Is French HADOPI law dead? (4)

Once more, European Parliament fights French HADOPI law. On 26 March 2009, the European Parliament has approved a report “Security and fundamental freedoms on the Internet”. 481 votes in favor, 25 against and 21 abstentions. The report has a large scope. Nevertheless, one of the voted recommendations may have direct impact on French graduated response.

Members of European Parliament are also concerned with the idea that “e-illiteracy will be the new illiteracy of the 21st Century.” The report argues that in this age, having access to the internet is “equivalent to ensuring that all citizens have access to schooling”, and that this access should not be denied by governments or private companies.

In other words, the European Parliament states that banning access to Internet should be illegal. The strongest penalty of the French graduated response is to ban for one year the access to Internet for infringers. French government already mitigated this banning announcing that they would probably allow some services such as mail.

If ever the EU decides that access ti Internet is a fundamental right of citizens, then French graduated response would be illegal. French government does not consider this access as a fundamental right.

Interestingly, the law is currently under examination of the French parliament. Some delegates already proposed to replace the Internet ban by a fine.

For history, follow the thread Is French HADOPI law dead? (3)

Graduated response: The pirate bay answers


A few days before the examination of French law that should launch the graduated response, the pirate bay has announced a riposte. The pirate bay launches a new service. Here is their description:

IPREDator is a network service that makes people online more anonymous using a VPN. it costs about 5 EUR a month and we store no traffic data.
our service is right now in a beta stage. we hope it will be released for the public before 1st of April. sign up now to start using it as soon as we’re stable.
the network is under our control. not theirs.

In other words, only authorized users will be allowed in the VPN and the transferred data are fully encrypted. This means that the HADOPI could not know that a member of ipredator is exchanging illegal data.

The main question is how many people will be ready to spend 5€ per month? Furthermore, if successful then the Pirate bay will have created one of the largest VPN infrastructure.

In any case, the graduated response will probably generate several actions

  • Movement towards encryption
  • Apparition of private protected small P2P networks with private trackers
  • Poisoning by the tracker sites of their tracker lists

Tax and recordable Blu Ray

The French commission Albis defines the tax for each recordable media. This tax is supposed to compensate the private use. The tax is transferred to content owners.

The commission has announced the expected tax for recordable BluRay disc. It will be 12.40€ (about $15) for 100GB, 6.20€ for 50GB and 3.10€ for 25GB. This value has been extrapolated from taxes on other media such DVD RW.

This high levy may slow down the adoption of recordable BluRay in the French market. The most probable scenario is that many French customers will order it on Internet in other countries (without the tax).

Ideally, an economic analysis should drive the value of the tax. If the tax is too high, then other sources will become more interesting and the content owners will loose money. If the tax is at a price acceptable for customers, then they will use French suppliers and content owners will earn money.

India and content production

I participated to a workshop on content protection organized by CCP and MPA at Convergence India 2009. It was interesting to check what the issues were in India.

The interest for content protection is rising. The other speakers were Rajiv DALAL (MPA India), Steve CHRISTIAN (Verimatrix), Sanjeev FERNANDES (NDS), Gautam GANDHI (Google India), Sanjiv KAINTH (IRDETO) and Vidar SANDVIK (CONAX). In other words, CA providers were very present at the workshop.

Rajiv gave some interesting information about India. All major US studios are investing in Indian production houses. It seems even that Will Smith will play in some Indian movies! And vice versa, Reliance is taking a foot in the US. Reliance purchase US theaters and invest in small US production houses. This may partly explain the rise of interest for content protection. US studios want to protect their financial investments.

Gautam explained the new strategy of YouTube. If a studio provides the reference movie, YouTube will filter its upload. This is a contract they have with Sony BMG India. Thus, Sony uses YouTube India to make electronic distribution in India. Surprisingly, it is still easy to find illegal copyrighted content on YouTube.

When discussing with the audience, the two main concerns seemed:

  • theater piracy and mainly analog theater.
  • Illegal rebroadcast of content. It seems that the pirates are well organized for crickett match (THE Indian sport). They prepare 12 STBs. they start with the first one. After a while, the broadcaster blacklists the STB (They use a visible watermark which carries a STB identifier, so called fingerprint) Then the “pirate” switches to the second STB…

When listening to all the speakers, I noted a problem. Every speaker used a different terminology for invisible watermark, session watermark, video fingerprint,… This is confusing. The industry should define a common vocabulary.

Phone and torrents

The G1 is the first mobile phone with new operating system Android by Google. The site Android and Me launched a bounty. The challenge was to write a G1 application that would scan the barcode of an official DVD, identify the title and then request the possible torrents for this title by connecting to most important trackers sites such as The Pirate Bay, Mininova…

Alec Holmes was the first to produce a working application and claim the $90 bounty. Through this application, called Torrent Droid, it is possible to walk in a store, scan the title, select the preferred torrent and launch the download of the torrent!

The application itself is not a revolution in the world of piracy. It is another way to enter the target. Rather than typing in the title in your preferred search tool (Che, dedicated toolbar in the browser…) you scan the disc. This change nothing in the piracy world.

What is meaningful is that this application was chosen to illustrate some advantages of G1 and Android. It would be interesting to discover who is behind the site Android and Me.

Is the application illegal? Your opinion?

Film Piracy, Organized Crime and Terrorism

The RAND corporation has published a heavy document entitled: “Film Piracy, Organized Crime and Terrorism”. This 162 page document is extremely well documented. Through published facts, it sheds some lights on the proven links between film piracy and organized crime (and even terrorist organizations) all over the world. It also shows some examples of legal authorities that are helping piracy. My preferred story is this Russian illegal replication DVD plant (pressing capabilities of 800,000 per month) which was closed after a first raid. It was sealed and put under surveillance by the police. Four months later, a new raid seized 55,000 new illegal DVDs (while the plant was supposed to be closed!)

Film piracy is an activity that has a low entry barrier, and low risk of heavy jail sentencing. It has even a better margin than drug selling (at least 3 times bigger).

This document is somewhat frightening. We are far from the student downloading a movie and distributing it to friends.

Of course, no technological answer can help in this case. The only thing we can do is to delay as much as possible the availability of bootlegs! But once available, technology is out of game.

The answer is obviously legal. The report is not very optimistic. Film piracy is still considered as victimless counterfeiting. This is not the case for pharmaceutical counterfeiting. Thus, it may not be the first priority of the authorities. The report expects that if public awareness of the links between film piracy and organized crime or terrorism would increase, then people would be less attracted by cheap illegal DVDs.

17-march:repaired the broken link to RAND document

DRM and games

I often described the ruckus generated by DRM for games (see Game and DRM or Spore and the DRM fury). Yesterday, I discussed with some French game editors. Their position was rather negative. According to them, game protections are today too weak. The result is that soon patches are available on P2P to defeat the protections. The paradoxical outcome is that honest customers who purchased games suffer of the constraints imposed by the game protection (for instance, checking the presence of a physical disc in the drive…) whereas dishonest users have the game without the constraints.

Using game theory (see the DRM game)), the winning strategy would be to steal the game! Thus, to change the winning strategy, there seems to be two possible solutions:

  • Make more robust DRM
  • Make DRM that are transparent to the customers but not to the dishonest users

Currently, I do not see this trend.