IPOS, AGC applying to intervene in illegal movie downloads case
Posted 20 Sep 2016 16:13 Updated 20 Sep 2016 16:20
SINGAPORE: The Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS) and the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) will be applying to intervene in court proceedings of a case involving alleged illegal downloading of two movies, they said on Tuesday (Sep 20).
The proceedings involve QOTD Film Investment Ltd and Fathers and Daughters Nevada, LLC - the rights owners of Hollywood movies Queen of the Desert and Fathers and Daughters. The latter is produced by Voltage Pictures, the same studio that went after those who illegally downloaded Oscar-winning movie Dallas Buyers Club last year.
TODAY newspaper reported last month that telcos Singtel, StarHub and M1 have been served papers in connection to the case.
In a joint statement, IPOS and AGC said that while content owners have the right to enforce their intellectual property, this should be done "in a way that builds legitimacy and respect for the entire process" and is not susceptible to allegations of abuse.
They added that they had reviewed positions taken in other jurisdictions such as Australia, Canada, the UK and the US in similar cases and noted that the courts in these jurisdictions imposed certain safeguards.
"We will be asking the courts to consider imposing similar safeguards and conditions, if we are allowed to intervene," IPOS and AGC said.
Members of the public affected by the proceedings can sign-up for complimentary intellectual property (IP) business and legal clinics, where they may receive preliminary legal advice on IP dispute cases in consultation with lawyers from private law firms to help them make informed decisions on their next course of action, according to IPOS.
"IPOS is committed to build a fair and balanced IP ecosystem that takes into account the interests of content owners, intermediaries and persons who wish to use copyright protected materials," it said in the statement.
- CNA/mz
- wong chee tat :)
Showing posts with label piracy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label piracy. Show all posts
Tuesday, September 20, 2016
Thursday, July 21, 2016
U.S. Authorities Charge Owner of Most-Visited Illegal File-Sharing Website with Copyright Infringement
Department of Justice
Office of Public Affairs
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Wednesday, July 20, 2016
U.S. Authorities Charge Owner of Most-Visited Illegal File-Sharing Website with Copyright Infringement
U.S. authorities have charged the alleged owner of today’s most visited illegal file-sharing website with criminal copyright infringement and have seized domain names associated with the website.
Assistant Attorney General Leslie R. Caldwell of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney Zachary T. Fardon of the Northern District of Illinois, Executive Associate Director Peter T. Edge of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) and Chief Richard Weber of the Internal Revenue Service-Criminal Investigation (IRS-CI) made the announcement.
Artem Vaulin, 30, of Kharkiv, Ukraine, was arrested today in Poland and is charged by criminal complaint, filed in U.S. District Court in Chicago, with one count of conspiracy to commit criminal copyright infringement, one count of conspiracy to commit money laundering and two counts of criminal copyright infringement. The United States will seek to extradite Vaulin to the United States.
“Vaulin is charged with running today’s most visited illegal file-sharing website, responsible for unlawfully distributing well over $1 billion of copyrighted materials,” said Assistant Attorney General Caldwell. “In an effort to evade law enforcement, Vaulin allegedly relied on servers located in countries around the world and moved his domains due to repeated seizures and civil lawsuits. His arrest in Poland, however, demonstrates again that cybercriminals can run, but they cannot hide from justice.”
“Copyright infringement exacts a large toll, a very human one, on the artists and businesses whose livelihood hinges on their creative inventions,” said U.S. Attorney Fardon. “Vaulin allegedly used the Internet to cause enormous harm to those artists. Our Cybercrimes Unit at the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Chicago will continue to work with our law enforcement partners around the globe to identify, investigate and prosecute those who attempt to illegally profit from the innovation of others.”
“Artem Vaulin was allegedly running a worldwide digital piracy website that stole more than $1 billion in profits from the U.S. entertainment industry,” said Executive Associate Director Edge. “Protecting legitimate commerce is one of HSI’s highest priorities. With the cooperation of our law enforcement partners, we will continue to aggressively bring to justice those who enrich themselves by stealing the creative work of U.S. artists.”
