Background of Piracy in the Entertainment Industry
For a long time, the entertainment business has struggled with the issue of piracy. Piracy is a term used in the media and entertainment industries to describe the illegal duplication and dissemination of works protected by intellectual property laws (Bakhramovna and Bakhramovich 1132). Physical piracy involves creating and selling illegal copies of materials, whereas digital piracy involves distributing protected works through unofficial channels. Pirated media’s prevalence is primarily attributable to the widespread dissemination of digital media and online information.
The increase in internet piracy has facilitated the easy distribution of legally protected works. Further complicating matters for those who possess copyrights is that the internet allows their work to be shared while they remain anonymous. Arbitration is a preferable method of resolving copyright infringement disputes in the entertainment industry, offering advantages over traditional litigation and other forms of alternative dispute resolution, such as negotiation and mediation.
The entertainment business has incurred massive financial losses as a result of piracy. Due to piracy, legal sales of copyrighted works have dropped, leaving the copyright owners with little or no money (Tomczyk 11). Employment in the entertainment business, notably in the music and film industries, has been lost due to piracy. Additionally, piracy has reduced originality in the media business. A lack of protection for their works against piracy might discourage copyright holders from producing new material. Due to this, there may be a decrease in both the quality and amount of creative output.
Asia has some of the highest incidences of entertainment sector piracy among the world’s regions. In China, music and films are highly pirated, thus raising a global concern (Domon et al. 118). The region’s piracy rate declined as stronger European copyright laws and enforcement mechanisms were implemented (Mann). However, it remains a significant problem in nations like Russia, where copyright infringement rates are higher (Leston).
The entertainment business in North America has indeed faced substantial amounts of counterfeiting. Due to the high number of consumers of entertainment material, the United States has been a prominent victim of piracy (U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement). The prevalence of piracy varies widely between African nations. The government should collaborate with stakeholders in the entertainment industry to combat piracy.
Significance of the Topic
Counterfeiting has seriously affected the financial stability of many parties involved in the music industry. Due to piracy, legitimate content creators have lost considerable cash and employment (Cantatore 4). Piracy may have many further effects because the entertainment industry is essential to many countries. It may be difficult for owners of copyrights to enforce their rights in the entertainment business due to the complicated legal environment around piracy.
Piracy disputes may be settled more quickly and easily via arbitration (World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) 9). Rapid technological development has made piracy more accessible, and the legal system has fallen behind. Arbitration may be a versatile and adaptive method for settling piracy-related claims. Arbitration is useful for resolving intellectual property disputes and ensuring that creators are fairly paid (WIPO 10). It may assist in lessening the financial losses associated with piracy by offering a quick and effective mechanism for settling piracy issues, which can stimulate creative and innovative thinking.
Purpose of the Research
This study focuses on how arbitration is used to settle intellectual property infringement cases in the entertainment business. It aims to assess how well arbitration works to resolve piracy issues and investigate the benefits and drawbacks of this approach. Additionally, it seeks to evaluate the legitimate and useful consequences of arbitration in the entertainment business and determine the variables that impact arbitration in piracy cases (WIPO 9). The ultimate goal of this study is to thoroughly evaluate arbitration’s effectiveness in resolving entertainment industry piracy problems in a fair, practical, and cost-effective way.
Research Methodology
The research methodology for this study will involve a literature review and the analysis of court cases related to piracy disputes in the entertainment industry. The literature study will examine previous works on entertainment industry piracy, arbitration, and Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR). This analysis will offer an overview of the critical factors that affect the success of arbitration in cases of entertainment sector infringement. Case studies of litigation involving entertainment sector piracy will be analyzed. This research will examine the legal ramifications of using arbitration to settle piracy issues, the efficacy of arbitration in resolving pirate disputes, and the benefits and drawbacks of utilizing arbitration to settle disputes. Thematic analysis will examine the data gathered from the case studies and literature studies.
Impact of Piracy on the Entertainment Industry
Definition and Types of Piracy
Piracy illegally copies and distributes copyrighted materials, including videos, audio recordings, books, computer programs, and video games. It is when an individual shares, sells, or downloads someone else’s work without permission from the original creator (Oganyan et al., 736). Copyright infringement is a serious crime because it undermines the value of the intellectual property.
