Assignment on

Software Piracy: A case from political and legal perspective

 Summary:
Piracy is the unauthorized use of use of another's production, invention, or conception specially
in infringement of a copyright or the unauthorized duplication, distribution and downloading of
computer software and applications. Computer software and the act of piracy is a match made
in heaven. It is extraordinarily easy to make copies of software that possess all the qualities and
features of the original product. Makers of software face immense challenge to protect their
digital products from being pirated. Software Piracy is an explosive issue, it increasingly cuts to
the perception, protection, and enforcement of intellectual property rights. Presently software
piracy ranges from a single individuals making an unauthorized copy of a software product for
use, sale, or free distribution to a companys mismanagement of its software license. Principal
types of piracy include: end-user piracy, pre-installed software, Internet piracy, counterfeiting,
and online auction piracy. Countries where piracy rates were the highest in 2008 include China
(92%), Vietnam (92%), Ukraine (91%), Indonesia (88%), and Russia (87%). Countries where
piracy rates were the lowest in 2008 include the United States (22%), New Zealand (23%),
Denmark (26%), Austria (27%), and Sweden (27%). The pervasiveness and tenacity of software
piracy in the face of an ever-expanding set of intellectual property rights laws, policies, and
treaties raises profound questions for the software industry in particular and intellectual
property rights in general. According to Business Software Alliance (BSA), the total damages
resulting from software privacy skyrocketed to $ 63.4 billion.

Software companies started to take various measures to defend their intellectual property
rights, starting from introducing anti-copying mechanisms in 1980s and 90s. Later they
focused on distribution models and different means of technological protection like passwords,
license codes etc.

There are different type of organizations who are working to fight piracy, namely International
Property Rights (IPR), Business Software Alliance (BSA), Software and Information Industry
Association (SIIA), International Anti-Counterfeiting Coalition (IACC), World Intellectual Property
Organization (WIPO). WCT and WPPT are two of the major treaties that have been signed in
order to eliminate piracy. Even TRIPS which is a significant treaty signed by WTO members, has
clauses to protect intellectual properties from being pirated.

Emerging countries are the prime location of piracy. Although piracy is a problem in the United
States, the issue is far worse in many other parts of the world, especially in emerging markets.
For example, the Business Software Alliance found that although software piracy declined or
remained the same in more than 80 percent of countries, global piracy still increased by 3
percent in 2008 because of rapidly expanding growth in PC ownership in high-piracy regions
such as Asia and Eastern Europe. Indeed, even though emerging markets only account for 20
percent of the software market, they make up 45 percent of software piracy. Emerging markets
account for a large portion of piracy in the music industry as well. China in particular has a high
rate of piracy where over 90 percent of downloaded songs are illegal. Many Latin American
countries similarly experience high rates of music piracy: it is estimated that there were 2.6 and
1.8 million illegally downloaded songs in Mexico and Brazil, respectively, in 2006. Moreover,
absent concerted and serious efforts to combat digital piracy in the United States and abroad, it
is likely that the overall rate of piracy will increase as more people acquire Internet-connected
computers and the average broadband speed increases.

Pirates have become very chic and well-adjusted with global scenarios and constantly changing
their course of actions. Those include cracking licensing codes, duplicating holograms, falsifying
e-mail headers, setting up anonymous post office boxes etc. They have been able to be always
tone step ahead of the law enforcement agencies even the recent introduction of cyber-police
are not being able to track and predict all of their activities. It has been observed over time that
pirates have become sophisticated entrepreneurs. They have full distribution chain, full
manufacturing chain and these are all based on profits.

Unfortunately, the digital era also has a serious downside for content producers and others in
the industry as it has made it easier than ever for consumers to get access to content without
authorization or without paying for it.

Different type of political ideologies and legal legacies make it more complicated to fight this
extraordinary problem. Legitimacy of piracy differs from culture to culture, so that conditions in
different countries are not suitable for an aggressive stand against piracy. There are also some
ethical barriers to condemn the act of piracy. Globalization has resulted unemployment and
sustained fall in income level in some countries, so the tendency to acquire anything at a lower
price gives rise to use of pirated software. Another very important factor is the collectivist
philosophy of nations where people think piracy is the way of dealing with monopolists who
charge exorbitant prices for necessary software that are vital tools of economic development.

