Tell me more x
, there is a new speed test available. Give it a try, leave feedback!
dslreports logo
spacer
1
spacer
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer

view:
topics flat nest 
Comments on news posted 2011-06-23 09:37:35: Back in 2008 we noted how the RIAA was planning to ditch their scorched earth legal assault against P2P users, and replace it with a "graduated response" or three strikes approach, wherein users who repeatedly engaged in copyright infringement receiv.. ..

prev · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · next

openbox9
Premium
join:2004-01-26
Germany
kudos:2
reply to axiomatic

Re: Suspected = guilty no matter what

Where do you see my applause for the inconvenience? I'm on the other side of this argument, so perhaps I made my point poorly.

Please, stop with the "that's how networks work" thing. It's irrelevant to most of your arguments.


DataRiker
Premium
join:2002-05-19
00000
reply to openbox9
Oh, Well yea that's obvious.

Good thing I only use the internet to pirate.


heat84
Bit Torrent Apologist

join:2004-03-11
Fort Lauderdale, FL
reply to Frank

Re: A Business opportunity

said by Frank:

said by 88615298:

So copyright holders should give out their product for FREE and they will make more money? genius. Let run that by McDonald's "hey if you give out you food for free you'll make more money" Does that even make sense?

no, what this means is that things need to be reasonable in terms of cost to median income.

mcdonalds is a good example. A big mac is tasty because of the combination of 1000 island dressing, and lettuce with hamburgers. Most people who like big macs would rather just go to mcdonalds and buy one because it's fast and CHEAP.

If mcdonalds started selling big macs for $30 each then people would just pirate the recipe and make their own bigmacs at home and mcdonalds would lose money and blame it on recipe pirates.

People who DVR, record way more then I download. The monthly DVR fee doesn't come close to fairly compensating the copyright owner. If you were to divide the monthly fee by the number of programs the average DVR user records, it would probably be less than one cent per recording. And the whole fee doesn't go towards copyright compensation. No one will ever convince me that there's a difference between DVRing and Bit Torrent. Either way you watch without commercials(not to mention either way you're stuck with the in-program ads). So if I'm a pirate so are DVRers. And I don't come close to downloading what DVRers record. Maybe 5 programs a week I download. People here are always complaining that 150 or 200GB isn't enough DVR hard drive space. It would take me almost a year to fill that if I DVR'd the equivalent of what I download. And I wouldn't use a DVR for archival purposes either. Are DVR recordings stored in an uncompressed format? That would explain the space issue.

People pirating the Big Mac recipe? I didn't know they were that good.LMAO(non-condescending laugh, that's just straight-up funny)
--
Bit Torrent is my DVR.


firephoto
We the people
Premium
join:2003-03-18
Brewster, WA
reply to BHNtechXpert

Re: Suspected = guilty no matter what

So when lots of people upload their data to the cloud for connivence or a backup those uploading their music and video collection will get throttled? Not likely but anyone using bittorrent for anything will see the hammer come down because it's not associated with a service that skims the money off the top.

It's just fully dumb to provide a data connection they turn around and tell people they need to stick to the popular commercial websites or get flagged as a pirate.

I'm my data and my rules where it goes, if you want to snoop on my data prepare for the consequences.
--
Say no to JAMS!


firephoto
We the people
Premium
join:2003-03-18
Brewster, WA
reply to BHNtechXpert

Re: A Business opportunity

said by BHNtechXpert:

said by ctggzg:

Nice to see some people have done their homework on how to lie and cheat and get away with it. Thanks for sharing.

I completely agree with you. I'm not at all sympathetic to the pirates but I do understand the concerns of the legit peeps. The legits however are outnumbered 50 to 1 in who is doing what however and denying that truth is highly misguided.

And you seem happy to just throw the minority under the bus because those who are supposedly breaking the law and causing financial damage are what matter so the grenade in the bad guys back is ok even if it kills a few people around them.

Or you acknowledge the reality of the situation and know it's easier to set the toll if people are mostly going to corporate US sites because there's a chance of getting some extra money on both ends.
--
Say no to JAMS!


