Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

AT&T To Cut Off Some Customers' Service in Piracy Crackdown (axios.com)

Posted by msmash on from the extreme-measures dept.

AT&T will alert a little more than a dozen customers within the next week or so that their service will be terminated due to copyright infringement, news outlet Axios reported, citing sources familiar with its plans. From the report: It's the first time AT&T has discontinued customer service over piracy allegations since having shaped its own piracy policies last year, which is significant given it just became one of America's major media companies. AT&T owns a content network after its purchase of Time Warner earlier this year, an entity now called WarnerMedia. Content networks are typically responsible for issuing these types of allegations to internet service providers (ISPs) for them to address with their customers.

85 comments

  1. Alleged Copyright Infringement = Loss of Essential by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What a shithole country!

  2. corporate plaintiff, judge, and executioner by sittingnut · · Score: 4, Interesting

    " discontinued customer service over piracy allegations"

    allegations!

    a tech/media corporate decides who allegedly committed alleged crimes (alleged "piracy", alleged "hate speech", alleged "election interference", etc are just the beginning) against related or fellow tech/media corporates or supporters, and deal out de-platforming punishment too.
    welcome to rule by big corporates, according to their rules and their courts.

    1. Re:corporate plaintiff, judge, and executioner by lactose99 · · Score: 2

      As engaging in media piracy isn't a protected class this is just doing business.

      --
      Fully licensed blockchain psychiatrist
    2. Re:corporate plaintiff, judge, and executioner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      It's their terms of service, if you violate them (or give them reasonable cause to believe you violated them) then of course they are going to not offer their service to you.

      If you invited me to your house and then suspected I had stolen stuff from you would you kick me out? Or would you continue inviting me in until you had obtained proof enough that you could satisfy a court of law?

    3. Re:corporate plaintiff, judge, and executioner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Big Brother was always going to be a corporation. The government might regularly find ways around the 1st and 4th amendments, but it still takes them time and effort, and lots of times the courts reverse them eventually anyway. Tech companies can be much more agile and Minitrue their shit whenever they feel like it, relying on an army of "They're a private company, they can do whatever they want!" shills to march out and defend them, despite the fact that a huge and increasing percentage of all human communication passes directly under their control.

    4. Re: corporate plaintiff, judge, and executioner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Alleged. You missed the point that we should all be presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.

    5. Re: corporate plaintiff, judge, and executioner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      And you missed the point that any two parties can stop doing business with each other any time they want. This company has decided it's not going to do business with people it suspects steal from it. Stop the freakin' presses, oh lord, end of the world.

    6. Re:corporate plaintiff, judge, and executioner by rogoshen1 · · Score: 2

      We give them monopoly power, then wonder why they behave like a monopoly.

      When it comes to regulations or blocking community broadband they'll bleat "free market..!" (how's that for mental gymnastics?)
      But they'll *gladly* take gigantic government subsidy gibs for infrastructure improvement that of course they'll never deliver on.

      They also managed to get one of their stooges (okay, the last couple at least) To run the agency that's supposed to regulate them.

      The internet as it has existed since the 1990's has been nice. But once it was found that there was significant money to be made, it had absolutely no chance of lasting in the long-run. Fantastic times we live in.

    7. Re: corporate plaintiff, judge, and executioner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not a court of law, though. They don't always have to follow the same standards and rules as the government.

    8. Re:corporate plaintiff, judge, and executioner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Wrong analogy.
      This is not about invitation to a private house, it is about a publicly offered service, usually provided by a monopoly or an oligopoly. A service sometimes tightly tied to taxpayer funded government services to the point of no being easily available elsewhere.

      As such, mere allegations of violations should not be the cause of banishment.

           

    9. Re:corporate plaintiff, judge, and executioner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If they terminate service early, do I get to charge *them* the early termination fee?!

    10. Re:corporate plaintiff, judge, and executioner by mark-t · · Score: 1

      That probably depends.... did they sign a contract with you agreeing to pay such a fee if they terminated service before a certain date?