The illegal dissemination and dissemination of copyrighted works using portable phones, such as smartphones and tablets, is known as mobile piracy. Physical piracy includes the unapproved reproduction and dissemination of hard copies of protected content, such as CDs, DVDs, and books. Online piracy entails illegally distributing and sharing protected materials over the internet. It may encompass illegal streaming websites, peer-to-peer sharing, and using file-sharing networks. Live piracy is the unlawful recording and dissemination of live performances and sporting competitions. Physical copies, digital file exchange, and mobile device users all constitute a means of illegally spreading material.
Economic Impact of Piracy
The entertainment sector has been hit hard by the rise of piracy, which affects everyone, from artists to distributors to retailers. Piracy causes a reduction in earnings for the rightful creators of an original work by diverting sales away from authorized avenues (Atanasova 19). When companies lose money, they have less incentive to invest in new ideas, lowering the threshold for what customers may enjoy.
The software and digital media industries suffer economically from the unlawful downloading or duplicating of copyrighted digital items from the internet (Koay et al. 1). Businesses are discouraged from investing more resources into developing new products. The government’s capacity to supply essentials is diminished due to the decline in tax income. Stopping piracy is essential to the long-term success of the creative industries and the employment of people who rely on them.
Case Studies
The effects of piracy on the entertainment sector have been shown via case studies. Pirated movies, for instance, have a major impact on the box office due to this problem. The popular HBO series Game of Thrones was widely downloaded via torrent sites (Dick). The fact that the program could only be seen by subscribers to premium cable and streaming providers such as HBO and Hulu limited its intended customers. The program was reportedly copied over many times in 2022, costing the network significant revenue losses (Dick). The 2017 musical blockbuster Resurrections was likewise a primary target of online pirates (Watercutter). Even though it had only been out in theaters for a short period, the movie quickly came online and was downloaded illegally over a million times.
More events related to piracy have been experienced online in recent years. Being one of 2021’s most awaited films, Spider-Man: No Way Home was one of the year’s most often pirated films (Watercutter). The movie, which premiered in December 2021, was pirated online only days after its debut, and within a short time, millions of copies had been downloaded and circulated (Watercutter). These case studies have emphasized the considerable impact of piracy on the entertainment industry and exemplify the need for sustained initiatives to fight piracy and safeguard intellectual assets.
Penalties for Piracy
International Efforts to Combat Piracy
While piracy negatively impacts the entertainment industry worldwide, there have been continuing international attempts to counteract it for many years. Several nations 2010 signed the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) (New Zealand Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade). It is one of the most famous worldwide attempts to fight piracy. The purpose of the ACTA is to end intellectual property theft and imitation on a global scale by establishing uniform rules for their protection. The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) is another example of a worldwide initiative that brings nations together to create and adopt consistent intellectual property rules and standards (WIPO 4). The United Nations has formed the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) to further fight piracy and other types of crime.
Overview of Legal Framework
The legal foundation for piracy consists of many national and international laws prohibiting and punishing those who engage in it. Under international treaties such as the WIPO Copyright Treaty, the Berne Convention, and the TRIPS Agreement, countries must impose criminal punishments for piracy to protect property rights (Islam and Bhuiyan 1). Copyright, patent laws, and trademarks, among others, are entrenched in the codified legal systems of most nations, and their violations are punishable by fines, jail sentences, and financial penalties. The entertainment industry has used non-legal tactics to fight piracy, including developing digital copyright management tools, public education initiatives, and legal punishments.
Many copyright infringement events have happened, and the law has taken its course to handle them. Copyright infringement claims were made against Redbox by Disney in the 2018 lawsuit Disney Enterprises, Inc. V. Vidangel, Inc. case. Redbox bought Disney Combo Packs without Disney’s permission and resold the codes independently. As the Combo Packs indicated that the downloadable codes were not for resale, Disney claimed that Redbox’s conduct amounted to copyright and contractual violations (Disney Enterprises, Inc. V. Vidangel, Inc.). A judge sided with Disney, finding that Redbox’s unlicensed selling of digital download codes violated the complaint’s rights and was a contractual infringement, and Redbox was forced to pay Disney $250,000 (Disney Enterprises, Inc. V. Vidangel, Inc.). Copyright violations have serious consequences, as seen by these examples, and safeguarding intellectual property is crucial to the success of the media business.
