‘Pirate’ Movie Streaming Sites Declared Legal By Italian Court

Discussion in 'HardForum Tech News' started by cageymaru, Mar 29, 2017.

  1. cageymaru

    cageymaru [H]ard as it Gets

    Apr 10, 2003
    In 2015 an Italian court ruled against the owners of filmakers.biz, filmaker.me, filmakerz.org, and cineteka.org citing them for running a pirate movie operation and generating revenue through the sale of advertising. In February 2017, the $600,000 judgement against the owners was reversed through appeal as it was determined that advertising on a website, that provides only links to pirate material, does not necessarily make it a for profit business. The prosecution must also show that profit activity is connected to an individual. The advertising on the website didn't provide financial gain for the owners, thus it was ruled to be simply file sharing. File sharing the court ruled is a saving of expense and not a for profit business. Thus the penalties of Copyright Law and associated sanctions aren't applicable in this case.

    The repercussions of the ruling will undoubtedly be felt across Europe as Italy is a Member state of the European Union. With the NFL, NBA, and other American sporting corporations seeking to generate a fan base in the EU, I'd think that it may even affect our laws. What is the incentive for paying to watch a game when you can stream it from Italy? If the stream is simple file sharing in Italy, then how does that affect the legality of watching it in America? This was truly an interesting ruling coming out of Italy! What do you think?

    “The Judge has recognized as lawful the portals’ activities, and this despite the presence of advertising banners,” Sarzana says. According to the lawyer, it is not enough to simply show that the ‘pirate’ site generates income. The prosecution must also show that profit activity is connected to an individual. If it does not, the sharing aspect could be considered as merely avoiding an expense rather than a for-profit activity designed to generate “significant gain”. In the event, that’s exactly what happened.

    “In fact, the Judge ruled that file sharing, i.e the sharing of files protected by copyright, is a saving of expense and not a for-profit business. Therefore, in these cases you cannot apply the penal provisions of copyright law and the resulting administrative sanctions,” Sarzana notes.
  2. The Gonz

    The Gonz [H]ard|Gawd

    Jun 24, 2004
    NFL/NBA Corporate Moron: Hey Boss, Italy is allowing pirated content. It's going to hurt revenue growth. How should we proceed?

    NFL/NBA Bigwig: Raise prices in America.

    Both: BRILLIANT!

    Le Sigh
  3. emphy

    emphy Limp Gawd

    Aug 31, 2016
    In a world where, in some countries, bottled water is sold for a couple of bucks where its nearly free from tap (with sometimes better quality), I am sure there will be some creative answers to this question...
  4. Master_shake_

    Master_shake_ [H]ardForum Junkie

    Apr 9, 2012
  5. dj_spanmaster

    dj_spanmaster Limp Gawd

    Aug 1, 2004
    Not having to route a low quality stream from overseas back to my house, and convenience of streaming to my Roku: those may provide enough incentive.
  6. LurkerLito

    LurkerLito 2[H]4U

    Dec 5, 2007
    It's IMHO a reasonable and correct ruling, but I am sure the media companies will help change their minds through various "lobbying" efforts to various lawmaking persons.
  7. OFaceSIG

    OFaceSIG 2[H]4U

    Aug 31, 2009
    When I was young and stupid I was ok with piracy in any form. Now as an adult I vehemently try to avoid any piracy of any kind. It is very telling though that in Europe which is quickly running out of any sort of common sense or normalcy that piracy sites can win a case at all, in any capacity.
  8. gxp500

    gxp500 Gawd

    Mar 4, 2015
    Unfortunately stream.it is not what i expected...
  9. NeoNemesis

    NeoNemesis 2[H]4U

    Mar 10, 2004
    Piracy is a necessary evil. We'd probably still be buying CDs if Napster had never existed.

    You think the Music industry wants to sell you a song for $1 when they could be selling CDs filled with 12 shit songs and 1 good one for $20?

    Same for video. Content creators would never have embraced Netflix if they could have kept up the old advertisement laden cable model.

    I don't pirate stuff because I have more than enough money to buy all the content I want, but I understand what an important driver of innovation it's been.
    burton14e7 likes this.