Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Rightscorp Pushing ISPs To Disconnect Repeat Infringers

Unknown Lamer posted about two weeks ago | from the can't-make-art-so-time-to-sue dept.

Piracy 92

Torrentfreak acquired slides from the Anti-Piracy and Content Protection Summit indicating that Rightscorp wants ISPs to disconnect repeat copyright infringers, and that 140 small ISPs are already doing so. From the article: Christopher Sabec, CEO of Rightscorp, says that they have been in talks with various Internet providers urging them to step up their game. Thus far a total of 140 ISPs are indeed following this disconnection principle. ... By introducing disconnections Rightcorp hopes to claim more settlements to increase the company’s revenue stream. They offer participating ISPs a tool to keep track of the number of warnings each customer receives, and the providers are encouraged to reconnect the subscribers if the outstanding bills have been paid. ... Cutting off repeat infringers is also in the best interests of ISPs according to Rightscorp, who note that it is a requirement for all providers if they are to maintain their DMCA safe harbor. The presentation slides seem to indicate that Rightscorp is planning to go after the safe harbor protections that ISPs are given under the DMCA in order to force the issue.

cancel ×

92 comments

I think I speak for everyone here (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47389889)

dafuq?

I think I speak for everyone who reads your post (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47389955)

Learn english.

Re:I think I speak for everyone who reads your pos (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47390035)

You assume that we wasted our time even trying.

Re:I think I speak for everyone who reads your pos (1)

Calydor (739835) | about two weeks ago | (#47392135)

English should have started with a capital letter.

Maintain DMCA safe harbor? (5, Insightful)

mwvdlee (775178) | about two weeks ago | (#47389903)

How can a company be a threat to an ISP's DMCA safe harbor status without actual court decisions to back up their copyright infringement claims?

Re: Maintain DMCA safe harbor? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47389927)

They want to use the fear of some pre trail jail time to get people to pay up

Re: Maintain DMCA safe harbor? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47389989)

They want to use the fear of some pre trail jail time to get people to pay up

Pre trail jail time? Is that like hiking a nature trail? I brought my tablet on the nature trail once, got lots of proofreading done!

Re: Maintain DMCA safe harbor? (2)

Imrik (148191) | about two weeks ago | (#47390947)

They'd have trouble justifying pre-trial jail time for a non-violent offense that doesn't necessarily require jail time as a punishment.

Re:Maintain DMCA safe harbor? (2)

arbiter1 (1204146) | about two weeks ago | (#47389963)

Its pretty easy, all they gotta prove to the court is the ISP is allowing piracy to happen on their network and not taken any "reasonable" action to stop it. As for what is reasonable is the question. If court finds they haven't done enough then they can be held financially liable for what end users do. They tried it against google for videos on youtube, hence how they got backdoor access to delete shit with almost no oversight.

Re:Maintain DMCA safe harbor? (2)

sumdumass (711423) | about two weeks ago | (#47390147)

The problem is that the safe harbor provision doesn't require ISPs or Network providers to do anything but remove claimed infringing content per a DMCA request and replace it per a counter claim. Well, that is as long as the infringing content is a product of the third party and not the ISP's actions.

Doing that should legally be doing enough. This is a bit different than Youtube as youtube exists for the sole purpose of something similar to the copyrighted materials whereas ISPs are simply a carrier allowing you to make decisions on where to go and what to access or provide.

Re:Maintain DMCA safe harbor? (5, Interesting)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | about two weeks ago | (#47390203)

The problem is that

A problem is that... you mean. There are others.

Like for example the fact that these download snoopers so far have not shown to have legal status to be enforcing anything. Like the fact that most of these "investigators" don't have anything that qualifies as legal evidence. Like the fact that they have been shown to be breaking the same laws they accuse others of breaking (you can't break the law to enforce the law). Like the fact that cutting off Internet service based on thin evidence of non-criminal wrongdoing is probably illegal.

Oh, yes, there are MANY problems with this whole scheme. And a lot of it could be solved TOMORROW by the FCC choosing to regulate ISPs as Title II Common Carriers.

