LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksDecides 2012 is too long to wait to start obliging ISPs to act on illegal peer-to-peer activity.
Read more.
Decides 2012 is too long to wait to start obliging ISPs to act on illegal peer-to-peer activity.
Read more.
Personally, I cannot wait for a new government! Nothing I would like better than to see that smug grin wiped off Brown's face. Lets face it though what ever government we do get will rapidly forget the "people" elected them so setting policies the majority of people like, rather than a small group of lobbyist for vested interests think.
Isn't that what the govt are doing? Preventing illegal file sharing is in the interests of the vast majority - it's only a small group who want to take without providing the means for more content to be produced.Originally Posted by oolon
I would rather they use the resources to fix infrastructure first and misselling of "up to" broadband services given the fact that it is inherently much difficult to remove illegal p2p sharing.
Andeh13 (25-08-2009),Breezey (25-08-2009),CAT-THE-FIFTH (25-08-2009),chuckskull (26-08-2009)
Actually no I don't, I think the majority of the public does not care, and the rest is against it. There is never any balance in these new laws. If it also went to do say, it was ok to rip your CD for your own use on your mp3 player. I might agree. Its only Stick Stick with these things, never any carrot.
If record company sold me the right to have a piece of music in a non transferable way however allowed me to have it in any format I liked, and improved formats in the future then it might be worth buying. Would solve the thief of CDs problem, not that its a problem for the record companies. Thats the point really, they want us to have an inferior product for more money, with more restrictions than that currently available, so strange people say no.
However, if they are going to force the ISPs to police this, their costs are going to go up. Which means we are going to have to pay more for the internet. This will be another example of the law abiding getting punished for something they haven't done - much like the stupidly restrictive copy protection on games.
I didn't say they cared, but it's in their interest. The majority of the public don't care which particular method is used to treat sewage, but it's in their interest to have one that works. Likewise it's in the public's interest to have a working market system where people are paid for goods on merit, and there's a link between customer usage and profit, than the alternative system of people taking what they want without paying, and either resulting in no more creative industry or a system where we all pay the same, regardless of whether we're going to use a product, and developers get fixed pay pretty much regardless of innovation or quality.
No thanks, I prefer our market system, so would the vast majority, hence the govt is acting for the majority.
Not as much as we'd have to pay if we all had to pay for content we don't use.
Funny that only a few weeks ago "Lord" Mandelson was a tech virgin, knew next to nothing. Then the moment he gets back from his holiday (did i forget to mention he was staying in a villa owned by a top media exec, who was there ofc) suddenly Internet Piracy is his number 1 concern!
As a constant reader of techdirt.com i'll say this:
Filesharing does not need to be policed like this, the major industries simply need to learn to cash in on it. As has been proved many times by bands such as NIN and Radiohead that sharing music online can make you alot more money than not (For those who havent heard about it, both share their music on bittorent themselves, get more people to listen to it, then cash in by offering bonus features to people who buy etc)
**Edit**
Ok so the above statement is true for the music and movie industries mostly, i'll agree that game piracy is a bigger issue as developers are trying to find better digital distrobution methods and are actually trying, they shouldn't be punished by piracy. The problem there isn't one of bad business model but one of high pricing.
Im 110% behind systems like steam and xbox live, that allow you to just access any game you want from them, at a cheap and easily accessable price. Steam is great for this as it allows both a combat to piracy and good value for customers.
Last edited by Arthran; 25-08-2009 at 11:02 AM. Reason: adding
Biscuit (25-08-2009)
It's about time that something is doen about this. Hopefully if this reduces the number of pirates developers will change their priorities and give more thought to PC ports. And to all of oyu pirates out there, STOP!
The principle is sort-of sound, that is, filesharing of copyrighted material is bad & wrong & illegal. It's just the difficulties of implementing a fair & effective policing policy that's a total minefield.
[
I would be in favour of really opressive, crule and unusual punishments on filesharing on one condition which is, Sort out reasonable lengths of copyright so that content goes into the public domain after 2 years or 3 years. I simply cannot understand why anybody should expect to live off a piece of work for life, the original idea behind copyright was that it was a limited period of exclusive rights not that it would go on for longer than the average persons life time.
I buy an awful lot of content, games, DVD's and music but I am giving up DVD's and only buying non RIAA/BPI member music (quite easy because I am into hosue music). I am simply never going to buy content again unil these issues are properly and fairly resolved. Which of course they never will be.
HEXUS FOLDING TEAM It's EASY
come on guys, if you have a brain cell you would know ISP can't do swat on illegal p2p sharing...come on, this is not gonna clean up illegal anything. just an act. nothing more.
its like asking isp to banning inappropriate sites for children - come on.
And thats the whole thing behind it.
