dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


view:
topics flat nest 
Comments on news posted 2012-12-18 08:59:48: You might recall that iiNet, one of Australia's largest ISPs, was sued by the Australian Federation Against Copyright Theft (AFACT) and the Australian arms of various movie studios for failing to stop the transfer of pirated content across their netw.. ..

page: 1 · 2

rradina

join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO
reply to bobjohnson

Re: Ridiculous...

You misunderstand me. I agree with it being illegal but you didn't answer how the mail system, UPS or Fedex determines what's illegal and how ISPs should likewise police what they "ship".


bobjohnson
Premium
join:2007-02-03
Orlando, FL
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·T-Mobile US

1 edit
I understand what you are saying but the two things aren't on the same level though... If you ship whatever has been determined illegal by laws that are already in place against possession of said items (bombs, drugs, moonshine, certain guns, etc.) through any of these services and you put a return address on them, expect a visit from your local federales. If you are sending stolen and or otherwise illegal stuff over the internet and your leaving your ip address all over it... Well, that's where it gets sketchy. They are just making up the rules as they go on this issue. Obviously the ISP shouldn't ignore any legitimate request for information and most of them already have a copyright office but are not using them against their own customers. But if people weren't violating copyright law the trolls wouldn't be on the fishing expedition in the first place.
--


Kearnstd
Space Elf
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
kudos:1
I have a feeling you have never worked in the business.

UPS has no way to know what is in a package outside of what they are told. They do not randomly open boxes that are not crossing national boarders. If you ship an AK-47(the fully auto and clearly illegal variety) from PA to FL and its packed properly? UPS will never know. Even if the box did break I can tell you that nobody at the sort would know an illegal one from a legal semi-auto replica.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports


bobjohnson
Premium
join:2007-02-03
Orlando, FL
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·T-Mobile US
said by Kearnstd:

I have a feeling you have never worked in the business.

UPS has no way to know what is in a package outside of what they are told. They do not randomly open boxes that are not crossing national boarders. If you ship an AK-47(the fully auto and clearly illegal variety) from PA to FL and its packed properly? UPS will never know. Even if the box did break I can tell you that nobody at the sort would know an illegal one from a legal semi-auto replica.

No I haven't worked in the business. Likewise if you torrent Hurt Locker or whatever through a vpn on your neighbors wireless network or hide the crack well enough that the police don't find it when they pull you over...
They are finding people that in comparison are shipping a full-auto uzi not in a box with a sticker and postage on the side of it.
--



NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:12
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC
reply to bobjohnson
said by bobjohnson:

If you try to ship a pound of cocaine and an AK chances are that their x-ray machines won't miss it. Not paying for things and sharing things against copyright laws is illegal. It's the same as possession of any digital medium that is illegal. If you share it on the internet, they will find it and then find you.

Who are "they"? How will "they" find "it"? In terms of FedEx, UPS, USPS.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum


bobjohnson
Premium
join:2007-02-03
Orlando, FL
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·T-Mobile US
said by NormanS:

said by bobjohnson:

If you try to ship a pound of cocaine and an AK chances are that their x-ray machines won't miss it. Not paying for things and sharing things against copyright laws is illegal. It's the same as possession of any digital medium that is illegal. If you share it on the internet, they will find it and then find you.

Who are "they"? How will "they" find "it"? In terms of FedEx, UPS, USPS.

USPS has the postal inspectors that do it all the time, the TSA finds suspect packages on UPS and FedEx planes... Drivers report them... Etc.
--



NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:12
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC
said by bobjohnson:

said by NormanS:

said by bobjohnson:

If you try to ship a pound of cocaine and an AK chances are that their x-ray machines won't miss it. Not paying for things and sharing things against copyright laws is illegal. It's the same as possession of any digital medium that is illegal. If you share it on the internet, they will find it and then find you.

Who are "they"? How will "they" find "it"? In terms of FedEx, UPS, USPS.

USPS has the postal inspectors that do it all the time, the TSA finds suspect packages on UPS and FedEx planes... Drivers report them... Etc.

But TSA is not the carrier. The carriers, except for USPS, have no inspectors. And even the USPS inspectors are not allowed to open packages willy-nilly, without warrants.

