Slashdot Mirror
Don't Forget: "Six Strikes" Starts This Weekend
Dr. Eggman writes "If you don't recall, then Broadband/DSL Reports is here to remind us that ISPs around the U.S. will begin adhering to the RIAA/MPAA-fueled 'Six Strikes' agreement on July 1st. Or is it July 12th? Comcast, AT&T, Verizon and Cablevision are all counted among the participants. They will each introduce 'mitigation measures' against suspected pirates, including: throttling down connection speeds and suspending Web access."
The problem is that MPAA/RIAA somehow think they're going to get more money from what they think are "consumers". The overwhelming majority people they're going after have no plans on giving their money to media distributors because they either don't have any or know better. Yet, they continue to waste their resources going after these "pirates" - who aren't really pirates because they're not profiting from their activities in any way.
The distributors are always complaining about how they're barely making ends meet.... perhaps if they didn't pay themselves millions of dollars they wouldn't have any problems? As I see it, they're just greedy assholes. They should do us all a favor and roll over and die. In a world where cost of distribution is very close to $0, there is no need for a digital media distribution company.
So I guess the government's position that access to the Internet is as important as freedom of speech only applies to communist countries http://articles.cnn.com/2011-02-15/politics/clinton.internet_1_internet-freedom-repression-expression?_s=PM:POLITICS
Come on now, really? I'm a card carrying member of the EFF (truly) but that's a little much. That's like saying "let's plant some dope in his car and then call the cops because we don't like him!"
Activisim is one thing, setting someone up for legal issues is another, in my book.
"As the intrepid kobold companion continues his journey, he begins to wonder... if priests raises dead, why anybody die?
The old system of lawsuits is better for victims of the RIAA, as their rights are respected. The only reason this is being promoted as "positive" is because the vultures need to move onto a new strategy to keep ahead of the judges, as the courts are growing wise to the years of abuse of the law.
Hardly.
It's the beginning of mass amounts of hosted VPS/torrent solutions and SFTP traffic.
Laws have never once curbed popular behavior without huge losses of life and civil war. So until there is the decapitation, or drawn-and-quartered rule, I sincerely doubt behavior modification will be the outcome.
Trying to ban SFTP traffic is not going to work, and trying to play whack-a-mole with VPS/seedbox providers will be fruitless.
You're foolishly misguided if you think the RIAA is going to stop suing people that have no way to defend themselves. If anything they will use these warnings against these people.
The legal system is stacked against the common person in these situations.
This is the same justification proponents of "binding arbitration" use. Surprise! arbitration is also stacked against the common person, and so will this gentlemen's agreement between huge corporations. At least, in theory, you have a fighting chance in the legal system. In this system (and in arbitration), you're punished, period.
Rule of Thumb: Any agreement or contract that you were not part of writing is designed to screw you.
In the land of the free, the creative industry finds creative ways to restrict people's freedom. How ironic.
Yeah, and "computer" should only be used to describe people who manually do mathematical calculations as a profession. <rolls eyes> It's 2012, sperglord; wake up and smell the coffee. Software piracy has even made it into major dictionaries.
Blank media tax is not brilliant. It presumes a crime/civil infringement will absolutely occur. Should I have to pay copyright tax for taping my kids birthday? Its an evil foisted upon you by those that wish to farm your income.
Good-bye
it's okay for them to enforce laws
No, not always. Laws are far from perfect. In doubtful cases, yes, enforce the law. But this case is not in doubt. These anti-piracy laws are far too extreme. Too easy to twist such power to spy on innocent citizens, silence dissent, push unrelated agendas such as a crusade against porn or drugs or terrorism, and leverage the even more extreme privileges the content cartels think they would like. These laws are bad. I don't think it's possible to have any anti-piracy law that doesn't trample upon other vital freedoms.
And now, try to wrap your head around this idea: piracy is good. It is good in the sense that the public would benefit more if there was no such thing as a monopoly on copying. The public does not benefit as much from the current custom of trying to lock everything down, and the waste of millions on monopolistic gouging, clinging to outdated, grossly inefficient distribution systems such as CDs, and enforcement and court cases, DRM, lobbying, and even public campaigning. Capt. Copyright was ludicrous, and if anything, only served to undermine the message they were trying to push. All these anti-piracy efforts are predicated on the notion that piracy is bad, and that copyright is the only way or the only fair way artists can make a living. No. Not only are the anti-piracy bills too extreme, the very foundational ideas behind them all are wrong. Some think they are pushing bad means to achieve a good end, but the end they seek is not good. Does the end justify the means? If you have to go all fascist and use force to achieve some good end, you ought to reexamine that end and ask, is it really good? Odds are, it is not.
serving the complaint to your ISP instead of suing you, they're saving you money
Saving me money? Not at the price of due process and freedom! They should have no right to kick anyone off the Internet. That's like taking away the driver's license of someone accused-- accused, mind, not convicted-- of burglary, because logically they must have used a car to reach the target and haul away the goods. They don't need to convict anyone of anything, all they need do is make an accusation. So much for due process.
Intellectual Property is a monopolistic, selfish, and defective concept. It is "tyranny over the mind of man"
Blank media tax is not brilliant. It presumes a crime/civil infringement will absolutely occur. Should I have to pay copyright tax for taping my kids birthday?
Well, the song "Happy Birthday to You" is copyrighted, so yes.