IFPI's anti-piracy strategy leaks

A 30-page document containing the master anti-piracy strategy for IFPI (the umbrella group for all the record labels' national associations, like the RIAA and BPI) has leaked. The document, written by IFPI chief anti-piracy officer Mo Ali, has gotten into the hands of TorrentFreak. TorrentFreak's Enigmax summarizes the document in some detail:

Dealing with Internet service providers

In common with cyberlockers, IFPI have a set of rules they’d like to impose on Internet service providers. According to the industry group, ISPs should not provide Internet access to infringing sites, services or even unidentified customers. Furthermore, ISPs are required to “Implement a system of graduated response for infringing P2P users including warnings to an effective deterrent sanction.”

Site Blocking

ISPs are also required by IFPI to block access to infringing sites and services “located outside the local jurisdiction.” The chart below shows where blocking orders have been obtained (prior to April 2012) and how they are carried out.

Surprisingly, despite reports mounting to the contrary, IFPI seems to think that site blocking is an almost perfect solution to counter infringement.

“The effectiveness of such a ‘block’ will depend on the determination of the ISP subscriber and the content/website provider to maintain access to each other and to use circumvention techniques to bypass blocking techniques,” they write.

“There is evidence to suggest that there is limited (between 3% and 5%) adoption of these circumvention techniques although subscribers with more technical knowledge could look to circumvent ISP controls using virtual private networks (VPN) or anonymous proxies.”

Leaked Report Reveals Music Industry’s Global Anti-Piracy Strategy (via /.)


  1. one way to make that 3% to 5% to increase is to make it the only way to get to Breaking Bad.  there was a time when bittorrent and vuze were considered “technical”

    1. The copyright industry’s determination to prevent paying customers access to legitimate goods is nearly incomprehensible to me.  That is, until I realize that the copyright industry can’t see past its own nose, or understand anything that happened more recently than 1960.  Then it makes sense.

      When they see the internet, they think it’s a commercial construct, when, in reality it’s a social and cultural phenomenon.  You can’t educate people into changing their views on morality.  Especially when Sesame street and Mr. Rogers taught us from a young age to share whatever we can spare.

      File sharing is much closer to communication than any economic exchange.  And while banning a product usually causes a black market to spring up, banning communication always prompts massive resistance in the general population.  They have a better chance at stopping the earth’s rotation than preventing people from sharing, copying, and consuming, and doubly so if their business models don’t allow them to take advantage of global availability and demand for anything that can be made into data.

  2. “ISPs are also required by IFPI…”

    Required? When did IFPI become a government agency…aside from being in bed with the Department of Justice, the USTR, and particular Congresscritters and writing the laws that their Congresscritters push…?

    1. It seems more to me like the quote should be: “The IFPI feels unjustly entitled to require of ISPs…”

      It’s just blindingly ironic how the IFPI/**AAs bitch and moan about how kids these days act as if they’re entitled to get whatever they want whenever they want.  The production companies could make boatloads of filthy lucre if they offered legitimate offerings the public demands.  People are going to get what they want one way or another, and the **AAs are only tying their own nooses by not taking advantage of such an obvious opportunity.  Instead they waste all of their money on ineffective enforcement and DRM that punish the legal buyers and have no effect on copyright infringers.

      It’s almost a bait-and-switch.  Except there’s no legitimate product to buy, and switch is hickory.

      1. It’s always ironic when they bypass democratic processes by directly influencing the people’s (supposed) representatives in order to pass unjust laws and then the people bypass those unjust laws in response. “We bought those laws fair and square!”

    1.  Sure. Anytime you like. Prior to 1995, all sorts of people were setting up their own networks, connecting those to larger networks.

      I can tell you that it is costly. One month my phone bill was almost $500 (US). That was when I decided feeding my family was more important.

  3. Can I just say, “F*CK the IFPI”. ;)

    Just loved the last sentence about limited take up of circumvention techniques in the light of the recent new article about how use of BT has actually increased in the UK since the ISP block on TPB.

  4. Before consumer ISPs were just fat-pipe providers obsessed with speed, they actually publicised their custom features in order to stand out. Here’s a killer feature: automatic VPN. Whenever you connect, you’re automatically tunneled to your country of choice. You can have custom site/country maps (i.e. comedy central/US, bbc/UK etc), all silently done for you. I don’t want the hassle to deal with additional VPN bills and clients on top of my existing ones for the pipe, just add £5 or 10/m to my existing bill; most OSs support most VPN protocols out of the box nowadays, so it can’t be that hard.

    I’d drop good dollars on kickstarter for such a company, which is becoming more and more necessary in the UK and abroad. It would slowly rewire the internet with privacy tools for everyone.

Comments are closed.