To Slow Piracy, Internet Providers Ready Penalties

[jefferson_dem]

Source: NYT

By BEN SISARIO

Americans who illegally download songs and movies may soon be in for a surprise: They will be warned to stop, and if they don’t, they could find their Internet access slowing to a crawl.

After years of negotiations with Hollywood and the music industry, the nation’s top Internet providers have agreed to a systematic approach to identifying customers suspected of digital copyright infringement and then alerting them via e-mail or other means.

Under the new process, which was announced Thursday, several warnings would be issued, with progressively harsher consequences if the initial cautions were ignored.

The companies took pains to say that the agreement did not oblige Internet providers to shut down a repeat offender’s account, and that the system of alerts was meant to be “educational.” But they noted that carriers would retain their right to cut off any user who violated their terms of service.

In bringing together the media companies and Internet carriers, the deal demonstrates how the once-clear line separating those two businesses has been blurred. Eight years ago, the Recording Industry Association of America had to sue Verizon to try to uncover the identity of a customer who was sharing music online. This year, Comcast completed its merger with NBC, bringing an owner of digital content and a conduit for it under the same roof.



Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/08/technology/to-slow-piracy-internet-providers-ready-penalties.html?_r=2&ref=bensisario

[flor-de-jasmim]

1. Would this include using torrents to get TV shows? Or only music and movies?

[vi5]

2. Is this a serious question?

I can't tell. Of course it would include TV shows. Why would it not? They are just as much copyrighted intellectual property as anything else.

[flor-de-jasmim]

4. Yes, but I was thinking that not all older TV shows are available for purchase.

[vi5]

7. True, but I would say that is fairly rare....

I would be curious to know what percentage of tv shows that have aired over the year are not available for purchase either on line or on dvd/blu ray/etc. I've seen dvd releases of some of the most ridiculous tv shows that only aired one season.

I'd say if it's something that is not available anywhere and nobody owns the rights to it any more then chances are probably slim that any copyright holder will come after a person downloading that. But you never know.

[kentauros]

8. And I've always thought that the owners were losing out by not offering them.

Not that they should have to produce DVDs of everything they own, but make their library available for download, even limited-view downloads. The technology has been available for years, and yet they don't do this. My impression is that they think DVD-production first and then nothing else. Producing a DVD is costly, what with the art design involved as well as the physical production of the disk, box and eventual distribution. Downloading negates all of those costs and turns it into almost pure profit.

And yet, they hang onto the old "gotta have it in my hands" model, and all those old or even one-shot shows never see the light of day (or screen.)

[BlueJazz]

9. Very true. There are some wonderful episodes of "Austin City Limits" that ....

....are not on DVD or even YouTube. (and I mean TONS of stuff like Chet Atkins & Larry Carlton)
I wrote to the source about several episodes that I would like to buy or download.
Got back a rather terse letter. "We don't do that"

Wanted to write back "I know what you CAN do with all the episodes"


:) :)

[kentauros]

13. I can understand wanting to reply like that.

I probably would have asked why they don't want to make that much more money by doing it, though. Maybe then they'd listen ;)

Austin City Limits seems like the perfect show to offer downloads. I guess the profit margins on downloads aren't high enough

[aquart]

33. Well, libraries have limited-time downloads of books.

I don't know why they wouldn't also have downloadable TV archives.

[kentauros]

34. One of the criticisms I've read against the RIAA

is that they have yet to come into the digital age. They were still defending CDs when people were ditching that format for mp3 (and FLAC, for those that want a format without quality losses.)

My guess is that the producers are still thinking in terms of "gotta have it in my hands" versus digital. I would hope that someone has explained this concept to them. I'd sure like to know their reasons for not doing it.

[onehandle]

3. In other words, your Internet activities will be watched closer than ever.

What could go wrong?

[Pab Sungenis]

5. The big problem is that

the approach the ISP's take defines all peer-to-peer sharing as illegal when nothing could be further from the truth.

People who distribute video podcasts or public domain material over bittorrent could find themselves being branded as criminals when nothing could be further from the truth.

[msongs]

6. perhaps u could share your concerns with the people causing the problem :-) nt

[Thav]

10. Think of all the cyberwarfare and cybercrime that happens

all due to Internet access. Spamming, Scamming, hacking etc.. all due to having Internet access.

Do not make light of legitimate users of P2P getting branded as criminals because of the medium of transfer they use, as it can be applied to anyone with Internet access. "You have internet access? You must be a cyber criminal."