Question 01
Collectivism and individualism, democracy and totalitarianism,
rule of law and rule of man; what do these concepts say about
the intellectual property rights of software and the legitimacy
of its protection?
All these concepts are much relevant to explain the trend in digital piracy across different
nations and cultures around the world. They are discussed below:

Collectivism and individualism:

The Individualism and Collectivism dimension describes the relationship between individuals
and the group in a society. For the countries with low individualism, people consider the group
as the main source of their identity. On the other hand, an individualistic culture would pay
more attention to the performance of the individual. Sharing software among group members
is considered acceptable and beneficial for the whole group and is expected. Individualism and
collectivism can be defined as a set of shared beliefs and values of a people concerning the
relationship of an individual to aggregates or groups or individuals to. It represents the way
individuals relate to others in their society, and it reflects their emotional and cognitive
attachments to particular networks of individuals. The former views morality as the good of
the in-group (family, friends, colleagues, etc.) while the latter construct morality as equality of
the individual. This rationality was effectively useful to explain Americans decision (not) to buy
pirated products. Some researchers articulated on the polar extremes between some
collectivist cultures and the Western cultures in terms of personal interaction style,
communication style, notions of self, and the development and maintenance of interpersonal
relationships.
Collectivism:
Perspective that the needs of the group take precedence over the needs of the individual;
Encourages dependence on the organization. Need of the group takes precedence over needs
of individual. Collectivism encourages virtue of sharing for the welfare of the society. This
cultural ideology holds the interest of the community, society or the nation over the individual
needs and privacies. In South Korean culture scientific discoveries are not regarded as private
property rather means for the overall development of the nation. So, usage of unlicensed or
pirated software is not a heinous crime in these cultures.
Individualism:
An emphasis on the importance of guaranteeing individual freedom and self-expression.
Encourages fulfilling leisure time and improving skills outside the organization. This ideology
encourages individual freedom, rights, needs and privacies over any other factor. Intellectual
property rights is considered one of the major rights of an individual or a company. Violation of
this right may result in lawsuits and possible punishments such as payment of fines or
incarceration.

Democracy and totalitarianism:

Democracy:

Democracy represents a political system in which citizens participate in the decision-making

and governance process, either directly or through elected representatives. Contemporary
democracies share the following characteristics:
 freedom of opinion, expression, and the press
freedom to organize
free elections
an independent and fair court system
a nonpolitical bureaucracy and defense infrastructure
Citizen access to the decision-making process.

Democracy and software piracy interrelate in interesting ways. Democratic countries as well as
the democratic principles of strong civil and political liberties seem to offer a buffer against
software piracy, while nondemocratic countries appear to exacerbate piracy by having
restricted market access to certain products. This restricted access to legitimate products,
which might be seen as politically innocuous in other contexts provides opportunities for
exploitation of copyrighted materials to fill the void. Hopefully, future research will build upon
this preliminary work by extending the database in terms of years covered, countries involved,
and types of piracy acts assessed to better understand the relationship between democracy
and IP theft. Powerful democratic countries produce large quantities of Intellectual Property
and they benefit most directly from the creation and implementation of strict laws against the
theft of their Intellectual property. These powerful democracies, therefore, have a vested
interest in protecting Intellectual property. By using the law as a vehicle to protect IP, they have
far fewer IP infractions.

Totalitarianism:

Totalitarianism represents a political system in which citizens seldom, if ever, participate in the
decision-making and governance process; power is monopolized by a single agent and
opposition is neither recognized nor tolerated. It is also characterized by suppression of political
and civil freedoms. In this system attitude of the ruling dictator or party towards intellectual
property is reflected in the enforcement of IP protection laws. So that it affects the amount of
usage of pirated software among the people of the country. Usually totalitarian system either
promotes piracy or neglects the seriousness of the issue altogether.

Rule of law and Rule of man:

Rule of law:
The principle that every member of a society must follow the same laws. The rule of law
institutes a just political and social environment, guarantees the enforceability of commercial
contracts and business transactions and safeguards personal property and individual freedom.
Under this political scenario all citizens or entities are equal in the eyes of the law. Regarding
intellectual property rights and piracy, there are some international standard laws such as:
Market access laws
 Non-discrimination laws
Transparency laws
Societies under rule of law can enforce the laws when the intellectual property laws are broken.
Software piracy rate is much lower in some of the countries where strong rule of law is
prominent. Establishment of rule of law is very important to prevent digital or any type of
piracy.
Rule of man:
Notion that the word and whim, no matter how arbitrary, of the ruler are law. In this type of
ideology state is run by masterful showmen and appearances is much more dominant than
substance. Intellectual property laws exist here but mostly they are not enforced properly. In
some countries (China), Intellectual property laws are enforced to protect local invention or
ideas from foreign interference.

Question 02
What is the relationships among governments, institutions,
organizations and companies in developing the legal means to
fight piracy?
There are major relationships among governments, institutions, organizations and companies in
developing legal framework to reduce or eliminate piracy. Technically, the standards of
software piracy are unequivocal. Thus, parties have been hopeful that collective political
arrangements and legal actions by companies, associations, governments, and institutions
would lead to a decline in global software piracy. However, coordinated anti-piracy initiatives
such as high-profile legal proceedings against companies using illegal software, increased
government cooperation in providing legal protection for intellectual property, and the
criminalization of software piracy have proven to be largely ineffective. Even efforts at the
transnational level to get nations to sign treaties and to require them to protect and enforce
intellectual property rights according to global, not local, standards have not yielded the
desired results. Unfortunately, the ease with which software can be duplicated, sold, and
distributed continues to baffle the industry.

Because of the enormous economic, technological, and political implications of the problem,
software companies, industry associations, home governments, and transnational institutions
should all take lead roles in negotiating with the governments of countries with high piracy
rates. Each of those parties has related but slightly different arguments to put forth, and it is
very important to make the point that all of the parties are highly vested in the issue
therefore, they should all step forward. Further, different parties will have stronger or weaker
relationships with the governments of high piracy nations. Those parties who have the most to
offer those governments will be in a position to make their arguments most persuasively. Thus,
efforts of all the stakeholders in the issue should be thoughtfully coordinated.

There is no single copyright law which operates throughout the globe, but instead, there is an
international system of principles to which individual nation states have regard when devising
their own laws. Differences between the laws which apply in different international
jurisdictions sometimes create problems for the effective prosecution of offenders who reside
in different geographical regions from those in which they commit their offences or in which
their victims reside. The principle of national treatment also means that acts which constitute
infringement of copyright in one country may not amount to infringement in another.

Finally, software maker, governments, and associations have urged transnational institutions to
policy piracy. The world intellectual property organization (WIPO), for example, pledged to
developing IPR treaties. WIPO then lobbied members to ratify an array of antipiracy treaties-
namely, the World Copyright Treaty (WCT) and the WIPO performances and Phonograms
Treaty (WPPT). Similarly, the World Trade Organization (WTO) enacted an agreement on Trade-
Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) to regulate enforcement of IPR
violations. TRIPS requires all member nations to protect and enforce IPRs according to global,
not local, standards.
Most believed that these tactics reflected a useful battle plan to conquer the pirates. The mix of
technological barriers, consumer education, stronger intellectual property policies, effective
law enforcement, and institutional support seemed to work. Concerted political and
commercial action, supported by the growing global reach of software companies, high-profile
legal proceedings, increased government cooperation, the criminalization of software piracy,
and tougher trade agreements, led some to see an end to software piracy.

Question 03

Can the software industry control software piracy without government

help? Why should the software industry dislike greater government
regulation?
 No, government help is needed, but extensive government intervention may result in
decreased profitability for the software industry. Some governments like China, India find out
legal loopholes and technicalities to claim to abide by the treaties (WIPO & TRIPS) while
continue to patronize pirated digital products.