Criminal Penalties
The criminal penalties for piracy are meant to be harsh and deterrent to both people and organizations. Anyone guilty of piracy in most nations risks jail time, monetary fines, or both. The United States has some of the harshest punishments in the world for copyright infringement. Criminal digital piracy is punishable by a maximum of five years in jail and penalties totaling more than $250,000 for people and nearly $1,000,000 for businesses under federal law (Justia). The legal consequences for piracy are comparable in other nations. The criminal sanctions for piracy are an effective deterrence against the crime and a way of punishing individuals who do it. They safeguard the interests of artists, producers, and other industry players.
Civil Penalties
Offenders might face both criminal and civil penalties for their pirate activities. The latter is meant to compensate the rightful proprietors of the original work for any financial losses they may have sustained as a consequence of the infringement. Damage awards, injunctions, and other civil punishments are available in criminal and civil proceedings. In legal lawsuits, for instance, copyright holders in the United States may ask for civil penalties of between $750 and $30,000 per infringing work (Justia). Copyright holders have the option of pursuing interim action to halt infringement. Holders of copyrights have the right to sue for monetary damages, an accounting of profits, and other relief in civil court in Great Britain, for instance.
Effectiveness of the Penalties
The severity of the penalty, the degree of compliance, and the unique setting of the infringement all have a role in how well punishments are implemented. It has been shown that harsh and persistent use of criminal sanctions, such as fines, imprisonment, and asset confiscation, may be an effective deterrent against piracy (Atanasova 14). Compensation for losses sustained due to piracy may be achieved by imposing civil sanctions, such as awarding damages in litigation. Punishments having little impact on reducing piracy might be due to the predominance of piracy in some geographic regions and poor enforcement laws.
Arbitration Process in Piracy Cases
Overview of Arbitration
Arbitration is a kind of ADR that enables disputing individuals to sort out any differences without going to court. For arbitration, a neutral third person, known as an arbitrator, examines arguments and proof from both parties and then renders a final, contractually enforceable judgment (WIPO 8). Disputes between copyright holders and accused infringers may frequently be resolved via arbitration.
When the parties have a continuing connection or desire to maintain anonymity, this approach might be preferable to conventional litigation due to its speed and lower expense. Specific contracts, such as distribution or licensing deals, mandate arbitration as a conflict resolution. In most cases, the arbitrator’s judgment is final and enforceable, subject to dispute solely if the arbitrator acted outside their jurisdiction, illegally, or in malpractice.
Advantages of Arbitration in Piracy Cases
In recent years, arbitration has become famous for settling legal disputes across many sectors, including the entertainment business. First, completing an arbitration takes far less time than a court case (WIPO 9). Cases involving piracy may take years to settle in court due to the complexity of the issues involved. Contrarily, arbitration may be finalized in a couple of months, resulting in quicker and cheaper outcomes for all parties.
Second, the costs of arbitration are usually lower than those of those involved in court cases (WIPO 9). Costs associated with litigation vary from those needed to hire attorneys and experts to those required to pay for court proceedings. Arbitration, however, often needs fewer stages in the procedure and less evidence, which may drastically lower expenses.
Third, the rules of arbitration are often more accommodating than those of a courtroom trial. The parties have complete control over the arbitration process, including who will act as the arbitrator, when and when the hearing will be, and what issues will be addressed (WIPO 16). Due to this adaptability, the parties may adjust the procedure to meet their requirements and preferences.
Fourth, arbitration hearings are held in secret and are not open to the public, which is extremely useful in piracy cases. Hence, the parties may avoid intense exposure and revealing confidential information. In the end, arbitration rulings are usually final and binding, leaving the parties with few avenues for further appeal. As a result, the conclusion of the disagreement may be clearer and more complete.
Arbitration Rules and Procedures
The procedure starts when a copyright holder submits a complaint to an arbitration agency. WIPO encompasses the rules and processes that arbitrators must follow while working with their organizations (WIPO 3). Timelines for filing, evidence, and arbitrator qualifications are all spelled out in the rules. The accused offender can refute the accusation with proof and defenses when a claim is made. The arbitrator will hear evidence, witness testimony, and legal opinions from both sides at a hearing. The arbitrator will then provide a final and binding ruling, called an award, to end the conflict.
