QuoteIf you download potentially copyrighted software, videos or music, your Internet service provider (ISP) has been watching, and they’re coming for you.Specifically, they’re coming for you on Thursday, July 1.That’s the date when the nation’s largest ISPs will all voluntarily implement a new anti-piracy plan that will engage network operators in the largest digital spying scheme in history, and see some users’ bandwidth completely cut off until they sign an agreement saying they will not download copyrighted materials.http://news.cnet.com/8301-31001_3-57397452-261/riaa-chief-isps-to-start-policing-copyright-by-july-1/?tag=mncol;topStoriesFucking HELL, I don't pirate software or music, but what if they think that by downloading MUGEN content we're violating copyright laws?
There's a huge impracticality here. There's actually far more piracy that goes on than these ISPs seem to believe. The lawsuits the RIAA tried to hand out failed due to the sheer number of people they had to go after; the sheer number would overwhelm the aggressors here. You can't really put a dent in it by attacking the receivers instead of the givers.
Mothman said, June 27, 2012, 05:54:02 pmQuoteIf you download potentially copyrighted software, videos or music, your Internet service provider (ISP) has been watching, and they’re coming for you.Specifically, they’re coming for you on Thursday, July 1.That’s the date when the nation’s largest ISPs will all voluntarily implement a new anti-piracy plan that will engage network operators in the largest digital spying scheme in history, and see some users’ bandwidth completely cut off until they sign an agreement saying they will not download copyrighted materials.http://news.cnet.com/8301-31001_3-57397452-261/riaa-chief-isps-to-start-policing-copyright-by-july-1/?tag=mncol;topStoriesFucking HELL, I don't pirate software or music, but what if they think that by downloading MUGEN content we're violating copyright laws?You forgot to mention emulators, mods, etc. The kind of things that are grey area but might get flagged. Honestly I seriously doubt anything good for companies would come of this. As said by Orochi Gill, they need to attack the hosters and not their own consumers. I doubt AT&T, Verison, Comcast, etc. are so tight knit that they would sacrifice their own consumers for each other. Besides it's not like everyone is getting their services in bulk, they specifically price their services to make the most money they can while not over inflating the cost. Restricting access to something someone paid for; or cracking down on something like mugen, emulators, roms, mods, etc. is stupidity. What they need to do is make it more difficult for people to obtain their respective properties by specific hardware and software configuration which have their own code language which is read by their own software. It sounds like alot but it can help against piracy.Everything from here on out should be their responsibility, not ours. Better to make it harder for a theif than to make it harder for everyone.
[E] said, June 27, 2012, 07:45:15 pmThey are just going to make it easier for the criminally organized pirates to make more money.Exactly. Organized piracy basically sets the standards for bypassing legal sanctions and restrictive measures - they just make it harder for receivers to get their hands on pirated products, creating a higher demand for the pirates' services.
Orochi Gill said, June 27, 2012, 06:50:26 pmThere's a huge impracticality here. There's actually far more piracy that goes on than these ISPs seem to believe. The lawsuits the RIAA tried to hand out failed due to the sheer number of people they had to go after; the sheer number would overwhelm the aggressors here. You can't really put a dent in it by attacking the receivers instead of the givers.I don't think this will stop them from trying it.
Will it happen also in Italy? I hope not.Emulators are not illegal while the rom you download from some sites are.
I am downloading some home video's a friend has uploaded. They are amusingly named Mission ImpossibleHow does the ISP know that i am actually downloading MI? They don't, not without opening them, at which point they do rather breach privacy.They can hit torrents by being involved in the seeding and capturing all the IP's who download bits from them. But you can't really tell what data someone is downloading without downloading it yourself. Even from something like rapidshare. If i download something called say... The Lion King from rapidshare there is NO guarantee that's what i'll get, i might get back door bangers 8 or something instead. This is probably fake. Did they get their data from facebook or twitter?
Killer Kong? said, June 27, 2012, 06:35:15 pmDoes this apply to Canadian ISPs too? If not, I'm kinda lucky I guess.this.and wtf: if i had waited after this sunday to buy my virtual copies of Diablo 3 and Guild Wars 2 and then downloaded the clients legally (for a nice total of 37 gigs), how the fuck would they know the difference versus streaming movies / downloading copyrighted materials illegally??
Cyanide said, June 27, 2012, 11:11:03 pmI am downloading some home video's a friend has uploaded. They are amusingly named Mission ImpossibleHow does the ISP know that i am actually downloading MI? They don't, not without opening them, at which point they do rather breach privacy.They will just sue your friend for using a copyrighted name.
Cyanide said, June 27, 2012, 11:11:03 pmI am downloading some home video's a friend has uploaded. They are amusingly named Mission ImpossibleHow does the ISP know that i am actually downloading MI? They don't, not without opening them, at which point they do rather breach privacy.They can hit torrents by being involved in the seeding and capturing all the IP's who download bits from them. But you can't really tell what data someone is downloading without downloading it yourself. Even from something like rapidshare. If i download something called say... The Lion King from rapidshare there is NO guarantee that's what i'll get, i might get back door bangers 8 or something instead. This is probably fake. Did they get their data from facebook or twitter?You raise a very good point, but unfortunately that's all they have to go on and therefore they will charge you first, ask questions later. Meaning you would have to PROVE said file wasn't actually what it was labeled in court. Until then, your screwed. Burden of proof with these copyright cases is always on the defendant and not the prosecutor/plantiff. Why? Because said Plantiff has million dollar lobbyists behind him/her. So they get the leeway. Also for Rapidshare and the rest of the cyberlockers like Mediafire, upload.to, Ifile, etc - they can't do shit. ISP's historically haven't been able to go after Cyberlockers with ANY amount of efficiency and thus don't even go after them at all. I guarantee this "spy scheme" is restricted to P2P based services.
