European Commission included IPFS in Counterfeit and Piracy Watch List

On the official website of the European Commission, the draft document was published some days ago, called Counterfeit and Piracy Watch List. In this document, the following fragments are placed:

(iv) Interplanetary File System

The Interplanetary File System (IPFS) is a distributed file storage system that enables the decentralised storage and sharing of content in a peer-to-peer manner, similar to BitTorrent. In this system, users act as nodes of the network, hosting and serving files and websites, each holding a portion of the overall data. IPFS provides a decentralised infrastructure that supports the development of various applications, including those based on blockchain technology. Unlike the World Wide Web, which relies on location-based addressing using URLs, IPFS employs content-based addressing using content identifiers (CIDs), which are hashes 25 of the content itself.

Internet users access content stored on IPFS in two main ways: either by installing an IPFS client software to become a node in the network or by utilising public or private IPFS gateways. Public gateways are openly accessible to everyone. IPFS gateways serve as a bridge between the IPFS network and applications that do not natively support the IPFS protocol and rely on standard web protocols like HTTP, such as web browsers. By allowing the use of standard web protocols, gateways facilitate easier access to IPFS-stored content for a broader audience.

The decentralised and global nature of IPFS makes tracking of the origin of infringing content difficult and limits takedown efforts. However, gateway operators can voluntarily implement content filtering measures, such as using lists of CIDs to block. Some stakeholders in the publishing industry have reported that services like Library Genesis (LibGen), Z-Library, and Anna’s Archive utilise IPFS to illegally distribute copyright protected content, including through public gateways.

(in Introduction)


3.2.4 Peer-to-peer and BitTorrent indexing websites

Peer-to-peer and BitTorrent indexing websites use the peer-to-peer file distribution technology to allow users to share content. The websites act as aggregators of peer-to-peer links, which users can search for and access via the website. When a user clicks on a link, the peer-to-peer technology allows the user to download media files stored on other users’ computers across the peer-to-peer network. A user in a peer-to-peer network downloads files from other users’ private storage place and makes their own files available for upload to the peer-to-peer network. Users offering a file are known as ‘seeders’ and they share these files with other users known as ‘peers’.


InterPlanetary File System (IPFS)

IPFS was reported by book publishers for inclusion in the Watch List. It is a decentralized peer-to-peer (P2P) network for distributing, storing and sharing content. Super Pirate and the major pirate networks, including Library Genesis (LibGen), Z-Library, Anna’s Archive are reported to use public gateways to host and distribute copyrighted materials on IPFS.


This document could only be considered as an implicit declaration of IPFS as a piracy tool. The legal prevention practices existing in most countries leave no doubts about the exact working mode the authorities would select: the preventive bans or explicit declaration of the whole technology with the ecosystem suspicious.

From the point of view of the health of FAIR ecosystem and internet community, this action, in my opinion, should be considered as a preemptive act over the freedom of speech and freedom of information interchange, cause a technology is an instrument, but not a social phenomenon.

So, should we prepare ourselves for a legal ban, at least in some countries? This question is now seeming open.

Copy of the document in IPFS :smirking_face: for the case it would be deleted from the European Commission’s Library website: bafybeifnmpdgchvllwlduufbb3mlxw63vjctwnlctzbrgu4rylx2o7mody

1 Like

cc @mosh as you might be interested in this ^

1 Like

At dClimate we have been using IPFS to replicate public ESA (European Space Agency) climate datasets to make them easier to discover and query, reducing the load on the Copernicus servers while exemplifying the principles of FAIR for research reproducibility. Making climate data more available is essential for addressing the climate crisis, the European Commission should be very aware of this.

We shouldn’t be defensive resigning ourselves to preparing for a legal ban, but rather being proactive and reaching out to policymakers/lawmakers to ensure common sense legislation prevails before this goes any further. I would be happy to speak with whomever or providing additional information to demonstrate how IPFS is a tool which improves collaborative research in everything from climate sciences to bioinformatics research. Feel free to ping me at david at dclimate.net

1 Like

They haven’t banned Bittorrent yet anywhere as far as I understand even if it can be equally difficult to track with the right tools. They’ll likely just focus on the gateways.

1 Like

I know that BitTorrent was banned, but in Australia as a technology, not the application, so we have a precedent about doung that

1 Like

@arcturus, thanks for pointing this out! I want to reach any stakeholder, but it will be way better if the buzzword could be at least agreed upon and openly published. After the presentation I gave on the FisMat conference (it will be shared very soon), it was not a great discovery that the interest in the scientific community about the decentralised technologies is very significant.

1 Like

Presentation shared: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/394054253_Distributed_Identification_of_Knowledge_How_Can_Decentralized_PIDs_Save_Human_Legacy

IPFS: https://bafybeidxld3ybaftkza5y3a6wqqjqitdsjdy43gxpooyrjibw3yutinp74.ipfs.dweb.link/FisMat%202025.pdf

1 Like

Apparently there was a consultation period and the book publishers went all-in against IPFS and no one cared to raise any objections so IPFS in general was included. Pretty unfair but maybe on the next iteration the IPFS Foundation and other people affected can get involved and try to set the record straight.

This is a frightening fact in the context of an increasing willingness to control technologies instead of use cases. I will write a post soon for PID Forum to reach the people involved in PID legally advised development, stating that the prospective technology is under legal pressure.

@arcturus, it seems the defensive behaviour would be the only variant for us since now… Anyhow, reaching out to the stakeholders is essential

2 Likes

The post is prepared and sent for the moderation.

1 Like

The PID Forum post has passed the moderators’ assessment and it lives now here:

@arcturus @mosh @hector it will be exceptionally cool if you would be able to comment and express your opinion also there!