“Investigating cyber-enabled schemes is a top priority for CI,” said Chief Weber. “Websites such as the one seized today brazenly facilitate all kinds of illegal commerce. Criminal Investigation is committed to thoroughly investigating financial crimes, regardless of the medium. We will continue to work with our law enforcement partners to unravel this and other complex financial transactions and money laundering schemes where individuals attempt to conceal the true source of their income and use the Internet to mask their true identity.”
According to the complaint, Vaulin allegedly owns and operates Kickass Torrents or KAT, a commercial website that has enabled users to illegally reproduce and distribute hundreds of millions of copyrighted motion pictures, video games, television programs, musical recordings and other electronic media since 2008. The copyrighted material is collectively valued at well over $1 billion, according to the complaint. The complaint alleges that KAT receives more than 50 million unique visitors per month and is estimated to be the 69th most frequently visited website on the internet.
In addition, a federal court in Chicago ordered the seizure of one bank account and seven domain names associated with the alleged KAT conspiracy.
According to the complaint, KAT has consistently made available for download movies that were still in theaters and displayed advertising throughout its site. KAT’s net worth has been estimated at more than $54 million, with estimated annual advertising revenue in the range of $12.5 million to $22.3 million, according to the complaint. The complaint alleges that the site operates in approximately 28 languages. KAT has moved its domains several times due to numerous seizures and copyright lawsuits, and it has been ordered blocked by courts in the United Kingdom, Ireland, Italy, Denmark, Belgium and Malaysia, according to the complaint. KAT has allegedly operated at various times under the domains kickasstorrents.com, kat.ph, kickass.to, kickass.so and kat.cr, and relied on a network of computer servers located around the world, including in Chicago.
Several motion pictures currently available for download and sharing on KAT are still showing in theatres, including “Captain America: Civil War,” “Now You See Me 2,” “Independence Day: Resurgence” and “Finding Dory,” according to the complaint. The complaint alleges that Vaulin, who used the screen name “tirm,” was involved in designing KAT’s original website, oversaw KAT’s operations and, during the latter part of the conspiracy, Vaulin allegedly operated KAT under the auspices of a Ukrainian-based front company called Cryptoneat.
The charges and allegations contained in the complaint are merely accusations. The defendant is presumed innocent until and unless proven guilty.
HSI and IRS-CI investigated the case with substantial assistance from the International Organized Crime Intelligence and Operations Center, the National Intellectual Property Rights Coordination Center, the Criminal Division’s Office of International Affairs and the Polish Border Guard and National Prosecutor’s Office.
Senior Counsel Ryan K. Dickey of the Criminal Division’s Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section and Assistant U.S. Attorneys William E. Ridgway and Devlin N. Su of the Northern District of Illinois are prosecuting the case. The Criminal Division’s Office of International Affairs also provided significant assistance in this case.
- wong chee tat :)
Monday, May 23, 2016
Lawyers in Dallas Buyers Club action face punishment
Lawyers in Dallas Buyers Club action face punishment
Lawyers in Dallas Buyers Club action face punishment
Jared Leto and Matthew McCounaughey in Dallas Buyers Club.
KOH SWEE FANG VALERIE
valeriekohsf@mediacorp.com.sg PUBLISHED: 4:15 AM, MAY 17, 2016
SINGAPORE — The Law Society of Singapore (LawSoc) will be going after two former lawyers of the legal firm representing United States film studio Dallas Buyers Club LLC, following a complaint lodged last year on their conduct in civil claims against illegal downloaders of the movie.
In a reply to the complainant Internet Society (Singapore), which TODAY has seen, the LawSoc said an inquiry committee has decided that a formal investigation by a disciplinary tribunal was not necessary, but that the lawyers in question “should be given a warning, reprimand or order to pay a penalty of not more than S$10,000”.
