'Anne Frank' Copyright Dispute Triggers VPN, Geoblocking Questions At EU's Highest Court (torrentfreak.com) 11
An anonymous reader quotes a report from TorrentFreak: The Dutch Supreme Court has requested guidance from the EU's top court on geo-blocking, VPNs, and copyright in a case involving the online publication of Anne Frank's manuscripts. The CJEU's response has the potential to reshape the online content distribution landscape, impacting streaming platforms and other services that rely on geo-blocking. VPNs services will monitor the matter with great interest too. [...] While early versions are presumably in the public domain in several countries, the original manuscripts are protected by copyright in the Netherlands until 2037. As a result, the copies published by the Dutch Anne Frank Stichting, are blocked for Dutch visitors. "The scholarly edition of the Anne Frank manuscripts cannot be made available in all countries, due to copyright considerations," is the message disallowed visitors get to see.
This blocking effort is the result of a copyright battle. Ideally, Anne Frank Stichting would like to make the manuscripts available worldwide, but the Swiss 'Fonds' has not given permission for it to do so. And since some parts of the manuscript were first published in 1986, Dutch copyrights are still valid. In theory, geo-blocking efforts could alleviate the copyright concerns but, for the Fonds, these measures are not sufficient. After pointing out that people can bypass the blocking efforts with a VPN, it took the matter to court. Around the world, publishers and streaming services use geo-blocking as the standard measure to enforce geographical licenses. This applies to the Anne Frank Stichting, as well as Netflix, BBC iPlayer, news sites, and gaming platforms. The Anne Frank Fonds doesn't dispute this, but argued in court that people can circumvent these restrictions with a VPN, suggesting that the manuscripts shouldn't be published online at all. The lower court dismissed this argument, stating the defendants had taken reasonable measures to prevent access from the Netherlands. The Fonds appealed, but the appeal was also dismissed, and the case is now before the Dutch Supreme Court.
The Fonds argues that the manuscript website is (in part) directed at a Dutch audience. Therefore, the defendants are making the manuscripts available in the Netherlands, regardless of the use of any blocking measures. The defendants, in turn, argue that the use of state-of-the-art geo-blocking, along with additional measures like a user declaration, is sufficient to prevent a communication to the public in the Netherlands. The defense relied on the opinion in the GO4YU case, which suggests that circumventing geo-blocking with a VPN does not constitute a communication to the public in the blocked territory, unless the blocking is intentionally ineffective.
This blocking effort is the result of a copyright battle. Ideally, Anne Frank Stichting would like to make the manuscripts available worldwide, but the Swiss 'Fonds' has not given permission for it to do so. And since some parts of the manuscript were first published in 1986, Dutch copyrights are still valid. In theory, geo-blocking efforts could alleviate the copyright concerns but, for the Fonds, these measures are not sufficient. After pointing out that people can bypass the blocking efforts with a VPN, it took the matter to court. Around the world, publishers and streaming services use geo-blocking as the standard measure to enforce geographical licenses. This applies to the Anne Frank Stichting, as well as Netflix, BBC iPlayer, news sites, and gaming platforms. The Anne Frank Fonds doesn't dispute this, but argued in court that people can circumvent these restrictions with a VPN, suggesting that the manuscripts shouldn't be published online at all. The lower court dismissed this argument, stating the defendants had taken reasonable measures to prevent access from the Netherlands. The Fonds appealed, but the appeal was also dismissed, and the case is now before the Dutch Supreme Court.
The Fonds argues that the manuscript website is (in part) directed at a Dutch audience. Therefore, the defendants are making the manuscripts available in the Netherlands, regardless of the use of any blocking measures. The defendants, in turn, argue that the use of state-of-the-art geo-blocking, along with additional measures like a user declaration, is sufficient to prevent a communication to the public in the Netherlands. The defense relied on the opinion in the GO4YU case, which suggests that circumventing geo-blocking with a VPN does not constitute a communication to the public in the blocked territory, unless the blocking is intentionally ineffective.
Netherlands copyright is 70 years after death (Score:3)
Anne Frank died in 1945, 79 years ago.
Netherlands copyright is 70 years after death. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
All of her writings should already be public domain.
Cannot Obey Every Copyright Law of Every Country (Score:2)
We all knew it was coming (Score:1)
What was the point of the "World, Wide, Web" again? I can't seem to remember.
At least they still don't know about proxies, which technically aren't VPNs, but this could have lasting impact on everything including Tor. How they would enforce it I have no idea besides making it illegal and taking it off the app stores. Even if you block the VPN apps though, you can still set up a server in another country and install VPN so
Re: (Score:2)
First Russia, then Brazil, then this. All in the name of censorship or copyright.
Did you forget about France?
copyright renewal fees are needed that will fix a (Score:2)
copyright renewal fees are needed that will fix an lot of stuff.
Re: (Score:2)
There was never any point in history where all nation states would agree to abdicate their own laws or sovereignty in this space, merely a defacto agreement or inertia to wait and see what the commercial and social impact would be.
We now know that it turns
What horseshit (Score:2)
She was murdered nearly 80 years ago & wanted the world to know what happened.
These belong to everyone & should be in the public domain.
Re: (Score:3)
She was murdered nearly 80 years ago & wanted the world to know what happened.
She wrote all of it before her family was arrested, and she didn't yet know what was going to happen.
It was a private diary. It's unlikely she wanted anyone else to read it.
Before it was published, her dad edited out a lot of the personal stuff, some of it musing about sex.
Revenue numbers (Score:3)
Anyone have a source for the revenue numbers Anne Frank's works, her likeness, her museum/house/etc. brings in a year?
These type of articles need to ask about the money, who benefits, political motives, etc.
Re: (Score:2)
Anyone have a source for the revenue numbers Anne Frank's works
Google says $1.5M/year in royalties.
Many middle and high schools include Anne's diary in their curriculum because teens can relate to it.
Re: (Score:1)
She was murdered nearly 80 years ago & wanted the world to know what happened.
These belong to everyone & should be in the public domain.
Especially since we have dickheads who feel comfortable enough to cosplay as nazis now. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/u... [nbcnews.com]
In simpler times it was considered common courtesy to empty a tommy gun if you happened upon a group of them. I also guarantee these were the same assholes who bitched and moaned about wearing a mask during covid.