Downloaders’ be warned, you’re next—gov’t

[Monseratto]

Now really...

PASIG CITY, Philippines–Individuals downloading music, movies and software are being targeted by the Pilipinas Anti-Piracy Team (PAPT), a consultant for the software organization Business Software Alliance (BSA) said.

However, trapping and prosecution of individuals may not happen until the country’s Intellectual Property Code is amended.

BSA consultant Bienvenido Marquez III said in an interview that end-users should also be liable for piracy, even if downloads are for personal use.

The growing usage and decreasing cost of broadband Internet services in the Philippines are now allowing people to download larger files, such as software and movies, into their hard drives.

“We can’t prosecute individuals because there is no such law. However, we can go after individuals or even shops caught sharing or selling downloaded items,” he said.

He added that even the E-Commerce Law has no specific provisions on prosecuting piracy through downloading.

Marquez said Congressman Rufus Rodriguez and Senator Edgardo Angara have proposed amendments to the current IPR Code.

Marquez said downloading of illegal content from the Internet has increased worldwide and in the Philippines and that losses could be in the millions.

There are now a lot software applications and peer-to-peer websites that allow downloading of content from the Internet.

However, there are few laws abroad governing prosecution of users who download content from the Internet partly because content are hosted in different places abroad.

[ab_initio]

Now really...

^^ why prosecute an individual downloading for personal use? prosecute the one behind the invention of the software that allows me access to it...that's contributory piracy...no need to amend the law...just intensify the enforcement and hone some more those in the fact finding and investigation of piracy offenses... how can we enhance the present invention when it is strictly regulated? that's precisely the spirit of personal use...so that among the many end users baka may bagong invention out of the new one which has patent or copyright...

[Horsepower]

hahahaha. UK and US FAILED MISERABLY to curb online piracy. Pilipinas pa kaya who doesn't even have an eight of the resources of these countries (and the intelligence).

Multi-layer proxy pa lang, tapos na e.

Asa pa. hehehe.

[ghosthunter]

hahahaha. UK and US FAILED MISERABLY to curb online piracy. Pilipinas pa kaya who doesn't even have an eight of the resources of these countries (and the intelligence).

Asa pa. hehehe.

Only in singapore has online piracy has been controlled. It's because the government controls the ISP and monitors it's traffic.

[Yoda]

prosecute the one behind the invention of the software that allows me access to it...that's contributory piracy.

Following the same logic, we should then prosecute the inventor of the gun. Or the hammer. Or the ball point pen. They can all be used to kill someone.

[ab_initio]

Following the same logic, we should then prosecute the inventor of the gun. Or the hammer. Or the ball point pen. They can all be used to kill someone.

i am talking about contributory piracy...if your analogy falls under contributory piracy, then why not? may piracy po ba diyan, Sir sa examples niyo po? kindly review your post po if it has a connection with my post...i am sure you know patent, invention, copyright po.

[Yoda]

i am talking about contributory piracy...if your analogy falls under piracy, then why not? may piracy po ba diyan, Sir sa examples niyo po? kindly review your post po if it has a connection with my post...i am sure you know patent, invention, copyright po.

That's why it's called an analogy.

How is the creator/inventor of a tool liable for any wrongdoing done using his/her invention which was contrary to its intended purpose? Why should he/she be responsible for what other people do?

[ghosthunter]

With the current kind of laws we have for raids... very unlikely they would be actually catching anyone. For starters, a search warrant has to be very specific. If I would be paranoid, I can just put all my downloaded content into a network accessible storage box hidden somewhere in the house. You can even setup a wifi version as well to hide almost all the wires that might give it away.

Second, if there isn't a complaining party, it is difficult for BSA & PAPT to make a sustained campaign. The complaining party has to post a bond which is usually a couple hundred thousand pesos. The money is used to fund the raiding group including the vehicles, people, etc. The BSA/PAPT might do two or three raids on their own just to make an example but not much beyond that. And since it costs so much to do one raid, they will target bigger operators. They will totally bypass end users which is probably the bigger segment of the "downloaders" they are trying to stop.

We just have to take a look at Pirate Bay in their "legal" battle against the copyright lawyers. In fact they were raided and found NOT GUILTY of any copyright laws simply because their servers do not house the actual files being shared.

In the same light, our IP laws are not prepared to handle peer-to-peer sharing. And to our country's interest, it's best that politicians keep their noses out of the techies' business unless they suddenly want to see their websites hacked and computer contents made useless.

[Altis6453]

Good luck with that one. Even in the US, enforcement and prosecution of downloaded content (audio and video) from the internet by a private individual for personal use is difficult to do.

[testament11]

wala, hindi eto makakaya gawin sa atin

[ghosthunter]

i always thought that the global crisis was somehow caused by this ******* downloads. imagine home entertainment to the max no cost no spending

madali naman hulihin ang mga ******* downloaders. just create a new cyber job that will police the subscribers. huli ka na

tingin ko only time will tell talagang ang next regulation will be internet-related. eto ang pumapatay ngaun sa'tin lahat.

Is this related to your delusion that you single-handed are responsible are the reason why the prices of LCD/Plasma TVs are dropping in prices?

OldBlue, you might have skipped your pills last night.

