DOCSLIB.ORG

A Proposed Legislative Framework to Protect Digital Copyright from End User Infringement on the Internet in Thailand: a Comparative Approach

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Proposed Legislative Framework to Protect Digital Copyright from End User Infringement on the Internet in Thailand: a Comparative Approach A PROPOSED LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK TO PROTECT DIGITAL COPYRIGHT FROM END USER INFRINGEMENT ON THE INTERNET IN THAILAND: A COMPARATIVE APPROACH PRASERT JARUNRATANASRI A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of Nottingham Trent University for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy October 2016 “This work is the intellectual property of the author. You may copy up to 5% of this work for private study, or personal, non-commercial research. Any re-use of the information contained within this document should be fully referenced, quoting the author, title, university, degree level and pagination. Queries or requests for any other use, or if a more substantial copy is required, should be directed in the owner(s) of the Intellectual Property Rights.” Abstract This thesis argues that Thailand does not have adequate specific legal remedies to protect copyright work on the internet, for example, the use of copyright content on public websites or file-sharing platforms. The aim of the study is to construct a legal framework to provide effective copyright protection remedies. In particular, more effective remedies are needed for copyright infringement by end-users using client-server and Peer-to-Peer (P2P) file sharing technology. In terms of methodology, this thesis is documentary research. The thesis employs a comparative system legal approach. It compares Thailand’s Copyright Act (No.2) B.E.2558 (CA 2015) with digital copyright enforcement systems in two foreign jurisdictions: (1) the Notice and Takedown (N&T) system of the United States; and (2) the Graduated Response (GR) of France. It examines and compares functional aspects between the CA 2015 and N&T as applied to the client/server technology. The same comparative system method is also employed with respect to digital copyright infringement under the CA 2015 compared with the GR system as it applies to P2P technology. The thesis constructs a proposal for a more effective legislative framework to protect copyright on the internet for Thailand. The thesis finds that the practical enforcement problems relating to both client/server and P2P end user infringers in the online environment is threefold. First, it involves fast widespread distribution of content. Second, there is a large number of potentially infringing internet end users. Third, there are significant difficulties in identifying an actual infringer. The author argues that Thailand’s CA 2015 court procedure is not suitable because it is slow, costly and does little to solve any of the aforementioned problems. The thesis finds that generalised characteristics of a suitable enforcement remedy should include several elements, namely, end user educative and awareness- raising functions and gradually increasing legal sanctions such as warning, fines as well as internet access restriction. It is recommended that the N&T and GR remedies in use in the US and EU respectively be adopted in Thailand with certain adjustments to suit the Thai context and replace existing unwieldy criminal and civil litigation. To this end, it is recommended that in order to overcome the difficulty of infringer identification, a new internet subscriber’s duty should be introduced in Thailand. I Acknowledgements This thesis would never have been fulfilled without the encouragement of many people. I am grateful to my supervisors, Dr. Janice Denoncourt, Dr. Elizabeth Chadwick and Professor David Ong for reading various drafts, discussing complicated issues; and providing comments, guidance and all other supports. For four years, all of these have illuminated my knowledge and the understanding of PhD study, and have greatly contributed to the success of my PhD thesis. I am privileged to work under their supervision. Many thanks are also due to academic and non-academic staff of Nottingham Law School and Graduate School for providing support academically and administratively throughout the course of my study. I would also like to thank my parents, Mr.Thongchai and Ms. Somchit Jarunratanasri, who are the most important persons in my life and who are always my motivation of all time. I thank my sister and brothers and their families who have taken good care of my parents in Thailand while I could not do so. Special thanks go to my own family, my wife Onusa Krisanalome Jarunrattanasri and my daughter Jittibhorn Jarunratanasri, who always stand beside me in any difficult situation and inspire the positive side of my life here in the UK. The language in the PhD thesis would not have been more precise and smooth without assistance from my proof reader, Mr. Alan Kitson, who is also my friend, my English teacher and my daughter’s English and Spanish teacher. I would like to thank him for all of these contributions and, many times, his encouragement. I would not have had an opportunity to study PhD and to complete the thesis without permission and financial support from the office where I work, the Thailand Office of Attorney General. I would like to express my gratitude to the office, to all Thai tax payers and to my mother land, Thailand. Finally, the most appreciation is for the Lord Buddha and his disciples (Buddhist saints) whose teaching (Dharma) enlightens my wisdom, discloses the focus on the present moment, not the past and the future, and helps me abandon ignorance and other negative thoughts. This relieves me from stressfulness and confusion, not to mention health issues such as migraine, gastritis, eye strain. I would not have made it without them and it is to them that I dedicate this thesis. II Table of Contents Abstract...........................................................................................................................I Acknowledgements.........................................................................................................II List of Abbreviations....................................................................................................VIII List of Tables.................................................................................................................XII List of Figures................................................................................................................XII Chapter 1: Introduction ................