      --
      File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
    11. Re:corporate plaintiff, judge, and executioner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The internet as it has existed since the 1990's has been nice. But once it was found that there was significant money to be made, it had absolutely no chance of lasting in the long-run. Fantastic times we live in.

      Oh don't be such a sad doom-and-gloom preacher when things are hardly that bad. This isn't about the death of internet, the internet is thriving. You can still do all those old things from the 90s perfectly well on the internet. In terms of money this view of a provider not offering their services to people they believe to be pirating content means they lose money.

      Yes the system won't be perfect and I'm sure somewhere along the line some AT&T customer is going to suffer a service disruption because of some chain of events that causes them to be mis-identified as engaging in piracy. No justice system is perfect but that doesn't mean we simply forgo one on that basis.

    12. Re: corporate plaintiff, judge, and executioner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Sure, especially since the 12 can all just get service from the competing provider in the area...

      Capcha text "inequity"

    13. Re:corporate plaintiff, judge, and executioner by rogoshen1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I really don't think content providers and ISP's should be allowed to co-mingle like this. It leads to a situation where you have a company that's positioned itself as a regional monopoly (either naturally, such as access to coax; or through pure evil -- shutting down community broadband, or other competitors) that's able to completely control communication. And in this particular case, if you do something they don't like, they can completely cut you off. Besides, the bigger the company, the more abusive they are to their customers.

      ISP's should be dumb pipes for getting whatever bits you request to your box. Letting them do anything else is just inviting disaster.

      On a tangent though.. regarding your comment about the internet thriving:

      You really don't see how the internet is going from a democratizing thing, where people can freely express their opinions and views.. to a curated swamp of social media that's fed through advertising and monetizing personal information?

      The thought that's slowly creeping in is that it's the duty of the gatekeepers (be it google, facebook, reddit, whoever) to censor inconvenient or 'problematic' views. They may dress this up with whatever fashionable terms they like; but it's still censorship. Which can sound nice, at least in the near term since it's fringe views that get shut down. (not many people will stick up for a neo-nazi, or antifa or whoever else goes against the current)

      BUT that line, or what constitutes 'acceptable' speech will invariably shift towards the middle -- the definition of "being a troll" or "being a dick".

      Also troubling is the desire to abolish privacy. Which again, having these gate-keeping companies acting as the arbiters of online discourse, will result in the death of privacy, and as a result -- the death of free speech.

      I'd say instead of thriving, it's grown to the point it's liable to tip-over.

    14. Re: corporate plaintiff, judge, and executioner by NFN_NLN · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Live by the sword die by the sword. Then I should be able to start a new ISP using the tax payer funded infrastructure they laid down and they better not whine and cry about it.

    15. Re:corporate plaintiff, judge, and executioner by grep+-v+'.*'+* · · Score: 1

      a tech/media corporate decides who allegedly committed alleged crimes

      Those NAUGHTY, EVIL IP addresses -- they should remove them from the available DHCP range and make them go stand in the corner until they see the transmission errors of their ways.

      --
      If the universe is someone's simulation -- does that mean the stars are just stuck pixels?
    16. Re:corporate plaintiff, judge, and executioner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wrong analogy.
      This is not about invitation to a private house, it is about a publicly offered service

      I didn't say this was about invitation to a private house, it is about one party offering something to another party on certain terms. If offered party violates those terms (or the offering party has reason to believe they have) then they no longer offer the service. There is no law that states they must offer the service until some unspecified arbitration process is completed.

      A service sometimes tightly tied to taxpayer funded government services to the point of no being easily available elsewhere.

      As such, mere allegations of violations should not be the cause of banishment.

      That's a separate discussion on the terms under which the government should provide funding but you need to decouple that from the "not being easily available elsewhere" because there are plenty of unique services and just because there is only one vendor of a service does not mean they have to have some court-mandate process for deciding whether or not to continue offering service to particular parties.

    17. Re:corporate plaintiff, judge, and executioner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You really don't see how the internet is going from a democratizing thing, where people can freely express their opinions and views.. to a curated swamp of social media that's fed through advertising and monetizing personal information?