Re:Maintain DMCA safe harbor? (4, Insightful)

Solandri (704621) | about two weeks ago | (#47390535)

Oh, yes, there are MANY problems with this whole scheme. And a lot of it could be solved TOMORROW by the FCC choosing to regulate ISPs as Title II Common Carriers.

Actually, all this is probably exactly why the FCC is choosing not to regulate ISPs as common carriers. If they do that, then the copyright holders and the government have to do the legwork of tracking down and prosecuting copyright violators. The way it's set up now, they can just threaten the ISP and make the ISP do the busywork for them.

Re:Maintain DMCA safe harbor? (1)

Imrik (148191) | about two weeks ago | (#47390949)

The two aren't mutually exclusive.

Re:Maintain DMCA safe harbor? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47390669)

Like the fact that cutting off Internet service based on thin evidence of non-criminal wrongdoing is probably illegal.

How so? They can cut off your service for whatever they want. You do not have a right to their service. Read the TOS.

Re:Maintain DMCA safe harbor? (1)

jeIIomizer (3670945) | about two weeks ago | (#47391813)

And we can regulate them however we want. What is your point? A company bullying ISPs around to try to punish users without any trial might not be very popular.

Re:Maintain DMCA safe harbor? (1)

mpe (36238) | about two weeks ago | (#47392139)

Like for example the fact that these download snoopers so far have not shown to have legal status to be enforcing anything. Like the fact that most of these "investigators" don't have anything that qualifies as legal evidence. Like the fact that they have been shown to be breaking the same laws they accuse others of breaking (you can't break the law to enforce the law).

Rather you can only do this if you are an actual "cop". Another Issue is if these people do have the authority to represent the copyright holder they also have the ability to create a "legal torrent".

Re:Maintain DMCA safe harbor? (1)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | about two weeks ago | (#47402923)

Rather you can only do this if you are an actual "cop".

Even then, the actual legal exceptions for police are fewer and thinner than most people think.

A few years ago, in one state nearby, the legislature clarified that when police are off-duty (off the clock), they have to obey the same laws, and particularly the same firearms laws, as everybody else. There was a huge howl of protest from law enforcement but they failed to make any legitimate case that it was somehow dangerous or unfair.

The reality was, they wanted to have it both ways. They wanted to be able to "be a cop" whenever they damned well felt like acting like one, but not at other times. Now it's clear that under the law (at least in that state), they're cops when they're on the clock and being paid to be cops. ONLY then. When they're off-duty they can carry guns or not just like other citizens, in the same places and under the same circumstances as other citizens, and they can make citizens' arrests, just like other citizens.

Re:Maintain DMCA safe harbor? (3, Insightful)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | about two weeks ago | (#47390247)

Really what people should keep in mind here is that these "rights" groups aren't doing this to right any real social wrongs. They're doing it to make money. Plain and simple. Make money by threatening to make other suffer.

If that's not a pretty good description of extortion, I don't know what is.

Re:Maintain DMCA safe harbor? (5, Insightful)

easyTree (1042254) | about two weeks ago | (#47390293)

I forget, is extortion illegal in the US at the moment? I'm just wondering, as bribing politicians appears to be legal.

Re:Maintain DMCA safe harbor? (3, Insightful)

Imrik (148191) | about two weeks ago | (#47390961)

Extortion is only illegal for those without strong legal teams.

Re:Maintain DMCA safe harbor? (2)

easyTree (1042254) | about two weeks ago | (#47390243)

Surely they should be held at minimum partly responsible - I mean, how the hell did their stuff get all over the internet anyway?

"My dog is not in our house, it's on your lawn - therefore you deserve jail time."

Hello?

Also, they seem pretty ironically named; "rightscorp" ? how about people's right to internet? to access all human knowledge (well, at least that part of all human knowledge which hasn't been locked inside the walls of academia, despite being funded by society at large) ? surely that trumps whatever petty bullshit you are referring to - some mere business interest which everyone is trained to pretend is somehow damaged when rightsholders allow their stuff to leak all over the internet due to failing to use appropriate measures to prevent it.

