Say hello to our brave new world. Now the RIAA and MPAA have gotten the ISPs to do their dirty work for them.

Given how suing customers (shockingly!) didn't work as a business model, they now want ISPs to step in our their behalf. It works like this:

RIAA/MPAA: Hey ISP, this address was downloading copyrighted material.
ISP: Got it.

The ISP now implements a series of steps to mitigate against you (roughly a "six strikes" policy). You can only use unauthorized access (via open wifi, hackers, or whatever) as an excuse once. And that will cost you $35.

You get six strikes, then they kill your connection.

There is no due process. There is no vetting the original material was copyrighted and the person issuing the notice has rights over that material. Your guilt is assumed.



http://torrentfreak.com/isp-six-strikes-...me-120803/

Not that I don't agree with the policy but I'm pretty sure you're not entitled to "due process" when it comes to a service provided by a private company.

(11-12-2012 02:17 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  Say hello to our brave new world. Now the RIAA and MPAA have gotten the ISPs to do their dirty work for them.

Given how suing customers (shockingly!) didn't work as a business model, they now want ISPs to step in our their behalf. It works like this:

RIAA/MPAA: Hey ISP, this address was downloading copyrighted material.
ISP: Got it.

The ISP now implements a series of steps to mitigate against you (roughly a "six strikes" policy). You can only use unauthorized access (via open wifi, hackers, or whatever) as an excuse once. And that will cost you $35.

You get six strikes, then they kill your connection.

There is no due process. There is no vetting the original material was copyrighted and the person issuing the notice has rights over that material. Your guilt is assumed.



http://torrentfreak.com/isp-six-strikes-...me-120803/

(11-12-2012 03:10 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  Not that I don't agree with the policy but I'm pretty sure you're not entitled to "due process" when it comes to a service provided by a private company.

You're being accused of a criminal act. You're being punished for that accusation. Not once is any part of that process questioned.

What is to stop me from taking Robert's ISP info, and claim he's downloading copyrighted material I own until he's banned?

(11-12-2012 03:40 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(11-12-2012 03:10 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  Not that I don't agree with the policy but I'm pretty sure you're not entitled to "due process" when it comes to a service provided by a private company.

You're being accused of a criminal act. You're being punished for that accusation. Not once is any part of that process questioned.

What is to stop me from taking Robert's ISP info, and claim he's downloading copyrighted material I own until he's banned?

If you come over to my house for a bbq and I call you a rapist and threaten to kick you out if you don't give me 50$ I have not denied you due process. Even if I kick you out.

I don't disagree to anything you have to say about how sucky it is, nor how easy it would be for someone just leeching your wireless to do bad things. It's just that you have no *right* to that service and as such they can set any terms they care.

It may not be illegal, but it is unethical.

I hope somebody like the EFF or ACLU sues the first ISP to do this.

(11-12-2012 04:45 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  It may not be illegal, but it is unethical.

On this I completely agree.

Quote:I hope somebody like the EFF or ACLU sues the first ISP to do this.

Agreed. Though its not criminal one could surely sue and hopefully score a big enough victory to give ISP's a pause..

This is what you get when you have no regulation. Land of the free!

What good is freedom from government oppression when we trade it for oppression from corporations?

So what happens if I download stuff using wifi provided by Starbucks?

So the RIAA knows that I like Goat Porn?

(11-12-2012 08:34 AM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  This is what you get when you have no regulation. Land of the free!

Wait so the RIAA and MPAA had nothing to do with all of the crap copyright law that came out over the past 15 years? Are you seriously aying that there is no regulation regarding music/movies and the internet...

Did they just not try to pass SOPA?
Do we not already have the DCMA?

Your assertion that this is because there is a lack of regulation is asinine.

(11-12-2012 09:54 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(11-12-2012 08:34 AM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  This is what you get when you have no regulation. Land of the free!

Wait so the RIAA and MPAA had nothing to do with all of the crap copyright law that came out over the past 15 years? Are you seriously aying that there is no regulation regarding music/movies and the internet...