[Viva_La_Revolution]

14. exactly my problem with this. Will they be inspecting the files we download

(or upload) to make sure they are illegal?

That feels creepy.
You'd think I'd have gotten used to my privacy being invaded after the last decade, but alas..

[lbrtbell]

35. What's hilarious is that there's a simple way around all this BS

People could just do what they used to do in the days of dial-up: Swap CD's, DVD's, or even flash drives or memory cards with the music and videos burned onto them.

As a bonus, it will be a huge boost to the USPS.

When will the RIAA ever learn that their greed ALWAYS comes back to kick them in the teeth?

[-..__...]

11. So, what happens when someone...

uses a public or neighbors unsecured wifi connection to download?

If it's an unsecured residential connection that's being abused, I would hope that the ISP would make an effort to identify the problem and
assist the home owner in securing their router.

Free and public connections would present a whole other problem.

Are ISP's going to come down on them as well?

[cullen7282]

12. I'm confused at how this is any different than what they already do

Your IP address is identified by the copyright holder, who then contacts your ISP, your ISP sends you a warning. They already do that.

[greiner3]

15. ?

So you are saying that your IP address is sent to any and all business, organization, educational and government site that you peruse?

I would like your proof that this happens. The government's Raptor system, announced a few years back, supposedly sifted through every email sent and received in the US. This capability was only looking for a few 'terrorist' phrases and words. I think the capability that this system has increased capability a decade later is expected.

But this is the government. Not your ISP. I doubt the Feds share this technology with the 100s of ISPs in the country. Or not.

[AlphaCentauri]

17. such a tools are called Packet Sniffers and any private company can make them

no need to use the governmet's technology

[ManiacJoe]

20. That is how it works.

> So you are saying that your IP address is sent to any and all business, organization, educational and government site that you peruse?

That is how hit works. Your IP address is required so that the website can returned the requested data to your computer.

[boppers]

36. You cannot view a site without sending out an IP address.

You can, however go through proxies, in which case you send the proxy your address, and the proxy sends the destination site *their* address.... but for the most part, every site logs the IP address of everybody who looks at it. Basically, to use old school metaphors, you're sending the site a "self addressed, stamped, envelope", and they send the web page back to that envelope address.

"I would like your proof that this happens."

Go to this website:
http://www.whatsmyip.org/

You sent them your address, they sent you a web page with that address in it.

"The government's Raptor system, announced a few years back, supposedly sifted through every email sent and received in the US"

Sounds like you're talking about Carnivore. It's been replaced by better technology now, as Carnivore was only limited to very small amounts collection.... and couldn't collect at all unless a collection node was in the path a message took. Echelon collects a lot more, but the data has to "leave" the US to be legally captured. Narus boxen are a little more legally.... interesting.

"I doubt the Feds share this technology with the 100s of ISPs in the country. Or not."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_packet_analyzers

There's a bunch of them out there. Sometimes when I get bored I'll simply fire one up and see what kind of radio signals people in my area are sending out.... because if you use wireless, and aren't encrypting, anybody can see it.

[boppers]

39. This is more formal, and less fishing.

Sometimes, the copyright holder would just sue, and let the ISP and/or customers know they were being sued. This puts the ISP in the role of handing out warnings, as well as being the ones who can *accurately* identify which customer has which IP (and when).

[jtrockville]

16. So ISPs are law enforcement agents now?

[AlphaCentauri]

18. I bet they are getting ready for Pay Per View Web

most likely they'll want in the near future go back to AOL old fee system, to pay for watching their websites

[JJW]

19. Well in that case I'll terminate cable service

I don't need cable if I can't download big files. I can easily surf with dial up or dsl. No need to pay 3 or 4 times as much for cable or fiber.

[iamthebandfanman]

21. i have a friend who said they already do this to him..

i forgot to ask his provider, but he had told me just a couple weeks ago he had gotten his THIRD warning and they still hadnt done anything to stop him lol

[boppers]

38. Qwest/Centurylink rolled out a prototype early.

I haven't seen it on other networks, but it seems pretty straightforward....

"Hey, customer, this is going to get you in trouble. Please stop, as we know you can't pay us if you have huge court costs to make up for your behavior".

[JohnnyRingo]

22. I understand the ISPs want to avoid lawsuits that have been threatened

...but I doubt they'll actually do much to cut off paying subscribers.
Regardless of one's personal view on digital rights, these companies are in business to make money, and will walk a fine line between legal action and retaining as large a customer base as possible.