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Motivation for the Research................................................................................ 1 1.3 Aim of the Thesis ................................................................................................ 4 1.4 Objectives of the Thesis ...................................................................................... 4 1.6 State of the Field and Deficits in the Current Research and Literature and Contribution to the Knowledge........................................................................................... 13 1.7 Scope of study .................................................................................................. 13 1.7.1 End users accessing internet at home. ............................................................... 13 1.7.2 No Technological Protection Measure (TPM) .................................................... 14 1.7.3 Domestic Infringement, not International. ........................................................ 14 1.7.4 Copyright Infringement Exception Exclusion ..................................................... 14 Chapter 2: Justification for Digital Copyright Protection Remedies and Technological Aspects of Protection of Copyright on the Internet ...................................................... 15 2.1. Justification and Characteristics of Digital Copyright Protection Remedies......... 15 2.1.1 The Notice and Takedown (N&T) System ........................................................... 15 2.1.2 The Graduated Response System (GR) ............................................................... 20 2.2 Current Trends in the Field of Digital Infringement ............................................ 25 2.2.1 Client-Server Protocol ........................................................................................ 25 2.2.2 Store-and -forward System ................................................................................ 27 2.2.3 Peer-to-Peer Protocol ......................................................................................... 28 2.3 Legal Online Copyright Enforcement Techniques and Remedies ......................... 31 2.3.1 Notice and Takedown ......................................................................................... 31 2.3.2 Suspension and De-subscription of an Internet Account ................................... 31 2.3.3. Traffic Management .......................................................................................... 32 2.3.3.1. Traffic Shaping or Bandwidth Shaping .................................................................... 32 2.3.3.2. Traffic Capping or Bandwidth Capping ................................................................... 33 III 2.3.4 Blocking (IP Address, URL, Site, Port and protocol) ........................................... 34 2.3.5 Content Identification and Filtering ................................................................... 35 2.3.6 Other techniques and measures ........................................................................ 36 2.4 Infringement Detection and Identification
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Copyright Alert System: a Potential Unfair Burden on Small Business Owners, 23 J
    Journal of Law and Policy Volume 23 | Issue 1 Article 8 2014 The opC yright Alert System: A Potential Unfair Burden On Small Business Owners Rachel Schneidman Follow this and additional works at: https://brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/jlp Recommended Citation Rachel Schneidman, The Copyright Alert System: A Potential Unfair Burden On Small Business Owners, 23 J. L. & Pol'y (2014). Available at: https://brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/jlp/vol23/iss1/8 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at BrooklynWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Law and Policy by an authorized editor of BrooklynWorks. THE COPYRIGHT ALERT SYSTEM: A POTENTIAL UNFAIR BURDEN ON SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS Rachel A. Schneidman* The Copyright Alert System (CAS) confers on Internet Service Pro- vider’s (ISPs) the power to use “mitigating measures” against alleged copyright infringers in order to discourage piracy. This power is a result of a voluntary agreement between the ISPs, the Motion Picture Associa- tion of America, and the Recording Industry Association of America. Alt- hough the effectiveness of the CAS and the privacy concerns it raises have been analyzed in academic literature, the possible encumbrance of the CAS on small business owners has not been sufficiently considered. This Note argues that while the CAS may be a valuable tool in im- peding online piracy, it has the potential to unfairly burden small busi- ness owners. Specifically, this Note asserts that the CAS’s scope should be expanded to include all broadband users, including residential and business users of every size.
