Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Bell Wants Canada to Criminalize Pirate Streaming Services

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    4,540
    Satfix Buxs
    241,776
    Thanks
    4,059
    Thanked 7,025x in 2,728 Posts
    Items Crown Royal
Gift received at 11-09-2019, 09:07 PM from Putski
Message: Have a couple drinks on me..Sword

    Default Bell Wants Canada to Criminalize Pirate Streaming Services

    from ernesto at torrentfreak

    Canadian telecoms giant Bell is recommending that the Government should criminalize people who are involved with pirate streaming services, including those who advertise or sell pirate set-top boxes. The proposal is seen as a prime tool to combat online piracy. In the same submission, Bell also revives its call to institutionalize site blocking.
    To ensure that the Internet is able to function to the benefit of the broader public, the Government of Canada appointed an external panel to review Canada’s communications legislative framework.
    The panel is expected to release its findings next month, which will in part be based on input received from public submissions earlier this year.
    Thus far, most submissions have surprisingly been kept from public view. However, University of Ottawa professor Michael Geist filed an Access to Information Act request and will publish the responses he receives. The first one comes from Canadian telco Bell and stretches to 167 pages.


    Bell’s submission deals with a wide variety of topics ranging from online video regulations to online privacy requirements. For the purposes of this article, however, we focus on the company’s suggestions when it comes to piracy and copyright infringement.
    One of the Government’s prime policy priorities, according to Bell, should be to combat content piracy.
    “Canadian creators, the Canadian broadcasting system, and the Canadian
    telecommunications system do not have effective tools to protect the content that is central to the creative and digital economy against the rampant growth of digital piracy,” Bell writes.
    The submission goes on to cite various piracy studies that support this claim. It reports, for example, that 26% of all Canadians admit to having accessed pirated content online. In addition, it mentions that 15.3% of all Canadian households use set-top-boxes with piracy add-ons or access piracy subscription services.
    According to Bell, now is the time to address the online piracy issue and it provides two concrete proposals. The first one is aimed at tackling pirate online streaming services, including the previously mentioned streaming sites and set-top boxes.
    Bell equates this relatively new type of piracy to the boom in black market satellite piracy roughly three decades ago. At the time, lawmakers responded by updating the Radiocommunication Act to criminalize the decoding of encrypted signals and the possession and sale of devices intended for that purpose.


    “This stimulated law enforcement activity in the area of satellite piracy, which contributed to the investigation and shutting down of piracy operations and also had a significant deterrent effect,” Bell notes.
    The telco stresses that a similar response is now required to deal with the online streaming epidemic. Most pirate streaming services no longer rely on encryption but are based on rebroadcasting content over the Internet instead.
    This type of streaming activity should be criminalized in the Broadcasting Act, Bell recommends. Not just the services and sites that do the ‘broadcasting,’ but also people who advertise or sell related products.
    “Accordingly, we recommend that a provision be added to the Broadcasting Act making it a criminal offense for anyone subject to an exemption from the requirement to hold a license to knowingly operate, advertise, supply, or sell or offer to sell access to a distribution undertaking that retransmits broadcasting without lawful authorization from a programming undertaking.”
    Such an approach would concentrate criminal liability on commercially-motivated operators engaged in organized crime and would stimulate additional law enforcement activity to address this pressing threat,” Bell adds.
    This measure doesn’t appear to be aimed at end-users but will certainly affect pirate streaming sites, vendors of pirate set-top boxes, as well as those who promote them.
    The second anti-piracy proposal put forward by Bell is to make it possible for ISPs to block pirate sites more easily. This is the same plan proposed by Fairplay Canada Coalition last year, but with a twist.
    “By far the most important tool that modernized legislation should adopt is the ability for an independent authority to grant orders requiring all Internet service providers (ISPs) to disable access to sites that are blatantly, structurally, or overwhelmingly engaged in piracy,” Bell writes.
    This Fairplay blocking proposal was denied by the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) last fall, which noted that it lacks jurisdiction. According to Bell, this is something the Government could change through an update of the Telecommunications Act.


