Slashdot Mirror


SBC/Pacbell To Filter 90% Of alt.binaries Groups

An Anonymous Coward writes: "I received an email from PacBell.net (Pacific Bell's ISP), stating that they're transitioning their usenet services to Prodigy. They're making a few changes along the way." He excerpts from the email: "In addition, after evaluating possible copyright infringement issues, newsgroup usage and the cost of providing newsgroup access, we will no longer offer some alt.binary newsgroups. For a list of alt.binaries that will no longer be offered, please refer to our FAQ at http://global.pacbell.net/usenet_update.html.' Note that the link currently doesn't go to the right place. After telephoning SBC, I was informed that upwards of 90% of the alt.binaries.* groups are going to be blocked."

19 of 253 comments (clear)

  1. Uncensored newsgroup access by Jish · · Score: 5, Informative
    I realize this story is about fighting censorship and arguing about how big business is taking away our freedoms...

    However, a good alternative for newsgroup access I have used for a while is:

    uncensored-news

    The upgrade regularly and I have never had problems accessing them or finding a group. And now they have a special server just for multimedia and binaries...

    Just a thought for any of you who want a solution other than an uphill battle with your ISP...

    Josh

    1. Re:Uncensored newsgroup access by great+throwdini · · Score: 5, Informative

      Interesting licensing terms over at uncensored-news:

      17. ACCEPTANCE
      "Bookmarking this web site shall constitute an implicit acceptance of the foregoing terms herein set."

      Having dragged the link from the parent post onto my desktop, I somehow managed to accept terms to a service about which I had not even read. We do live in strange times, don't we? :\

      Seriously though, no refunds, hostile chargeback policy, etc. It's being run as an 'adult service' but if it nets me a better feed of the rec.games.roguelike groups, maybe I'll...

  2. Regarding newsgroups and ISP's by mindstrm · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Although I agree that a big, fat news server does make an ISP more attractive...

    when I buy internet service, I want IP routing, PERIOD. I don't *want* to pay for whatever wierd services they think they need to run. I'll do my own mail, dns, everything else.

    If tehy don't want to waste resources (legal or technical) in carrying some newsgroups.. fine. I guess it sucks for their customers who like it....
    but I've been paying for access to news-servers separately for years now. It just makes sense. They are far less likely to change policies and rip you off when it's their sole business.

    1. Re:Regarding newsgroups and ISP's by treat · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I'll do my own mail, dns, everything else.


      You're lucky that you're allowed to. Increasingly, ISPs are not allowing this, wanting to charge 5-10 times as much for business rates for customers that want such simple things as an e-mail address that will never change.

  3. Conduit/Content by Satai · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The idea of filtering based on content is what is important here. I was under the impression that as long as the ISP "only provided the lines" - that is, was merely a conduit to the Great Big Internet - they were allowed to get away with lots of illegal stuff going on; but as soon as they began to make value judgments based on legality, they were responsible for all further illegal activity. I could be wrong, but that's the impression I was under (sounds reasonable to me, to be honest.)

    Filtering based on bandwidth isn't a new thing - this is why we have such a proliferation of Usenet Providers. Lots of ISPs filter to keep down the cost for such a relatively small 'payback' in user satisfaction/use.

    But, again, I'm curious - does this make them liable for the illegal content that does get through, since they are now officialy filtering based on legality?

    1. Re:Conduit/Content by Amoeba · · Score: 4, Informative

      At an ISP I once worked at I was involved in establishing newsgroup policies and the possible legal consequences and this is my take based upon the legal advice and discussions I had at the time. Unless there have been some changes in the past few years that I've missed, the minute an ISP changes their terms of service to explicitly block access based on the legality of content they technically lose their "common carrier" status protection and can be held liable etc.

      Unfortunately these kinds of cases never get to court in any way that would force a change of this type of crap because of the purposefully vague and specious language describing what exactly you're paying for in that same damned ToS.

