Internet providers to begin warning customers who pirate content

[Helix]

(CNN) -- It is about to get a bit more difficult to illegally download TV shows, movies or music online.
A new alert system, rolling out over the next two months, will repeatedly warn and possibly punish people violating digital copyrights. The Copyright Alert System was announced last July and has been four years in the making.

Internet providers to begin warning customers who pirate content - CNN.com


entertainment companies will now be monitoring your download habits via your ISP.

 

[Henrin]

Many if not all those providers listed have been doing this for a few years now.

Anyway, I love how its the providers job to deal with copyright violations. :lamo

The government wants them to do it and the copyright owners want them too, but don't anyone realize the business models we are talking about are ****.

 

[Henrin]

I also just love how copyright law is restricting people from doing with their property as the see fit. Here is a wonderful fact for these companies. When you sell a product it is no longer YOURS, and therefore, you do not have control over it. Understand? Good. So get to shutting up and minding your own business.

 

[Ikari]

Internet providers to begin warning customers who pirate content - CNN.com


entertainment companies will now be monitoring your download habits via your ISP.

This really isn't the internet providers problem. The cable companies are just pissed that people found a work around their enforced local monopolies and government supported packaging.

 

[molten_dragon]

This isn't really that different from what's already in place. It still relies on content holders to try and catch people doing it, and there are plenty of ways around it. Or, just switch to a company that refuses to play along.

 

[rathi]

More blatant corruption courtesy of the power and influence wielded by large corporations. If media companies want to allege copyright infringement, they can make their case in a court of law like anyone else. The concept that they can screw with your internet simply by claiming you have done something wrong is illegal and utterly without merit. My ISP has a contract with me to deliver the internet, they are violating that if they refuse service for any reason beyond refusal to pay or court order.

 

[solletica]

Internet providers to begin warning customers who pirate content - CNN.com


entertainment companies will now be monitoring your download habits via your ISP.

Sounds like a standard right wing law--stupid and unenforceable.

 

[Helix]

Sounds like a standard right wing law--stupid and unenforceable.

i suspect they'll enforce it just fine. your ISP can determine pretty quickly if you're watching pirated shows on the sly. there's also a huge advantage in it for them : that pirated material equals a lot of bandwidth.

i don't download anything pirated. too many viruses, and too much risk. however, for what i'm paying for my connection, it pisses me off that my ISP and the entertainment cartel will be watching me like a hawk.

 

[solletica]

i suspect they'll enforce it just fine.

Please read

and get back to us.

 

[PeteEU]

i suspect they'll enforce it just fine. your ISP can determine pretty quickly if you're watching pirated shows on the sly. there's also a huge advantage in it for them : that pirated material equals a lot of bandwidth.

That is not true. In fact much of the bandwidth usage now days in the US comes from legal sources like Netflix and Hulu. Problem is not the piracy, but the lack of understanding by the content providers that we dont want to wait for our content nore do we all want to see it in the movie theatre. Piracy is worst in countries where there is limited access to content.. wonder why they pirate then...

i don't download anything pirated. too many viruses, and too much risk. however, for what i'm paying for my connection, it pisses me off that my ISP and the entertainment cartel will be watching me like a hawk.

Again not true.... there are no viruses in movies or music.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

This is so ****ing stupid.

All you have to do is watch or listen it through some online source and capture the stream with a computer program that's on your computer.

I swear.

So 'tracking that' would require a warrant. But i guess that's not what most people do, is it?

 

[Dr. Chuckles]

That is not true. In fact much of the bandwidth usage now days in the US comes from legal sources like Netflix and Hulu. Problem is not the piracy, but the lack of understanding by the content providers that we dont want to wait for our content nore do we all want to see it in the movie theatre. Piracy is worst in countries where there is limited access to content.. wonder why they pirate then...



Again not true.... there are no viruses in movies or music.

last year I remember coming across a figure that cited 65% of the data transfered over the net was dedicated to content on netflix. If true, that's rather staggering

 

[HonestJoe]

My ISP has a contract with me to deliver the internet, they are violating that if they refuse service for any reason beyond refusal to pay or court order.

You should probably carefully read that contract and associated conditions you've agreed to before acting on that assumption.

