Slashdot Mirror
70% of P2P Users Would Stop if Warned by ISP
Umpire writes "As the UK considers a three strikes policy to fight copyright infringement, a new survey reports that 70% of UK broadband users would stop using P2P if they received a warning from their ISP. 'Wiggin commissioned the 2008 Digital Entertainment Survey, which found that 70 percent of all people polled said they would stop illegally sharing files if their ISP notified them in some way that it had detected the practice. When broken down by age group, an unexpected trend emerges: teenagers are generally more likely to change their behavior than older Internet users.'"
When broken down by who's paying the bills, an obvious trend emerges: People who have to answer to Mom and Dad as to why nobody in the family can get their email anymore are generally more likely to change their behavior than people can just buy another throwaway account.
P2P != illegal file sharing
Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
"Would you stop doing illegal things, when reprimanded by someone?"
Did they also asked: "Would you stop your perfectly legal activity, when reprimanded by your ISP?"?
Or: "Do you think it is right, that your ISP should monitor your activity on the internet?"
"Between strong and weak, between rich and poor [...], it is freedom which oppresses and the law which sets free"
They can't stop legal P2P - there is nothing illegal about that. All that will happen on the illegal side is it will go encrypted - then the ISP will have no idea of what is being transferred which kind of absolves them.
that 100% thought that traffic encryption and ip obfuscation would be desirable features of the next generation of file sharing apps
get clue, riaatards. the game is over. you lose. your business model is dead, and cannot be extended with legions of lawyers
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
70% of P2P users would lie about stopping if polled about "illegal file sharing". The other 30% just don't care.
The European Commission recently had a public consultation about this. I'm surprised not more understand the issues involved - my response deals with just a few of them:
Response to Commission from Pirate Party leader
(the first few lines is a preamble in Swedish, followed by the actual letter in English.)
In short, this does not deal with copyrights and culture anymore. It deals with the cost to society of enforcing today's copyright. That cost involves the abolition of the messenger immunity, freedom of the press, and private communications as a concept.
No right exists in a vacuum - there is always a cost to society of enforcing that right. Without a proper cost-to-benefit analysis, no informed decision can be made.
Just because something is stated in a ToS doesn't mean it's legally stated in a ToS.
Post-rock/Ambient/Drone and other noise.