      Basically it still boils down to whether your lawyer(money) can beat up their lawyer(money), though the size of the ToS "backdoors" & loopholes can help :)

      --
      Do not taunt Happy-Fun Ball
    2. Re:Conduit/Content by DennyK · · Score: 5, Informative

      If they were actually filtering *traffic* based on content, that might leave them liable for all kinds of fun lawsuits. But in this case, they are not filtering traffic, they're just refusing to offer some newsgroups on their own news server. Essentially, they're only changing what content they are offering on their own server, not what kind of content passes over their lines...and no matter what the reasons, that should not affect (legally) their responsibility for general traffic. I'd guess PacBell/SBC customers can use any other news servers out there and still be able to access groups that aren't carried on Prodigy's.

      Thank goodness RoadRunner still offers most, if not "all", of the alt.binaries.* tree... ;)

      DennyK

  4. Re:The 'net has moved on by rknop · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I say, let it die peacefully. The intelligent people left newsgroups a long time ago and the only remaining denizens are the pornographers and anarchists who don't deserve a voice in the first place.

    Sort of a pity, realy, since NNTP is a protocal designed for distributed discussion groups. Now, instead, we're all stuck with web-based messaging systems, like this one, which, in a word, suck. Oh, some are better than others, but to my view, using a web browers for a discussion board is like using a hammer to drive screws.

    Think about it: we're all stuck with the interface that the server has decided to implement. Whereas, with NNTP, we can each choose our own newsreader client, and yet still all communicate.

    A pity that the Web Browser has become such the "killer ap" that now everybody uses it even when there are far better longstanding tools out there.

    -Rob

  5. could backfire on them by sessamoid · · Score: 5, Insightful

    While cutting down on their news server costs considerably, this move could backfire on them. If a significant number of their customers actually like and use the alt.binaries groups on their news server, they'll go elsewhere for news service.

    The problem with this is that since the news is no longer kept within their own network, that all that traffic is going to have to pass through their mian connection to the internet. They could end up having to spend quite a bit more on bigger pipes as a result of this.

    Should be interesting to watch.

    --
    "No, no, no. Don't tug on that. You never know what it might be attached to."
  6. This is cute, too by TomatoMan · · Score: 4, Insightful
    From their benefits page:

    By the act of entering this site, I agree to the terms set forth in the terms & conditions

    Well, I'm glad you do. And when you can provide an airtight definition of what "the act of entering this site" means, and some explanation of how users can agree to something they haven't seen, then maybe I'll think about agreeing too... or not.

    By the way, your reading this post constitutes your agreement to immediately pay $100 into the TomatoMan Gets A New G4 fund. Thank you for your contribution.
    --
    -- http://frobnosticate.com
  7. It's a good thing by martin-k · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Though they have ulterior motives, I applaud the move. Anything that rids Usenet of the binaries is inherently good.

    A full newsfeed is 200 to 250 *GBytes* a day, of which only around 5% is text-based discussion. Just by dropping binaries and keeping the same amount of disk space, a news provider increases retention time for *real* discussions immensely. If I had to decide whether I want my ISP to serve incomplete binaries to alt.fan.britney-spears.blow-job or have six months retention for comp.lang.*, I'd prefer the latter (others might have different preferences, though ...)

    Get used to it: If you want binaries, pay for it. It's not that bad: 10 bucks a month, and you're in business. Go to Newsguy, Giganews, Supernews, uncensored-news.com, newsfeeds.com but don't expect your ISP to provide everything.

    -Martin

  8. This has been a long time coming by satsuke · · Score: 4, Informative

    I dumped SBC* services months ago explicitly because of usenet service.

    And it wasn't because of alt.bin* style groups. Just plain discussion groups were affected to.

    Here is a short timeline of SBC / PACBELL usenet service.

    Once upon a time SBC operated several usable usenet servers.

    Each one had acceptable retention times and a good varity of groups to see.

    news.swbell.net
    news.pacbell.net
    news.flash.net

    There was also a server in prodigy-land that had a horrible retention rate and skipped articles left and right .. this was the one I never used.

