Slashdot Mirror
Should ISPs Be Allowed To Delete Your MP3s?
Water Paradox asks: "A friend of mine recently
discovered that his ISP had deleted all of his MP3 files without notice. He is a succesful local DJ with numerous recordings to his name, and the MP3s were all of his own material. He said he zipped them up and within 8 hours, they were back on his site, so all is well. My question is, are other people experiencing this? Perhaps this is a question for Ralph Naderians, but what resources do we as ISP users have against this kind of action?" The ISP in question is Half Price Hosting, and aparently they have an automated process that deletes all MP3s from their servers. Now I do agree that ISPs have the right to police their machines, but is it really right for them to delete files from a user's Web site without even a nastygram explaining why such action was taken? What should we do when ISPs resort to this type of behavior and they are the ones in the wrong? This is a fairly important issue as everyone on the Internet deals with an ISP of some form. If this behavior isn't checked, the next time something like this might happen it could be any file, not just MP3s. Update: 11/23 by J : As several comments have noted, grep their
terms of service for "MP3" (Cliff and I would have done this last night but their website was down). Then go read your ISP's terms...
IMO, you have it.
It's best to leave once you've found a more friendly ISP, particularly one that notifies you of any actions they take on your account and give you a chance to defend yourself without arbitrarily deleting files.
It's like any other market with products, you should investigate the product before putting the money down. Usually there is a lot of information out there to help you determine if the product is worthwhile. If there isn't any, move on to a different product or take a risk with that one. It's your money. Often a product selected on price alone will suck, keep that in mind too. I investigate everything I buy now, not because I've had trouble, but I want to make sure my money is best spent, and even if I find problems while investigating I end up buying because, I can work around it, I like knowing what I might run into as well as the chances.
It's also a good thing to ask questions before signing up, check their reputation, check to see if their customer support is worth their name, investigate their history of dealing with customers and _read_ the acceptable use policy!
It really sucks that you have to do this, but IMO I think it's better than regulating the ISP market.
Not as simple a question as you might think.
Is it a file with the suffix '.mp3' (What if I rename it?)
Is it a file which the 'file' utility declares has the relevant magic numbers at the beginning?
What if I zip it?
What if I base64 encode (or uuencode) it?
What if I encrypt it?
In all cases, to play it I could have a wrapper script to undo the obusfaction and give me those MP3 bits.
An automatic job which deletes things is a stupid thing to do. Its an attempt at a technological solution to a social problem. If the ISP doesn't want you doing things, it should notify you in the Acceptable Use Policy (AUP).
If you violate the AUP you suffer - perhaps a warning and then junk the account, exactly as ISPs do with spam accounts.
Going round and deleting files is just foolish. Sigh.
I work for an ISP in the netherlands, where we have... privacy laws. Everyone has a right to privacy. it's about time the US had some of those laws too. but americans despise laws. laws are bad. laws may cost big business money.
//rdj
No one can understand the truth until he drinks of coffee's frothy goodness.
--Sheikh Abd-Al-Kadir, 1587
Okay, granted that maybe .00385 (rounded) percent of MP3's might actually be legal "everybody's happy" MP3's, but pretty much all of the rest of them are illegal. If you own the album, one would suppose that you could keep the MP3 for yourself, but to post it in a public web directory is a little bit sketchy (ala "MyDrive"). Perhaps it would be an issue of it was posted in a non web-accessible directory, but other than that, I think the ISP was doing the "smart thing." Think of it this way, if 99% of the apples in the bunch are rotten, would you spend your time digging around for the good one, or would you just pitch them all.
/support/s_terms.asp
And if anything, he agreed to the terms of srevice which explicitly state:
4.1.5. The storage and distribution of MP3 format files via the Company network is prohibited.
Which are clearly shown at http://www.halfpricehosting. com
So the only right he has is to go pound sand or to find a new provider. Sorry to burst the bubble, but if you agree with terms of service, and then violate them, you don't have a right to complain- or at least nobody has to listen.
