Sponsored

Bandwidth and Service Limits Proposed to Curb Illegal Downloads

Agrajag

ULTIMATE Member
To me it seems like a lot of time and effort spent on something that, in the end, is not going to make the slightest bit of difference to the "problem" of illegal downloads.

At the moment, tracing "illegal" downloaders depends entirely on certain parties scanning the Bittorrent/Emule/Limewire networks for the IP addresses of persons sharing copyright material.

OK, there's a chance that this could discourage some people from using these services to get their files if there's a risk of getting caught, so it may do something to stem the flow of illegal files on these networks.

In the end, downloaders will simply start using services like Rapidshare, Megaupload or Usenet, where the chances of getting caught at the moment are ZERO and are likely to remain that way.
 

carrot63

Pro Member
Every attempt to stamp out the sharing of copyrighted material has failed so far, and I don't see any future efforts succeeding until the rights holders engage with consumers in some meaningful way over cost and what they are allowed to do once they have the material.

Since the days of Napster an entire generation have come into adulthood with 'free' shared music as a natural part of life. It might be wrong, but it's going to be a harder habit to change than it would have been 10 years ago when the industry first took the opportunity to miss an opportunity, and the longer they take the harder still it will get. Itunes is the best effort so far, the recent "nearly" Virgin deal would probably have been even better.

When the industry figures out that they need to put more of the effort into the carrot than the stick, they might get somewhere. Because the days when they can dictate terms have long since disappeared.
 

Bob2002

ULTIMATE Member
When the industry figures out that they need to put more of the effort into the carrot than the stick, they might get somewhere. Because the days when they can dictate terms have long since disappeared.
Spotify (only had a small play with it) seems to work quite well and most of the time the adverts aren't intrusive, in fact the next obvious step for Spotify is to offer the music video as well. :hrmph:
 

otester

Top Member
I think people are missing the big picture here, this filtering technology, if put in place, could be abused by the government to block other politically based content.
 
Is P2P really illegal anyway?

"this filtering technology, if put in place, could be abused by the government to block other politically based content."

Absolutely right. This is a far more serious matter than a few music files, and one that ISPs should be making a lot of noise about.

And incidentally....., IS P2P really illegal anyway? Is it actually a criminal offence to share a few music files with somebody? Can you be sent to prison for it? Granted there may be a technical infringement of copyright law, but that's not a criminal offence: it's a matter for the civil courts. I'm open to being corrected, but aren't the PRS and their kind out of order to use the word "illegal" here? It isn't "illegal" unless it's a criminal offence, and I have never heard of anybody being arrested by the police and thrown into the cells for making a copy of an old Stones record (or whatever).
 

boggits

Top Member
Acts that may be criminal offences in the UK include:

From Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1998, §107

- making copies for the purpose of selling or hiring them to others
- importing infringing copies (except for personal use)
- offering for sale or hire, publicly displaying or otherwise distributing infringing copies in the course of a business
- distributing a large enough number of copies to have a noticeable effect on the business of the copyright owner
- making or possessing equipment for the purposes of making infringing copies in the course of a business
- publicly performing a work in knowledge that the performance is unauthorised

The Copyright and Related Rights Regulations 2003

- communicating copies or infringing the right to "make available" copies to the public (either in the course of a business, or to an extent that has a noticeable effect on the business of the copyright owner)
- manufacturing commercially, importing for non-personal use, possessing in the course of a business, or distributing to an extent that has a noticeable effect on the business of the copyright holder, a device primarily designed for circumventing a technological copyright protection measure.

So there are ways that p2p can be illegal, it up to a judge to make that descision
 

Agrajag

ULTIMATE Member
Can UK ISPs be forced to monitor their networks? The EU's E-commerce Directive states:

No obligation to monitor

The E-commerce Directive states that Member States must not impose a general obligation on service providers to monitor the information which they transmit or store. It is normally accepted that if you do monitor the content on your servers then you are at greater risk as you will be treated as a publisher of that information.
Though I suppose that doesnt stop the government forcing ISPs to filter content.
 

otester

Top Member
Can UK ISPs be forced to monitor their networks? The EU's E-commerce Directive states:



Though I suppose that doesnt stop the government forcing ISPs to filter content.
Well if the 'affected' industries teamed up with the government to not attack ISP's for having some 'illegal' content on their networks although they have heavy filtering, this could easily bypass the EU directive.
 
Thank you James for taking the trouble to write out all that!

