In a demand submission recently issued by the IIPA, the organization is currently demanding (PDF) that Canada be put on a priority watch list. For years, copyright lobbying interests have been making demands in many countries to legislate to their bidding and, taking a page right out of the script of South Park, has a strange obsession of blaming Canada for their alleged movie piracy woes.

Last year, copyright lobbying interests have been trying to put Canada on a priority watch list, but failed to do so. Additionally, to appease American based corporations, the Canadian government allowed the copyright industry to pass anti-camcording legislation. It almost seems like there’s a short memory present given that the report doesn’t appear to even discuss the legislation – instead, talks about how Canada supposedly refuses to take action against alleged piracy.

Of course, they have no problems with the fact that Bill C-61 was tabled – the latest iteration of the Canadian DMCA which died on the order-paper last year. Apparently, the Canadian DMCA didn’t go far enough as the IIPA demanded that Canada force ISPs to fight piracy. This was one of many demands they made while under the presumption that Canada was under some kind of obligation under WIPO to ratify copyright laws. The reality is that Canada signed WIPO, but did not ratify it, meaning that Canada actually isn’t obliged to ratify copyright laws.

Other demands include that the RCMP and crown prosecutors divert a major amount of resources to fighting piracy. Heaven forbid they go after silly petty issues like murder, copyright infringement is apparently a serious issue. While effectively telling Canada how to run a country, they also demand that more resources be put into border security that focuses on intellectual property issues. Now, this might seem a little more of a minor demand, but given that one of the rumours surrounding the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement was the fact that people could be stopped at the border for trying to bring an iPod across it because, in theory, it could contain unauthorized copies of MP3’s, it creates the image that the IIPA wants Canada to comply with things like ACTA, rather than WIPO.

An excerpt from the submission:

We also explained how those hopes [of copyright reform in 2007] were dashed when the Canadian government let a mid-December deadline pass without tabling any copyright legislation whatsoever, and without announcing any decision of an Interdepartmental Working Group tasked to address widely acknowledged and serious shortfalls in enforcement.

So, apparently, it’s not good enough that Canada pass copyright legislation, but they think Canada should comply with their deadlines. The problem with this is that Canada is a sovereign country and there’s a little thing called a Canadian government that decides if or when things are passed. Still, undeterred by this, the IIPA says that it is setting a new deadline of this Spring to introduce another Canadian DMCA.

They even include a wish list of what they want to see in the legislation:

• Include protection of Technical Protection Measures (TPM or DRM as it’s more commonly known)
• Hold ISPs effectively liable for the actions of their users
• Implement a notice-and-takedown regime
• Respect what was ruled in the MGM vs. Grokster case in the US with regards to encouragement of copyright infringement
• Ax the $500 cap for online copyright infringement and implement statutory damages (translation – millions or even billions) as seen in Bill C-61
• Reconsider the exemption of educational purposes (referencing section 30.04 of bill C-61)
• Only allow libraries and archives to format shift if a format is becoming obsolete
• Disallow interlibrary loans if it’s a digital copy
• Restrict private copying with regards to sound recording

Of course, what report wouldn’t be complete without an unproven piracy statistic? Now, the IIPA, in the paper, says that Canada’s piracy rate is 33%. Throughout 2007 and 2008, copyright lobby groups were busted for making up statistics about Canadian piracy rates. The statistics went all over the board including 10%-20%, 20%-30%, 50%, 70%, 75%, 85%, and even 90%. An incredible margin of error of 80%.

Another excerpt:

Internet music piracy appears to be on the increase in Canada, aided by the uncertain legal environment and serious shortfalls in enforcement. These factors contribute to the formidable propensity of Canadians to patronize illegal online sources of copyright material, thus stunting the growth of legal alternatives. For instance, although channels such as digital downloads, online subscription services and delivery of music to mobile devices account for nearly 30 % of the legitimate U.S. market for recorded music, the comparable figure for Canada is only 12%; and the estimated number of unauthorized downloads (1.3 billion) swamps the number of legitimate downloads (20 million) by a factor of 65:1.6 These statistics bear out the OECD’s 2005 conclusion that Canada has the highest per capita incidence of unauthorized fileswapping in the world.

