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."
It's the beginning of the end for the INTERNET.
I guess most people will probably still avoid it until their first strike, but Freenet's still alive and shuffling many TB of data between the nodes without the possibility of monitoring.
https://freenetproject.org/
This graduated system actually sounds like a big improvement over their old policy where some college kid would be downloading and sharing 1000's of songs, and then get hit by a subpoena by the RIAA's lawyers.
Now, they send out warnings and follow them up before taking further action. So the infringer gets feedback in time to change their behavior before they get served with a big lawsuit.
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.
It's finally over! Hooray!
"I bless every day that I continue to live, for every day is pure profit."
1. Record innernets radio with streamripper, a free CLI app ported for Unix and Win32.
2. See how streamripper lays all the songs in your folder nice and neat with all the MP3 tag information intact.
3. Sort the folder on size in your favorite file manager and delete all the sub-megabyte commercials.
4. See how RIAA doesn't have a clue what's going on because it's like taping your songs on a boom box.
5. ????
6. Profit!
To: RIAA/MPAA assholes
I've been less and less likely to go to movies, thanks dudes.
Being specific: the idea that y'all think movies are a good way to strip cash from consumers to your pockets is annoying. The idea that you deserve to do so no matter what is plain offensive.
Anything is possible given time and money.
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?
Sorry for all those folks that don't have any other option! This also the reason I keep turning down all those 'amazing' Comcast deals... look --> a whole year at $1/month. Yeah, great deal until RCN is out of business and I don't have another option.
I didn't see this answered anywhere. I use bittorrent to download and seed Linux distros and the Wikipedia for schools disc. How much will this pointless crack down impact my legal and legitimate use of this service?
Loadup your favorite songs with Grooveshark, queue Streamripper and voila. MP3s magically appear in your folders! No torrents required.
It doesn't exist. It's not accurate, and therefore completely invisible. The above pixels are blanked out and your eye does not read them. Nothing to see here, please move on.
According to FAQ #4 "How does the system work?", the process begins when a copyright owner reports your IP address and date to an ISP. To determine how much your service would be affected, I first need to know what copyright owner would report you. Or did you expect it to be something mickey-mouse like The Tetris Company complaining about the inclusion of Quadrapassel or tetris.el in a Linux distro?
You want to make a difference? Blow shit up.
Mother of God - did the Anarchist movement have a power breakfast meeting this morning? You guys sure are up early...
"As the intrepid kobold companion continues his journey, he begins to wonder... if priests raises dead, why anybody die?
Well, it depends. If the target was a person who'd been instrumental behind, say, mandatory sentencing for drug possession, I'd be all for it. It's basically a way of showing the people who make these decisions the practical ramifications of them - because they either cannot understand basic logic, or don't care because they don't think it will apply to them.
Likewise, if this was targeting, say, a participating ISP's CEO, or the family of an RIAA exec, I'd be all for it. They're introducing a process that punishes people while circumventing due process. Let's see it bite them in the ass a few times, like it will everyone else.
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
They would rather deal with online services than P2P. That's what this has been about this the beginning of this ridiculous situation. The old media barons do not want to see a world in which people can be both consumers and distributors of entertainment or software, because that turns their whole business upside down. Peer to peer networks, and yes, that includes the Internet itself, are the targets; they want this to look more like cable TV systems, where consumers have consumption devices and where distributors have to negotiate deals and fight things out in courts.
The RIAA and MPAA love playing whack-a-mole; they have decades of experience doing it, they have laws on their side, they have public sympathy on their side. Suing an service provider off the face of the Earth doesn't really get the public angry, and it can result in that service provider making a deal that rakes in cash. Suing some college kid, some working class parent, some old computer-illiterate grandmother -- those things get the public angry (which is only tolerable up to the point where they start voting for less industry friendly politicians), they have no chance of producing a profitable deal, and they involve a party that has little money to give.
Palm trees and 8
In the land of the free, the creative industry finds creative ways to restrict people's freedom. How ironic.
