Top EU Court Says There’s No Right To Online Anonymity, Because Copyright Is More Important ( www.techdirt.com )

The key problem is that copyright infringement by a private individual is regarded by the court as something so serious that it negates the right to privacy. It’s a sign of the twisted values that copyright has succeeded on imposing on many legal systems. It equates the mere copying of a digital file with serious crimes that merit a prison sentence, an evident absurdity.

This is a good example of how copyright’s continuing obsession with ownership and control of digital material is warping the entire legal system in the EU. What was supposed to be simply a fair way of rewarding creators has resulted in a monstrous system of routine government surveillance carried out on hundreds of millions of innocent people just in case they copy a digital file.

fruitycoder ,

If copyright is sacrosanct then the creation of data by me is my own personal property and without a contract anyone holding my data is in violation.

twig ,

Property rights being valued above human rights is kind of a mainstay of capitalism.

rottingleaf ,

Property rights are part of human rights.

This situation is about preventive protection of someone's rights warranting real violation of your rights.

It's a clear violation of status quo, it's absolute bullshit, and the officials responsible for this should all spend quality time in jail answering questions about mafia organizations they are affiliated with, and then be flogged on TV, with a lifetime prison sentence after.

ChaoticEntropy ,
@ChaoticEntropy@feddit.uk avatar

Great... so we're reaffirming that society's various structures exist purely for the benefit of monied interests, as ever. Any benefit the regular person sees from arrangements is purely coincidental, your rights stop at the point at which a corporation needs them to.

rottingleaf ,

Top me court says this is not enforceable bar real totalitarian state. EDIT: Also fuck them children of crowd.

Diplomjodler3 ,

They're working on it.

IllNess ,

This is so stupid since several thousand devices can use one IP address. NAT exists.

If I download music in a Starbucks, can they fine the Starbucks CEO then?

Anyway I hope I hope online artists, and authors are able to use this to sue AI companies for stealing their copyrighted works.

General_Effort OP ,

The background is that French law requires ISPs to retain the IPs of their customer for some time. That way, an IP address can be associated with a customer.

If I download music in a Starbucks, can they fine the Starbucks CEO then?

A CEO is an employee. You generally can't sue employees for this sort of thing. It may be possible to sue the company as a whole for enabling the copyright infringement, but that's not to do with this case. Perhaps in the future, operators of WiFi-hotspots will be required to use something like Youtube's Content ID system.

Anyway I hope I hope online artists, and authors are able to use this to sue AI companies for stealing their copyrighted works.

They can use this to go after "pirates". It's got nothing to do with AI.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • [email protected]
  • kbinchat
  • All magazines