    [Show full text]
  • Internet Service Providers in Thailand
    Internet Service Providers In Thailand: Evaluation of Determinants Affecting Customer Loyalty By Student 2 A dissertation submitted for the Masters in Business Administration The Business School University of Roehampton 2011 Declaration Form The work I have submitted is my own effort. I certify that all the material in this Dissertation, which is not my own work, has been identified and acknowledged. No materials are included for which a degree has been previously conferred upon me. Signed Date (Saruta Tangjai) i The Abstract Recently, the Internet service industry in Thailand has been developing and improving their marketing strategies to retain existing customers and create new ones because of a highly competitive market. It is significant for Internet service providers to consider customer satisfaction and customer loyalty in order to help their businesses develop a competitive edge and increase their brand value. In addition, customer loyalty can be a significant factor that helps an Internet service provider increase its profits and create more competitive advantages in the long-term (Oliver, 1999: Lin and Wang, 2006). This research aims to explore the determinants, which affect customer loyalty in the context of Internet service providers in Thailand. A questionnaire survey was conducted with a sample consisting of Thai Internet users in the capital city, Bangkok. The determinants that affect customer loyalty have been tested and analyzed using several approaches so as to explore the significant determinants and understand relationship between the determinants and customer loyalty. The determinants that were analyzed in this research are tangible, reliability, responsiveness, assurance, empathy, pricing, switching cost, trust and brand image.
    [Show full text]
  • FAQ's on the Center for Copyright Information and Copyright Alert
    FAQ’s on The Center for Copyright Information And Copyright Alert System 1. How significant is online content theft? • Content theft is estimated to cost the U.S. economy $58 billion, 373,000 American jobs and $16 billion in lost employee earnings every year, and to cost federal, state and local governments $2.6 billion each year in lost tax revenue. However, data suggests1 that most users (up to 70%) would stop content theft once alerted that it is occurring, that it is illegal and that there are consequences associated with continuing to engage in it. A new educational center and system of alerts – similar to credit card fraud alerts – will help address this problem. The alerts will let subscribers know when their accounts have been identified for possible content theft, advise subscribers of the serious consequences associated with it, and encourage them to stop it from occurring again. 2. What is the Center for Copyright Information? • The Center for Copyright Information (“CCI”) will focus on educating subscribers about the importance of copyright protection and lawful ways to obtain movies and music online. The Center will also help to develop and confirm “best-practices” for a new system of progressive Copyright Alerts, similar to credit card fraud alerts, which will alert subscribers when potential content theft is identified on their Internet accounts. The Center is being established jointly by the film, music, and television industries in partnership with Internet Service Providers (ISPs) and will benefit from guidance by consumer advocates and technical experts serving on its advisory committee or providing other expert services.
    [Show full text]
  • History of the Internet-English
    Sirin Palasri Steven Huter ZitaWenzel, Ph.D. THE HISTOR Y OF THE INTERNET IN THAILAND Sirin Palasri Steven G. Huter Zita Wenzel (Ph.D.) The Network Startup Resource Center (NSRC) University of Oregon The History of the Internet in Thailand by Sirin Palasri, Steven Huter, and Zita Wenzel Cover Design: Boonsak Tangkamcharoen Published by University of Oregon Libraries, 2013 1299 University of Oregon Eugene, OR 97403-1299 United States of America Telephone: (541) 346-3053 / Fax: (541) 346-3485 Second printing, 2013. ISBN: 978-0-9858204-2-8 (pbk) ISBN: 978-0-9858204-6-6 (English PDF), doi:10.7264/N3B56GNC ISBN: 978-0-9858204-7-3 (Thai PDF), doi:10.7264/N36D5QXN Originally published in 1999. Copyright © 1999 State of Oregon, by and for the State Board of Higher Education, on behalf of the Network Startup Resource Center at the University of Oregon. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution- NonCommercial 3.0 Unported License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/deed.en_US Requests for permission, beyond the Creative Commons authorized uses, should be addressed to: The Network Startup Resource Center (NSRC) 1299 University of Oregon Eugene, Oregon 97403-1299 USA Telephone: +1 541 346-3547 Email: [email protected] Fax: +1 541-346-4397 http://www.nsrc.org/ This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. NCR-961657. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.
