Slashdot Mirror


Verizon To Throttle Pirates' Bandwidth

another random user sends this excerpt from the BBC: "U.S. net firm Verizon has declared war on illegal downloaders, or pirates, who use technologies such as BitTorrent to steal copyrighted material. Verizon has said it will first warn repeat offenders by email and voicemail. Then it will restrict or 'throttle' their internet connection speeds. Time Warner Cable, another U.S. internet service provider pledging to tackle piracy, says it will use pop-up warnings to deter repeat offenders. After that it will restrict subscribers' web browsing activities by redirecting them to a landing page. The Electronic Frontier Foundation, which campaigns for digital freedom, is highly critical of the imminent campaign, saying: 'Big media companies are launching a massive peer-to-peer surveillance scheme to snoop on subscribers.' ISPs will be acting as 'Hollywood's private enforcement arm,' it added."

224 comments

  1. IN OTHER WORDS !! EAT - SHIT - DIE- !! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    If they catch you !!

  2. I've got a way around this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I've got a way around this, but I don't want to post it here, lest it be targeted.

    It's easy, but it costs money. I've never heard of someone getting sued using one, but that doesn't mean I'm confident enough to post my technique / service here...

    1. Re:I've got a way around this by alostpacket · · Score: 4, Funny

      Starts with a V and ends with PN?

      --
      PocketPermissions Android Permission Guide
    2. Re:I've got a way around this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      I can do a triple back-flip followed by a double somersault and land on gracefully doing a handstand as finish without even getting a running start.

      I just don't want to right now.

    3. Re:I've got a way around this by planckscale · · Score: 1

      or starts with a P and ends with a ROXY? or starts with OPEN ends with WIFI? or starts with SERVER and ends with RENTAL? or or or

      --
      Namaste
    4. Re:I've got a way around this by NFN_NLN · · Score: 1

      In other words people are just going to embed BitTorrent traffic within https packets.
      Use port 443 with https headers and just change the payload. They can do deep packet inspection all they want but they can't go into the encrypted payload.

    5. Re:I've got a way around this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Maybe not, but it would be obvious from usage pattern exactly what is going on. It would quickly be shut down.

    6. Re:I've got a way around this by Rob+the+Bold · · Score: 1

      Maybe not, but it would be obvious from usage pattern exactly what is going on. It would quickly be shut down.

      Use encryption, go to (internet) jail.

      --
      I am not a crackpot.
    7. Re:I've got a way around this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Or starts with NET and ends with a FLIX? Seriously, its 7 bucks. At some point its going to be easier and cheaper to pay the content creators than to avoid being caught by the ip police.

    8. Re:I've got a way around this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The usage pattern might tell them something, but it wouldn't tell them what you're downloading and whether or not its copyrighted.

    9. Re:I've got a way around this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It may be obvious that it is bittorrent traffic, but they won't know if it is pirated or legimate.

    10. Re:I've got a way around this by fredprado · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Not when the IP vendors do not sell what you want to buy...

    11. Re:I've got a way around this by Zemran · · Score: 1

      I just host shit on Google Drive as soon as I get something good and my friends dl and do the same... Pandora cannot get her shit back in her box...

      --
      I love stacking my barbecues in the shed at the end of summer - you can't beat a bit of grill on grill action.
    12. Re:I've got a way around this by fredprado · · Score: 1

      And more importantly: cannot prove it.

    13. Re:I've got a way around this by HermMunster · · Score: 1

      Netflix is Microsoft's pony. It only rides in Microsoft's fields. There's a huge segment of people that can't run it. It's also country specific.

      --
      You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
    14. Re:I've got a way around this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OSX too.
      iOS
      Android
      Roku.
      built into TV.
      xbox
      ps3
      wii

      You have a point about geography, but "It only rides in Microsoft's fields" is laughably wrong.

    15. Re:I've got a way around this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I never knew the PS3, Wii, various Android tablets, etc, were from Microsoft.

      Or did you just mean you can't run it on Linux?

    16. Re:I've got a way around this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      they can deploy transparent proxy at the gw and initiate/hijack your ssl session from there...

    17. Re:I've got a way around this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey now, he was bashing Micro$$$$oft... don't let facts get in the way of the daily Two Minute Hate on Slashdot.

    18. Re:I've got a way around this by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      Sure they will. They'll just make a whitelist of 'good' trackers, like the WoW updater. If you're doing BT but not communicating with one of the good trackers, they they assume you're a dirty pirate. The only legal users to be hurt will be people like linux downloaders and people getting CC-licensed films... and those people aren't a huge part of the market, so may safely be ignored.

    19. Re:I've got a way around this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fingerprinting encrypted traffic is an active research topic.

    20. Re:I've got a way around this by datapharmer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      as someone who runs deep packet inspection on a few networks I can tell you a) it is pretty easy to tell what shouldn't be passed through and b) a little sand in the underwear bites - Throwing in some junk data in the right ratio can wreak havoc on an ssl encapsulated torrent connection. Send all you want over ssl but it will be throttled and so much garbage by the end you won't want to waste your time after a few days. I can also tell you it is pretty easy to block this even without deep packet inspection. Hint: dns tends to be required to get your torrent information in the first place, and it is pretty easy to send you a response from my dns server that looks like a response from your manually configured dns server. You won't know the difference and will just assume thepiratebay is down.

      --
      Get a web developer
    21. Re:I've got a way around this by darkain · · Score: 1

      Except that Android and GoogleTV are flavors of Linux too, so yes, at least SOME Linux distributions support it.

    22. Re:I've got a way around this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Netflix is Microsoft's pony. It only rides in Microsoft's fields. There's a huge segment of people that can't run it. It's also country specific.

      Get your facts straight netflix run on ios, android, windows, and apparently even on linux now.

    23. Re:I've got a way around this by LurkingSince1999 · · Score: 0

      Have you checked the Netflix catalogue lately? Pretty sparse unless you want to watch >1 yr old TV series. I'm 0 for my last 5 attempts at trying to watch the movie I'm in the mood for. After enough searching I can usually settle for *something* but most likely I'll just turn it off.

    24. Re:I've got a way around this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Netflix won't play with linux users.

    25. Re:I've got a way around this by smartin · · Score: 4, Interesting

      That sort of sounds illegal to me. If the ISP's start generating fake DNS responses or modifying packets, i suspect that they will be spending time in court. Not all bit torrent traffic is illegal.

      --
      The difference between Canada and the USA is that in Canada healthcare is a right and gun ownership is a privilege.
    26. Re:I've got a way around this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You run 8.8.8.8? I guess you could DPI it, as long as there's no VPN happening. And if you do DPI VPN connections (and I imagine you do do so, because there's a few that do it in my city) you end up on the whiteboard at the IT department at most large workplaces as "When they call and can't connect via these ISPs, explain they filter VPN traffic and you'll need to switch to a provider which isn't [list]".

      Then when you call your boss and say you couldn't do your work because you were on that ISP, your boss calls us and we tell your boss that the employee called in 3 weeks ago complaining about it and if he's still on that provider, then you should discipline him by telling him he won't be working at home anymore. :o) Usually the employees just switch, though, because they enjoy working from home. A few call their ISP and bitch, but if the ISP has more than a few hundred users, the tier 1 support just tells them to quit pirating and then the employee realizes they need to find a new ISP that wants to earn some money.

      FWIW, I'm looking at you Bell and (sometimes) Rogers, right up there on the whiteboard. :D

    27. Re:I've got a way around this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Guess who can afford this costly court battle. Hint: It's not you, and you can't go for a class-action lawsuit, either.

    28. Re:I've got a way around this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except I'm pretty sure ISP's can do whatever they want with traffic on their network. Any and all legal rights you may or may not have can be, and usually are, forfeited upon using their service which constitutes agreement to the terms of service.

      I seem to recall one Canadian ISP ( Shaw ) trying to claim that any and all content uploaded through their service became theirs.

    29. Re:I've got a way around this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Might as well be throttled anyway if you are using a VPN

    30. Re:I've got a way around this by Rob+the+Bold · · Score: 2

      Who needs to prove it? Googling "bogus piracy takedowns" gets six million results.

      --
      I am not a crackpot.
    31. Re:I've got a way around this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Or starts with NET and ends with a FLIX? Seriously, its 7 bucks. At some point its going to be easier and cheaper to pay the content creators than to avoid being caught by the ip police.

      Atleast in the Nordic service, all the movies I'd watch available, I already have. The only worthwhile video so far has been 'Outcasts', which is a British scifi series I hadn't even heard of before. If I can find something like that every month in Netflix, it might be worth it, but with the current selection, I don't see myself subscribing permanently.

    32. Re:I've got a way around this by dywolf · · Score: 1

      Dear Customer,

      In order to better serve you with high speed internet we have instituted a fee for VPN access. This fee is to partly defray costs associated with internet piracy, the primary use of VPN service, and the overhead from allowing VPN connections, which as we all know are bandwidth intensive.

      Signed,
      Your local ISP's MAFIAA representitive

      --
      The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
    33. Re:I've got a way around this by thoughtlover · · Score: 1

      Netflix is Microsoft's pony. It only rides in Microsoft's fields. There's a huge segment of people that can't run it. It's also country specific.

      What the heck are you talking about?? Netflix runs like crap on the 360...same with trying to watch almost any streaming video on the 360 whether it comes from Netflix or MS's servers. Maybe I have something configured wrong, but Netflix runs great on the WD Live+ or OS X. This is my experience. It also chaps my hide that I have to pay MS to use Netflix on my 360.

      --
      No sig for you! Come back one year!
    34. Re:I've got a way around this by KiloByte · · Score: 2

      Like VeriSign's Site Finder, offshots of which are currently operated by the usual batch of bad ISPs?

      --
      The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
    35. Re:I've got a way around this by kiwimate · · Score: 1

      I've got a way around this, but I don't want to post it here, lest it be targeted.

      It's easy, but it costs money. I've never heard of someone getting sued using one, but that doesn't mean I'm confident enough to post my technique / service here...

