Big Six UK ISPs Capitulate To Music Industry 317
Barence writes "Britain's six leading internet providers have signed a Government-led agreement to stamp out illegal music file sharing. The six providers — BT, Virgin Media, Orange, Tiscali, Sky and Carphone Warehouse — will implement a series of measures against those found to be file sharing. Offenders may find their internet connection is throttled, or may even have their traffic 'filtered' to prevent media files from being downloaded. The ISPs are reportedly reluctant to impose the BPI's preferred 'three strikes and you're out' approach of cutting off users' broadband connections."
What do you want to bet... (Score:5, Interesting)
No...there's no hidden agenda here from BPI...
This will cause encrypted darknets to flourish which will cause a faster downward spiral due to the whole 'Pedo Menace'.
Re:This should be good. (Score:5, Interesting)
But they're not planning to sue anyone, just send them "menacing" [theregister.co.uk] letters...
I have to admit to being rather surprised the ISPs have agreed to this - I like The Register's take on why they might have done so.
As long as the onus is on them to prove you did it (Score:1, Interesting)
... and isn't on you to prove you didn't after they've throttled or cut your connection , then I don't have a problem with it. I have little sympathy with the bleating from the p2p boys who'll whine about freedom to share as they please. Sorry lads , but someone had to spend time and money for that music or film to be created , theres no good reason you should get it for free. If you're too tight to pay for it , tough luck, thats your problem.
Re:This is the way we're all headed (Score:5, Interesting)
And then we'll all just use TOR.
[Matrix] What good is an Onion Router Mr. CastrTroy if it can not exit? [/Matrix]
You can bet that if this trend continues they'll be able to cover all the major trunk points and any Tor endpoints that are unchecked at that point will be highly noticeable.
Re:This is the way we're all headed (Score:5, Interesting)
There will always be a grey market for this sort of stuff. My ISP recently started blocking access to Bittorrent trackers. Solution? I signed up for an $8 per month SSH tunnel account that has a SOCKS proxy, so I just tunnel all my tracker communications through there. If for some reason I need to hit a specific website, then I do the same.
Besides - all it takes is for the issue to be important enough and for 1 ISP to offer the better service, and people will flock there. Once the ISP's realize that though it's smaller on a per payment basis, that the general Internet using public has more money to fling around than the recording industry, then they'll ease up.
thank you music industry (Score:5, Interesting)
for giving developers a reason to build even hardier file sharing aps
it was easy to shut down napster: cut off the head
you had to poison morpheus, limewire, etc. with phony files
then emule and bittorrent proved immune to being shut down and poisoned. so now you have to go to the carriers and put the burden on them to search for file sharing patterns
the next step in the war is to build apps that obfuscate their activity. make it look like http form requests. make it look like smtp traffic. randomize ips, obfuscate ports, etc.
that's all your effort results in, dear music industry: stronger, hardier weeds that you can never kill
you lose. you just don't know it yet
legions of poor, music hungry teenagers: 3
hired guns of the music industry: 0
you're dying music industry. please just get dead already please
Re:The real issue (Score:5, Interesting)
...the record companies have essentially got the ISP's to do their dirty work for them...
That's probably not the case, at least beyond the face of it.
There seems to be a growing desire on the part of the ISP to stem the tide of locally hosted content on the internet. They can't censor servers they don't control, and would much prefer their customers were consumers, rather than providers (or redistributors), of content.
Switch! (Score:5, Interesting)
Guys, seriously, who here still uses one of the big six ISPs by *choice*?!
It's time to switch [adsl24.co.uk] ISPs [enta.net]
The difference in service is staggering.
I'm gonna be emailing my ISP to thank them for not signing up to this new scheme.
Disclaimer: I don't work for adsl24 or entanet, nor do I get paid for directing you there. I'm just a very happy customer
http://adsl24.co.uk/broadband_home.php [adsl24.co.uk] - take a look, you won't be disappointed
ISP?... (Score:5, Interesting)
This isn't about ISPs bending to the will of the various media associations - it's about ISPs trying to position themselves to deliver content and ensure _THEIR_ content is the content being delivered. ISPs should be prohibited from being in any business other than providing internet service because, in becoming content providers as well, they are increasingly acting in anti-competitive ways (if you think illegal p2p traffic is the only traffic they're manipulating, then you haven't been paying attention...).
