AfterDawn: Tech news

Brein loses important P2P case

Written by James Delahunty @ 12 Jul 2005 4:02 User comments (9)

Brein loses important P2P case Dutch anti-piracy organisation Brein (you may remember them for being responsible for the shutting down of ShareConnector) had their plans dealt a huge blow today when a Dutch judge ruled that ISPs did not have to hand over subscriber details of file sharers. The file sharers in question are being accused of sharing copyrighted material illegally on P2P networks, but for now Brein just has the IP addresses of these users. They approached the ISPs first asking them to give the details but were met with opposition.
Not one of the five ISPs gave Brein the details and said that only a criminal trial court could demand such details from them. The case was brought to a civil court in the city of Utrecht where the Judge made the decision that he would not order the ISPs to give the details because he believed the plaintiffs had not met the necessary conditions to warrant such an order.

"Brein has sought help from a research company, which has looked at the shared folders on computers of the file swappers. In that process it may have accessed private files," the judge said in the court ruling. This is yet another case where a Judge has ruled for privacy over piracy. "The judge does not deem this correct, because according to Dutch law, privacy is insufficiently protected in the United States," the ruling said.

Brein represents 52 media companies in total including EMI, Sony Music and Universal Studios. Brein manager Tim Kuik said he would take his case to a higher court. The attorney for the ISPs, Christiaan Alberdingk Thijm said the ruling was an important victory for the privacy of Internet users. "Private organizations cannot start sniffing around on someone else's computer and collect data," he said.


Previous Next  

9 user comments

112.7.2005 18:26

it's a small victory, but it goes to show there are still a few people in power that recognized the rights of internet users.

213.7.2005 00:30

Haha. As said, small victory, but still. Im happy about it =) "Private organizations cannot start sniffing around on someone else's computer and collect data" Goddamn right!

313.7.2005 03:00

I agree, any victory however big or small is good news. QUOTE ______________________________________________________ "Brein has sought help from a research company, which has looked at the shared folders on computers of the file swappers. ______________________________________________________ Who do they think they are.

413.7.2005 03:05

I am also with the others on this. "a Small Victory" but this goes to show that this is more that a p2p problem if the courts give the go ahead of the allowance of details of certain isp users to b given to private organsisations, the whole issue of privacy in general will go out the window and it will b a free for all !!! I am pleased that some people can c the big pictures in regards to this major issue. But I am afraid that like i said this is a small victory and we have a long way to go....

513.7.2005 04:17

no this is more than a "small victory" because i this case the jedge decided not to get details handed over because he believed the users in question had their privacy rights stomped on by that "research" company.. In other cases around the world, judges ruled that ISPs didnt have to hand over infoalso for privacy reasons, however the door was open for the IP Address to be sued in a John Doe case... whereas here the judge actually points out that the data collecting may be illegal in the first place...

613.7.2005 04:33

lucky for the people in the netherlands :D

713.7.2005 18:22

about time we see someone making the right choice

815.7.2005 19:05

I wonder how Brien would react to these situations: 1) I access THEIR computer & copy files, to use against them (in whatever way). 2) One of the P2P users copyrights the contents of his personal computer, then sues Brien for copyright infringement.

921.7.2005 15:54

Got an idea on how to bankrupt the RIAA. Use their own tactics but multiply it by 100 million! Everyone in the U.S. as a small claims court branch. If everyone sued the RIAA simultaneously, they would not have enough attorney's to answer the legal pleadings. Thus it would be summary judgement in 99 million cases. Summary judgement means winning without a fight. so 99 million times $1000 that's almost 100 Billion dollars. RIAA would have to spend so much time and money just to answer the legal summons that they would go bankrupt in trying to do it. Probably just the postage would kill them. LOL Small claims court costs around $35. But if you have no income, the court fees are usually paid for by the court. The mailing of the summons is usually $10, I'm sure everyone can spare $10-35. The trick is for everyone to do it at once so that the RIAA is inundated. This is kinda of like a legal denial of service attacks but through the courts.

Comments have been disabled for this article.

News archive