Actually, on the torrent front they are the "legal" owners of said file, could you not say "I downloaded it all from you" at which point you do rather lose the piracy, if they're putting their own file up for download and people download it, where is the illegality there?
My concern is if the ISPs going to go after people who uses sites like File-Factory, U-uploaded, and Mediafire.
DNZRX768 said, June 28, 2012, 05:29:24 amMy concern is if the ISPs going to go after people who uses sites like File-Factory, U-uploaded, and Mediafire.That's what I am expecting. Because if it's like MegaUpload, it's in their sights.
Cyanide said, June 28, 2012, 05:13:09 amActually, on the torrent front they are the "legal" owners of said file, could you not say "I downloaded it all from you" at which point you do rather lose the piracy, if they're putting their own file up for download and people download it, where is the illegality there?Are you talking about home movies, etc or real copyright material? In the case of the latter, saying you downloaded it entirely from someone else doesn't absolve you of the legal issues. Hell it actually makes the case against you that much easier. The "illegality" of the situation is downloading that illegal file. Doesn't matter where it originated from, etc. Unless you can somehow prove you have the permission of the copyright owner or the copyright owner purposely uploaded the content for the express purpose of sharing it, your screwed. So for example the only way you could get around the legality is in the case of indy productions where the copyright owner uploads the content for the express purposes of "getting it out there." DNZRX768 said, June 28, 2012, 05:29:24 amMy concern is if the ISPs going to go after people who uses sites like File-Factory, U-uploaded, and Mediafire.The problem with going after Cyberlockers is there is no efficient reporting/logging system. P2P is easy to track unless the traffic is obfuscated because P2P networks generally operate in a unique fashion. Where as Cyberlockers use the standard HTTP protocol (usually port 80) and unless they actually monitor the file, they won't be able to really pinpoint if you downloaded it or not. As it will just look like standard traffic. Well, I for one sincerely doubt these ISP's will do jack shit to curb Cyberlocker traffic. But you know what? I'll end up being the first to know considering that's the only thing I use for the content I download. So if they truly are going after people who use Cyberlockers, I'll be getting a notice within a week after this is started. (I download a good 100GB a month.)EDIT: Hell someone on another forum I visit actually got a notice from Verizon Fios because the person downloaded a movie through public bitorrent and then 10 minutes later downloaded something using Jdownloader. The ISP mistakenly confused the bitorrent download for the Jdownloader file and actually sent a notice with the details of the Jdownloader session. Of course it got tossed out because it was really a mis-identification. BUT, you know what the notice said? X was downloaded, Protocol : Jdownloader (Port 80). That's ALL the information they get from Cyberlockers. And to be honest the only way they got the file downloaded was because it was actually from the bitorrent. Otherwise all they see is (Unknown file downloaded) using (port 80).
This has to be fake because I'm pretty sure this would be breaching privacy in one way or another. If this is for real then I'm truly disturbed at how far the government would go to spy on people....Then again it's probably a way to get more money.. but still... PRIVACY!
PowerWave said, June 28, 2012, 07:11:56 amThis has to be fake because I'm pretty sure this would be breaching privacy in one way or another. If this is for real then I'm truly disturbed at how far the government would go to spy on people....Then again it's probably a way to get more money.. but still... PRIVACY!By those comments I'm guessing you haven't heard of the new provisions that completely obliterate the First Amendment? I have no idea if they were passed into law but they made it through congress with a staggering vote in favor. Only like 3 opposed it. Now Obama may have veto'd it by I doubt it.Let's just say the government loves to screw us over with rights. If they can pretty much obliterate the first amendment, do you really think Privacy is sacred? I mean hell, we already know the government uses Facebook as a damn database for our it's citizens. Surprisingly, I haven't seen the following link AT ALL. No has reposted it. I had to go to a console scene site before I even found out about it. Just goes to show how hush hush the government is keeping it.http://rt.com/usa/news/348-act-tresspass-buildings-437/ - First amendment obliteration.
I have mixed feelings about the whole "piracy" issue.Hakufu1021 said, June 28, 2012, 09:13:42 amhttp://rt.com/usa/news/348-act-tresspass-buildings-437/ - First amendment obliteration. As far as this goes, it may just be a knee jerk reaction to intelligence about assassination plots and it hardly "completely obliterates the First Amendment". How many people have been arrested since Obama signed it back in March?
The First Amendment has always been the go-to target when the powers of government are impeded by it. Bush tortured people without any proof that he needed to (or legally could), and Obama has a hitlist (yes, an actual list of people he wants to assassinate), and now this. Believing that any part of the Bill of Rights in the US is sacred is like believing that the government genuinely wants to help you. Due process has already been forsaken, and every part of the First Amendment is at risk.The only thing I could say is that at least it isn't like in Britain, where every street corner has an asston of security cameras around it.
Lobo said, June 28, 2012, 07:11:16 pmThis is so going to cause a shitstorm.Not if the gov't scares everybody into submission.
Vegeta 20XX said, June 28, 2012, 06:42:47 pmThe First Amendment has always been the go-to target when the powers of government are impeded by it. GOOD NEWS!!! SCOTUS decided your right to lie about being awarded the medal of honor is protected by the first amendment. (grrrr)Was that too far off topic? If so I instruct myself to get back on topic.
Hakufu1021 said, June 28, 2012, 09:13:42 amhttp://rt.com/usa/news/348-act-tresspass-buildings-437/ - First amendment obliteration.oh do you mean this thing http://mugenguild.com/forumx/index.php?topic=139485.msg1533202#msg1533202 that completely ruined america
