ISPs to be ordered to boot illegal downloaders

[Shellac]

Unless they're sat in the swarm with you.

Yes indeed the ISP / anyone can sit in the swarm with you, but surely they first have to prove that the file you have downloaded is copyrighted before they can issue a warning email. Just because the file is called "Britney.Spears.New.Album.Torrent" does not mean it actually is.
And how exactly do they establish the ownership of copyright without it becoming a legal minefield where the ISP's act as judge and jury.

Surely I am innocent of copyright infringement until it is proven otherwise? Or can ISP's kick you off for 'suspicion of'.....

 

[WotDa]

Wouldn't that be illegal for them to do, they'd break copyright laws?

They wouldn't need to download anything to sit in the swarm, except maybe a readme.

It's seems like a massive breech of privacy to me though.

 

[peetee]

Wouldn't that be illegal for them to do, they'd break copyright laws ?
Fake peers are very quickly picked up an blacklisted though.
Then there's the thing of closed communicy's.
I'm member of enpugh sites that don't accept new members since ages, and it's pretty much clean, all people are fair sharers.

It would be illegal yea, but if this was brought in as a law they would allow ISPs to breach the copyright laws in some small section as a means of catching people, effectively giving them a 'warrant', its like the police coming to search your house for something, its breaking and entering, but if they have a warrant they are aloud to

 

[Gilly]

If it's their fault, it's also the fault of everyone

No it isn't. It is specifically their fault.

If it's their fault it's the fault of currency for existing and driving the globe.

Broadcasters and distributors charge way over the odds for products because of currency?

I think this all boils down to the fact that piracy is now so widespread that it's hardly seen as a bad thing by most people [and some don't even know it's bad]. Years ago the pirates were looked on as rebels, now they're de rigeur.

It is so widespread because of the way the industry has acted for years.

People should learn that music and film is a privilege to be paid for and not an intrinsic right.

The industry should learn to be driven by demand, not try to drive demand. It is too rigid, doesn't adapt enough. If it had adapted more and earlier then we wouldn't have such problems today.

Will this ever happen? Not likely. The only next step it to try to get the ISPs to do the policing.

Which, for too many reasons to name in this single post when they've already been listed in this thread, also won't happen.

 

[magick]

The are two issues at stake here. Firstly the corporate entertainment industry is a far, far worse state then they're letting on :-

* Broadcast television is losing viewers, and advertising revenue, at a horrifying speed. By not discussing it in the media very much, they are hoping not to accelerate the problem. They have to convince their advertisers that it is still a worthwhile investment, even as TiVo and DVD usage is increasingly eliminating commercials from most people's daily media diet.

* The Hollywood film industry is collapsing, forcing it to release far fewer big-budget features than in the past. Indie films like "What the Bleep" and "The Secret" are becoming runaway hits because they talk about concepts the mainstream doesn't want people knowing - the old-school metaphysical truism that "you create your own reality". Illuminati-funded hyperviolent movies, with no uplifting or spiritually nourishing content, are falling on their faces left and right, because people simply do not want to see something that will not make them feel good.

* The music industry has become a pathetic parody of its heyday in the 70s and early 80s, with CD sales plummeting to abysmal new lows and revenues being utterly destroyed by illegal downloading.

* Britney Spears: Hundreds of millions of dollars had been invested into Britney Spears to make her into the next Madonna, and unless she has a miraculous rehabilitation, that investment has now been totally wasted. This is not unlike:

* Tom Cruise: Even greater funds were invested into Tom Cruise by the movie industry than into Britney, but again his reputation was permanently destroyed by his Scientology-oriented stunts - and Sumner Redstone, the head of one of the great Family media companies, personally fired Cruise himself. [Cruise was brought out at the Oscars and did nothing to poke fun at himself - an apologetic attempt to regain some respect.

Secondly and probably most importantly, this is the government moving towards the total censorship of the net

 

[z0mbi3]

If you live in Hull or the surrounding area then this is already happening to some degree.I have been disconnected for downloading music before and a few of my friends have too! They then send you a letter with the filename of the file you were downloading and also the website you were downloading it from, they then ask you to bring a handwritten letter saying that you have removed the offending file and promise not to do it again or else then they will reconnect you.
They also say if they catch you again then the service could be permamently disconnected.As karoo have the monopoly in Hull that would mean i couldnt have a bb connection if I got caught again.

