Italian Pirate IPTV Customers Risk a 5,000 Euro Fine Starting August 8, 2023 (torrentfreak.com) 45
An anonymous reader quotes a report from TorrentFreak: Italy's brand new anti-piracy law has just received full approval from telecoms regulator AGCOM. In a statement issued Thursday, AGCOM noted its position "at the forefront of the European scene in combating online piracy." The new law comes into force on August 8 and authorizes nationwide ISP blocking of live events and enables the state to issue fines of up to 5,000 euros to users of pirate streams .
In a statement published Thursday, AGCOM welcomed the amendments to Online Copyright Enforcement regulation 680/13/CONS, which concern measures to counter the illegal distribution of live sports streams, as laid out in Resolution 189/23/CONS. The new provisions grant AGCOM the power to issue "dynamic injunctions" against online service providers of all kinds, a privilege usually reserved for judges in Europe's highest courts. The aim is to streamline blocking measures against unlicensed IPTV services, with the goal of rendering them inaccessible across all of Italy.
"With such measures, it will be possible to disable access to pirated content in the first 30 minutes of the event broadcast by blocking DNS resolution of domain names and blocking the routing of network traffic to IP addresses uniquely intended for illicit activities," AGCOM says. "With this amendment, in perfect synchrony with the changes introduced by Parliament, AGCOM is once again at the forefront of the European scene in combating online piracy activity," says AGCOM Commissioner Massimiliano Capitanio.
In a statement published Thursday, AGCOM welcomed the amendments to Online Copyright Enforcement regulation 680/13/CONS, which concern measures to counter the illegal distribution of live sports streams, as laid out in Resolution 189/23/CONS. The new provisions grant AGCOM the power to issue "dynamic injunctions" against online service providers of all kinds, a privilege usually reserved for judges in Europe's highest courts. The aim is to streamline blocking measures against unlicensed IPTV services, with the goal of rendering them inaccessible across all of Italy.
"With such measures, it will be possible to disable access to pirated content in the first 30 minutes of the event broadcast by blocking DNS resolution of domain names and blocking the routing of network traffic to IP addresses uniquely intended for illicit activities," AGCOM says. "With this amendment, in perfect synchrony with the changes introduced by Parliament, AGCOM is once again at the forefront of the European scene in combating online piracy activity," says AGCOM Commissioner Massimiliano Capitanio.
Also in the news (Score:5, Funny)
Sales of VPN access curiously spikes in Italy.
Re: (Score:2)
Sales of VPN access curiously spikes in Italy.
Yea, and some collateral damage may be the blocking of VPNs which would harm legitimate users.
Re: (Score:2)
Can I be there when the Italian government gets skinned by their industry for essentially gutting their remote work capability and thus their competitiveness?
Re: (Score:2)
Italy would not block all VPN by IP, they would negotiate a solution with the VPN providers; one example is to limit contracts to legally established companies (not individuals). Some places have similar regulations for the likes of AirBnBn, homeowners have to include a licence number (the government run a script on the AirBnB website or gets the data from them; checks that each licenced user does not pass some maximum limits).
Of course there are workarounds, one could create a company just for the purpose
Re: (Score:2)
Rent a server at a hoster abroad, install a VPN service...
Re: (Score:2)
They don't need a solution that works 100%. They need a solution that reduces their problem by 80%, and in 2-4 years they will re-evaluate their options and try improve quantitatively. Public policy is a matter of choosing which imperfect solution should solve the largest number of old problems while creating the smallest number of new problems, and re-evaluating after a while. It does not have to be perfect at first try, it generally does not have to be perfect at all either (with few exceptions; protectin
Re: (Score:2)
It doesn't. I give the whole shit about a day before the first "How to set up your own VPN abroad the fool proof way" Video on YouTube. Complete with Patreon link in case you feel generous to someone who lets you continue watch your movies and shows for free.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
You do know that this is a tech site, and you do know that a fair amount of the people here not only despite spam but also have a background in security and know how to audit webpages, not to mention that they also know how to trash webpages with shoddy security, and spamming them with these very shoddy webpages gives them a really, really good incentive to do just that and blow those webpages out of the net?
Just asking for a friend...
Revenue (Score:2)
So... was there a huge revenue spike after they did it?
Re: Revenue (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
You don't believe in rights? Ok. I don't believe in supporting your totalitarianism either.