The exact punishment will be decided by the LawSoc council after the lawyers respond to whether or not they wish to be heard on their side of the story in the matter — a procedural requirement under the Legal Profession Act (LPA).
“If a penalty or reprimand is imposed by Council, it will be published in the Government Gazette as required under the LPA,” said the society in a May 11 letter to Mr Harish Pillay, who is immediate past president of Internet Society (Singapore), a non-governmental organisation promoting Internet usage. The LawSoc letter was signed off by its director of conduct and chairman of the inquiry committee K Gopalan.
When contacted yesterday, the society declined to comment. “Under the LPA, the Law Society is required to maintain confidentiality for disciplinary proceedings save for information which the Society is required by law to publish,” said a spokesperson.
In June last year, Internet Society (Singapore) complained to LawSoc that Mr Robert Raj Joseph and Mr Lee Heng Eam, who were both still with Samuel Seow Law Corporation then, had issued letters threatening criminal proceedings to advance civil claims against the film’s pirates. These demand letters to 77 M1 subscribers asking for a written offer of damages and costs had spelt out a maximum fine of S$50,000 or imprisonment not exceeding three years for a conviction under Section 136(3) of the Copyright Act, and a maximum S$20,000 fine and six months’ jail term under Section 136(3A) of the Act.
At that time, Mr Samuel Seow, the firm’s managing director, had said a new batch of letters that were worded differently were sent to StarHub and Singtel subscribers who allegedly downloaded the movie illegally. He had also said Mr Raj, who was the director of the litigation and dispute resolution practice group in the firm, was leaving the firm, but the departure was not linked to his handling of the case.
The Law Society’s Practice Directions and Rulings Guide 2013 states that it is improper for a solicitor to “communicate in writing or otherwise a threat of criminal proceedings in order to achieve a stated objective in any circumstance, for example, to compel a witness to attend at the solicitor’s office to give a statement or to sign a written statement despatched to him”.
Both Mr Raj and Mr Lee could not be reached for comments yesterday. After leaving the firm, Mr Raj set up his own practice in July last year. Mr Lee left after him, and has since become an in-house legal counsel, according to Mr Seow.
Mr Seow added that he had not heard of the latest development from the LawSoc. “It would not be right for me to comment on this,” he said. “We want to take the position that we protect copyright owners. It’s unfortunate, but they are my former employees.”
- wong chee tat :)
Lawyers in Dallas Buyers Club action face punishment
Jared Leto and Matthew McCounaughey in Dallas Buyers Club.
KOH SWEE FANG VALERIE
valeriekohsf@mediacorp.com.sg PUBLISHED: 4:15 AM, MAY 17, 2016
SINGAPORE — The Law Society of Singapore (LawSoc) will be going after two former lawyers of the legal firm representing United States film studio Dallas Buyers Club LLC, following a complaint lodged last year on their conduct in civil claims against illegal downloaders of the movie.
In a reply to the complainant Internet Society (Singapore), which TODAY has seen, the LawSoc said an inquiry committee has decided that a formal investigation by a disciplinary tribunal was not necessary, but that the lawyers in question “should be given a warning, reprimand or order to pay a penalty of not more than S$10,000”.
The exact punishment will be decided by the LawSoc council after the lawyers respond to whether or not they wish to be heard on their side of the story in the matter — a procedural requirement under the Legal Profession Act (LPA).
“If a penalty or reprimand is imposed by Council, it will be published in the Government Gazette as required under the LPA,” said the society in a May 11 letter to Mr Harish Pillay, who is immediate past president of Internet Society (Singapore), a non-governmental organisation promoting Internet usage. The LawSoc letter was signed off by its director of conduct and chairman of the inquiry committee K Gopalan.
When contacted yesterday, the society declined to comment. “Under the LPA, the Law Society is required to maintain confidentiality for disciplinary proceedings save for information which the Society is required by law to publish,” said a spokesperson.