      Perhaps you are confused about what the internet is, the internet is not Google or Facebook or Twitter or whatever. There's nothing to stop you using a BBS or email just like we have been doing for decades.

      The thought that's slowly creeping in is that it's the duty of the gatekeepers (be it google, facebook, reddit, whoever) to censor inconvenient or 'problematic' views.

      Again, Google, Facebook, Reddit, etc are not the internet. These are things that sit atop the internet. You actually think things like BBSs and early social pages were just these fantastic bastions of free expression where nobody engaged in anything that anybody else complained about? It was just some love fest of respect for your fellow man? Come on.

      Which can sound nice, at least in the near term since it's fringe views that get shut down. (not many people will stick up for a neo-nazi, or antifa or whoever else goes against the current)

      No, because that is the whole point of the internet. Just because you can curate speech on a platform atop the internet doesn't mean you can do so everywhere. If you have a forum on a specific topic should you not be allowed to curate content there? Of course you should and thanks to the internet people with different views can express them on different platforms atop it.

    18. Re:corporate plaintiff, judge, and executioner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's nothing to stop you using a BBS or email just like we have been doing for decades.

      Except the twitter mobs that descend on the hosts of sites who they don't like and get them thrown off the internet.

      You actually think things like BBSs and early social pages were just these fantastic bastions of free expression where nobody engaged in anything that anybody else complained about?

      Not as old as some, and only anecdotal evidence, but the BBSes I frequented in the 90's were a thousand times more 4chan-ish than facebook-ish. The idea of anyone getting banned for thoughcrime or un-PC opinions (or really anything short of actual flooding or posting child porn or something) was repugnant. Though as I understand it usenet was much more in the "If I disagree with you I'll write a snide 1500 word essay about it that no one will ever read and then brag about killfiling you" vein.

    19. Re: corporate plaintiff, judge, and executioner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      Actually you can force a business to sell to you. For example, if you want a cake for your same sex wedding.

    20. Re:corporate plaintiff, judge, and executioner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except the twitter mobs that descend on the hosts of sites who they don't like and get them thrown off the internet.

      Again that's not the internet, anybody knowing the location of the server can get to it. We didnt start with domain name servers and they aren't a requirement now, just a convenience.

      You actually think things like BBSs and early social pages were just these fantastic bastions of free expression where nobody engaged in anything that anybody else complained about?

      Not as old as some, and only anecdotal evidence, but the BBSes I frequented in the 90's were a thousand times more 4chan-ish than facebook-ish.

      Right and that is the point. While you might not like facebook it doesn't mean the internet is facebook, no we certainly do have things like 4chan on the internet as well.

    21. Re:corporate plaintiff, judge, and executioner by rtb61 · · Score: 2

      Prove you have never ever enganged in media privacy, prove it, go right fucking ahead, prove you never copied once or get cut off, you can always spend a few years in court trying to get reconnected. The wrong political speech will be equal to copyright infringement, prove elsewise in court for a couple of hundred thousand dollar of a couple of years and then whoops get caught again and be required to prove your innocence.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    22. Re: corporate plaintiff, judge, and executioner by CoolDiscoRex · · Score: 1
      It's their terms of service, if you violate them (or give them reasonable cause to believe you violated them) then of course they are going to not offer their service to you.

      Unless they are in a regulated industry, or are a government-regulated monopoly, in which case, offering their service to you is part of their terms of service with the regulators.

    23. Re:corporate plaintiff, judge, and executioner by fafalone · · Score: 1

      Internet service is essential to modern life, AT&T has a monopoly or is half of a duopoly in most of its markets. It benefits from extensive government subsidies (that just pad its profits, but that's another issue). Under these circumstances, the "business can do whatever the fuck it wants" rule shouldn't apply, and terminating someones access should require proving they were pirating, not a one-sided allegation from the accuser.

    24. Re:corporate plaintiff, judge, and executioner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Were you not listening to the news about Justice Brett Kavanaugh? All allegations must be believed. Everyone is now guilty until proven innocent.

