Cops pull plugs on TV-links, claim 'facilitation of infringement' Last week's arrest of a 26-year-old Cheltenham man, and the related closure of the TV-links website, has prompted a flurry of speculation that the very foundations of the internet (linking to stuff) might be under threat. Although this might be a worry too far, legal eagles at Pinsent Masons say that it could be an important …
...are belong to FACT". Sorry, couldn't resist.
On a side note, it's a bit appalling how Free Speech seemingly doesn't matter any more. I mean, I this bar where, if you really try, you can find all kinds of interesting stuff that fell off the back of a truck. But I should presumably just shut my gob or I could face jailtime. Neat. Problem solved. Or maybe not...
"All our information is being coordinated by FACT" - so basically FACT get to tell trading standards what to do and they act without doing any investigation of their own.
Hopefully, this will get the due process it deserves and ends up in a courtroom with a judge who asks "whats a website?"
Bah waaa we cant catch the people posting the illegal content so we will go after people who post a link to it and sue them for every penny they have got as well.
After all there are so many more people linking to illegal content than there are posting it.
They will be taking out arrest warrants on google, yahoo, MSN and ask next as they link to millions times more illegal content than this person ever did.
In other news, your local ISP is about to announce a "Safe Links" package. For only UKP 500 per month, they will check the copyright on every link you post (and erase the link for you). For an extra UKP 1000 per month, they'll check the copyright claims on every link you download and block it if any one of 666,666 organizations has posted a claim, any claim, to the material in that link.
I never thought I'd see the day when even I would even for a second think that perhaps, just perhaps, we're seeing the beginning of the end for the "internet". Seems that the last 10 years of frenzied copyright law lobbying and changes by big-name "content owners" (not creators, owners) is finally paying off for them. They're starting to reclaim the place they lost when the London Company of Stationers failed to stop the Statute of Anne in 1710.
Would the last person left on the internet please turn out the lights?
It is the sincere desire of all governments to pass enough laws that we are all criminals. Thus, whenever they think any individual needs a bit of suppressing, all they have to do is apply the appropriate law and the appropriate penalty. Problem solved: the annoying person is either in jail, or too poor to cause trouble.
... And FACT is the UK’s leading trade organisation established to protect and represent the interests of the film and broadcasting industry against copyright and trademark infringements.
Does it mean that GNU people (or their buddies) can be made in charge of EU against Microsoft? Now that'd be cool.
www.google.com
www.youtube.com
Well, that's me in the clink :|
"Sites like TV Links contribute to and profit from copyright infringement."
Did TV Links actually make money from hosting links?
Bizarre - next we'll be told that it's illegal to own a modem or router - better still, a telephone line as that could potentially carry copyright material.
No, one better - Electricity... let's ban that to ensure that digital media cannot be copyright-infringed :P
This is mind-boggling.
What we have (sorry, had) is a place where people can post links to sites which host copyrighted material. A seemingly popular site, at that. Can you see where we're going with this, kids?
Now, I may only have a brain the size of a melon, but I'd have thought that a site like that would have been a valuable thing to anyone looking to shut down copyright violators because, effectively, it's just a bulletin board for dobbing in the pirates.
So either Fact or plod have essentially taken the decision to just shoot the stool pigeon. Nice one, Ironside. You da man.
Is it just me? Wouldn't you leave it open and just let the public happily post up links to actual culprits, then pick them off as they come in?
It is, it's just me, isn't it. Oh well.
Perhaps it got in trouble because it would display the clip (tv, film, etc) inside a frame which was hosted by tv-links. Not sure if there was a banner ad or anything displayed in the frame though (ABP for the win).
Still I'll miss it even though many of the links seemed to be dead.
... that it's apparently quite easy to buy cannabis in many of the pubs and clubs in Brixton.
So, does that make me guilty of "facilitating" a drug deal? If somebody's getting beaten up in a dark alley way, and I point and shout "Look, over there" does that make me guilty of assault?
What a bunch of crap. It'll be a sad day for law, justice, free speech and democracy all in one if this "talking about something is the same as doing it" attitude is allowed to prevail. FACT and the RIAA can bang on about intellectual property rights all they like but until they stop trying to deprive me of my physical property rights over my own computing equipment they're no better than a bunch of muggers in a dark alley and I will continue to steal (back) as much as I possibly can from them at every opportunity.
"We don't have a simple offence of facilitating infringement in the UK"
Er...so why was the guy arrested then? Ah, the beauties of a third world country...
"People are quite willingly trying to circumvent the law."
Duh... I wonder how many people would obey the speed limit (and other traffic laws) if they knew for sure there were no cops, speed cameras, etc. around...
"Gloucestershire police could not confirm exactly what the 26-year-old was arrested on suspiscion of, saying that the case had most likely now been handed over to trading standards officers.
