“Six Strikes” Anti-Piracy Scheme Unfair

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
I'm not taking sides but, if you keep downloading stuff after six warnings from your ISP, your stupid ass deserves whatever you get. :D

In the coming months U.S. Internet providers will begin to warn and punish alleged copyright infringers. The “six strikes” plan is the result of a deal between the MPAA, RIAA and several large ISPs. While the parties involved have described the scheme as fair and balanced, University of Idaho Law Professor Annemarie Bridy has her concerns. In a new report she points out that the copyright alert system lacks transparency, favors copyright holders, and that procedural fairness is hard to find.
 
Wow, a lawyer has concerns, I'm shocked!

Hey, at least some one is saying something about all this copyright bullshit. Doesn't matter what form it come in, if its for reducing the power and reach of the MPAA/RIAA I'm all for it!
 
How spaced apart do the six warnings have to be?

My buddy was turning right on red at the traffic light by his house. He saw the light flash, but thought nothing of it because right on red is legal. Apparently he didn't come to long enough of a stop, and 8 days later got two letters in the mail, then two more the next day, then two more after that, etc.

So because of the lag, he could easily have exceeded "six warnings" before even having received the first one!
 
What determines... the strikes as strikes?

I know they send out erroneous letters before. I've gotten one saying I downloaded a harry potter movie, I believe it was 5. After the first 2, I wouldn't want to hear about it, let alone watch it. Which is funny, because I didn't even know it was out to download it even if I was inclined to.
 
I think this will go nowhere. Cable companies are not going to want to enforce this, let alone cut off subscribers and the associated backlash.

IIRC, there was just an article as well about a judge saying unsecured wireless networks are okay. So you've got one hand saying unsecured is fine while the other says 6 and your out.

I hope cable companies get sued for mistaken letters and/or cutoff's. That would put an end to this real fast.
 
Im gonna gather up 6-10 friends and make up my own policies and rules and laws too. Its always cool to be pushed around by agencies/organizations that have no official governmental capacity in the least. Line up the lawyers now.
 
The whole thing seems like a huge scam in the first place. Hopefully it disappears quickly.
 
Of Course! It's totally fair to disconnect an elderly couple who just want to be able to look up movie times and look at pictures of their grand kids because they aren't sophisticated enough to lock down their wireless modem and don't understand that someone else is using it!

I personally can't wait until we get automated content recognition systems for files like we have with video for youtube. It's widely recognized that that system works with 100% accuracy and that no videos that were legitimately owned by the uploader have been blocked. As such, applying such a system in regulating whether or not people have internet access makes total sense.

I especially like the part where you wind up being liable for all traffic that goes through your internet connection whether or not you had any knowledge of it.
 
So does this mean those who got sued for $22,000 per song and lost, should be able to get retrials because they didn't get 6 warnings? :D
 
Of course not, you don't see falsely convicted criminals given extra years of free life, do you?

Giving money back is as impossible as extending life past their time!
 
Oh man all this six strike talk is giving me a raging appetite for some salted meat :confused:

Law breaking is and will be punished to the fullest, so don't copy that floppy :p

Americas tacking a pounding from Big Daddy, Oh whats that you want him to spank it :eek:

That's what PVR's are for dummy or go to jail, "For your health!" :)
 
I don't find the six strike rule so wrong.
What I have an issue with is that the connection is being actively monitored or filtered. I mean, it most likely is already but then how come reputable sites like hardocp don't force https.
I am all for tinfoil hats, but man, help us out.
 
I'm not taking sides but, if you keep downloading stuff after six warnings from your ISP, your stupid ass deserves whatever you get. :D

Yes, I'm sure when my network printer gets flagged it'll immediately stop using bittorrent before another strike. I'm sure this system is foolproof... :rolleyes:

Well I guess it's not all bad, my network printer can pay a fee to appeal it's innocence.
 
This is what's going to happen:

Your dad downloads metallica from itunes.
The system misunderstands the download as piracy.
ISP issues a strike and a letter, unfortunately the letter goes to the wrong address.
This happens 6 times in a row.
Your Internet gets cut off.
Your dad calls his ISP and gets no where for days.
Your dad cancels service, can't get service from any other ISP.
It's now weeks since you last played Diablo 3.

Good luck with that.
 
I don't understand how they determine if you aren't using the net the "right" way? Looking for high traffic only using one port (i.e. torrents)? Or are they going to say since your traffic is high you must be illegally downloading? I have 4 people in the house and sometimes 4 streams of Netflix going at once. What are the grounds here? What about files I put in the cloud so I can download them later? Each ISP needs to release a statement to every customer explaining how they are tracking this information otherwise it's pointless.
 