    25. Re:corporate plaintiff, judge, and executioner by BringsApples · · Score: 1

      You know, these ISPs have the ability to see encrypted data, right? I mean, legal or not, they CAN do it. Maybe they do it sometimes, if they feel suspicious about certain traffic, dunno. And so, maybe, rather than go through the whole legal system, they just include a bit in their terms of service that says that if you pirate stuff, they kick you. Then later, all they have to do is say, "We think you're pirating stuff, you're banned." and then it's up to you to bring it to court if you feel the need.

      This is almost along the same lines, logically, as yelling threats of murder at someone, getting arrested for it, and then claiming you have rights to free speech.

      --
      Politics; n. : A religion whereby man is god.
    26. Re: corporate plaintiff, judge, and executioner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... donâ(TM)t copy that floppy? ...

    27. Re: corporate plaintiff, judge, and executioner by RaviBrounstein · · Score: 0

      Nice, The only problem I see is that if you require annon to post something itâ(TM)s prolly not something you should post. The lack of privacy from big brothers like facebook, if anything might move the internet culture as a whole from the âoe12 year oldâ attitude folks who believe they canâ(TM)t be found out and hide behind a fake wall to a more sensible perceived age. Freedom of speech isnâ(TM)t freedom of anonymous speech. If you want to talk about neo-naziism that is a fringe and if you can handle the fire get out of the kitchen. Itâ(TM)s not like these groups donâ(TM)t have the same problems in public out there.

  3. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  4. I do wonder... by 3seas · · Score: 1

    ...how many of them are AT&T employees.

  5. just now noticing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    "discontinued customer service "

    I think AT&T discontinued customer server many years ago.

  6. Re:Alleged Copyright Infringement = Loss of Essent by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It's the first time AT&T has discontinued customer service over piracy allegations...

    Maybe these people were using encryption, thus AT&T can't confirm they are not pirates, thus the allegations.

    How does "if you don't have anything to hide then everything you do should be public knowledge" sound to you?

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
  7. Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Very, very. Trump next.

  8. without proof its slander and defamation of charac by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    without proof its slander and defamation of character..i got that on a kinda head slide of a real lawyer, he said if you had say a youtube channel and los tmoney t gets stronger case so loss a money = they could lose a court case

  9. Re:Alleged Copyright Infringement = Loss of Essent by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 2

    It's the first time AT&T has discontinued customer service over piracy allegations...

    Maybe these people were using encryption, thus AT&T can't confirm they are not pirates, thus the allegations.

    How does "if you don't have anything to hide then everything you do should be public knowledge" sound to you?

    Sure. And when politician are fully transparent, like releasing their tax returns and stop holding closed-door sessions and accepting anonymous and/or non-disclosed donations, PACs that don't have to disclose their donors and/or expenditures are abolished, and corporations do away with non-disclosure agreements and private meetings, and things like that, then maybe we can talk.

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  10. Isn't disabling 911 service illegal? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought terminating 911 service was illegal. Wait, is this phone service, landline or cell phone or internet service?
    We shouldn't have to read past the summary to identify which specific service this is refering to.

    1. Re:Isn't disabling 911 service illegal? by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 2

      Good thing Internet voting isn't a thing.

  11. Re: Alleged Copyright Infringement = Loss of Essen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Itâ(TM)s ***12*** people. Iâ(TM)m not sure itâ(TM)s some crazy conspiracy. I donâ(TM)t need to see logs to know that those 12 are guilty of piracy and probably tremendously prolific. And probably on the sharing side not the downloading side.

  12. Good! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe this kind of crap will push you damn people into developing internet service without a goddamn ISP!

  13. And yet politicians by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    with trump in particular repeatedly violating copyright at rallies. I do not understand why these artists have not sent one giant sueball at these flagrant violations of copyright. I thought you got like 250K per infraction. Trump would be in the tens of millions at this point.

  14. Considering the atrocious options in the USA .. by AbRASiON · · Score: 4, Informative

    This is pretty bad. A lot of areas seem to be only serviced by one provider, it's kinda terrible.

    Time for more VPN use.

    1. Re:Considering the atrocious options in the USA .. by porlryan · · Score: 1

      Americas internet services are10-15 years behind the UK (which is pretty average compared to the rest of the world). Data caps and high prices caused by a lack of competition are causing the US to slip further and further behind with no solution in sight.