      I've got exactly the same technique. I call my technique "Buy the damn album/DVD instead of pirating it illegally."

      You're welcome.

    36. Re:I've got a way around this by sl4shd0rk · · Score: 1

      Not when the IP vendors do not sell what you want to buy...

      Oooo.. How does one download this grass you speak of?

      --
      Join the Slashcott! Feb 10 thru Feb 17!
    37. Re:I've got a way around this by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 2

      I can do a triple back-flip followed by a double somersault and land on gracefully doing a handstand as finish without even getting a running start.

      I just don't want to right now.

      Which is perfectly understandable, because this simple feat could get pretty complicated if you tried to post your comment with your wireless keyboard in the middle of it.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    38. Re:I've got a way around this by Man+On+Pink+Corner · · Score: 1

      I love this argument. Googling "truck dog rutabagas" gets 1.28 million results.

    39. Re:I've got a way around this by wwalker · · Score: 2

      Insightful?! I'm a netflix subscriber since they were sending out DVD disks in bubblewrap padded envelopes. And yet I'm still reaching for pirate bay about as often as I use netflix. And I'll be doing it until there is a service that lets me download or stream absolutely *any* movies, shows, etc. the *second* they air anywhere in the world. Hell, I'm even willing to pay $300 per month for the privilege, not $7. And yet the entertainment industry continues to keep its head up its arse...

    40. Re:I've got a way around this by Travelsonic · · Score: 1

      A lot of presumption there, anon, got any proof about the first part? I'm guessing on the 2nd part, but if they are interfering with legal traffic in an illegal manner no TOS Or any shit like that can prevent them from being sued over it.

      --
      If you believe in privacy, and believe you have "nothing to hide" at the same time, you're a goddammed idiot
    41. Re:I've got a way around this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      If you've got a better way to transport rutabagas, we'd all love to hear it.

    42. Re:I've got a way around this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      a) it is pretty easy to tell what shouldn't be passed through and b) a little sand in the underwear bites

      c) Having a 30-06 AP round fired from a 'scoped rifle come through your bedroom/hotel/condo/office window and drill you right in the head if you're an ISP/MAFIAA/RIAA top exec pulling this crap would really suck for you, too. People are gonna get fed up enough that this will eventually happen if these assholes keep up their shit. I'm surprised it hasn't already.

    43. Re:I've got a way around this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At some point its going to be easier and cheaper to pay the content creators than to avoid being caught by the ip police.

      Not if you use one of the above solutions. Hell, even without them, it's unlikely that you're going to be caught.

    44. Re:I've got a way around this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It also chaps my hide that I have to pay MS to use Netflix on my 360.

      That'd be a Microsoft XBox 360, presumable?

    45. Re:I've got a way around this by chrismcb · · Score: 1

      So you want to buy something, someone doesn't want to sell it to you... so the answer is to forcefully take it?

    46. Re:I've got a way around this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good point about the dns replies. Wouldn't dnssec solve/nullify that vector?

      http://www.root-dnssec.org/
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNSSEC

    47. Re:I've got a way around this by dissy · · Score: 1

      I can't wait for the next world of warcraft update, when their system mistakenly flags millions of users as pirates for using bittorrent!

    48. Re:I've got a way around this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What the hell do you think forcefully means?
      Take for that matter?

      We're not talking about an army of mouse-nunchuk wielding cat burglars....yet

    49. Re:I've got a way around this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please tell me how you are spoofing DNSSEC, as well as other DNS spoofing evasion measures?
      Especially if I'm running my own resolver?

      Thanks
      Not-A-Pirate-But-Interested-To-See-Fail

    50. Re:I've got a way around this by fredprado · · Score: 1

      I don't know how exactly force could be involved in this. Could you elaborate?

    51. Re:I've got a way around this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not at all. The answer is to kill the person with it and their entire family by beating them over the head with 'it'. Whatever 'it' is it is clearly too dangerous to be allowed to exist and must be destroyed.

    52. Re:I've got a way around this by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      Have you considered the idea of saving your money and just downloading the DVD instead from a non-fascist ISP? Why waste money like that?

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    53. Re:I've got a way around this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cheapest overseas VPS you can rent, run transmission (or your favorite Bt client), and use https to download or stream the files from it.

      US-based MAFIAA are focused on best ROI, so they talk US residential ISPs and some US commercial ISPs into going after piratey clients, but don't bother the greater effort to persuade some european ISP to do their work enforcing US law (if they can be persuaded at all...).

      Legit HTTPS traffic (not e.g. masking bittorrent as HTTPS) to an "unknown" host, even in large volume, is not a good target for throttling, and as long as the VPS is only used by you and a few friends, it will remain unknown, i.e. not blacklisted for throttling, DNS blackholing, etc..

      Bonus points for ridiculously fast downloads (720p TV episodes, 1-2GB, takes 1-5 minutes), then saturate your home connection's downstream bandwidth pulling it in (and if video bandwidth < your downstream, you can start watching immediately while it spools). Avoids the "consumer ISP slow-upstream curse" altogether, and you may even get by with a cheaper plan, saving the $10/month you spend on a VPS.

    54. Re:I've got a way around this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've got an even better idea, I'll just pirate it legally.

    55. Re:I've got a way around this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it's more like this.

      - You want to buy something.
      - No one wants to sell it to you.
      - You've got a buddy that has some and is willing to share.

      The parallels between marijuana and filesharing are amazing.

    56. Re:I've got a way around this by kiwimate · · Score: 1

      Do you want the product? If yes, then it's not a waste. If no, then downloading it for free is pointless because you don't care about it.

      Alternately - have you considered the idea of showing some moral fibre and either buying something if you want it, or doing without if you don't want it and/or disagree with the principles behind the business practices?

      I really struggle with this idea of entitlement that says just because you want something you can take it. Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should.

    57. Re:I've got a way around this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To the parent, I call nonsense on your post. I have a two VPN solutions I use:
      1) Personal VPN Proxy
      2) Work

      Both use default routes and both are fully encrypted. Deep packet inspection on such encrypted data at best would only shows patterns, not payloads.
      - For #1, patterns alone are just that, patterns. Patterns do not determine if the activity is legal or illegal. You would need a lot more to go off of than "deep packet inspection" to make that distinction.
      - For #2, if you as an ISP are MITM the handshakes and decrypting my packets, I'll be glad to introduce you to my company's lawyers for potential IP theft, customer data theft, etc. Believe me when I say they aren't friendly on those topics.

      FTFA:

      But the industry freely admits that the campaign is unlikely to deter "hardcore" pirates, who can easily circumvent the copyright alert system by setting up virtual private networks.

    58. Re:I've got a way around this by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      What you seem to be advocating is not simply paying MegaCorporation for something you know that you like or think you will like, but always paying for something regardless of how much you may or may not think you will like it. Like it is a moral issue. But it isn't a moral issue. By downloading some bits I am hurting no one. There is no victim. By downloading and sharing a particular pattern of bits I am exercising a basic human freedom in the digital age. It's a sort of freedom of movement really. My right to move bits around in any manner I see fit.

      I really struggle with this idea of entitlement that says just because you want something you can take it. Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should.

      I met a model once. She was very, very beautiful. Her face was itself a great work of art. She was complaining about people staring at her. She was telling me that her model friends also found it annoying. That raised an interesting question for me. Is it wrong to look at or take photos or videos of a very beautiful girl walking around outside in public? It may or may not be legal to take her photo without her permission depending on where you live, but this isn't about legality. It is about ethics. Just by looking at a beautiful girl you are making a copy of her face in your mind. And of course photos or videos are explicit copies of her image--of the way light reflects off the countours of her face. What gives me the right to do any of that? After all it is her face. Every person who sees her is given a kind of free gift. Shouldn't she be able to decide who she considers worthy of that gift? My conclusion was that, although it is her face, and she owns it and all the rights to it, it is her choice to make it publicly available for viewing/imaging by venturing out in public without a mask or paper bag or bandages covering it. She does have the option of only allowing close friends or paying customers to view the aesthetic miracle that she was born with. I believe the freedom of beautiful women to venture out into public without being gawked at is less important than the freedom of the gawkers to look at it. It's a tradeoff, but one that I think makes sense.

      In a similar way, if you object to people "stealing" your bits, perhaps it's best not to allow them out into the world in the first place, because just as people are going to look at a beautiful face unless you cover it, people are going to make copies of a digital pattern if you release it into the wild. It's just the nature of digital information. If you don't like the nature of digital information you can simply earn a living in some way that doesn't involve attempting to sell it.

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    59. Re:I've got a way around this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I pay for Netflix, Hulu Plus, and Amazon Prime (prime is mostly just a bonus of their cheaper shipping). I still have to occasionally download shows like The Big Bang Theory (used to be on CBS.com, not sure if it is anymore, but their player screwed me over more than once) and Game of Thrones because they refuse to put them on Hulu.

    60. Re:I've got a way around this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I buy DVD's, pay for multiple streaming services, and still occasionally need to use torrents. Deal with it.

    61. Re:I've got a way around this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And I am sure they will try really hard to differentiate between the OS downloads of Linux, Game updates for Battlefield, and the latest hollywood drivel.

    62. Re:I've got a way around this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I still have to occasionally download shows like The Big Bang Theory ... and Game of Thrones because they refuse to put them on Hulu.

      Excuse me for asking, but why exactly do you "have" to download these shows? What will happen to you if you don't? You'll break out in hives?

    63. Re:I've got a way around this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you want to buy something, someone doesn't want to sell it to you... so the answer is to forcefully take it?

      Copying is not theft
      Stealing a thing leaves one less left
      Copying it makes one thing more -
      that's what copying's for.

      Copying is not theft.
      If I copy yours you have it too
      One for me and one for you
      That's what copies can do

      If I steal your bicycle
      you have to take the bus
      but if I just copy it
      there's one for each of us!

