Big Six UK ISPs Capitulate To Music Industry

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."

Dodge this...

apt-get install libopenssl :-P

Re:Dodge this...

Easy - If your connection has a high ratio of uploads compared to other users on the network (or meets some other arbitrary criteria), your connection class is set to "suspect" and any traffic not identifiable by the filtering system is blocked or throttled.

This is the way we're all headed

It's only a matter of time before typing www.piratebay.org into your URL bar produces "Sorry, this site is blocked for content infringement" on ALL of our browsers (since we all ultimately answer to our ISP's).

Re:This is the way we're all headed

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.

Re:This is the way we're all headed

1. Start an internet service provider business
2. Block access to anything you feel like blocking
3. Start an SSH tunnel service
4. Profit!

Re:This is the way we're all headed

see, people ARE willing to pay for music and movies. they're willing to pay eight dollars a month for music and movies.

frankly, that sounds like a fair deal to me.

Re:This is the way we're all headed

I didn't pay THEM more. I paid a third party more. Having that SSH account is pretty handy.

Re:This is the way we're all headed

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

It makes me think of West Germany. I was watching "The Lives of Others" the other day, and one scene made me realize just how crazy things were. They analyzed the output of a typewriter, and figured out the make and model of the typewriter, and then they proceeded to ask who in the country had one of these typewriters. Apparently none were registered? Registering typewriters? Seriously. Treating a method of disseminating information as a controlled item. It seems we are headed in that direction. Where the governments want to be able to control what we talk about, and with whom we talk.

Re:This is the way we're all headed

The same is true today for colour laser printers. I know its supposed to be used to track counterfeiters but how long will it be until they use it to find someone printing leaflets trying to arrange a protest or even just those with differing views. I know they're scared of terrorists/freedom/their own shadows/people having free will but all this monitoring & tracking is getting rediculous.

It wont last... either they'll go stupidly too far until it self-destructs around them or the people will get so sick of it that we'll have a revolution but I just wish they'd hurry up and do it.

Filtering/inspecting...

Filtering/inspecting traffic implies taking responsibility implies getting lawsuits directed at ISPs for users' content.

Re:Filtering/inspecting...

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.)

This should be good.

You thought watching SCO trials was fun, you ain't seen nothing yet. There's going to be some fireworks over this one when they sue the wrong person.

Re:This should be good.

There's going to be some fireworks over this one when they sue the wrong person.

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.

What do you want to bet...

...that surprisingly the ISPs won't distinguish between copyrighted files and independent artists?

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'.

UK to consult on alaws to curb illicit filesharing

The UK Government has released a consultation into potential legislation aimed at curbing illicit filesharing on the net. Several of the legislative options on the table are worrying, and mirror schemes being discussed in various national and international fora. They include streamlining the legal process to require ISPs to provide personal data relating to an IP address, handing responsibility for taking action against illicit filesharers to a third party body, or requiring ISPs to take action against users themselves or to install filtering equipment to block infringing content.

At the same time a "Memorandum of Understanding", negotiated behind-the-scenes with strong influence from the Government, between the UK's six major ISPs (Virgin Media, Sky, Carphone Warehouse, BT, Orange and Tiscali) and the British Phonographic Industry and the Motion Picture Association. Signatories endorse five principles in the MoU:

1. That a joint industry solution is the best way forward
2. That they will work together to educate consumers about why illicit filesharing is wrong
3. That making content available in a wide range of user-friendly formats is important
4. That they will engage in a 3 month trial to send letters to 1,000 subscribers per week suspected of downloading or uploading unlicensed, copyrighted material
5. That they will work with OfCom to identify effective measures to deal with repeat offenders

The Open Rights Group has more details [openrightsgroup.org]

Don't.

If they don't want you to listen to their music, don't. Don't download, don't listen, don't buy.

Don't stea... I mean infringe copyright :-) either. Just don't.

FILTER HOW ??

exactly how are they going to filter the connections ?

I listen to last.fm thats a music stream in mp3 of copyrighted artist it helps that last.fm (CBS rather large firm) have the license so how is my ISP going to know that ?

this looks like just as excuse to cut out people who do file sharing they simply will look at the large downloaders and accuse them

BPI has no technology and nor do the ISP that can differentiate between licensed and unlicensed !

regards

John Jones

The real issue

The real issue I see with this isn't so much that the ISP's are sending out warning letters - they've all stated that they're not prepared to cancel anyone's service - but that the record companies have essentially got the ISP's to do their dirty work for them.
NOW they know that the ISP's will have detailed files on every single person they find allegedly distributing copyrighted music - detailed files that means these "John doe" cases we seen in America will start turning into "John Smith" cases.

Re:The real issue

...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.

thank you music industry

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

Switch!

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?...

ISPs need to be reminded that their job is to provide internet service. Once the lines between providing access to the tubes and providing content on those tubes blurred, things were doomed to go downhill.

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...).

Carphone warehouse stance

Carphone Warehouse, a large UK ISP that operates the TalkTalk and AOl(uk) brands doesn't seem entirely enthusiastic about this [talktalkmembers.com]
In their response they say:
We will continue to fight to protect your privacy and your right to freedom of use of the Internet. What we will not do is:
* disconnect your service or slow the speed of your connection
* monitor your traffic
* divulge your details to content companies (unless forced to do so by a court)
Some content companies are pushing for changes in the law to force us to do these things - we will vigorously fight any such changes in the law.
and they list some helpful excuses:
Q: What would cause me to receive a letter?
If the content companies send TalkTalk an IP address that matches to your broadband connection then they may send you a letter. However, there are many reasons why you might have done anything wrong and the claim unfounded:
* The content that is being offered for upload may actually be being shared legally
* The content company may have made a mistake in identifying the IP address
* It may be someone else in the household that offered the content for upload
* It may be that someone 'hijacked' or 'piggybacked' on your wi-fi connection
and add:
Q: Does the content company have my details to pursue me?
If a copyright infringement has actually occurred content company have some legal powers to attempt to prosecute you. To do this they would need to know your details (e.g. name, address), which they do not currently have. TalkTalk have and we will continue to refuse to divulge your details to them or any other content companies. However, a content company may seek a court order requiring them to divulge your details. TalkTalk will vigorously fight on your behalf to resist this, but they feel they should let you know that they cannot guarantee that they will be successful in protecting your details.
A least they look like they are trying.

Re:Precedent

Next thing you know, they'll be outlawing alcohol

Whoa bad idea... last time the US tried that we ended up with NASCAR!