Australian human-rights groups on Tuesday expressed fear over the possible takeover of Internet Service Providers (ISP) with regard to the web content access and control in the country, citing the highly anticipated verdict of the Federal Court over Internet piracy on Thursday.

The Electronic Frontiers Australia (EFA), a group established to protect the civil rights of millions of online users in the country, fear that the Federal anti-piracy court could turn ISP firms to “online copyrights police” and cut the Internet access of users accused of illegally downloading or sharing files over peer-to-peer networks.

“There will be a paradigm shift. We will have to be used in seeing the rest of our lives offline,” EFA Spokesperson Geordie Guy said.

The verdict on the piracy case, which has pitted Australia’s largest Internet provider iiNet against Hollywood and Ausie film and television producers, is expected to come out on Thursday.

It will be recalled that entertainment companies, including Hollywood giants Paramount Pictures, Village Roadshow, and Twentieth Century Fox International have accused iiNet of allowing or have not done enough to prevent thousands of online users from sharing music and movie files illegally on the Internet.

However, iiNet stressed that it has never authorized or encourage, in any way, online users from illegally sharing or downloading files online. In fact, the company has even warned users from using P2P networks and sharing copyright infringed files.

Meanwhile, EFA said that there is a big possibility that the Australian Internet piracy case could go further that similar cases filed around the world, saying that ISP companies are usually held responsible for the illegal activities done by consumers.

“For example, we’ve have never seen an electric company being held responsible for supplying electricity to homes that were found growing or making illicit drugs,” he said.

Based on court records, at least 94, 000 alleged violations were committed in iiNet’s network in just 59 weeks.

United Kingdom authorities on Friday said that music labels and movie studios should bear at least 75 percent of the cost for the continued abolition of illegal file-sharing websites on the Internet.

UK Treasury Minister Stephen Timms said that since copyright holders will be the major beneficiaries of the campaign, they should contribute some 75 percent of the expenses used in tracking down illegal file-sharers.

Meanwhile, the remaining 25 percent of the expense should be shouldered by the Internet Service Providers. The total cost of the 10-year campaign was pegged at over £500m.

At the same time, Timms has called on recoding and movie companies to provide cheap and legal alternatives to the online users to help curb the effect of Internet piracy to their business. The official cited that the progress in the fight against the illegal file-sharers has been “much too slow.”

It will be recalled that the music industry pushed for stronger government action against the issue, citing the 12 percent drop in its sales last year. The recording industry has also pushed for the equal split in the cost of the campaign among the copyright holders and ISPs.

The BPI, composed of all the major recording labels in the UK, stressed that a 75:25 split ratio is not fair and is not a proportionate allocation for the people who own the rights.

Based on records, the music industry posted more than 30 percent drop in the sales market since 2004.

The International Federation of the Phonographic Industry said that Internet piracy has been a huge barrier to the market growth, calling for the ISPs to immediately disconnect people who were found violating copyright laws.

The organisation claims piracy is a huge barrier to market growth and has called on ISPs to disconnect persistent offenders.

The UK government is now implementing the three-strike policy which could lead to users’ disconnection if they were labeled as “persistent offenders.” An issue that human-rights activist quickly brushed off.

A US District Judge in Minnesota has “drastically” reduced the amount of penalty imposed against a local woman found guilty of illegally sharing music files over peer-to-peer file-sharing websites. The judge has reduced the “monstrous and shocking” amount of nearly $2 million dollars to only $54, 000.

In his decision, US District Judge Michael Davis said that he was shocked to learn that the jury had imposed nearly $2 million penalty against Jammie Thomas-Rasset for sharing some 24 songs using P2P networks.

From the $1.92 million award to the music companies, Davis has reduced the amount Thomas-Rasset need to pay to just $2, 250 per song or a total of $54, 000.

“A $2 million verdict for stealing and illegally sharing or distributing 24 songs cannot justify the need for deterrence, which only purpose is to obtain free music over the Internet,” Davis said in his ruling.

Meanwhile, Judge Davis has dismissed the motion of Thomas-Rasset, requesting for re-trial of her case. The federal judge also gave the music labels concerned and the Recording Industry Association of American seven to accept the new ruling or file for another trial for the damages.

Sought for comment, RIAA Spokesperson Cara Duckworth said that they lawyers are now studying possible options on the new ruling. She, however, refused to give further details about the case.
Meanwhile Thomas-Rasset expressed hope to the US justice system, saying that the new ruling was a positive development in her case. She added that her lawyers are now working to further decrease the penalty.

“It does not matter if it is $2 million or $54, 000. The fact is, I’m a mom with four kids, a single job, and we really don’t have the dough like that right now,” Thomas-Rasset said.

Thomas-Rasset’s case was only one of the more than 30, 000 lawsuits filed by the RIAA against identified illegal file-sharers. Majority of the cases went into settlement, which cost people around $3, 500 each.

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is now facing a tough hurdle in its controversial push to draft a new set of guidelines that would require Internet providers to equally treat websites and data flowing in their networks.