      Making more of a thing
      that is what we call âoecopyingâ
      Sharing ideas with everyone
      That's why copying is fun!

    64. Re:I've got a way around this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That would be a great idea, IF WE WERE ALLOWED TO BUY THE DAMN THINGS and they came without physical media.

      I use spotify and youtube exclusively, but no similar service exists here for movies or series. Netflix just came out, but its totally shitty and a pale shadow of the US one. I want to watch stuff, not wait months or years after everyone else has seen it.

      Seriously, they should shape up or shut up. Music piracy is at an all time low, because its so easy to get through youtube/spotify.

      Stupid movie industry.

    65. Re:I've got a way around this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aye, matey! Is thar any other way ye be seein'? Them babies shouldn't be rottin' their teeth on that landlubber candy anyway! Yaargh, take the world by storm ye scallywags! Rape, Pillage, Maim... all from the comfort of yer mummy's basement, like TRUE men!

    66. Re:I've got a way around this by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

      Last time I checked, Netflix had around 5% of the stuff I wanted to watch.

      --
      Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
    67. Re:I've got a way around this by Kelsen · · Score: 1

      I don't necessarily agree - or disagree - with the idea here. But suppose we start from another well-known and widely accepted definition of stealing: taking something that isn't yours, that you didn't earn, that you have no rights to.

      The idea that copying is not theft focuses on the fact that nothing is effectively removed from the owner, and that's true. I think that it is more worthwhile and meaningful to focus on what it is, and means, to me.

      Maybe that's just me, though.

      Dave Kelsen
      --
      "The happiness of your life depends upon the quality of your thoughts: therefore, guard accordingly, and take care that you entertain no notions unsuitable to virtue and reasonable nature." ~ Marcus Aurelius

    68. Re:I've got a way around this by chrish · · Score: 1

      I've had similar backwards experiences with my AppleTV2... streaming from Apple is unwatchable (5-10 minute 'buffering' sequences every 20-30 minutes), but Netflix runs great on that thing.

      I suspect Apple's pathetic Canadian CDN is to blame... downloads from their app store max out around 150K/sec on my connection (damn XCode, why you so big), while Steam can sustain 500K/sec no problem.

      --
      - chrish
  3. Makes sense for them. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    1. Reduces traffic on their networks
    2. Should reduce the number of inquiries from RIAA etc that they need to deal with, and the staff to do it

    1. Re:Makes sense for them. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      3. Reduces their profit margin as people move away from these services to ones that don't give a fuck whats on the wire.
      4. Makes them liable for all the other 'bad' things their customers do. They have displayed they DO have the level of control needed to stop spam or other crap comming from their customers machines.

    2. Re:Makes sense for them. by jythie · · Score: 3, Informative

      (4) might be a real concern, but (3) is not. In the US, very few areas actually have any competition. The regulation that allowed viable competition to exist were removed so even even urban areas are unlikely to have more then 2 options, most areas will only have 1.

      But yeah, (4) might come back to haunt them.

    3. Re:Makes sense for them. by Synerg1y · · Score: 1

      RIAA obtains access to Verizon logs, since Verizon publicly acknowledges having them, sues everybody who ever got flagged, nobody uses Verizon ever again.

    4. Re:Makes sense for them. by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What regulation that allowed viable competition was removed? As far as I am aware, both cable providers and telephone providers have been regulated as local monopolies for almost as long as the former has existed and since before I was born for the latter. Unless someone else is allowed to run the cabling/fiber there can be no real competition. The fact that there are no more than two options just about everywhere is a product of regulation, not a product of the removal of regulation.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    5. Re:Makes sense for them. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The funny part is that they are the fastest (US) network without much congestion. They are overbuilt last I heard, with too *few* customers. They even sold part of FiOS to Frontier. And not snooping on their users used to be a PR selling point they made. Maybe both have changed and their customer base is actually nearing higher levels? *Shrug*

    6. Re:Makes sense for them. by jythie · · Score: 1

      In the past DSL providers, just like phone companies, were required to lease to other ISPs, thus even though you physically had a verizon connection you could use anyone as your ISP.... just like with dial up you were not required to use the telco's ISP service. Cable was not regulated like that since it was considered too small at first and when it got large enough they decided to remove the DSL regulation rather then bring Cable into it. Pretty much overnight we went from an ecosystem where you could choose from dozens of ISPs to, well... one... maybe two if you switched physical providers.

    7. Re:Makes sense for them. by Shempster · · Score: 1

      What regulation that allowed viable competition was removed? As far as I am aware, both cable providers and telephone providers have been regulated as local monopolies for almost as long as the former has existed and since before I was born for the latter. Unless someone else is allowed to run the cabling/fiber there can be no real competition. The fact that there are no more than two options just about everywhere is a product of regulation, not a product of the removal of regulation.

      I believe he was referring to a wrongheaded 2002 FCC reclassification of broadband Internet service as an information service rather than a telecommunications service.

      "In theory, this step implied that broadband was equivalent to a content provider (such as AOL or Yahoo!) and was not a means to communicate, such as a telephone line. In practice, it has stifled competition.

      Phone companies have to compete for your business. Even though there may be just one telephone jack in your home, you can purchase service from any one of a number of different long-distance providers. Not so for broadband Internet. Here consumers generally have just two choices: the cable company, which sends data through the same lines used to deliver television signals, and the phone company, which uses older telephone lines and hence can only offer slower service."

    8. Re:Makes sense for them. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People wouldn't ditch Verizon. They'd be without internet at all if they did that in many places in the US.

    9. Re:Makes sense for them. by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      I'd rather see part 2 of that - upset parents use the fact that Verizon didn't step in and stop piracy, hate speech, bullying, child-pornography, pedophilia, terrorism and file a class action lawsuit against Verizon for all failures. You can't have it both ways - either you police your network, or you don't.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    10. Re:Makes sense for them. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Regulation is often conflated for specific regulations. Regulation itself could be anything from arch-conservative to radical librarians :). It's the nature of the regulations that affect the nature of "regulation" itself. Given that no environment exists where some regulations are not applied, hence implying that everything is regulated (by government, by owner, by consensus, by fiat etc.) it is the nature of the regulators and their regulations and not "Regulation" itself that determines a given outcome.

      In other words, using a binary dichotomy between regulated/unregulated is at best myopic, at worst intentionally deceptive. I understand the school of thought that originates from, but it's not really based in the phenomenological realities of government but hypothetical ones.

    11. Re:Makes sense for them. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is, and has been impossible, to have a legal monopoly on cable services in the USA since the Telecommunication Act of 1996. There are no cable monopolies anywhere in the USA and there have not been for going on 16 years. You don't see cable companies fighting each other for the same customer base because the cable company is already fighting three satellite TV providers for TV customers and the local telco for data/voice customers. There is no monopoly. There are no exclusive franchise agreements (and there have not been for 16 years.) There is no lack of competition.

      This leads me to this very important questions: WHAT MONOPOLY?!?!?!

    12. Re:Makes sense for them. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about if you replace people in (3) with some huge company deciding it for them. The whole isp business might seem like a low hanging fruit for someone with few tens of billions of pocket money.

      Of course then you'll have another monopoly and people on other continents will eventually be making fun of your lousy gigabit connections when they all have 10 gigabits.

  4. capitalism by Xicor · · Score: 1

    if they keep doing stuff like this, they will be shooting themselves in the foot, as people will switch to companies that arent.

    1. Re:capitalism by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      Except that they are pretty much a monopoly in their markets. If you are lucky, you have competing service through your cable company, which is probably already capped and for many will be Time Warner.

      How hard is it to kick off municipal broadband, anyway?

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    2. Re:capitalism by Xicor · · Score: 1

      google fiber will eventually spread out to the entire country... and they are also pushing to becoming wireless service providers. both of these will affect verison

    3. Re:capitalism by Synerg1y · · Score: 1

      Mhm, and the rest of the ISPs are made of rainbows and sunshine. I like the https solution, I wonder what the pitfalls are besides lower performance, but bittorent started back when AOL was still around w dial up and hasn't changed a whole lot since. But there's a part b to this and that's they ask why is this computer connected to 500 others in seemingly unrelated circumstances, etc... Oh well, I've always been a proponent of get it away from the mainstream and back to the nerds and let it slip back under the radar, unfortunately now it won't look the same at least under the hood.

    4. Re:capitalism by jythie · · Score: 1

      The major ISPs lobbied to make municipal broadband illegal.

    5. Re:capitalism by jythie · · Score: 2

      Google already bent to the will of the RIAA/MPAA. They might provide a little competition, but functionally they are unlikely to be any different.

    6. Re:capitalism by Shadow99_1 · · Score: 1

      I''m in an area that is vaguely serviced by Verizon and otherwise actually serviced by Time Warner. So regardless I'm expecting false positives from them and no recourse.

      As for Municipal broadband... It's illegal where I live thanks to their efforts (this includes the whole state).

      --
      we are all invisible unless we choose otherwise
  5. I look forward to the innovation this will cause by Jimmyisikura · · Score: 1

    I hope that the brighter pirates devise even more inventive ways to keep their privacy, perhaps that creativity will spill over into the more legal realm of the internet.

  6. This is BS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think these companies need to get out of peoples business and provide the service that was promised. I can't see how this is legal?

    1. Re:This is BS by kiwimate · · Score: 0

      I can't see how this is legal?

      Oh the irony, in a discussion about Verizon targeting users who are illegally pirating stuff...

  7. what are the chances... by Steven_M_Campbell · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What are the chances that this will simply be used to target anyone who uses the bandwidth they paid for?

    1. Re:what are the chances... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Probably slim. You could easily eat through your bandwidth by using legitimate content services such as Netflix, Pandora, Amazon, iTunes, etc. If they were to use this to throttle customer who wasn't doing anything wrong, they'd probably get sued and have to deal with all kind of regulatory crap. The real question is whether or not they'll be targeting anyone who uses torrents in a non-copyright infringing manner (e.g. distributing FOSS).