Well, my own feeling is that the whole copyright situation is copy-wrong. (I speak as a retired software engineer who used also to be a recording engineer). Copyright law wasn't handed down from Mount Sinai along with the ten commandments. Surveys have shown that most people do not feel instinctively that there is anything morally wrong about copying, in the way that most people know instinctively that theft or murder are wrong. The original 1956 Copyright Act was bought and paid for by EMI at the beginning of the pop industry after the war; they pushed it through Parliament to give themselves a virtual monopoly on recorded music, and we poor suckers have let them get away with it ever since. But now technology has out-paced them and they're fighting a losing battle against an incoming tide. But it's a battle they can never win.

If Person A can earn a living by making something and selling it, but Person B can make and sell it cheaper, then as far as I'm concerned Person B has my blessing. The argument about stifling innovation cuts both ways (see http://www.againstmonopoly.org/). The way for a creative individual to secure his income is by continually generating new output and by keeping ahead of the others. If a musician, inventor, programmer, engineer or whatever has to resort to the courts to secure his income, he's lost the plot anyway. If you want to do just one thing and then live off the proceeds for the rest of your life, then you should do something that can't be copied. But in reality there is nothing done by one artist or engineer which cannot be copied or got round by another artist or engineer, and that's life. The likes of EMI should have enough sense to realise that, and the rest of us should have enough sense not to let them turn our country into a police state for the sake of preserving their profits.

I have spoke! :)

Ian H.Thain
 

otester

Top Member
Thank you James for taking the trouble to write out all that!

Well, my own feeling is that the whole copyright situation is copy-wrong. (I speak as a retired software engineer who used also to be a recording engineer). Copyright law wasn't handed down from Mount Sinai along with the ten commandments. Surveys have shown that most people do not feel instinctively that there is anything morally wrong about copying, in the way that most people know instinctively that theft or murder are wrong. The original 1956 Copyright Act was bought and paid for by EMI at the beginning of the pop industry after the war; they pushed it through Parliament to give themselves a virtual monopoly on recorded music, and we poor suckers have let them get away with it ever since. But now technology has out-paced them and they're fighting a losing battle against an incoming tide. But it's a battle they can never win.

If Person A can earn a living by making something and selling it, but Person B can make and sell it cheaper, then as far as I'm concerned Person B has my blessing. The argument about stifling innovation cuts both ways (see http://www.againstmonopoly.org/). The way for a creative individual to secure his income is by continually generating new output and by keeping ahead of the others. If a musician, inventor, programmer, engineer or whatever has to resort to the courts to secure his income, he's lost the plot anyway. If you want to do just one thing and then live off the proceeds for the rest of your life, then you should do something that can't be copied. But in reality there is nothing done by one artist or engineer which cannot be copied or got round by another artist or engineer, and that's life. The likes of EMI should have enough sense to realise that, and the rest of us should have enough sense not to let them turn our country into a police state for the sake of preserving their profits.

I have spoke! :)

Ian H.Thain
You have to remember that the government sees the exploits in what they are doing so they let them do it, aka. being able to fully censor the internet eventually under the guise of "copyright infringement".
 
Top
Promotion
Cheapest Superfast ISPs
  • Hyperoptic £20.00 (*22.00)
    Avg. Speed 50Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
  • Vodafone £22.00
    Avg. Speed 35Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
  • TalkTalk £22.45 (*36.00)
    Avg. Speed 38Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
  • Post Office £22.90 (*37.00)
    Avg. Speed 38Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
  • Direct Save Telecom £22.95 (*29.95)
    Avg. Speed 35Mbps, Unlimited
    Gift: None
Prices inc. Line Rental | View All
Helpful ISP Guides and Tips
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
»
Promotion
The Top 20 Category Tags
  1. BT (2508)
  2. FTTP (2188)
  3. FTTC (1656)
  4. Building Digital UK (1602)
  5. Politics (1421)
  6. Openreach (1415)
  7. Business (1234)
  8. Statistics (1097)
  9. FTTH (1070)
  10. Mobile Broadband (1034)
  11. Fibre Optic (967)
  12. Ofcom Regulation (915)
  13. Wireless Internet (906)
  14. 4G (895)
  15. Virgin Media (855)
  16. Sky Broadband (594)
  17. EE (590)
  18. TalkTalk (577)
  19. Vodafone (514)
  20. Security (411)
Sponsored

Copyright © 1999 to Present - ISPreview.co.uk - All Rights Reserved - Terms  ,  Privacy and Cookie Policy  ,  Links  ,  Website Rules