Disclaimer: I didn't read the whole summary :S

Re:Maintain DMCA safe harbor? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47390677)

Surely they should be held at minimum partly responsible - I mean, how the hell did their stuff get all over the internet anyway?

It got there by someone violating copyright and disseminating copies in contravention of copyright law.

Re:Maintain DMCA safe harbor? (1)

easyTree (1042254) | about two weeks ago | (#47394185)

Someone within the circle of trust. Why bring the rest of us into it? If they had their own houses in order they wouldn't need to go down this route.

Re:Maintain DMCA safe harbor? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47394763)

Or would they? Maybe the goal isn't stopping 'piracy' but the application of the 'massively-overkill means to stop piracy.'

</removes-tinfoil-hat>

The word "rights" in this context (1)

tepples (727027) | about two weeks ago | (#47393755)

Also, they seem pretty ironically named; "rightscorp" ?

The name appears to derive from the phrase "exclusive rights" in the U.S. Constitution, Article I, section 8.

Re:Maintain DMCA safe harbor? (1)

WaffleMonster (969671) | about two weeks ago | (#47391089)

They tried it against google for videos on youtube

Google is not an ISP.

Re:Maintain DMCA safe harbor? (1)

DanielRavenNest (107550) | about two weeks ago | (#47393967)

Then what is Google Fiber?

Re:Maintain DMCA safe harbor? (1)

WaffleMonster (969671) | about two weeks ago | (#47401503)

Then what is Google Fiber?

Content and Eyeball networks operate under different legal environments. For example CALEA does not apply to "information services" and serving content carries significantly different legal exposure vs. merely forwarding packets.

Google acting as an eyeball network for a chosen few has no bearing. Eyeball and content are different. In the context of parents remarks google was acting entirely as a content network.

Parent tried to use content network examples to make a point about eyeball networks which is apples/oranges.

Re:Maintain DMCA safe harbor? (0)

jaymz666 (34050) | about two weeks ago | (#47390025)

It's OK Citizen, if you're not doing anything wrong you have no need to worry.
Move along.

Re:Maintain DMCA safe harbor? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47390161)

Ok how about a company that repeatedly makes false DMCA take down notices be 'disconnected' from the net?

Re:Maintain DMCA safe harbor? (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47391191)

"140 small ISPs"

they are simply targeting those who cannot afford to defend themselves, their networks, their business, or their customers; or the rights to due process for all, from the perceived threat of a legal onslaught from big media.

The most intriguing thing in this to me... (2)

tlambert (566799) | about two weeks ago | (#47389937)

The most intriguing thing in this to me... ...is that they were able to identify 140 ISPs, presumably 130 or so of which were not owned by a regional monopoly phone company or a cable company.

Re:The most intriguing thing in this to me... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47389981)

he most intriguing thing in this to me... ...is that they were able to identify 140 ISPs

Here is a small list of 30 in california alone [dsl-servic...viders.com] .

Re:The most intriguing thing in this to me... (5, Interesting)

jlb.think (1719718) | about two weeks ago | (#47390115)

The most intriguing thing in this to me... ...is that they were able to identify 140 ISPs, presumably 130 or so of which were not owned by a regional monopoly phone company or a cable company.

One would be Nextech, owned by Rural Telephone, in northwest Kansas. I've recieved several phone calls from them, and they have shut off my internet before due to supposed infrining. Frankly I think what I do with my internet is none of their damn business. I've even got calls for running a Tor node (not exit) along with I2P. Giving ISP's common carrier status would solve the problem. Since Rural Telephone is a common carrier I wonder if it makes their subsidiary Nextech one too? No such luck I think.

Anyone have the list of ISPs? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47389947)

Does anyone know where I can find the list of those 140 ISPs? I use EPB (gigabit) and would like to know if they are kissing media ass or not.