 

[OrphanSlug]

These efforts are always one step behind the game anyway, anyone ever here of a secure connect VPN? It is beyond easy to sign up some ISP, point your PC or entire home network to a VPN somewhere, set up encryption, and download at will. Plenty provide the service, for little or nothing. ISPs trying to deep packet inspect will only see encrypted trafic from an IP somewhere to another IP their client is using. And there is little that can be done about it other than shut it off. Avoids ISP throttling and trying to apply traffic type, or packet type limitations. In the end, the ISP does not know what the hell is going on and about all they can report to mommy and daddy government is a whole lot of traffic to a single IP all encrypted with no real reporting what the hell that traffic is. The harder the government tries, the more people will find ways around all of this uselessness.

 

[Helix]

That is not true. In fact much of the bandwidth usage now days in the US comes from legal sources like Netflix and Hulu. Problem is not the piracy, but the lack of understanding by the content providers that we dont want to wait for our content nore do we all want to see it in the movie theatre. Piracy is worst in countries where there is limited access to content.. wonder why they pirate then...

it's estimated that piracy accounts for over twenty percent of internet traffic. that alone is a serious incentive for ISPs to participate in the crackdown.

http://documents.envisional.com/docs/Envisional-Internet_Usage_Report-Summary.pdf

Again not true.... there are no viruses in movies or music.

lol. i've had a couple friends who were active on gnutella and bittorrent, and some of the viruses were so serious even i had trouble getting them off of their computers. i wouldn't touch those services with a forty foot cattle prod.

 

[PeteEU]

it's estimated that piracy accounts for over twenty percent of internet traffic. that alone is a serious incentive for ISPs to participate in the crackdown.

http://documents.envisional.com/docs/Envisional-Internet_Usage_Report-Summary.pdf

And it is a horse**** argument and frankly a horse**** number. ISPs, especially in the US, have for years refused to upgrade their backbone and infrastructure to a 21st century Internet and cant meet the demand of a 21st Internet. It is a classic method by ISPs who have failed or are failing to keep up in demand, to limit what you can do on the Internet connection you are paying for.

That is also why ISPs, in the US, and around the world, have attempted to put in tiered usage plans.. the pay X and then you get access to Youtube and Hotmail, pay Y and you can add ESPN online and so on model. It is their way of screwing people over and over.... Thankfully that was quickly shot down in Europe by the EU.

Targeting piracy just part of an overall strategy of failing ISPs. In the end the ISPs cant really see if you are pirating software, movies or music.. especially with bittorrent sites and trackers going to the cloud. They can see P2P traffic but quite a few software companies and even legit online streaming sources use P2P to get their content out.. because it is cheap and fast and means the content provider does not require as much bandwidth. Microsoft uses a version of P2P for example, as does Blizzard. They can of course start to sniff packets and other methods, but all that takes time and costs money and there are a lot of false positives with such methods.. and they cant do jack**** if the traffic is encrypted.

But what it boils down too is again the lack of investment. Piracy is not the only target, but also things like Hulu and Netflix and similar services will take more and more bandwidth since consumers will demand HD content.. which like it or not sucks bandwidth like no tomorrow. And that means the ISPs are fighting tooth and nail to limit content whereever they can and whenever they can. ISPs have threatened to change pricing so that the uploader like Netflix has to start to pay a premium compared to you... where do you think Netflix will get the money to pay for that? The companies are of course resisting this move big time and I hope they win.

No, what the Internet needs is more freedom. As it stands now, most piracy is because of lack of access to content. Like it or not, the world has changed since the 1980s, and there are no real borders on the Internet and that means people demand content as soon as possible. So as long as people cant get that access legally, easily and a reasonable price, then they will start to pirate. If a person loves a tv show, then he/she will do anything to get the newest episode as soon as possible, and since US TV shows take at best a week but more likely months if not years to appear overseas... then pirating these shows is huge. Now had the TV producers say let anyone rent the episode after it had aired in the US for a few bucks.. then piracy would be seriously hit. Spotify is a great example of that.. piracy of music in European countries where there was access to unlimited with commercial stream fell considerably. But then the US music companies forced Spotify to change that when they wanted to get access to the US market... so the service went from free with commercials to X number of playings per account... still with commercials of course. And guess what.. piracy went up again.

Now it seems Microsoft has made its Xbox music available for free in Windows 8.. with commercials.. that might again make priacy drop dramatically.. we shall see.

Point is.. piracy can only be fought by giving access early, cheaply and universally to content. Putting up bull**** walls between countries on the Internet due to outdated copywrite laws... will only keep piracy in business.

lol. i've had a couple friends who were active on gnutella

Gnutella has been dead and full of virus **** for almost a decade. I am still amazed that people use this very unsecure network still.

and bittorrent,

That depends on what sites you use and if you actually read the comments on torrent links.

and some of the viruses were so serious even i had trouble getting them off of their computers. i wouldn't touch those services with a forty foot cattle prod.