    [Show full text]
  • Time Warner Copyright Infringement Notice
    Time Warner Copyright Infringement Notice Deviate and unreproached Brandy herries her blungers catechize damn or smuggled misguidedly, is Cyril silver-tongued? Sander is flatwise pustulant after exhilarant Tann scruples his chondriosome tabularly. Tyrone is anamnestically hypersthenic after morphological Isidore spook his quarreller longways. Time Life and fear Time Life logo are registered trademarks of Time Warner Inc. Nobody gets sued for illegally downloading movies right. The ISP refused to forward Rightscorp's notices of infringement to Cox customers. Learn more than courts should never even democracy itself and time warner may appropriately be the burden of. To prove copyright infringement the plaintiff must show 1 that the defendant. The aisle led if the creation of the mile for Copyright Information CCI. Notice-takedown-putback procedures related to alleged copyright infringement. Now either have adults who see infringement as medicine business model. Warner Music Group WMG Comments Submitted in number to US. Imperial residential accounts, copyright infringement notices to challenge jurisdiction determinative in their copyrights are infringed, evaluated the evolution or conflicting lines or the blocking. Copyright Alert System CAS was whether voluntary industry effort will educate and penalize internet. A recent DMCA copyright complaint to Google filed on behalf of Warner Bros by. Verizon says customers who such a fifth violation notice damage have. This includes companies like Time Warner Cable Comcast Xfinity AT T. Warner Bros Fan Creators and Infringement Claims The main Side. Help but was smoke a copyright infringement notice from ISP. Will the cost Industry both To Win Its Copyright Battle. This notice states that the copyright owner believes that arrive are hosting and.
    [Show full text]
  • Information & Communication Technologies Thailand Market Study
    Information & Communication Technologies Thailand Market Study APRIL 2018 © Copyright EU Gateway | Business Avenues The information and views set out in this study are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of the European Union. Neither the European Union institutions and bodies nor any person acting on their behalf may be held responsible for the use which may be made of the information contained therein. The contents of this publication are the sole responsibility of EU Gateway | Business Avenues and can in no way be taken to reflect the views of the European Union. The purpose of this report is to give European companies selected for participation in the EU Gateway | Business Avenues Programme an introductory understanding of the target markets countries and support them in defining their strategy towards those markets. For more information, visit www.eu-gateway.eu. EU Business Avenues in South East Asia Central Management Unit Thailand Market Study April 2018 Submitted to the European Commission on 6 April 2018 Information & Communication Technologies – Thailand Market Study - Page 3 of 207 Table of Contents_Toc511739543 LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................................................................... 5 LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................................................ 6 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS .......................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Charter Spectrum Notice of Copyright Infringement
    Charter Spectrum Notice Of Copyright Infringement Davis educating his chauffeuse nichers thrasonically, but quartered Stanfield never pulverising so loose. Judicial and apprehensible Kenneth braised consumptively and clutch his abstention intractably and tracklessly. Yehudi often discuss spinally when unattainted Foster melodized past and braked her alps. There must be of charter communications operating credit for the transaction in a home where they do next and choose what cox Or abduct any product identification proprietary copyright or other. This website is vast service of Charter Communications Inc andor its respective subsidiaries providing the. While many users panic when receiving infringement notices from their ISP in the majority of cases there cause no need never worry Stopping sharing the lump in longevity usually solves the few and tie no additional sharing takes place to further warnings should be received for legitimate content are least. Alleging copyright infringement against an unnamed defendant Defendant1. And record labels who want over 10000 copyrights is fair clear message to ISPs like. Some policy forms an exclusion for trademark infringement. Recently changed commerce, infringement notice of charter spectrum copyright. Organization violated the Digital Millennium Copyright Act hurt when. Elizabeth Hart et al v Charter Communications Inc et al No. How tough my ISP tell below I'm downloading copyrighted files. Infringement claims continue to it brought frequently in the communications. Time Warner Subpoena Archives Torrent Lawsuit Defense. How to Pirate Software Without been Caught Gizmodo. Looking to a lawsuit attorneys fees logically flow as of infringement, net primarily include bandwidth being accused by them? For Android devices both clients work just got but the notable speed difference between BitTorrent and uTorrent in male former's favor gives it intelligent edge.