DMCA safe harbor irrelevant and hard to get (5, Insightful)

gavron (1300111) | about two weeks ago | (#47389965)

The real question cleverly ignored by these rights-maximalists is
"Is the ISP/provider responsible for the content posted by others."
As we know, absent *ACTUAL INDUCEMENT TO INFRINGE*
the answer is no. There is no secondary liability to ISPs nor
reponsibility as per the CDA sec 230.

Now if the ISPs *ACTUALLY INDUCE* (see Napster and possibly Mega,
or so USDOJ says), then there is a POSSIBLE liability.
THAT's the only thing providers need to fear, but instead they knee-jerk
take down material.

Note that the DMCA notice is not "DMCA Takedown notice" but rather
"Notice of ***CLAIMED INFRINGEMENT***" (emphasis mine).

A "safe harbor" doesn't mean that a LACK OF A SAFE HARBOR means
instant guilt/civil liability. That is a fact lost on most knee-jerk ISPs.

ISPs should pull up their big-boy shorts and quit taking it in the pants
from every email-script that tells them to take down content because DMCA.

E
my script verifies that this is true under oath and here's my script-copied
pgp signature because dmca.

Re:DMCA safe harbor irrelevant and hard to get (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47390023)

Why are you forcing line breaks in your paragraphs, it makes your comments hard to read.

Re:DMCA safe harbor irrelevant and hard to get (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47390129)

Why is my cock in your mom's mouth, it makes it hard for her to breath.

Re:DMCA safe harbor irrelevant and hard to get (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47390279)

That's his Dad's mouth...

bad news for uploaders! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47389979)

Dang, those guys who set up their DVR to upload every single show as soon as it hits the air are gonna get cut off.

Good news for downloaders! DMCA doesn't criminalize downloading. Consumers are safe, again.

Awesome plan (1)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47389985)

Too bad I use a VPN, so I'll continue to download everything still as I always do before I buy it. It's not exactly like you can return shitty media, don't believe me go to Walmart and try it. They'll say no then after you bitch ten or twenty minuets they'll finally offer an exchange "thank god", but when you get back there they'll only let that exchange be the same piece of shit you're trying to return. It's at that point I get arrested for going ballistic, headbutting the guy trolling me and kicking the cash register half way across the store. What can I say, I had issues back then.

People love supporting stuff they love because it helps the people make more stuff they'll most likely love, downloading is consumer protection for me, I cannot afford 20$ for something I hate or even 1 cent.

Rightscorp is just looking to extort more people by holding their internet connection hostage, they're no better than scumbags that ran Prenda. What happens if I go on a warloading spree? "leeching wifi to download"

Re: Awesome plan (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47390011)

Don't buy every blu ray in the store on release date

Wait a month or two and read the reviews

Re: Awesome plan (1)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | about two weeks ago | (#47390031)

Even simpler, legal and cheaper: I just wait for a year or two and then I can watch it on Netflix Canada.

Not everything hits Netflix, even eventually (1)

tepples (727027) | about two weeks ago | (#47390423)

So when is the film Song of the South or the TV series Spartakus and the Sun Beneath the Sea coming to Netflix in North America?

Re:Not everything hits Netflix, even eventually (1)

lgw (121541) | about two weeks ago | (#47393863)

It's not like Song of the South [youtube.com] is hard to find (though I supposed Disney will get around to flinging it into the nearest briar patch eventually). Why is the French animation hard to find? I mean, Netflix has nothing interesting for streaming so it's no surprise it doesn't have something so obscure .... or was that your point?

Copyresponsibility (1)

tepples (727027) | about two weeks ago | (#47394039)

My point is that if something isn't available even on DVD decades later, it definitely won't be available on streaming. Rights come with responsibilities, and some people who otherwise obey copyright law might end up having to pirate in cases where a copyright owner violates its "copyresponsibility". If a film or TV series still lacks a home video release years after its theatrical or broadcast run, I guess some people who pirate it feel an other-than-legal justification that when a copyright owner acts like the proverbial dog in the manger [wikipedia.org] , copyright is failing its intended purpose "to promote the progress of science and useful arts".