Did they just not try to pass SOPA?
Do we not already have the DCMA?

Your assertion that this is because there is a lack of regulation is asinine.

The three strikes law is completely a private enterprise. It has nothing to do with SOPA or the DMCA. Crap like this, though, is what you get when net neutrality is taken off the table. I will agree that a lot of government regulation and recent laws regarding copyright and cryptography is a load and should be repealed.

(11-12-2012 10:08 AM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  

(11-12-2012 09:54 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(11-12-2012 08:34 AM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  This is what you get when you have no regulation. Land of the free!

Wait so the RIAA and MPAA had nothing to do with all of the crap copyright law that came out over the past 15 years? Are you seriously aying that there is no regulation regarding music/movies and the internet...

Did they just not try to pass SOPA?
Do we not already have the DCMA?

Your assertion that this is because there is a lack of regulation is asinine.

The three strikes law is completely a private enterprise. It has nothing to do with SOPA or the DMCA. Crap like this, though, is what you get when net neutrality is taken off the table. I will agree that a lot of government regulation and recent laws regarding copyright and cryptography is a load and should be repealed.

How much do you want to bet ISPs who do join get an "enhanced rate" on their OnDemand royalties to copyright holders? Eh? Eh?

And BTW ... this aint capitalism. We have made it nearly impossible from a regulatory standpoint to launch a new major ISP from nothing thanks to red tape, licensing, FCC hurdles, and more. I whole heartedly support line sharing requirements as one of my lone exceptions to government interference.

(11-12-2012 04:22 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(11-12-2012 10:08 AM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  

(11-12-2012 09:54 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(11-12-2012 08:34 AM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  This is what you get when you have no regulation. Land of the free!

Wait so the RIAA and MPAA had nothing to do with all of the crap copyright law that came out over the past 15 years? Are you seriously aying that there is no regulation regarding music/movies and the internet...

Did they just not try to pass SOPA?
Do we not already have the DCMA?

Your assertion that this is because there is a lack of regulation is asinine.

The three strikes law is completely a private enterprise. It has nothing to do with SOPA or the DMCA. Crap like this, though, is what you get when net neutrality is taken off the table. I will agree that a lot of government regulation and recent laws regarding copyright and cryptography is a load and should be repealed.

How much do you want to bet ISPs who do join get an "enhanced rate" on their OnDemand royalties to copyright holders? Eh? Eh?

And BTW ... this aint capitalism. We have made it nearly impossible from a regulatory standpoint to launch a new major ISP from nothing thanks to red tape, licensing, FCC hurdles, and more. I whole heartedly support line sharing requirements as one of my lone exceptions to government interference.

Line sharing is going out the window. ILECs are dumping their copper and want everyone on wireless

(11-12-2012 04:58 PM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  Line sharing is going out the window. ILECs are dumping their copper and want everyone on wireless

There aint enough spectrum courtesy of government. Hell, existing wireless carriers are b*tching about not enough spectrum for future LTE rollouts already.

(11-12-2012 05:05 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(11-12-2012 04:58 PM)mixduptransistor Wrote:  Line sharing is going out the window. ILECs are dumping their copper and want everyone on wireless

There aint enough spectrum courtesy of government. Hell, existing wireless carriers are b*tching about not enough spectrum for future LTE rollouts already.

With all the analog off air channels being FORCED to convert to digital but at higher frequencies, there might be plenty of space in the VHF spectrum. Not sure if wireless carriers want to use those freqs, but it's there.

My question is, how should the record labels be allowed to go after people who steal their product? If you illegally download music you should be prosecuted. case closed

(11-12-2012 06:26 PM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  My question is, how should the record labels be allowed to go after people who steal their product? If you illegally download music you should be prosecuted. case closed

They tried that but it wasn't efficient enough for their liking. For several reasons:

1) They sue for over $100,000 per song. Not even in a parallel universe does that make sense. When they were actually awarded that in a case against a poor single mother, the backlash was tremendous. She will *never* be able to pay even one song off.