BHNtechXpert
BHN Staff
Premium,VIP
join:2006-02-16
Saint Petersburg, FL
kudos:164
reply to Tanshin

Re: Suspected = guilty no matter what

said by Tanshin:

I suppose you could argue that there wouldn't be anti-p2p IP sniffers on those torrents, but how do you know that ISPs still won't classify it as pirating in a hasty manner? What if they want to save money and will just start looking at P2P in general (I believe Comcast throttles all P2P traffic already)? When an ISP accuses somebody of pirating, are they required to provide justification?

I think you don't understand how DPI works. A Ubuntu file will have a significantly different "signature" or bit pattern than lets say a music or movie file will. Tagging a particular file would be useless because the pirates would just remove the tag. They can't however change the fingerprint or bit pattern of a copyright works however without having an impact on the quality of the movie or music and that's how ISP's will know the difference between the two.
--
"I can’t give you a surefire formula for success, but I can give you a formula for failure: try to please everybody all the time."
~ Herbert Bayard Swope


Camaro
Question everything
Premium
join:2008-04-05
Westfield, MA
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Verizon Wireless..
·Comcast

We will see

To do anything that is mentioned there for newer practices to implement on a customer would be one a major TOS change that i don't think for once they are going to pass by the average joe who doesn't take the time to read it cover to cover,plus the big one advertisement,there is no way in hell that any agency that oversees any of this is going to let them do this,most people don't even know the the different speed packages let alone throw in throttling and who knows what else they come up with.And like everyone said the real pirates already probably know a way around.


TamaraB
Question The Current Paradigm
Premium
join:2000-11-08
Da Bronx
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Optimum Online
·Clearwire Wireless
reply to BHNtechXpert

Re: A Business opportunity

said by BHNtechXpert:

Bob fast is relative. I don't consider any of the solutions currently available fast but that's just me I guess.

The only speed hit I see is minimal, and attributed to the added protocol traffic. I rent a $15.00/Mo off-shore VPS for P2P use. It downloads your typical 350MB TV show in about 4 minutes, then, for viewing, I go off VPN, and simply stream the show to my PC with not even that minimal speed hit from the VPN. Surfing/email/usenet/ssh/etc.... only on the VPN, as the minor speed hit for those services is not even noticeable.

What I pay for the VPS is less than my Internet connection.

Bob
--
"Remember, remember the fifth of November.
Gunpowder, Treason and Plot.
I see no reason why Gunpowder Treason
Should ever be forgot."

"People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people"



firephoto
We the people
Premium
join:2003-03-18
Brewster, WA
reply to BHNtechXpert

Re: Sad but predictable outcome

said by BHNtechXpert:

So get over it...this myth of implied privacy is just a myth. If you aren't doing anything wrong to begin with you have nothing to fear.

That's the biggest bullshit argument ever and you know it but it keeps the sheep happy and their the majority of dumb customers so lets set the bar low.

How does a one-of-a-kind implementation of something not leave one fearing the fact that someone WILL get knowledge of it because a bunch of power hungry and money seeking ISPs are spying on users data because the feds do it so they know they can get away with it too.

And that is what most of this is about anyway. The RIAA and friends crap is just a distraction. It's pathetic that physical contact with others is almost the only way to conduct real sensitive business in these technologically advanced times all because of government endorsed spying on citizens being legal.

So you have the ISP as the biggest problem in the mix because they do NOT get rid of those customers they know are "offenders" but instead wait for a paying **AA who wants customer records. It must be great to not only provide internet when paid but provide personal information out the other end to anyone paying the fee. Another great scam in this land of the free.
--
Say no to JAMS!


BHNtechXpert
BHN Staff
Premium,VIP
join:2006-02-16
Saint Petersburg, FL
kudos:164
reply to firephoto

Re: A Business opportunity

said by firephoto:

said by BHNtechXpert:

said by ctggzg:

Nice to see some people have done their homework on how to lie and cheat and get away with it. Thanks for sharing.