    2. Re:Considering the atrocious options in the USA .. by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      How do you know you can trust your VPN provider though? And, if everyone started using VPN for downloading pirated content, you'd see a crackdown on VPN providers, compromising their own security, making them useless for not only pirating but for everything else too. If nothing else you might find ISPs blocking access to VPN providers because they're being pressured to crack down on piracy even when they can't prove 'illegal' content is traversing their network.

    3. Re:Considering the atrocious options in the USA .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Spectrum just decided to double my monthly bill... the only other option is AT$T.. which is of course the same company... and charges the same monthly rate.

    4. Re:Considering the atrocious options in the USA .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No major ISP is going to tread on VPN usage, at least if they want to continue getting big contracts from businesses willing to pay tens of thousands a month for dedicated lines. Almost every business bigger than a mom'n'pop shop uses a VPN these days, and I doubt the blockers at the ISP would be capable of making the distinction between "Sales Lead trying to get to the internal server via Cisco AnyConnect" and "Software Blackbeard downloading AutoCAD via CyberGhost".

      Also, "if everyone" is a facile argument that never held water. It would first require the population of pirates to outweigh the population of legitimate consumers, and it never will.

    5. Re:Considering the atrocious options in the USA .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are useless unless it's something like AirVPN. I often see PC Magazine do a VPN roundup. I wouldn't trust a single one of them because they ALL keep records and are located within US jurisdiction. Therefore, ISPs and media companies can spy on you. There was a recently a court case where VyperVPN turned their logs over and the customer lost in court.

    6. Re:Considering the atrocious options in the USA .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or, don't pirate movies, music, and software

    7. Re:Considering the atrocious options in the USA .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Americas internet services are10-15 years behind the UK (which is pretty average compared to the rest of the world). Data caps and high prices caused by a lack of competition are causing the US to slip further and further behind with no solution in sight.

      You do know that the UK can fit inside the US state of Texas don't you?

      It is easier to build highspeed networks everywhere in a piddly little country like the UK than large expansive countries like the USA.

      BTW why do UK farmers out in the 'shires have to trench their own cable/fiber to get fast Internet access rather than marginally useful dialup or DSL?

      Is it because BT/whoever is run by wankers that are too cheep to do so?

  15. A little more than A DOZEN? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OMG, end of the world. How will they survive without those dozen customers?

  16. Re:Alleged Copyright Infringement = Loss of Essent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People still being attacked for privacy.

    Allegation still sufficient to axe a customer.

    Weird to ask a question as it's being answered.

  17. Ok then by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

    It begins.

    Giant Internet gateway providers begin filtering content (that isn't inherently illegal.)

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  18. Serves them right! by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 0

    These dozen-or-so people who are being cut off from AT&T access to the Internet are getting what they deserve; they clearly were sloppy in their piracy methods and therefore were detected as such. Hopefully they'll have learned their lesson, though, and when they get service from some other company, they'll be more careful to cover their tracks and remain undetected.

    1. Re:Serves them right! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or they had someone, say a neighbor who introduced a MITM or simply took use of their WIFI-signals. Because that never happens. Right? Well, I'll tell you that is entirely possible for someone to say use your WIFI-signals for all their illicit downloading and only use their own for their legal activity. I've seen that in action in an apartment complex, where there were dozens of WIFI-signals. If someone did that to you, you would just be getting what you deserved, right? Yeah, I don't think so.

  19. Next big fight by nightfire-unique · · Score: 1

    The next big fight for many nations will be securing Internet access as a basic/fundamental service not subject to termination for any reason (aside from non-payment, so long as nothing life-critical depends on it).

    --
    A government is a body of people notably ungoverned - AC
  20. Re:Alleged Copyright Infringement = Loss of Essent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since when is the internet 'essential'? You can live your life just fine without it.

  21. Cheap cheezy VPNs by duke_cheetah2003 · · Score: 1

    This is a good use case for all those cheap VPN services out there. I wouldn't count on them to protect your privacy much, but it's another layer someone has to peel to figure out you're pirating stuff. Switch between services frequently perhaps. Certainly easier than switching ISPs. Hell run more than one at a time, just to really confuse the spooks.