In a court hearing on Friday, the three judges handling the case questioned the FCC’s authority to impose the “net neutrality” obligations against Comcast Corp., the country’s largest Internet and cable television operator.

It will be recalled that Comcast has filed a case against the FCC over the issue of net neutrality, questioning the agency’s intention in preventing broadband providers in the United States in blocking access to certain websites.

But the FCC said that the new rules should help hundreds of millions of Internet users and stop abuse of control by the IPs over the contents that can be viewed in their high-speed networks.

During the hearing, the lawyers of Comcast argued that the FCC has no authority to impose such rules against the IPs, saying that 2008 order, which bans company from blocking file-sharing websites and other related technologies, was based on the obsolete 2005 net neutrality principles.

The 2005 guidelines has been the basis of the FCC order, which was then headed by Republican Kevin Martin.

The principles also guided the FFC in enforcing communication laws, which include the website control issue.

FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski said that they would continue to push the drafting of the new guidelines that would bind IPs from blocking file-sharing websites.

In a statement, Genchowski said that they are confident that the Federal Court of Appeals would preserve the free and open Internet.

Should the decision of the court go against the FCC order; many of the cases regarding net neutrality would also be affected. This will also undermine the agency’s capability to impose such order on telephone, cable, and Internet companies.

It will be recalled that various giant phone companies and cable operators in the US cried foul over the net neutrality issue following the launching of voice over internet protocol features of websites like Google, saying it is anti-business.

The growing problem of illegal file-sharing and digital piracy, which has long hounded the music and movie industries, is now threatening to affect the e-Book business as well.

One of the best examples of the impending threat to e-Books is the illegal file-sharing of Dan Brown’s novel “The Lost Symbol,” which was earlier released in September.

The blockbuster novel could have set the pace for the future of e-Books withmajor e-Reader manufacturers outselling hardcopy editions.

However, the projected paradigm shift from hardbacks to digital books was marred by the illegal downloading of the e-Book copies, which also threatens publishers and authors, who have agreed to digitize their books for a more lucrative market.

Reports told that less than a day after “The Lost Symbol” was released, pirated digital copies of the e-Book was already being shared to peer-to-peer file-sharing websites like BitTorrent and Rapishare.

It also told that less than a week after the release, the e-Book copies has been downloaded more than 100, 000 times in the said P2P networks.

Experts said that the digital piracy problems, which has long been confined to music and movies, may only get worse as demand for e-Readers continue to grow.

Since its launching, Amazon’s Kindle, Sony e-Reader, and Barnes & Noble’s Nook, as well as other Smartphone manufacturers like the Apple iPhone and Research in Motion’s Blackberry has made significant sales records in 2009.

The Association of American Publishers said that digital book sales in the second quarter of 2009 has rallied to more than $37 million, three times higher than the sales record in the same period in 2008.

The group said that they did not publicly release the said study, fearing that it could attract illegal downloads.

However, with the rise in the number of digital book readers and the availability of millions of e-Book copies on the Internet, publishers and authors will have future headaches in 2010 as the industry faces more tough challenges ahead.

Joel Tenenbaum, a graduate student of the Boston University who was ordered to pay music labels some $675, 000 over copyright infringement charges, has asked a judge handling his case to grant him a new trial and to reduce the amount of damages imposed earlier by the jury.

It will be recalled the Tenenbaum was ordered by the court to pay record labels more than $675, 000 for illegally downloading music files through peer-to-peer file-sharing networks.

The student, who was a native of Providence, Rhode Island, has admitted that he has downloaded and distributed some 30 songs in the P2P networks.

But he contested that the amount of damages imposed against him by the jury was simple “off the roof” and unconstitutionally illegal.

Lawyers of the student said that the damages for the songs he has illegally downloaded should be based on the actual cost of the music files being sold online, which is roughly around 99 cents per song.

During the trial, his lawyers consistently argued that the damages Tenenbaum has to pay for the illegal download should be in-lined with what customers pay for legal music.

In their motion filed on Monday, the camp of Tenenbaum insisted that the federal jury’s verdict on the amount of damages was too high.

The lawyers also said that their client is only one of the millions of people who have downloaded and shared the music files; and that the entire amount of losses should not be shoulder by the students.

Meanwhile, one of the lawyers of the record labels maintained their stand, saying that the damages imposed against the student is just and necessary to deter future copyright infringement.

They also stressed that Tenenbaum is a “hardcore copyright infringer” and should be set as an example to other violators to stop the proliferation of illegal file-sharing on the Internet.

U2 frontman Bono has called on authorities to implement a tougher control over the proliferation of illegal downloading on the Internet, saying that file-sharing over peer-to-peer networks has a devastating effect on intellectual property rights owners and other creators of “cultural products”.

The Irish rock star stressed that it is the music industry that has become the “sacrificial lamb” in the growing problem of illegal file-sharing in the Internet, saving the movie and television industries.

