Dogfather
Premium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | Not really 3 strikes
It looks like you just have to do a click-through "yeah I deleted it" screen. |
|
mikepd
Discovery
Premium,MVM
join:2000-10-26
New Port Richey, FL
clubs:
 ·Verizon FIOS
 ·Verizon Online DSL
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| Contract Law
I would really like to see this practice of three violations and the subscriber gets disconnected challenged in court. Courts tend to take a dim view of contracts that give too much control to one side over the other party.
Even if it is published as part of the TOS, it can still be held null and void by a court as unfair so it would be very interesting to see how this would play out before a judge.
--
Always Reach Beyond Your Grasp |
|
Fubar
join:2001-02-20
Phoenix, AZ
| Am I missing something?
It says responsibility, Not they are required...
And the tree strike rule applies Any TOS violation, not just file sharing...
And Cox sends out several warnings before Strike 1 is even employed... If the warnings go unanswered or ignored then the service will be shut off until the warning is acknowledged...
And my source?: »Re: [ALL] P2P Uploading and Downloading on Cox HSI |
|
sbrook
Premium,Mod
join:2001-12-14
H0H 0H0
·Rogers Hi-Speed
Host:
Rogers
Bell Canada
| Interesting
Another significant problem with this is that according to their letter, the copyright holder has to identify the individual suspected of copyright violations. Identification by IP is not identifying the individual ... that is being done by the ISP.
I am not a lawyer and don't even play one on television, but that sure looks like yet another big hole in this policy. |
|
Dogfather
Premium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | How about 3 crappy movies or albums and you're out
Seems that would make more sense in terms of promoting civilization. |
|
russotto
join:2000-10-05
Collegeville, PA | Scammers
There's no such thing as a valid DMCA takedown for torrenting. DMCA warnings apply only to ISP-hosted content. |
|
jchambers28
join:2007-05-12
Alma, AR | burn em
Bern them to a dvd we have no more problem> |
|
fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| reply to mikepd
Re: Contract Law
said by mikepd  :I would really like to see this practice of three violations and the subscriber gets disconnected challenged in court. Courts tend to take a dim view of contracts that give too much control to one side over the other party. Even if it is published as part of the TOS, it can still be held null and void by a court as unfair so it would be very interesting to see how this would play out before a judge. The provider has a right to take actions against those who violate 'the rules'.. and, to this day, distributing copyrighted material is not legal. The TOS clearly states you are not allowed to do it.. if it's against the TOS to do so, they certainly have the right, based on the TOS as it is, to simply pull your access on the first violation if they really wanted to.
What calls into play, more so than your opinion of favoring one side, is if the provider has enough evidence to be sure that you were in violation.
Here comes the flames for this.. I really don't think the xxAA is just sending out letters at random with out first having obtained the material they reported. Since they have the "rights" to the protected work, they also have a right to make the allegations.
This "contract law" is based on actual law.. the TOS agreement is simply stating they are going to enforce laws. What you're talking about is the action they take while enforcing them, to which I agree. |
|
dcurrey
Premium
join:2004-06-29
 ·ViaTalk
1 edit | Dumb question
Ok if they are just forging return p2p packets how can they determine if its pirated content or not. Despite what some would say everything transferred via p2p is not illegal.
If they are also doing deep packet inspection does this not also violate wire tapping rules the same way NebuAd advertising did.
Edit:
Never mind I think I get what going on. A third party contact the isp saying ip is sharing copyrighted material and the isp just sends you an email with no proof needed. |
|
ninjatutle
Premium
join:2006-01-02
San Ramon, CA | reply to russotto
Re: Scammers
Scammers are no better than thieves... |
|
plattypus1
join:2005-04-08
Riverside, CA
·Charter Pipeline
| DMCA letters are easily forged, and hard to get rid of.
I've received one DMCA warning in the past. It was for an .iso of the Wii game "Red Steel." My Wii isn't even modchipped, and at the time I didn't have a DVD burner- and the IP address was for a modem in another city. (I worked for the ISP at the time, so I knew their addressing scheme.) After calling the ISP and explaining all of this, the gentleman at the ISP agreed with my assessment of the address data at least, but he told me that there was nothing that they could do to remove the letter from the file. If I were a Cox customer, this would have been Strike One. Fair?
These letters lack a critical component- accountability. Not only do they assume customers are guilty, but they do not even provide any way to prove a customer's innocence even in cases of clear error. In my case, who cares... but if my continued service was in danger, it would be a very different issue. |
|
Fubar
join:2001-02-20
Phoenix, AZ | Nope, warning one.... At least according to the link I provided above |
|
hoyleysox
join:2003-11-07
Long Beach, CA
·Cox HSI
·Time Warner Cable
| Uverse
They have sent me 4 cable boxes and I have had to call them 4 times for various issues. Now the DVR broke and they cannot fix it over the phone. I just had the service for 3 weeks. I do not have a telephone but they shove a phone connection and long distance down my throat with their bundle. Now this bs!