Case Studies of Arbitration in Piracy Cases
In recent years, arbitration has emerged as a method for the entertainment sector to resolve piracy allegations. There was a domain name dispute at the center of Gravity Co. Ltd., Gravity Interactive, Inc. V. Registration Private, Domains by Proxy, LLC / Zhang Xiaodong case. Complainant Savant Systems LLC submitted a complaint against Respondent Wei Zhang, claiming that the respondent registered and utilized the disputed domain name in bad faith and violation of the complainant’s trademark rights. Both parties submitted their cases to the WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center to resolve the conflict.
The panel determined the similarity between the contested domain name and the complainant’s trademark, “Savant,” to be confusing. The arbitration panel found that the contested domain name was confusingly similar to the complainant’s property since it included the brand and the generic word “system” (Gravity Co. Ltd. v. Zhang Xiaodong). It was concluded that the contested domain name was confusingly similar to other names in the industry. According to the arbitrators, the respondent had no rights or genuine interests in the contested domain name. Respondent was not well recognized by the contested domain name and possessed no copyright or trade name privileges in the term “Savant.”
As a result of their investigation, the panel concluded that the respondent had registered and was using the contested domain name with malicious intentions. Given the above, the arbitrator ruled in favor of Savant Systems LLC’s complaint and ordered the transfer of the contested domain name, savantsystem.com (Gravity Co. Ltd. v. Zhang Xiaodong). This case illustrates the possible repercussions of registering and using domain names in bad faith and the need to safeguard trademark rights in the digital space.
More WIPO cases show how arbitration has effectively solved copyright cases. The Mou Limited v. Sun Yanqi case featured a disagreement over a domain name. The claimant was alleging fraudulent registration and usage by the respondent and seeking transfer of the domain name from the latter to the former. Respondent claimed they were not using the domain dishonestly since they had a genuine interest in it. After a determination that the complainant had enough proof, the domain name was transferred to the complainant. This case illustrates why it’s crucial to safeguard intellectual property rights and how arbitration may be used to resolve disagreements over domain names effectively.
Arbitration is an effective way through which piracy cases can be amicably solved. Two parties disagreed about using copyrighted software in the Helena Revoredo Delvecchio, Prosegur Security Company, SA v. Raquel Nieto Mena case. A software developer claimed that the defendant illegally installed its program on many computers without purchasing a license. Respondent said that it had acquired legal software licenses, refuting the charges. The arbitrator concluded that the respondent violated the complainant’s copyright by installing the software without a valid license. The respondent was fined and prohibited from using the program by the court. The arbitrator further ruled that the respondent must pay the arbitration fees.
When arbitration is properly enforced, many copyrights-related cases can be amicably solved. The Netherlands corporation filed Compagnie Générale Des Etablissements Michelin v. Contact Privacy Inc. Customer 0150017794 / Milen Radumilo against the Canadian client. The former claimed that the latter had acquired and used a domain that was the same or confusingly comparable to the complainant’s brand. The respondent claimed he was genuinely interested in the domain name and was using it properly. The single arbitrator ruled that the respondent had no rights or legitimate interests in the domain name and had registered and utilized it in breach of trust. The arbitrator agreed with the complaint and issued a transfer order for the domain name.
Limitations of Arbitration
Arbitration has several benefits over other methods for settling piracy claims, but it does have certain drawbacks that must be addressed. One of the arbitration’s key drawbacks is that it may be more costly than other forms of conflict settlement, such as mediation or negotiation (Goldberg et al. 273). This is because arbitration usually calls for the parties to pay an arbitrator, an expert in piracy, and may call for extra fees to cover administrative expenditures. Additionally, the cost of gathering and presenting evidence may be rather significant. Arbitration may be more time-consuming than some dispute settlement processes. The parties must unanimously agree upon the choice of arbitrator, the arbitration procedure, and the outcome.
Arbitration in piracy cases may not effectively deter future piracy, a key disadvantage of the process. Arbitration might take longer than some methods of dispute settlement since its evidence requirements and process are sometimes more complicated (Goldberg et al. 273). Although arbitration may help resolve a disagreement between two parties, it may not get to the base of the issues that encourage piracy in the first place. Factors such as lack of enforcement power, ambiguous legal frameworks, and inadequate copyright protection fall under this category. Certain nations have weak judicial systems or do not acknowledge the legality of arbitration. It might make it difficult to get an arbitration award enforced. Arbitration rulings and the recovery of damages might be difficult to implement in such cases.