Gloucestershire Trading Standards confirmed that it was involved in the investigation, but declined to elaborate on what the owner of the site had been arrested for, beyond saying it was "offences under the Copyright Act"."
Does 'Mr. TV-Links' actually know what he's been arrested for himself? Or are they keeping him in the dark as well?
If Microsoft steals some code from the Ly-nux kernel, the whole world goes up it arms about infringements on the GNU and open-source code etc...
But if the cops shut down a site that links to material that is illegally made available, then we dump on the 'man' and the 'system' for violating our god-given freedom to pirate video content?
As far as i'm concerned, they are both stealing... so why is one 'right' and the other is 'wrong'?
TV links was a great idea, due to the job i do, i'm not able to always be around to watch my favourite shows every week, also i can't afford to have Sky or Virgin. So TV-links was brilliant as I could watch my favourite shows and catch up with anything I have missed! Surely this website is a tribute to any show that is featured on there, as it shows that there is a demand for them. The producers should be amazed that their show would be available to ANYBODY in the world!
Its funny how Gun crime in the UK is at an all-time high, with young children being shot and killed, and the police decided they want to arrest someone who just wants to be able help people find their fave shows...only providing links and not even streaming them himself!
So I would like to say Well Done and Congrats to the Police and Trading Standards for destroying something so beautiful...I hope you rot in hell
Big Stu
There is a certain English language site hosted in Russia – a sort of a “TV Underground” one might say, were there are highly illegal links to highly illegal content, not paedophilia, mind you, or anything like that – much more illegal, links to the 1963 doctor Who!
And since it is hosted in Russia, a country well known for its record on caring about highly illegal *linking*, I think that it will be a safe bet that it will stay up for a while.
P.S. I think that I will host a site, that I know is at least in some way is bound to attract attention from the authorities. Hmm, let’s see, were should I host such a site? – I know! I will do it in such a way, that my secret identity will be known, in a country that tries to emulate the “FAC*T common sense” of the America, nothing will ever happen to me, for sure!
Come on people, do not bend over and be FACT in the riASSofa
So lets see, linking or displaying copyrighted content...
Well lets start simple, you tube, my space, facebook, every search engine on earth, ever, now then characters names and logos are copyrighted along with there appearance (also the word drow) so any website with mentioning of the word drow, character names, images of characters, logos, or any websites that link to websites with above mentioned information...Well done we just lost most of the internet all that's left is maddox, OH NOOOOOO!
"We don't have a simple offence of facilitating infringement in the UK"
"People are quite willingly trying to circumvent the law."
So... people are willingly trying to circumvent something for which there is no simple offence? Or, to put it another way, they're trying not to break laws that don't exist? Sounds like doublespeak to me...
How can it be an offence to give directions, for that is what a link is. It is not the material itself.
If you decide to drive in the M1 at 150mph (these were the days) and you get caught and find yourself in court. Am I guilty of an offence because I gave you directions to the M1?
Am i missing something here, or are Gloucester Police working for Trading Standards, who are working for FACT? So, the Police now report to corporation-owned propaganda machines other than the government now? Can I expect a visit from the police if I get into a dispute with a a mechanic over a repair on my car because he happens to be a member of a trade association?
What the hell is going on here? Why are we paying for police to be used as thugs to bully people on behalf of a trade syndicate?
Consider the drugs world:
A) A white-van-man who takes a crate of cocaine up the M9 is a criminal.
B) A National Express coach driver who takes a passenger carrying a suitcase of cocaine up the M9 is not.
The difference?
The van driver made the trip to get the cocaine to his contacts. The coach driver was performing a legal, legitimate service and someone else abused that service, presumably without his knowledge.
TV-Links was part of the supply-chain of infringing content. Unlike Google, it's main purpose was to supply links to infringing content.
***********
@Morten:
"On a side note, it's a bit appalling how Free Speech seemingly doesn't matter any more. I mean, I this bar where, if you really try, you can find all kinds of interesting stuff that fell off the back of a truck. But I should presumably just shut my gob or I could face jailtime. Neat. Problem solved. Or maybe not..."
That's always been illegal in the UK. It's called being "an accessory to crime". If you know where someone fences goods, you're supposed to tell the police, not drum up business!
The question here is whether copyright law enables prosecution as an accessory. If it doesn't, the man shouldn't be in custody, but if it doesn't, it needs changed.
* Even if the chap is found to be innocent,
* even if, in the cold light of day, charges are not brought,
let us not forget that this man has now had his fingerprints taken and his DNA sampled, and placed on the national databases where criminal records are kept,
and that he will now be a suspect in every crime committed in the UK until he is 100,
even if he has inconveniently died before then!
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