What right does anyone have to pirate content? While blocking can be abused and probably will result in blocking legitimate users, such as those that use a VPN but actually have paid for access, but blocking and fining pirates is hardly an infringement on their rights.
As a side note, Godwin's Law sure approached 1 fast in this discussion.
Re: (Score:1)
You want to run the terminology clock 30 years backwards. For that time, if you said, "Steve? Oh that guy. Yeah, he pirates a lot of stuff,", I think it's fair to say your listener would not assume Steve had a ship anchored off the coast with a hold full of booty.
Language evolves, and your refusal to incorporate a well established, modern meaning, and adherence to the anachronism is the opposite of communication.
Besides, your post reeks of logical fallacy.
Let me know if you need clarification. :)
To the person who modded me troll (Score:2)
I have had my posts modded "troll" in the past, and I never argued it - primarily because on rereading the post, I thought, "well, okay. I can see their point." And sometimes (not often and not maliciously), I was, in fact, poking the bear.
But this time I feel compelled to defend it. The reason there is no "-1 I don't like it" option is because that's not an argument. If you disagree, say why. I thought my post was specific, clear, and targeted correctly. But "-1 troll" because you have nothing else is shit
Re:So the Nazis did it? (Score:5, Interesting)
What right does anyone have to pirate content?
What obligation do you have to verify that another person has rights to distribute content to you? When I buy a DVD at wal-mart, how much legal documentation should they include in the box, and should I have to read it all before I buy it?
Re: (Score:2)
What right does anyone have to pirate content?
What obligation do you have to verify that another person has rights to distribute content to you?
I would guess many people who are using IPTV are aware that it is not legitimately distributing the stuff they stream but like the price; i.e. free. That's pretty good indication the stream is not legit.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
What to address first ... let's start at the top and work down, it ain't that long.
Italy is famous. It helped the Nazis.
Actually, it invented them. Or Fascism, rather. Mussolini was Hitler's great role model. He even copied his "March on Rome", which was a total and resounding blunder. Later he seized power the "legal" way and reshaped the legal system as soon as he could. Much like some parties do (and a lot more try and tried) today, I may ask.
Can't wait for them to let me know I owe 5,000 euros (like half a McDonald's burger in real money).
The exchange rate between the EUR and the USD is currently 1:1.10171. In other words, those 5k EUR
Re: (Score:3)
We did pay for it. All of us have been paying through the nose by having the public domain stolen from us and trillions upon trillions of our dollars simply given to these companies as hand outs. Every single piece of IP and copyrighted material for the next century has been paid for a thousand times over just from the corruption and grift of the last few years alone.
Re: (Score:2)
And I'm pretty sure you also have a really great concept how to motivate people to create content in the future, yes?
Re: (Score:2)
Either it has intrinsic value not tied to corporeal presence or it doesn't. If you can't steal it from the author, you can't steal it from the public domain. And how do you conclude something has been paid for a thousand times over? Seems to me that would mean they got all production costs plus a reasonable profit, all times a thousand.
Not many works make a thousand times their cost.
Re: (Score:2)
Not many works make a thousand times their cost.
How is a person supposed to get a three hundred million Euro contract if people can watch him kicking a ball around for free?
Re: (Score:1)
...
Can't wait for them to let me know I owe 5,000 euros (like half a McDonald's burger in real money).
The exchange rate between the EUR and the USD is currently 1:1.10171. In other words, those 5k EUR are USD 5,508.54. My guess is that you got that burger not from McD but from here [robbreport.com].
But finally, and my actual question, what right do you think you have to for-pay content you didn't pay for?
MMmmmm.. a Robb Report Buuuurrrrrrgerrrrrrr... slurp.
There are various responses that outline --as usual-- various people's opinion, including someone who thinks quoting a Tom Cruise movie is how you engage in a dialogue on /. SMDH.
I do not think I have the right to for-pay content I didn't pay for. There are so many begged questions there to break it down easily but I'll try.
FOR-PAY CONTENT is a construct you invented. Try a Google search for it and be amazed it doesn't come up. To give you the charit
Re: (Score:2)
Since I tried really hard to avoid any loaded terms, I guess I went a bit overboard and "invented" my own. So allow me to define what I mean.
For-pay content is content that you can access in exchange for some kind of payment. Whether this then entitles you to consume that content whenever you please or whether it allows you to consume that content for a specific time or a specific amount of times is outside of the scope of the term. What value that content has, to you or to its owner, is essentially between
Re: (Score:1)
Fair enough. I'll hold back on the copyright maximalist and find a term that is more neutral. For now, not needed.