Any modern anti-virus system can prevent most of those. Of course if you are one of those that click yes to everything.... like my dad... the you are asking for it. But hey that keeps me busy

 

[PeteEU]

last year I remember coming across a figure that cited 65% of the data transfered over the net was dedicated to content on netflix. If true, that's rather staggering

Not really. Netflix is very popular in the US, along with other similar services. And video, especially HD quality really takes up a lot of bandwidth. And it will only get worse, because slowly.. very slowly... Netflix and similar services are spreading across the globe. Sadly Netflix and these services have one major drawback... their content is old.

 

[Helix]

And it is a horse**** argument and frankly a horse**** number. ISPs, especially in the US, have for years refused to upgrade their backbone and infrastructure to a 21st century Internet and cant meet the demand of a 21st Internet. It is a classic method by ISPs who have failed or are failing to keep up in demand, to limit what you can do on the Internet connection you are paying for.

That is also why ISPs, in the US, and around the world, have attempted to put in tiered usage plans.. the pay X and then you get access to Youtube and Hotmail, pay Y and you can add ESPN online and so on model. It is their way of screwing people over and over.... Thankfully that was quickly shot down in Europe by the EU.

Targeting piracy just part of an overall strategy of failing ISPs. In the end the ISPs cant really see if you are pirating software, movies or music.. especially with bittorrent sites and trackers going to the cloud. They can see P2P traffic but quite a few software companies and even legit online streaming sources use P2P to get their content out.. because it is cheap and fast and means the content provider does not require as much bandwidth. Microsoft uses a version of P2P for example, as does Blizzard. They can of course start to sniff packets and other methods, but all that takes time and costs money and there are a lot of false positives with such methods.. and they cant do jack**** if the traffic is encrypted.

But what it boils down too is again the lack of investment. Piracy is not the only target, but also things like Hulu and Netflix and similar services will take more and more bandwidth since consumers will demand HD content.. which like it or not sucks bandwidth like no tomorrow. And that means the ISPs are fighting tooth and nail to limit content whereever they can and whenever they can. ISPs have threatened to change pricing so that the uploader like Netflix has to start to pay a premium compared to you... where do you think Netflix will get the money to pay for that? The companies are of course resisting this move big time and I hope they win.

No, what the Internet needs is more freedom. As it stands now, most piracy is because of lack of access to content. Like it or not, the world has changed since the 1980s, and there are no real borders on the Internet and that means people demand content as soon as possible. So as long as people cant get that access legally, easily and a reasonable price, then they will start to pirate. If a person loves a tv show, then he/she will do anything to get the newest episode as soon as possible, and since US TV shows take at best a week but more likely months if not years to appear overseas... then pirating these shows is huge. Now had the TV producers say let anyone rent the episode after it had aired in the US for a few bucks.. then piracy would be seriously hit. Spotify is a great example of that.. piracy of music in European countries where there was access to unlimited with commercial stream fell considerably. But then the US music companies forced Spotify to change that when they wanted to get access to the US market... so the service went from free with commercials to X number of playings per account... still with commercials of course. And guess what.. piracy went up again.

Now it seems Microsoft has made its Xbox music available for free in Windows 8.. with commercials.. that might again make priacy drop dramatically.. we shall see.

Point is.. piracy can only be fought by giving access early, cheaply and universally to content. Putting up bull**** walls between countries on the Internet due to outdated copywrite laws... will only keep piracy in business.



Gnutella has been dead and full of virus **** for almost a decade. I am still amazed that people use this very unsecure network still.



That depends on what sites you use and if you actually read the comments on torrent links.



Any modern anti-virus system can prevent most of those. Of course if you are one of those that click yes to everything.... like my dad... the you are asking for it. But hey that keeps me busy

easy, Tex, we're on the same side. i completely agree that this is partially a cop out by ISPs to postpone upgrading networks to handle additional traffic. i also think charging by bandwidth usage is also a ****ty deal for the customer, who is already paying more than he or she should be at this point in internet evolution. the ISPs are holding back what the internet could be, and some ISPs are cable providers who are overcharging for that as well. much of the piracy is a direct result of the fact that people are charged out the ass for a package of channels that they don't even want and are shut out of the channels that they really do want, like HBO. if i could trade every sports channel that i never watch for HBO, i'd do it in a heartbeat.

as for the raw piracy numbers, it's anyone's guess how accurate the percentage is, but i'd guess that it's still significant. most of it, however, is also the industry's fault. they overcharged for CDs for years, switched recording formats multiple times so that customers had to re-purchase the same content over and over again, and the list goes on. even neat technology like on demand has been screwed up. for example, i pay for cable, and i like Sons of Anarchy. it's available on demand. one would think that i could have access to the current season so i could catch up on what netflix doesn't have yet. but i go to on demand, and there's an episode from mid season and nothing else. and even that episode expires. WTF? it's no wonder that there's so much piracy. consumers want to watch shows as they want when they want, and cable companies want to stand in the way. meanwhile, the entertainment industry is still basically trying to sue the VCR 35 years later. it's unreal.

 

[HonestJoe]

And it is a horse**** argument and frankly a horse**** number. ISPs, especially in the US, have for years refused to upgrade their backbone and infrastructure to a 21st century Internet and cant meet the demand of a 21st Internet. It is a classic method by ISPs who have failed or are failing to keep up in demand, to limit what you can do on the Internet connection you are paying for.

I'm not sure that's fair. Most bandwidth bottlenecks are between the local switch and the back of the PC. There's no point the ISPs upgrading their internal networks to top speeds if the old phone networks they're sitting on remain unchanged. That would just cost them lots of money for little or no benefit to their customers.

A "21st Century internet" would require combined commitment from industry, government and the wider public. In the UK, I'm not convinced there is enough pressure for this before all the other things we need to spend money on and I doubt the US is much different. We want the streaming movies and on-line gaming but aren't willing to make the investments to make them viable long term.

I don't see how any of that justified piracy anyway. That's just about a wider issue of ever increasing greed and expectation in the face or static or diminishing resources. Most pirated material is or would soon be available legally and not entirely unreasonable prices for optional luxury items.

 

[PeteEU]

easy, Tex, we're on the same side. i completely agree that this is partially a cop out by ISPs to postpone upgrading networks to handle additional traffic. i also think charging by bandwidth usage is also a ****ty deal for the customer, who is already paying more than he or she should be at this point in internet evolution. the ISPs are holding back what the internet could be, and some ISPs are cable providers who are overcharging for that as well. much of the piracy is a direct result of the fact that people are charged out the ass for a package of channels that they don't even want and are shut out of the channels that they really do want, like HBO. if i could trade every sports channel that i never watch for HBO, i'd do it in a heartbeat.

as for the raw piracy numbers, it's anyone's guess how accurate the percentage is, but i'd guess that it's still significant. most of it, however, is also the industry's fault. they overcharged for CDs for years, switched recording formats multiple times so that customers had to re-purchase the same content over and over again, and the list goes on. even neat technology like on demand has been screwed up. for example, i pay for cable, and i like Sons of Anarchy. it's available on demand. one would think that i could have access to the current season so i could catch up on what netflix doesn't have yet. but i go to on demand, and there's an episode from mid season and nothing else. and even that episode expires. WTF? it's no wonder that there's so much piracy. consumers want to watch shows as they want when they want, and cable companies want to stand in the way. meanwhile, the entertainment industry is still basically trying to sue the VCR 35 years later. it's unreal.

I agree.

Being an European, we are even more screwed. At least you have access to HULU and Netflix over there.. not much of that in Europe so far.. only a few countries and it is still limited by "has to be shown on national tv first" rules.

 

[PeteEU]

I'm not sure that's fair. Most bandwidth bottlenecks are between the local switch and the back of the PC. There's no point the ISPs upgrading their internal networks to top speeds if the old phone networks they're sitting on remain unchanged. That would just cost them lots of money for little or no benefit to their customers.

That is a whole other issue. The distance between the local switch/phone central and your home will define how fast a connection you have... if you are on normal phone lines. If you are on cable TV then that is not a problem and if you are on fiber optic then it is certainly not an issue.

However the problem, especially in the US.. is not the switch/phone central to the home, but in between switch/phone centrals. If companies dont upgrade their backbone then they cant meet the demand.. and that is exactly what some companies, mostly so far in the US.. are doing and have been doing. When that happens then they start to find ways to keep the bandwidth capacity they have and still take the same money for their services.. and that is done by throttling, banning services and putting caps on how much you can download.

A "21st Century internet" would require combined commitment from industry, government and the wider public. In the UK, I'm not convinced there is enough pressure for this before all the other things we need to spend money on and I doubt the US is much different. We want the streaming movies and on-line gaming but aren't willing to make the investments to make them viable long term.

Sorry but that is a cop out. Most of Scandinavia has access to 21st century internet or soon will have. Why? Because the private companies understood to invest in the fiber-optic technology from the start. The major telecommunications giant in Denmark in the 1980s (and the only one at the time and government owned but very independent) made an early call to only use fiber-optic cables in new installations on its backbone and over time replace the non fiber-optic parts. After privatisation this drive continued with an even bigger pace and since the turn of the century that investment has now turned to going with fiber-optic from the switch/phone central to the home. Sweden is even more ahead on this front. Point is, private companies invested in the technologies and are now reaping the rewards along with other competitors creating lower prices and faster connections for the average consumer.

In the UK, BT has simply not invested as it should pure and simple, especially in rural areas. But saying that, the UK has in most major cities already 21st century internet.

I don't see how any of that justified piracy anyway.

That content providers limit access to content based on nationality is wrong.

That's just about a wider issue of ever increasing greed and expectation in the face or static or diminishing resources.

Only greed here is from the content providers. In fact the artists are often screwed royally by these greedy content providers. The content providers live in the past.. pure and simple.

Most pirated material is or would soon be available legally

That is simply not true. The most pirated material is of material that is not accessible. TV shows are very popular, because they dont come to most other countries outside the US for at best.. weeks.. and more often.. many months after airing in the US. Movies has gotten better, but even here DVD releasing is idiotic and still bound by regions. Take the movie A-Team. This movie was first released on DVD in regions 5.. aka Russia... 2 to 3 weeks before it was released in the UK theatres.

and not entirely unreasonable prices for optional luxury items.

Disagree also on this. DVD prices are still quite high relative to what you get. Netflix is reasonable but the content is ancient. But it is basically irrelevant.. the DVD is dead.. people want streaming of the newest hottest tv and movies. They dont get that, so they pirate it instead.

 

[celticwar17]

**** this. Am I the only one who think the internet should be free? As long as no one is making money selling your stuff it should be fine.

 

[Stewart]

The answer to piracy is to not lock down content, the answer is to make it so easy to get your hands on legal content that it makes torrenting look like a hassle and not patronized your consumer base in the same instance. Regional pricing and releases in particular patronize consumers and DRM, I know I pirate the latest season of Downton Abbey because it takes so long to get here, not until April next year. On demand for TV and other digitial mediums is the way of the future, the longer the Content creators stick to failing methods the harder the fall. Everyone wants to protect their pot of gold (paytv and free to air) but it is rapidly eroding.

Spotify, Hulu, Netflix and Steam to a degree(still has regional pricing) are services that come to mind. Steam has revitalized PC gaming.
It's the future....... stupid.

 

[Deuce]

This is so ****ing stupid.

All you have to do is watch or listen it through some online source and capture the stream with a computer program that's on your computer.

I swear.

So 'tracking that' would require a warrant. But i guess that's not what most people do, is it?

Um. Data streamed from some online source... can still get tracked. Your ISP still has to deliver that data to you. If it came from an illegal source, they can figure that out. If it came from Netflix or Itunes, they never cared in the first place.

 

[Tonawanda]

I believe that this thread started off with (if my translation is correct) "Can you believe that those no good so and so’s are trying to keep me from downloading copywrited material using my bought and paid for internet service to police me”. It’s got a bit technical after that.

I do agree that the internet providers are making lots of $ with a limited and somewhat defective service. And, yes, no one likes to be watched or told what they can or cannot do. And yes, the media companies should have to prove it.

I also have grabbed some stuff floating around the net. As a matter of fact, I am currently downloading streaming audio from the WABC radio station utilizing RarmaRadio. It’s nice being able to transfer the programming to an iPod and listen to it when its more convenient And since it is not commercial free, I don’t feel particularly guilty if its copywrited or not. And, in this case, I’m not too concerned about the internet police grabbing me. I also like making DVD copies of premium movies for my own use. Someone told me that it was not a copywrite violation to make a back-up copy for personal use. But, those ominous warnings and $50,000 fines are really scary, right? And, I have no idea if it’s a violation or not. I sure hope none of those internet police are monitoring this forum.

But,

I’m sure you noticed that I used the grabbed some stuff phrase in the previous sentence. It feels and sounds better than using words like steal or copyright.

You probably won’t agree with this analogy and it may not the best, but if you come across someone’s property whether its secured or nailed down or just floating around, you must return it, and could be charged with possession of stolen property if you don’t. I would like to think that you would return someone’s wallet or laptop if you came across it.

It is nice to download stuff from the internet or programming from the cable service, but media companies produce this stuff with an anticipation of selling the product and making more $, so I won’t lose any sleep or be outraged if I can’t download legitimate copywrited stuff.

What do you think?