Swedish antipiracy law stirs up political waters

File swappers in Sweden, land of the world's largest bittorrent sharing site, The Pirate Bay, are facing a tougher future.

The so-called IPRED law, scheduled to go into effect Wednesday, will in some instances require Internet service providers to reveal subscribers' Internet Protocol addresses to copyright holders--including the film, music, and game industries--that charge users with illegal file sharing.

The Swedish law stipulates that property rights holders can take their grievances to a court, which will examine the evidence, including the extent of the file sharing, and decide whether the IP address will be released. The copyright holder then can send a warning letter to the ISP subscriber, and eventually file a civil case against the alleged pirate if the violation doesn't stop.

The law takes effect just as a copyright infringement case against The Pirate Bay draws to a conclusion. The verdict in that trial, due to be announced April 17, will not be affected by the new law, since only file sharing done after Wednesday will be taken into account. In response to the new law, however, The Pirate Bay site recently launched IPREDator, a new paid service that lets users download "more anonymously." The service costs 5 euros a month.

CNET has contacted The Pirate Bay for comment, but has not yet heard back.

In the United States, major ISPs including AT&T and Comcast have recently begun working with the Recording Industry Association of America to target people suspected of pirating music. The steps involved could include suspension or termination of service for repeat offenders, in a determination made by the Internet provider.

In Sweden, a country with one of the highest rates of Internet use in the world and a strong tradition of peer-to-peer networks, the IPRED law is proving to be a political hot button.

Citizens in general, and young men in particular, oppose IPRED in large numbers, according to a recent survey for Swedish national newspaper SvD.

For its part, the Antipiracy Agency, an organization formed by the film and game industries to fight Internet piracy in Sweden, is happy about the new law, which was passed by a large majority of the Swedish parliament on February 25.

"Of course we'll use the law," Henrik Ponten, a lawyer for at the Antipiracy Agency told Swedish news agency TT. "We have not acted to get the law and then not use it."

But in a sign of just how sensitive the law is, the center party in Sweden's ruling right alliance, which formulated the law, publicly debated its stricter aspects, a stance likely taken to appease a key voting demographic--young people for whom file sharing is one of the biggest political concerns. The leading party in the opposing left alliance party, the Social Democrats, did the same, even though it too voted for the law.

A country of file sharers
The once notorious file-sharing software Kazaa, the established peer-to-peer telephony software Skype, and similar offerings originated in Sweden. An estimated 1 out of 10 Swedes engage in file-sharing practices. File sharing is such a big issue in the Northern European country, in fact, that elected politicians write op-eds on emerging technologies for mainstream news outlets.

And the Pirate Party--which was formed in 2006 to reform copyright law and protect citizens' rights to privacy--after only three years has the one of the largest numbers of members among the youth wings of the country's political parties.

The numbers related to IPRED bear that out. According to the survey by the newspaper SvD (article in Swedish), 79 percent of men ages 15 to 29 oppose IPRED. Only 32 percent of those polled support the law, while 48 percent say they oppose it adamantly.

The law, based on the European antipiracy directive Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement Directive, is supposed to focus on file sharers who upload material and those who download a considerable numbers of files. Where the line will be drawn is not yet clear.

Technically, it has also been questioned whether one can link the downloading of a certain file to a specific person. For instance, if a computer is shared in a family or the subscriber has been surfing with a wireless router, a pirate could be using that connection to download files illegally.

The Left and Green parties in Sweden, which are in political opposition to the ruling right-wing alliance, voted against the law. They say it threatens democracy and personal integrity, since it gives large companies too much power to act as police and collect sensitive personal data.

Whether the law has an effect remains to be seen. According to the survey in the newspaper SvD, only one out of four people who answered that they were sharing files said they would stop once the new legislation is in place.

[1363nd0f1337]

Yeah, honestly, I hope software pirates have their machines catch on fire and molest them.