Government actions to control software piracy:

1. Increase Public Education and Awareness: Governments can increase public awareness of the
importance of respecting creative works by informing businesses and the public at large about
the risks associated with using pirated software, while encouraging and rewarding the use of
legitimate products.
2. Implement WIPO Copyright Treaty Obligations: Around the world, copyright and other
intellectual property laws have lagged behind the pace of technology innovation. With the
advent of cloud computing and the proliferation of networked mobile devices, policymakers
should modernize protections for software and other copyrighted materials.
3. Create Strong and Workable Enforcement Mechanisms: Strong copyright laws are essential
but meaningless without effective enforcement. Governments must fulfill their obligations
under the WTOs Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement by
adopting and implementing laws that meet international norms for IP rights protection.
4. Step-Up Enforcement with Dedicated Resources: Too often, the punishment associated with
unlicensed software crimes are too insignificant to be deemed an effective deterrent for
software pirates. Countries can elevate their enforcement of intellectual property by:
Creating specialized intellectual property enforcement units at the national and local level and
providing dedicated resources to investigate and prosecute intellectual property theft;
Increasing cross-border cooperation among police and other enforcement agencies to improve
coordination for law enforcement in multiple countries;
Supporting the training of law enforcement and judiciary officials (including establishment of
specialized IP courts where appropriate) and providing better technical assistance to ensure
that those on the front lines of intellectual property protection are equipped with the tools
needed to deal effectively with the changing nature of intellectual property theft.
5. Lead by Example: Because governments are the largest users of software in the world,
implementing a government-wide zero-tolerance for pirated software policy is one of the
most effective mechanisms available to persuade the public to take this critical issue seriously.
This can be achieved by implementing software asset management policies as an example for
the private sector to follow.

Policy Recommendations
While industry will take the lead on many of these responses to the challenge of digital piracy,
policymakers in the government also have a key role to play. Actions that policymakers should
take include the following:
 1. Support Anti-Piracy Innovation
Government policies should support technological innovation wherever possible, as innovation
is a key driver of economic growth and productivity. Unfortunately, some advocacy groups
often object to technical controls designed to prevent piracy, claiming they The information
Technology & Innovation foundation are a threat to civil liberties or harmful to consumers.
Government should affirm that they takes piracy seriously and encourage anti-piracy
innovation and use. The federal government needs to take a clear position that it supports
reasonable industry action to fight digital piracy. And they should also develop a process
whereby industry can consult with them on proposed uses of anti-piracy technology and
consumer advocates and others can bring forward concerns about actual uses.

2. Encourage Coordinated Industry Action

Collaborative action by various industry stakeholders has been able to address this problem in
at least one area. A group of copyright owners and website offering user-generated content
hosting came together to develop a set of principles to help reduce piracy. These principles
included all parties working to ensure that the Identification Technology is implemented in a
manner that effectively balances legitimate interests in

1. Blocking infringing user-uploaded content,

2. Allowing wholly original and authorized uploads, and

3. Accommodating fair use.

Going forward there is an opportunity for more industry collaboration to fight piracy. The
federal government should encourage stakeholders to develop best practices and collaborative
self-regulation regimes, such as implementations of a graduated response system by ISPs.
However, some anti-piracy measures, such as content filtering, could require government
oversight to prevent abuses and ensure consumer rights are protected, especially in the
absence of a collaborative agreement among key stakeholders. Other approaches, however,
such as blocking websites, may require governmental approval before industry can act. Finally,
the government should also consider providing anti-trust exemptions for collaborative industry
action to address these problems.

Some successful initiatives of the governments around the world is listed below:

Brazil: National Council Against Piracy (CNCP), this special council facilitates the
collaboration between the government and private sector regarding intellectual
property rights.
China: China Banking Regulatory Commission (CBRC), this special body of government
formulates and implements policies regarding financial institutions over software
deployment and legalization.
 Malaysia: Ministry of Domestic Trade took hard actions and raided counterfeit software
worth $55 million.
Mexico: Ministry of Economy became the first governing body to earn BSAs certification
in standards based SAM, known as CSS(O).

If the software industry could successfully develop technical and business measures to thwart
counterfeiters, government intervention would be unnecessary. Thus far, the industrys best
efforts have been unsuccessful. Given the value of the products involved, the global appeal
of pirated software, and the relative ease with which counterfeiting occurs on a worldwide
basis, the temptation for counterfeiters to continue their activities is irresistible. In spite of the
need for assistance and cooperation from all stakeholders, the software industry could
presumably object to greater government regulation; while innovation moves at lightning
speed, regulation tends to lag well behind technological developments and market realities.

