Quantcast
Connect with us

Surfthechannel.com verdict sets powerful precedent for copyright battles

Published

on

Anton Vickerman probably didn’t want to enter the history books in this way. As the founder of surfthechannel.com, a website that provided links to TV and film content – in a significant number of cases, unlicensed and illicit – the 38-year-old last week became the first person in Britain to be jailed for running a site linking to pirate material. He was jailed for four years after a private prosecution brought by the Federation Against Copyright Theft, AKA Fact, funded by the TV and film industries.

In a furious 18,000-word commentary on his website, Vickerman says a lawyer had advised him that Surfthechannel was legal. Fact, he alleges, behaved like a private police force – with employees and private investigators using subterfuge to get hold of personal information. But worse: it acted without oversight or any sort of restriction on behaviour, intent on its task of trapping alleged copyright “thieves”. (Although as any lawyer will point out, there’s no such offence as copyright “theft”, only “infringement”, because by its very nature if you take a copy, the original remains. But “Federation Against Copyright Infringement” doesn’t have quite the same ring.)

For its part, Fact is unapologetic, and declined to comment on Vickerman’s allegations. “If what he was doing was legal, why did he go to such lengths to hide his identity and location?” said a spokesman for Fact. “Why not just operate as a legitimate business in the UK? Why did he set the site up anonymously, and make it so hard to find him?”

In the ongoing “content wars”, between those who run sites that offer links to all sorts of content, and the people who don’t always want those links to exist, Vickerman’s conviction marks the conclusion of a remarkable battle. After Google’s announcement this month that it would demote sites with high numbers of copyright complaints, the content owners seem to be getting an edge.

And Fact, long known as a pitbull when it comes to pursuing alleged copyright infringers, now has a victory that it can use to intimidate others who might be thinking about setting up link sites.

In his writing on Surfthechannel, Vickerman expresses amazement and fury at the prosecution and the lengths that Fact went to in order to mount it, especially after the Crown Prosecution Service declined to mount a case under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act (CDPA). Other cases where links websites have been tried under forms of the CDPA, including TVlinks and Newzbin, have not found them guilty of infringement. The CPS also declined to prosecute Richard O’Dwyer, who ran tvshack.net, another links site.

ADVERTISEMENT

What’s so different about Surfthechannel? Nikki Powell, an intellectual property lawyer at the London-based Addleshaw Goddard, points out that Fact did not bring a case under the CDPA; instead, Vickerman was tried under the criminal charge of “conspiracy to defraud” (specifically, to defraud the film companies whose pirated products were being linked to).

“That’s much harder to prove,” Powell says. “You have to show that all the parties have the intention to [financially] harm the plaintiff.” The attorney general’s guidance suggests such cases involve some or all of “several significant but different kinds of criminality; several jurisdictions; different types of victims, eg individuals and banks; organised crime networks”. By choosing to prosecute Vickerman under that law, Fact was arguably setting the bar high, because it also had to match the criminal standard of conviction – that is, beyond reasonable doubt – unlike civil cases, which are decided on “balance of evidence”. And if Fact lost, it would bear all the costs of both defence and prosecution.

Fact’s case – which the jury accepted – is that Vickerman conspired with others to put the infringing content online and link to it, thus denying the film producers, cinema chains, DVD rental and pay-TV companies potential revenues, while collecting money from adverts placed on the site. All are necessary elements of a “conspiracy to defraud” case.

Among the titles that were up early — in some cases simultaneously as the doors opened at cinemas — were films such as Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull and Prince Caspian. Fact argued in court that the millions of links and visitors, and the length of time that Surfthechannel operated, meant between £52m and £198m of lost revenues, based on the provision of access to the top 50 films over the indictment period, tallied with the idea that 55% of those who went to the site would have bought the film in some way instead.