I stopped buying anything with the Sony label years ago when they won a $250,000 suit against a 14 year old girl and her single mother on a disability pension for downloading a few songs. Unfortunately I already used up my vote so I couldn't stop buying when Sony when they recently jacked up prices on Whitney Houston music to cash in on her death. Start with the worst offenders in the RIAA/MPAA...put them out of business...then pick off the next. What they win in lawsuits they'll lose in sales. Sony used to be an innovative company with brilliant engineers and reliable products...then they fired their engineers and replaced them with lawyers...they figured they could make more money being copyright trolls...tell them they were wrong...vote with what you buy.
The copyright lobbyists live in a world of services, a world where people are either consumers receiving service, or service providers who provide service. They love this world, because copyright fits very naturally into it -- the copyright holder can negotiate with the service providers, whose business interests compel them to enter into profitable deals. That is why they love the cable TV system -- the consumers are just leaf nodes, whose money can simply be siphoned upward to the businesses running the show.
Compare this to the Internet, where peer to peer networking thrives (and which is a peer to peer network itself). Sure, there are service providers online, but the truth is that unlike the cable TV system, the Internet does not require service providers to distribute entertainment -- anyone with an Internet connection can be a participant in entertainment distribution. Suddenly, the consumers are not just passive receivers whose wallets can be raided; they are participants in the distribution of entertainment, and they are not all party to an explicit deal with the copyright industry. They might receive their entertainment without having to pay for it, they might distribute the entertainment before or after the industry would have preferred, they might make entertainment available that embarrasses the industry.
The industry does not know how to rake in billions of dollars in profits in such a scenario. Thus they have simply resorted to attacking peer to peer itself. As long as people are only able to receive their entertainment from a distribution service, the industry is happy. They'll play that game, they'll sue and bargain with file sharing websites, because they understand the model and the websites have more to lose than some college kid. The endgame is for the Internet to become a fancy cable TV system, where there are channels, distribution regions, disputes between networks and copyright holders that leave consumers without entertainment, and most importantly, consumer systems will just be passive receivers.
Six strikes? Just a way to scare people away from peer to peer models, until there are enough TPMs and DRM systems to ensure that peer to peer networking is no longer possible.
Palm trees and 8
Instead of Usenet or the Internet returning to the days of being networks for hackers and intellectuals, we are entering an even darker age. Now, when we are online, we need to make sure that we are encrypting everything, that our certificates are valid, that we are using an anonymity system, that our firewall is configured to block ranges of IP addresses known to be used by certain organizations, and that we stay up to date on the latest methods of attacking all these systems. The Internet is a depressingly hostile network these days, and this only worsens that situation.
Palm trees and 8
Go with a anonymizing VPN in another jurisdiction, and send a big fuck you to the snooping crew.
I recommend/use IPredator but there are others. (I am not affiliated)
Effectively renders all of these measures moot and gives you a great defense if someone raises a flag.
..don't panic
Nothing to hide, nothing to fear. Just like you have nothing to fear from the TSA or the Patriot Act! Those in power can never make mistakes or do anything wrong.
Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
But they are still vulnerable to oppressive bandwidth caps. ( which you will see starting to drop next as the fight continues. )
And not casting stones or predicting bad things, but i have been on FN since the early days, but i now have a cap, so i have reduced the available bandwidth available to FN via QoS
---- Booth was a patriot ----
I have a bunch of Linux distros that I torrent continuously (debian, lubuntu, and ubuntu-studio at the moment). I don't code so I help out the Linux community as I can.
Will the ISP systems be smart enough to figure out what's being torrented or just dumb and track if your line shows any torrent participation at all 'you must be a pirate'?
I suspect they only look for the torrent header codes and cannot see inside so cue up all kinds of additional backlash for the ISPs/etc.
. What is in the torrent transfer codes to show reliably what's in the included file?
Can we please (pretty please!), once and for all stop using the term "pirate" instead of "copyright infringement" or maybe "illegal copying" (if you want to get a slightly harsher tone) — especially for headlines and story blurbs!?!?!
I know you know, but still: Pirates are people that get what they want on the high seas, normally using violence or threats of violence. Let us not play into RIAA/MPAA/FACT/...'s hands by using their propaganda language.
