UK anti-piracy campaign set to begin

[philip2009]

Yeah, no.

If you really think rights holders are going to find this acceptable and just say "Oh well, there's nothing more we can do!" then that's a naive position. Unless the number of warnings issued reduces infringement substantially they will be back for more, and they'll get more.

 

[233]

this will be round one. after 12 months or so they will release the figures on how may millions emails they have sent and how many individuals they have targeted and then go for proper legislation.

it bad enough that we've lost direct access to EZTV and others already but this will just strengthen the case for more site bans and quicker one down the line.

there is also the case for letting parents know that little Jonny upstairs in his bedroom and all innocent he claims, is actually the schools major porn distributor and pirate music king.

little Johnny is probably more clued up than half us on here and is hiding behind all sorts of VPNS and well on his way to making his first million flogging porn dvds to his peers

 

[spoffle]

If you really think rights holders are going to find this acceptable and just say "Oh well, there's nothing more we can do!" then that's a naive position. Unless the number of warnings issued reduces infringement substantially they will be back for more, and they'll get more.

It doesn't really matter whether they find it acceptable or not. If more people than they can manage are doing it, they can't really do much about it.

There are a very limited amount of avenues rights holders can go down to attack copyright infringement, and stopping some from downloading is only one.

Copyright infringement is part of the industry whether they like it or not. If people can't share online, they'll share physical copies of discs instead.

How are they really going to control it? Your position is a position of ignorance.

 

[Ploppy2k3]

little Johnny is probably more clued up than half us on here and is hiding behind all sorts of VPNS and well on his way to making his first million flogging porn dvds to his peers

lol youre probably right. I dont think most parents though have a clue to what their kids do online or actually care. I think they would care however if they started getting letters and then bang they are in court.

I fully agree it can never be stopped and the avenues for copyright holder are few but they will continue pushing and I can only see this letter campaign as an evidence gathering operation with consequences down the road.

 

[spoffle]

lol youre probably right. I dont think most parents though have a clue to what their kids do online or actually care. I think they would care however if they started getting letters and then bang they are in court.

I fully agree it can never be stopped and the avenues for copyright holder are few but they will continue pushing and I can only see this letter campaign as an evidence gathering operation.

It is nothing more than an attempt at scare tactics. An IP address attached to a download is not proof. Hence the way they're going about it.

 

[Ploppy2k3]

It is nothing more than an attempt at scare tactics. An IP address attached to a download is not proof. Hence the way they're going about it.

With current law you re right. that's basically what I think the whole exercise is about. proving piracy is a problem and then coming up with a law around it.

 

[philip2009]

...Your position is a position of ignorance.

Then I'll leave you with this ignorant BBC analysis -

They would not say it publicly, as they do not want to be seen as rocking the boat, but it is the ISPs who will be happiest with this deal.

Ecstatic, even. The contrast between what was originally put on the table - throttling internet speeds, or cutting people off altogether - and what is now coming to pass could not be more stark.

But sources close to the discussion suggest there could be a bigger game at play here. Within the leaked agreement, one important point: if this system does not have a big effect on piracy, then rights holders will call for the "rapid implementation" of the Digital Economy Act, and all the strict measures that come with it.

Steve Kuncewicz, an expert in online and internet law, agreed. He speculated that the deal "may be a Trojan horse exercise in gathering intelligence about how seriously downloaders take threats".

In other words, if it can be shown that asking nicely does not have a significant effect on curbing piracy, rights holders will for the first time have a seriously credible set of data with which to apply pressure for harder enforcement on those who simply do not want to pay for entertainment.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-27330150

 

[Ch3m1c4L]

Pfft. Do not want to pay for entertainment. I WANT TO PAY!
I have gone through several different online streaming services, and get bored of the content as once ive caught up on what they have, it takes too long for them to get anything new i want to watch.
Currently i have netflix, purely as my parents got a smart tv at their place, so i figured I would get an account and let them watch it to.

The fact I can set up my own media library and streaming service, and have more content than them is stupid.

And I thought there was already a policy for getting sent letters etc?

 

[Tute]

I'm still waiting for widespread legal FLAC downloads.

Exactly this. After the rise of Steam i'm shocked nobody bothered to do the same for music and TV. Simply offer a decent service at decent prices with a simple download/redownload policy and I think people would flock to it - hell I know I would.

I have to wonder if the rights holders actually prefer to overcharge for what they do sell and stomach the "losses" from pirates - in which case they aren't going to get a lot of sympathy from me.

 

[AtticusFinch]

Unless there is a real penalty for illegally downloading content, it will be unaffected. The principal difficulty is that we now have a generation of internet users who have grown up with the notion that things should be accessible and free and seem to have no moral compass aorund the fact that they're stealing IP every time they do it.

Shame, buit that's how it is.

 

[spoffle]

Then I'll leave you with this ignorant BBC analysis -

So you're blindly following the ignorant views of some "expert". I can't say that's any better.

The guy is an expert in law, not the practicalities of what it would take to actually try and forcibly stop piracy.

The internet as it stands is already too much for the authorities to handle, it's currently in the same situation as if everyone who drove a car decided to stop obeying speed limits.

The government couldn't do anything about it on the whole. They might get away with picking off only the top most speeders but that's about it.