    2. Re:what are the chances... by Synerg1y · · Score: 1

      Verizon already got sued for this once, it was a good day when I received a check for $50 for my old broadband card when I got kicked off their network at the very end of my contract (I had another ISP so I didn't give a f').

    3. Re:what are the chances... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're contradicting yourself.
      Using torrents in a non-copyright infringing manner == using legitimate content services.

    4. Re:what are the chances... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No he isn't.

      The GP said that they're not likely to use this to throttle people who use lots of bandwidth but don't use bit torrent. Instead it's likely just going to be people who do a lot of torrenting that get hit, and the interesting question will be if they bother to distinguish between copyright infringing and non-infringing use of bit torrent.

    5. Re:what are the chances... by Mitreya · · Score: 1

      What are the chances that this will simply be used to target anyone who uses the bandwidth they paid for?

      Not to mention the lucrative $35 review fees involved. It's a win-win for Verizon.

      Soon this will turn into highly desirable insurance -- i.e. "pay extra $10/month and we will protect you from lawsuits by not releasing your info". (or at least actually fight for you in court before releasing it)

    6. Re:what are the chances... by screwdriver · · Score: 1

      Cellular networks get away with it all the time. They sell "unlimited" plans that have hidden caps where they cut you off for "abuse".

    7. Re:what are the chances... by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      It's not a win-win in markets where they have competition or for customers that are paying for more than their most basic tier of service. If they are serious about this I predict that they will lose over 90% of their higher tier customers. Why pay extra for all that bandwidth if all you can use it for is to make a web page load 1/10000 of a second faster?

      Where I live luckily there is still a high speed non-Comcast alternative that hasn't joined forces with the MAFIAA. If Verizon ever throttles me they will lose me as a customer forever and I'll do my best to stiff them on my last bill as well.

      Will have to see how great of an idea those execs think this is when their stock options drop due to losing millions of dollars as a large portion of their customer base either moves to other ISPs or downgrades their service to the most basic available.

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    8. Re:what are the chances... by lsatenstein · · Score: 1

      I usually download DVD images of Linux distributions as evaluation copies. If it is midnight, (GMT-5), I will start a torrent for a distribution and go to bed. My ISP does not support high upload rates, so throttling is more or less done by the system. During the day, I will use wget and a mirror website to download my favorite distribution. Since I am in North America, if I can, I choose a mirror that is in Europe. Midnight there, is 6pm here in Montreal. At midnight their system us is low, and ours is moderate. I have rarely run into medium to severe throttling.

      --
      Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
  8. Why I stick with my local telco VDSL by Cito · · Score: 3, Informative

    I've had it when it was plain adsl at 1.5 megabit down in the late 90's all the way to now vdsl with 20 megabit down. They still offer newsgroup access free with all their accounts, and ability to generate emails at will up to 20, then you can delete ones not needed and recreate sorta as a anonymous email service of their own.

    every year or so they claim on dslreports forum that they'll never keep logs more than 1 week for legal purposes mainly to do with child porn, and they so far have not responded to letters from antip2p companies like mediadefender, claiming they get trashed.

    Now things may change in future, but there is no bandwidth cap and it's truly unlimited, I know according to DUmeter, adding upload/download together I used 418 gigs last month and average 317 to 422 gigs per month, most of it is torrent traffic seeding and downloading. And never got a letter or even bothered.

    I always tell people stay the fuck away from cable and big name dsl like at&t and stick to local telco services, local landline small companies most all offer dsl2plus to vdsl services and are much much better than cable.

    No bandwidth caps, no filtering, and no bother, true freedom at least for now.

    I've been pirating since 1996 though when I cut my cable tv off. Starting on newsgroups and IRC old "fserve" bots for television episodes and movies.

    Now it's torrent RSS downloader on the seedbox connected to my western digital WDTV Live plus box on my tv.

    I definitely support local telco's cause most ignore the bullshit of the big isp's, hell my isp even sent out letters letting customers know they will not be taking part in this "6 strike" shit and marketed as if it was a cable only problem so it keeps their customers from wanting to go to cable.

    great marketing move imo

    1. Re:Why I stick with my local telco VDSL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

      I've been pirating since 1996 though when I cut my cable tv off. Starting on newsgroups and IRC old "fserve" bots for television episodes and movies.

      Now it's torrent RSS downloader on the seedbox connected to my western digital WDTV Live plus box on my tv.

      Allow me to be the first to say, FUCK YOU.

      No, seriously, fuck you. It's assclowns like you who think "ooh I has interwebz I can download anything I want" that are ruining it for everyone else. I'll download a TV episode or three that I may have missed, but gimme a break. All these years of all of us bitching that there is no viable paid option to support, and now that we're starting to get them, dipshits like you wave around your e-peen like downloading everything in sight is some badge of honor. No, what you accomplish is to end up proving the douchenozzles in the content industry right. You get used as a statistic to "prove" that everyone is pirating everything.

      End result, data caps and packet snooping so it's a pain in the ass to download ANY large amount of data because we're automatically assumed to be dirty pirates. So to end with: FUCK YOU.

    2. Re:Why I stick with my local telco VDSL by Redmancometh · · Score: 1

      In every place ive lived...3 states there are NO "local" telco providers.

    3. Re:Why I stick with my local telco VDSL by KrazyDave · · Score: 1

      Amen. Earthlink DSL customer here in California since 2000, no worries about ISP monitoring, throttling, peak-time congestion, etc. and likewise I cut off even cable TV infiltration 2 years ago (just watching OTA antenna TV and loving it.) Gosh bless my little copper phone line.

      --
      www.chihuahuarescue.com- Help to end dog abuse, abandonment and cruelty
    4. Re:Why I stick with my local telco VDSL by Dyinobal · · Score: 1

      Same here, I also have a local DSL provider, i don't get the same speeds cable users do but I've literally no hassel from my ISP with regards to my bandwidth usage which can be up to a terrabyte a month on really high months.

    5. Re:Why I stick with my local telco VDSL by Cito · · Score: 1

      Yup, always support your local telco's dsl service. You'll never be harassed, get letters or be bothered about bandwidth caps like cable companies do.

      Earthlink, Windstream dsl, and all the local telco isp's are 1000x better for true unlimited bandwidth and they don't monitor you

    6. Re:Why I stick with my local telco VDSL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      except their max speed here is 3Mb with a pitiful upload speed. makes it difficult to do actual work.

    7. Re:Why I stick with my local telco VDSL by HermMunster · · Score: 1

      Hey man, that anonymous poster saying fuck you is your judge jury and executioner.

      --
      You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
    8. Re:Why I stick with my local telco VDSL by zlives · · Score: 1

      agreed. if you are lucky enough to still have one... support local business

    9. Re:Why I stick with my local telco VDSL by michrech · · Score: 1

      There are two local telephone providers in my general area (that I know about), though neither serves my town with DSL. The one that also offers fixed wireless (which I *can* get) is twice as expensive for lower bandwidth, AND they have absolutely no issues in passing your information over to media companies wanting to sue you...

      --
      bork bork bork!
    10. Re:Why I stick with my local telco VDSL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, exactly. It's people's total inability to be moderate about it that has caused the problem. Also, I pirated everything in the 90s because I was a teenager and my weekend job washing dishes for minimum wage wasn't going to buy a lot of DOS games. Now that I'm grown I can afford to buy what I want. Sure, I still pirate some music but I try to support artists I really enjoy and listen to a lot. These guys who are like "never pay for software!" or "why are you buying music? lol" are the worst. I guess you never plan on working as a software developer for a small company that sells products to consumers? Or you don't care enough to support the music scene in your city/state/country?

      If Verizon just cracks down on the idiots who have 100 torrents from TPB seeded wide open all day and night then I say no problem. Now if they wanna bust my balls because I torrent an occasional album or audiobook, that's bullshit because I buy as much as I pirate, in fact I often end up buying the stuff I pirated!

    11. Re:Why I stick with my local telco VDSL by pixelpusher220 · · Score: 1

      You local 'telco' as opposed to, ahem, VERIZON?

      --
      People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people :-D
    12. Re:Why I stick with my local telco VDSL by Mitreya · · Score: 4, Insightful

      End result, data caps and packet snooping so it's a pain in the ass to download ANY large amount of data because we're automatically assumed to be dirty pirates.

      I feel your pain, but don't be deluded into thinking that pirates cause data caps

      Verizon doesn't want to upgrade their network and supply the bandwidth they actually sold. Overselling is lucrative -- hence the data caps

      Also, many providers are paving the way for selling their own streaming services (or partnering with one). Hence, it is nice to have strict caps and then say "oh, and OUR service does not count towards your cap".

      People should buy digital content now that it is sometimes available in a convenient form. But don't think for a second that doing so will stop all this bandwidth cap bullshit. We need competition -- having multiple alternative ISP services available would be a good start. Over last decade, I usually had 1 choice available to me, sometimes 2 (cable and DSL).

    13. Re:Why I stick with my local telco VDSL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To be fair though Verizon randomly bumped up the cap on my dsl a couple times over the years with no announcements or fanfare just suddenly one day you go from 640kbps to 1.5mbps to 3mbps etc. although my fios has been the same speed since i got it but it's fast i don't really need more speed for the foreseeable future.

    14. Re:Why I stick with my local telco VDSL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Verizon is a telco, not a cable company.

    15. Re:Why I stick with my local telco VDSL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Overselling isn't just lucrative, its the only way to actually do broadband. Even at gigabit+ wholesale prices, no consumer wants to pay for a true 50mbps of usage when chances are they'll only use 1% of it over a month. Not all ISPs are big Tier1s with full (or almost full) peering coverage, some actually do need to pay standard $4-6/mbps wholesale rates for the most of their traffic, if everyone had a dedicated 20-50mbps 24/7, you'd be looking at $80-200/month undelivered (DSLAM, DOCSIS gear, last mile, whatever maybe required) even at $4/mbps, and trust me a lot of rural independents are paying more than that.

