Home
 » ISP News » 
Sponsored

Research Claims Court Ordered ISP Website Blocking is Open to Abuse

Monday, July 4th, 2016 (12:15 pm) - Score 440
banned and forbidden uk internet censorship

A new study from researchers working out of the Western Sydney University and King’s College London has claimed that court ordered website blocks by UK broadband ISPs, such as those used against Internet piracy websites, could be open to abuse.

Copyright Holders have for several years been able to harness Section 97A of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 to secure mandatory “blocking orders” against copyright infringing websites, which must be enforced by the major ISPs (e.g. BT, Sky Broadband, Virgin Media, EE and TalkTalk).

However the new paper again reminds us that such blocking is largely ineffectual unless every country in the world does it and even then it can be easily circumvented, such as through the use of Virtual Private Networks (VPN), DNS changes, HTTPS or Proxy Servers etc.

On top of that the paper warns that, in the EU context at least, “not only does the implementation of the blocking injunction fall short of due process requirements, but also the legal basis for the remedy in the context of enforcing trade mark rights is questionable.” Sadly we couldn’t find a working download link on the summary, but Torrentfreak has an extract.

One particular concern is raised with regards to how the operators of such sites are effectively excluded from proceedings, although it’s equally fair to say that anybody running a haven for copyright infringement probably won’t turn up to court.

Report Extract:

“Notably, neither of [the] domestic provisions under which the High Court typically exercises jurisdiction in granting blocking injunctions provide that the operators of the online locations sought to be blocked be made party to the application before the court.

Thus, a common feature in the series of cases leading to blocking injunctions in the copyright context … is that only the ISPs who were called upon to block the target online locations were before court and not the operators of the online locations in issue.

[M]ost orders to-date have been granted after consideration of the applications on paper alone. Essentially, what this means is that the court is only possessed of the material submitted by the rights-holders, which go uncontested by the ISPs, leaving the interests of the operators of the target online locations completely unrepresented.

What must be emphasised is that, in future, there may be instances where the operator of an online location has a plausible defence to a claim of IP infringement. In the circumstances where the court is only privy to the pleadings and documentary evidence submitted on behalf of a right-holder, the court’s discretion may become the subject of abuse.”

Apparently the manner in which the relevant EU directives are implemented means that even site operators who could be identified and notified, which is very rare, don’t have to be informed of the proceedings under the law. The UK does apply a safeguard that allows such operators to join the case, but the lack of a notice requirement under the law may “render this safeguard, at best, useless.”

Mind you nobody seems to dispute that the sites being targeted aren’t anything other than platforms for facilitating mass copyright infringement and so far there have been no clear examples of abuse by Rights Holders. Meanwhile ISPs and Rights Holders continue to count the ever rising costs of imposing such blocks in the first place (here).

Add to Diigo
Mark Jackson
By Mark Jackson
Mark is a professional technology writer, IT consultant and computer engineer from Dorset (England), he also founded ISPreview in 1999 and enjoys analysing the latest telecoms and broadband developments. Find me on Twitter, , Facebook and Linkedin.
Leave a Comment
2 Responses
  1. Avatar dragoneast

    Bet this is one of the EU Regulations that the Murdochs won’t want to get rid of in their post-Brexit plan!!!

  2. Avatar Steve Jones

    Is this really a danger? Any site operator who was unfairly blocked has he option to counter-sue for compensation. Of course it’s not viable for small operators, but is there any evidence that this is going on?

    Of course there have been examples of sites being unfairly back-listed by the clean-feed type processes as mistakes and mis-classifications are made from time-to-time. A court procedure should give more visibility than that process which is inherently somewhat secretive as it deals with illegal content.

Comments RSS Feed

Javascript must be enabled to post (most browsers do this automatically)

Privacy Notice: Please note that news comments are anonymous, which means that we do NOT require you to enter any real personal details to post a message. By clicking to submit a post you agree to storing your comment content, display name, IP, email and / or website details in our database, for as long as the post remains live.

Only the submitted name and comment will be displayed in public, while the rest will be kept private (we will never share this outside of ISPreview, regardless of whether the data is real or fake). This comment system uses submitted IP, email and website address data to spot abuse and spammers. All data is transferred via an encrypted (https secure) session.

NOTE 1: Sometimes your comment might not appear immediately due to site cache (this is cleared every few hours) or it may be caught by automated moderation / anti-spam.

NOTE 2: Comments that break our rules, spam, troll or post via known fake IP/proxy servers may be blocked or removed.
Cheapest Superfast ISPs
  • Hyperoptic £20.00 (*22.00)
    Avg. Speed 50Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
  • Direct Save Telecom £22.95 (*29.95)
    Avg. Speed 35Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
  • Origin Broadband £23.00
    Avg. Speed 35Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
  • Vodafone £23.00
    Avg. Speed 35Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
  • SSE £23.00 (*33.00)
    Avg. Speed 35Mbps, Unlimited (FUP)
    Gift: None
Prices inc. Line Rental | View All
The Top 20 Category Tags
  1. BT (2464)
  2. FTTP (2093)
  3. FTTC (1631)
  4. Building Digital UK (1574)
  5. Politics (1380)
  6. Openreach (1378)
  7. Business (1207)
  8. Statistics (1077)
  9. FTTH (1014)
  10. Mobile Broadband (1006)
  11. Fibre Optic (957)
  12. Ofcom Regulation (902)
  13. Wireless Internet (884)
  14. 4G (874)
  15. Virgin Media (843)
  16. Sky Broadband (586)
  17. EE (577)
  18. TalkTalk (563)
  19. Vodafone (497)
  20. Security (402)
New Forum Topics
Promotion
Helpful ISP Guides and Tips
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
Sponsored

Copyright © 1999 to Present - ISPreview.co.uk - All Rights Reserved - Terms , Privacy and Cookie Policy , Links , Website Rules , Contact