 

[spoffle]

Unless there is a real penalty for illegally downloading content, it will be unaffected. The principal difficulty is that we now have a generation of internet users who have grown up with the notion that things should be accessible and free and seem to have no moral compass aorund the fact that they're stealing IP every time they do it.

Shame, buit that's how it is.

It has nothing to do with morality, and it's not a matter of stealing IP. It's copyright infringement. Stealing IP would be taking another's IP and trying to pass it off as your own, or at least using significant parts of it in something you're making yourself.

 

[Confused]

As usual when these types of things come up... implement a system like Steam, which makes it easy to purchase, download, and more importantly REDOWNLOAD again later on, and more people will do so.

They also need to get their acts sorted out with timescales - if you want me to watch your movie/tv show, and then discuss it with others, then you need to make it available either as it's being broadcast, or immediately after. Not at the end of a "season", but immediately.


Prior to Steam becoming what it is, I will admit that I rarely purchased any games. Since Steam, I haven't pirated any games. That's the kind of total conversion rate that TV/film companies should be looking towards, and the only way to do so on a wide scale is to implement a good system, like Steam.

 

[spoffle]

As usual when these types of things come up... implement a system like Steam, which makes it easy to purchase, download, and more importantly REDOWNLOAD again later on, and more people will do so.

They also need to get their acts sorted out with timescales - if you want me to watch your movie/tv show, and then discuss it with others, then you need to make it available either as it's being broadcast, or immediately after. Not at the end of a "season", but immediately.


Prior to Steam becoming what it is, I will admit that I rarely purchased any games. Since Steam, I haven't pirated any games. That's the kind of total conversion rate that TV/film companies should be looking towards, and the only way to do so on a wide scale is to implement a good system, like Steam.

The problem is that they don't want to change with the times, they want to keep to the same business model that barely worked decades ago and are throwing their toys out of the pram because it's not working for them.

 

[Trifid]

Exactly this. After the rise of Steam i'm shocked nobody bothered to do the same for music and TV. Simply offer a decent service at decent prices with a simple download/redownload policy and I think people would flock to it - hell I know I would.

I have to wonder if the rights holders actually prefer to overcharge for what they do sell and stomach the "losses" from pirates - in which case they aren't going to get a lot of sympathy from me.

I think you are being far too hopeful for legal FLAC downloads from a mainstream site (I do recall there used to be a small scale one). I realised about 6 years ago that convenience services like Spotify were the future and gave up all hope of 'owning' music, not bought or downloaded a single track since. I do slightly miss the community that went with the dedicated music download sites though and 24bit vinyl rips.


Much more of interest is an internet based service that competes with Sky and has UK and US based shows live (multicast) and archived with no adverts. Netflix is still a bit too small scale to truly compete.

 

[philip2009]

So you're blindly following the ignorant views of some "expert". I can't say that's any better.

No, I have my own views which just happen to be agreed with by the BBC analysis I found later. The analysis is about sources close to the discussion, not just Steve Kuncewicz. It defies common sense that the same rights holders who pushed for the DEA are just going to roll over and accept infringement without consequences.

 

[pablouk]

(But if people ignore the warnings, no further action will be taken.)

These even made my children Laugh.

 

[spoffle]

No, I have my own views which just happen to be agreed with by the BBC analysis I found later. The analysis is about sources close to the discussion, not just Steve Kuncewicz. It defies common sense that the same rights holders who pushed for the DEA are just going to roll over and accept infringement without consequences.

They will have to roll over because it's not technically possible to do what they want, and if enough people are doing it then it warrants its legality to be looked at all. Hence my point on ignorance and about speeding. It's already past the point where they can't follow it up. This is the very reason why it's a few letters, then nothing because it's too much work to try and actually police it.

Which is already happening, they removed the illegal status of copyright infringement recently as it's too much to try and police. That's also ignoring the fact that these "rights holders" spend more money fighting piracy than they claim to lose from it. They are a bunch of idiots.

 

[philip2009]

Obviously we have different views of what may happen in the future, so only time will tell. However you did introduce this point -

...Which is already happening, they removed the illegal status of copyright infringement recently as it's too much to try and police.

There has been no change in the status of copyright infringement, are you referring to the vg24 article? TorrentFreak addresses it -

All it took yesterday was a single article to trigger off a tidal wave of copycat reports across dozens of sites including the mainstream RT.com. Just to be absolutely clear - Britain HAS NOT decriminalized file-sharing and to suggest otherwise only puts people at unnecessary risk. File-sharing remains ILLEGAL in the UK, guaranteed.

...

Except it’s not fun at all. It’s completely untrue on countless levels and to suggest otherwise puts people at risk. Let’s be absolutely clear here. Copyright infringement, whether that’s on file-sharing networks or elsewhere, is ILLEGAL in the UK. Nothing, repeat NOTHING, has changed.

As detailed in our previous article, VCAP is a voluntary (that’s the ‘V’ part) agreement between some rightsholders and a few ISPs to send some informational letters to people observed infringing copyright.

This means that the mainstream music labels and the major Hollywood studios will soon have an extra option to reach out to UK Internet users. However, whenever they want to – today, tomorrow or next year – any of the copyright holders involved in VCAP can still file a lawsuit or seek police action against ANYONE engaged in illegal file-sharing – FACT.

...

Rest of article...

 

[Luke_Bowman]

This whole campaign is a waste of time and resources