Slashdot Mirror


MPAA Wants ISPs to Disconnect Persistent Pirates (torrentfreak.com)

Ernesto Van der Sar, reporting for TorrentFreak: The MPAA wants Internet providers and services to take stronger actions against persistent copyright infringers. Ideally, the most egregious pirates should lose their accounts permanently, the group says. To accomplish this ISPs should be required to track the number of notices they receive for each account. In recent weeks, many groups and individuals have voiced their opinions about the future of the DMCA, responding to a U.S. Copyright Office consultation. This includes the MPAA, which acts on behalf of the major Hollywood studios. In a 71-page submission the group outlines many problems with the current law, asking for drastic reforms. Ideally, the group would like search engines to enforce a "stay down" policy ensuring that content can't reappear under different URLs. In addition, it would like registrars to suspend domain names of pirate sites, such as The Pirate Bay.The problem is that ISPs don't necessarily see this abuse as a problem.

9 of 263 comments (clear)

  1. Why is enforcement the ISP's responsibility? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why is it the ISP's responsibility to enforce copyright laws? Piracy is only a problem for the ISP if excessive bandwidth is consumed and it results in degraded network performance. But that doesn't really have anything to do with copyright laws.

    There need to be different penalties depending on the type of infringement. The person who downloads a couple of movies on bittorrent and doesn't realize they're also uploading is very different from a person who is collecting money for access to a site with a massive collection of movies. In short, to collect a large settlement, it should be shown that there's an intent to distribute and/or the person infringing upon copyrights is profiting from doing so. This would probably render it unprofitable to pursue individuals who download a few movies but don't intend to share them.

    The focus needs to be on people who are making the movies available to begin with, those who are sharing massive amounts of content, and those who are making a profit from piracy.

    Unlike what seems like a large portion of Slashdot, I don't think there's an ethical defense for piracy. However, the punishment ought to be proportional to the egregiousness of the offense committed. The massive settlements against people who weren't infringing a lot of content is absurd. And there's no reason to disconnect people from internet access for piracy, either temporarily or permanently. That's ridiculous.

    I'd suggest that for the casual offender, the maximum settlement should be the larger of 1.3*(retail price)*(number of proven downloads) or, 10*(retail price). Let the much larger settlements only apply to the most egregious offenders.

    1. Re:Why is enforcement the ISP's responsibility? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Unlike what seems like a large portion of Slashdot, I don't think there's an ethical defense for piracy.

      It's not so much that a people defend piracy, it's that there is a large reaction against the means the record/movie industry is using to battle something that should be their problem.
      If they want to change their product to make it harder to pirate I'm completely fine with that.
      Lobbying to change the law to make reverse engineering illegal is something I don't approve of. If I want to figure out how a product I bought works then they shouldn't have a say in the matter. If the record companies didn't want me to do that they shouldn't have sold me the product.
      I would like to keep the laws in a state where you have to prove that someone is doing wrong before punishing them.
      I would also like that everyone is treated equally under the law and that means that the "victim" can't have a say in what the punishment should be, otherwise we will get a situation where hurting a nice and forgiving person is less severe than one who is vengeful.

      Now we have a bunch of companies that wants to change the law so that they can point out people they don't like and punish them without a fair trial.
      Not only that, they want other companies to go through the work to do the punishment. That wouldn't be a problem if everyone just told those companies to fuck off.
      Unfortunately that isn't happening and because of that those companies have become the largest threat we have to functional democracy where everyone is treated equal under the law. Not even terrorist groups like ISIS are close to causing that much harm to our society.

      I don't care much for piracy. I got too busy with other hobbies and more or less stopped consuming the kind of media involved there, but I rather see all the companies involved with RIAA/MPAA dismantled and everyone working for them becoming unemployed with all the damage that comes with that than let them change the laws the way they want to.
      So whenever someone comes crying about "how should the artist get paid" all I can say is bugger off, you don't have a right to get paid and you sure as hell don't have the right to change the laws to make your business profitable.

