Apparently there was some sort of media summit in Abu Dhabi recently, and a big topic of discussion was copyright infringement. (I think we need to reserve the word “piracy” for actual, sea-faring piracy, not kids grabbing the random Sublime song off LimeWire.) Rupert Murdoch called on governments to stop copyright infringers, asking them to punish them as they would shoplifters. I guess Murdoch doesn’t understand the different between theft and copyright infringement. And Ari Emmanuel, Rahm Emmanuel’s brother (and the inspiration for the Entourage character Ari), has been lobbying President Obama to implement some sort of three-strikes policy, like they have in France. France!

A couple things: one, I’m pretty sure President Obama is a little busy trying to get some sort of healthcare law passed; the concerns of Hollywood bigshots aren’t exactly on his radar right now. Two, we’re beginning to enter the next election cycle, so Congress is going to be on its tippy toes trying not to offend anybody or do much of anything. It’s sorta like laying low come 3pm Friday, so your boss doesn’t saddle you with a last-minute assignment that’ll keep you at the office one longer that you need to be. Congress is busy doing nothing, in other words.

As for Murdoch: whatever, dude. I think my government has more important things to do than track down high schoolers who download an episode of 24. At least I hope it does!

width="270" height="169" />

France’s top constitutional court approved a revised plan to penalize those accused multiple times of infringing intellectual property, according to …

Originally posted at Media Maverick

It looks like, in France, men still are born and remain free and equal in rights. That anti-piracy law that we’ve been tracking, known in France as the Hadopi law, is now, for all intents and purposes, pretty much null and void, thanks to the intervention of a court there. Well, the court there, the Constitutional Council. It is the view of the court that “free access to public communication services online” is in line with the rights laid down in the French Constitution. Any effort to subvert that right—say, three strikes and you’re out, and disconnected from the Internet for a year—necessarily conflicts with the Constitution.

There’s more. Not only did the court take issue with the whole kick-you-off-the-Internet part, it also pointed out that, wait a minute, since when can the executive convict people? (You’ll recall that the French Parliament initially wanted nothing to do with the law; Sarkozy is said to have hammered it through by will alone.) Because, in effect, that’s what it would have been doing. It set up an “independent” agency to track people online (so as to count how many strikes that have), and, if found “guilty,” bam! Then there’s the whole matter of invasion of privacy: since when is it the government’s job to follow your trail of bread crumbs online? At the behest of “artists” (read: the suit-wearing money men in the entertainment industry), no less!

Now, the Hadopi law will still go into effect, just without the stricken provisions (kicking people off the Internet, tracking their whereabouts, etc.) How exactly you can enforce the law now without the ability to keep track of people, to keep track of how many “strikes” they have, I have no idea.

There’s also more pragmatic forces at work here. I recall seeing several comments, during my run-in with Best Buy, deriding the idea of taking Best Buy to court. (Note: I have just let the matter die, no lawsuit or demanding an apology or whatever. Just move on.) “Why would you want to clog the courts up with this nonsense?” etc. Can you even imagine how busy the courts would be if that independent agency dragged every teenager who downloaded an album before a judge? (Never mind that the Hadopi law didn’t provide for people to fight the accusations!) It would surely be madness.

Only now has this three-strikes law piqued my interest. I look forward to the fallout.

Flickr

The French Constitutional Council rejected a key provision that would

…

Don’t expect every country in Europe to follow France in implementing a “three strikes” anti-piracy laws. A report called Digital Britain, which assess the UK’s preparedness to enter the digital era, will be published next week, and inside are methods that the UK could use to combat Internet piracy. One such method: slowing down the Internet connection of file-sharers so as to prevent them from effectively downloading illegal content. (Though, if my UK acquaintances are telling the truth, broadband in the UK is garbage to begin with. It’d be like telling a slug to slow down.)

Slowing people down is one option, rather than just cutting people off from the Internet altogether, which is something the EU doesn’t support. The Government there, now less a few Blairites, sees Internet access as being as important as something like running water.

Also in the report: a demand that ISPs cooperate when copyright infringement is found. You know, sending letters to customers saying, “Yeah, we found out that you were downloading Premier League games, and now the FA and Sky Sports are breathing down our necks. Knock it off.”

Of course, that’ll open up ISPs to all sorts of nastiness. “If they can catch people downloading episodes of “Lost,” why can’t they spot people who are looking at terrorism sites, teasing Gordon Brown, etc.?”

Flickr

After two lackluster years of tiny audiences and slashed budgets, the Electronic Entertainment Expo is trying to recapture some of its past luster–but it may be too little, too late. That’s a shame, because E3, being held next week, is one of only a handful of trade shows the …