ISP's to shop P2P users! Demon what happened to your integrity as an ISP?

Discussion in 'Broadband' started by ·.¸¸.·´¯`Wango´¯`·.¸¸.·, Jan 18, 2004.

  1. ·.¸¸.·´¯`Wango´¯`·.¸¸.·, Jan 18, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. ·.¸¸.·´¯`Wango´¯`·.¸¸.·

    Danny Horne Guest

    Danny Horne, Jan 18, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. ·.¸¸.·´¯`Wango´¯`·.¸¸.·

    Alex Heney Guest

    Alex Heney, Jan 19, 2004
    #3
  4. ·.¸¸.·´¯`Wango´¯`·.¸¸.·

    nwsy Guest

    I'm on Demon and I have first-hand experience of their policies regarding
    illegal filesharing.

    A few months back, Universal caught me sharing a TS of Bruce Almighty. They
    emailed Demon, who opened an Abuse ticket about me, asked me politely to
    stop sharing it and forwarded the original Universal email to me. I deleted
    the file, informed them and Universal that I'd done it and everything was
    fine.

    It seems like Demon's basically doing the same thing they've been doing
    previously, but saving themselves work by passing on the email address of
    the offender instead of doing the work themselves.

    Taking action against users for illegal filesharing is just upholding the
    terms of their AUP.

    I don't have a problem with Demons' decision and I'm not worried -
    especially as the organisations doing the complaining have no legal rights
    in the UK. They are also increasingly unsupported by EU law, the economical
    reality, and their own people.

    And why am I not surprised AOL is getting all gung-ho? AOL TIME WARNER, that
    big entertainment conglomerate. Can't work that one out at all :)
     
    nwsy, Jan 19, 2004
    #4
  5. ·.¸¸.·´¯`Wango´¯`·.¸¸.·

    Colin Wilson Guest

    I'm on Demon and I have first-hand experience of their policies regarding
    If you don`t mind me asking, what method were you using to share it ?
     
    Colin Wilson, Jan 19, 2004
    #5
  6. ·.¸¸.·´¯`Wango´¯`·.¸¸.·

    nwsy Guest

    Kazaa
     
    nwsy, Jan 19, 2004
    #6
  7. ·.¸¸.·´¯`Wango´¯`·.¸¸.·

    Colin Wilson Guest

    If you don`t mind me asking, what method were you using to share it ?
    Cheers - I think I tried it once and forgot about it again quickly :-]
     
    Colin Wilson, Jan 19, 2004
    #7
  8. ·.¸¸.·´¯`Wango´¯`·.¸¸.·

    Paul Guest

    Kazaa users can be easily traced by there IP address back to there ISP,by
    the RIAA and there port tracking software that interrogates P2P programs but
    Kazaa +++ Lite has the ports the RIAA use for tracking blocked so they cant
    track you.

    I had a similar letter passed to me by my ISP via the RIAA stating I had
    downloaded and was sharing T3, the laugh of it was it was, was the file was
    called terminator 3 but the actual film turned out to be Fight Club, so they
    are still pissing in the wind and don't really know what you have on your PC
    to share, you could call it what you like and share it and they don't know
    because they cant open the files to find out.

    Read some of the convictions they screwed up, like the MAC user accused of
    downloading and sharing files on Kazaa .................. there isn't a
    version of Kazaa that will run on a MAC ................ just a bunch of
    suites given a PC and told what to do they haven't got a clue.

    Is the RIAA going to convict the Russian Government for example there all
    running pirated XP software.


     
    Paul, Jan 19, 2004
    #8
  9. -snip-
    And you forgot about legitimate file sharing - your assumption is flawed.

    Gary
     
    \intolerance\, Jan 20, 2004
    #9
  10. -snip-
    Integrity is a word you need to look up in that case and take a look at
    innocent, until, proven, guilty, assumption and legitimate ;-)

    Gary
     
    \intolerance\, Jan 20, 2004
    #10
  11. ·.¸¸.·´¯`Wango´¯`·.¸¸.·

    Alan LeHun Guest

    I seriously doubt that rights holders are going to go out of their way
    to track down legitimate file sharers. As such, I doubt very much that
    Thus will be "shopping" any.

    There is no assumption and the insertion of illegal does further define
    the subject line.
     
    Alan LeHun, Jan 20, 2004
    #11
  12. ·.¸¸.·´¯`Wango´¯`·.¸¸.·

    Alex Heney Guest

    Perhaps *YOU* should try reading what this was about then.

    Since you obviously do not have a clue.
     
    Alex Heney, Jan 20, 2004
    #12
  13. ·.¸¸.·´¯`Wango´¯`·.¸¸.·

    nwsy Guest

    The rights holders, apart from vociferous exceptions like Metallica,
    couldn't give a toss. Filesharing accounts for a miniscule portion of
    overall global piracy and most people in the industry tend to ignore it or
    accept it as part of the business. The RIAA is losing signatory members hand
    over fist. It is also a purely American organisation and as such has no
    legal standing in this country.

    In fact, once legitimate filesharing takes off, some reports are predicting
    something like a 15% increase in sales. So I can't see too many people
    making too much of an effort to put us all off doing it, legitimate or
    otherwise.
     
    nwsy, Jan 20, 2004
    #13
  14. nwsy said...
    You don't know that. I'm not saying I know otherwise, and I'm sure
    even I could think of examples that don't give a toss, but such a
    sweeping statement is almost certainly flat wrong.
    How are you measuring piracy, and the proportion of filesharing? What
    part of the world are you talking about?