    16. Re:Why I stick with my local telco VDSL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i think most people outside of the industry don't understand it, but like to complain anyway.

    17. Re:Why I stick with my local telco VDSL by Bodero · · Score: 1

      Verizon doesn't want to upgrade their network and supply the bandwidth they actually sold. Overselling is lucrative -- hence the data caps

      What? You mean the same Verizon that unveiled FiOS Quantum, a 300/65 connection, earlier this year?

      In fact, they've invested anywhere from $23 to $30 billion dollars in FiOS. To say they didn't upgrade their network is the height of ignorance.

      But hey, I guess this one didn't exactly fit into your "X does Y because of Z, always, no exceptions" template.

    18. Re:Why I stick with my local telco VDSL by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      that are ruining it for everyone else.

      I think the ones that are ruining the web are the ones actually taking steps to ruin the web. You know, companies and lawmakers.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    19. Re:Why I stick with my local telco VDSL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When will that be installed in, anywhere else, exactly?

      I have 1 gigabit service between two desktops, I guess US bandwidth is increasing!!1

    20. Re:Why I stick with my local telco VDSL by Bodero · · Score: 1

      When will that be installed in, anywhere else, exactly?

      My bad, I thought we were discussing Verizon as an ISP on this thread, I apologize for bringing in facts about Verizon as an ISP.

    21. Re:Why I stick with my local telco VDSL by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      Now that I'm rich I can afford to buy what I want.

      FTFY. You won't stay rich for long throwing your money away like that.

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    22. Re:Why I stick with my local telco VDSL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you start nitpicking as you have your right. However if you look at reality I'm sure Verizon has done what it saw in its own best interest. Upgrading the last mile was in its own best interest for a portion of its customers. However that does not mean that the entire infrastructure has been sufficently upgraded to cope with the increased use of the last mile connection.

      I won't switch to cable by virture of the disshonesity of all the cable internet service providers (that I'm aware of). Comcast for instace will advertise up to 20mbps and then do everything in its power to reduce it's obligation to provide you 20mbps. It's how "up to" got added to the advertising. Cable has its limitations in that it is a shared resource in the "last mile". What they would need to do is guarentee 10mbps and advertise burst speeds of up to 20mbps. But they would also have to actually be able to provide those speeds.

      DSL providers can actually provide the 10mbps they advertise provided the conditions of the line leading to your residence or business are good enough. They don't have to lie about it because it is not a shared resource. I'm not saying that they aren't also limited by other infrastructure. They can cut corners and provide insufficent bandwidth to the telco. I haven't see that. I have heard qwest (which now owns centurylink- which i have) is one of the companies doing that unfortunately. I haven't experienced it though. I pay for 10mbps and actually get it. However qwest hasn't implimented the infrastructure here. That was done before and so the advertised speeds are what we get. Unfortunately we have two bad choices in this area. qwest or comcast. sadly this was an area with two companies that were at one time more local. RCN (covered NJ mainly i believe) and sprint (back in the day- not sure the size of sprint although they were much better than qwest in this area at least).

  9. It's an elegant solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Both from a technical and a legal standpoint.

    What is the EFF talking about, "surveillance"? Subscribers have to specify the URL of the content they want to download, and Verizon maintains a list of known piracy sites. A file download can take many minutes, sometimes over an hour. It's not like Verizon needs to snoop through people's posts to get this done.

    1. Re:It's an elegant solution by miltonw · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, it damn well isn't elegant. The fact that you think so simply means that you haven't a bloody clue what you're talking about.

      Those URLs of "known piracy sites" are the same URLs of sites that host significant amounts of perfectly legal content.

      There are two scenarios that Verizon can follow:
      - Invade everyone's privacy and inspect everything being downloaded, or
      - Assume everyone who downloads more than a "certain amount" is "a pirate -- even when they aren't.

      Whichever scenario Verizon chooses, it will be very wrong.

      No, not "elegant" at all. Really, really bad. You really haven't a clue what you are talking about.

    2. Re:It's an elegant solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those URLs of "known piracy sites" are the same URLs of sites that host significant amounts of perfectly legal content.

      Verizon can track the URLs of the known pirated content. If the sites are known as predominantly piracy sites, even with pockets of legit material, then the entire site should be flagged. After all, the subscribers are being throttled, not prosecuted.

      No, not "elegant" at all. Really, really bad. You really haven't a clue what you are talking about.

      Relax, the US elections are over. We can do without this type of debating tactic for at least a couple years.

    3. Re:It's an elegant solution by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      After all, the subscribers are being throttled, not prosecuted.

      "I only punched you in the face! It's not like I murdered you or anything!"

      But yeah, I don't see how punishing random people is an elegant solution. Anti-piracy schemes like this typically end up hurting not only the 'pirates' but also the people who don't infringe upon copyright.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    4. Re:It's an elegant solution by WWWhatsup · · Score: 1

      I think you are missing the point here. The Copyright Alert System is solely concerned with bittorrent peers, and, as I was able to get clarified via a question during the conference, only to seeders and not to leechers.

      The actual monitoring will be done by Mark Monitor on behalf of the content companies. If they successfully leech identifiable content from a seed, then that seed's IP address will be passed to the ISP for CAS processing at the appropriate alert level.

      The ISPs will not be doing any monitoring under this system..

  10. Demand a refund, by MouseTheLuckyDog · · Score: 1

    If they start throttling bandwidth and advertise they are providing certain speeds, or if they sell plans with certain bandwidth, then you should be able to demand a refund for bandwidth payed for but denied.

    1. Re:Demand a refund, by pixelpusher220 · · Score: 1

      It's pretty clear you're violating the contract you signed if you are, indeed, pirating stuff. Hence, no reason for them to refund anything.

      You're thinking of throttling people for using the advertised speed 'too much' when that 'too much' isn't defined and means you can only use the advertised speed for about 3.4 minutes before you get throttled. THAT is a contractual violation by THEM. Pirating is a contractual violation by YOU.

      --
      People in cars cause accidents....accidents in cars cause people :-D
    2. Re:Demand a refund, by kiwimate · · Score: 1

      Nice little rant.

      It's convenient that the artists whose works you are pirating can't demand a refund from you, isn't it.

    3. Re:Demand a refund, by Pubstar · · Score: 1

      Just to put things in perspective, I just had to download my steam games after a format last week. Total transfer was well over 500gb. That's not including HD youtube and netflix on 2 TVs or online gaming and some linux downloads. I probably have well over 1TB of legit download this month.

    4. Re:Demand a refund, by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      It's convenient that the artists whose works you are pirating can't demand a refund from you, isn't it.

      That might make sense if the artists actually gave him anything. Most likely, someone else allowed him to copy the data, and he didn't receive any money or anything else from the artists. What would they want him to refund... a copy of their own works?

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    5. Re:Demand a refund, by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      Actually he can. All he has to to is ask. I will refund every penny that he gave me. In fact, I would be perfectly willing to do even more and pay him the same thing he gets for a royalty on his work: probably no more than a nickel per unit. Or were you really referring to the actual owner of the IP, nearly always a gigantic mega-corporation?

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    6. Re:Demand a refund, by kiwimate · · Score: 1

      You're being deliberately obtuse and you know it.

      All he has to do is ask

      Does he know you've taken his works without paying? If he doesn't, that's pretty unfair of you, isn't it.

      I will refund every penny that he gave me

      Can you stop being so petty? Maybe then we can have an actual discussion about the issue at hand.

      ...gigantic mega-corporation

      So because a company takes on risk (nearly all albums lose money for the record company. Yes, really. No, not under some kind of tricky accounting. They generally really do lose actual real money), puts in all of the marketing, puts in all of the distribution, puts in all of the supply chain, you think you have a right to screw them because they have a lot more money than you approve of?

      If you shoot back with "but the artist doesn't get any of the money", then I answer:

      1. the artist certainly isn't any better off with you pirating it, are they?
      2. it's beside the point; who gave you the right to arbitrarily decide that because you disagree with their chosen business model you get to break the law and take something for free and deliberately flaunt that business model?
      2a. and don't say "they have no choice, they have to go with the evil corporation". Of course they have a choice in this day and age. Self-publish and self-distribute on their own web site, or via Amazon self-publishing, or on iTunes, or any number of other avenues.
      3. I bet if you actually meant what you said then you could find their contact details and send them a check for a couple of dollars...
      3a. ...and I also bet you never, ever will, because at the end of the day you really just want to get your stuff for free and at your convenience, regardless of whether it's illegal or anyone suffers.

      All this high-and-mighty nonsense whining about evil corporations is just smoke. You just like that you can get stuff for free.

    7. Re:Demand a refund, by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      Does he know you've taken his works without paying? If he doesn't, that's pretty unfair of you, isn't it.

      They aren't his works anymore. He sold the rights to them to GiantEvilCorporation_00368. Once he's done that it really isn't any of his business anymore. I wouldn't think he would be in any position to complain.

      So because a company takes on risk (nearly all albums lose money for the record company. Yes, really. No, not under some kind of tricky accounting. They generally really do lose actual real money), puts in all of the marketing, puts in all of the distribution, puts in all of the supply chain, you think you have a right to screw them because they have a lot more money than you approve of?

      I'm not screwing them. I'm just not paying them. And, yes, I do think I have that right. I was born with certain inalienable natural rights as a human being. Rights not granted by any government. One of those rights or freedoms is to copy a bunch of bits. Whatever the benefits of GiantRecordCompany being around I don't think it is more important than basic human freedoms.

      If they don't like it they are free to choose a different line of work. Somehow I don't think the executives at those companies with 10 million dollar houses and half million dollar cars are going to make that choice, but if they don't like the free nature of information then perhaps they should stop trying to sell it. And no I don't feel sorry for anyone who makes more money in one week or even one day than I make in a whole year. They are not making any less money because of me anyway.

      1. the artist certainly isn't any better off with you pirating it, are they?

      So what? They aren't any worse off either.