    [Show full text]
  • Piracy and Copyright Enforcement Mechanisms
    NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES PIRACY AND COPYRIGHT ENFORCEMENT MECHANISMS Brett Danaher Michael D. Smith Rahul Telang Working Paper 19150 http://www.nber.org/papers/w19150 NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138 June 2013 The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Bureau of Economic Research. At least one co-author has disclosed a financial relationship of potential relevance for this research. Further information is available online at http://www.nber.org/papers/w19150.ack NBER working papers are circulated for discussion and comment purposes. They have not been peer- reviewed or been subject to the review by the NBER Board of Directors that accompanies official NBER publications. © 2013 by Brett Danaher, Michael D. Smith, and Rahul Telang. All rights reserved. Short sections of text, not to exceed two paragraphs, may be quoted without explicit permission provided that full credit, including © notice, is given to the source. Piracy and Copyright Enforcement Mechanisms Brett Danaher, Michael D. Smith, and Rahul Telang NBER Working Paper No. 19150 June 2013 JEL No. D69,L1,L11,L8,L82,M31,O30 ABSTRACT Much debate exists around the impact that illegal file sharing may have on the creative industries. Similarly, opinions differ regarding whether the producers of artistic works should be forced to accept any weakening of intellectual property rights resulting from illegal file sharing, or if governments should intervene to protect these rights. This chapter seeks to inform these questions by outlining what we do and do not know from existing academic research.
    [Show full text]
  • Making Copyright Work for Creative Upstarts
    2015] 1021 MAKING COPYRIGHT WORK FOR CREATIVE UPSTARTS Sean Pager* INTRODUCTION Imagine you are a singer in a rock band. You are working hard to make a living, playing gigs, and waiting for that big break. Then one day, you are listening to the radio, and you are thrilled to hear one of your songs being played. Your excitement turns abruptly into anger, as you realize that your song is being played as part of a car commercial. You never approved this. So, you call up the car dealership to protest and demand that they pay you. But they brush you off, saying you should be grateful to get free pub- licity for your music. What to do? You cannot afford a lawyer, and even if you could, the cost of litigating this case in federal court dwarfs any license fee you might recover in damages.1 You never registered your copyrights in the song, so you are not eligible for statutory damages or attorney fees.2 And you cannot file a claim in state small claims court because copyright cases are subject to exclusive federal jurisdiction.3 Frustrated at your lack of recourse, you decide to quit music and go to law school instead.4 The point of this simple story is that the standard theory of copyright incentives comes with an Achilles heel. This theory justifies giving exclu- sive rights to authors because doing so will encourage them to create and * J.D. 1998, U.C. Berkeley Boalt Hall School of Law; A.B. 1989, Harvard University; LL.M.