Bread is easy. Once consumed it is gone. Content is not that way and that's on purpose. Content creators want
to write once and sell many (or act once, sell many, or air once, sell many, etc.) Of course it would be great if anything
I ever created once I could sell many many times, and even 70 years after my death my offspring could sell it and make
money despite neither have created anything
Re: (Score:2)
Is it me or did you forget to make an argument after telling people where you stand on copying and its legality?
Ok, you think copying should be legal. We get it. What's your argument? What's your solution to the problem? What's your proposal?
It is trivial to multiply content today (provided it's not physically or logically restricted from being). How do you plan to keep people from multiplying content at will, distributing it and leaving the creator without a way to recover his expenses? Content is a very c
Re: (Score:1)
Thanks for sharing what you think is trivial.
You're tirivla.
That buzzing sound as you fall off a cliff is the sound of your failure to make any sense.
Buzz off, fly.
Re: (Score:2)
Whoa, that escalated kinda quickly. All because I was asking for some kind of argument after reading your whole manifesto there and not finding one...
I know it is upsetting to some people when confronted with a direct question that punches a hole into their hot air balloon that they inflated with their speech, but you might want to deal with it one day or another or you'll never get out of this loop of dropping your manifesto, getting asked some direct questions and bouncing off the wall.
Because ... well, y
Re: (Score:1)
...Because ... well, yeah, it is entertaining and looks funny, but at some point in time you might want to be taken seriously.
It appears that I am taken seriously. The numerous comments following my post seem to indicate that.
Worry not, young padawan. The gravitas of my words extends far beyond the spittle on online forums.
Best regards, and congratulations to Max for his win today. Go Lewis!
Re: (Score:2)
I've read the comments you got, did you? Between people calling you a pontificating cunt and lamenting that the whole shit descends into a Godwin, there isn't much that could be considered "agreeing" with your position. Let alone taking you serious.
You do know that it's possible on /. to see what replies other people got? And what moderation?
Or do you just not read what people reply to you and just consider that they don't just ignore you as they usually already a "victory"? You remind me of a kid that brea
Re: (Score:1)
I've read the comments you got, did you? Between people calling you a pontificating cunt and lamenting that the whole shit descends into a Godwin, there isn't much that could be considered "agreeing" with your position. Let alone taking you serious.
You do know that it's possible on /. to see what replies other people got? And what moderation?
Or do you just not read what people reply to you and just consider that they don't just ignore you as they usually already a "victory"? You remind me of a kid that breaks stuff so they get at least scolded instead of ignored.
And this is where we clap our hands. So much time spent on ME and lecturing ME and not addressing the topic.
Mike is a great guy but he never coined a law. That's a misnomer.
My position is my position. If you disagree, feel free. There are 9B+ people on this planet, and likely not all of them do agree with what I write, but whether they do or not or what they choose to do (ignore, move on, blath on incessentatly, be illiterate, scold, etc.) is not my concern.
But thank YOU for ensuring YOUR analysis of wh
Re: (Score:2)
I'm seriously still waiting for an argument from you. I've seen your position. Yes. But a position is not an argument. Saying "I think the climate change should be over" is certainly a position, but it makes no suggestion how to remedy the situation. Likewise, saying "copyright is wrong" offers no idea how to improve the situation or solve the problem it creates.
If you don't want to, that's fine, but you might want to say so. Because, in general, people do expect an argument in a discussion medium. If all y
Re: (Score:1)
How perfect (Score:4, Insightful)
"this amendment, in perfect synchrony with the changes"
You gotta love it when politicians use such conclusory statements. When I see something like that, it is apparent they are trying to paper over some defect. Ignore the Man behind the curtain and obey the Almighty Oz.
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Television (Score:1)
It's amusing to see how highly this industry values itself. I wonder how much more drama we have in store as a result of it's death throes.
I no longer pirate since there's nothing worth watching anymore. There's no value to it. Any of it. The quicker the whole thing dries up and dies, the better.
Can't wait for A.I. written/directed and produced shows because they can't afford human talent anymore. Those yachts don't pay for themselves, you know...Bill Burr was right. He just picked the wrong boat. ;)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
https://youtu.be/wTP2RUD_cL0 [youtu.be]