Slashdot Mirror
Big Six UK ISPs Capitulate To Music Industry
Barence writes "Britain's six leading internet providers have signed a Government-led agreement to stamp out illegal music file sharing. The six providers — BT, Virgin Media, Orange, Tiscali, Sky and Carphone Warehouse — will implement a series of measures against those found to be file sharing. Offenders may find their internet connection is throttled, or may even have their traffic 'filtered' to prevent media files from being downloaded. The ISPs are reportedly reluctant to impose the BPI's preferred 'three strikes and you're out' approach of cutting off users' broadband connections."
apt-get install libopenssl :-P
It's only a matter of time before typing www.piratebay.org into your URL bar produces "Sorry, this site is blocked for content infringement" on ALL of our browsers (since we all ultimately answer to our ISP's).
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
Filtering/inspecting traffic implies taking responsibility implies getting lawsuits directed at ISPs for users' content.
You thought watching SCO trials was fun, you ain't seen nothing yet. There's going to be some fireworks over this one when they sue the wrong person.
The simple truth is that interstellar distances will not fit into the human imagination
- Douglas Adams
Although this does bind ISPs to prosecuting sharers in at least some manner, we don't know how severely it will be enforced yet. Thus far ISPs like Virgin have maintained they will punish filesharers but have only sent out a very limited number of warnings.
It's also worth noting that we don't have the "sue them into oblivion" culture that seems to be the case across the pond. It seems like this could go either way. I'll be keeping my fingers crossed!
...that surprisingly the ISPs won't distinguish between copyrighted files and independent artists?
No...there's no hidden agenda here from BPI...
This will cause encrypted darknets to flourish which will cause a faster downward spiral due to the whole 'Pedo Menace'.
"Bah!" - Dogbert
Next thing you know, they'll be outlawing alcohol and chopping your hand off if you badmouth Allah. Think the British parliament would respond if I told them this law is unconstitutional? I suppose Gordon Brown wants to one-up Tony Blair by, rather than just playing George Bush's puppet, actually doing things Bush wishes he could do but can't.
Whale
The UK Government has released a consultation into potential legislation aimed at curbing illicit filesharing on the net. Several of the legislative options on the table are worrying, and mirror schemes being discussed in various national and international fora. They include streamlining the legal process to require ISPs to provide personal data relating to an IP address, handing responsibility for taking action against illicit filesharers to a third party body, or requiring ISPs to take action against users themselves or to install filtering equipment to block infringing content.
At the same time a "Memorandum of Understanding", negotiated behind-the-scenes with strong influence from the Government, between the UK's six major ISPs (Virgin Media, Sky, Carphone Warehouse, BT, Orange and Tiscali) and the British Phonographic Industry and the Motion Picture Association. Signatories endorse five principles in the MoU:
The Open Rights Group has more details
If they don't want you to listen to their music, don't. Don't download, don't listen, don't buy.
:-) either. Just don't.
Don't stea... I mean infringe copyright
Everybody should pick up the attitude that if you can't share it, don't buy it. Just a thought.
The deal is something of an about-face for Carphone Warehouse boss, Charles Dunstone...
Guess they got their own "Obamas" over their too.
I hope encryption can work until we find a way to dump the ISPs.
What?
Rubbish!
;-)
The keys will obviously be stored in a disused submarine lavatory with no lights and a sign saying 'Beware the leopard!'.
"Bah!" - Dogbert
exactly how are they going to filter the connections ?
I listen to last.fm thats a music stream in mp3 of copyrighted artist it helps that last.fm (CBS rather large firm) have the license so how is my ISP going to know that ?
this looks like just as excuse to cut out people who do file sharing they simply will look at the large downloaders and accuse them
BPI has no technology and nor do the ISP that can differentiate between licensed and unlicensed !
regards
John Jones
The real issue I see with this isn't so much that the ISP's are sending out warning letters - they've all stated that they're not prepared to cancel anyone's service - but that the record companies have essentially got the ISP's to do their dirty work for them.
NOW they know that the ISP's will have detailed files on every single person they find allegedly distributing copyrighted music - detailed files that means these "John doe" cases we seen in America will start turning into "John Smith" cases.
+1 IDisagreeSoHeMustBeATrollOrAnAstroturferOrAShill
for giving developers a reason to build even hardier file sharing aps
it was easy to shut down napster: cut off the head
you had to poison morpheus, limewire, etc. with phony files
then emule and bittorrent proved immune to being shut down and poisoned. so now you have to go to the carriers and put the burden on them to search for file sharing patterns
the next step in the war is to build apps that obfuscate their activity. make it look like http form requests. make it look like smtp traffic. randomize ips, obfuscate ports, etc.
that's all your effort results in, dear music industry: stronger, hardier weeds that you can never kill
you lose. you just don't know it yet
legions of poor, music hungry teenagers: 3
hired guns of the music industry: 0
you're dying music industry. please just get dead already please
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Guys, seriously, who here still uses one of the big six ISPs by *choice*?!
It's time to switch ISPs
The difference in service is staggering.