    Than SBC instituted rate capping at 128K down .. there was a lot of activity in the swbell support newsgroups about this .. most along the lines of talking about class action lawsuits stemming from a rate cap on a service that was explicitly guaranteed at 384k for DSL service

    SBC than noticed that customers were leap frogging from server to server. In order to pull together each and every single piece of a multipart binary this was required sometimes.

    Up until this point the service was still relativly stable .. even though with the rate caps I had to start downloading stuff before work and finish up when I got home

    Than there was some large crash .. all of the indexs were corrupted and no usenet service for several days. Tech support knows nothing about usenet

    After his point there was barely a single multipart article that came across properly.

    So they're service became unusable and at that point I left as soon as my contract expired.

    Now I'm using RR in Kansas City .. 45K upstream .. around 2 meg down and a usenet service that is usable enough to follow discussions and follow binaries without spamming groups with repost request.

    This cut of content is just par for the course for SBC. Although I don't think it will affect many people though .. everyone I know who is still on SBC moved on to commercial usenet providers a long time ago.

    oh .. and Time Warner KC / RR jacked they're prices up to $45 .. now that SBC has backed off a bit from advertising they're service.

    funny thing .. my SBC DSL connection has been disconnected since March .. but when I turn the DSL modem on I still get ATM / DSL link contenuity .. must not be to awful busy if they can left former customers still take a port on the DSLAM>

    Satsuke

  9. The email announcement by acceleriter · · Score: 5, Informative
    From: support@swbell.net
    To: deleted@swbell.net
    Sent: Friday, July 27, 2001 11:20 AM
    Subject: Attention Usenet Newsgroup Users - Important Information


    Dear Southwestern Bell Internet Services Usenet Newsgroup Member,


    If you are currently using Southwestern Bell Internet Services Usenet
    Newsgroups, we have very important information for you. As you may know,
    Southwestern Bell Internet Services has teamed with Prodigy®, a leading
    national Internet service provider, as the Southwestern Bell Internet
    Services preferred source of Usenet Newsgroups and other Internet related
    services.


    On July 25, 2001, your newsgroup server, which is currently hosted by
    Southwestern Bell Internet Services, will begin a transition to Prodigy. To
    continue using Usenet Newsgroups after the final transition date of August
    25, you must update your newsgroup software with new server information.


    For instructions on how to change your Usenet software, please visit
    http://global.swbell.net/usenet_update.html. After August 19, your current
    settings will no longer be available.


    In addition, after evaluating possible copyright infringement issues,
    newsgroup usage and the cost of providing newsgroup access, we will no
    longer offer some alt.binary newsgroups. For a list of alt.binaries that
    will no longer be offered, please refer to our FAQ at
    http://global.swbell.net/usenet_update.html.


    For Southwestern Bell Internet Services customer support regarding Usenet,
    please call:

    * 1-800-NET-HELP for Dial-up Access Customers
    * 1-877-SBC-DSL5 for DSL Internet Customers

    Thank you for using our service and for your attention to this matter. See
    you on your new Usenet Newsgroup service!


    Sincerely,

    The Southwestern Bell Internet Services Team


    Copyright 2001 Southwestern Bell Internet Services, Inc All rights
    reserved. Southwestern Bell and Southwestern Bell Internet Services, Inc.
    are registered trademarks of SBC Communications Inc. or its subsidiaries.
    Prodigy is a registered trademark of Prodigy Communications L.P. Other names
    may be trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective owners.

    --

    CEE5210S The signal SIGHUP was received.

  10. Re:Good thing by Lobsang · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I Agree!

    Let's also trash out all the Xerox Copiers, since they can be used for Copyright Violation. Better yet, let's destroy all tape recorders since they can be used for Music piracy! Oh god! The VCRs! We almost forgot them! Let's destroy them too! Oh yes, no CDRs will be allowed of course...

    This is just ludicrous...

  11. Good by Masem · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I wish more ISPs did it this way as well. USENET is not a file-transferring medium; it's meant for discussion in plain/text and nothing else. My current ISP doesn't filter anything, and when the newsgroup goes flakely, a good number of subscribers b&m about poor speeds and lack of multiple connections at high speeds, missing parts, poor retention, and groups not subscribed to. Of course, supporting what these users want is way more than I would expect any reasonable ISP to offer.

