Bittorent Loses Again: A Recent Lithuanian BitTorrent Case and What It Means for the Construction of the E-commerce Directive

• Author: Rita Matulionyte - Mindaugas Lankauskas
• Position: Dr., LL.M. (Munich), Deputy Director, Law Institute of Lithuania - Researcher, Law Institute of Lithuania
• Pages: 179-189

Bittorent Loses Again

2013

179

3

Bittorent Loses Again

A Recent Lithuanian BitTorrent Case and What It Means for

the Construction of the E-commerce Directive

by Rita Matulionytė, Dr., LL.M. (Munich), Deputy Director, Law Institute of Lithuania

Mindaugas Lankauskas, Researcher, Law Institute of Lithuania.

© 2013 Rita Matulionytė and Mindaugas Lankauskas

Everybody may disseminate this ar ticle by electroni c means and make it available for downl oad under the terms and

conditions of the Digita l Peer Publishing Licence (DPPL). A copy of the license text may be obtaine d at http://nbn-resolving.

de/urn:nbn:de:0009-dppl-v3-en8 .

Recommended citation: Rit a Matulionytė and Mindaugas Lankauska s, BITTORENT LOSE S AGAIN: A Recent Lithuanian

BitTorrent Case and What It Means for the Cons truction of the E-commerce Directive, 4 (2 013) JIPITEC 3, 179

Keywords: BitTorrent, File Sharing, E-commerce Directive, Intermediary Liability, Internet Service Provider,

Hosting, Lithuania, Sweden, Finland, Linkomanija, Pirate Bay, Finreactor

A. Introduction: Copyright piracy

and enforcement in Lithuania

1

Copyright enforcement in cyberspace (the Inter-



in Lithuania, as in the rest of the world. There are

no reliable statistics on copyright violation rates in

Lithuania in general. In regard to software, accord-

ing to the survey conducted by the Business Soft-

ware Alliance (BSA), software piracy in Lithuania ac-

counted for 54 per cent of all software in 2011 (i.e.

more than half of the software has been acquired

and used illegally), whereas the commercial value

of unlicensed software had reached around 44 mil-

lion USD.1 In the regional context, Lithuania is not

unique, since the average piracy rate in Central and

Eastern European countries is 62 per cent.2 In the

music and audio-visual sectors, online piracy levels

are likely to be even higher.

2 The enforcement of online infringements in Lithu-

-

ing societies in Lithuania (LATGA, representing au-

thors, and AGATA, representing neighbouring rights

holders) have been individually consulting and as-

sisting members who are trying to protect their on-

line rights. Most disputes are solved through on-

  

procedures; hardly any infringement cases reach

the courts. The Lithuanian Anti-Piracy Association

(LANVA), the association primarily focused on soft-

ware piracy, has been more active and has initi-

ated several – unsuccessful – court proceedings in

 

S. B. was accused of illegally downloading Micro-

soft Windows 7 and making this software publicly

available on the Internet for non-commercial pur-

poses using BitTorrent protocol. However, the case

was dismissed due to procedural violations.3 As an-

other example, in 2012 the German company Digi-

protect Gesellschaft zum Schutz Digitaler Medien

mbH requested the main Lithuanian telecommuni-

cations company TEO to disclose the identities of

its customers for the purpose of starting proceed-

  

refused to disclose the information, Digiprotect ap-

proached the court. However, the Vilnius Regional

Court rejected the request, stating that revealing

Abstract: This article first discusses a

recent Lithuanian BitTorrent case, Linkomanija, with

its shortcomings and perspectives. It then compares

the outcomes of the Lithuanian case with recent

court practice in Scandinavian countries (the Swedish

Pirate Bay and Finnish Finreactor cases). Finally, it

poses some questions as to whether BitTorrent sites

should be qualified as hosting services under Article

14 of the EU E-commerce Directive (2000/31/EC) and

whether the application of the limited liability stan-

dard, as developed by the Court of Justice of the Euro-

pean Union, would be reasonable for BitTorrent file-

sharing services in general.