EU court rules in Telenet copyright case: ISPs can be forced to hand over some customer data use details

Belgian firm must produce the IP addresses of BitTorrent users


Europe’s top court has ruled ISPs can be forced to hand over the details of customers who are alleged to have downloaded material illegally online - but only if they meet certain criteria.

That’s the latest judgement in another case involving Cyprus-based Mircom International Content Management Consulting, and Belgian ISP Telenet.

The complex case - which involves a number of legal arguments - appears to pivot on the balance between enforcement of IP rights and the data protection of the individuals accused of infringing them.

According to court papers, Mircom holds the rights of a “large number of pornographic films” produced by eight operations in the US and Canada.

The case started when Cyprus-based Mircom demanded that Telenet hand over customer details linked to IP addresses gathered by a separate German-based company on behalf of Mircom.

Mircom alleged that these IP addresses had been used to “share films in the Mircom catalogue.”

Telenet dug in its heels and refused, which prompted Mircom to start legal action in June 2019 when it brought the case before the Companies Court in Belgium – the Ondernemingsrechtbank Antwerpen.

Seeking further guidance, the case was then passed to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) which, among other things, interprets the law to make sure it is applied in the same way in all EU countries.

In its preliminary finding published last week, the CJEU found that customer details can be handed over as long as it is done in a way that is "justified, proportionate and not abusive."

The court interpreted the relevant legislation, read together, as meaning that the laws did not prevent:

the systematic recording... of IP addresses of users of peer-to-peer networks whose internet connections have allegedly been used in infringing activities, nor the communication of the names and of the postal addresses of those users to that rightholder or to a third party in order to enable it to bring claim for damages before a civil court for prejudice allegedly caused by those users, provided, however, that the initiatives and the requests to that effect by that rightholder or such a third party are justified, proportionate and not abusive and have their legal basis in a national legislative measure.

The ruling – which spans some 14,000 words – was requested after the Ondernemingsrechtbank Antwerpen had "doubts as to the merits of Mircom’s application" and sought clarification in three areas.

First, that due to the “decentralised nature of peer-to-peer networks” (the customers were accused of sharing the flicks through the BitTorrent file-sharing network) could those involved could have legally been deemed to have communicated copyright material? Or, in other words, was there a case to answer?

The second area that needed clarification was whether Mircom was “able to benefit from the protection conferred by EU law in respect of the enforcement of intellectual property rights, since Mircom does not actually exploit the rights acquired by the film producers, but is merely claiming damages from alleged infringers.”

“Such conduct corresponds almost precisely to the definition in legal literature of a ‘copyright troll’,” said Advocate General, Maciej Szpunar, publishing his legal opinion on the case in December 2020.

Finally, the court expressed doubt about the way the IP addresses had been collected in the first place.

Summarising the issuing facing EU judges the AG said that the case will have to take into account “the relationship between, on the one hand, the necessary judicial protection of intellectual property rights and, on the other, protecting the personal data of possible offenders.”

Now that the CJEU has published its view, lawyers on both sides of the argument will be picking over the details before it heads back to the court in Antwerp.

In July 2019, Virgin Media's lawyers managed to see off a group of copyright owners - including Mircom – that tried to force the British ISP to hand over the personal details of people for allegedly downloading copyrighted pornographic movies. ®


Other stories you might like

  • DuckDuckGo tries to explain why its browsers won't block some Microsoft web trackers
    Meanwhile, Tails 5.0 users told to stop what they're doing over Firefox flaw

    DuckDuckGo promises privacy to users of its Android, iOS browsers, and macOS browsers – yet it allows certain data to flow from third-party websites to Microsoft-owned services.

    Security researcher Zach Edwards recently conducted an audit of DuckDuckGo's mobile browsers and found that, contrary to expectations, they do not block Meta's Workplace domain, for example, from sending information to Microsoft's Bing and LinkedIn domains.

    Specifically, DuckDuckGo's software didn't stop Microsoft's trackers on the Workplace page from blabbing information about the user to Bing and LinkedIn for tailored advertising purposes. Other trackers, such as Google's, are blocked.

    Continue reading
  • Despite 'key' partnership with AWS, Meta taps up Microsoft Azure for AI work
    Someone got Zuck'd

    Meta’s AI business unit set up shop in Microsoft Azure this week and announced a strategic partnership it says will advance PyTorch development on the public cloud.

    The deal [PDF] will see Mark Zuckerberg’s umbrella company deploy machine-learning workloads on thousands of Nvidia GPUs running in Azure. While a win for Microsoft, the partnership calls in to question just how strong Meta’s commitment to Amazon Web Services (AWS) really is.

    Back in those long-gone days of December, Meta named AWS as its “key long-term strategic cloud provider." As part of that, Meta promised that if it bought any companies that used AWS, it would continue to support their use of Amazon's cloud, rather than force them off into its own private datacenters. The pact also included a vow to expand Meta’s consumption of Amazon’s cloud-based compute, storage, database, and security services.

    Continue reading
  • Atos pushes out HPC cloud services based on Nimbix tech
    Moore's Law got you down? Throw everything at the problem! Quantum, AI, cloud...

    IT services biz Atos has introduced a suite of cloud-based high-performance computing (HPC) services, based around technology gained from its purchase of cloud provider Nimbix last year.

    The Nimbix Supercomputing Suite is described by Atos as a set of flexible and secure HPC solutions available as a service. It includes access to HPC, AI, and quantum computing resources, according to the services company.

    In addition to the existing Nimbix HPC products, the updated portfolio includes a new federated supercomputing-as-a-service platform and a dedicated bare-metal service based on Atos BullSequana supercomputer hardware.

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022