Point, match, set.
"Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes."
-E. W. Dijkstra
This is a very easy issue to address. Your ISP has the right to anything they want to to the files you store on their server. They can delete them, read them, modify them, or leave them alone. You, as a customer, have exactly one right. You can take your money elsewhere.
Sure, you can report them to the Better Business Bureau, but that just amounts to the same thing, customers leaving (or never signing on). Sure, you could try and take them to court for breaching their own policies, but they can pretty much change their policies whenever they like for whatever reason they like. What it boils down to is that you have very few protections that apply when it comes to dealing with a private company. It's been said before, but it's worth repeating that things like the First Amendment don't apply when you're dealing with a private company in this manner.
All you have is the power of your money. Use it.
-Todd
---
"The details of my life are quite inconsequential..."
It should be noted that it's directly within their policy that users MAY NOT create downloadable sites as part of their unrestricted bandwidth. That includes adult material, mp3s, and other.
Data Transfer - Explanation
In 1996, we were one of the first providers to
provide "unlimited traffic" as a standard feature
with all plans. Since then, this terminology has
come under fire for various reasons. As a result,
web hosting companies have been forced to
re-evaluate the way in which traffic allotments were
depicted.
Here's our philosophy in a nutshell...
Chances are, if you are looking to buy web hosting
services in a "shared" environment, you are not
going to be a high traffic site. You may get a lot
of hits and be successful - but you won't be a major
concern when it comes to bandwidth. If you were a
high-traffic site, you would probably need a
dedicated server.
Since 1996, we have only had a handful of customers
abuse this "unlimited" bandwidth feature. It usually
comes from site that is offering illegal copies of
software, or had content that was not in compliance
with our Terms of Service.
As a result, we have changed to an "unrestricted"
traffic model. This means that unless your site
compromises the performance of the web server
(which, by the way, probably won't happen), or the
performance of our network - we don't care how much
traffic you have. Your site should be successful.
What distinguishes our plans is the features that
are available - not the traffic limitations.
The first question this poses is, "How can you offer
unlimited traffic if all you have is an OC3
connection?". Simple, we can't. Neither can anyone
else. The reality is that your site can use as much
of our available bandwidth as it wants - without
fear of penalty. Just don't hurt our server or the
network. We figured that it was about time that a
hosting company explained this very confusing issue.
If you have any questions, please contact our sales
department.
NOTE: You can not have adult sites, download sites
and MP3s on our servers.
Rod Taylor
How many users read the full terms of service? Perhapsmaybe .00385 (rounded).
.mp3 extensions, be it Metallica or a recording of your child's first words. This isn't a fight against copyright violations its a fight against a file format.
At this point someone tosses in "ignorance is no excuse for breaking the law." But no one is breaking the law. Is this child porn? No.
Did they bother asking you if those mp3s are or aren't being distributed to non-CD owners, have they checked the logs to see if these things are being downloaded en masse. Did they ask the user if this he owns the work?
Nope, they just did a blanket delete of
I can imagine the day when most people have broadband and suddenly there's a blacklist on mov, mpg, asf, etc. We can degenerate back to a text only internet and toss in strict declarations of copyright because someone, somewhere might be sued.
Yes, he should leave that ISP. Anyone in that situation should inform others about their policies and blacklist them before they blacklist more of our formats.
Using your bad apple analogy, this is a country where we sell bongs, blank CDs, cable test chips, guns (constant abuse of sales and carry laws) etc. A small percentage of these things are used legally We accept things like these because a democracy has the responsibility to protect the rights of the minority.
I own a small ISP in Texas, and I'm forced to watch these types of issues very closely. While I respect Half-Price Hosting's (HPH) Terms of Service, and agree that they had the right to do what they did...I disagree with the approach. I fully think that their automated script should be "kind" enough to at least send a note to the user indicating their MP3's were rm'd.
