steltz wrote:According to the MPA's own website:
"The Government has asked Ofcom to review section 17 of the Digital Economy Act. Ofcom are assessing whether the Act’s reserve powers to enable courts to block websites dedicated to copyright infringement could work in practice."
Note the wording "websites dedicated to copyright infringement". Even if the one piece mentioned was still in copyright and had somehow mistakenly got through the copyright review process, that hardly makes the whole site "dedicated to copyright infringment". If MPA's own wording of the Act is correct, then they can't read or comprehend, either willingly or unwittingly, the content.
That section of the Act (you can read it here
) actually refers to any website that "has been, is being or is likely to be used for or in connection with an activity that infringes copyright" which is insanely vague, and likely to cover IMSLP. However, it does go on to require that the site has a "substantial amount of material" that is infringing. Given IMSLP's lack of legal presence in the UK (I imagine), it probably wouldn't be hard for the MPA to convince a judge of this and get it blocked - the fact that IMSLP is in Canada would make no difference.
But that part of the DEA hasn't been brought into force yet, and the fact that Ofcom was asked to look into this was a clear sign that the government has abandoned this (and that is the impression I've been getting from MPs as well). In my opinion, the reason this is being rejected is because it would likely be illegal under the various European laws. The current plan involves secret negotiations between the UK government, ISPs and the copyright lobby (probably including the MPA) to get "voluntary" web-blocking schemes running - in which case there's no judge, no trial and no due process. But that's still in the future...
I guess that they went with directly contacting Go-Daddy following the success the US's ICE has had with that approach - and it is a pretty easy way of getting things done.
On the issue of taking down the email, under English law (not sure about Canada or the US), the copyright in that email is retained by the author, so it's probably infringing copyright from their point of view. There are also issues of breach of confidence/misuse of private information and so on. Most likely, though, they'd have to sue Go-Daddy for that, for presumably forwarding it to IMSLP.