Re:Awesome plan (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47390103)

It's funny how you think downloading is illegal. Pirated streams are not like illegal drugs. You're not infringing the copyright unless you upload. But you can choose to believe you're infringing just so you can feel like a badass, if you want.

Re: Awesome plan (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47390505)

You literally cannot download without uploading, dumbass. That legal fight was lost years ago.

Re: Awesome plan (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47391281)

Really? Because I download a lot of stuff *without* torrent/edonkey sharing, from file upload sites, and it works just fine and I'm not sharing anything. Things that broadcast on HDTV just the prior hour (usually they're up within 20 minutes after).

If you know where to go they're easy to find. In fact I keep up on my favorites because they get DMCA "takedown'ed" usually within a day... so it's only if I *can't* find it as a simple download (without also having to share) that I resort to torrent type files. (And then only on VPN where I'm not on my own IP).

Re: Awesome plan (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47391393)

WTF are you talking about? I control my bit torrent client's settings and I NEVER allow it to upload. How is it impossible to download without uploading again? Your comment makes no goddamn sense.

Re: Awesome plan (1)

wagnerrp (1305589) | about two weeks ago | (#47391629)

You cannot download unless someone else is uploading. Since uploading is copyright infringement, and thus illegal, you are party to the illegal action. Your argument is like claiming it's not illegal to buy bootleg goods.

Re: Awesome plan (1)

jeIIomizer (3670945) | about two weeks ago | (#47391907)

You cannot download unless someone else is uploading.

Someone else did the uploading of their own volition. You are not "party to" that.

But I'd be genuinely surprised if downloading wasn't illegal in many countries. It seems like the copyright thugs wouldn't allow that to happen.

Re: Awesome plan (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47392197)

And someone else made the hooker sell her body. You just paid her the $20 to wear the goat chain and carry a placard saying "Onward to the top, Sun God Ra!!!" while dancing on Main Street.

Your argument is about as silly as that image.

Re: Awesome plan (1)

jeIIomizer (3670945) | about two weeks ago | (#47392327)

I don't really see your point. The fact is, the person doing the downloading likely didn't have anything at all to do with the uploading. There are an uncountable number of files available for download right now, and I'm willing to bet that you didn't have anything to do with a vast majority of them. Why would that suddenly change if you decide to download some of them? It wouldn't. The only way you'd be related is if you uploaded the file yourself, or helped someone else do so.

The hooker analogy is, as is usually the case with analogies put forth by you cretins, nonsensical. Why not respond to my actual argument rather than trying to obfuscate the issue by arguing by analogy?

Your argument is about as silly as that image.

Your argument is about as silly as... pretty much any copyright propaganda argument.

Re:Awesome plan (1)

Xenx (2211586) | about two weeks ago | (#47390509)

If funny how people talk about the fact that downloading is legal, but ignore the fact that by default torrent(most common method) also uploads.

Re:Awesome plan (1)

jeIIomizer (3670945) | about two weeks ago | (#47391909)

By default, but it can be configured to not do that. Or you might not use torrents at all.

So Rightscorp coming to a computer (1)

future assassin (639396) | about two weeks ago | (#47389995)

near you to ask them to make sure they don't sell computers to people who will pirate?

You can tell they are extremists (1)

Ceriel Nosforit (682174) | about two weeks ago | (#47390017)

A reasonable, sane person would demand limiting a pirate's bandwidth; not disconnecting them completely.

We don't chop off the hands of thieves anymore.

(But we do put loonies in the loonie bin. Hmm!)

Re:You can tell they are extremists (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47390041)

What the hell is limiting bandwidth going to accomplish exactly? Force them to use more compression? Give them time for a coffee break? Ooooh, scary, that'll stop 'em.