ADVERTISEMENT

Judge John Evans put the case against linking sites more succinctly: “If the producers are unable to exploit the product in which they have invested, then almost certainly the film will not make a profit. Whether made by the major film studios or the smaller production companies, if films fail to make a profit or at the very least break even, then the incentive to produce films diminishes and with it goes what has been a major source of entertainment to millions worldwide for over a century.” That, in a nutshell, sums up the content wars: producers who want to set a price, against consumers who also want to set a price – ideally, zero.

“For the CPS, it means they can feel that even if they don’t pursue a case then they can rely on a private prosecution by someone like Fact,” says Luke Scanlon, an intellectual property lawyer at Pinsent Masons. “But you do have to wonder about the data protection implications. The police arrest the guy, and then they hand over private data about him to Fact because it’s mounting a private prosecution? That’s surprising.”

For Vickerman, the latest casualty in the content wars, it won’t be any comfort to know that he has been doubly precedent-setting.

© Guardian News and Media 2012

Report typos and corrections to [email protected].
READ COMMENTS - JOIN THE DISCUSSION
Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

QAnon authors in a fight over doing an audiobook — because they think their followers can’t read

Published

on

On Monday, The Daily Beast reported that the authors of a popular book for believers in the QAnon conspiracy theory are in a bitter fight over whether or not to release an audiobook version.

QAnon: An Invitation to The Great Awakening came out last year and peaked near the top of the Amazon bestseller list in March. One of the book's co-authors, Dustin Nemos, is publicly attacking another co-author, who goes by the name of "JoeM," for his "petty and hostile and paranoid" refusal to help produce an audiobook, and notes that it is necessary because a disproportionate number of QAnon believers are elderly, have bad eyesight, and may not be able to read the book as text. JoeM, for his part, has accused Nemos of being a "grifter" who is trying to make a buck off of true believers.

Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

Missouri governor appoints judge who fundraised for crisis pregnancy center to help decide Planned Parenthood’s license

Published

on

On Monday, the Associated Press reported that Gov. Mike Parson (R-MO) has appointed former Macon County Associate Circuit Judge Philip Prewitt to the Administrative Hearing Commission, a state agency that oversees disputes between the state and organizations seeking licensure.

Prewitt, a former Republican candidate for office, once fundraised on Facebook for Ray of Hope Pregnancy Care Ministeries, a "crisis pregnancy center" that masquerades as a health care facility in order to trick women seeking abortions into listening to anti-abortion propaganda. In 2015, the Missouri Supreme Court reprimanded Prewitt for the post encouraging people to donate, saying that it violated judicial ethics rules.

Continue Reading
 

Breaking Banner

Trump being a ‘compulsive liar and erratic ignoramus’ is why he failed on Iran: Conservative columnist

Published

on

President Donald Trump's highly-criticized decision to withdraw from the Iran nuclear deal has resulted as was warned, with the country reviving its nuclear program, a conservative columnist explained in The Washington Post on Monday.

Conservative Max Boot took a victory lap in the hard-hitting column, reminding that he had signed a March 2016 letter by 121 Republican foreign policy analysts warning about Trump's approach.

"I wish we had been wrong, but we were all too right," Boot wrote.

"Trump has shown no ability to grow in office; but then it’s hard to learn if you all you read is Fox News chyrons. He is today the same compulsive liar and erratic ignoramus he was at the start of the 2016 campaign," Boot said. "Only now, the stakes are much higher."

Continue Reading
 
 

Copyright © 2019 Raw Story Media, Inc. PO Box 21050, Washington, D.C. 20009 | Masthead | Privacy Policy | For corrections or concerns, please email [email protected]

I need your help.

Investigating Trump's henchmen is a full time job, and I'm trying to bring in new team members to do more exclusive reports. We have more stories coming you'll love. Join me and help restore the power of hard-hitting progressive journalism.

TAKE A LOOK
close-link

Investigating Trump is a full-time job, and I want to add new team members to do more exclusive reports. We have stories coming you'll love. Join me and go ad-free, while restoring the power of hard-hitting progressive journalism.

TAKE A LOOK
close-link