Search

The article discusses the proposal of the House of Common's Culture, Media and Sport Committee for strict rules on internet piracy control in Great Britain. It notes the report of the committee on the issue of copyright infringement specifically on audio-visual material piracy. It recommends the increase of criminal sanctions for those who will violate infringement laws.

The article focuses on expectation on making a new version of the controversial Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) or the Protect IP Act (PIPA). Through these bills, the U.S. Department of Justice and the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency were given power to cut service to websites accused of online piracy or counterfeiting U.S. products. Some business groups want government action against online piracy.

An interview with David Sohn, general counsel at Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT), is presented. When asked what the CDT's involvement in the January 18, 2012 protest was, he refers to CDT's analysis of the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA). He believes that it is better to work within the existing legal framework including notifying the Web host. He says copyright holders need to come up with a business model that makes their content attractive.

The article reports that the proposed bills, the Stop Online Piracy Act and the Protect IP Act, have been placed on hold on January 20, 2012 in the U.S. According to Representative Lamar S. Smith, chairman of the House's Judiciary Committee, the committee has decided to postpone the enactment of the bills. The opposition of Google Inc. and Wikipedia against the proposed bills are highlighted.

The author discusses Hollywood's hope that the U.S. Congress will pass the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) that would authorize the government to censor foreign Web sites.

The article offers the author's insights on various issues significant to the U.S. fashion and retail industries which Congress need to tackle in 2012. The author says that Congress, which may face gridlock at the heat of the presidential election, needs to act on a bill against online piracy and counterfeiting. Retail group leader David French urges the government to give states the control over internet sales tax. Moreover, the permanent normal trade relations with Russia is discussed.

The article discusses why the U.S. entertainment industry should not support the PROTECT IP Act and the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) related to foreign rogue websites involved in piracy. It states that the bills would affect technology companies and so Hollywood, Los Angeles in California should not support them as history has proved that technology is beneficial for the film industry. It mentions that the bills if passed will make it more difficult to build legitimate online film services.

The article reports on the efforts of Hollywood studios and networks in collaboration with unions, guilds, and other content creators to broadcast and cable advertising campaigns which aims to gain support for the Protect IP Act in the Senate and the Stop Online Piracy Act in the House in the U.S.

The article reports on legislative actions on two bills under consideration in the U.S. Congress, the Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act (PIPA) and the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA). Both bills have become stalled as House and Senate members changed their minds about them following a protest action by large Internet websites. The views of several Republican candidates in the 2012 U.S. presidential election on SOPA are presented.

The article reports on U.S. and Europe lawmakers, including U.S. Senator Harry Reid, using the microblogging service Twitter to comment on two U.S. Internet piracy bills, the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act (PIPA).

The article discusses three Internet piracy bills in the U.S. Congress, the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), the Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act (PIPA), and the Online Protection and Digital Enforcement Act (OPEN). It lists key supporters and opponents of the bills, notes their rationales, and presents comments from an official on intellectual property issues in U.S. President Barack Obama's administration, Victoria Espinel.

The article reports on two Internet piracy bills under consideration in the U.S. Congress, the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act (PIPA). Internet companies such as Google oppose the bills. Comments are presented from U.S. Representatives Darrell Issa and Lamar Smith and U.S. Senator Patrick Leahy.

The article discusses the European Union (EU) Court of Justice case between copyright collecting society Sabam and Internet service provider (ISP) Scarlet which dealt with the illegal downloading of copyrighted materials using peer-to-peer networks. The EU court held that the EU's Copyright Directive and Enforcement Directive prevent national authorities from forcing ISPs to monitor the information on their networks.

The article discusses the Australia Federal Court case Australian Federation Against Copyright Theft (AFACT) v. iiNet Ltd. which dealt with copyright infringement and online piracy. The court held that iiNet was not liable for the illegal downloading of copyrighted materials by Internet users since the infringement notices provided by the film companies did not contain sufficient information.

The article discusses a delay in voting by the U.S. House Judiciary Committee on the U.S. legislative bill HR-3261, also known as the U.S. Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), due to increased pressure from lobbyists. There is reportedly bipartisan opposition to the bill, including U.S. Representatives Darrell Issa, Zoe Lofgren, and Jared Polis. Supporters of the measure argue that online piracy is a growing problem in the U.S.

The article discusses the Online Protection and Enforcement of Digital Trade Act (OPEN), an anti-piracy bill that would allow the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) to determine if websites are infringing on intellectual property (IP) rights, unlike the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and the Preventing Real Online Threats to Economic Creativity and Theft of Intellectual Property Act (PIPA). OPEN is supported by Internet companies including Twitter, Yahoo!, and Google.

The article offers the author's insights on the Protect IP Act or Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), an internet regulation for intellectual property protection. The author states that so much of the anti-piracy bill is so familiar and web sites to be prosecuted under SOPA were not clearly stated. Meanwhile, he says that one new twist with SOPA is giving copyrights holders the power to force transaction companies such as MasterCard Inc. and advertisers to stop paying offending sites.

The article reports on the statement issued by U.S. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi regarding the need to pass an anti-piracy legislation in the country that will address foreign websites dealing with pirated goods.

The article discusses the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), a proposed piece of U.S. legislation which is aimed to stop online piracy and copyright infringement and which has been endorsed by the Association of American Publishers (AAP). Tom Allen of the AAP says that SOPA would not obstruct freedom of speech. Groups and people who oppose the bill include the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the Internet search company Google, and the group Public Knowledge.

The article presents internet industry news briefs; internet search company Google has developed a mobile device application allowing consumers to use smartphones like credit cards for retailers; a coalition of U.S. companies are urging Congress to pass the antipiracy PROTECT IP Act targeting rogue websites; Google websites were collectively the most-visited websites in the U.S. in August 2011.

The article reports that according to Lord Timothy Clement-Jones, a member of the British House of Lords, anti-piracy provisions in the British Digital Economy Act neither breaches human rights nor criminalizes file sharers. Clement-Jones, who played an important role in the bill approval, says that the bill is designed to deal with online piracy and to protect young authors and creators.

The article reports that Justice Kenneth Parker dismissed a case that challenged the legality of the Digital Economy Act of Great Britain filed by telecommunications companies British Telecommunications (BT) and TalkTalk. Topics discussed include Parker's argument that the law did not violate the European law and deals with illegal downloading and some provisions under the law that address the problem of online copyright piracy.

The article reports that New Zealand passed the Copyright (Infringing File Sharing) Amendment Bill on April 14, 2011. Topics discussed include the three strikes law aimed at preventing online copyright infringement and the bill sponsored by Commerce Minister Simon Power and introduces a revised three strikes system against infringers and clear definition of Internet service providers (ISP).

The article reports on Dutch secretary for security and justice Fred Teeven's April 11, 2011 letter to the parliament which outlined his plan for changing copyright law in the Netherlands. Topics discussed include Teeven's aim to introduce web-blocking powers in the Netherlands and remove copyright levies and targeting online piracy by focusing on Internet service providers.

The article reports that Internet-related services and products provider Google has testified at the final hearing of the U.S. House on legislation targeting third parties who facilitate online intellectual property (IP) infringement. Topics discussed include Google's warning on the consequences of regulating search and Google general counsel Kent Walker's claim that the company could support narrow laws targeting financial transactions and advertising brokers.