    I strongly dispute your use of the world `miniscule' unless you can
    actually cite some convincing data on this. Because in the sample of
    `people I know', filesharing is a massive portion of piracy. I'd say
    there are at least 5000 illegal MP3s to every broken Microsoft EULA in
    my circle of friends. I have encountered no other type of piracy.
    I buy all my books in charity shops, if that counts. :)
    If a company's selling music online, why would it want to put you off
    buying it?
    I can see many people putting in plenty of effort to put us all off
    doing it illegally (Microsoft, RIAA, no?).

    But anyway... it doesn't seem like there's anything that can be done
    either way. Time to bite the bullet and come up with a new business
    model. Unless the government starts subsidising record companies like
    it does farmers. Gits.


    -- thom.
     
    Thom Lawrence, Jan 20, 2004
    #14
  15. In the above, you make a series of assertions, some of which are
    provably wrong, others of which are dubious to say the least. You
    probably ought to cite some references. By the way, you're sadly
    mistaken if you think that most rights holders don't care - you
    obviously don't work in the rights industry.

    And you're missing what I think was Alan's point, which was that Thus
    can't "shop" legitimate file shareers because they're, er, legit.
    Quite possibly, but irrelevant.
    And obviously, once legitimate whiskey-making takes off, sales will
    increase, so I can't see the Revenue making much effort to stamp out
    illigimate stills.
     
    Mark McIntyre, Jan 20, 2004
    #15
  16. ·.¸¸.·´¯`Wango´¯`·.¸¸.·

    nwsy Guest

    The whole world, as pointed out in this report on the BBC website a while
    back:
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/music/3283463.stm

    In a nutshell, an independant report predicts a half-billion pound global
    downturn in CD sales this year, which amounts to 3% of global sales. Now
    this takes in all factors, economic downturns, natural trends, and piracy -
    which in a global market is not limited to filesharing. Indeed, filesharing
    would amount to a tiny proportion of that small drop in profits. Another
    report I can't find now mentioned that for everyone that's using a
    filesharing client, only 1% at any one time is downloading a movie. This was
    a quote by a movie industry executive, going on record that Hollywood
    doesn't care too much about movie filesharing.

    Found it: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/music/3222646.stm

    I've recently been to a website that catalogues the labels that the RIAA
    incorrectly lists as "members".
    http://www.magnetbox.com/riaa/news.asp

    Actually the RIAA's own site is rather telling, with their news section:
    http://www.riaa.com/news/newsletter/default.asp
    detailing their actions against third world countries and flea markets. Good
    going guys!

    The IFPI (RIAA's European affiliate) Has published figures on global Piracy
    in 2003 which doesn't include Online piracy. If it was such a massive
    problem, wouldn't it be included?
    http://www.ifpi.org/site-content/antipiracy/piracy2003.html

    There's more info out there, but from the official sites I'd say that their
    focus was on illegal CD's and their distribution in latin america and the
    far east, not joebloggs@kazaa and all his mates. Indeed, the RIAA news site
    only mentions the *failed* Verizon action and their condemnation of the
    verdict.
    Depends on your definition of "massive" doesn't it? I share over 5000 mp3's
    and I'm smallfry. I also highly doubt that you've encountered no other forms
    of piracy. You've never been to a car boot sale, never surfed Ebay, never
    seen those guys down the pub flogging dodgy cd's/dvd's/VHS's?
    By prosecuting, or at least trying to get P2P users prosecuted willy nilly.
    It surely puts as many legitimate users off - the "don't want to be put in
    the same category as them" effect.
    Again, depends on your definition of "many". If you look at the numbers
    involved, it's a vociferous effort being made by a few organisations who
    have the media in their pocket.
    Bloody hell, if they start treating the Recording industry the same as
    they're treating the farmers, there'll be no money left in the industry in
    two years' time!

    Which would be a blessing when it comes to most of the stuff in the charts
    over the last ten years or so.

    I suggest you do some googling on the subject, then doing some maths with
    the results this turns up. You'll see like I did when I did this that
    filesharing really isn't the vast problem it's made out to be by the shouty
    minority. Remember, take with a pinch of salt everything you read from
    biased media sources like Virgin, MSNBC, AOL Time Warner and the like.
     
    nwsy, Jan 20, 2004
    #16
  17. ·.¸¸.·´¯`Wango´¯`·.¸¸.·

    nwsy Guest

    For quotes from both sources, see my reply to Thom.
    Hold your horses there bucko...
    Wait for the context...

    There ya go: *"Legitimate or otherwise"*. Answering the point made by Alan,
    and agreeing in fact.
    Irrelevant sarcasm. The whiskey-making industry *has* taken off, something
    like 300 years ago, so it's hardly a good comparison to a market that's only
    just in its most infant stages is it?
     
    nwsy, Jan 20, 2004
    #17
  18. ·.¸¸.·´¯`Wango´¯`·.¸¸.·

    Sean Guest

    Sean, Jan 20, 2004
    #18
  19. ·.¸¸.·´¯`Wango´¯`·.¸¸.·

    Sean Guest

    On the Tue, 20 Jan 2004 10:54:07 -0000, nwsy uttered forth the
    following...
    And so we should take everything you say seriously when you have
    admitted you are nothing more then a thieving pikey! Instead of
    downloading that next album, why don't you go into your local
    supermarket/record shop and just pinch it from the shelf! Oh but that
    would be theft wouldn't it! It amazes me how the likes of yourself try
    and justify theft by saying that it's OK, what I steal is only a small
    proportion of the profits, so it must be OK.
     
    Sean, Jan 20, 2004
    #19
  20. ·.¸¸.·´¯`Wango´¯`·.¸¸.·

    nwsy Guest

    You know, I wrote a long, reasoned response to this, but now I don't see the
    point wasting my time.

    It must be hard to type with your head that far up your backside.
     
    nwsy, Jan 20, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.