Slashdot Mirror


BPI Requests ISPs Suspend Suspected Filesharers

MartinJW writes "The British Phonographic Industry (BPI) has written to two of the UKs larger ISPs, Tiscali and Cable & Wireless, asking them to suspend the accounts of 59 users they have identified as 'illegal file sharers.' The BPI says they have 'unequivocal evidence' of IP addresses that were used to upload 'significant quantities' of music. Although the IP addresses were used to identify the ISPs involved, the providers are the only people able to identify the exact individuals responsible. This marks a significant change in the BPI's tactics; previously they have targeted individuals but it seems that they are now taking it one step further and requesting the ISPs take decisive action to uphold the terms in their own 'acceptable use policies.'"

3 of 224 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Not going to be a problem by grasshoppa · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Oh and did anyone else notice that if this happens then people are being punished without ever having seen a judge or even a police officer. No sworn in official will be involved just people from two companies. Welcome to the justice system of the 21st century.

    Grand stand much?

    A private business has every right to refuse service to anyone, for any reason ( despite what the equal rights groups may tell you ).

    This isn't a government organization exacting punitive measures against citizens on a private organizations say-so. This is one private org asking another to "punish" their customers.

    Their paying customers. Which to me seems like a bad idea. But whatever.

    --
    Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
  2. ISPs move away from that practice in Sweden by peope · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Here in Sweden ISPs have warned and disconnected people accused of copyright infringement.
    However in recent time people have been aware of the issue and some ISPs has gone against the practice.
    Nowadays ISPs here are reluctant to be known as a party to disconnect you because of those reasons.
    Customers simply move away from their services.

  3. The most correct approach so far by erroneus · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm really very sympathetic to the cause of file sharing. I only see the file-sharing-universe as the participant that I am. I don't do it all that much but I feel a bit grateful for those that share stuff... whether intentionally or not. (Hehehe... one of my favorite boredom-killing past times is to open a gnutella client and search for p*.jpg or *.doc or *.xls... you might be surprised as what people are stupid enough to share!)

    As a rule, if I really want something, I buy it. I would like to assume (and from what I hear it's generally true) that when people fully appreciate something or functionally use it, they buy it. That goes for software, music, movies... whatever... okay, I admit I don't buy porn... but anyway.

    But if ever there was a "correct" approach to their handling, this would be it. Their [the clients'] anonymity is preserved. They don't get a criminal record. They don't pay thousands to defend themselves. They don't settle for large amounts of money. And in my guess, the worst they might initially get is an interruption of service as a warning and probably resume connectivity (after turning off sharing) shortly thereafter and lives go generally unharmed.

    It's not that bad really.