UC Irvine Cracks Down on P2P

grendel20 writes "After years of dialup, one thing I was looking forward to the most about college was the fast ethernet connection. Upon arriving at UCI though, I found my kazaa speeds to be way below subpar. Apparently, UCI has limited access for all P2P programs with this fine piece of hardware. Now what do I do?" Whether you agree with what UC Irvine is doing or not, I do applaud them for publicizing and being straightforward about it. Upstream entities can implement these sorts of controls without telling users, and it's tempting to do so because it will reduce the number of user complaints.

Comments

I wonder if they'll get sued

[anthony_dipierro]

Therefore, of the 60 mbs total bandwidth, 5 - 10 mbs is set aside for P2P.

Sounds perilously close to contributory copyright infringement to me.

liar liar

[leroybrown]

Now what do I do?
Stop breaking the law, asshole!!

Re:No moral judgement?

[anthony_dipierro]

I think it should be up to the taxpayers funding the University if they want to pay for the 5mb pipe dedicated almost entirely to P2P.

Fine, but then those taxpayers are making a moral decision to support piracy.

Apparently no one seems to get my point about the spam hoster. By turning their back on the obvious piracy, they are making a moral decision to support pirates. Now personally I don't find piracy to be immoral, so I support what they're doing, but they are making a moral judgement.

Further, you can argue that they don't have proof of the piracy, but likewise spam-friendly ISPs don't have proof of the spam. You can't prove that the receiver didn't opt-in.

Re:No moral judgement?

[anthony_dipierro]

I should point out that I don't necessarily consider infringing copyright to be an intrinsic "wrong" -- more of a "technical wrong".

I don't think it's "wrong" at all, but still, supporting those who commit copyright infringement is making a moral judgement.