Other Options for Settlement
Mediation
Mediation is another ADR tool that may be used to resolve piracy-related disputes. A neutral third party (the mediator) assists the parties in communicating with one another and working together to find a solution acceptable to everyone (Goldberg et al. 225). Unlike in arbitration, the mediator does not have the power to decide the outcome or enforce a solution.
As a neutral third party, the mediator helps bring the parties together and urges them to settle the dispute independently. The parties to a piracy issue may benefit from mediation since it gives them a voice in the result of the case while still maintaining their commercial connections. Mediation generally results in the quicker and more economical settlement of disputes than the time and money spent on court proceedings or arbitration.
As valuable as mediation might be, it does have certain limitations. The success of mediation depends on the dedication and cooperation of those involved (Goldberg et al. 226). Mediation may fail if one party is unwilling to engage in due diligence or is not motivated to resolve the conflict. Although mediation may lead to a satisfactory outcome for all parties, it is not guaranteed to produce a legally enforceable agreement. While it has drawbacks, mediation helps settle piracy disputes.
Negotiation
Successful agreements are reached via negotiation, which involves dialogue and compromise. Formal and informal negotiations may occur before, during, or after a conflict. Negotiation is a viable method for settling intellectual property conflicts between parties (Goldberg et al. 16). Parties may negotiate with one another directly or via legal professionals. License agreements and other types of remuneration may be discussed during talks between the disputants. By avoiding lengthy and costly legal actions, a person may save time and money by settling a disagreement via negotiation.
Negotiation, however, has its limits in solving disputes among parties. Parties’ unwillingness to compromise or unreasonable expectations of the result are possible problems (Goldberg et al. 87). Nevertheless, discussions may fail if the parties cannot agree that it is satisfactory to both. If the parties cannot resolve their differences via negotiation, they may need to seek other settlement methods like mediation or arbitration. However, negotiations are an effective method for settling intellectual property issues since they often produce unique and beneficial outcomes for all parties involved.
Other Forms of ADR
Parties may select from various ADR methods, including but not limited to arbitration, mediation, and negotiation, to settle their conflicts. Early neutral evaluation (ENE) is one ADR in which the parties submit their case to a third unbiased assessor, who then appraises the case’s shortcomings and strengths, allowing the parties to evaluate their positions better and perhaps resolve the dispute (Kimei 1).
Mini-trials are another type of ADR in which each side voluntarily presents its case to a third-party observer or board. The board then makes a judgment that is not legally binding on either side. Another ADR is collaborative law, in which the disputing parties and their lawyers collaboratively work toward a fair resolution. A conciliator helps parties find a solution via improved communication and identifying shared interests in an ADR process called conciliation. ADR approaches provide the parties to a disagreement a number of choices for settling the conflict outside of court, which may save them time and money.
Comparison of ADR Options
Arbitration is the superior choice compared to other forms of ADR due to its many benefits. One of the arbitration’s main advantages is that the arbitrator’s ruling is legally binding and must be abided by both parties (Goldberg et al. 260). It removes the danger inherent in non-binding ADR processes such as mediation and negotiation, where one or both parties might withdraw from the agreement.
Unlike mediation or discussion, where the parties’ decision may not be definitive or enforceable, arbitration gives finality and clarity to the parties. Since the parties to a copyright dispute may not want some details of their case made public, arbitration’s greater privacy than litigation may be a decisive factor. When resolving a dispute via arbitration, the parties may choose a neutral third party with experience and training in the subject matter technical details in a disagreement.
In contrast to the time-consuming and costly litigation process, arbitration offers a quicker and more efficient means of resolving disputes. As a result, the parties have more say over the pace of the proceedings and may typically achieve a settlement more quickly than if they went to court. It may be particularly significant in conflicts involving time-sensitive copyrighted material.
If the parties choose arbitration, they may select a neutral third party with experience and competence in the field of intellectual property at issue (Goldberg et al. 259). It is not always possible in court since judges may lack knowledge of specific intellectual property laws. Compared to negotiating or mediating, arbitration provides a more organized procedure. When going to arbitration, both sides submit their arguments to a third party, who will then decide based on the facts offered. As a result of the procedure’s organization, the parties might feel more confident that they have presented all of their relevant arguments and proof.