I'm gonna be emailing my ISP to thank them for not signing up to this new scheme.
Disclaimer: I don't work for adsl24 or entanet, nor do I get paid for directing you there. I'm just a very happy customer
http://adsl24.co.uk/broadband_home.php - take a look, you won't be disappointed
...UK ISPs who will not enjoy my custom in the future.
Operation Guillotine is in effect.
ISPs need to be reminded that their job is to provide internet service. Once the lines between providing access to the tubes and providing content on those tubes blurred, things were doomed to go downhill.
This isn't about ISPs bending to the will of the various media associations - it's about ISPs trying to position themselves to deliver content and ensure _THEIR_ content is the content being delivered. ISPs should be prohibited from being in any business other than providing internet service because, in becoming content providers as well, they are increasingly acting in anti-competitive ways (if you think illegal p2p traffic is the only traffic they're manipulating, then you haven't been paying attention...).
I see it. How come they don't? There would be no reason for this if the music industry decided to make two changes. First, they need to accept the new model of doing business. Clearly, the Internet has changed the landscape of things, and the old ways simply won't work as effectivly anymore. The second problem is that none of this would be necessary if the music industry decided to change their pricing model. Again, $20 is too much for a cd. I think if pricing was a little lower, it might cut down on the amount of "copyright infringement" cases. But no, the music industry would rather bully around whoever gets in their way. It's ridiculous, any other industry would change, or lower their prices, it just seems like there's a general lack of competition.
Once upon a time there was a Music Industry. It had a business model that it liked. Then came the Internet, and a company came along offering a business model that it didn't like. So, instead of taking the money that the new business model offered, the music industry decided to flush that money down the toilet instead. The technology and consumer demand didn't go away, and finally the music industry said, "Hmm... maybe we shouldn't have flushed all that money down the toilet." So they went and they found that some of the money they had flushed away was still stuck in the U-bend and they got it out and they cleaned it off. It was too late to get the rest though, a thousand flowers had bloomed and (most) people decided they didn't really have a problem getting everything for free.
Now, the music industry is trying to get people to pay for something that they have gotten for free for years and years. And people know that there's just about no downside to the "stealing." So, the music industry flails around trying to go back to 1999 and do things right this time, but their time machine doesn't seem to be working.
Here's hoping you have better luck than we did.
Sincerely,
American ISPs
Carphone Warehouse, a large UK ISP that operates the TalkTalk and AOl(uk) brands doesn't seem entirely enthusiastic about this
In their response they say:
We will continue to fight to protect your privacy and your right to freedom of use of the Internet. What we will not do is:
* disconnect your service or slow the speed of your connection
* monitor your traffic
* divulge your details to content companies (unless forced to do so by a court)
Some content companies are pushing for changes in the law to force us to do these things - we will vigorously fight any such changes in the law.
and they list some helpful excuses:
Q: What would cause me to receive a letter?
If the content companies send TalkTalk an IP address that matches to your broadband connection then they may send you a letter. However, there are many reasons why you might have done anything wrong and the claim unfounded:
* The content that is being offered for upload may actually be being shared legally
* The content company may have made a mistake in identifying the IP address
* It may be someone else in the household that offered the content for upload
* It may be that someone 'hijacked' or 'piggybacked' on your wi-fi connection
and add:
Q: Does the content company have my details to pursue me?
If a copyright infringement has actually occurred content company have some legal powers to attempt to prosecute you. To do this they would need to know your details (e.g. name, address), which they do not currently have. TalkTalk have and we will continue to refuse to divulge your details to them or any other content companies. However, a content company may seek a court order requiring them to divulge your details. TalkTalk will vigorously fight on your behalf to resist this, but they feel they should let you know that they cannot guarantee that they will be successful in protecting your details.
A least they look like they are trying.
If it goes on like this, step by step the internet will become more and more moderated and people will tolerate it. Now the measures in China may seem unacceptable to us, but if people accept these small steps like this one here, more and more we'll go towards the same anyway. Sad indeed :(
BBC News April 2nd 2010
ISPs have detected a massive spike in encrypted activity on the internet. Indecipherable "SSL" packets have increased in volume massively in recent months. This trend is seen as "disturbing" in the words of one child protection group.
"There could be anything being sent in these encrypted streams. Anything at all, and we have no way of knowing it", said Angela Termagantine, spokesperson for Protecting the Innocent. "There's little doubt that lurid, disgusting and atrocious images of naked children are being transmitted in these clandestine packets of information. Something Must Be Done."
Police spokesman Robert Peeler warned the public that very sinister developments have given us cause to believe that a vast network of Terrorists are transmitting plans to bring terror and mayhem to Britain's streets. "It is likely that this flood of inscruitible data is the precursor to an outright Terrorist assault, if not an invasion , on British citizens." Police believe that ssl may be a code word for terrorist cells, possibly referring to a passage, or passages from the Koran. Peeler added, "We are working with leaders in the Muslim community to reach young people and other members of the community in an effort to identify the sources of these sinister "ssl" packets."