    I would love to see the lameness ratio of USENET decrease due to lack of users that were using it primarily for binary transfer, and back to the state it was before the Endless September, and wish more ISPs took this route.

    --
    "Pinky, you've left the lens cap of your mind on again." - P&TB
    "I can see my house from here!" - ST:
  12. Specialization vs Censorship by stuccoguy · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I am the last person that would ever condone anything that smelled even remotely like censorship, but from a customer perspective I think this move makes sense.


    When I contract with an ISP I want to be connected to the internet at the highest possible speed and reliability. If the ISP is spending time and money subsidizing usenet or free home pages it makes it even more difficult for them to provide me with the level of service I require. I want my ISP to focus their resources on the service I am paying for and that is connection.

    At the same time, I subscribe to a commercial usenet service and I want them to focus their resources on article completion and retention. If my news service suddenly started offering connectivity to its subscribers without charging additional fees, the news service itself would suffer. Most people would find that unacceptable and yet they expect their ISP to offer commercial quality news service at no additional cost.


    I realize their is a historical backdrop against which most ISPs offer email, home pages and news groups along with connectivity. But the internet market place is evolving and maturing into a more service oriented place. Some things are worth paying for and if you truely value usenet you will subsidize its existence by paying for a premium service.

    On the other hand, if SBC is continuing to offer some binary newsgroups and not others than their move cannot be seen merely as a move to improve quality of service for their customers, but must be seen to some degree as censorship. After all, they had to use some criteria other than cost or quality of service to decide which groups to offer or not.

    Under these circumstances I think that their motive should not be applauded even though it will almost certainly allow them to increase service levels.

    On a closing note, I used to use SCB/PacBell and their service is horrible anyway.

  13. Fine print: too much trouble by TomatoMan · · Score: 4, Interesting
    This is one thing that irritates me about slashdot... everybody is posting "oh my god I found this horrible thing on line 126144 of the TOS"...

    Whatever, I pay $10/month and get NNTP access to some 90,000 groups and have never had a single problem... period.

    So yeah, somebody in their legal department put some shitty things into their terms of service... but if it never actually means anything to me as a user then I can let it slide...
    Exactly the attitude their legal department hopes you'll have. "Sign here, and here, and - HEY! DON'T READ THAT! - sign here, and here..." (Berke Breathed)

    As long as you never have a problem, then you'll never have a problem. If you do, the first thing you'll have to do is find out what you agreed to, with your fingers crossed. Then don't act surprised at the results.
    --
    -- http://frobnosticate.com
  14. 90% cut off?? YES!!! Er.. I mean... NOOOOOOO!!!! by tcc · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Heh :)

    In my world, inside my head, I thought 90% cutoff was a good thing because I was sure they talked about filtering useless spam in the newsgroups, I've rolled on the floor with joy like stimpy in an episode which I don't remember...

    Then someone outside my world came in and explained to me that the 90% figure was in VOLUME not in # of posts... everything around me turned to grey, as I understood that this would filter the best content (p0rn) and leave only the spamming...everything around me faded, in a dark dark grey...

    --
    --- Metamoderating abusive downgraders since my 300th post.
  15. Not censorship... by Syberghost · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...they HAVE to do this, folks.

    You should be bitching at the legislature that created the DMCA and passed it, and the courts that are ruling that the ISP's can be sued for the copyright violations.

    And even then, you're sucking wind, because the alt.binaries newsgroups alone require something like two T1s worth of bandwidth alone to provide, and don't make a *DIME* of income for the ISPs.

    So which choice should they make:

    1) Start charging for Usenet access.
    2) Stop providing Usenet access at all.
    3) Drop alt.binaries in whole or in part, so that the rest of Usenet can be kept for a reasonable retention period at a reasonable cost.

    They're not blocking outbound access on port 119, they're just declining to devote 3Mb/S of bandwidth and (150GB * number of days retention) to providing a service that 99% of their users don't even use, and a large number of the remaining 1% don't get from them anyway.