Re:FILTER HOW ?? (Score:3, Interesting)
In fact, Carphone Warehouse (aka TalkTalk) is already doing that. I can get 200-400kB/s on http downloads, but only maybe 1-4kB/s on any traffic on non-standard ports (ssh or p2p etc).
And yes, of course it is just a method to clamp down on customers who actually use the bandwidth they paid for - the "piracy" argument is merely a very convenient justification for the ISPs.
Re:Filtering/inspecting... (Score:5, Interesting)
Filtering/inspecting traffic implies taking responsibility implies getting lawsuits directed at ISPs for users' content.
That's exactly what I was thinking. Doesn't this strip them of their "safe harbor" status? Of course, they don't have to fear the media companies that they're trying to help. Technically, the MAFIAA could now sue the ISPs, but in order to get the ISP's assistance in filtering, they've probably offered some sort of covenant not to sue.
However, there must be some business with deep pockets that's taking a loss from unauthorized copying/illegal activity that would love to bite the ISP's hand off now that they're not offering a content-neutral network. Any suggestions?
How about the government sues the ISPs for allowing VoIP calls where terrorism is discussed? Since they're no longer content-neutral, then they should be filtering for and preventing that. And because they're not, bad things costing billions have happened that are directly attributable to the ISP carrying such content...
(Yes, I realize that's not what we'd actually want the ISPs to do. The point is to show the ISP the error of their ways. Once they start filtering certain content, they lose safe harbor, and are liable for not filtering all other sorts of things. Their only viable choice is to return to content neutrality.)
Re:This is the way we're all headed (Score:3, Interesting)
You can bet that if this trend continues they'll be able to cover all the major trunk points and any Tor endpoints that are unchecked at that point will be highly noticeable.
And finally freenet will become worthwhile.
Re:Don't. (Score:2, Interesting)
What's more, a lot of it is musically educational too! Take The Mod Archive [modarchive.com], where you can download modules. You can open them up in a tracker and see the notes go by right before your eyes. That caught my interest a few years ago and I've been learning to make music myself since then.
Re:Don't. (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm an old guy, so I pretty much already have the vast majority of "my music" on CDs, ripped to ogg files. Anything new I come across these days that actually interests me will more often than not be a bootleg. Should something come up that should want to purchase, I'll do my damnedest to find it on ebay, or in a pawn shop, before I'll enrich those SOB's coffers.
Now get off my lawn!
Re:Switch! (Score:2, Interesting)
Look up WBC (Wholesale Broadband Connect), and/or Datastream.
My understanding is that BT owns the last mile, then passes the traffic directly from the exchanges (in the case of datastream), or from the aggregation points (WBC), directly to the ISP's network.
ie, they don't get to fiddle with my traffic.
Re:The Music Industry's Problem (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:This is the way we're all headed (Score:5, Interesting)
QCompson shows something that some businesses still haven't accepted - there will always be a way around the system. When Napster was taken down, they thought that it was all taken care of but they were wrong, since the use of Guetella shot off the chart. (for you chronologically anal folks, i know development of the listed software is quite not in order, but common use of it and the popularity of it is.) There was Kazaa and the FastTrack network, teh wonderful world of DC++, ed2k, and BitTorrent, which I find to be amazing technology by itself. ISPs are finding ways to slow down the connections (which is sad really, since the BT Protocol is used in many nets where only *legal content* is shared.) ASAIK every major bittorrent client now supports encryption, and if ISPs break through that, somone will develop a way around it. We might reach a point one day when FreeNet is the one way around our own ISPs.
This all makes me wonder what the Internet is. We know of the reason behind its origins, and in the 90s it became this world network created on the basis of digital anarchy in a sense. What do people think the final outcome will be in the end? Just another stream of knowledge limited by the government or something more still? I'm curious on what people think.