      2. it's beside the point; who gave you the right to arbitrarily decide that because you disagree with their chosen business model you get to break the law and take something for free and deliberately flaunt that business model?

      Rights are not something that can be given. You either believe that human beings have them or you don't. I believe I have the right to copy some bits that are out there. What's more I don't think anyone has the right to stop me. Not even the artist who created the particular pattern of bits in the first place.

      I don't care about the law. I break the law every single day. Every time I get in my car. Laws are only important as practical matters: in terms of not getting caught. Ethical beliefs are important, but as we have already established I don't think copying bits is wrong.

      In the rare circumstance where the artist is self-publishing I might very well choose to pay them for it. Or just donate to them. I wouldn't feel that it would be wrong or that I would be "stealing" if I didn't, but I would probably want to. I've actually done that. I've voluntary given money to a musical artist who had a "donate" button on his website. I already owned all of his CDs, but I knew that meant almost nothing in terms of the money that he actually recieved from me. By buying the CDs I was mostly paying BigFacelessCorporation. It's really a very frustrating system for both the artist and his fans. I wanted to express my gratitude to him in a more personal way by directly giving him enough money to go out to a restaurant or something. And unlike the megacorporations he wasn't rich. So the money I gave didn't seem completely meaningless. With megacorps it's like adding a needle to a haystack.

      3. I bet if you actually meant what you said then you could find their contact details and send them a check for a couple of dollars...

      That would be silly. You can't buy much with a few dollars these days. It wouldn't be worth the effort of driving to the bank and depositing the check, and I don't think the artist would really want to give out his home address or even have people searching for it just so they can send a check for a few bucks. But

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
  11. Link to the story... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...just got slashdotted? (by pirates...?) lol

  12. Re:I look forward to the innovation this will caus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You bet it won't take long for some people to figure out how to mask where they are etc. I don't think this is going to stop anyone. Information is free, Free as in free beer!

  13. Two-Way Street by guttentag · · Score: 4, Interesting

    In other news, Verizon customer John Doe has declared his Web browsing history and related Internet activity to be a "work of art" created by him and subject to copyright protection. On Friday he announced that any company caught illegally downloading, storing or sharing his copyrighted work will be subject to throttling: a process by which he reduces his payments for their services to pennies per day.

    Why isn't this a two-way street? If the consumer did this, Verizon would simply say he had not paid what he owed in full. But here Verizon is unilaterally deciding not to provide the service in full. Perhaps the consumer should have the right to charge the company late fees for services not rendered in full.

    1. Re:Two-Way Street by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But here Verizon is unilaterally deciding not to provide the service in full. Perhaps the consumer should have the right to charge the company late fees for services not rendered in full.

      They're unilaterally changing the agreement with their subscribers, which the subscribers agreed to let them do. At least they're announcing the change; I'm not sure the agreement requires that.

    2. Re:Two-Way Street by HermMunster · · Score: 1

      Though you may think you can do that you can't. Unfortunately. Congress determined pretty explicitly what types of works are covered by copyright. There has been a number of cases where things such as live broadcasts were not covered by Congress's copyright protection and the rulings have been that those events don't get that sort of protection (complete protection). Read the techdirt.com article about the UW restricting journalistic tweets to X #. I think you'll understand why his claim of copyrighted works would not hold water.

      --
      You can lead a man with reason but you can't make him think.
    3. Re:Two-Way Street by jodido · · Score: 0

      maybe if there were another option this user would stop, but here in NYC that's pretty much it, unless you want to get an unlimited data plan from T-Mobile or Sprint and try your luck tethering your phone. BTW you think Democrats can "run things properly"? Ask the folks out in Rockaway or on Staten Island--Democrat mayor, Democrat senators, Democrat president, Democrat fail.

    4. Re:Two-Way Street by dywolf · · Score: 1

      Naturally they change the TOS to reflect the throttling and require agreement before allowing you to connect again, and oh by the way, connecting again is automatic agreement.

      --
      The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
    5. Re:Two-Way Street by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What someone -- like the ACLU or EFF -- needs to do is sue one of these ISPs for being responsible for any and all illegal activity occuring on their network. Find someone harmed by a child predator, or some other thing that results in wrongful death, and file a lawsuit on behalf of the victims claiming that the ISP is partially responsible because they could have prevented it. Then when they say no, point to this.

      The real issue is that they can't pick and choose what they want to be responsible for. They're either responsible for their traffic or not. Why the fuck should they pick copyright infringement as the thing they want to stand up for?

      When you look at it this way, they look like a bunch of crooks. As far as I'm concerned, Verizon supports sexual predators, organized crime, and domestic violence. The same is true of any ISP who participates in this six-strikes law. Why should you say this? Because they're choosing not to prevent any of these things. The proof? They're choosing to prevent something else.

  14. mechanism? by pla · · Score: 3

    Time Warner Cable, another U.S. internet service provider pledging to tackle piracy, says it will use pop-up warnings to deter repeat offenders.

    How, exactly, do they plan to accomplish this? Yes, obviously, they have the capability to do the ultimate "man in the middle" attack, but I have rather a huge problem with them analyzing my traffic and modifying it enough to intelligently inject malicious scripts into pages I view.


    More to the point, ISPs keep announcing grand plans like this, but not mentioning how they plan to detect "pirates" or what appeals process they plan to put in place. And yes, I know we'll all joke and say "none, of course", but realistically, you don't just lose all your rights as a result of engaging in minor civil offenses against a third party. Hell, even serial killers still get their day in court.

    1. Re:mechanism? by Derekloffin · · Score: 1

      I'd like to know how they are going to go about detecting such, without incurring complaints that they aren't outright blocking such. If it is just 'you're using bittorrent' then they are also blocking lots of legitimate bittorrents (including a major MMO). If it is just detecting connection to known pirate sites, why don't they just block them outright?

    2. Re:mechanism? by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      I'm guessing they'll make a whitelist of 'legal' trackers, or at least those large enough to be noticed by Verizon (like the MMO) and just assume all others are piracy. It'll mean blocking things like niche linux distributions and independent free media, but Verizon may well consider that an acceptable loss.

    3. Re:mechanism? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Hell, even serial killers still get their day in court.

      But serial killers only kill people. They don't potentially cost a massive corporation a lost sale. Also, they might even wind up killing "pirates", so the MPAA might actually like them.

    4. Re:mechanism? by NoKaOi · · Score: 1

      More to the point, ISPs keep announcing grand plans like this, but not mentioning how they plan to detect "pirates" or what appeals process they plan to put in place. And yes, I know we'll all joke and say "none, of course", but realistically, you don't just lose all your rights as a result of engaging in minor civil offenses against a third party. Hell, even serial killers still get their day in court.

      Actually, they have announced how they plan on detecting pirates. They will rely on the rights holders to send them complaints, and there is a (probably useless) dispute process. While this is better than deep packet inspection, I see the problems as:

      1. If you do get a warning letter, your only recourse is to give your ISP $30 to dispute it with no confidence that they'll actually do anything or care.
      2. Even if you give them money to dispute it, you can still be effectively disconnected (throttled into uselessness) without getting your day in court. The ISP doesn't have to give a damn about your dispute. In reality there's no recourse for false positives, and the history of the rightsholders extortion letters gives us confidence that there will be many false positives.
      3. The ISP bears the cost of dealing with these accusations from the rightsholders, which their customers ultimately end up having to pay for. The rightsholders don't have to pay anything to the ISP even though customers have to pay to dispute it.
      4. Most of us in the US don't have a choice of ISPs so if we don't like it, tough. If we're lucky we have the choice of 2 (cable or DSL) and more than likely both of them are a-holes.

    5. Re:mechanism? by Travelsonic · · Score: 1

      Honestly, I'd be tempted to encourage everybody to write to the FTC over this. There is no way slandering somebody and making them pay to be unslandered is legal.

      --
      If you believe in privacy, and believe you have "nothing to hide" at the same time, you're a goddammed idiot
    6. Re:mechanism? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Flash updates set off a suricata/snort warning for a DHT ping (a bittorrent thing)...this will be hilarious.

    7. Re:mechanism? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm guessing they'll make a whitelist of 'legal' trackers, or at least those large enough to be noticed by Verizon (like the MMO) and just assume all others are piracy.

      That'll kill private trackers, but public torrents are moving more and more to DHT; when people get punished for connecting to public trackers, popular torrent sites will adapt and overcome by removing trackers completely.

      It'll mean blocking things like niche linux distributions and independent free media

      No, they'll just use DHT, if they don't already.

  15. Hopefully you can switch telcos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The first two alerts will result in a simple notification email informing the users that their connection has been flagged for copyright infringements.
    (pretty sure no one under 40 checks their ISP given email.)

    After the second warning comes the acknowledgment phase in which a popup is delivered users. ( I am assuming that they illegally intercept and replace all my communications using a man in the middle attack? Because installing popups in SSL encoded pages Isn't going to get them far.)

        Once received subscribers are required to read and confirm, a process designed to ensure that they are aware of the unauthorized sharing that’s taking place via their account. (If you get this far, just drop your subscription and demand a refund for your time lost. Money is one of the few things that corporate executives see.)

  16. google fiber by Xicor · · Score: 1

    with any luck, google will take this as a reason to expand google fiber more quickly and basically kick out the rest of the providers

  17. Incorrect headline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It should be "Verizon to Throttle Bandwith, Sometimes for Piracy".

  18. The shroud of the dark side has fallen by akpoff · · Score: 1

    "Begun the Clone War has" - Yoda

  19. Doesn't this open themselves up to more lawsuits? by BLToday · · Score: 1

    When they were just "common carrier" they can't be sued for things that goes across their network. Anyone know the legal implications of this?

  20. Switch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Glad I have Charter for this one. They have not decided to go full evil yet. If you have the option (and most of you don't) you should take these warning to switch to a company that is either local and doesn't care, or has officially denounced the six strikes. Also tell your less technical friends who may not be on Slashdot.