Question 04
How do you think consumers in wealthier countries versus
those in poorer countries justify software piracy?
 Consumers in high theft countries tend to share a collectivist mindset; they see property as being
common to all and existing for the benefit of alloften they do not understand the basic concept of
intellectual property rights. As with many other products, they want to acquire them at the lowest
possible cost. On the other hand, consumers in lower theft countries tend to share an individualist
mindset; the concept of intellectual property rights is well understood and long established within
their countries and cultures. IPRs are seen to be a necessity for economic development and
growth; royalties and profits are seen as the just fruits of creativity and investment.

Consumers in poorer countries differ from those in wealthier countries in a few aspects regarding
justifying software piracy. In relatively poor countries the average income of an individual is not
sufficient to purchase the legal version of software. Naturally they tend to seek out cost saving
means to purchase software and finding the process of acquiring pirated software very easy and
hassle-free, they engage in the consumption activities of pirated software. Another aspect is the
ease of getting pirated software which has made young people think that if it's so easy, it can't be
wrong. There are cultural factors that affect the justification of software piracy in poor countries. It
has been observed that consumers in wealthier countries are highly educated and economically
better off than those of poorer countries. For this reason piracy in a mass level is seen less in rich
countries.

The vigor of IPR protection often reflects a countrys stage of economic development. Typically,
poorer countries provide weaker legal protection than richer countries. Generally, developed
countries contend that protecting ideas is the only way to energize the incentive to innovate. If
stuff you create can be misappropriated, reasoned an analyst, your incentive for continuing to
create valuable intellectual property diminishes significantly. The perspective in poorer countries
and increasingly in wealthier countries rejects this reasoning. Disregarding the inflammatory
charges of colonial oppression and economic imperialism, analysts offer several arguments against
the protection of IP. The specific arguments are:

i. Obliterating development: Inhibits local development and lowers global welfare by

constraining the use of existing knowledge. Innovation or scientific discoveries may be used for
the greater good of the nation. In a global scale software can be considered a major tool of
 economic development which is being out of reach to vast portion of global population because
of intellectual property rights laws.
ii. Intellectual monopoly: Creates intellectual monopolies that protect business interests, bestow
monopoly profits and lessen the efficiency gains or free trade. Large business conglomerates
are the main beneficiaries of intellectual property rights.
iii. Inflation: Inflates the prices that poor nations pay for products and processes that are available
only from wealthy nations. Ideas and innovations are mostly produced in developed countries.
So poor countries suffer from the extremely high expenditure of acquiring those ideas.
iv. Obstructing generation of new ideas: Results in licensing fees and regulations burdens that
increase the cost of idea creation and slow the rate of diffusion of new ideas. Economic
development and generation of new ideas and innovation are interrelated.

People in the poor world don't pay for software, games, music and movies because these goods
cost too much. In poor markets where legitimate media costs the same in relative terms, as it does
in rich markets, the amount of illicit purchasing is about the same. But that's not what the media
companies say they believe. In their official narrative bolstered by a long line of studies with
undocumented methodologies and assumptions is that poor countries simply lack a "culture of
copyright" that can be reinforced through education and enforcement. The way that the airwaves
and newspapers in poor countries are dominated by the official view of piracy, presented
uncritically and at length. The message is even integrated into the school curriculum through official
teaching units produced by American entertainment conglomerates and given to teachers to be
delivered verbatim to their students.

Question 05
Can you envision a scenario where companies and consumers
reach a relationship that eliminates the profitability of piracy-
whether it is for software, music, movies and other digital
products?
Yes, I can envision a scenario where companies and consumers reach a relationship that
eliminates the profitability of piracy. To reach that scenario everyone needs to come together
to create an environment where everyone's interest will be served. First, the software industry
needs to convince governments the world over of the need for consistent, tough legislation to protect
intellectual property rights. Governments must also be willing to pursue and prosecute violators. To be
successful in these efforts, it may be necessary for software producers in North America, Europe, and
Japan to convince their governments to pressure the governments in high theft countries to adopt and
enforce appropriate legislation. Second, the software industry should continue to lobby transnational
institutions such as the World Intellectual Property Association and the World Trade Organization to
help establish standards and police piracy.

As this involves not only pirated software but also music, movies and other digital products, the
range of the measures is far wider. What should be done to achieve the balance is discussed
below:

1. Changing Social Behavior

Digital piracy exists, in large part, because individuals choose to engage in it. Content producers
have worked to change this behavior through various means, including encouraging users to
simply choose not to engage in the activity either because it is wrong or because it is easier to
acquire content legally.