Re:As long as the onus is on them to prove you did (Score:2, Interesting)
I get modded the same way whenever this topic comes up. People keep insisting that there needs to be a new way to sell music, one based on sharing and often on voluntary payments. They neglect that under the current laws, anyone is perfectly able to begin selling their music under such a model. Yet no-one does. What these Flamebait modders are demanding is a change in law to reduce options in the market place by eliminating the possibility of the older business model, thus forcing their model. And they demand this in the perverted name of Freedom.
Now all this said, the point made earlier about proving guilt was correct. This doesn't look like it is the case that someone must prove you guilty before suspending your account. It seems that you must prove your innocence (how?) when you are suspended by your ISP (and realistically, that just means that a program somewhere has decreed you are guilty. Good luck persuading them that their software is incorrect - they probably didn't even write it themselves, just installed something given to them by the *AA). And suspension from the Internet is a ridiculously disproportionate response in any case.
Re:Switch! (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Dodge THIS (Score:1, Interesting)
I read this comment without noting the date at the beginning.
I thought this was a cut & paste from the BBC website.
Is that not a pretty good comment on the state of today's society?
Re:Carphone Warehouse? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Dodge this... (Score:2, Interesting)
The article is a bit misleading though in that the crucial word in the above summary is "may". The ISP's have agreed they will send out warning letters, but not blocking and throttling (although most the ISPs listed already employ some throttling of heavy users at peak times already).
Re:This is the way we're all headed (Score:2, Interesting)
That's borderline racketeering: "Nice criminal record/livelihood you got here. It would be a real shame if something were to happen to it." Essentially, the media industry is saying that they'll magnanimously overlook you in their litigation campaign for a fee, even if they have no evidence against you.
Re:Dodge this... (Score:4, Interesting)
So i guess if you encrypt everything, even if you are 100% legal you will be falsely accused, retaliated against, and perhaps have a civil case you can file?
Or will they just fall back on the fine print in their contracts where the ISP can pretty much do what ever they please, anytime they want?
Re:This is the way we're all headed (Score:3, Interesting)
I didn't realise that Dizzee was completely independent (not my sot of music, though the wife likes it). That is fascinating that he's become so successful without any major backing and turns on the head the argument that only successful artists can turn "indie".
Is there an official Dizzee position on file sharing? Since you seem to be positing that file sharing has led to his success and produces a revenue stream through performance, is distribution encouraged, tolerated or frowned upon. Presumably it is to be preferred if people pay for the music, but do you take the stand of, for instance, Jonathan Coulton where tracks are available to share legally and the assumption is that if you enjoy it enough you will support the artist financially through buying recordings in physical (or even download) form, at concerts or by buying colouring books (gotta love that JoCo).
Are the recordings under standard copyright or released under a Creative Commons license. It seems to be that Dizzee is in a position of influence (top-of-the-pops, mainstream artist) that NIN are not to promote to the music buying populace the concept of it being ok to share music and that artists can make a living from that rather than the traditional label routes.
If everything you say is true, Dizzee should be the poster boy of the interwebs to promote the idea that non-label, self-promotion and fan generated popularity is totally possible.
Re:This is the way we're all headed (Score:3, Interesting)
I also didn't realise the big part the internet had played in Dizzee's success (and yes, I'm a fan), but this is precisely the kind of thing the major labels would like to prevent. Independents spreading their music by word of mouth through downloads and YouTube completely borks their business model, which relies on control of popular taste.
So props to you for working with people rather than against them. Like I said, the majors don't deserve this money - give it directly to artists. Maybe not retrospectively in royalties, which could turn into an accounting nightmare, but how about upfront to pay for gear or recording time for new artists?
So Leeches are safe? (Score:3, Interesting)
Whenever I download an ISO, I always leave BT running until I have uploaded several times what I downloaded. I am talking about Linux ISOs and stuff here. I do not download what I haven't paid for. Even stealing from theiving scumbag record company executives is stealing.
If I get any such letter, I will calmly reply and ask for a formal apology. If that fails, they will get bad publicity. Users come to me all the time at work and ask for reccomendations. At the moment, my advice is just keep away from AOL and TalkTalk. I would need to expand that.
I am also sure that the local press would love the story...