Entertainment company Warner Bros. is defending its anti piracy efforts following allegations of abuse, including removing content that it did not own the copyrights to. The claims raise serious questions as to whether current anti-piracy efforts making its way through Congress may punish innocent parties if this is a common occurrence.
File hosting service Hotfile sued Warner in September, claiming that after granting server access to Warner to remove copyrighted content, the media giant not only removed its own but also content it owned no rights to.
Hotfile alerted Warner to the issues, but the movie studio ignored those complaints. Running out of options, Hotfile sued Warner for fraud and abuse.
The real rub comes in Warner's own description of its practices, which can be found in a filing with the US District Court for the Southern District of Florida. Warner admits that it took down files that it didn't own the copyrights to, and typically searched for files on keywords alone.
Worse yet, Warner instructs employees to take down software that enables faster download of pirated content. These files are open-source, so no one owns those rights.
The courts must now decide if Warner is within its rights, although any legal observer should expect the judge to ban Warner from removing files other than its own: the law doesn't allow for vigilante copyright protection.
That said, everyone should worry if these methods are widespread in the industry.
Two companion bills are snaking through Congress, the PROTECT-IP Act in the Senate, and the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) in the House. Critics have lambasted both bills for what they see as blatant censorship.
Why? In SOPA the legislation would create a legal basis for the Attorney General to cut off websites from the Internet, even without notice. With that in mind, think of the story of Hotfile and Warner. What if an entertainment company like Warner mistakenly claimed pirated files on a company's web server?
That website could lose Internet access -- no questions asked. In some cases, it gives the power to the corporations themselves to ask for blacklisting, which could strip the websites of their legal right to be innocent before proven guilty.
In the bill's defense, that only appears to be for payment processing, but nevertheless the website could be stripped of its revenue stream for days while fighting to prove its innocence.
"The potential for rampant abuse is obvious: whether it’s a frivolous claim that wouldn’t withstand the scrutiny of the official process or an attempt to put an emerging competitor at an extreme disadvantage", Electronic Frontier Federation activist Trevor Timm says.
Warner and Hotfile's saga should serve as a wakeup call to those in Congress pushing for the current forms of these bills.
It is clear that an industry's overzealous effort to curb piracy has gone too far and is negatively impacting a business as a result. Washington's effort could add a whole new dimension to that, especially considering Warner's alleged carelessness.
Photo Credit: CURAphotography/Shutterstock