I completely agree with you. I'm not at all sympathetic to the pirates but I do understand the concerns of the legit peeps. The legits however are outnumbered 50 to 1 in who is doing what however and denying that truth is highly misguided.

And you seem happy to just throw the minority under the bus because those who are supposedly breaking the law and causing financial damage are what matter so the grenade in the bad guys back is ok even if it kills a few people around them.

Or you acknowledge the reality of the situation and know it's easier to set the toll if people are mostly going to corporate US sites because there's a chance of getting some extra money on both ends.

I'm not throwing the minority under the buss at all. They won't be affected by these changes...only the illegal majority will. That's what you guys fail to get...you aren't the target...the bad guys are and they will take every safeguard to insure this is the case. Nobody wants to finger the wrong person because the result will be expensive. That has never been their goal. Unfortunately there will be some friendly fire issues and they will have to be addressed as they happen...they will be expensive mistakes but they will happen and people will learn from them and changes will be made accordingly. It's not a perfect solution but it's better than filing lawsuits off at people as Jan Does.

As for these assclowns crying foul over having left their wifi open and it being exploited by a neighbor to download porn...I feel no sympathy for these idiots and the lame ass excuse they use as "I should be able to share my wifi" is bullshit. If you want to be treated as a responsible adult you need to act like one. Leaving yourself open for exploitation is nobodies fault but your own when it comes to leaving your wifi open. Stop whining, man up and take your punishment for being an idiot...and next time lock down your freakin wifi like normal rational thinking adults.
--
"I can’t give you a surefire formula for success, but I can give you a formula for failure: try to please everybody all the time."
~ Herbert Bayard Swope


TamaraB
Question The Current Paradigm
Premium
join:2000-11-08
Da Bronx
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Optimum Online
·Clearwire Wireless
reply to BHNtechXpert

Re: Good for the RIAA/MPAA

said by BHNtechXpert:

In the case of broadcast television you are at lets say level A whereas someone is licensed to distribute the content might be a level D.

I am not talking about distributing anything, I am talking about my personal right to view something I have paid to view, or listen to. Copyright law has degenerated into something it was never intended to be, and is certainly not compatible with current technology.

When I had my Akai 1/4 inch reel-to-reel tape deck, it was perfectly OK and legal for me to record play-lists on it from my records, or off the radio, (saving the vinyl from wear), and enjoy hours of uninterrupted music for my personal use. The same was true when I bought my first Laser-disk player (Sony Betamax if I recall), and subsequently made backup copies OF THE MOVIES I BOUGHT to VHS tape when that came out, because the 12 inch video disks were fragile.

Before DRM, I could rip my DVDs WHICH I PAID FOR to a hard drive and do the same. Now it seems, copyright has morphed into not so much a "copy" right, but a listening/viewing right. Soon they will want a fee for each time I play a song, or watch a movie I purchased. Greed has driven this way too far, and the backlash towards the entertainment industry is a bitch, and will certainly get worse if they continue on this path.

What I observe, is that over the years, the rights which I have always enjoyed are being taken away. Nobody likes losing something they have always had, and will find ways to retain them.

Bob

--
"Remember, remember the fifth of November.
Gunpowder, Treason and Plot.
I see no reason why Gunpowder Treason
Should ever be forgot."

"People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people"



BHNtechXpert
BHN Staff
Premium,VIP
join:2006-02-16
Saint Petersburg, FL
kudos:164
reply to firephoto

Re: Sad but predictable outcome

said by firephoto:

said by BHNtechXpert:

So get over it...this myth of implied privacy is just a myth. If you aren't doing anything wrong to begin with you have nothing to fear.

That's the biggest bullshit argument ever and you know it but it keeps the sheep happy and their the majority of dumb customers so lets set the bar low.

How does a one-of-a-kind implementation of something not leave one fearing the fact that someone WILL get knowledge of it because a bunch of power hungry and money seeking ISPs are spying on users data because the feds do it so they know they can get away with it too.