And you are right, "The Copyright Infringement Bay" has not got the same sound to it as "The Pirate Bay".
Largo, Florida. I can get wired broadband service from Bright House Networks, Verizon, Comcast, AT&T, Knology. There are several companies in my area that sell "wireless" to the house, and of course there is satellite based service.
That is just for the line. I don't know about all of them, but several of these allow you to use their line and other companies for the ISP (the connection to the internet). So that's an option, too.
Pity that many folks don't have the choices they should have for high speed internet.
The ISP is not the one doing the monitoring, it's the RIAA/MPAA hired contractors, who will then complain to your ISP. In theory, they should only be doing this for things they own the copyright for, but you can bet mistakes will be made. Afterall, why bother with accuracy when they know anybody using bittorrent must be a pirate?
My, how little actually seems to have changed?
Take over the pejorative and use it as a badge of honor. It's a proven technique. Hence, self described queers marching down the street, and The Pirate Party.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
I have a bunch of Linux distros that I torrent continuously (debian, lubuntu, and ubuntu-studio at the moment). I don't code so I help out the Linux community as I can. Will the ISP systems be smart enough to figure out what's being torrented or just dumb and track if your line shows any torrent participation at all 'you must be a pirate'? I suspect they only look for the torrent header codes and cannot see inside so cue up all kinds of additional backlash for the ISPs/etc. What is in the torrent transfer codes to show reliably what's in the included file?
The only worthwhile comment/question in the entire discussion... and no response. Everybody else is complaining that their freeloading and lawbreaking is going to get harder. Boo hoo. They sound like Goldman Sachs when congress was proposing to regulate financial markets.
But here is the real relevant question, will legitimate uses of this legitimate technology be punished now that the due process has been removed?
-- QED
I posted this earlier, but accidentally as an a/c. Or, do I look for good a/c comments and then post them as my own? I actually don't, and did post this earlier, but you still don't know that for sure. I need to cut back on the pain killers. Anyway...
My uverse router cannot handle more than a few hundred connections before it goes all wonky. Apparently, there isn't enough memory for the connection tracking. Unfortunately, the router does not let me turn off NAT and use it as a straight bridge, allowing me to use a real router. It does offer a mode called DMZPlus which sort-of accomplishes the same thing as bridging, but still uses the router's connection tracking. This all means that participating in torrents and all of the connections related to that use will bring my uverse router to its knees.
Enter the VPN. The beauty here is that all of those connections are handled on the other end of the VPN, freeing the resources of my powerfully weak uverse router. I set up a virtual machine running transmission-daemon and openvpn, firewalled it like crazy, and control it with transmission's wonderful ajax interface. This way, the uverse router deals with just one connection - the VPN. My days of rebooting my router after any torrent use are over.
My grandpa has an internet connection for the sole purpose of having cameras in his house to watch him. The cameras are not compatible with WiFi encryption. If someone logs in and uses his internet to download, and the ISP ends up cutting off his internet to stop "his piracy", we won't be able to see the cameras or if he's fallen or needs help. I wonder what the ISPs will have to say then if he ends up dying because we couldn't see him?
When an ISP starts denying you access to service or curtailing service you are paying for based on having conducted their own investigations or making determinations of guilt the lawsuits will be filed, the plaintiffs will win and the ISPs will stop.
Remember kids SOPA failing has consequences. The most salient amoung them with regards to this plan was the immunity grant to ISPs for playing judge jury and executioner against its paying customers.
How are ISP's going to deal with colleges or universities where many users share one gateway? Dorm's would easily break the 6 strike limit. So you are going to punish all students tho they may have not done any thing.
A pessimistic view, but technically correct.
There are no technical facets to six strikes - the ISPs aren't doing deep packet inspection or the like. This is just copyright holders monitoring torrents to compile a list of infringers, which they then use to complain to the appropriate ISPs. The ability to use BitTorrent hasn't changed, and if it's a legal torrent then no one will be complaining.
Blow shit up.
Should we start with your place?