    [Show full text]
  • Technical and Legal Analysis of Comcast's Network Management
    Technical and Legal Analysis of Comcast’s Network Management Practices by Satish Sunder Rajan Gopal B.Tech., Pondicherry University, 2009 A thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Colorado in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Master of Science Department of Interdisciplinary Telecommunications 2011 This thesis entitled: Technical and Legal Analysis of Comcast’s Network Management Practices written by Satish Sunder Rajan Gopal has been approved for the Interdisciplinary Telecommunication Program Paul Ohm Dale Hatfield Preston Padden Date The final copy of this thesis has been examined by the signatories, and we Find that both the content and the form meet acceptable presentation standards Of scholarly work in the above mentioned discipline. Satish Sunder Rajan Gopal (M.S, Telecommunications) Technical and Legal Analysis of Comcast’s Network Management Practices Thesis directed by associate professor Paul Ohm Comcast took a controversial decision by targeting P2P (peer to peer) specific protocols to control congestion in upstream traffic over its network. In 2008, FCC required Comcast to stop and reveal details of their current network management practices that violated Network Neutrality obligations. Many concluded that Comcast’s actions were against Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) standard. However, rules of network neutrality, a policy statement architected by FCC cannot be enforced. And IETF, a standards body does not control Comcast’s actions. This research focuses on a hypothetical infringement suit which shows how an internet service provider could be liable for infringement, when it deviates from IETF’s protocol standards and while controlling copyrighted material over its network.
    [Show full text]
  • Section 512 of Title 17 a Report of the Register of Copyrights May 2020 United States Copyright Office
    united states copyright office section 512 of title 17 a report of the register of copyrights may 2020 united states copyright office section 512 of title 17 a report of the register of copyrights may 2020 U.S. Copyright Office Section 512 Report ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The publication of this Report is the final output of several years of effort by the Copyright Office to assist Congress with evaluating ways to update the Copyright Act for the 21st century. The genesis of this Report occurred in the midst of the two years of copyright review hearings held by the House Judiciary Committee that spanned the 113th and 114th Congresses. At the twentieth and final hearing in April 2015, the Copyright Office proposed several policy studies to aid Congress in its further review of the Copyright Act. Two studies already underway at the time were completed after the hearings: Orphan Works and Mass Digitization (2015), which the Office later supplemented with a letter to Congress on the “Mass Digitization Pilot Program” (2017), and The Making Available Right in the United States (2016). Additional studies proposed during the final hearing that were subsequently issued by the Office included: the discussion document Section 108 of Title 17 (2017), Section 1201 of Title 17 (2017), and Authors, Attribution, and Integrity: Examining Moral Rights in the United States (2019). The Office also evaluated how the current copyright system works for visual artists, which resulted in the letter to Congress titled “Copyright and Visual Works: The Legal Landscape of Opportunities and Challenges” (2019). Shortly after the hearings ended, two Senators requested a review of the role of copyright law in everyday consumer products and the Office subsequently published a report, Software-Enabled Computer Products (2016).
    [Show full text]
  • How to Download Torrents Without Getting Caught by Comcast How to Bypass Comcast’S Bittorrent Throttling
    how to download torrents without getting caught by comcast How To Bypass Comcast’s BitTorrent Throttling. Back in August we reported that Comcast was limiting BitTorrent traffic. Comcast denied our allegations, even though we had some pretty solid evidence. However, a recent test by Associated Press confirmed what we have been reporting all along. The million dollar question remains, can Comcast subscribers get around this, and more importantly, how? Comcast is using an application from the broadband management company Sandvine to throttle BitTorrent traffic. It breaks every (seed) connection with new peers after a few seconds if it’s not a Comcast user inside your community boundary. According to some Comcast technicians, who were brave enough to tell the truth, these Sandvine boxes are installed at the cable modem termination system. As a result, it is virtually impossible to seed a file, especially in small swarms without any neighboring Comcast users. The good news is that there are several ways to fight back and get BitTorrent up and running again. Robb Topolski, a networking and protocol expert summed up some of the workarounds that reportedly solve the throttling issues. What is working. 1. Quite a few Comcast users report that forcing protocol header encryption completely eliminates the problems. This is the easiest solution since most BitTorrent clients support encryption. Please note that simply enabling encryption is not enough, it has to be forced. More details on how to do this can be found over here. 2. Another successfully workaround is to run BitTorrent over encrypted tunnels such as SSH or VPN.
    [Show full text]