Re:You can tell they are extremists (1)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | about two weeks ago | (#47390065)

If you limit their upload bandwidth to the point that they can't finish uploading something before the next one airs, they'll fall behind the regular cable/satellite schedule and people will stop downloading copyrighted material and subscribe to cable/satellite instead to watch their shows.

Or some stupid corporate thinking similar to that, I assume.

Re:You can tell they are extremists (1)

Ceriel Nosforit (682174) | about two weeks ago | (#47392067)

Or they might suddenly start advocating huge increases in bandwidth in the US, so that when you drop from 100/50 Mbps to 256/256 Kbps it really stings.

Re:You can tell they are extremists (1)

Ceriel Nosforit (682174) | about two weeks ago | (#47392049)

It is something scary they can make threats with. Here in Finland where I live internet access is a human right.

Presumably you Statesians will want to comply with our philosophy in preparation for when we are the world's only super power.

Re:You can tell they are extremists (1)

whoever57 (658626) | about two weeks ago | (#47390059)

(But we do put loonies in the loonie bin. Hmm!)

At best, only temporarily. Many of the homeless are suffering from various forms of mental illness.

Re:You can tell they are extremists (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47390909)

(But we do put loonies in the loonie bin. Hmm!)

At best, only temporarily. Many of the homeless are suffering from various forms of mental illness.

yeah but thats only cuz you have to be fucked in the head to be homeless!

Re:You can tell they are extremists (1)

jeIIomizer (3670945) | about two weeks ago | (#47390077)

A reasonable, sane person would demand limiting a pirate's bandwidth; not disconnecting them completely.

A reasonable, sane person would demand that we do nothing, because this sort of draconian enforcement is disgusting.

Re:You can tell they are extremists (1)

Ceriel Nosforit (682174) | about two weeks ago | (#47392055)

A reasonable, sane person would demand limiting a pirate's bandwidth; not disconnecting them completely.

A reasonable, sane person would demand that we do nothing, because this sort of draconian enforcement is disgusting.

A reasonable, sane person could choose to do these among many things, being reasonable and sane.

I mean to say that if a sane person did support draconian enforcement for some disgusting reason then they would not take it to an extreme.

Re:You can tell they are extremists (1)

jeIIomizer (3670945) | about two weeks ago | (#47392145)

'extreme' is subjective, anyway. Reasonable and sane people care about freedom.

Re:You can tell they are extremists (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47391575)

We don't chop off the hands of thieves anymore.

(But we do put loonies in the loonie bin. Hmm!)

40 years ago, maybe. But today, it's damn near impossible to force somebody in the United States into involuntary psychiatric treatment (inpatient, outpatient, or otherwise) unless they've broken laws & can have their arm twisted into agreeing to commitment as a strategy for avoiding prison, or present a clear risk of harm to others or themselves (with overwhelming weight on "to others", and almost perfunctory concern for "to himself").

There's an even bigger problem -- no American health insurance policy covers involuntary or court-ordered psychiatric treatment, so you can forget about sending them anywhere besides a state-funded institution that probably hasn't existed in most states since the 1980s. And most states have laws requiring the release of anybody who can't be accommodated by an accredited treatment facility within some relatively short window of time -- even if they do present a clear risk of harm to themselves or others.

Re:You can tell they are extremists (1)

ToddInSF (765534) | about two weeks ago | (#47394217)

We elect them as Governors, and to Congress nowadays.

This just annoys pirates more. (1)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | about two weeks ago | (#47390133)

I promise to locate and submit at least one copyright-infringing work that is not yet easily available into the standard pirate channels of circulation in protest. It'll probably be something very obscure, as all the mainstream stuff is already out there. I don't know what it'll be yet.

Re:This just annoys pirates more. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47390305)

arrrrrrrr Jim lad; hook a salty sea dog up with a torrent link won'tcha?

OK where's the list? (1)

rrohbeck (944847) | about two weeks ago | (#47390301)

So we know which ISPs to avoid or if we should switch.

Basic Human Right (1)

CanEHdian (1098955) | about two weeks ago | (#47390477)

It's a basic human right [www.cbc.ca] to have access to the Internet... except in the "land of the Free" of course.