2. Increase Public Education and Awareness

Reducing software piracy requires a fundamental shift in public attitudes toward software and
IP. Public education is critical, therefore, to increase awareness of the importance of managing
software assets and respecting creative works through compliance with software licensing.
Experience has shown that public private awareness campaigns about piracy and the value of IP
can be extremely effective. In addition, support for industry-led initiatives to promote the
business practice of managing and optimizing software purchases, utilization, and maintenance
- a process known as software asset management (SAM) can help governments, businesses,
and other organizations derive greater value from software assets by optimizing their use of
licensed applications and reducing piracy.

3. Educate users on impact of digital piracy

Content producers have worked to try to educate users about copyright issues and change
public behavior. As early as 1992, the Software Publishers Association launched a famous video
campaign titled Dont Copy that Floppy to explain the impact of piracy on industry and urge
users to respect digital copyrights. The movie industry has made similar efforts such as showing
anti-piracy notices at cinemas and including anti-piracy videos on DVDs. While the effectiveness
of such public or private efforts to date is unknown, a long-term change in what is considered
acceptable social behavior could help decrease digital piracy, the same way that changing social
norms have led to reductions in littering and smoking.

4. Provide users legal means to access content

Some users acquire digital content illegally because comparable content is not available by legal
means. Some content producers choose to restrict availability as part of their business model or
because they fail to perceive that long tail markets exist, a practice that is increasingly
problematic in the network era. For example, movies released in theaters often are not
officially released on DVD for many months because of the studio business model, reflected in
contractual agreements with file distributors, that emphasizes theatrical distribution first. The
movie may also have only a limited release and be available only in a few theaters or in certain
countries. If a user wants to watch this type of movie outside of the theater during this window,
the only option is to download the film illegally. Similar constraints also exist for television
programming. Content producers should be encouraged to provide users legal and affordable
access to copyrighted content.

5. Provide users the ability to identify legal means to access content

It is becoming increasingly difficult for the average Internet user to differentiate between legal
and illegal content. While a user who downloads a feature-length Hollywood movie at no cost
on a P2P network should not reasonably expect this to be a legal copy, most Internet users
would suspect that an online video streaming website is providing legal content (especially
those charging a membership fee), but have no way to verify that the copyright owner is being
properly reimbursed.

6. Implementing Technical Controls

Various technical controls can help reduce digital piracy. These controls can be implemented in
one or more of the processes used to exchange and view copyrighted contentfrom the users
media player or personal computer to the Internet service provider used to transfer the
content.

7. Digital rights management

Industry groups have implemented various technical controls to mitigate file sharing. The most
common control has been digital rights management (DRM) technology, or technical controls
embedded within the content to prevent unauthorized use. Business and personal productivity
software typically comes with DRM that requires a unique license key to activate the product.
DRM is not a perfect solution, as individuals have produced both digital and analog means of
circumventing DRM, although such activity was rightly made illegal by the Digital Millennium
Copyright Act (DMCA). However, DRM does deter from piracy many users who, in the absence
of DRM, would illegally copy the digital content.

8. Network management

Pirates constitute the largest group of Internet users engaged in uploading and downloading
the largest amounts of content. For example, in Japan, the Ministry of Communications reports
that over 50 percent of broadband traffic is from P2P file sharing, most of it illegal. And these
high bandwidth-using pirates cost ISPs more to serve, thereby, in the absence of volume-based
plans, leading to higher prices for all consumers. This is a particular problem for rural ISPs,
because they pay more for Internet transit than their better-connected urban counterparts and
frequently rely on wireless last-mile connectivity that is harder to accelerate than wireline
systems. In addition to usage caps, some ISPs around the world, particularly cable systems that
have more limited upload capacity, have adopted systems that lower the priority of packets
flowing to and from their heaviest users during periods of high network load.

9. Content identification

Content identification systems recognize copyrighted content so that copyright owners can take
steps to reduce digital piracy. Using these systems, copyrighted content can be detected by
automated means if others try to share it on file sharing networks or websites. Various
technologies can be used to identify content including:

Watermarking
Fingerprinting
Metadata

Each of these systems employs a database, a feature-extraction system, and a pattern-matching

engine that together are similar to the systems that are commonly used to block spam and
protect personal computers from viruses and other forms of malware.