      TL;DR; It's not in defense of piracy, it's in defense of a functional legal system.

    2. Re:Why is enforcement the ISP's responsibility? by QuietLagoon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Why is it the ISP's responsibility to enforce copyright laws?...

      It's not. This proposal is the basis for increasing the extortion done by the MPAA, e.g., "pay us $5000 and we won't have your ISP terminate your Internet access".

      .
      It makes it a lot easier for the MPAA surrogates to extort people into paying up, instead of paying for a lawyer to defend oneself against trumped-up charges.

    3. Re:Why is enforcement the ISP's responsibility? by thegarbz · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Unlike what seems like a large portion of Slashdot, I don't think there's an ethical defense for piracy.

      How about piracy being an ethical offence against the industry slowly taking away your rights in the media, your product, your ability to watch something, to buy something, to have something come into public domain, rooting your computer, breaking a disc playback format, attempting to criminalise or prevent format shifting which is legal in most of the world...

      The list of the ethical breaches of the movie / music industry just has no end.

      I would happily pay for media, but no one seems to sell me what I want except for the pirate bay.

  2. Allow DMCA abusers to be shut down too by auzy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If the law also allows DMCA abusers to be shut down too, I have less of a problem with this law (by which I mean, companies which send out DMCA notices incorrectly). And by shut down, I mean, being unable to send out notices in the future, and disconnected from the internet entirely (including their company website)

    It wouldn't surprise me if all members of the MPAA have incorrectly sent out DMCA notices before, for media they had no rights too (a news station for instance shut down a video of a Mars landing uploaded by NASA).

    So, if laws were put in place to allow companies to be shut down, if they abuse the DMCA, or make a mistake, I wouldn't have a problem with this, because it would ensure that notices were only sent in cases that they were warranted.

    But the way it stands, it just opens the system up to more bullying and abuse.

  3. Say no to piracy by xororand · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Piracy is an act of robbery or criminal violence at sea.
    We should not tolerate marine thuggery.

    Copyright infringement, however, can't be easily equated to piracy or theft.

    https://www.gnu.org/philosophy...
    http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/...

  4. So, lemme get that straight, what was that? by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You want me to disconnect my customer, who will then burden and pester me and my support about it, I will lose that customer and potentially others, if word gets around that I randomly disconnect my customers based on nothing more but hearsay from you and your whims? You want me to risk my common carrier status and insanely bad press and PR? Without any kind of compensation whatsoever?

    You find the door yourself or should I just toss you out the window?

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  5. Re:I have a better idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I have conflicted feeling about this idea, on one had I really really want to do things legally. I subscribe to netflix, amazon prime, hulu and own hundreds of cd's dvd and bluerays. etc. I don't mind paying for ad-free content. but I'm currently in a situation where we will be traveling half-way around the world where our netflix subscription will not work, with a 2 and a 4 year old who insist on/have favorite movies. So, even though I'm paying for like 3 streaming services, I'm basically forced to pirate their favorite stuff thats unavailable on physical, purchasable media, because I need it off line, and in different regions. I guess that I *could* buy a 20 dollar dvd and rip it but then I will be paying a fourth time for something that I feel I've already paid for. Some things are simply unavailable legally.

    It's too much, they're too greedy.

    Piracy is the easiest (and coincidentally the cheapest) way to consume content. I can put it on any device I own, time shift, format shift and region shift without worrying if it'll work because I changed location, device or format for something I paid for already. The alternative is you can sit next to hysterical children on a 12 hour flight.

  6. Re:Causes no harm? by Kernel+Kurtz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Some people will still create new content and no doubt some people will still find ways to do so commercially. But society shouldn't complain if it makes that change and then finds that, lacking the same incentive to create and share new works, hardly anyone is making big summer blockbusters or original AAA quality computer games or well-produced studio albums or....

    People were creating art long before there was such a thing as copyright.

    The world before copyright gave us Shakespeare and Beethoven. The world now gives us Justin Bieber and Sharknado.

    Nuff said.