2) Suing your customer ... turns out that's a bad business model that engenders hatred and turns away customers at the margins. WHO KNEW?!

3) They frequently lost because an IP address isn't a person. It is impossible to know who downloaded it, or even if it was a person from that household or a hacker or somebody on open wifi.

If the RIAA and MPAA want to reduce piracy, then they should give the consumer what they want. Just a few of today's ludicrous practices:

- Region locked discs are stupid. It prevents people from importing stuff not available in their country.
- There is no lawful way to playback a DVD or Blu-Ray under Linux, because the encryption arm of the MPAA demand you pay a license fee for playback of either one. Obviously that doesn't work with open source software, and is actually INCOMPATIBLE with several of the major open source licenses such as the GNU GPL. That effects over 50 million people. We just use standard open source libraries to break the encryption on a DVD or Blu-Ray to play it ... but technically that's illegal under the DMCA.
- In the time it takes you to download a pirated movie, you still haven't sat through all the pre-roll ads and movie trailers you cannot skip in a DVD or Blu-Ray.
- DRM is a joke. Consumers want to be able to buy a copy and then play it on their computer ... or their media center ... or their iPad ... or the smartphone .... etc. The model of buy another copy for every single type of different device you own is ludicrous.

The RIAA is moving at glacial pace away from some of this. Only after getting clubbed relentlessly did they finally offer DRM-free music at semi-reasonable prices $1/song. And yes, iTunes pricing is still stupid. Amazon is closer to reasonable, but I think it should be cheaper. The catalogs still aren't there either. This has meant the RIAA has had to increasingly accept death to the one hit wonder. No more will we pay $17.99 for an album full of utter garbage and one good song. No more will we pay $6.99 for a single. $1 for the one good song ... DRM free.

(11-12-2012 06:26 PM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  My question is, how should the record labels be allowed to go after people who steal their product? If you illegally download music you should be prosecuted. case closed

Why not prosecute people who record TV shows? Oh, that's right, they already tried that.

(11-12-2012 06:47 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(11-12-2012 06:26 PM)flyingswoosh Wrote:  My question is, how should the record labels be allowed to go after people who steal their product? If you illegally download music you should be prosecuted. case closed

They tried that but it wasn't efficient enough for their liking. For several reasons:

1) They sue for over $100,000 per song. Not even in a parallel universe does that make sense. When they were actually awarded that in a case against a poor single mother, the backlash was tremendous. She will *never* be able to pay even one song off.

2) Suing your customer ... turns out that's a bad business model that engenders hatred and turns away customers at the margins. WHO KNEW?!

3) They frequently lost because an IP address isn't a person. It is impossible to know who downloaded it, or even if it was a person from that household or a hacker or somebody on open wifi.

If the RIAA and MPAA want to reduce piracy, then they should give the consumer what they want. Just a few of today's ludicrous practices:

- Region locked discs are stupid. It prevents people from importing stuff not available in their country.
- There is no lawful way to playback a DVD or Blu-Ray under Linux, because the encryption arm of the MPAA demand you pay a license fee for playback of either one. Obviously that doesn't work with open source software, and is actually INCOMPATIBLE with several of the major open source licenses such as the GNU GPL. That effects over 50 million people. We just use standard open source libraries to break the encryption on a DVD or Blu-Ray to play it ... but technically that's illegal under the DMCA.
- In the time it takes you to download a pirated movie, you still haven't sat through all the pre-roll ads and movie trailers you cannot skip in a DVD or Blu-Ray.
- DRM is a joke. Consumers want to be able to buy a copy and then play it on their computer ... or their media center ... or their iPad ... or the smartphone .... etc. The model of buy another copy for every single type of different device you own is ludicrous.

This. The RIAA and MPAA members bullied their customers for years. Suddenly, they don't like the pushback.

They don't like the market's direction? Then respond to the market's forces.

Publishing has done this. It has changed the model, but the world hasn't ended.