10. Blocking Internet users from websites that index or track pirated content

Critics of piracy mitigation have focused most of their attention on the supposed drawbacks of
filtering, and have tended to ignore alternate approaches that are either supplemental or
independent to filtering. One alternate approach focuses on the websites and technologies that
exist for the sole, primary, or significant purpose of enabling digital piracy. Enabling digital
piracy is a profitable business, and there can be little doubt that profiting from unlawful activity
is indefensible. There is also little difficulty in recognizing such sites, as they often fail to
respond to legitimate takedown notices, or fail to do so in a timely manner, and prominently
display indexes of unlawful content.

11. Blocking Internet users from websites that offer pirated content

Existing laws against fraud and false advertising apply to such sites, but the Internet enables
them to spring into existence, change identities, and move about much faster than the legal
system can keep up with them. Moreover, many of these sites are in nations where the service
is legal or where the national government turns a blind eye to enforcement. Once again a
simple blocking solution at the ISP level may be the most effective means of preventing Internet
users from using these websites to engage in digital piracy domestically. Mechanisms such as
this are necessary to deal with real-time Internet offenses and are entirely appropriate, provid-
ed that falsely identified parties have equal real-time recourse to prevent abuse.

12. Blocking funding for websites and organizations that support piracy

Websites and organizations that facilitate piracy require funding to stay in business. As
described earlier, these websites often get funding through online advertising or through direct
sales of pirated content. One way to reduce piracy is to block these sources of funding so as to
make piracy unprofitable or less profitable.

13. Enforcing legal rights of content owners

Content producers have also used legal means to protect their interests, including pursuing
criminal and civil penalties against organizations and individuals engaged in or enabling
copyright infringement.

14. Lawsuits against organizations facilitating piracy

In response to legal pressure in certain countries, organizations that facilitate unauthorized

online file sharing, such as The Pirate Bay, have located themselves in countries where weaker
laws protect them from criminal and civil lawsuits for copyright infringements. For example,
The Pirate Bay operated for many years in Sweden before authorities began criminal
prosecution of the individuals involved in the websites operations, leading the head of the
MPAA to brand Sweden an international piracy haven. Digital piracy, both online and for
physical media, is especially high in countries like China and Russia which generally have less
protection for intellectual property.

15. Lawsuits Against Internet Users Engaging in Digital Piracy

In addition to pursuing legal action against businesses supporting copyright infringement,

organizations such as RIAA and MPAA have filed numerous lawsuits against Internet users
suspected of distributing copyrighted content without authorization. These lawsuits target
individuals based on the IP address of suspected file sharers and typically result in out-of-court
settlements. The motivation behind these lawsuits is to stop some of the most egregious
examples of file sharing and to increase the risk associated with unauthorized file sharing.

As many others have pointed out, the Internet is a vast, distributed system that has no central
point of control. This does not mean that it is free of control. Rather, it means that each of us is
the controller of our small part of the system. The responsibility for maintaining the Internet
commons falls upon each user, each service provider, and each business and institution that
uses it, operates it, and profits by it. Governments need to put in place frameworks that
facilitate and encourage responsible control. The Internet is a tremendous enterprise of user
empowerment, free speech, and innovation, but it facilitates unlawful acts just as much as
lawful ones.

Conclusion
The resolution of the question of Internet piracy will ultimately depend upon how a balance is
struck between the protection of various public and private interests. Public interests include
the right to obtain information and the right to free speech coupled with the need for efficiency
in communication. Private interests relate to the need to protect authors works from
unauthorized reproduction or manipulation of a derogatory nature. An effective balance will
enable Internet users to benefit from the wide range of facilities and services available on the
Internet whilst ensuring that those who create material are adequately encouraged to continue
the production of valuable works in the digital environment.

Unfortunately, the number and complexity of the legal and social issues in the debate over
Internet piracy are such that it is unlikely that all interests will be accommodated prior to
reforms taking place. We can only hope that those regulatory responses which are adopted will
be closely monitored and evaluated in order than any adverse consequences can be detected
and remedied prior to the global community suffering irremediable harm.