I don't understand how they determine if you aren't using the net the "right" way? Looking for high traffic only using one port (i.e. torrents)? Or are they going to say since your traffic is high you must be illegally downloading? I have 4 people in the house and sometimes 4 streams of Netflix going at once. What are the grounds here? What about files I put in the cloud so I can download them later? Each ISP needs to release a statement to every customer explaining how they are tracking this information otherwise it's pointless.

They have some way of knowing. You can already get "Notice of Copyright Infringement" notifications from your ISP with the exact name, size, time, etc of the file you downloaded.
 
I'm not taking sides but, if you keep downloading stuff after six warnings from your ISP, your stupid ass deserves whatever you get. :D

really. and what about the false positives that you have to pay to challenge? what about the amount of error? what about the fact that they have identified PRINTERS as the one downloading stuff... what about false positives?

seems to me that its not entirely a specific persons stupid ass that is the problem here.
 
They have some way of knowing. You can already get "Notice of Copyright Infringement" notifications from your ISP with the exact name, size, time, etc of the file you downloaded.

Those come from copyright notices served on the isp by a copyright holder. A lot of torrents are tracked, they log the ip#s and send it to the ISP for identification (who) and action (letter).

I assume this is just an extension of that. If you're downloading illegally without encryption (and newsgroup account) you're likely to get a notice.
 
This would be a perfect opportunity for someone to begin an ISP from a local and ultimately to a national level to advertise themselves as nothing more than a dumb pipe provider. Period. End of Story.

All they would have to do is say, you pay for certain levels of bandwidth on a tier program and that's it. We wouldn't give out any personal info to advertisers. Any data is held for 3 days maximum for customer service purposes and QA. All IP's get a 1 week rotation and short of an actual specific search warrant, no casual law enforcement requests will be answered. Also all data is treated the same, no packet sniffing/probing, no content shuffling, nothing. All data is equal.

How far do you think this would go?
 
This is stupid for so many reasons.

#1 Who gets to blow the whistle? What is considered piracy to them? A YouTube with a song in the background possibly?

#2 How can avoid this from being used maliciously? If I wanna be a dick to someone, I can download 6 different movies or songs while said person is away.

#3 What will this accomplish anyway? If you get booted from your ISP, you will either switch ISPs, or get the ISP under someone else name. Then you'll likely setup a proxy and encrypt everything you have to hell and back.
 
I think this will go nowhere. Cable companies are not going to want to enforce this, let alone cut off subscribers and the associated backlash.

IIRC, there was just an article as well about a judge saying unsecured wireless networks are okay. So you've got one hand saying unsecured is fine while the other says 6 and your out.

I hope cable companies get sued for mistaken letters and/or cutoff's. That would put an end to this real fast.
Yeah, no kidding.
 
This would be a perfect opportunity for someone to begin an ISP from a local and ultimately to a national level to advertise themselves as nothing more than a dumb pipe provider. Period. End of Story.

All they would have to do is say, you pay for certain levels of bandwidth on a tier program and that's it. We wouldn't give out any personal info to advertisers. Any data is held for 3 days maximum for customer service purposes and QA. All IP's get a 1 week rotation and short of an actual specific search warrant, no casual law enforcement requests will be answered. Also all data is treated the same, no packet sniffing/probing, no content shuffling, nothing. All data is equal.

How far do you think this would go?

Big Corp would buy them out or use their lobbying powers to force them into closure.
 
I think this will go nowhere. Cable companies are not going to want to enforce this, let alone cut off subscribers and the associated backlash

This is my experience. I personally have not had any warnings, nor do I know anyone who has. It's not in the provider's best interest to impose on their customers. Because whether they go to another provider, or just get cut off, they are losing their customer.

That being said, though, I better get my printer a lawyer...
 
This is what's going to happen:

Your dad downloads metallica from itunes.
The system misunderstands the download as piracy.
ISP issues a strike and a letter, unfortunately the letter goes to the wrong address.
This happens 6 times in a row.
Your Internet gets cut off.
Your dad calls his ISP and gets no where for days.
Your dad cancels service, can't get service from any other ISP.
It's now weeks since you last played Diablo 3.

Good luck with that.

Not sure if serious or just stupid.
 
If the penalty for the 6th strike is simply having your internet disconnected, I don't really see the problem from a legal stand point because they aren't suing you or anything like that. They provide a service, they put conditions on that service, if you breach those conditions they reserve the right to disconnect you.

Even if you have a judge that says "you don't have to secure your wireless" I don't see why the ISP can't say "if you don't secure your wireless we'll refuse to serve you". If they then turn around and try and take you to court over copyright infringement, then yes, you could play the unsecured wireless card, but as far as them disconnecting you from their service, isn't it at their discretion whether or not they want to keep you connected or not?
 
