Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

US ISPs Refuse To Disconnect Persistent Pirates (torrentfreak.com)

Posted by msmash on from the stand-on-piracy dept.

An anonymous reader writes: The U.S. broadband association USTelecom, a trade association representing many ISPs, is taking a stand against abusive takedown notices and a recent push to terminate the accounts of repeat infringers. They argue that ISPs are not required to pass on takedown notices and stress that their subscribers shouldn't lose Internet access based solely on copyright holder complaints. ustelecoSigned into law nearly two decades ago, the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA) aimed to ready copyright law for the digital age. The law introduced a safe harbor for Internet providers, meaning that they can't be held liable for their pirating users as long as they 'deal' with repeat infringers.

10 of 198 comments (clear)

  1. Uhhh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ... the Digital Millenium (sic) Copyright Act (DMCA) aimed to ready copyright law for the digital age.

    Uh huh, yeah, that's what their intent was. Sure.

    1. Re:Uhhh by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes it was. Copyright law was very efficient at being a tool to violate any and all consumer rights in the physical world, the DMCA brought this property to the digital realm.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  2. Re:The customer losses would be too big. by Caesar+Tjalbo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yeah, I reckon those "persistent pirates" pay for the best plans.

    --
    "I'm not much interested in interoperability. I want substitutability. I want to be able to throw your software out."
  3. Define Pirates by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 5, Insightful

    DCMA is a violation of my privacy and publishing rights as a Canadian citizen in the US under the US/Canada Data Treaty, which is subject to the Canadian Bill of Rights (which was adopted in the 1980s so it has greater rights than Americans do).

    What DCMA calls a pirate is a treaty violation. DCMA is subject to treaty rights, not the other way around.

    You can't steal my rights by calling them piracy.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  4. Repeat infingers by silas_moeckel · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I have no issue with them disconnecting people who lose multiple lawsuits for copyright infringement. I think at this point the MPAA etc has blanket sent notices to every subscriber in the US multiple times so thats far to low of a bar to use.

    --
    No sir I dont like it.
  5. Re:The customer losses would be too big. by JustNiz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think the ISPs are just rightly trying to avoid the movie/music industry pushing them into becoming the de-facto "internet police" (along with the associated responsibilities and liabilities) instead of the media industry doing their own dirty work at their own cost.

  6. Makes sense by twistedcubic · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They are refusing to forward extortion notices to subscribers ("Pay me $8000 or I will sue") because 1) many times these fools either don't have standing to sue for copyright infringement, or don't provide sufficient proof they have standing to sue, 2) the "copyright holder" could easily be an impostor, and no ISP wants to facilitate fraud or fishing, or 3) the copyright holder might be complaining about fair use, which big media companies refuse to acknowledge even exists. I agree, there should be court judgments before an ISP is forced to act.

  7. No Problem, but it should work both ways. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Its fine to disconnect customers after 3 violation notices, as long as:
    they also stop accepting violation notices from any "rights holder" who sents 3 incorrect ones.

  8. Re:The customer losses would be too big. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    As someone who used to partake in the darker side of content acquisition, I always paid for the fastest package I could find.

  9. Re:The customer losses would be too big. by Hylandr · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The correct way to provide constructive criticism:

    Make a statement to the contrary, provide supporting evidence. eg:

    You are incorrect as to who bought whom. Comcast bought Time-Warner

    In 2014:
    http://money.cnn.com/2014/02/1...

    In 2015:
    http://www.usatoday.com/story/...

    Wiki:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    Name calling is not constructive and suggests the name caller may be lacking in maturity, or blood sugar.

    --
    ~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.