UK ISP Says No To Music Industry Pressure 70
siloko sends us to the BBC for the story of one ISP standing up to the music industry. (But note that this ISP is one of the ones said to have worked with Phorm on plans to track customers' surfing.) "The head of one of Britain's biggest internet providers has criticized the music industry for demanding that he act against pirates. Charles Dunstone of Carphone Warehouse, which runs the TalkTalk broadband service, is refusing. He said it is not his job to be an internet policeman."
Re:Love the guilt laden language they use... (Score:1, Informative)
That said, they do have the politicians from both of the major parties in their pocket and currently involved in a competition to see who can out-do each other in terms of linking file-sharing to some "despicable act".
Talk Talk: bit torrent throttlers (Score:3, Informative)
Phorm (Score:2, Informative)
Perhaps if the BPI and friends weren't so stupid and greedy, this situation would have never arisen? There is a discussion to be had concerning renumeration for "artists" or anyone who traditionally relies on royalties as a major part of their income. I see no reason middlemen like the BPI, RIAA and friends should be relevant to that discussion.
Re:Neutrality? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Talk Talk: bit torrent throttlers (Score:3, Informative)
They're going for publicity here - good for them. I don't think they're really standing up to anything.. ISPs are reluctant to do the kind of thing the BPI is asking without a court order anyway, so it's all noise right now.
If the government tried to legislate that ISPs are effectively censors of the internet there would be a bit of a stink. Not least from the ISPs themselves who could suddenly become liable if illegal downloads/kiddie porn/etc. were found on their networks.. at the moment they're no more liable than the post office or british telecom are for these things.
Re:Amazed (Score:3, Informative)
The weaker part is getting the paedophiles[0] to register their email addresses, in the same way as they have to register their physical address. We all know it's easy to create new email addresses, but the point here is that for said paedophile, creating / using a new email address becomes an offense (or at least a cause for investigation) in itself, in the same way that registering one postal address and being found to be living at another would be. The assumption is that they wouldn't need a new non-registered address unless they were planning to do something wrong.
It's not a perfect analogy, but it seems to me a pretty reasonable attempt to do something, involving the right people - users of web sites and admins of web sites - without stomping all over everyone else's use of the Internet.
[0] For whatever definition of that is in the measures. Not all paedophiles are on the Sex Offenders Register, and not everyone on the Sex Offenders Register is a paedophile.
Re:Eh, whatever. (Score:2, Informative)
Of course, the (secret) list of blocked sites, maintained by an organisation called the IWF [iwf.org.uk], now includes other things as well as child porn, such as "racial abuse". If the government decided to have a crackdown on file sharing they could easily force ISPs to add other sites, such as (for example) the Pirate Bay, to the banned list.
Re:Love the guilt laden language they use... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Eh, whatever. (Score:2, Informative)
My isp http://www.aaisp.net.uk/ [aaisp.net.uk] has not been forced by the government to do any such thing.
Re:Eh, whatever. (Score:3, Informative)
The link that you gave does not state that any blocking is taking place, it simply serves as a focus where complaints can be sent. In fact, the page showing the 'relationship' between the IWF and the police is blank! Similarly, the page showing the relationship with the Government simply gives information on those politicians who support the IWF. As far as I understand it, there is no legal remit for ISPs to monitor the content of your internet traffic in the UK. It can be done for individual cases where the police or relevant agency can obtain a warrant suitably authorised under current legal and judicial rules.
Re:Love the guilt laden language they use... (Score:2, Informative)
Oh, and IANAL.