This is my experience. I personally have not had any warnings, nor do I know anyone who has. It's not in the provider's best interest to impose on their customers. Because whether they go to another provider, or just get cut off, they are losing their customer.

That being said, though, I better get my printer a lawyer...

It's a fear thing, the MPAA/RIAA are probably paying the ISPs more than they'd be losing from people getting cut off, with the idea of spreading fear to the consumers that they might get cut off, thus reducing the incentive to pirate.

At least that's how I see it. I doubt the ISPs themselves give a flying fuck about copyright infringement themselves, they must be getting some incentive from the MPAA/RIAA, either in the form of money or agreements not to take legal action against the ISPs for whatever reason.
 
For the economy that is damaged this plan will work to fix everything that is broke. For shame on everyone here complaining your nothing but a "kleptomaniac pirate" looking for his next fix.

"Remember your poor because you pirate!"
 
For the economy that is damaged this plan will work to fix everything that is broke. For shame on everyone here complaining your nothing but a "kleptomaniac pirate" looking for his next fix.

"Remember your poor because you pirate!"
Yea cause preventing people from getting on the internet will boost the economy? Because the music or movies you didn't buy are not funding the big corporations who want to sell you DVDs and Blu-Rays that comes with commercials before the movie starts. Or the music CD that comes with the one song you wanted, but got all the other songs for a price you can't argue with.

The internet supplies more jobs then anything the MPAA/RIAA can supply combined. Cutting people off is not a solution, at least not a good one.
 
Well if you get 5 strikes and keep pirating...I think YOU are the one to blame for being an idiot. Seriously, I think 5(or is it 6 and the next is getting cut off?) warnings are enough.
 
As long as there is some way to ARGUE a strike... I'm not saying the Idiots that are downloading should be let off - but like others said. dead people / printers / people without computers/internet have been supposedly identified by the mpaa/riaa for copyright infringement.

How would you deal with the Situation of being accused of downloading something if there was no arbitration/way to argue?

Axe
 
In the coming months the Center for Copyright Information (CCI) will start to track down online ‘pirates’ as part of an agreement all major US Internet providers struck with the MPAA and RIAA.


How the hell can they track down people that are using encryption and a VPN or highly anon proxy? Are they just assuming that if you have a constant download you are pirating?

It seems to me like they are more interested in going after the soccer moms that don't know how to do it right than the REAL pirates.

I also think usenet is going to make a come back here in the near future.

For example, in civil copyright infringement lawsuits the burden of proof is on the copyright holder, but the six-strikes scheme turns this around. In other words, there is no presumption of innocence.

That is the biggest thing I have a problem with.
 
Yea cause preventing people from getting on the internet will boost the economy? Because the music or movies you didn't buy are not funding the big corporations who want to sell you DVDs and Blu-Rays that comes with commercials before the movie starts. Or the music CD that comes with the one song you wanted, but got all the other songs for a price you can't argue with.

The internet supplies more jobs then anything the MPAA/RIAA can supply combined. Cutting people off is not a solution, at least not a good one.

Six strikes and your out, ya blew it! followed buy a deserving punishment. These people can't play ball buy the frickin rules ...OUT! Don't be foolish and support these homeland terrists Urbana-Champaign on destroying the economy.
:p
 
I've had to call biz customers regarding copyright complaints. My fav was calling the owner of the business, and letting her know we received a copyright infringement notice from the porn industry! :p I so wanted to list the titles in question, but I couldn't bring myself to do it to her. eheh....
 
Im gonna gather up 6-10 friends and make up my own policies and rules and laws too. Its always cool to be pushed around by agencies/organizations that have no official governmental capacity in the least. Line up the lawyers now.

You will need >$10 Billion also
 
The "methods" to check your downloads (through your IP) are flimsy at best. I used a similar "check" and it told me that I've downloaded some relatively older Hollywood movies dubbed in Italian and Dutch...Why the flying f**k would I download Hollywood movies dubbed in a language I only know the basics of (Italian) and another which I have no idea of at all (Dutch)?
 
If the penalty for the 6th strike is simply having your internet disconnected, I don't really see the problem from a legal stand point because they aren't suing you or anything like that. They provide a service, they put conditions on that service, if you breach those conditions they reserve the right to disconnect you.

That is true. I guess there is very little that can be done. Although I won't be surprised if someone tries to sue because they feel they didn't breach service conditions. But, even still, it probably won't go anywhere.
 
Just curious here, but if its not in our ISP agreement, could something be done about it?(nothing to do with downloading illegal stuff just a straight up question)
 
Back
Top