That's not the same as what we're talking about. What happens at the moment is that the ISP will be contacted by the MPAA, RIAA or similar parties saying they have evidence that your ISP has been downloading copyrighted material. You're ISP then sends you a scare letter and you agree not to do it again.

That's what you get for using limewire or torrents unprotected.

 

[MrMoonX]

no one who is a massive downloader will get hammered because they can just use their neighbours unprotected wireless networks, if most peoples neighbours are anything like mine

 

[Shellac]

no one who is a massive downloader will get hammered because they can just use their neighbours unprotected wireless networks, if most peoples neighbours are anything like mine

Well this is whole different kettle of fish.. Dodgy downloads will get you kicked off your ISP but not much else. Hijacking a wireless connection is a good ol' fashioned illegal activity that will get you in a heap more trouble.

"The Communications Act 2003 says a "person who (a) dishonestly obtains an electronic communications service, and (b) does so with intent to avoid payment of a charge applicable to the provision of that service, is guilty of an offence".

 

[Sudden]

I don't really see the problem with obtaining tv shows through other means if i'm paying for sky anyway?
We have the full sky subscription in the house, movies, sports etc etc. , but as others have said that it takes so ridiculously long to show things here that it's just not worth the wait. Most of the tv shows are even shown in India before they are shown here (and I have a cable subscription there as well, so effectively, I could be paying twice for the same tv show )

point being, when and if it shows here, it's being paid for anyway. So what's the difference if I watch it there or watch it online? (yes, the advertisment costs argument exists, but if I watch somethign else at that time anyway since i'm not going tos ita round look at ads, its defeated )

 

[Vixen]

Yea, Prison Break was the same too, the thing is... At Uni its 2 of us in a flat, We definately cant afford to stump up for sky, we did have skyone on virgin before which was great, but I wasnt happy when we lost it, so now we either have to buy sky, and be in the 12month commitment, which wont be v good for us since we wont be here another 12months, just to watch one or 2 programs on SkyOne, the rest we can watch on freeview anyway.
In effect I get the choice of paying hundreds of pounds to watch prison break, with Sky getting aload of my money for things i dont want, or I just steal Prison Break.. bonus being I get to watch it faster than everyone with Sky.
Though my parents do have a £50 sky subscription, so I dont really feel that bad, because if I didnt download it I would ask my parents to record it every week and send me the disc, but whats easier, really?
Its still not really good enough.
Arguement also comes into play for p2p-video streaming now, theres a reason a lot of footy gets watched online, because Skysports+setanta cost a fair bit together right? And for me it would be pointless having both since all i watch is footy, and even then i only really watch my liverpool games and the odd others, and how many games do 'your' team have televised every year? not really value for money is it.. BUT i do have setanta atm, I forgot to cancel it mind you, EVERYONE got it when it was 2months for £1, shows that a lot of people would prefer the lower prices and have it for the sake of it, If I could pay for individual footy games on the TV id love it, it wouldnt be crap quality like p2p streams etc, aslong as it was reasonable, Prem+ was SHOCKING.


At the moment we cant go elsewhere and generate them revenue, which is what ****** me off, they have the ability to offer the better service and crush pirating by just releasing online at a higher quality with ads, but they dont, so we go elsewhere. People like having a choice, its just a shame they only offer us 1 legal choice.

That's just complete rubbish. It's almost a year since Sky One was removed from Virgin, which means you could easily have switched your tv over to Sky when it happened. The minimum Sky package is about £16, and if you'd tried last year, you probably could have blagged a free Sky+ box at the same time (I did it when I renewed). Alternatively, you could just buy or rent the dvds when they come out.

You have reasonable choices, there's really no need to pirate.

 

[magick]

Persoanly I don't think it'll be the end of the world. People no longer listening to music and watching films created and sponsered by corporations can only be a good thing.

Most people I know who download illegaly won't be inclined to go out and buy them instead.

 

[Darkwave]

Coming soon to BBC News...

Breaking News: Online population of the UK drops to nearly zero!

 

[MrMoonX]

Well this is whole different kettle of fish.. Dodgy downloads will get you kicked off your ISP but not much else. Hijacking a wireless connection is a good ol' fashioned illegal activity that will get you in a heap more trouble.

