• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

UK Govt Pushes 10 Years Jail For Online Pirates

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Sheentak

Member
https://torrentfreak.com/uk-govt-pu...160421/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter


The UK government has published its conclusions following a consultation into punishments for online copyright infringement offenses. At the earliest opportunity Parliament will be asked to increase custodial sentences up to a maximum of 10 years while ensuring that unwitting pirates are protected.

In early 2015 a study commissioned by the UK Intellectual Property Office (IPO) concluded that criminal sanctions for copyright infringement under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (CDPA 1988) should be amended to bring them into line with offenses such as counterfeiting.

The report triggered a proposal from the UK government that the maximum prison sentence for online copyright infringement should be increased to ten years. The current maximum of two years is not enough of a deterrent, it was argued.

In July 2015 the government launched a consultation aiming to gauge opinion on boosting penalties to ensure that online piracy is considered as “no less serious” than offline infringements.

This morning the government released its conclusions while confirming it will indeed be asking Parliament for a ten year maximum sentence.

In a published statement, Minister for Intellectual Property Baroness Neville-Rolfe says that more than a thousand responses (pdf) helped to shape the government’s decision to stand by its earlier calls for increased penalties. Demands for additional clarity will also be addressed.

“As a result we are now proposing changes that include increasing the maximum sentence, but at the same time addressing concerns about the scope of the offense,” Neville-Rolfe says.

“The revised provisions will help protect rights holders, while making the boundaries of the offense clearer, so that everyone can understand how the rules should be applied.”

The minister says that a number of safeguards are already in place to “limit the risk” that a “very low level” infringer could be subjected to a high penalty, including that infringement must be proven to the criminal standard of beyond reasonable doubt.

Addressing concerns raised by the consultation that unwitting infringers might find themselves subjected to draconian sentences when they had no intent to cause any harm, the government references a system that has been in place for some time at the Police Intellectual Property Crime Unit (PIPCU).

Without mentioning them by name, the report notes that “enforcement agencies and private prosecutors have a staged response system, encompassing education, ‘cease and desist’ notices, and domain suspension.”

In other words, those likely to be targeted by the ten year sentence are given advance warning by the likes of PIPCU, FACT and the BPI, that they’re treading on thin ice.

The government also addresses concerns that the term “affect prejudicially” is too vague when used to describe the extent to which a copyright holder needs to be affected before an offense is committed.

“It was argued that a single infringing file could fulfil this requirement in some circumstances (if widely shared subsequent to the infringement for example) therefore setting an unacceptably low threshold for committing the offense,” the government explains.

The government’s position is that minor infringement does not lead to a criminal prosecution but it does concede that the term “affect prejudicially” has the potential to “give rise to an element of ambiguity.”

Perhaps predictably the consultation raised concerns that a maximum sentence of ten years would place infringement alongside serious offenses such as rape, firearms offenses and child cruelty.

Nevertheless, the government feels the sentence is warranted and uses the case brought against several release group members last year as an indicator that while ten years is a maximum, it would only be utilized in the rarest of cases.

“The Government believes that a maximum sentence of 10 years allows the courts to apply an appropriate sentence to reflect the scale of the offending. An example where copyright infringement was deemed to warrant longer than a 2 year sentence is where five defendants received sentences totaling 17 years for releasing more than 2,500 of the latest films onto the internet,” the government writes.

“They were prosecuted under the Fraud Act, where the highest sentence was four and a half years. Capping the maximum available sentence at a lower level would unnecessarily limit the ability of the courts to apply appropriate sentences in the more serious cases of copyright infringement.”

The government says it will now introduce its re-drafted offense provisions to Parliament at the “earliest available legislative opportunity.”
Click to expand...
 
D

DedValve

Banned
Pirates are truly inmoral, disgusting pieces of trash and anything short of the death penalty by stoning is too good for them.
 
M

msv

Member
That is verrry extreme. If pirates can get sentences of 10 years, then what would be applicable for companies that scam the system and 'steal' billions? Seems like if you want to get away with pirating you should just start a company. Then you won't ever get jail time, just fines. Then call bankruptcy when you get a fine.
 
O

Oemenia

Banned
Gallbaro said:
The plebes must be deterred from easy theft!



Tax dodging only arises when the system places an undue burden on the select few who already carry society.
Click to expand...
While the same system punishes people for being born poor and rewards those that were more lucky.
 
K

kiguel182

Member
Pirating is not okay but 10 years is ridiculous. Totally bonkers.

The fact that their prime-minister is involved in tax evasions schemes makes this even more dumb.
 
H

hobblygobbly

Member
I wouldn't be surprised if you'd get a lesser sentence if you had to see someone with a bluray in the street, hit them in the knees with a bat, take it from them and run off.

10 years is insane.
 
L

Linkyn

Member
I've never understood the point of jail sentences for pirating. Who exactly is being helped with that? Are they hoping to rehabilitate people? Are online pirates a menace to society? Other than being punitive and them hoping for it to be a deterrent, why not just fine people or give them community service, so they can help repair the damage they've caused?
 
J

Jebusman

Banned
DedValve said:
Pirates are truly inmoral, disgusting pieces of trash and anything short of the death penalty by stoning is too good for them.
Click to expand...

Be careful, you wouldn't want to cut yourself on all that edge there.

It's hard to tell because it's pretty vague the way they present it, but it seems like the maximum 10 years is more about people who are distributors of pirated content, rather than the average joe just downloading them.

Downloading a pirated film/song/game should honestly be a lesser crime than petty theft. Still a crime obviously.

But distributors, I can buy they want harsher sentences. 10 years seems way overboard though.
 
B

badb0y

Member
Pirate movie = 10 years
Cause global banking collapse = No one goes to jail in fact government will bail you out.
 
A

AngryMoth

Member
My view on piracy is that it is immoral but it also isn't reasonable to expect regular humans who don't have a lot of money to pay for stuff when they can just as easily pirate with 0% chance of being caught. Like yeah you shouldn't do it but I'm also not gonna judge people who do too harshly.

10 years jail time for a non-violent crime is ludicrous, I personally wouldn't support any jail time even for serial uploaders. A fine and community service or something would suffice
 
R

Randomizer123454444

Member
Jebusman said:
Be careful, you wouldn't want to cut yourself on all that edge there.

It's hard to tell because it's pretty vague the way they present it, but it seems like the maximum 10 years is more about people who are distributors of pirated content, rather than the average joe just downloading them.

Downloading a pirated film/song/game should honestly be a lesser crime than petty theft. Still a crime obviously.

But distributors, I can buy they want harsher sentences. 10 years seems way overboard though.
Click to expand...

In theory perhaps, but you are forgetting that the copyright holders like to demand maximum penalties. Example:

https://torrentfreak.com/sharing-7-movies-on-bittorrent-1-5-million-damages-121201/

Penalties like this are done "to set an example". If this (10 years max) goes through, it will only be a matter of time before someone gets 10 years in jail for pirating one movie. It won't be a question of if, it will be a question of when.
 
B

Banana Aeon

Member
badb0y said:
Pirate movie = 10 years
Cause global banking collapse = No one goes to jail in fact government will bail you out.
Click to expand...

No, but they the job creators.

*Remember our glorious job creators, laying off thousands of people so they can continue raising their own pay*

Glorious leaders of industry.
 
P

Pankratous

Member
This is utterly ridiculous.

Jail shouldn't even be an option for this kind of crime. Pay a fine - that's it. You're not violent, you're not dangerous, you don't need to be removed from society.
 
K

kadotsu

Banned
I'm more interested in the "unwitting protection" part. They probably buried something to make it easier for scummy lawyers to extract money out of minor infringers.
 
J

Jebusman

Banned
Greenpaint said:
In theory perhaps, but you are forgetting that the copyright holders like to demand maximum penalties. Example:

https://torrentfreak.com/sharing-7-movies-on-bittorrent-1-5-million-damages-121201/

Penalties like this are done "to set an example". If this (10 years max) goes through, it will only be a matter of time before someone gets 10 years in jail for pirating one movie. It won't be a question of if, it will be question of when.
Click to expand...

That example still points out the difference though. He "shared" clips. Thus he became a distributor. I still think his penalty (1.5 mil for 7 clips only downloaded ~6600 times) is a little much, but the idea that "distributors" are punished more harshly rather than the downloaders is still valid.

Like I agree that 10 years is ridiculous, but I don't disagree with the wording that there should be safeguards to ensure that minor infringers aren't judged on the same level that distributors are, and technically already are with the copyright warning stuff.
 
S

Savitar

Member
R4fODtb.gif
Click to expand...

Apt
 
B

Beefy

Member
Grooming and raping or even murdering some one gets you a lesser sentence...


This is all about looking after the big companies.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Man Arrested for Uncensoring Japanese Porn With AI in First Deepfake Case
2
75
12K
LordOfChaos replied
Interview with Shuji Utsumi (SEGA Co-COO) by Japanese media outlet Seizo-Trend
Business Game Dev
1
1K
Unknown? replied
Sweden Considers Six Years in Jail For Online Pirates
38
4K
KonradLaw replied
  • Locked
Man jailed for harassing Labour MP Luciana Berger online (UK)
3
999
Familienoberhauptvogel replied
  • Locked
Online pirates could face 10 years in jail
2 3
111
15K
Starwolf_UK replied
Top Bottom