Re:Basic Human Right (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47390859)

in the real world, it's not even possible to pay your bills without internet access. You would get marked as a person who wont pay your bills, if you fail to pay even once. Without internet access, it's difficult to do at all. Cutting people's internet access is very evil.

Re:Basic Human Right (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47390933)

in the real world, it's not even possible to pay your bills without internet access. You would get marked as a person who wont pay your bills, if you fail to pay even once. Without internet access, it's difficult to do at all. Cutting people's internet access is very evil.

Yes. As we all know, before the Internet, no bills were ever paid on time. Not Ever. Nosiree.

Re:Basic Human Right (1)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47391803)

in the real world, it's not even possible to pay your bills without internet access.

Maybe that's the case in your retarded country. In the rest of the "real world", we can pay bills the traditional way just fine.

Keep this up (3, Insightful)

nurb432 (527695) | about two weeks ago | (#47390635)

And more tools will arise that will drive people so far underground they will never figure out who is doing what. And the more publicity they get, the more 'regular' people will learn there is free stuff out there.

Lets call it the 'Napster effect'.. (tm)

Rightscorp overview... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47390703)

"
Overview

Rightscorp, Inc. is dedicated to the vision that digital creative works should be protected economically so that the next generation of great music, movies, video games and software can be made and their creators can prosper."

    Again with the falicy that copyright is here so that creators can prosper.

How do they.... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47390735)

How do they expect me to keep downloading all these pirated movies if they keep shutting off my neighbors Internet connections....

It's like they want me to have to pay for a VPN or something :(

Lack of rights (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47390771)

Rightscorp. Taking away rights where ever we can.

Captcha: logged

Which is worse? (1)

WaffleMonster (969671) | about two weeks ago | (#47391195)

I can't fathom why any ISPs in their right mind would go along with this crap.

Acting against your customer base in this way is a good way to lose customers and ruin your brand. I can only assume not all 140 ISPs have the luxury of not having to give a shit about their customers.

Most importantly taking punitive action against someone you *suspect* of breaking the law is itself illegal. By taking matters into your own hands you open yourself up to lawsuits from effected customers. SOPA/PIPA crashing and burning means no enabling legal cover.

Finally whenever you as an ISP give in to these demands and just do whatever is asked without taking necessary time to understand law you might as well be announcing you are an easy target via front page ad on the New York times... expect to be flooded with requests accordingly.

Ya right (4, Informative)

Charliemopps (1157495) | about two weeks ago | (#47391201)

I used to work DMCA requests for a moderately large ISP. They are NOT disconnecting people for repeat abuse. They would never disconnect you because some 3rd party doesn't like what your using your connection for. You're a paying customer, and the rights hold is not. There is no financial incentive for them to disconnect you.

They will disconnect you if you're costing them money however. But for an ISP, that's a difficult thing to do. There are laws, and franchise agreements with the city. They're pretty much required to give you service, even if you cost them money... unless they can find an excuse to disconnect you. Like if you were a software pirate.

The moral of the story? If you live in an upscale apartment complex, where everyones got 1gig fiber connections, you're never getting disconnected. EVER. If you're 10 miles outside of town in a sparsely populated area with old decaying lines that the ISP has to constantly come out and repair, and every time you start up your torrent client the entire neighborhoods network crawls to a halt, it may be in your best interest to avoid doing things that would give your ISP and excuse to boot you.

Notice how they said a bunch of small rural ISPs were the only ones who'd started doing this. Yea, this has nothing to do with piracy and everything to do with getting rid of customers that are costing them money.

Re:Ya right (2)

ToddInSF (765534) | about two weeks ago | (#47393985)

Thank you for taking the time to contribute something that isn't hysterical and useless.

Bit torrent needs to die (1)

WaffleMonster (969671) | about two weeks ago | (#47391317)

A number of companies have taken to monitoring *ALL* BT traffic of consequence on a *GLOBAL* basis. They know with high degree of coverage what everyone using bit torrent is trading.