WRT ISPs, let the copyright trolls take their evidence to court to get subpoenas; one case per IP address.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum


bobjohnson
Premium
join:2007-02-03
Orlando, FL
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·T-Mobile US
said by NormanS:

But TSA is not the carrier. The carriers, except for USPS, have no inspectors. And even the USPS inspectors are not allowed to open packages willy-nilly, without warrants.

WRT ISPs, let the copyright trolls take their evidence to court to get subpoenas; one case per IP address.

This I agree with... But as of now the trolls are finding who is sending the files and needing the ISPs to give them a physical address. This is all just a really big mess and as I mentioned in a reply above, the internet is a different animal than shipping physical things.
--



NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:12
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC
said by bobjohnson:

This I agree with... But as of now the trolls are finding who is sending the files and needing the ISPs to give them a physical address.

But they are going direct to the ISP for that information; they should be taking the information before a judge and filing a formal complaint in a court of law. One case per IP address.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum


bobjohnson
Premium
join:2007-02-03
Orlando, FL
I wonder how many people would actually be charged with something if they actually did that.


DataRiker
Premium
join:2002-05-19
00000
reply to bobjohnson

Re: More power to them

said by bobjohnson:

I believe they are scaring the average Joe from pirating with this crap. The people that know what they're doing aren't who they are after.

For the US, I disagree. Average Joe here knows absolutely nothing about the RIAA/MPAA other than some faint memory of Napster, and knows even less of the ISP's policies in place to deal with them.

Other than a few on this site who express their dismay and horror at copy and paste, most people just don't care one way or the other.


NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:12
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC
reply to bobjohnson

Re: Ridiculous...

Why would it lead to charges? Criminal action has a stiff level of proof to meet. I would expect it to lead to civil complaints.

The point is, sanctions should not be imposed based on third party complaints without judicial overview.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum


bobjohnson
Premium
join:2007-02-03
Orlando, FL
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·T-Mobile US
said by NormanS:

Why would it lead to charges? Criminal action has a stiff level of proof to meet. I would expect it to lead to civil complaints.

The point is, sanctions should not be imposed based on third party complaints without judicial overview.

I'm thinking about states where the criminal justice system is a state income source like Florida, or some situations where the judicial system believes they would be doing good by attempting to prosecute people based on this stuff. It will happen.
--


rradina

join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO
reply to bobjohnson
Read Karl's news article again.

I'm not arguing that an ISP should not turn over whatever records it has when a judge asks for information to proceed with a case. The ISP in question is complying with that request. It has asked for more time to comply because it wants to notify the customers that their information will be released and that the data may be used against them in a legal matter. (Probably because some other law requires them to do so or they might be held liable for privacy issues.)

I'm also not arguing for piracy and I don't have a position on whether or not the entertainment industry's business model is broken. If folks steal something and they get caught, that's how the system is supposed to work.

My question is should the ISP be in the business of policing activity taking place over its infrastructure? I understand the USPS has a police force that investigates things like mail fraud and those who seek to disrupt the mail service with harmful acts. However, they also wouldn't detect an illegal DVD copy mailed through their system as well as many other illegal activities because they don't generally open packages to inspect them. Regardless, we shouldn't use the bankrupt USPS model as an example of anything. The mere fact that they have a forensics lab rather than relying on local/national authorities to help with those matters is likely one of the reasons they are bankrupt. Yes -- someone has to do it but why would the postal service have to duplicate labs in other law enforcement agencies?

The copyright trolls want a lot more from ISPs and I'm asking what we require this country's "physical shippers" to do when their services are associated with illegal activity. Further, if we ask the ISP to do more, is this a wise decision? Do we want an ISP acting on behalf of the entertainment industry and charging all of us for these costs? What's reasonable?

My position is I think it's ridiculous (see the title to this thread) to ask the ISP to self-police the suspected illegal activity that takes place on its network. If we regulate them and demand it, they will pass that cost on to us and IMO, it's no different than those "music CD blanks" that had some sort of built-in fee paid to the music industry to offset the fact that those blanks would be used for pirating music. Whether or not they were didn't matter.