  21. Seems like an ideal setup for a class action... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Lawyer finds say 3000 educated Verizon subscribes, they then stop all illegal use of bittorrent (if there actually was any) and radically increase there use of legal bittorrent files (update WoW on 64 machines- sure, need to grab the latest Linux distros (all of them, and then seed like crazy!), absolutely; all 3000 of those subscribes sharing daily videos and journals with each other, also awesome- just for good measure they should use the piratebay to access the legal torrents.

    Wait for a good number of them to be throttled for 'illegal' activity- and launch the class action suit for breach of contract slander, and whatever else can stick.

    1. Re:Seems like an ideal setup for a class action... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd do it.

    2. Re:Seems like an ideal setup for a class action... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed. This is effortless to honeypot.

    3. Re:Seems like an ideal setup for a class action... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      sign me up

  22. DPI to burn you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anyone "catch my drift" on the above? I hope so, IF you *think* you're going to "outsmart" the gatekeepers, you are in for a HUGE surprise...

    APK

    P.S.=> Let me tell you all about 1 thing: You piss someone off enough? They'll get you, & they WILL make it personal, especially if/when you offend their egos (which is HUGE in geeks) or worse, their livelyhood.

    Only a matter of time... because, sooner OR later, if/when you are pulling shit? You will make a mistake... it happens. For every thing you can think of, 10 more can go wrong.

    Ok - put it this way, I've seen it happen, & so have most of you I suspect:

    E.G. #1 - Ever heard of Kevin Mitnick?? He played those kinds of games, & pissed off "the cyber samurai" (don't recall the guy's name, but he was burned REPEATEDLY & shamed by Mitnick, who of course, only really had the advantage of 'surprise' (sort of))... in the end, you all know what went down!

    E.G. #2 - What I feel should be "required reading" for security pros no less in Cliff Stoll's "The Cuckoos Egg" - all it took was one VERY determined guy to take down a German spyring in league with the KGB, to burn a LOT of very skilled 'hacker/cracker' types who made a very fundamental oversight in whom they were using as a conduit to attack our military installations (1 of which my brother was stationed at in Richmond Hill).

    So, don't be fools... despite being "hidden in the crowd" & what-not, it is YOU @ the disadvantage in the end...

    ... apk

    1. Re:DPI to burn you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *Yawn*

    2. Re:DPI to burn you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whooa, for a moment you frightened me until I realized that you're a clueless douchebag.

    3. Re:DPI to burn you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From what I can understand of your ranting, somebody's apparently offended your huge ego, and perhaps a certain somebody let slip that you shouldn't ever be hired in any kind of technology-using role. Perhaps that somebody was even you, since you use your real name on schizophrenic ramblings. I find it hard to imagine that someone would hire you, given your impressive track record of belligerent martyrdom and your devout resolve that Delphi is the ultimate language of all time.

      You seem to like pulling shit. You'll carry on an argument long past any reason, until other debaters lose interest. Any actual debate is pointless, because you don't care about silly things like logic. At the first sign of losing a debate, you blame the other guy for attacking you, and cite your enormous list of long-irrelevant posts. You quote movies as your arguments, and see yourself as the hero in every literary work you encounter.

      Despite everyone else's wishes, you don't just hide in the crowd, Alexander. You make your presence painfully known. You crave the attention, so you can be the hero of your own story. You want everything to be about you. You stalk people, derailing their other conversations. You post quickly an off-topic rant in a new story. You bump years-old discussion threads (on other sites) just to proclaim the all-powerful might of the archaic hosts file.

      Now you have your wish. This post is all about you. Big fucking deal.

    4. Re:DPI to burn you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it sounds like he got a piece of you and you're projecting.

    5. Re:DPI to burn you by Rob+the+Bold · · Score: 1

      Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

      --
      I am not a crackpot.
    6. Re:DPI to burn you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hahahaha, indeed. I agree.

    7. Re:DPI to burn you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      coming out of an ac troll like you only makes us laugh.

  23. so meanwhile at verizon by nimbius · · Score: 4, Funny

    attorney: "the RIAA is threatening serious litigation if we dont crack down on piracy"
    exec: "ok, we've been there before. what do they want"
    attorney: "they want us to crack down"
    exec: "done. tell them we will warn pirates and throttle their internet connection:"
    engineer: "thats not really feasible or possible given our resources and the nature of the internet as a self healing..."
    exec: "its a completely feasible way to solve this problem, i have complete confidence in its ability."
    engineer: "how would you know??"
    exec: "because the problem is a lobbying group, not a pirate."
    engineer: "how do they verify it works?"
    exec: "tell them to test from their phone."

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
    1. Re:so meanwhile at verizon by sdguero · · Score: 1

      I know you got modded up for being funny but this is seriously how it works...

  24. Re:Doesn't this open themselves up to more lawsuit by Derekloffin · · Score: 1

    ISP's aren't considered common carriers as I recall. They do have some protections but it isn't the same as common carrier protections and as one would easily conclude they don't have the same obligations either. I could be wrong though, as I'm running on foggy barely awake memory here.

  25. Warning Letter by unique_parrot · · Score: 1

    Dear Customer,

    notify yourself herby informed that you have used more than 15 megabytes of your download volume in a week. This has been monitored as pirating use of our great services.
    Should you continue pirating your credentials will be sent to our share^h^h^h^h arm of^h^h^h^h^h^h you have to pay without reciving any content (not even great advertisements).

    Your favorite Verizon

  26. What's next by future+assassin · · Score: 1

    Computer/phone manufacturers installing piracy tracking chips on all computers? After all without a computer you can't pirate at all. What stop there, maybe have a Best Buy employee make you sign a No Piracy contract before you buy anything with storage that can connect to the internet?

    --
    by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
    1. Re:What's next by Jellodyne · · Score: 1

      Your CPU will be a tracking chip. But you can always buy a CPU from someone other than Intel and AMD, and assuming there's a chip maker who doesn't make all of their chips Trusted Computing platforms. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusted_Computing

    2. Re:What's next by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are alternatives

      Sent from my beowulf cluster of RS6000s

  27. So will torrenting Ubunu ISOs get me throttled? by scorp1us · · Score: 1

    And the link is 404

    --
    Slashdot's rate-of-post filter: Preventing you from posting too many great ideas at once.
  28. The kickback for them is video streams. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since time Warner and Comcast do video streaming for HBO and the like, I presume they had a back-room deal where if ATT and Verizon cooperate on the f-sharing, then they'll get a special deal on pricing, or consideration when they come back and ask the video companies to be able to stream their videos on a pay video streaming service. Isn't this what they really want to get into and thus must do the movie industries bidding?

  29. Here come the Pinkertons by rtp · · Score: 2

    The Internet is still very much the wild west.

    The equivalent of train robberies, bank heists, Indian raids, and muggings in the mining towns on payday are a common occurrence in today's online environment.

    You and I may not think copying electronic bits is a big deal, but many corporations are ruthless enough to pursue a dollar anywhere. Never underestimate greed. The larger the corporation, the further away from reality sit its leadership, the more ruthless the organization becomes.

    Big government isn't very effective in the new frontier. The early decades are always chaos.

    Thus, corporations turn to their own methods for protection, enforcement, and collection of revenue.

    If it's profitable, can you blame them?

    History clearly renders our future.

    The west was free. The west was lawless. Those who were weak, those who were greedy, complained, and plotted. The west was then tamed.

    Freedom suffers at scale.

    The more individuals that are granted freedom, the more likely some knot of individuals will coalesce around seizing freedom from others for their own selfish gain, returning humanity to prison. When you're out numbered and out gunned, what happens?

    1. Re:Here come the Pinkertons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When you're out numbered and out gunned, what happens?

      Use more gun. That's how you stop some big, mean mother-hubbard from tearin' you a structurally-superfluous behind.

    2. Re:Here come the Pinkertons by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      How could corporate greed be the motivation here? Verizon does not stand to gain a single customer with this scheme, but they stand to lose potentially millions or at least hundreds of thousands of customers in locations with broadband competition. They will lose me the second they try to pull this bullshit with me. I would imagine that their local competitors with similar pricing and connections speeds are going to be very happy if Verizon actually goes ahead with this insanity.

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
  30. I download music podcasts free - is that piracy? by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    Seriously, because a bitstream of legal music may appear to be piracy (same bits) but isn't.

    I trust Verizon as far as the next guillotine for their CEO and top execs.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  31. Thepromobay by phorm · · Score: 3, Interesting

    So how will they determine what's piracy and what's legit?
    Heavy bandwidth/bt users are pirates?
    Those who use thepiratebay are pirates?

    The last few things I downloaded off TPB were legit promo albums given out by bands (one band: "Stockholm" is pretty good).
    The last few linux ISO's I downloaded, also bittorrent, as well as a few FOSS games.
    Wow and many games use BT for updates.
    So how would Verizon determine whether I'm a "dirty pirate" or just a guy who makes use of technology?

    1. Re:Thepromobay by Vicarius · · Score: 2

      ... So how would Verizon determine whether I'm a "dirty pirate" or just a guy who makes use of technology?

      Easy-peasy! If you use more bandwidth than a grandma checking emails, then you are a dirty pirate!

    2. Re:Thepromobay by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i would like to know the same.

      i do a lot of legal torrenting, Linux Distros, Large file updates, the new humble bundle games.. etc

      are they just going to assume that because you are using a BT port you are illegally downloading? or are they going to invade your privacy and look at what you are downloading?

  32. How do they differentiate non-infringing files? by kawabago · · Score: 3, Insightful

    We have seen all kinds of examples of some entity claiming ownership of a work they don't in fact own. What protects consumers from spurious claims? Good will of the entertainment industry? They don't have any. This kind of practice will make consumers turn against the entertainment industry and demand it be muzzled.

  33. Recently Switched to Frontier by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Been having gameing lags and other issues with Comcast last several months. Could not even do uploads on Speed tests due to filtering. Guess what.. After switching to Frontier.. No more lags.. And can do Uploads on speed tests and throttleing tests work.. hhhmmmmmm.....

