a gargantuan task" and "if that happens, we all lose”.
Plaintiffs in the case were Bedford, Freeman and Worth Publishing Group, LLC a subsidiary of Macmillan; Cengage Learning Inc.; Elsevier Inc; John Wiley & Sons, Inc.; The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.; and Pearson Education, Inc.
Comments on this article
By Liz Bury
That is interesting. I wonder if the German courts are inclined to take a stronger line than elsewhere in Europe.24 Feb 10 09:05
By Katharina Scheid, RapidShare AG, Company Speaker
To understand this article one must know more about German law: 1. A preliminary injunction is without a hearing of the involved party, e.g. RapidShare. It is not a trial. Only the accusing party has the chance to describe the situation as they perceive it. RapidShare will have a chance to explain the situation in more detail once we have appealed, which we will. 2. In Germany, there is a conflict between two competing laws regarding piracy. In addition, data privacy regulation is very tight: According to Telemediengesetz (law under which hosters operate) preliminary action as suggested is not something hosters are entitled to do. They are to rely on the take down notices of content owners, which should be sent to abuse@rapidshare.com as plain text, listing the links leading to the material that violate their copyright. German copyright law takes a completely different view on the issue. It law implies responsibility of the distributing party of pirated material to prevent distribution. As confirmed by various court rulings in the past, RapidShare is not distributing itself. What is more, Copyright law was made for a world of physical goods, where prevention does not interfere with the privacy rights of millions of people. In the internet age, prevention like preemptive control of uploads naturally leads to the violation of the data privacy of millions of other users, that have not even been suspected of any wrong doing, by monitoring their private communication. This leads to a major conflict, since the monitoring of private communication is highly protected by law and is only granted by court order under the circumstances that there is evidence or serious reason to believe that the person monitored will commit a serious crime. So basically, this boils down to a discussion about how society wants to balance the need for protection of copyright versus the protection of data privacy. As long as this conflict has not been resolved in Germany, there will be more trials regarding this matter, as we have already seen in the past. RapidShare is currently aiming at getting a decision from the highest court in Germany to resolve the matter and receive clear guidelines.24 Feb 10 14:16
By jackson
This is rather like gun shop handing out guns to all and sundry and then saying it cannot prevent gun owners leaving its premises. No, but it can stop giving users the ability to load up pirated materials. Oh, but then your business model goes bye-bye. Shame.24 Feb 10 15:08
By Karen Kluba--Rosewood Manor
I'm thrilled to read this and I'm hoping for more of this kind of action. It's hard enough to run a business that relys on printed matter, much less fight each offender. We need to protect our copyrights.24 Feb 10 15:58
By Downloader
Whilst pirating is a hot issue at the moment. With regards to Authors and books. I have downloaded books in the past, but only the ones that I have already purchased physically. Would a simple way of cutting this out be issue a book in paper format and give a code back to the publishers website to download a DRM version that I can then put on my Iphone, Kindle etc.24 Feb 10 16:19
By T Moore
@Downloader. No. Ebooks are separate products; therefore you must buy separately. If a publisher offers the ebook as an add-on, that would be one thing, but Amazon does not, and neither do the rest of us. You'll just have to choose.25 Feb 10 16:37
By Realist
@T Moore "You'll just have to choose." Actually, he doesn't. He CAN download your book, or any other book, if he chooses. It may be illegal, but he can still do it. This attitude of "shut up and pay up" doesn't work any more. The solution to this whole problem is added value. Give customers something they want, and they'll pay for it. You can't force outdated business models on a new, tech savvy generation.26 Feb 10 00:26
By Iucounu
@jackson: "it can stop giving users the ability to load up pirated materials." - but how? Do you propose Rapidshare scans every file uploaded to their servers and compares it to a master database of everything in the world that's covered by copyright? Because that's impossible. All they can do is take stuff down once it's been identified as infringing.26 Feb 10 10:03
By Angelica Sellers
I hope and pray that something will be done. The freedom of filesharing interferes tremendously with my freedom to earn a living from my work. Rapidshare takes links down, yes, but they do not keep repeated offenders from using their service further or block those pirates from uploading the same material another 50 times with different links. These kind of lenient policies have to be payed by working class artists and small e commerce, who already have to suffer under the weak economy. DMCA complaints are only as effective as the policies of the recipient. Rapidshare - it is time to do something against the damage of small businesses due mass filesharing. Your service is appreciated and needed - don't let it be a pirate bay further. Angelica Sellers aka KatNKDA, Missouri, U.S.08 Mar 10 16:55