This desperately needs to change. I'm no fan of piracy yet detailed metrics are being used to justify all manner of legislative craziness affecting everyone.

I don't claim to have any good solutions the market would be likely to embrace... we all need to find one soon.

Re:Bit torrent needs to die (1)

DanielRavenNest (107550) | about two weeks ago | (#47394049)

> A number of companies have taken to monitoring *ALL* BT traffic of consequence on a *GLOBAL* basis.

I call BS on that. The Pirate Bay alone has 46 million peers active. Nobody short of the NSA, and maybe not even them, can monitor that much traffic. If "of consequence" means the several thousand torrents with > 100 active peers, it would be feasible to get statistics, and maybe an IP list, but not monitor the actual traffic between users.

Re:Bit torrent needs to die (1)

WaffleMonster (969671) | about two weeks ago | (#47401313)

I call BS on that. The Pirate Bay alone has 46 million peers active. Nobody short of the NSA, and maybe not even them, can monitor that much traffic.

You don't need to "monitor traffic" or collect contents. You need only collect signals of peers announcing what they have.

http://www.cs.bham.ac.uk/~tpc/... [bham.ac.uk]

DarkNet Torrenting FTW! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47391525)

It's 2014 people! Instead of insisting on getting yourself caught with direct connects and 'no log' vpns (subject to demands just the same, lol, idiots) ALL you stupid torrenters should go fire up https://geti2p.net/ , configure it to donate about five times the bandwidth you use back to the network, then TORRENT THE FUCK out of all the torrents there.
Totally FREE, totally DARK, no fucking PIG MAFIAA, EVER gonna swoop your ass!!!
This means you don't have to HIT and RUN leech anymore like the little pussies you are. You can seed your entire collection 24x7x365 without giving the SLIGHTEST FUCK.
All you have to do is queue up whatever you want and come back in an hour or two for some FLAC's or maybe a day for a VOB9. I've got fuck all media now :-)

Re:DarkNet Torrenting FTW! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47391933)

(subject to demands just the same, lol, idiots)

But very likely not in the same country you live in, and they have nothing to give. Not being in the same country alone drastically decreases the probability that anything will happen. You're the idiot.

Re:DarkNet Torrenting FTW! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47393795)

No, he's no idiot. He's showing you the only bulletproof way there is to go in this game.
Ever hear of MLAT treaties? That's where two contries help each other solve crimes. Copyright infringment is considered a crime. Therefore, if they want to, and believe me the MAFIAA will be and is forcing this issue, they will force an order to keep logs and to disclose them. Whether in trade for something in return, or not.
You are stupid if you think VPN's will save you from the trivialities of 'law' and 'law enforcement'.
You need the strength of YOUR OWN LAW of crypto darknets behind you.
It's the ONLY way to go. And if you don't see that, you're dumb.

Re:DarkNet Torrenting FTW! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47393819)

Without your own law of crypto you will ALWAYS be subject to political, legal and financial whim.
That's just not good enough. Take your rights back with crypto.
By doing that you then force them to take away freedom of speech. And there will be wars and revolution before the people let that happen.

How its going down here. as already discussed. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47394775)

Here its going to go down if/when they approach the ISP i work for.

Dear customer.

We appreciate your patronage over the last 15 years as we grew from a single hotspot operation to the large WISP providing 100k+ customser with the only viable connection to the outside world. You have built your businesses and personal lives on our network and we have worked hard together to fill the last mile gap that was keeping your communities in the stone age.

Unfortunately due to interference with rights ransom companies such as Rightscorp, he have no choice but to announce we are shutting down effective immediately. We realize this will effectively cut entire communities off from the internet with no incumbent to take up the slack.
the only advise is that you call Christopher Sabec of Rightscorp at (his cell number) and inquire how he will handle the mess he created.

Regards

The internet cooperative.

Wrong section? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about two weeks ago | (#47397587)

But isn't that 512(a) - which has no takedown provision - not 512(c)?

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...