Of course, this completely flies in the face of the fact that Canadian digital music sales have outperformed the United States for three years in a row. It’s a shaky argument to rely on 2005 statistics when later years showed obvious growth in legitimate music sales. That’s what the actual reality is.

An additional excerpt:

Canada’s response too often falls short. While Canadian authorities may say that combating copyright piracy is an important objective, some of their actions – in terms of priority setting, resources, training, and the outcome of prosecutions – suggest the contrary. [...] The continued prevalence of pirate product in Canada’s retail market indicates another enforcement shortcoming: the RCMP’s long-standing reluctance to target retail piracy.

It’s evident that whoever put this together never saw some of Michael Geist’s videos, one of which highlights the fact that the RCMP have actually taken an active roll in fighting physical for-profit piracy. Instead, the IIPA paints Canadian enforcement is hardly doing anything – nothing could be further from the truth.

If anything else, this report can easily be debunked using evidence that contradicts some of the wildest claims in the demand letter. With no mention of the anti-cam legislation that was passed a little over a year ago, cherry picked or even made up statistics to try and “prove” a point, the demand letter does little more than offer, yet, another mythical take on what really is going on in Canada.

There have been reports on vnunet and Shanghai Daily among other sites. A large “theater website” from China is suing the major US movie studios for damaging their reputation when they filed a lawsuit against them in the first place.

The reports are suggesting that an MPAA spokesperson was quoted in saying that services like Jeboo make a profit off of copyright infringement. They say that they undermine legitimate online services with their activities.

Jeboo was accused of pirating movies like Pirates of the Caribbean 2, a claim flatly denied by Jeboo. Additionally, Jeboo reportedly claimed that they only settled to get the lawsuit out of the way as quickly as possible.

Holeywood reporter says that Jeboo could not be reached for comment on the matter. Meanwhile, Shanghai Daily offers the following:

However, the five US movie giants and the MPAA issued statements on MPAA’s official Website saying Jeboo.com had stopped its infringement and apologized for its illegal activities. The address also quoted Frank Rittman, Vice President and Asia-Pacific Regional Counsel for MPAA as saying: “Services like Jeboo have profited from copyright infringement and undermined the development of legitimate online services.”

Jeboo.com said the address was untruthful and violated the agreement signed by the two parties. Jeboo.com said the address severely harmed its honor and its image as the biggest Chinese authorized online media provider.

The reports seem to lean towards suggesting the story is legitimate. If such a lawsuit is successful, chances are, it’ll force the major studios to be more careful about what they say when issuing anti-piracy statements at the very least.

As it stands for now, it is not perfectly clear, even if likely true, if this report is legitimate.

digg_url = ‘http://digg.com/tech_news/Reports_MPAA_Sued_for_Defamation_Over_Piracy_Lawsuit’;

Last time British copyright extension was brought up, the worry was how songs like those produced by the Beatles would fall into the public domain starting at 2012. There was concern, by some, that artists would be at a competitive disadvantage because American copyright laws for sound recordings if far longer then that of their British counterparts.

While the proposal to extend copyright laws in the UK two years ago has been shot down, it may not come to a surprise to some to see the issue brought up again now. It is expected that the Sound Recordings Bill will be into it’s second reading early next month. The Open Rights Group, a UK-based group of people who aims to preserve digital rights (citation) is urging British citizens to act or risk having the bill go through the Commons without debate.

“It is vital that you write to your MP now to ask him or her to attend the Commons on 7 March and stand up and object to this Bill.” Becky writes, “If you don’t the Bill is likely to pass through to committee stage without debate.”

She adds, “What can you say to persuade your MP to show up to the Commons on a Friday? Perhaps you might point out that all the economic evidence points against term extension. Or that every other UK citizen is expected to contribute to their pension out of income earned in their working life. Or that retrospectively extending copyright term won’t encourage Elvis Presley to record any more new tracks. Or that if governments continue to draft intellectual property legislation on behalf of special interest groups, it will only further erode the respect that ordinary citizens have for the letter of the law.”

Open Rights Group offers reading materials, among other things, they say would be helpful in making pitches to MPs. They include a reading package (PDF) as well as a letter writing guide.

“And as for the European front, expect news very soon of how you can get your voice heard as an EU citizen. Together, we can stop copyright term extension, but only if we take action!” She said.

The report contains the following:

A draft consultation suggests internet service providers would be required to take action over users who access pirated material via their accounts.

But the government is stressing that plans are at an early stage and it is still working on final proposals.

The Times suggested that broadband firms which failed to enforce the rules could be prosecuted, and the details of customers suspected of making illegal downloads made available to the courts.

The above in particular has had some suggesting that the DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) in the United States at least protected ISPs from such a predicament and therefore, allowed for safe havens – particularly with newsgroups. Unfortunately, such thoughts may be a little premature given that many things in recent months have happened that put into question the safe harbor provisions.

Last month, Zeropaid reported on AT&T saying that they would filter the internet for unauthorized traffic. People like Tim Wu have wondered if the major telecom company which controls more than half the telephone lines across the United States. What safe harbor provisions? Either way, as ZeroPaid also reported, it had Verizon saying that they would simply not follow suit in such business practices.

Though while it may seem all voluntary in the United State over whether or not a provider chooses to utilize the safe harbor provisions, there is also a case going on that might tst the safe harbor provision yet. This case, which ZeroPaid also reported on, is the Warner vs. Seeqpod case has brought into question on how one could qualify for the safe harbor provisions in the first place. Among the complaints Warner had against the company, there was the following:

SeeqPod aims to capitalize on the illegal use of “free” music to grow its user base rapidly and inexpensively.

Almost sounds like half of all the ISP advertising features with the ideas of “fast downloading”, or, ‘getting music quickly’, or ‘fighting with slow connections’, etc. While the case has yet to be played out in the courts – and some suggest that it’ll likely fall back onto the Google vs. Perfect10 case – it is likely to be a case to potentially put the safe harbor provisions into question in the first place. Could UseNet providers be on the hook in the future? At this point, who knows?

Meanwhile, back in Britain, the report arrives on the heals of the U2 band manager saying that ISPs should employ a ‘three strike’ system for copyright infringement. It is currently unclear whether, as of the drafts current iteration which was only leaked and not officially released, this would consist of being kicked off of only one ISP or ending up being banned from all the British ISPs. As it stands right now, the current version is said to be taking the U2 suggestion and proposing to employ it at this point.

The report also continues with the following:

Technology that allows internet providers to monitor what content is being downloaded is becoming more effective, said James Bates, media director at consultants Deloitte.

There is no shortage of criticism over network filtering being effective by any stretch of the imagination. One of the criticisms of network level filtering came from the IIA (Internet Industry Association of Australia)

One thing is for sure, trying to make ISPs in Europe turn into the copyright police is nothing new. A Spanish music group tried and failed to force an ISP to divulge the identities of alleged copyright infringer’s in a manner similar to the United States.

Unfortunately, also last month, the Europe also proposed that ISPs should be the ones fighting copyright infringement over the internet. It seems as though that Britain may be the first to try and take the European Union up on their proposal.

Open Rights Group, and advocacy group for consumer rights in the digital world, were able to find get a few tidbits of the proposal:

“Users suspected of wrongly downloading films or music will receive a warning e-mail for the first offence, a suspension for the second infringement and the termination of their internet contract if caught a third time, under the most likely option to emerge from discussions about the new law.

“Broadband companies who fail to enforce the ‘three-strikes’ regime would be prosecuted and suspected customers’ details could be made available to the courts. The Government has yet to decide if information on offenders should be shared between ISPs.”

The Open Rights Group said, “Any serious move towards disconnecting offenders is likely to play havoc with the Government’s ambition to foster an e-enabled society.”

“What’s more, as soon as law enforcers start snooping for IP addresses to pass on to ISPs for disconnection,” said the group, “hardcore filesharers will simply start using encryption to obfuscate their identities. Then they’ll develop software that makes it easy for non-technical people to do the same. And then industry will be back to square one.”

One thing is for sure, things are bound to get interesting if any of these ideas are followed through.

