Home Business “Clear Sky”: a new approach to pirate web sites

“Clear Sky”: a new approach to pirate web sites

1624
0
pirate-681x397
- Advertisement -

In front of the backdrop of discussing legislative anti-piracy initiatives, it is evident that a lot of processes have to be taken under control. The same conclusion is prompted by international experience. In many countries, the advertisers’ associations and companies valuing their reputation give up advertising on pirate resources.

A successful example of this anti-piracy campaign can be the Swedish advertisers’ association “Swedish Advertisers”, which affiliates over 600 companies. A good sign is that many Ukrainian advertisers are also about to take seriously the need to work in the legal framework and are ready to give up advertising on pirate web sites. But they face a problem at the same time: which web site can be recognized pirate? Which are the criteria to follow?
The anti-piracy initiative of the four largest media holdings “Clear Sky” came up with a proposal of a fundamentally new approach, i.e. the pirate resource can be identified by video frames. The White List will contain private video frames (information can be placed just by the owner) not claimed by right holders (SLM, Megogo, 1+1) and public video frames with content protection tools like automatic content and right holder identification, a notification system of right holders (Youtube).

white_list-en

The Black List will be completed by private video frames facing claims from right holders (FS, Seasonvar, Kinogo) and the public ones without any notification system (Ex.ua, Videocub, VK, Facebook).

black_list-entop-10-en
That was reported by Vitaly Chirkov, representing the StarLightMedia, during the presentation organized by the initiative “Clean Sky”. He explained that that was just their recommendation for advertisers, and the latter were free whether to cooperate and draw up a common list, or to decide individually. As may be supposed, there are still few of highly concerned advertisers. But they do exist. A representative of the Mondeliz Company informed about their experience and about elaborated intracompany criteria they applied to identify and recognize pirate resources.
Iryna Andrushchenko, representing the sales house, clarifies that the Black List is a more convenient option, as the White List introduces severe restrictions and narrows advertising platforms. Once the lists available, they can be added into the system for not to place advertising automatically on pirate resources.
Donald Townsend, Regional Intellectual Property Rights Attaché, recalls that according to the DCFTA international trade agreement signed by Ukraine, it must enable the notice and takedown system by January 1, 2016, aimed at blocking pirate resources. Ukraine has not done it yet, and it is unlikely to manage doing it by the beginning of 2016. Mr. Townsend states this is the requirement for Ukraine to be taken seriously in the international arena. According to him, it’s not worth being afraid of these innovations, as the system works in most countries without becoming an element of censorship or competition.
Ivan Shestakov, representing Megogo, spoke about the fruitless anti-piracy fight once again and drew attention to the piracy as a serious setback for legal business. Mr. Shestakov presented encouraging evidence that since the summer of 2014 there has been a high and sustainable increase in number of users who joined the legal video resource for not to sponsor pirates.

- Advertisement -
Previous articleLocking of RuTracker may be canceled
Next articleThe Ministry of Internal Affairs searches the Dnepropetrovsk office of the “Datagroup”