    Piracy always finds a way, this is a meaningless futile gesture by AT&T.

    1. Re:Cheap cheezy VPNs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Use of an unlicensed (i.e. not paid for, and without a back door for monitoring; possibly, simply one that's not work-related and not sold by the ISP) VPN will be considered evidence of piracy in the not too distant future.

  22. Re:Alleged Copyright Infringement = Loss of Essent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It's the first time AT&T has discontinued customer service over piracy allegations...

    Maybe these people were using encryption, thus AT&T can't confirm they are not pirates, thus the allegations.

    How does "if you don't have anything to hide then everything you do should be public knowledge" sound to you?

    I think if AT&T booted people off their service for using encryption (whether https or some other) we would see a lot more than 12 people get banned. These people received 9 warnings and still couldn't figure out how to use a VPN? They kinda deserve it on stupidity grounds alone.

  23. Re: Alleged Copyright Infringement = Loss of Essen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Since the past 10 years where you can barely do anything with being online. Want to find a job? Tough shit, most of the postings are online and most employers will probably want to email you.

    I'm not saying it's right but there's plenty of bullshit in society that requires a internet connection now.

    2018 sucks

  24. Outsourced it to Lily Tomlin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Now I wonder if they'll also start to check that their customers who play Music On Hold to their victims paid the requisite royalties OR ELSE disconnect them for "piracy". Sauce for the goose, etc.

    (Yes, the message is very much implied: ISPs playing copyright cops? Don't go there, idiot ISPs. But of course it's a telco that has to go and be just that stupid.)

  25. Internet Partiality and Conflicts of Interest by cloud.pt · · Score: 1

    Isn't this a beauty. Like someone else put it - judge jury, and executioner.

    I guess the best thing that could happen to someone is getting the contract terminated for them - something that would, at least in my country, is a terrible endeavour to do by the client, since we basically have to pay the full remainder of the contract. This way ATT is basically begging other customers to use another provider. That's probably the best thing ATT could do to all their clients! Why just a dozen though? Is this some sort of ploy to demonize those 12 guys, as if not everybody else in their network hadn't committed some form of piracy...

  26. Re:Alleged Copyright Infringement = Loss of Essent by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 2

    Wow, nine fucking warnings?

    Okay, fair enough.

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
  27. Thanks FCC and FTC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Go fuck yourselves, for allowing this to happen.

  28. Re:Wicca Witchcraft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the witches in Wicca have been watching too much Bewitched

    Not just offtopic but offtopic enough to get your own rhyme

    AC burblin on Wicca been suckin too much dicka

  29. The corporate good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... service will be terminated due to copyright infringement ...

    Is this because AT&T owns the copyright or because they've decided to sacrifice revenue for the 'public (meaning corporate) good'?

    People have been complaining about Facebook being judge, jury and executioner in cyberspace: I wonder if AT&T will cause the same outcry?

  30. Re: Alleged Copyright Infringement = Loss of Essen by techno-vampire · · Score: 1

    I recently moved to a town in Colorado, with a population of about 9,000. Before I got my home Internet set up, I could connect through the local library, or if I needed it later in the evening, there are several fast food outlets with WiFi. Sure, it's not as convenient as having it at home, but it's not like you're completely cut off.

    --
    Good, inexpensive web hosting
  31. Cory Doctorow's Pirate Cinema Realised by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Trent McCauley is sixteen, brilliant, and obsessed with one thing: making movies on his computer by reassembling footage from popular films he downloads from the net. In near-future Britain, this is more illegal than ever. *The punishment for being caught three times is to cut off your entire household from the internet for a year - no work, school, health or money benefits.*

    Trent thinks he is too clever for that to happen, but it does, and *nearly destroys his family*. Shamed and shattered, Trent runs away to London, where slowly he learns the ways of staying alive on the streets. He joins artists and activists fighting a new bill that will jail too many, especially minors, at one stroke. Jem introduces him to the Jammie Dodgers, beautiful brilliant "26" to love and cemetery parties.