[boppers]

40. No, they'll just report "Hey, we warned him", when the customer is sued.

...which also frees up the ISP from some liability, because they took action to try and stop it.

[bloomington-lib]

23. To Slow Piracy, Internet Providers Ready Penalties

Source: NYT

Americans who illegally download songs and movies may soon be in for a surprise: They will be warned to stop, and if they don’t, they could find their Internet access slowing to a crawl.

After years of negotiations with Hollywood and the music industry, the nation’s top Internet providers have agreed to a systematic approach to identifying customers suspected of digital copyright infringement and then alerting them via e-mail or other means.

Under the new process, which was announced Thursday, several warnings would be issued, with progressively harsher consequences if the initial cautions were ignored.

The companies took pains to say that the agreement did not oblige Internet providers to shut down a repeat offender’s account, and that the system of alerts was meant to be “educational.” But they noted that carriers would retain their right to cut off any user who violated their terms of service.

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/08/technology/to-slow-piracy-internet-providers-ready-penalties.html

[Fearless]

24. Well if they didn't gouge people for their media there wouldn't be need to "pirate" it.

[cstanleytech]

25. I can see potential lawsuits for the ISPs if they slow the speed but keep charging the client

the exact same amount of money for the service.

[boppers]

26. Read your contract.

Speeds are not guaranteed (unless you're paying for a CIR contract, but those start around $800 a month.)

[cstanleytech]

28. They could argue that its an artificial slowing of the speed

thus the isp is the one at fault for the speed and not say something like a bad connection.

[boppers]

29. It's their wires.

They're allowed to do that, under a great number of circumstances.

[Downwinder]

27. Or if they contract to provide a certain bandwidth.

[endless october]

30. more on this :

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/07/07/us-internet-piracy-idUSTRE7667FL20110707

[Dawson Leery]

31. Does this include downloading from youtube?

Since youtube is readily available and there are many free programs out in the market to download from youtube, will this be affected?

[boppers]

41. If it's pirated content on Youtube, possibly...

...but youtube also tries to keep that kind of content policed.
*giggle*
No, really, they do.
*giggle*

The better way to cut off pirated youtube content is to contact youtube.

[saras]

32. Too much stupid to shovel

First thing - unappealable penalties without trial

Second thing - profound disagreement over where copyright boundaries actually are

Third thing - who trusts them to look as hard as they have to (into encrypted streams) to find this stuff and not to sell whatever they find of value, let alone not even look at anything else they're not supposed to look at

Fourth thing - the entire "intellectual property" fiasco is another part of the "we're done - let's end progress" stream of governance. Every economy that's advanced significantly in the industrial age has done so by systematically, massively violating intellectual property laws - Switzerland, Germany, Japan, China, S.E Asia collectively, India, Brazil. The early history of mass media in America is filled with cheats and lawsuits. My favorite example - the manufacturers of the earliest radio transmitters claimed the right to control completely what was broadcast over them, even if you had bought one from them. In a subsequent lawsuit, the court ruled in THE COMPANY'S FAVOR, but public distaste was extreme enough that they quit enforcing the provision anyways. But there's over a hundred years of examples this bad or worse.

Fifth thing - the internet is so necessary to urban lives that this is rather like cutting hands off for stealing, even if the person is actually guilty.

Sixth thing - these folks have such an AWFUL record already of going after the wrong people and missing major problems that they aren't really trustworthy with this much more power without outside supervision.

[boppers]

37. Interesting points....

First thing: Not a government penalty. A private business is declining to accept your traffic.

Second thing: You are correct, and this will lead to abuse, CoS comes to mind, and arguments about fair use.

Third thing: There are laws already about that sort of thing, but for the most part, it's always been an honor system with ISP's. Unless you're using sufficient encryption, you will be sniffed. As far as finding violations, they (the copyright holders) typically look at decrypted content... so, if you're shuffling around an encrypted collection of Lady GaGa tunes, and it's named "stuff", you're much less likely to get nailed than somebody sharing song-by-song on some peer to peer network.

Fourth thing: We're still exploring social boundaries for acceptable internet behavior, but the laws have already sided with ISP's: They are allowed to control what you do on top of their networks. (Thank spammers for that one).

Fifth thing: Find a new internet link. Problem solved. (Oh, and hands aren't usually re-attachable in as little as 5 minutes with a credit card).

Sixth thing: The ISP's *are* the adult supervision. The MPAA (or whomever) says "Your customer 123.123.234.234 is sharing hundreds of movies". The ISP looks into it, and if it's verifiable, warns the customer.