Minute44 - Dan Schonhaar

Over the last few years loads of sites have popped up on the web offering links to the latest episodes of your favourite TV shows and to new movies (some of which have yet to see a worldwide cinema release.) I’m talking about stuff like peekvid.

In the past weeks however one of the UK’s favourites, TVlinks.co.uk has been shut down by FACT working with the Gloucestershire police and trading standards authority. The individual who owns the site, a 26 year old man from Cheltenham, has been arrested on charges relating to the facilitating of copyright infringement. These charges are brought despite the man having hosted no media on his own servers and also giving a disclaimer saying he has no responsibility for media he links to.

Unsurprisingly the backlash has started almost immediately with people loyal to TVlinks claiming that no crime had been committed and he was unfairly arrested. Even non-TVlinks users have had their two cents worth, saying that it was unfair to go after a relative small-fry when sites like Google and YouTube not only link to illegal content but host it on their servers as well. They feel that the only reason the major players haven’t been pursued is because they have so much money making them practically above the law and in this argument there is some truth. Both Google and eBay (owners of YouTube) have the money and resources to, if not shrug off the charges all together, engage any prosecuting agency in a legal battle for decades. Neither of those are attractive propositions, especially when the general public are footing the bill.

But I don’t think it’s just the chance of an un-winable or 20 year legal battle that made FACT go after the little guy. I feel there was some strategy here also. Look at the case of Jammie Thomas, a 30 year old woman in the US, who was recently convicted and fined a massive £220,000 for downloading 24 separate songs from the Kazaa network that were protected by copyright. Before this case it was, traditionally, the major downloaders (the ones who pull down several TB of data and are obviously distributing it for a profit) who got pinched. This obviously meant that small time users like Jammie Thomas were unafraid of being prosecuted and continued downloading the odd album here and there without much thought. Now, however, small users are scared. They’re looking over both shoulders and are worried about the possibility of a life-destroying fine. The message FACT are sending out with the prosecution of TVlinks is “Even the small fry is braking the law and we will come after him.”

But let’s look for a minute at the crime he has been charged with here. Certainly a lot of people think that there has been no crime committed and by posting a disclaimer he is removed of all responsibility. I however see quite clearly the crime he is being prosecuted for and although TVlinks will be missed (I love Heroes) I have to say the guy had it coming. He is clearly an accessory to copyright infringement. He is knowingly providing links to known illegal content and therefore generating profit for the hosts of those sites. It’s no different than a guy pointing people in the direction of a drug dealer he knows. Even if he takes no cut of the profits, he’s still assisting the drug dealer by generating business for him. Simple. In this case though, because the drug dealer is super-rich and has limitless resources it isn’t at all viable to go after him.

It really sucks that things are the way they are here because by all rights it’s the ones who host the illegal content that should be made to keep tighter controls on what they allow hosted. YouTube are sort of bowing to the pressure as every now and again you’ll get a message “Video has been removed due to a copyright infringement” or something along those lines which proves that they are keeping a watch on content in some capacity. It seems to be reactive rather than proactive though, like a user has to complain before a video is removed.

The agencies that police this sort of thing are government-run, which means that they are paid for by the tax payer. This creates a catch 22 situation. We want the real culprits dealt with but don’t want to pay for the massive costs associated with dealing with them.

Related Articles:

Guardian Unlimited - TV Links Shut Down for Linking

Channel Register - Cops pull plugs on TV Links, claim “facilitation of infringement”

The Register - TV Links Man was arrested under trademark laws