"The Communications Act 2003 says a "person who (a) dishonestly obtains an electronic communications service, and (b) does so with intent to avoid payment of a charge applicable to the provision of that service, is guilty of an offence".

yeah but a person who really wants to steal wireless wont get caught its hard to prove, especially to get a conviction and im sure the police dont give two hoots about wireless stealing, as they cant even be bothered when your car gets broken into etc.

 

[a1ex2001]

The encryption is impossible to crack, so they aren't going to buy computers to try to crack it.

Maybe they'll just ban encrypted content that they are not allowed to inspect? The simple solution to the encryption thing is for ISPs to insist on only encryption that is agreed with them being used which they could check for naughty behaviour.

Of course the bleeding hearts civil liberties mob will be all over it claiming there right to privacy etc or should that be there right to hide what they are doing?

 

[Gaygle]

Hrm, I sent this text in to BBC 1 Radio a minute ago and just got a call on my answer phone from Newsbeat wanting to talk about it?!!

Here's what I said:

"I can go online and download a tool which will make it impossible for ISPs to see what I'm doing [I'm talking about the likes of Tor]. Monitoring downloads is just an invasion of privacy and will not hinder hard-core pirates who are already using measures which stop ISPs seeing what they are really up to online. The problem that needs to be addressed is the price, availability and restrictions currently associated with music and films, but the production companies are too stubborn to accept the fact that their products are now worth less, and would rather force us in to an overpriced market than cater for what consumers demand at a price they are willing to pay."

I don't know whether to call them back or not... It'd be cool to chat but I've got a pretty awful phone manner - some reason I find it hard to speak to people I don't know unless it's face-to-face.

Go on!! do it! You won't have to talk on the air or anything, i reckon they'll just want more information about the ways around the filters. I'll be listening! doooooo ittttttt!

EDIT: if you do call back, post it up!

 

[Shellac]

yeah but a person who really wants to steal wireless wont get caught its hard to prove, especially to get a conviction and im sure the police dont give two hoots about wireless stealing, as they cant even be bothered when your car gets broken into etc.

Indeed... there's more than enough crime already, hence this government desperately trying to get ISP's to police their own users. Something which a dull witted politician undoubtedly thought was a great idea without having the faintest clue how hard this is to put into practice.

It'll be interesting to see what comes out of this and how hard the ISP's try and crack down.

 

[Pinkeyes]

I still say this comes down to cost.

I would be interested to know the uptake if the makers of Prison Break (for example) released the latest episode for download a couple of days after they broadcast it, for say 50p per episode, or £5 per season.
I would also like to know if this would make more money than selling the series to the likes of Sky (or in addition too, I am sure Skys main audience wouldn't be too much effected by this)

I think a lot of the people who watch this stuff illegally from P2P or newsgroups would take this up. Most of them pay a monthly fee to their usenet supplier anyway.

They would be getting good quality downloads, rather than hardcoded subtitles, out of sync audio... and all the other problems associated with pirate material. Never mind the legality issues of it.

 

[jonesy]

The example wouldn't stand. What I would do is either wait and eat free or go elsewhere.

That is also the choice in terms of US TV being aired here. Either wait for it, which is what they wish to force people to do, or get it elsewhere, which is what people are going to do if at all possible.

Is LOST not now showing at near enough the same time in the UK/USA now? Maybe this is the first step, or maybe something to do with writers strike.

 

[Energize]

Maybe they'll just ban encrypted content that they are not allowed to inspect? The simple solution to the encryption thing is for ISPs to insist on only encryption that is agreed with them being used which they could check for naughty behaviour.

Of course the bleeding hearts civil liberties mob will be all over it claiming there right to privacy etc or should that be there right to hide what they are doing?

You can't regulate encryption like that, just trying to do that would be impossible. Every business relies on encryption for things like online transactions, the exchange of sensitive information, vpn etc... If isps required everyones encryption keys for things like ssl, the whole uk internet would fall apart as no business would send any kind of info across the internet if a third party knew the encryption key.

You could have people hacking into isp servers for keys, and people working at the isp intercepting encrypted transactions commiting fraud. Plus that would not stop people sending each other encrypted avi/mp3 files, as they aren't using any standard like ssl, so would be undetectable as encrypted files using an automated system. Plus, encrypted files can be decoded to reveal different content depending on which key is used, so people would give keys over to the isp that would reveal an innocent document in the file, while another key that the other user had would reveal someones mp3 collection.

 

[metachi]

if they do that then there's no reason for me to use 24mb broadband.