Comcast Warns Infringing Customers Of Abuse
tm writes "Comcast recently sent out letters to DMCA-infringing customers, informing them of their illegal downloading transgressions. The notice clearly states that Comcast has been asked by the copyright owner, MGM, to notify the individual of their actions and demand that the downloaded file(s) be immediately removed. In addition, the individual must write a return letter, which consists of an explanation and an apology. It appears that if a valid explanation is given, such as 'I don't know how to secure my access point and my neighbors run wild on my connection,' then both Comcast and MGM will be happy. If the explanation is not satisfactory however, they may proceed with fines, termination of service, ect. It will be interesting to see how this plays out and if this will influence other ISPs to go after customers at Hollywood's request."
In the letter from Comcast, there is no mention of offering an apology.
Where does it say anything about you having to send an apology and an explanation? This is just a standard DMCA notification letter, which Comcast is REQUIRED to send in order to be protected from lawsuits by copyright holders. You have a right to send a counter-notification, which is a formal statement that they're accusing you in error. Usually you don't have to do anything about these letters, aside from the obvious step of not sharing copyrighted material online. This looks like a standard DMCA letter, ISPs have been sending these out for years.
"...Comcast request that you immediately remove the allegedly infringing works from the Service or Comcast will be forced to remove or block access to the works.
If you believe in good faith that the allegedly infringing works have been removed or blocked by mistake or misidentification, then you may send a counter notification to Comcast. Upon Comcast's receipt of a counter notification that satisfies the requirements of the DMCA, Comcast will provide a copy of the counter notification to the party who sent the original notification of claimed infringment. We will then follow the DMCA's procedures with respect to a received counter notification."
Since it is a bit torrent link they're talking about (if you go by the port number in the complaint) you could easily say that your child or something had to get 'the internet talk' and kill it as easily as that.
-EB
Do you ever walk alone like a drifter in the dark?
From Verizon's news page, and I quote:
Verizon appealed the court's decision because it opens the door for anyone who makes a mere allegation of copyright infringement to gain complete access to private subscriber information without the due process protections afforded by the courts.
They don't condone piracy, but they want to cover their customers in case of abuse. It's a very reasonable position and it makes me glad I'm a Verizon customer(though actually they are the only broadband availiable in my area).
Yeesh, Slashdot has gone from merely sensationalizing stories to just plain making shit up. I can't wait for the next Linux Kernel release announcement, which I'm sure will end up saying something like "500 University students sued for using Linux; now in Guantanamo Bay"
There is no sig, there is only Zuul.
It looks like this user was using bittorrent. If you are using bittorrent, the only client you should ever use is Azureus. Once you have Azureus installed, also install the Azureus SafePeer plugin. This will download the latest ip addresses from PeerGuardian which moved to a new address. This should help keep unwanted users out of your box.
If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land,
it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. -James Madison
Not really. The point is that you should provide a means for your ISP to 'cover their ass' in the event that they get 'requested' to do something about you specifically.
It would be nice to have a standard letter that lists the reasons that would be acceptable to them the presence of this 'criminal activity' in an area that they have legal liablity.
In short, the issue of copying music books and movies has no answer. So no one cares if you do or don't do it. All anyone really cares about is whether it is going to create a problem for them.
If they (the **AAs) were truly serious about stopping copying, then people would be going to jail for long periods of time for selling hard disks. Like how people in the USA (for example 65-year-old Canadian comedian Tommy Chong) are sent to jail for selling painted glass tubes that might be used for , ohmygod!, smoking illegal herbs.
[By the way, the news broadcast of Mr. Chong's imprisonment was followed by an advert for corporate love drugs - expensive pills designed to increase woman's sexual response. Ask your doctor today!]
Anyway, what Comcast is trying to tell you is that if you share files (and you do), please make an effort to come up with a reasonable excuse for them to ignore you while still collecting your money and providing service.
That's what this is all about.
First of all, this isn't new. I got one of these from Comcast back in September, which was 8 months ago.
:P
Second, it does not say you must submit an explanation and apology. You only have to submit something to them if you believe that the file was mistakenly identified.
The only thing this is asking you to do is stop sharing the file. Which is what I did. Comcast is not trying to invade your privacy. And they are most definitely not doing this because they want to, it's because the copyright owner has used the DMCA to force Comcast to notify you of your infringement.
I really wish the editors would look into the details of things like this before submitting a story. It's almost as if they want to post misleading information to make controversy amongst us users and start a heated debate.
Joseph?