Tiscali vince in Belgio: no ai filtri P2P

Link: Telcoeye: Tiscali vince in Belgio: no ai filtri P2P.

Come riporta Security and the Net, Scarlet -brand belga di Tiscali – ha vinto la propria battaglia in tribunale contro i filtri al traffico P2P.

The Belgian Society of Authors, Composers and Publishers (Sabam, the Belgian version of the RIAA) started a case against Tiscali, one of the largest ISP’s in Belgium. In it, they argue that ISP’s are responsible when their customers transfer copyrighted files via their network. In 2004, Sabam (in their own words) ”obtained an intermediary judgement by virtue of which the court acknowledged that copyright infringements (regarding the reproduction right and right of communication to the public) were being committed by TISCALI customers. ”

The court then ordered a study into
whether Tiscali (now called Scarlet) could be forced to block the
transfer of copyrighted material through their network. This was
finished last year, and in june 2007 Scarlet was ordered
to implement technical measures to block the transfer of copyrighted
works via P2P networks within six months. The fine for not following
these instructions was set to €2500 per day.

This year, Scarlet asked the court to cancel this order because the systems Sabam proposed for filtering traffic didn’t work as advertised; Sabam has already apologized to the judge about providing incorrect information. The court has now ruled in favor of Scarlet, staying the fine until the final ruling in this case which is expected about a year from now. [via]

If you like this post, please consider sharing it.

3 thoughts on “Tiscali vince in Belgio: no ai filtri P2P”

  1. Sono molto contento per questa sentenza.
    Non si tratta però di una vittoria in senso giuridico: dal punto di vista legale, il giudice belga ancora conferma la responsbilità dei providers su ciò che accade in Internet (basandosi su una interpretazione della Copyright Directive), però ora deve ammettere che il sistema dei filtri non funziona (o, se funziona, non rispetta la privacy, oppure è sproporzionato).
    Quindi si tratta di un caso i cui sviluppi vanno ancora monitorati.

  2. Interessante … soprattutto dato che la battaglia è stata vinta da un operatore che normalmente utilizza il DPI per i propri scopi di business …. Ma questo è un altro tema e ben venga – comunque – questo passo.

Leave a Reply to massimo cavazzini Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *