Slashdot Mirror
Music Industry Drafts Code of Conduct for ISPs
An anonymous reader writes "The Register is running a story about how the music industry is trying to get ISPs to sign 'code of conduct' agreements to cut people off for excessive bandwidth usage, to turn over details of users on demand, and to block certain 'illegal' websites." From the article: "According to the draft, the duo want ISPs and network operators to 'enforce terms of service that prohibit a subscriber from operating a server, or from consuming excessive amounts of bandwidth where such consumption is a good indicator of infringing activities.'"
Not content with creating a continent-spanning lawsuit-sharing network using special P2P (person to perpetrator) technology, the record companies' consortium, the International Federation of Phonographic Industries (IFPI) now wants your ISP to sign up to a new "code of conduct" that it has helpfully drafted with the help of the Motion Picture Association (MPA). A warning, though: you probably won't like it.
Here's a sampler. Under the new code, ISPs would put in place filtering technology to block services and/or sites that "are substantially dedicated to illegal file sharing or download services". They would retain data beyond what law enforcement agencies require, with the aim of helping track down copyright infringement. They'd hand that data, plus your identity, over to the IFPI or MPA if there was even a complaint - not a court order - against you for, you guessed it, copyright infringement. (And you'd have signed or clicked something agreeing to allow that.)
Want more? According to the draft, the duo want ISPs and network operators to "enforce terms of service that prohibit a subscriber from operating a server, or from consuming excessive amounts of bandwidth where such consumption is a good indicator of infringing activities." A summary of the draft can be found at the Electronic Digital Rights site's latest EDRIgram.
We wondered if it might be some clever hoax, and called the IFPI. "Oh yes, the draft" they said breezily and knowledgeably. The draft is for real.
And to back up their modest proposal, the MPA and IFPI aren't afraid to wave their big stick at the ISPs and network operators. Speaking last month at the invitation of the European Telecommunications Network Operators' Association (ETNO) , the head of the IFPI, John Kennedy, said: "Quality digital content is a key driver that makes consumers embrace new services. You invest billions in your pipes and cables and satellites but without content you have empty pipes and boxes. At this stage I am not even asking for much if anything by way of a financial commitment. I am asking for your time your energy your commitment and some social responsibility."
Tony Soprano couldn't have put it better. "Nice content-carrying pipes you've got here. What a shame if anything were to happen to them... now, we've got this little agreement for you to look at..."
Expect an interesting discussion next Monday, when this issue, and the draft code of conduct, will be discussed at a meeting in Geneva of WIPO, the World Intellectual Property Organisation. Which as you know has a stellar record defending the little guys against claims of copyright infringement.
If all that has you fizzing, then you're in good company, along with the UK's Internet Services Providers Association (ISPA). There will be an ISPA representative at next week's meeting, and if they're anything like as annoyed as the spokesman we talked about this with, they're so close to nuclear they already glow in the dark.
"This is obviously something they [IFPI and MPA] have worked on together," ISPA's spokesman almost spat. "They have made proposals like this in the past but that doesn't necessarily mean they have gone anywhere. They should really be going through the established takedown procedure. Some of these proposals contravene current laws and go beyond others. If you take the example of requiring subscribers to allow their identities to be given out - that's something that ISPs take very seriously, and only when required to by law enforcement. And they aren't a law enforcement authority."
But sometimes it seems like the MPA and IFPI feel this latter point is only a minor detail, which could be fixed in time.
France's ISPs seemed to have rolled over already. A version of this code was signed last July by three French ministers, representatives of the music industry, major ISPs and telecoms operators there. It allows collection societies and the like to create files from telecoms traffic data of supposed copyright infringers to "mutual
The thing is, most ISPs already limit your max bandwidth. If I pay for 1.5Mb/1.5Mb, I want to get the bandwidth that I pay for; it'd be completely unfair otherwise. If the ISP is overselling their capacity, that's *their* problem, not mine.
I would be out of luck, given the code that the music industry wants. I run four minor-use websites, and serve about a dozen services (mostly to myself), including a streaming music station so that I can listen to my music when I'm at work. Given this "code", I'd be gone in a heartbeat.
Any ISP that agrees to such a code can forget my business in a heartbeat.
sed "s/SJW.*$/... never mind. I was about to say something stupid, and also, I'm a troglodyte./Ig"
I recieved a letter simular to that form my isp. It basicaly said i was above the "average usage" and it tended to indecate i was doing somethign ilegal.
I told them that i was evaluating opensource programs and operating systems and this had nothign to do with anythign ilegal. Further i was paying extra money for a public static ip adress so i could run a server and they new about that. Then after explaining that the average was what it is because people like me use more bandwidth and if i quit it would lower the average i was still met with an attitude.
I then refered to the advertisement that was running on the television at the time wich was very simular to the same one when i purchased my broad band package. I added the advertised speed up and multiplied it to the number of days in a billing cycle. I then suggested that this is the amount of bandwidth i am entitled to and what i was actualy using was just a fraction of that. Of course i had to explain were i came up with that number but after wards i asked them to place my actual badwidth allowed in writing so i could refer it to my legal department(meaning lawer).
They never sent me anythign, i havn't changed anything except maybe the release cycles of the programs i am using and i havn't been bothered since. You might want to think about an approach simular to this. I don't know if it would help shut them up or not. I don't know if all the fuss i was doing just made them look at the trafic i generated and determin it was all legal wich stoped the letters. All i do know is that someone took notice and excluded me from the harrasment list.
FYI, you were right in the original post. 7-11 was originally Southland Ice Co.