The same way policies at work or in our society are implemented. The behaviors or the misbahaviors of the masses dictate the corrective measure and it's not always the minority causing the problem (like with this situation). If it were a small group of people then you might be correct but the problem is at an epidemic level....we're not talking about a few thousand people here...we're talking millions of violators.

Your pie in the sky visions of "we should treat each problem individually" perfect world doesn't exist. It's impossible and impractical to do this one a singular basis.

And your land of the free bullshit doesn't fly with me either. We are a land of laws, laws that all people are expected to follow in order to manage order and peace in our relatively free society. Without law our society as we love it ceases to exist...stop spewing that "land of the free" crap because it's obvious you have no clue as to how you got to be so free to begin with...
--
"I can’t give you a surefire formula for success, but I can give you a formula for failure: try to please everybody all the time."
~ Herbert Bayard Swope

Papageno

join:2011-01-26
Portland, OR

How do usenet binary groups fit into all this?

Everyone is always talking about P2P but no one talks about the more old-school Usenet.


BHNtechXpert
BHN Staff
Premium,VIP
join:2006-02-16
Saint Petersburg, FL
kudos:164
reply to TamaraB

Re: Good for the RIAA/MPAA

said by TamaraB:

said by BHNtechXpert:

In the case of broadcast television you are at lets say level A whereas someone is licensed to distribute the content might be a level D.

I am not talking about distributing anything, I am talking about my personal right to view something I have paid to view, or listen to. Copyright law has degenerated into something it was never intended to be, and is certainly not compatible with current technology.

When I had my Akai 1/4 inch reel-to-reel tape deck, it was perfectly OK and legal for me to record play-lists on it from my records, or off the radio, (saving the vinyl from wear), and enjoy hours of uninterrupted music for my personal use. The same was true when I bought my first Laser-disk player (Sony Betamax if I recall), and subsequently made backup copies OF THE MOVIES I BOUGHT to VHS tape when that came out, because the 12 inch video disks were fragile.

Before DRM, I could rip my DVDs WHICH I PAID FOR to a hard drive and do the same. Now it seems, copyright has morphed into not so much a "copy" right, but a listening/viewing right. Soon they will want a fee for each time I play a song, or watch a movie I purchased. Greed has driven this way too far, and the backlash towards the entertainment industry is a bitch, and will certainly get worse if they continue on this path.

What I observe, is that over the years, the rights which I have always enjoyed are being taken away. Nobody likes losing something they have always had, and will find ways to retain them.

Bob

You've got this all twisted. Nobody is saying that you can't make your own playlists and play the music or video you LEGALLY own anywhere you want. You cannot however take that work and distribute to friends or on the internet. Nobody is stopping you from doing any of that unless you own an Apple product.

DRM is a thing of the past...we're not quite there yet but we're getting there but it's going to take a bit of social responsibility in the meantime. You can rip your dvds to use on home media system and not violate the law. Where you run into trouble is when you share it on the net with 10000 other people.

Thats the problem the RIAA/MPAA have. They could care less what you do with that media in your own home.
--
"I can’t give you a surefire formula for success, but I can give you a formula for failure: try to please everybody all the time."
~ Herbert Bayard Swope

kiamsiamdala

join:2001-11-05
Utica, MI
reply to BHNtechXpert

Re: Sad but predictable outcome

Wow. With that line of thinking, why not have cameras set up in each room of our homes for them to monitor us with. Governmental GPS trackers on our cars would make sense too. We should probably do away with cash, as well.

watice

join:2008-11-01
New York, NY
reply to BHNtechXpert
I agree with your land of the laws statement. I'm no lawyer, but I'm pretty sure your domestic privacy is protected under our current laws.

I know you didn't make this analogy, but I see a severe flaw with the building a wall so you can't see in the house statement the person in this thread had mentioned. If I were to set up an email server for a company, and I happened to own the server, does that give me the right to go through everyones email? I think there's an expectation of privacy with emails (unless otherwise noted), and I'd think there'd be an even bigger expectation of privacy with data you transmit through your ISP's network.

