Several major UK broadband ISPs, including BT, EE, Plusnet, Sky Broadband, TalkTalk and Virgin Media (VMO2), have been ordered by London’s High Court to block six more streaming websites after they were found to be facilitating internet copyright infringement (piracy).
As usual such blocking orders, which flow from Section 97A of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act (CDPA), are expensive to bring but have in recent years become very common. Hundreds of websites have been blocked through this approach (thousands if you include their many proxies and mirrors), which usually include file sharing (P2P / Torrent), video streaming sites, Sci-Hub and those that sell counterfeit goods etc.
The latest injunction against the providers’ was jointly sought by Columbia Pictures, Disney, Paramount, Universal, Warner and Netflix. A total of six highly popular video streaming sites (movies and TV shows) were targetted by the order, including Tinyzonetv, Watchserieshd, Levidia, 123movies and Europixhd.
We should point out that it often takes a few weeks for such orders to be fully implemented and, at present, none of the named ISPs appear to have added them to their internet filtering systems.
Summary of the Court Order
It is also clear that the operators and users of Target Websites use the services of the ISPs to infringe copyright. It can reasonably be inferred that subscribers to the ISPs’ broadband services use them to access the Target Websites, given their popularity in the UK and the ISPs’ market share. The ISPs also have actual knowledge of the use of their services to infringe copyright, given the advance notice they were given of this application, which included sample evidence, and the service of the application and supporting evidence on them, and indeed their expressed lack of opposition to the order.
…
I am satisfied that the injunction is necessary to prevent or at least reduce damage to the Studios. I accept that the grant of an injunction under s97A has proved to be the most effective means of impeding and dissuading infringing activity of this nature. It will have no impact on legitimate trade. Having heard submissions on the form of the order, I am satisfied that it is proportionate and not unduly complicated. There is no indication that it will be difficult or costly to implement.
In my view the injunction does strike a fair balance between protecting the Studios’ rights and the other rights engaged. In particular, the public has no legitimate interest in accessing copyright works in infringement of the Studios’ rights and to the Studios’ significant detriment. Any interference with their rights and those of the ISPs is justified by the legitimate aim of preventing such infringement. The order contains appropriate safeguards.
Despite the costs and ease to which such blocks can be circumvented by consumers, Rights Holders often deem it to be a price worth paying as part of their wider efforts to discourage casual piracy. Some studies (example) have similarly suggested that sites in this way tends to result in increased traffic going to legal alternatives, but that may be countered by the rising prices and increasing content fragmentation of those alternatives. Credits to TorrentFreak for spotting.
Credit: Source link
