Isps need the internet traffic of their customers not to filter copyright infringement. That considers the European Court of Justice. The blocking of infringing traffic has too many consequences, both for isps as subscribers.
The European Court has ruled in a case brought by the Belgian auteursrechtwaakhond Sabam was filed against the also Belgian isp Scarlet. Sabam wanted Scarlet internet traffic that infringes copyright would be blocking, but the isp did not. The European Court has Scarlet now prevailed; the blocking of internet traffic with infringing material goes too far.
According to the Court, would such a measure, namely, mean that Scarlet a complex filter system in life need to call, what costs a lot of money and the Scarlet in his work would reduce. Sabam wanted to, for example, that peer-to-peer traffic was analyzed and blocked.
Such a system would also infringe on the rights of users, according to the Court. Their internet traffic should be monitored, what an invasion of privacy. In addition, the users would be limited in their right to freely receive information, because the filter system, according to the Court, legal content may wrongly block.
Against all this, to weigh the rights of copyright holders. This is the measure which Sabam claims in violation of EU rules, according to the Court, and need Scarlet, no internet traffic to filter. Since the European Court of justice, the highest judicial authority in the European Union, the ruling large effects: in similar cases shall be judges of EU member states, the opinion of the Court heavy weight.
Possible is also the case of Brein against Ziggo and Xs4all by the ruling affected. Brain wants the isps, The Pirate Bay block, using dns and ip blockades. The requirement of Brain differs from that of Sabam; he is less far-reaching, because the Brain has no control on internet traffic wants.