AT&T to Help MPAA Filter the Internet?

Save the Internet writes "Ars Technica is reporting that the MPAA is trying to convince major ISPs to do content filtering. Now, merely wanting it is one thing, but the more important point is that 'AT&T has agreed to start filtering content at some mysterious point in the future.' We're left to wonder about the legal implications of that, but given that AT&T already has the ability to wiretap everything for the NSA, it was only a matter of time before they found a way to profit from it, too."

I would just love to see...

[msauve]

ISPs burn themselves by getting into content filtering. Force them make a choice between "common carrier" status, where they aren't responsible for the traffic they carry, and being subject to suit over delivering damaging traffic, like viruses and DOS attacks.

The winners in other categories are...

[The Ancients]

Companies such as Endace [endace.com]. A start up from a NZ university, they've been on the Deloitte/Unlimited 50 fastest growing companies for several years (peaking at 1000% growth).

Someone has to make the product to enable this functionality, and if this goes ahead, it will prove very lucrative.

Re:Not surprising

[pilgrim23]

I am not a law expert but isn't there some provision about ATT being a common carrier that gives them certain privileges and responsibilities. The later pertaining to being not concerned with content on the lines? If ATT can filter content then does that mean she is NOT a common carrier and not allowed the benefits (easements through private property without paying rent for it, use of governmental immanent domain to gain easements, etc?

What I'm more worried about...

[phorm]

I'm not so much worried about AT&T filtering their customers' traffic... I'm not one of them, and there are often enough other choices. The problem is that this is only true if they're not filtering all the traffic that flows through their backbone, much like the recent NSA todo. If your ISP has traffic that passes through AT&T's network (or heck, uses their infrastructure), are they therefore going to be filtered as well?

Re:Prepare for boardin' by the MPAA!

[Not_Wiggins]

What stops you from using encryption? Encrypt all your traffic.

What stops you? All the people who say stupid things like "I don't care if the government watches what I'm doing... I'm not doing anything illegal and they'll catch more bad guys!"

You need the complicity of these people and their willingness to encrypt stuff that doesn't really need to be encrypted (say, like google searches for stock information).

But, let's say that one was able to get a bunch of Joe Sixpacks to start encrypting traffic that wasn't of some deemed dubious nature. All it would take is a threat letter from an ISP to the effect of: "We see that you're sending encrypted packets on our network consistently. We have a policy against such activity, so you must not encrypt it or you'll be banned!"

Can an ISP really ban encrypted traffic?

No.

Might Joe Sixpack believe it?

Sure.

He'd turn it off (see previous erroneous logic about giving up privacy) and leave only the "trouble-makers" who could be dropped without a loss of revenue. Heck, the ISP might even make money from the MPAA for such actions.

Hmmm... re-reading this response, I think I have a tinge too much "tin foil hat" mixed in, but I think the general gist stands: it would be nearly impossible to get average people to collude without strong motivation to do so, and I just don't see from where that motivation would stem. 8/