Here in Austin, commonly branded the Live Music Capital of the World, we have a lot of independent, young, struggling musicians, and we host a number of their websites, which include MP3's. So for us it would obviously be a BadThing(tm) to just blindly start deleting MP3's.
We take the view that that users are responsible for what they store in their home directories. If someone points out a ToS violation, we'll look into it, take the appropriate action.
I think this is very much akin to the arguments around the searching of school lockers. In that case, kids are very much held directly responsible for the contents of their locker. Some schools do massive random searches, and that obviously holds a lot of controversy, but many (most?) only search specific lockers when there is reason to do so.
Of course the way I look at it is--if the Police came into the school, searched a locker, found something "bad"--do they prosecute the school, since they own the locker? No, they'd go after the kid. Yet in the world of web-hosting, we've seen cases of the police/etc going after the user AND the ISP. Possibly part of the "sue everyone" mind-set that seems to prevelant these days.
It's back to the whole privacy issue, I suppose. If you're that concerned over the privacy of any materials you store in your $HOME, consult the privacy policies, or ask the provider direct questions about how they handle the privacy of user data/files.
You come to my house and I ask you to leave your shoes on the mat. You don't take your shoes off, but when I realise, I take them off you and throw them out the door.
;)
How's that for an analogy
I once read in a sysadmin book some really good advice (which I'll paraphrase to the best of my poor memory):
:-)
Ignorance _is_ a defence:
- Never, EVER, root through a user's files without reasonable suspicion. If you do so (looking for copyright violations, etc...) you open yourself up to some major legal troubles. Basically, if you get bored and check for MP3s (doesn't matter what you say, matters what the courts think... they'll decide it's because you are looking for copyright violations) you are liable to ensure there are no other copyright violations, since you have proven you can do this and are willing to do this.
Sorry, I'm a little confusing there. Maybe this might clear it up a little:
For example, say you are a security guard. One day someone is stabbed with a dagger at your company. Would you be blamed for it? No. How could you ever tell that someone had brought something like a dagger into work with them? You don't look for that. You were ignorant.
Imagine if you had been looking through personal items at work for weapons. Would you be blamed for not finding the dagger? Probably. It slipped through your checks and balances. You are at fault for not finding it. Your activities as a security guard were negligent.
So, when someone REALLY has copyright (but illegally distributed) MP3 files on their site at Half Price Hosting, will Half Price Hosting be at fault for not finding them first? They were looking for them.
It is better not to open yourself up to legal trouble like this. Simply let the person who is breaking the law deal with their own troubles. If word gets back to you from one of the involved parties _then_ take the appropriate action: suspend the account pending investigation (by a professional, such as a PI or Police Officer -- not the sysadmin).
Just my 2 cents, and IANAL, so I'm probably wrong. If you do something stupid because of my advice, it serves ya right for listening to someone ranting on the fly at a coffee shop style news house.
If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
Half-Price Hosting's Terms of Service include the following:
4.1.5. The storage and distribution of MP3 format files via the Company network is prohibited.
By posting MP3:s on Half-Price, you are violating their rules.
If you don't read the terms of service, don't be surprised if they delete your files. ISP:s have the right to restrict what they host, but only if they make it clear what the restrictions are. If this restriction hadn't been in the terms of service, Half-Price would be a god target for legal action.
This seems like a very clear case of the few making life crap for the many. There are some people that think its fair and reasonable to distribute copyright material from their web sites. The actions of these people mean that the ISP has to try various things to stop being sued by the copyright owners. In this case they tried an automated process which then fell down. Unfortunate yes, a better process would have been to flag those accounts holding 'MP3's and to check them out. But the real blame lies with the pirates.
Example: If it weren't for car thieves we'd not have to bother locking our cars.
People that pirate material make things less easy for the rest of us, the honest people. We shouldn't have to put up with people deleting things from our web sites, but then, bands shouldn't have to put up with people copying their art around the internet to avoid paying for somethig they want.
http://twitter.com/onion2k