Elsewhere on this site I've also said that current government ideas around forcing ISPs to keep every e-mail, text message, DHCP address and browsing history just in case authorities need the data is very dangerous. ISPs should have the capability to trace and record user activities when instructed to do so by the judicial branch of government. However, outside of what's necessary for billing, they shouldn't be tracking any of our personal activities without a judicial review that finds sufficient cause to consider us a suspect of a crime that could be aided by recording our on-line activity.

I know recording all of our activity all the time would really help put the bad guys away. Again, as I've said elsewhere on this site, it isn't the good that could be done with this data, it's the bad that could be done with this data. What's the old saying, better to let the guilty go free than imprison the innocent? I think it would be a sad day in America to have our government mine this data for "subversive" activity. In any nation, beneath the surface lurks McCarthyism. A treasure trove of data that contained every person's on-line activity would be irresistible to those ideas and we should just say no. I understand technology now makes this possible but just because technology enables something does not automatically make it good or wise.


bobjohnson
Premium
join:2007-02-03
Orlando, FL
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·T-Mobile US
I can usually argue anything lol... Not this time. It should be treated as a wiretap on a landline or the like but there are fine lines in all of this as with everything else. As it may cost more for the ISP to police this themselves, it will also cost more for your local court systems to deal with a bunch of extra crap going through as well...

houghe9

join:2008-02-27
Lexington Park, MD

copyright holder

if you own the copyright is it illeagal to download your own content? if it is legal to download your own property how is the isp expected to determine if it is the original owner downloading?

MrRuckus

join:2004-01-30
Portland, OR
said by houghe9:

if you own the copyright is it illeagal to download your own content? if it is legal to download your own property how is the isp expected to determine if it is the original owner downloading?

Because you are guilty until proven innocent. Copyright laws need to be revamped. They need to be updated as times have changed and a digital age now exists that didnt when the laws were made.

The MPAA/RIAA are like little kids being left behind and throwing a fit. Its just sickening how much pull they actually have.

patronanejo

join:2009-09-10
EC2R 8AH

4 edits
reply to bobjohnson

Re: Ridiculous...


This contradicts the original point:
said by bobjohnson:

....This is all just a really big mess and as I mentioned in a reply above, the internet is a different animal than shipping physical things.

Actually, what rradina See Profile originally meant was that they are not at all different:
said by rradina:

So they x-ray packages to discover illegally scanned copies of books, thumb-drives that contain an illegal copy of an MP3 library or an illegal copy of a DVD that someone just mailed to a dozen friends?

Forcing an ISP to police ostensibly-illegal digital files transiting its network infrastructure is no more legitimate than holding FedEx or USPS responsible for allowing illegal digital files --in thumb drives or on DVDs--to be delivered across their infrastructures.

It's preposterous, it's invasive, and the scale of the undertaking is badly misjudged.

patronanejo

join:2009-09-10
EC2R 8AH

2 edits
reply to REITOwner

Re: Take this analogy further

said by REITOwner :

Let's take this analogy further.....
I am an investor/owner of several dozen strip malls and shopping centers... I would have to hire a team of investigators and experts who....would have to continually check on the tenants...!

Agreed--like rradina's, your analogy is easy to extend because the issues are so clear-cut. The intellectual-property racketeers have crossed the line and left it far, far behind.

For decades, an underground network of tape-traders operated via the mails, exchanging bootlegged recordings from coast to coast. And for decades, the burden rightly lay with copyright owners to collect evidence sufficient to warrant a court order--in response to which the parcel services would rightly cooperate in full.

The thought of compelling the delivery services into examining every package for bootlegged recordings is patently preposterous, and would have outraged anyone within earshot of the idea--never mind that it would all take place without judicial oversight.

That a legitimate service can be coerced into invading the privacy of its own customers is simply not consistent with First World values. Moreover, the extortionists exert a destabilising effect on commerce, as there can be no confidence without accountability.

patronanejo

join:2009-09-10
EC2R 8AH
reply to averagedude
said by averagedude:

I wish I could get someone else to do my day job for me for free and I still get paid in full for a days work - now that would be awesome!

When justice is served, they will be required to compensate everyone for the services and labours they have extorted over the years.

Without a court order, they are not entitled to anyone's cooperation. Fuck doing their job for them, they aren't even entitled to sympathy.