[fourtheboys96]

i always thought that the global crisis was somehow caused by this ******* downloads. imagine home entertainment to the max no cost no spending

hahahahaha

someone has to buy a PC to download and play the downloaded material right?

the effect should be the opposite. increase in demand for electronic products.

[ab_initio]

^^ why prosecute an individual downloading for personal use? prosecute the one behind the invention of the software that allows me access to it...that's contributory piracy...no need to amend the law...just intensify the enforcement and hone some more those in the fact finding and investigation of piracy offenses... how can we enhance the present invention when it is strictly regulated? that's precisely the spirit of personal use...so that among the many end users baka may bagong invention out of the new one which has patent or copyright...

Following the same logic, we should then prosecute the inventor of the gun. Or the hammer. Or the ball point pen. They can all be used to kill someone.

just a point of clarification, Sir. where's the connection with your example to mine when i was talking about offenses affecting the intellectual rights of an inventor and to my mind po, your examples pointed to an entirely different crime...crime against person, the speculation that those objects, which according to you, are inventions, which can be used to kill someone...

That's why it's called an analogy.

How is the creator/inventor of a tool liable for any wrongdoing done using his/her invention which was contrary to its intended purpose? Why should he/she be responsible for what other people do?

sabi ni miriam (merriam webster) ito daw ang ibig sabihin ng analogy:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/analogy

[Yoda]

just a point of clarification, Sir. where's the connection with your example to mine when i was talking about offenses affecting the intellectual rights of an inventor and to my mind po, your examples pointed to an entirely different crime...crime against person, the speculation that those objects, which according to you, are inventions, which can be used to kill someone...

This is what you posted: "why prosecute an individual downloading for personal use? prosecute the one behind the invention of the software that allows me access to it".

So what you're saying is, we should prosecute the ones who invented P2P, Bit*******, etc. The ones who invented the tools. We should not prosecute the downloaders. The ones who use the tools.

That's how I interpret what you said. I may have misunderstood, but I don't see how else it could be interpreted.

If we'll be prosecuting the inventor of the tools and not the user of the tools, then that's where my analogies came from.

sabi ni miriam (merriam webster) ito daw ang ibig sabihin ng analogy:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/analogy

Quoting your source, "resemblance in some particulars between things otherwise unlike".

Downloading and killing people are totally unlike.

But...

User: Downloader <=> killer
Tool: P2P software <=> gun
Inventor: P2P inventor <=> gun inventor

Ok? ;)

[Jun aka Pekto]

Good luck with that one. Even in the US, enforcement and prosecution of downloaded content (audio and video) from the internet by a private individual for personal use is difficult to do.

I read somewhere the authorities are already talking to various ISPs and can hold them liable. I haven't really kept track of it since I don't pirate software anyway unless abandonware MS-DOS games count.

[s_quilicot]

bagong funds na naman yan.

in short corruption na naman,

[architect]

I read somewhere the authorities are already talking to various ISPs and can hold them liable. I haven't really kept track of it since I don't pirate software anyway unless abandonware MS-DOS games count.

If ISPs are held liable for the data pass through them, then mobile telcos should also be held liable for any data that pass through them, including x-rated materials, SMS messages containing libelous remarks, death threats, etc. By the same principle, the Post Office should be held liable for any illegal stuff delivered by them. All entities mentioned are mere conduits that can deliver both legal and illegal stuff.

[ghosthunter]

If ISPs are held liable for the data pass through them, then mobile telcos should also be held liable for any data that pass through them, including x-rated materials, SMS messages containing libelous remarks, death threats, etc. By the same principle, the Post Office should be held liable for any illegal stuff delivered by them. All entities mentioned are mere conduits that can deliver both legal and illegal stuff.

+1

In short, the ISPs will not agree to it. If GLobe/Smart/etc can get away saying they cannot monitor the sms/txt messages send/received by people, it's the same with ISPs.

[1D4LV]

quite impossible. they better check on the big companies first before going into the individual users na mas mahirap i trace o i-track.

mas malaki ang losses ng mga software companies kung big companies ang nandadaya sa software nila.

[Jun aka Pekto]

If ISPs are held liable for the data pass through them, then mobile telcos should also be held liable for any data that pass through them, including x-rated materials, SMS messages containing libelous remarks, death threats, etc. By the same principle, the Post Office should be held liable for any illegal stuff delivered by them. All entities mentioned are mere conduits that can deliver both legal and illegal stuff.

Maybe it's a matter of copyrighted material. One thing that differs an ISP from the Post Office is that the servers can monitor an abnormally large download, see what the file is, and see where the source is. If it's a legit source, let it through. If it's a ******* site, then they may block it. I'm sure the servers can be rigged to sound an alarm.

But, the noose is getting tighter. I think I had an email about my ISP's future plans. Of course, I deleted it without even opening it.

All these wouldn't be happening if everyone had an "honor" system.

If you can't afford it, don't use it, don't play it, don't watch it, don't listen to it. I've got tons and tons of internet bandwidth. I could easily pirate games. But, I choose not to. I learned my lesson with the Commodore Amiga. That platform had so many pirates/bootleggers, they drove most developers away. That lack of apps pretty much killed my favorite platform.

After that, I just buy everything that's not legally freeware. If a game cost too much, I wait until it's in the bargain bin or not play it at all.

Even with my YouTube uploads..... If I get a note saying there's copyrighted material and the owner's raising a fit, I delete it. Simple.