In June last year, Internet Society (Singapore) complained to LawSoc that Mr Robert Raj Joseph and Mr Lee Heng Eam, who were both still with Samuel Seow Law Corporation then, had issued letters threatening criminal proceedings to advance civil claims against the film’s pirates. These demand letters to 77 M1 subscribers asking for a written offer of damages and costs had spelt out a maximum fine of S$50,000 or imprisonment not exceeding three years for a conviction under Section 136(3) of the Copyright Act, and a maximum S$20,000 fine and six months’ jail term under Section 136(3A) of the Act.
At that time, Mr Samuel Seow, the firm’s managing director, had said a new batch of letters that were worded differently were sent to StarHub and Singtel subscribers who allegedly downloaded the movie illegally. He had also said Mr Raj, who was the director of the litigation and dispute resolution practice group in the firm, was leaving the firm, but the departure was not linked to his handling of the case.
The Law Society’s Practice Directions and Rulings Guide 2013 states that it is improper for a solicitor to “communicate in writing or otherwise a threat of criminal proceedings in order to achieve a stated objective in any circumstance, for example, to compel a witness to attend at the solicitor’s office to give a statement or to sign a written statement despatched to him”.
Both Mr Raj and Mr Lee could not be reached for comments yesterday. After leaving the firm, Mr Raj set up his own practice in July last year. Mr Lee left after him, and has since become an in-house legal counsel, according to Mr Seow.
Mr Seow added that he had not heard of the latest development from the LawSoc. “It would not be right for me to comment on this,” he said. “We want to take the position that we protect copyright owners. It’s unfortunate, but they are my former employees.”
- wong chee tat :)
Friday, February 12, 2016
Dallas Buyers Club abandons fight against Aussie pirates
Dallas Buyers Club abandons fight against Aussie pirates
Date: February 11, 2016
Hannah Francis
Technology Reporter
It's a happy day for Aussie pirates: The Hollywood studio behind the film Dallas Buyers Club has abandoned its fight to extract huge sums of cash from alleged copyright infringers.
Dallas Buyers Club LLC had until midday Thursday to lodge a second appeal against an August Federal Court decision which effectively prevented it from engaging in so-called "speculative invoicing" in Australia.
Michael Bradley of Marque Lawyers, who represented the studio in the case, confirmed to Fairfax Media the studio had not appealed the decision by the deadline.
He said while his client was disappointed by the final outcome of the case, it was not the end of the war against piracy in Australia.
"The problem isn't going away; Australia is still one of the most prominent jurisdictions for infringement, and rights holders will continue to feel that they're losing a lot of money, so I expect they'll continue to look for ways of deterring that behaviour," Mr Bradley said.
"The infringement is so large scale and the financial losses involved are so big, I don't think that's the end of the story."
He said the case was "very technical" and centred around access to information, with no bearing on the actual underlying legal issues of infringement and damages.
"Presumably infringers will be happy about the result; whether it will influence their behaviour [in regard to continuing to pirate], I have no idea," Mr Bradley said.
However Graham Phillips of Thomson Geer lawyers, who led the defence by iiNet and other internet service providers whose customers' details were at the centre of the case, said the outcome effectively defeated the speculative invoicing business model in Australia.
Dallas Buyers Club LLC's application ultimately failed because the studio overreached, he said.
"The demands they wanted to make were excessive, unsupported by the evidence they collected," Mr Phillips said.
Mr Phillips praised the ISPs for defending their customers' privacy, singling out iiNet's outspoken former chief regulatory officer Steve Dalby for leading the charge.
"The case is a great legacy for Steve Dalby ... who was keen to protect his customers from DBC's unfair speculative invoicing practice," Mr Phillips said.
Rights holders could succeed where Dallas Buyers Club had failed in obtaining details of alleged pirates, if they were able to prove in court their claims for damages would be reasonable and within the law, he said.