DPI is wrong on so many levels, and inefficient if the savvy will continue to find ways around it. I myself use a VPN on my VPS as well, but only when I'm on someone else's network. I'd expect to have some sort of privacy when using the services of an ISP that I pay [a large chunk of] money to monthly.

kiamsiamdala

join:2001-11-05
Utica, MI
reply to Papageno

Re: How do usenet binary groups fit into all this?

That's due to the first rule of Usenet.


ctceo
Premium
join:2001-04-26
South Bend, IN
Reviews:
·Virgin Mobile Br..
reply to BHNtechXpert

Re: Sad but predictable outcome

Then why is it class actions are now banned? Is that not essentially every man for himself? If it isn't I don't know what is.
--
»were.boldlygoingnowhere.org if we don't change out ways!


ctceo
Premium
join:2001-04-26
South Bend, IN
reply to kiamsiamdala
Does mobile x-ray, thermographic imaging, paralleled computing, and onstar mean anything to you?
--
»were.boldlygoingnowhere.org if we don't change out ways!


ctceo
Premium
join:2001-04-26
South Bend, IN
Reviews:
·Virgin Mobile Br..
reply to watice
So them where does the problem truly lie?

The nature of your secured content?
The design and implementation of the infrastructure it uses?
The fees you pay for said services?
The system that generates the currency you use to pay for it?

The answer may surprise you.
--
»were.boldlygoingnowhere.org if we don't change out ways!


BHNtechXpert
BHN Staff
Premium,VIP
join:2006-02-16
Saint Petersburg, FL
kudos:164
reply to watice
said by watice:

I agree with your land of the laws statement. I'm no lawyer, but I'm pretty sure your domestic privacy is protected under our current laws.

I know you didn't make this analogy, but I see a severe flaw with the building a wall so you can't see in the house statement the person in this thread had mentioned. If I were to set up an email server for a company, and I happened to own the server, does that give me the right to go through everyones email? I think there's an expectation of privacy with emails (unless otherwise noted), and I'd think there'd be an even bigger expectation of privacy with data you transmit through your ISP's network.

DPI is wrong on so many levels, and inefficient if the savvy will continue to find ways around it. I myself use a VPN on my VPS as well, but only when I'm on someone else's network. I'd expect to have some sort of privacy when using the services of an ISP that I pay [a large chunk of] money to monthly.

There is no privacy on the internet period...stop with that already. You are using someone elses network. They by your own user agreement may take whatever measures needed to secure that network, its users and any protections needed to insure that the company does not get into a legal situation. They aren't snooping your emails (the ISP that is) and they don't care what you transmit or receive so long as its not illegal. DPI would be used to look for specific signatures ONLY. I don't understand why people can't get this. If you guys would grab the actual issues where you are protected I would help ya out a bit but you guys are grasping at all the wrong straws. And don't ask I'm not gonna help you with the right ones...sooner or later somebody will get it.
--
"I can’t give you a surefire formula for success, but I can give you a formula for failure: try to please everybody all the time."
~ Herbert Bayard Swope


BHNtechXpert
BHN Staff
Premium,VIP
join:2006-02-16
Saint Petersburg, FL
kudos:164
reply to ctceo
said by ctceo:

Then why is it class actions are now banned? Is that not essentially every man for himself? If it isn't I don't know what is.

Your statement has nothing to do with the issue being discussed. Tort is a whole different beast...don't confuse the two.
--
"I can’t give you a surefire formula for success, but I can give you a formula for failure: try to please everybody all the time."
~ Herbert Bayard Swope


BHNtechXpert
BHN Staff
Premium,VIP
join:2006-02-16
Saint Petersburg, FL
kudos:164
reply to ctceo
said by ctceo:

So them where does the problem truly lie?

The nature of your secured content?
The design and implementation of the infrastructure it uses?
The fees you pay for said services?
The system that generates the currency you use to pay for it?

The answer may surprise you.