  34. Can you say "TOR" by morganjayp · · Score: 1

    If you really want to do this (or anyone else you don't want folks to monitor), and you don't want to get throttled just use a TOR client to proxy your traffic. For Android, use Orbot. If you use iOS (flame suit ON), well, you have bigger problems...

    1. Re:Can you say "TOR" by SuricouRaven · · Score: 2

      And watch TOR grind to a halt under the load. TOR wasn't made to handle something like that. There are precious few exit nodes, as only those either very stupid or very dedicated to free speech are going to run them and risk being mistakenly accused of trafficking in child porn or hacking into the network of someone with serious money. An onslaught of torrenters would bring TOR to it's knees.

    2. Re:Can you say "TOR" by Jellodyne · · Score: 1

      TOR is a bad choice for bittorrent traffic, and the TOR folks would kindly ask that you not use bittorrent on their service. A torrent proxy service or full VPN is the solution. I use BTGuard, which IS designed for bittorrent traffic. https://blog.torproject.org/blog/bittorrent-over-tor-isnt-good-idea

    3. Re:Can you say "TOR" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What you'd actually need is an onion-internal P2P system, one which didn't rely on exit nodes at all (just like accessing .onion sites doesn't). However, I suspect that a pure-TOR P2P system would end up being pretty similar to FreeNet, so it might be better just to recommend that torrenters switch to that. GNUnet might also be suitable, but I hear bad things about its stability (although FreeNet can be harmed by sudden termination).

  35. Verizon throttling its bandwidth? by gestalt_n_pepper · · Score: 1

    How could you tell? More seriously, Verizon is simply too cheap to upgrade its network to handle more traffic (Here's a hint, Verizon. It's called a "mesh network: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesh_networking." Try asking an engineer instead of a marketing oaf or a bean counter.)

    --
    Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
    1. Re:Verizon throttling its bandwidth? by systemidx · · Score: 1

      Mesh networking requires spending money.
      Therefore, they require government grants.
      Once they receive those, they just won't do the work.
      Government shrugs and carries on.
      Tax payers fucked.
      Rinse.
      Repeat.

  36. the difference..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    after reading the parent article I am still concerned as to how they plan to tell illegal file sharing with bittorrent from legitimate file transfers using bittorrent

    either way, chances are they will get it wrong before they get it right. with that being said, what penalties are they liable for if they terminate or throttle my service as a result of them flagging legit p2p torrents as 'illegal file sharing'. and with that being said, ALL these companies have already made sure that they cant be on the receiving end of a class action lawsuit from their users so at first glance, it appears that we have little to no power to stop them from abusing their own system to deprive legitimate p2p users of the bandwidth they are paying for

  37. Police Judge Jury and Sentencing by trevize42 · · Score: 1

    So the phone company now believes they have the right to: #1 - Police/observe what you do #2 - Judge what you are doing with no Jury or defense or proof #3 - Sentence you as guilty #4 - hand out a sentence of cut your internet access or re-direct you. If the government tried this people we go nuts. But I guess it's ok for a company.

    1. Re:Police Judge Jury and Sentencing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bartenders can choose to cut you off and/or remove you from the premises if, in their opinion, you're being a drunken asshat.

      Of course, you can always go to a different bar. That's the real problem here - because our local governments are keen on crapping down the throat of the free market, the average American has nowhere else to go for Internets due to asinine monopoly contracts.

  38. hollywood accounting is stealing by Dan667 · · Score: 1

    and there is lots more money being stolen by hollywood music and movie companies by pretending hugely successful music and movies did not turn a profit. Where is a war on hollywood accounting?

  39. Biased BBC by MrL0G1C · · Score: 1

    The BBC are as biased as f**k, the phrase in the first line of the article

    "who use technologies such as BitTorrent to steal copyrighted material."

    You know who's side they're on when they use weasel words like that, and it's certainly not the license-payers side.

    --
    Waterfox - a Firefox fork with legacy extension support, security updates and better privacy by default.
    1. Re:Biased BBC by dywolf · · Score: 1

      pirates do use "technologies such as bittorrent" to pirate. they also use usenet and usb sticks. the statement is not false.
      false would saying "all bittorrent users are pirates", "bitorrent has no legitimit use", etc.

      this is a case of bias, but its your bias, not theirs. simply stating a thing in a simple way is not in and of itself bias.

      --
      The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
    2. Re:Biased BBC by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      Peh. No one knows how to write neutral articles anymore. If the BBC had an ounce of journalistic integrity, it would have used "various technologies including, x, x, x, but not solely limited to them."

      The GP is right that the article has a bias.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    3. Re:Biased BBC by MrL0G1C · · Score: 1

      Lol at you completely missed what I was aiming at, they are calling all people who break civil law by infringing upon copyright criminals by calling them thieves, that is where the bias is, this is certainly not the first time they've call copyright infringement 'stealing' and I doubt it will be the last.

      A lot of people fail to realise that copyright is not a natural right - mankind got to where it is by copying - learning is a form of copying.

      Copyrights last too long and copying without the correct consent within the absurd time-frame set out by the law is not 'stealing'.

      --
      Waterfox - a Firefox fork with legacy extension support, security updates and better privacy by default.
  40. Does this mean they are now responsible for all? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does this mean they are now just as responsible for any child porn passing over their network? And will they be charged when it is found to have existed on a computer running on their network?

    They should now be legally responsible for anything which is passed over their network if this is the case. And if at any point a different ISP discovers illegal activity on anther ISP's network, it will be their responsibility to bring the first ISP to the attention of the police.

    It could get very interesting, with ISP's business model now including finding incriminating evidence on competitors networks. And then tryign to get them shut down as repeat infringers.
    Judge: You broke the law downloading that file...
    Customer: Well my ISP never told me I was doign anythign wrong? I thought it was ok to download ti as it wasn't blocked?

  41. Download Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why not constantly download and delete a Linux distro via torrent?

  42. NO! DON'T! by rbprbp · · Score: 2

    Please don't use Tor for torrenting. Not only it imposes extra load on the exit nodes, it won't keep you protected for the reasons mentioned in that link.

    --
    They're there in their room. You're on your own.
  43. Steal, huh? by jon3k · · Score: 2

    who use technologies such as BitTorrent to steal copyrighted material.

    steal/stl/
    Verb:
    Take (another person's property) without permission or legal right and without intending to return it: "thieves stole her bicycle".

    How in 2012 are people still unable to distinguish between theft and copyright infringement and how does it get passed slashdot moderators?

    1. Re:Steal, huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It doesn't matter any more, because they want it like that. Intentionally blurring the lines between the two make them easier to paint people as thieves.

      They may say "copyrighted material", but after years and years of misinformation the mind substitutes that with "stolen material" ( lucky break on their part, they're much too incompetent and stupid to actually think that far ahead. )

    2. Re:Steal, huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you tell a lie often enough, it becomes the truth.

    3. Re:Steal, huh? by duane_robertson · · Score: 1

      How in 2012 are people still unable to distinguish between theft and copyright infringement and how does it get passed slashdot moderators?

      For the same reason people have trouble with the difference between "passed" and "past." When written communication is quick and cheap, people don't spend much time on grammatical niceties, assuming that the reader will interpret their meaning.

    4. Re:Steal, huh? by jon3k · · Score: 1

      One of us has an editor and the other doesn't. One is a grammatical error based on phonetics and the other is a logical error. You can complain about my grammar all you want, but the two are not comparable.

  44. We Tried To Warn You! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Too not use the Bittorrent Client {or micro-Torrent} and anti-virus software. Now we're all f**k*d because you people insist on having active monitoring software on your computer.

  45. Boycott the throtlers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you get throttled, just drop the provider for another.
    Hurt them in the pocket.

  46. I've been in hot water with Time Warner before by sdguero · · Score: 2

    Or so I thought. In 2007 they sent me two DMCA notices and shut off my internet twice in one week. The second time they said "if it happens again, we will revoke your account." I said go for it. I can always get high speed internet from one of the other 4 providers available at my house. I kept downloading and never heard from them again.

    To me, the lesson of the story is that the ISPs are willing to hassle their infringing customers to the point of making their service slightly inconvenient, but as soon as you threaten to take away their $40/month, they back down.

  47. Cancelling their substription by wisnoskij · · Score: 1

    So instead of telling them that they will no longer take their money in exchange for providing a service they will just stop providing service and keep charging them?

    --
    Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
  48. Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So Verizon is going to punish people for using a legitimate program/protocol on the internet?

    1. Re:Really? by dcollins117 · · Score: 1

      Apparently, judging from the article downloading is illegal. Only pirates do that.To see something like this go unchallenged in a Slashdot summary sickens me, but, well we all know what's really going on.

  49. This is why I live in Canada by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In Canada, Rogers, of the Rogers/Bell duopoly, already tried doing exactly this. It was called ITMP, "Internet Traffic Management Practice". The CRTC ordered Rogers to either stop it or lose their license. Rogers chose the first option. This is exactly why I live in Canada and not the US, despite the huge economic drawback.

  50. "Using BitTorrent to steal" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    is at the top of my wish list, right after the ability to punch somebody in the face over standard TCP/IP...

  51. lol by syleishere · · Score: 1

    Sounds good then we can start VPN companies to protect their customers to do what they want like internet should be and make money off them.

  52. Same old, same old. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nothing new. Verizon, Time Warner, Comcast, etc have already been doing this for years. They are just flapping their gums to keep Hollywood and Disney happy.

    Also, the thing with Verizon is, they only rate limit on their DSL lines, they don't touch FiOS, ever.

  53. Re not all ISP are equal by lpq · · Score: 1

    Comcast may have more of a vested interest in stopping piracy as they are also a media owner (owning NBC) and the production companies that produce many of their channel lineups for things like Syfi... among others.

    But on the flip side -- given the quality of programming on their properties -- maybe they don't need to worry so much about piracy...*cough*.. ;-)