Federal Court Justice Nye Perram granted Dallas Buyers Club access to the names and addresses of the alleged pirates back in April, but put a temporary stay on access until the studio could prove to the court it would not threaten and pursue individuals for excessive amounts of money.
Justice Perram rejected "several versions" of the studio's proposed correspondence with individuals before deciding in August to lift the stay but impose strict conditions on access. These included that the studio only seek damages from individuals for the cost of obtaining the film plus some out-of-pocket expenses, and that it forfeit a $600,000 bond if the terms were breached. The restrictions effectively made any further action from the studio against individual pirates prohibitively expensive.
In September, Dallas Buyers Club LLC appealed the decision and sought access to the contact details of only 472 alleged pirates with a $60,000 bond – 10 per cent of the original amount – plus the right to seek further compensation. Justice Perram rejected the request in December, ordering the case to be thrown out on February 11 unless further action was taken.
- wong chee tat :)
Date: February 11, 2016
Hannah Francis
Technology Reporter
It's a happy day for Aussie pirates: The Hollywood studio behind the film Dallas Buyers Club has abandoned its fight to extract huge sums of cash from alleged copyright infringers.
Dallas Buyers Club LLC had until midday Thursday to lodge a second appeal against an August Federal Court decision which effectively prevented it from engaging in so-called "speculative invoicing" in Australia.
Michael Bradley of Marque Lawyers, who represented the studio in the case, confirmed to Fairfax Media the studio had not appealed the decision by the deadline.
He said while his client was disappointed by the final outcome of the case, it was not the end of the war against piracy in Australia.
"The problem isn't going away; Australia is still one of the most prominent jurisdictions for infringement, and rights holders will continue to feel that they're losing a lot of money, so I expect they'll continue to look for ways of deterring that behaviour," Mr Bradley said.
"The infringement is so large scale and the financial losses involved are so big, I don't think that's the end of the story."
He said the case was "very technical" and centred around access to information, with no bearing on the actual underlying legal issues of infringement and damages.
"Presumably infringers will be happy about the result; whether it will influence their behaviour [in regard to continuing to pirate], I have no idea," Mr Bradley said.
However Graham Phillips of Thomson Geer lawyers, who led the defence by iiNet and other internet service providers whose customers' details were at the centre of the case, said the outcome effectively defeated the speculative invoicing business model in Australia.
Dallas Buyers Club LLC's application ultimately failed because the studio overreached, he said.
"The demands they wanted to make were excessive, unsupported by the evidence they collected," Mr Phillips said.
Mr Phillips praised the ISPs for defending their customers' privacy, singling out iiNet's outspoken former chief regulatory officer Steve Dalby for leading the charge.
"The case is a great legacy for Steve Dalby ... who was keen to protect his customers from DBC's unfair speculative invoicing practice," Mr Phillips said.
Rights holders could succeed where Dallas Buyers Club had failed in obtaining details of alleged pirates, if they were able to prove in court their claims for damages would be reasonable and within the law, he said.
Federal Court Justice Nye Perram granted Dallas Buyers Club access to the names and addresses of the alleged pirates back in April, but put a temporary stay on access until the studio could prove to the court it would not threaten and pursue individuals for excessive amounts of money.
Justice Perram rejected "several versions" of the studio's proposed correspondence with individuals before deciding in August to lift the stay but impose strict conditions on access. These included that the studio only seek damages from individuals for the cost of obtaining the film plus some out-of-pocket expenses, and that it forfeit a $600,000 bond if the terms were breached. The restrictions effectively made any further action from the studio against individual pirates prohibitively expensive.
In September, Dallas Buyers Club LLC appealed the decision and sought access to the contact details of only 472 alleged pirates with a $60,000 bond – 10 per cent of the original amount – plus the right to seek further compensation. Justice Perram rejected the request in December, ordering the case to be thrown out on February 11 unless further action was taken.
- wong chee tat :)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)