The answer is in the people. Our society has become riddled with those who think they can just follow the laws they want to hell with the rest. We have raised three generations of uneducated, selfish, lazy, narcissistic little brats. They think they are above the law and they care about one thing and one thing only...themselves...to hell with everyone else. That's the problem...
--
"I can’t give you a surefire formula for success, but I can give you a formula for failure: try to please everybody all the time."
~ Herbert Bayard Swope

kiamsiamdala

join:2001-11-05
Utica, MI
reply to ctceo
Are they blanket implementations of governmental design?
--
'void planets roll regardless of desolation'


BHNtechXpert
BHN Staff
Premium,VIP
join:2006-02-16
Saint Petersburg, FL
kudos:164
said by kiamsiamdala:

Are they blanket implementations of governmental design?

Foil Hats Anyone?

kiamsiamdala

join:2001-11-05
Utica, MI
It was a loaded question, not me putting on a foil hat. Nice job at assuming, though. As you seem to always be in the right, and everybody else is lazy, stupid and self-entitled, I'll leave you to you delusions of grandeur. lol
--
'void planets roll
regardless of desolation'


BHNtechXpert
BHN Staff
Premium,VIP
join:2006-02-16
Saint Petersburg, FL
kudos:164
said by kiamsiamdala:

It was a loaded question, not me putting on a foil hat. Nice job at assuming, though. As you seem to always be in the right, and everybody else is lazy, stupid and self-entitled, I'll leave you to you delusions of grandeur. lol

My apologies...your question seemed more like a statement implying some government conspiracy...
--
"I can’t give you a surefire formula for success, but I can give you a formula for failure: try to please everybody all the time."
~ Herbert Bayard Swope

elray

join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·EarthLink
reply to fuziwuzi

Re: American GFW?

said by fuziwuzi:

Every day the US gets closer and closer to emulating China. A conservative, single-party government, unrestricted capitalism, dismantling government regulations on safety and environment, censoring internet, citizens being "detained for questioning" simply for protesting...

My partner in Shanghai is forced to use a VPN for his internet use, and I guess I will have to join him, now.

Our government is anything but Conservative - and that includes the prior administration.

If regulations are being dismantled, that would be big news.

As for being detained, well, that has always happened in small numbers - habeas corpus didn't mean much before 9/11, and it never will. But to suggest that detention occurs to suppress speech is nonsensical, as it achieves the opposite.


pryvaceee

@telus.net

DPI is a Privacy violation

One thing us peasants forget, is that DPI(deep packet inspection) is actually ILLEGAL, as it invades our Privacy Rights. It's illegal to come into my yard or my home and search my stuff. It's illegal to put a wiretap on my phone and listen to my conversations. It's illegal to open my mail in transit or when it's sitting in a post box.

With DPI, the ISP could easily create a dump file that sends certain data(P2P) of your Internet communications into a folder for review by the copyright mafia or the ISP, who have ZERO legal grounds to get your personal data without a warrant. And any passwords entered(into your download/file locker sites), that are not encrypted, could easily be stolen and used by the ISP or copyright mafia to royally screw your life over.

Are ISP's using DPI for monitoring of their users communications with certain sites that users complain about problems with their ISP? So easy to do, just set up the system to create a dump file for when certain sites are accessed and then compare the time of the posting(along with unencrypted posting data), with the time one of their users were there. Also noted in forums as, "my ISP just called 3 hours after I complained on the forum and then fixed my problem. How the f*ck did they know it was me?" And then a shill makes a lame excuse(random call) to cover up the DPI crime.

The main crime of this whole suspension, site blocking scheme is, no evidence has been presented that would actually stand up in a court of law with a real judge and prosecutor. Entrapment is still a crime, so when the copyright mafia sets up a honeypot that has copy's of the copyrighted file for download, they are actually giving you legal permission to download that file. And when the copyrighted file is labeled as some non-copyrighted works, the copyright mafia is GUILTY of the crime of entrapment, as well as EXTORTION when they send your ISP a letter for payment to be forwarded, stating the imaginary crime.

tmc8080

join:2004-04-24
Brooklyn, NY

nostalgia..

didn't the cable companies try this filtering nonsense in the late 90s and earlly 2000's? I dont' think it got Comcast a very happy customer base then...