“A decade’s worth of music file-sharing and swiping has made clear that the people it hurts are the creators—in this case, the young, fledgling songwriters who can’t live off ticket and T-shirt sales like the least sympathetic among us,” Bono said in his editorial piece for The New York Times.

“The only thing that has protected the TV and movie industries from suffering the same fate as to that of the music industry is the sheer number of downloads that people are looking for. And it is music files that are most commonly being shared over the network,” the frontman said.

“The movie and television industries have been protected from the fate that has befallen music and indeed the newspaper business is the size of the files,” he added.

The U2 lead singer also said that only time will tell if the movie and television industries will go down with music, citing the “immutable laws of bandwidth,” which could potentially allow users to download full movie lengths in just a small period of time.

“The technology and the immutable laws of bandwidth is just a few years away from allowing these users to download movie files and entire TV series in just a matter of seconds,” he cited.

In order for the governments around the world to control the problem, Bono cited the efforts of the United States to stop the huge problem in child pornography and China’s suppression of online contents, saying that it is perfectly possible to keep track and control the Internet content being shared illegally.

The International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI) said on Monday that Swedish music labels have now started to track down illegal file-sharers using an Internet Protocol that is considered unlawful, adding that it has already filed several lawsuits at the Stockholm district court.

IFPI Swedish chapter has asked the court to make users’ ISP address available and hand down the necessary information needed in the case. The chapter also said that it will then decide on what to do next.

It has been several years now since the IFPI has started its battle against illegal file-sharers, citing the need to address the growing problems of unlawful music download in the Internet.

It will be recalled that in April 2009, the Swedish government has implement a new legislation based on the Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement Directive (IPRED) of the European Union.

Under the said law, copyright holders are allowed to request the court information for the ISP address of users and provide them the necessary IP linked to the computers that have downloaded music files illegally through peer-to-peer file-sharing websites.

The law has opened the door for the music industry to implement a more aggressive tactic to flush out illegal downloader.

On Monday, the cases filed against the alleged illegal downloader has marked the first move by the music labels to fight P2P networks and users that has been taking advantage of the free music files they share in the Internet.

IFPI also revealed that they plan to take more advantage of the law by filing more charges against those who will be found sharing files. However, they said that they will have to wait for the result of the pioneering case before they make another move.

The accused user was said to have downloaded more than 50 songs and has made it available to different P2P platforms. IFPI also said that despite the low number of the actual songs shared, the actual activity of each song can reach to over 10, 000 downloads each day.

In a bid to control Internet contents being provided in the country, the Chinese government has shut down hundreds of video sharing websites, including links that allow downloading of films and television series.

In a Chinese newspaper report, popular websites offering video sharing has been ordered to be deleted or closed down by regulators in the past week.

Most of the websites included were popular peer-to-peer file-sharing websites, which has been regarded as one of the most prolific violators of the copyright laws. Those websites that were not considered as “above board” were also closed down.

In a statement, BTChina, one of the most popular video sharing website in the country, said that they have received a notice from the government regulators to close down its operations because it has no license to provide video and audio files through the Internet.

Also, the China’s Administration of Video Film and Television has ordered UUbird.com, a similar type of website, to delete all links that would allow online users to download TV series and films.

The order has given the websites until mid-February to comply with the state laws and regulations or face sanctions.

Since the start of the campaign last November 30, the Chinese government was able to shut down some 414 websites that has been identified of operating without license or containing pornographic and copyrighted contents.

It will be recalled that popular social networking websites has been closed down by the government in a bid to tighten its hold to the information being provided to its people following the outbreak of negative news against the government.

Social platforms likee Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter were the first to go as the government tries to block further news about the unrest in areas like Tibet and Xinjiang, which has been a hot topic on the Internet.

Following massive “losses” in the music industry due to blatant piracy on the Internet, moviemakers are now bracing themselves for more losses as web connection in the rest of the civilized world continue to get faster.

The warning came after music labels cried foul over the continuous proliferation of online piracy, which according to experts, could spread to movies as the web connections of the people speeds up.

Music labels, based on reports, said that they are losing huge amount of revenue due to piracy and are now struggling to convince online consumers to pay for the downloaded music files.

‘This prompted the recording companies to take action and filed cases against anyone who were caught sharing music files illegally through peer-to-peer file-sharing websites.

Based on assessments done by the industry, more than 40 billion songs have been illegally shared on the web since 2008 with the piracy rate booming to an unprecedented 95 percent.

Music labels urged courts all over the world to impose high-penalties to those who will get convicted.

However, United Nations’ World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) director general Francis Gurry opposed its implementation, saying that heavy punishments to users would be a counterproductive move by the companies.

“What we need to do is to reeducate the public about the issue and make them understand that this is not a case of victimless crime,” Gurry stressed.

He also cited that the music and movie industry should make these files available to the people at a flat rate to further avoid losing money.

“Both the music and movie industry is now under the most severe stress and making the transition from the physical to the digital world would further add up to that,” he said.

“Now that the larger and faster bandwidth capacity and the computer technology improving, the problem will now be similar to films and clips online,” Gurry added.