On Copyright Enforcement, Telecom Carriers Say: Three Strikes and We're Outta Here
A number of telecom carriers have been beating the drum for -- or at least indicating their approval of -- three-strikes legislation, in which consumers charged with illegally sharing music or videos three times can lose their Internet access. However, don't think of this as one large industry supporting another. No, the carriers are actually looking for a way to duck acting as copyright enforcers for music labels and studios. Turns out that they don't like it any more than consumers.
Eircom, a big ISP in Ireland, recently implemented a three-strikes policy. Why? Because of a lawsuit by the music industry:
The Irish Recorded Music Association (Irma), whose members include EMI, Sony, Universal and Warner, reached an out-of-court settlement with Eircom in February 2009 under which the telecoms company agreed to introduce such a system for its 750,000 broadband users.Customers get three warnings before they lose their Internet connection for a year. Things are no more happy in the U.S. Time Warner recently told a court that subpoenas targeting alleged infringers needed practical limits:
"Copyright cases involving third-party discovery of Internet service providers have typically related to a plaintiff's efforts to identify anonymous defendants whose numbers rank in the single or low double digits," wrote the cable company. "By contrast, plaintiff in this case alone seeks identifying information about 2,049 anonymous defendants, and seeks identifying information about 809 Internet Protocol addresses from TWC."Those who can monitor Internet activity find themselves becoming the private detectives of the content producers. The pain of running down information is taking a toll on the carriers, who have begun to see three-strikes as a solution. For example, last year, both AT&T (T) and Comcast denied their participation when reports came out that the RIAA was working with some ISPs on a three-strikes program. And yet, AT&T recently decided that it wanted a national three-strikes program. Why the difference? Because three-strikes is based on content producer claims of infringement, not actual proof. When the carriers are "forced" to implement such a program, they get three benefits:
- The carriers eliminate lawyers' time in handling subpoenas and the need to dig up any data that could provide proof.
- Carriers get to make nice to the content providers, and ultimately they want good relationships because they want content for their users.
- By pointing to a lawsuit or regulatory requirement, they get to pass the buck when consumers complain.
Image: Flickr user Jay just saw, CC 2.0.