[Lerianis3]

Get a life. The fact is that if these companies would charge a REASONABLE PRICE for their products...... most people wouldn't fileshare them, except the people who have NO discretionary income at all.

[1363nd0f1337]

It's not like anyone is holding a gun to your head telling you to buy things. You shouldn't be stealing someone else's intellectual property anyway. I hope your machine catches on fire and starts molesting you.

[Lerianis3]

This espouses why people in power have to realize that in this day and age, we are moving more towards everything being free, at least when it comes to computer software, movies, and music.
If the companies in question don't like that...... start making things that are actually WORTH THE MONEY YOU CHARGE FOR THEM!
No more games, movies, etc. that get less than 20 points out of 100 on a reviewing website.

[1363nd0f1337]

1. Nothing in the tech entertainment field is ever going to move towards being totally free. People, the developers and such, expect to be compensated for their time and effort, therefore the publishers have to put a price on the product that reflects this.

2. The number rating system is extremely flawed. Not only is based off of somebody's personal opinion, but it typecasts games/movies that the particular reviewer didn't like as being universally horrible when many people still enjoy it. Also, it creates these false boundaries between good products and bad products, what's the difference between a movie or game that gets and 89 and one that gets a 90? Is a game that gets a 75 as bad as a game that gets a 10? Neither of them are in the 90+ area but one could be significantly better coded and implemented. Basing your purchase off of such nonsense is ridiculous as all reviews are subjective and not objective. People should do research into the facts of things before they purchase, maybe then they wouldn't get "swindled" by buying a product that it turns out they didn't like. Caveat emptor. Look it up.

[Sam Papelbon]

Nobody with dark skin is ever going to move towards being totally free. People, the slave-owners and such, expect them to pick cotton, therefore the slave-owners have to crack a whip to reflect this.

expectations != entitlements

besides, ever checked out something called freeware? it's a pretty neat concept, you should google it sometime.

[Lerianis3]

Actually, no, they don't. Most developers in the freeware community are doing their work 'for fun', not because they are expecting to get paid for it, and as I said and you ignored: there is a REASONABLE PRICE for things..... if you don't charge the reasonable price, expecting your things to be stolen.

Really though, there is NO stealing going on here. The original disc stays in the hands of the maker, so they got their money for their product from SOMEONE.... they've been paid for it.

[darfjono]

@Lerianis3

exactly. filesharing isn't PIRACY or STEALING. it's sharing. stealing removes the original so that no one else can use it. Piracy is stealing **** on the high seas.

the only ones who are wrong are those who pirate software for money.

[hellomad]

software price may be reasonable, but what about the ad and hosting and bandwidth price? that makes the software cost more. if we CUT Advertisements? then prices will come down steep. and then again? there is competetion. so they need to advertise, like beauty soap, so brainless ladies may buy them (no offense ladies, its a generic term; viz. you cry like a girl). thus prices shoots up. and when it does? those who are weak, are kicked from competetion and the bulls stay. which helps promote piracy. well, they are developers too, even if they steal the concept from open source and rewrite the non-patented concept ( hehe ;-) you get the idea right?) still people will go for the brand name and the tagged ones. thus piracy. its not price which leads to piracy, its lack of common sense which leads to piracy. and beside how many average mail checker user will look for freeware? huh! they will end up downloading from p2p or ware share sites. this is like a necessary evil.
thus i neither condone piracy neither i support it. it is like a necessary evil.
it to some major extent has stopped many EVIL INC. from total dominition and at the cost of monetary loss.
piracy is common, its a necessary evil, like friction, you must accept it, even if you dont like it. it helps those evil inc from growing and also at the same time helps the needy ones use things beyond their financial reach dream.
am i clear? ping back please.

[JayWes]

The problem of the peer to peer file sharing is you open your computer to all kind of mischief. for example the dumb bunney who had classified information (the drawings and data for Avionics for a new Marine Helicopter) on a computer with peer to peer. This allowed people in Iran to download the classified file. I am amazed at how people do these things without thinking though the consequences of the action.