The Motion Picture Association were congratulating police recently after the success of “Operation Blackout” recently. The bust happened in the Banmor area of Bangkok. They say that while they did make 5 arrests, many more escaped police when lookouts warned them by blowing whistles.

“The police have no day off when it comes to pirates selling their products. We will
continue to do everything within our powers to stop these criminals.” said General Visuth
after the raid.

“We are happy that the Thai authorities have taken Operation Blackout to heart and
persisted in cleaning up Banmor despite all the challenges faced,” said Mike Ellis, Senior
Vice President and Regional Director, Asia-Pacific for the MPA. “It is a very promising start
to the New Year and we look forward to many more such success stories from Thailand.”

No famous dogs were involved in this raid.

The MPA says that many big titles that were confiscate in the raid including Alien vs. Predator 2, American Gangster, and I Am Legend.

The beauty of these 3 sites is that not only can you watch movies at a time and place of YOUR choosing but, that you aren’t subject to the usual headaches like DRM or playback restrictions.

It’s always nice to be able to get FREE stuff, and particularly when it seems like a gamble as to whether or not a $10 dollar movie ticket to watch a movie legally will have either Vegas style or Tijuana odds on the result.

When a movie’s FREE you don’t have to worry about that feeling of getting ripped off, and all the while get to enjoy the pleasure or the pain of watching it from the comfort of your own home.

As I pointed out before, there is an abundance of video content out there to watch but, only a finite amount of time to watch it in. These 3 sites allow you to watch movies on your own terms.

Now again, just like with TV shows, there’s a whole number of ways that one can get movie content from the internet and onto their PC but, to keep it simple we’ll be limiting it to 3 of the best methods here for you in this guide.

1. PeekVid
2. Movin Flicks
3. Junk Nova

PeekVid

Not really my first choice when it comes to watching free movies on-demand due to all the popups but, selection-wise it just can’t be beat.

It’s the selection of titles that really does make the site worth checking out, that and the fact that all the movies are of DVD quality, unlike some sites which sometimes stream CAMs that can oftentimes be quite difficult to sit through.

CHECK OUT PEEKVID

Movin Flicks

This one probably ranks as my favorite for the simple reasons that it has no popup ads whatsoever, and has a relatively new as well as classic selection of content to choose from that is updated regularly.

The selection of content is more limited than that of PeekVid but, the lack of ads makes it well worth it.

Also, the site has content that is far more current than that of PeekVid, though this does mean they are CAMs boys and girls (Oscar Season’s over remember?).

CHECK OUT MOVINFLICKS

Junk Nova

Rounding out the list of sites is Junk Nova, a recently discussed

Its performance bucked the trend in the market which prompted pre-Christmas profit warnings from rivals HMV and Woolworths. Virgin said the figures exclude online sales, which surged 191%.

Simon Douglas, the managing director, said there had been market share growth across all main formats. “Despite all the talk of high street doom and gloom, particularly around entertainment with its rampant price deflation, I am delighted with our trading performance,” he said.

DVDs became the dominant format for Virgin Megastores, eclipsing music for the first time in its trading history. Underlying sales growth in DVDs was 24.1%, with its market share rising by 0.7%.

Leading mobile operators including Cingular Wireless, Vodafone, Orange and Telefonica are seeing sales increases. Smart-phone users, researchers said, are driving the trend.

One mobile content supplier, New York-based Bango Inc., said consumer spending on mobile content in the United States for the first quarter of this financial year — April-June 2006 — was seven times higher than for the same quarter last year.

In the United Kingdom, spending was more than 50 percent higher, and in continental Europe, the Far East and Australia, end-user spending was four times higher than the same quarter one year ago, according to statistics from Bango.

As for pricing, new releases are going to cost £19.99 with older films costing £4.99. Whilst this might look incredibly expensive on the outset, Universal notes that buyers will get three versions of the film. One for a computer download, one for a portable device and a hard copy through the post.

However a lot of new releases cost less than £19.99, so you’re paying a premium for the three different formats. Why not just get the DVD and rip your own?

For those wanting to watch the film on their iPod, you are out of luck. The downloads will only work on Windows based devices such as PDAs and some portable movie players, so that’s rather aggravating.