Until copyright and IP is fixed, people will look at things like TV shows and say:
"why is it that if i miss a show on TV, then download it on my pc to watch later, im suddenly a criminal. That show is available on my tv, i should be able to download and watch it on my pc"
Which is a fair point. Lets say your a fan of star trek. Now voyager plays on V1 on virgin, but what if V1 is playing series 4 and is up to episode 10, but you wanted to catch up. By downloading a copy of episodes 7 and 8, your illegal. Yet if you was lucky enough to be watching tv a week or 2 ago, you'd have seen it.
I guess what im ranting about is thus:
Personal use of content that really ought to be in the public domain (in a certain way) shouldn't be a big problem.
The problem should be with people making money off of things they don't own.
Downloading an old TV show thats not displayed anymore shouldn't be an issue, because its something that was already displayed on tv to the public. Recording TV shows to VHS or DVD is legal from your home based on fair use, so should this be.
People will say "but what about the dvd sales of these series's", to which i will say: Make the extra's worth it, the quality on dvd vs downloading is worth it already. But should i spend my time and effort downloading all of Xfiles, or should i pay £120+ on a dvd boxed set that i will watch once?
This all comes down to market. If Fox offered a service to watch any of their shows, new or old live for a low fee, many people would be interested. Which is why services like Hulu need to be over here as well and Nurtured rather than butchered!
This is totally daft, file sharing is such a small issue to the majority of the population compared to the other issues. If the ISPs have to police it, it will make osts go up (more so then they already are - costs stated in digital Britain report), it will take longer for them to upgrade our current god awful connection speeds compared to the rest of the world and longer to fix this ''up to xMbs'' selling crap they like to through at us.
As has been said, since when is the government government by lobbyists & not doing what's in the public's best interest.
1) Sort out our connection speeds/traffic shaping & the 'up too' selling regime.
2) Upgrade the infrastructure to better meet the needs of the population & bring us up to scratch with the rest of the world.
3) THEN deal with the file sharing & piracy
This government is complete joke.
Exactly. It would be great if all the creative people who spent a lot of time moaning about it would actually come up with some ideas of fairer and more effective means of policing it - everyone's assuming the people in charge are just idiots, but maybe they have considered the alternatives?
I don't agree- I think upgrading the wholesale provision of internet and the underlying infrastructure is a completely separate issue to ISPs policing content - one won't affect the other.
As has been said, the govt. is doing what's in the public's best interest, not the minority who want to get things for free.As has been said, since when is the government government by lobbyists & not doing what's in the public's best interest.
They're working on the up to, market forces have a part to play in the rest as long as their is competition - something a help-yourself system acts to prevent.1) Sort out our connection speeds/traffic shaping & the 'up too' selling regime.
Agreed, but this has got nothing to do with:2) Upgrade the infrastructure to better meet the needs of the population & bring us up to scratch with the rest of the world.
Why wait? If you can do both then you should do both. In fact the more money that goes into the economy from the reduction of piracy then the faster we can upgrade infrastructure if anything, not the slower.3) THEN deal with the file sharing & piracy
Point one. It was overturned in the EU and thus should NOT happen. ISPs are NOT libel for your actions (the old demon case in point). Same rationale as BT being held responsible for you phoning up bomb threats. Why is a CIVIL case being allowed to be treated as a CRIMINAL matter? Have the RIAA/MPIAA become a legal authority now?
Point two. Implys consistant monitoring of your line. (I believe a warrent is required for that.)
Point three. Piracy hurts the RIAA / MPIAA... NOT the artists. The artists havent got a penny out of these cases or any restitution. Cry me a river. If they did their job properly and actually supported their artists i'd have /some/ sympathy. As it is all i'm hearing is fatcats whining they dont have enough cash to buy their 3rd malibu beachhouse.
Point four. They had their chance to work with people and do a reasonable deal that would compensate the artists. They wanted fat profits instead. Now they are struggling to catch up and have no concept of a digital world. iTunes isnt perfect but its a good way to go. Personally i prefer my music in MP3 format without DRM. DRM is just a axe over your heads. Turn off the authentication and you have a pile of dead bits. MS's servers are a case in point. Sorry. I bought the file. If i want to play it via a can and string i will.
Point five. Treating your consumers as scum of the lowest order and hounding them isnt the most sensible way to go about cleaning up the gratuitous profiteering they have done for the past 10 years.
Point six. Why in a GLOBAL trading economy have trade restrictions been allowed to be put in place. Region Encoding etc. There is ZERO technical reason for this. Its just Hollywoods wim.
Meh got away from my orignal rant but hey.
Short and sweet? ISP's shouldnt be allowed to kick you off for a CIVIL matter. Criminal matters are something else and existing laws cover that. There is far too much eroding of our consumer rights with zero comeback on those that are pushing this mandate.
Ultimately... its those with cash making policy.
CAT-THE-FIFTH (25-08-2009),mmh (26-08-2009)
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