    Things look bad. Parliament is in power of a few wealthy media conglomerates. But the powers-that-be haven’t entirely reckoned with the power of a gripping movie to change people’s minds ..."

    https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/13539171-pirate-cinema (my emphasis)

    Pirate Cinema
    by Cory Doctorow (2012)
    ISBN 0765329085 (ISBN13: 9780765329080)

  32. Re:Alleged Copyright Infringement = Loss of Essent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What is this manic obsession with politicians tax returns? It has absolutely no bearing on anything and is only used as a way to find things to criticize them about.

    How about instead you focus on what they stand for, what they've accomplished and what promises they've made and kept or not kept.

  33. Welcome to corporate oligarchy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "We can see you didn't spend enough money on our streaming services last month, since we won't believe that you are not watching films, we deduce that you are then watching pirated movies: You are hereby convicted of piracy, your services with all our companies and subsidiaries are hereby terminated... Did we tell you we also own the company that provides IT for the government? Ya, your drivers license and state ID have just been cancelled too... Tough luck... You should have rented the mandatory 6 films last month shouldn't you?"

  34. what now ? by fluffythedestroyer · · Score: 1

    So if I own a mazda and I go against the law (code rules mostly like getting too much tickets) can they make me stop using their "service" (their cars). I don't get the logic behind this.

    1. Re:what now ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you get caught committing piracy while using Linux, you're forced to install Windows 10 and use that.

  35. permabanned. by MJhasHIV · · Score: 0

    It hurts the heart. ;]

  36. Regulate by zedaroca · · Score: 2

    More reason to regulate them like an utility. Also, prohibit them from looking into traffic.

  37. Typical by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Typical slashdot outrage. AT&T has a lot of customers and, in this case, scope matters. The fact that 12 - 20 customers would be affected says this was actually considered by someone technical at the company and there was actual consideration put into this. The next stupid argument will be today 20, tomorrow 20,000 --- these companies have shown a willingness to broadly classify and change TOS based on what they THINK is going on.

    I'd wager that:
    1) The people/organizations that are going to get whacked know it, because they know what they're doing.
    2) Someone at the ISP KNOWS it's piracy but doesn't want to be in the middle, and rather than set further precedent for them being responsible for reporting they've decided to terminate based on "suspicion".

    Seriously, this isn't even the most evil thing AT&T did THIS MORNING, get a grip!

  38. Re:Wicca Witchcraft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wicca is only ever practiced by fat chicks. Everyone knows fat chicks are the work of the devil. You see, the damage is already done, nothing new to worry about.

    Fat chicks need luvin' too. More cushion for the pushin'. Baby fat is where it's at.

  39. Re:Alleged Copyright Infringement = Loss of Essent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What a shithole country!

    You are definitely making a comment that is NOT INSIGHTFUL, more like utterly stupid and "white privileged".

    If you drive in excess of the posted speed laws you get a ticket if you are caught. In some states if you drive way in excess of the posted speed laws your license will be revoked.

    In some places driving a car is essential to getting around and even doing a job, but driving is a privilege, not a right, in all states. Internet access should be the same.

    If you show no regard for following the law then your privileges should be revoked until such time that you "pay for your crimes" and demonstrate proper respect for the law.

  40. Get a VPN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's time like these I'm glad I use ExpressVPN.

  41. Re:Alleged Copyright Infringement = Loss of Essent by alexgieg · · Score: 1

    Since when is the internet 'essential'? You can live your life just fine without it.

    The same goes for phone service (in case it's from another company), electricity, gas, and running water and sewage treatment. If you doubt this, just look into how things were done for the first 99,99% of human history.

    As such, would it be okay for your local utilities to cut your service alleging you probably planned and committed copyright infringement using their services to: (probably) talk with your fellow copyright infringement co-conspirators, power your computer, nourish yourself with something cooked while (probably) committing it, and taking pees during the (alleged) committing of those infringements?

    --
    Conservatism: (n.) love of the existing evils. Liberalism: (n.) desire to substitute new evils for the existing ones.