Conclusion
In conclusion, this research emphasizes the value of adopting arbitration or other forms of ADR to resolve copyright conflicts in the entertainment business. Legal challenges to arbitration awards are rare since the process is private and binding. The case studies show that arbitration is a viable option for settling copyright issues and cutting down on the time, money, and hassle of litigation. These results have significant consequences for the media and entertainment sector. Stakeholders need to develop faster and cheaper means of settling copyright disputes as the number of such cases rises in the industry.
Arbitration is a possible alternative to reduce the time and money spent on court proceedings. Empirical studies on the efficacy of arbitration in settling copyright disputes in the entertainment sector are needed, which is why this topic is recommended for further investigation. Research of this kind may help determine what makes arbitration successful or unsuccessful in various settings and identify best practices. Stakeholders in the entertainment business should advocate for and support arbitration to resolve copyright issues since it offers a faster and less expensive alternative to litigation.
Works Cited
Atanasova, Irina. “Copyright Infringement in Digital Environment.” The Journal of Law and Economics, vol. 1, no. 1, 2019, pp. 13–22. Web.
Bakhramovna, Yakubova Iroda, and Yakubov Aybek Bakhramovich. “Problems of Copyright Protection: Plagiary and Piracy on the Internet.” Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education (TURCOMAT), vol. 12, no. 4. 2021, pp. 1132–35. Web.
Cantatore, Francina. “Publishing and the Law: Copyright and Globalization.” Publishing and Culture, 2019, pp. 1–35. Web.
Compagnie Générale Des Etablissements Michelin v. Contact Privacy Inc. Customer 0150017794 / Milen Radumilo. Vol. D2018-1539, 2018. Web.
Dick, Jeremy. “Game of Thrones Remains the Most Pirated TV Series in 2022.” Movie Web. 2022. Web.
Disney Enterprises, Inc. V. Vidangel, Inc.,. Vol. 17-56665, 2018. Web.
Domon, Koji, et al. “Digital Piracy in Asian Countries.” Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, vol. 46, no. 1. 2019, pp. 117–35. Web.
Ferreira, Thinus. “House of the Dragon, Rings of Power and Star Wars Most-Pirated in 2022.” Life, 2023. Web.
Goldberg, Stephen B., et al. Dispute Resolution: Negotiation, Mediation, Arbitration, and Other Processes. 7th ed., Wolters Kluwer Law & Business, 2020.
Gravity Co. Ltd., Gravity Interactive, Inc. V. Registration Private, Domains by Proxy, LLC / Zhang Xiaodong. Vol. D2021-2765, 2021. Web.
Helena Revoredo Delvecchio, Prosegur Security Company, SA v. Raquel Nieto Mena. Vol. D2018-0026, 2018. Web.
Islam, Mohammad Towhidul, and Azhar U. Bhuiyan. “International Mechanism for Resolution of Conflicts in Intellectual Property Rights for Establishing Peaceful Global Order.” Principal Foundations for Global Peace: A Way Forward for Better Future (Genuine Publications & Media Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi)., 2022, pp. 1–16. Web.
Justia. Criminal Copyright Infringement. 2019. Web.
Kimei, Madeline. “Early Neutral Evaluation (ENE) and Its Importance for the Civil Justice System in Tanzania.” SSRN Electronic Journal, 2020, pp. 1–7. Web.
Koay, Kian Yeik, et al. “Digital Piracy among Consumers in a Developing Economy: A Comparison of Multiple Theory-Based Models.” Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, vol. 55, July 2020, pp. 1–10. Web.
Leston, Ryan. “Russia Reportedly Legalizes Piracy of Games, Movies, and More.” IGN. 2022. Web.
Mann, Colin. “Study: Digital Piracy Declining in Europe.” Advanced Television. 2021. Web.
Mou Limited v. Sun Yanqi. Vol. D2018-0989, 2018. Web.
New Zealand Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade. Anti Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA). Web.
Oganyan, V. A., et al. “Internet Piracy and Vulnerability of Digital Content.” European Research Studies Journal, vol. 21, no. 4. 2018, pp. 735–43. Web.
Tomczyk, Łukasz. “Evaluation of Digital Piracy by Youths.” Future Internet, vol. 13, no. 1. 2021, pp. 1–26. Web.
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. IPR Center, RIAA Launch Partnership to Combat Digital Piracy. 2022. Web.
Watercutter, Angela. “Spider-Man: No Way Home, Piracy, and the End of the Box Office.” Wired, 2022. Web.
World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). Guide to WIPO Arbitration. WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center, 2020.