    Specifically, it wants the Government to amend current legislation to authorize the CRTC to approve and require Internet providers to disable access to sites that are blatantly, overwhelmingly, or structurally engaged in piracy.
    That blocking is not a perfect solution, shouldn’t matter. Even a partial reduction in traffic to pirate sites, as has happened in other countries, should already be rather effective, Bell argues.
    “A policy that reduces the total level of piracy by up to 40% from the level that would otherwise have prevailed, and that substantially increases the legal consumption of content, can only be considered incredibly effective. The fact that it does not eliminate 100% of piracy is not a justification for inaction,” the telco writes.
    Website blocking also finds support in a separate submission from Shaw Communications, another major Canadian telco. Similar to Bell, Shaw believes that an update to the Copyright Act is required to achieve that. The company, however, rejects a proposal to tax ISP subscriptions to support copyright holders.
    By criminalizing pirate streaming services and blocking pirate sites, Bell hopes to make a significant dent in Canada’s piracy rates. Whether the government’s expert panel will adopt these recommendations has yet to be seen.
    Many copyright holders are likely to side with Bell, but there is plenty of opposition as well. Michael Geist, for example, characterizes Bell’s submission as “self-serving in the extreme,” noting that it poses shocking risks to many stakeholders in Canada’s communication industry.

  2. The Following 18 Users Say Thank You to nobodyspecial For This Useful Post:


  3. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    596
    Satfix Buxs
    8,667
    Thanks
    405
    Thanked 489x in 243 Posts

    Default

    This comes as no surprise as you could see this happening from years ago. The Radio Communication Act ( RC Act ) only dealt with encrypted signals whether it be from Satellite or Cable. Years ago we were saying what are they going to do about the internet as TV programming started to shift there and was not regulated or covered by the RC Act.


    So here is their answer. To run & cry to the Government to create new laws against Internet streaming to protect their Financial interests. Then if they get new laws then they will run to the RCMP to blow smoke up their arses to go raid a whole bunch of folks just like they did for Satellite. It wasn't that long ago they were crying for stiffer penalties for the RC Act but that crying has stop has its rare nowadays that anyone gets charged with Pirating encrypted Sat Signals.



    Trying to stop Sat Pirates is one thing, trying to stop internet streaming is a different ball of wax. Go knock yourselves out. By the time if you ever get it under some control there could be some new technology for you to once again don your whinning hats off to the Government to complain about.




    GS2

  4. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Gunsmoke2 - GS2 For This Useful Post:


  5. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    9,895
    Satfix Buxs
    1,260,651,322,784
    Thanks
    3,734
    Thanked 12,085x in 5,693 Posts
    Items DevilBeef
Gift received at 01-24-2014, 04:26 PM from swanner
Message: Thanks for Your Input, with all the Hot Heads around.. Should be cooked in No Time..LOLDish
Gift received at 12-15-2013, 09:10 PM from holly2012
Message: From an Old FriendDog
Gift received at 10-30-2013, 12:15 AM from Just_angel
Message: love chloe xoxoxWhiskey
Gift received at 03-27-2013, 03:33 PM from thebeav
Message: found this behind the dumpster at the casino when i was looking for W H :)Heart
Gift received at 11-20-2012, 12:22 PM from Just_angel
Message: x0x0A Beer
Gift received at 11-06-2012, 03:58 AM from Styx_N_Stones
Message: I seem to have accumulated too many beers... LOL!Crown Royal
Gift received at 10-11-2012, 03:49 PM from Just_angel

    Default

    use a vpn

    DODGE the father

    RAM the daughter



    “Always do sober what you said you'd do drunk. That will teach you to keep your mouth shut.”

  6. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to dishuser For This Useful Post:


  7. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Posts
    10
    Satfix Buxs
    42
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2x in 2 Posts

    Default

    It's time for cable and sat companies innovate. (I am not sure how, but they are going to have to if they want to survive). The industry is where the music industry was back around 2005, and traditional cable and satellite companies are most likely to go the way of the record store.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •