ISPs to be ordered to boot illegal downloaders

SpeedFreak said:
can you tell us which ISP you work for so we know not to join ;)
Click to expand...

We don't sell consumer broadband, business only so no need to worry.

We provide gigabit or higher bandwdith connections to banks and numerous FTSE100 companies. My concern is that the network supports those connections, they pay more in a month than all our DSL users pay in a year. DSL is strictly a sideline because some of our customers have homeworker solutions from us which requrie us to have the ability to provide DSL.

This has gone a long way from my original point, which is that encryption won't save you from traffic profiling. The fact is that encrpyted or not, p2p is easy to detect and most FUPs would allow for throttling of users demonstrating consistent use of p2p.
 
Does this law apply to downloading files etc or would it apply to streaming media like.... premiership matches?.
It really irritates me that sky and setanta only ever show the 'rich clubs' games on tv, so i have no problem with streaming live Bolton matches each week :p

Am i breaking the law, doing this? I would've thought the people streaming the content were in the wrong.

What about downloading uk tv, is that illegal? I dont have my own tv (well i do but its in the garage), i dont watch a lot of tv, but if i see something i like i'll download it. And yes, i do have a tv license ;)

bigredshark said:
Nope, I hate BT with a passion - it comes from having to deal with them daily...
Click to expand...
Hehe dont get me started :)
 
bigredshark said:
This has gone a long way from my original point, which is that encryption won't save you from traffic profiling. The fact is that encrpyted or not, p2p is easy to detect and most FUPs would allow for throttling of users demonstrating consistent use of p2p.
Click to expand...

No one thought it would, Jihad meant he wasn't worried about the new proposed law, not traffic shaping. He probably uses tunneling or his own traffic shaping for that. ;)
 
~>Dg<~ said:
ok then youve lied in post that i read on here.

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=17837496&highlight=username_bigredshark


if you read the guys post above one of yours in that thread hes on about bt . if i made a mistake then sorry but from your reply it indicates that you do.
Click to expand...

I mentioned that we have BT centrals, which are the routers which ADSL connections come into an ISPs network on. Any ADSL ISP will have them. Maybe that's where the confusion came up?
 
What about BBC TV programs that you missed!?

My TV license is paid for, and if I missed a Top Gear Episode it'd take me 5 mins to go and bittorrent a HD version.

IMO that isn't illegal because whats the difference between that and me remembering to record it?

Thing is its On Demand, if I want to watch Top Gear - 4x06, I'll go and get it and have it in < 10 mins.

Same with a film, if I want to see lets say Ice Age (I've just rented this on DVD ;)), im not going to wait a day or two for it to come, download it in what? 30 mins? Hour? Can do something else in that time, not that I do because A) Its long and B) Any film I get is worth at-least renting
 
bigredshark said:
This has gone a long way from my original point, which is that encryption won't save you from traffic profiling. The fact is that encrpyted or not, p2p is easy to detect and most FUPs would allow for throttling of users demonstrating consistent use of p2p.
Click to expand...

Throttling is an ISP specific matter that is in no way related to the proposed law. p2p usage might be easy to detect and 99% of p2p content might be illegal but you have to prove beyond reasonable doubt that a user has downloaded copyright content. Examining the traffic profile isn't enough, you need proof the file was illegal and encryption makes that job much much harder.

I'll reiterate my opinion that its not the ISPs job to police what people use their connection for, its simply unworkable.
 
MTA99 said:
Throttling is an ISP specific matter that is in no way related to the proposed law. p2p usage might be easy to detect and 99% of p2p content might be illegal but you have to prove beyond reasonable doubt that a user has downloaded copyright content. Examining the traffic profile isn't enough, you need proof the file was illegal and encryption makes that job much much harder.

I'll reiterate my opinion that its not the ISPs job to police what people use their connection for, its simply unworkable.
Click to expand...

You need beyond reasonable doubt to take you to court, the ISP provides service to you at their discretion though and could remove it on suspicion of illegal activity. Which may be how they choose to self police it.

Also, if not the ISPS then who. The alternative is the government, and ISPs won't/can't hand over user details or logs without being compelled to legally. Thats expensive, lots of admin time for the ISPs and whoever is enforcing it. Considerably cheaper to self police it...
 
bigredshark said:
You need beyond reasonable doubt to take you to court, the ISP provides service to you at their discretion though and could remove it on suspicion of illegal activity. Which may be how they choose to self police it.
Click to expand...

The government proposals involve the threat of legal action hence the "beyond reasonable doubt" comment. I totally agree that ISPs provide a service at their discretion but they might find it difficult to find new customers or keep existing ones if connections are being throttled or disconnected on the suspicion on illegal use. Once the media get involved and find a single mum who got disconnected unfairly they'll have a field day! ;)

bigredshark said:
Also, if not the ISPS then who. The alternative is the government, and ISPs won't/can't hand over user details or logs without being compelled to legally. Thats expensive, lots of admin time for the ISPs and whoever is enforcing it. Considerably cheaper to self police it...
Click to expand...

Ignoring the final sentence and the "customer service" issues it raises.....that's the whole reason these proposals are a little short sighted.
 
RDM said:
I didn't say you weren't. But if my opinion was that speeding isn't illegal that wouldn't stop the police giving me a ticket. :)
Click to expand...

But if quite a few people have opinions and then get together and decide that discriminating against blacks is not fair, it becomes illegal :)
 
peetee said:
But if quite a few people have opinions and then get together and decide that discriminating against blacks is not fair, it becomes illegal :)
Click to expand...

Yeah because the similarities between the civil rights movements and internet piracy are striking...
 
a1ex2001 said:
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?
Click to expand...

hopefully that will not happen, otherwise i would have major problems.

im constantly sending lots of encypted data.

i work for a games company from home, so i have a constant vpn connection to the office, and theres always a lot of traffic traveling between it
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom