6 ms·

You Could Be Kicked Offline for Piracy If This Music Industry Lawsuit Succeeds

39 points by nwrk 8y ago

beefhash 8y ago
I don't see why this method in particular would be a problem with regards to achieving the goal. Enforcing copyright laws through traditional lawsuits and criminal law enforcement has been, by and large, a failure. We do need a change in the enforcement methods, as it's very clear the laws will not be adjusted to match the reality of rampant piracy. In the end, changing the method of enforcement it's just another method to make law and reality match up (as opposed to changing the laws to reflect reality).
- dnbgfher 8y ago
  What? Rightsholders aren't going to respond to reality, so in order to let them continue to ignore it we should ramp up enforcement methods, further isolating rightsholders from being forced to deal with it? How does this make any sense?
  - beefhash 8y ago
    There's no realistic way to combat the heavy lobbying that's going on around intellectual property questions, copyright in particular. Thus, to make reality and laws match, enforcement must be adjusted instead.
    - ycmbntrthrwaway 8y ago
      You say you "don't see the problem" because you see no way to fix things. The problem does not cease to be a problem because of that.
      - beefhash 8y ago
        I've made a clarifying edit. Maybe this helps capture what I'm trying to say.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
    - dnbgfher 8y ago
      I'm not sure I see the reason reality and laws must be made to match. I don't see that as something that is inherently all that valuable (if at all), and certainly not to the degree that it's worth doing whatever is easiest regardless of costs to make it happen.
- ycmbntrthrwaway 8y ago
  Then it is not we who need a change in the enforcement methods. We still need a change in copyright laws.
appdrag 8y ago
This already exist since years in france: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/HADOPI_law https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/HADOPI_law In practice less than 20 peoples have been disconnected because of this law in 9 years
WilliamEdward 8y ago
To get in trouble for piracy, you need to: A) live in a country where surveillance is huge (America, UK). This simply wouldn't happen in a 3rd world country. B) Own the actual content-distributing site (piratebay, etc). That's who litigators / law enforcement go after the most. C) If you don't own the site, you need to download ungodly amounts of content illegally. I'm talking 1000s of Gigabytes worth of content every month. D) Actually be worth the cost of a legal trial, meaning you have to respond to the email/notice, have the money to pay them, and be downloading so much they're somehow losing money. If you don't tick 100% of these boxes you will almost never be caught. Piracy isn't a big deal on an individual basis because people who do it were never going to buy the content even if they got forced to. If anything, they're doing your product a favour by checking it out and probably buying it in the future. Or it's a warning sign that you need to get your shit off of HBO and onto a more accessible platform. So nah, this lawsuit will change nothing. All it does is take away point C of the above list. Now, can you be kicked off the internet for this new law? I don't know the ins and outs but the reason i see that not happening is because ISPs would lose a huge amount of customers and would lobby against that hard, among reasons stated in the article. Anyway don't panic, the internet is still a wild west and nothing is going to change that anytime soon.
- crtasm 8y ago
  Nonsense, if someone on your IP is in a single bittorrent swarm for some content these firms are tracking that's enough for them to complain to your ISP and demand your details. TFA is warning that what they're pushing for now is for ISPs to be required to deny service to people based on these complaints. No trial involved.
  - WilliamEdward 8y ago
    And I'm saying ISPs would never let that happen. The amount of people who torrent is absurd, and the amount of people who are using the same net as someone who torrents is even greater. For this to be the least bit effective, they would have to dismantle VPNs, dynamic IP addresses, and somehow find a way to target specific people when they're using public internet. It's unpractical and salty record companies are picking their battles incorrectly. But they will be forced to learn this soon. Just for clarity, I only mentioned the trial part of things because that's how it currently works. Sorry for confusion.
a3n 8y ago
"So far, the music industry has yet to challenge bigger players with deeper pockets like AT&T, Comcast or Verizon, though these giants are likely watching the case with great interest for liability reasons." In a better world those larger ISPs would pony up, band together and help out the little guys, in their own enlightened self-interest, a la Newegg. But they probably see it in their thuggish self-interest to let the little guys be sued out of existence, and take over those customers. And then they may start fighting this.

39 points by nwrk 8y ago

I don't see why this method in particular would be a problem with regards to achieving the goal. Enforcing copyright laws through traditional lawsuits and criminal law enforcement has been, by and large, a failure. We do need a change in the enforcement methods, as it's very clear the laws will not be adjusted to match the reality of rampant piracy. In the end, changing the method of enforcement it's just another method to make law and reality match up (as opposed to changing the laws to reflect reality).

dnbgfher 8y ago
What? Rightsholders aren't going to respond to reality, so in order to let them continue to ignore it we should ramp up enforcement methods, further isolating rightsholders from being forced to deal with it? How does this make any sense?
- beefhash 8y ago
  There's no realistic way to combat the heavy lobbying that's going on around intellectual property questions, copyright in particular. Thus, to make reality and laws match, enforcement must be adjusted instead.
  - ycmbntrthrwaway 8y ago
    You say you "don't see the problem" because you see no way to fix things. The problem does not cease to be a problem because of that.
    - beefhash 8y ago
      I've made a clarifying edit. Maybe this helps capture what I'm trying to say.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - dnbgfher 8y ago
    I'm not sure I see the reason reality and laws must be made to match. I don't see that as something that is inherently all that valuable (if at all), and certainly not to the degree that it's worth doing whatever is easiest regardless of costs to make it happen.
ycmbntrthrwaway 8y ago
Then it is not we who need a change in the enforcement methods. We still need a change in copyright laws.

appdrag 8y ago

This already exist since years in france: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/HADOPI_law https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/HADOPI_law In practice less than 20 peoples have been disconnected because of this law in 9 years

WilliamEdward 8y ago

To get in trouble for piracy, you need to: A) live in a country where surveillance is huge (America, UK). This simply wouldn't happen in a 3rd world country. B) Own the actual content-distributing site (piratebay, etc). That's who litigators / law enforcement go after the most. C) If you don't own the site, you need to download ungodly amounts of content illegally. I'm talking 1000s of Gigabytes worth of content every month. D) Actually be worth the cost of a legal trial, meaning you have to respond to the email/notice, have the money to pay them, and be downloading so much they're somehow losing money. If you don't tick 100% of these boxes you will almost never be caught. Piracy isn't a big deal on an individual basis because people who do it were never going to buy the content even if they got forced to. If anything, they're doing your product a favour by checking it out and probably buying it in the future. Or it's a warning sign that you need to get your shit off of HBO and onto a more accessible platform. So nah, this lawsuit will change nothing. All it does is take away point C of the above list. Now, can you be kicked off the internet for this new law? I don't know the ins and outs but the reason i see that not happening is because ISPs would lose a huge amount of customers and would lobby against that hard, among reasons stated in the article. Anyway don't panic, the internet is still a wild west and nothing is going to change that anytime soon.

crtasm 8y ago
Nonsense, if someone on your IP is in a single bittorrent swarm for some content these firms are tracking that's enough for them to complain to your ISP and demand your details. TFA is warning that what they're pushing for now is for ISPs to be required to deny service to people based on these complaints. No trial involved.
- WilliamEdward 8y ago
  And I'm saying ISPs would never let that happen. The amount of people who torrent is absurd, and the amount of people who are using the same net as someone who torrents is even greater. For this to be the least bit effective, they would have to dismantle VPNs, dynamic IP addresses, and somehow find a way to target specific people when they're using public internet. It's unpractical and salty record companies are picking their battles incorrectly. But they will be forced to learn this soon. Just for clarity, I only mentioned the trial part of things because that's how it currently works. Sorry for confusion.

a3n 8y ago

"So far, the music industry has yet to challenge bigger players with deeper pockets like AT&T, Comcast or Verizon, though these giants are likely watching the case with great interest for liability reasons." In a better world those larger ISPs would pony up, band together and help out the little guys, in their own enlightened self-interest, a la Newegg. But they probably see it in their thuggish self-interest to let the little guys be sued out of existence, and take over those customers. And then they may start fighting this.