When news broke of the recent surge and its potentially sinister meaning, traffic at Tabloid News and Gossip sites spiked as millions of Britons swarmed to read titillating speculation about what may be concealed in the encrypted traffic. "People love this stuff, right." said editor of the Scandal on Sunday Andy Tartuffe. "I mean, you throw in a bit of nookie, bit of scandel, bit of how's your father, people go right for it, know wha' I mean? " When it was suggested his publication by be sensationalizing the potential content of the traffic surge he retorted, " Look, it's all porn right! There's dirty buggers out there doing dirty deeds and my readers what to hear all about it." "Especially the kiddie stuff, right. Get's 'em right rilled up! Big seller." he added as he drove away in his BMW with an unidentified young woman.
The Home Office has dismissed protests from network and computer professionals that SSL is a much used and needed protocol on the internet, and has moved ahead with plans to outlaw encrypted data on British networks. "We have to stop this sort of thing", said the Home Office Minister, "Saying that it has legitimate uses, or that only a small fraction of the transmitted material may be illegal is frankly a load of rubbish. If you have nothing to hide, you have no reason to be using these services. Any sensible person can see that."
In addition to banning SSL traffic and previous legislation mandating the handover of encryption keys, the government plans to have monitoring software installed on all internet connected devices in the country. "When you think about it, it's a small price to pay for the safety of you and your children." said the Prime Minister this afternoon. "We have overwhelming public support on this", he added, citing private party telephone polls.
Protests from expats living in Russia, China and Iran is more muted relative to earlier episodes. One comment received from an expat in Iran states "We used to get bothered by all this, but frankly, it's so much better over here that we really don't care anymore."
May the Maths Be with you!
The system's broken. It's just that simple. I don't advocate infringing on copyright because of it, but it is beyond repair, with corporations perpetually holding everything from the public domain and (at least in the US) undermining the Founding Fathers' view of copyright.
You probably got modded as flamebait (or troll) because you use "whine" and generally talk down to an opinion that differs from yours. Remember the old adage "you can catch more flies with honey than vinegar." (or words to that effect.) That doesn't make your opinion any less relevant, but it also clouds the opposite opinion as somehow less than your own. If that's what you were going for, no problem. But the consequence of that does open one's posts up to moderation negatively. (I know, I've had the same issue in other discussions.)
I am of the camp that advocates ignoring music altogether (and the same goes for movies and TV). The sooner we choke off their lifeline (OUR money) the sooner they'll realize who is more important to them, and at the very least realize that treating _customers_ like criminals does nothing but make them former customers.
I also realize that P2P and other tech used to infringe is not going to kill the industries working so hard to kill the tech. How long has it been since Napster? And they're still around... making billions. They claim (incorrectly of course) that they're on the brink of extinction because of P2P, but we've yet to see anything tank... and with the US opening of "The Dark Knight" proving that a movie people want to see will make money (lots of money), their argument for "impending doom" rings rather hollow.
There's quite a bit more subtle nuances available to discuss on this subject, (who gets the revenue, is it really worth the $ they claim, etc.) but you get the general idea w/r/t your original post.
Besides, if more people thought as you did (and didn't bother "collecting" the drek off P2P they would otherwise not buy in the first place), we'd not have to discuss this at all... and most likely our freedoms wouldn't collectively be dumped into the abyss in the name of "saving an industry from the evil pirates."
I'd rather see the industry be forced to cater to their customers as it should be... rather than the industry strangling its userbase. But that's just a pipedream these days.
It's the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Your cable tv provider is a cable tv provider and nothing more. Now, imagine they started offering channels of entertainment and selling advertising and generating revenue from those channels. Now, imagine they started degrading the quality of other channels (periodically "losing the signal", "getting poor reception", etc., etc., etc.) which "coincidentally" encourages people to watch their channels which seem to be free of the problems of those other channels.
See an obvious problem there?
This is what's happening with ISPs - they are providing access to the tubes. They are now providing content on those tubes. They are now degrading the service of other content providers (losing connections, poor speeds, etc., etc., etc.) thereby encouraging people to use their service(s) which happen to be free of those nasty problems other content providers suffer from.
This isn't business. It's anti-competitive manipulation of a market. In most countries (I'd guess all first world nations...), anti-competitive bullshit like this is illegal. Why are we allowing ISPs to do it?
(Fortunately) Carphone Warehouse arent actually all that big, they just tie people into hilariously bad broadband deals when they buy phones from them. I think calling these ISPs the 'Big Six' in the UK is a bit of an overstatement. I know a lot more people that use Be There than people who use TalkTalk, Orange or Carphone Warehouse
Whenever I download an ISO, I always leave BT running until I have uploaded several times what I downloaded. I am talking about Linux ISOs and stuff here. I do not download what I haven't paid for. Even stealing from theiving scumbag record company executives is stealing.
If I get any such letter, I will calmly reply and ask for a formal apology. If that fails, they will get bad publicity. Users come to me all the time at work and ask for reccomendations. At the moment, my advice is just keep away from AOL and TalkTalk. I would need to expand that.
I am also sure that the local press would love the story...
I'll see your Constitution and raise you a Queen.