I am going to give Uverse a try - after the tech comes out and fixes my cable box. |
|
CoxTech1
VIP
join:2002-04-25
Chesapeake, VA
| reply to plattypus1
Re: DMCA letters are easily forged, and hard to get rid of.
This is how you would respond if you feel that the claim of infringement is unjustified in any way. Here is the link and the applicable text regarding your concern:
»www.cox.com/policy/infringe.asp
Counter Notification:
If a notice of copyright infringement has been filed against you, you may file a Counter Notification with a Service Provider's Designated Agent. In order to be effective, a Counter Notification must be written and include substantially the following:
A physical or electronic signature of the subscriber.
Identification of the material that has been removed or to which access has been disabled and the location at which the material appeared before it was removed or access to it was disabled.
A statement under penalty of perjury that the subscriber has a good faith belief that the material was removed or disabled as a result of mistake or misidentification of the material to be removed or disabled.
The subscriber's name, address, and telephone number, and a statement that the subscriber consents to the jurisdiction of Federal District Court for the judicial district in which the address is located, or if the subscriber's address is outside of the United States, for any judicial district in which the Service Provider may be found, and that the subscriber will accept service of process from the person who provided Notification or an agent of such person.
Upon receipt of a Counter Notification containing the information as outlined in 1 through 4 above, Service Provider shall:
Promptly provide the complaining party with a copy of the Counter Notification;
Replace the removed material or cease disabling access to the material within 10 to 14 business days following receipt of the Counter Notification, unless the Service Provider's Designated Agent first receives notice from the complaining party that an action has been filed seeking a court order to restrain alleged infringing party from engaging in infringing activity relating to the material on Service Provider's system or network.
NOTE: Under the DCMA, claimants who make misrepresentations concerning copyright infringement may be liable for damages incurred as a result of the removal or blocking of the material, court costs, and attorneys fees. See Title 17, United States Code, Section 512(d).
NOTE: The information on this page is provided to you for informational purposes only, and is not intended as legal advice. If you believe your rights under U.S. Copyright law have been infringed, you should consult an attorney. |
|
SilverSurfer
join:2007-08-19
| Yep, Sounds Just like Cox Incompetent Communications
Please, Cox's left hand doesn't know what it's right hand is doing with regard to those customers that they haven't disconnected yet, but they're comfortable sending out disconnection notifications based on DMCA notices that aren't even accurate in the first place. |
|
MrMoody
Carbon Based Lifeform
join:2002-09-03
Smithfield, NC
·Embarq
·Skype
·magicjack.com
| Nothing new
TWC's stated DMCA policy as of Jan 2002:
quote:
Our Abuse policy sets ratings for the types of complaints. Copyright infringement is an automatic 24 hour suspension on the first offense, 14 days on the second offense, with termination of services occurring on the third offense.
--
Electile Dysfunction: the inability to become aroused over the choice for President put forth by either party. |
|
SilverSurfer
join:2007-08-19
1 edit | reply to fiberguy
Re: Contract Law
said by fiberguy :.. I really don't think the xxAA is just sending out letters at random with out first having obtained the material they reported. Since they have the "rights" to the protected work, they also have a right to make the allegations. Evidently you haven't been following along with the farce that is the DMCA notification process then. These companies do, in fact, randomly, and in most instances, incorrectly hand out takedown notifications like Halloween candy. This instance is but a single case in point.
Random and incorrect takedown notices happen quite frequently.
BTW, you should refrain from discussing Contract Law since you have absolutely no clue as to what you are talking about. |
|
SilverSurfer
join:2007-08-19
2 edits | reply to CoxTech1
Re: DMCA letters are easily forged, and hard to get rid of.
said by CoxTech1 :This is how you would respond if you feel that the claim of infringement is unjustified in any way. Thx, but no thx. You people are completely clueless/inept. This is how you subscribers should correctly and legally respond to Cox DMCA Takedown notifications. |
|
funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Washington, DC
·Verizon Online DSL
·Skype
| reply to russotto
Re: Scammers
said by russotto :There's no such thing as a valid DMCA takedown for torrenting. DMCA warnings apply only to ISP-hosted content. When you're uploading content from your P2P mode, it's ISP-hosted content, isn't it?
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
More features, more fun, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...
|
|
knightmb
Everybody Lies
join:2003-12-01
Franklin, TN
·AT&T DSL Service
1 edit | reply to fiberguy
Re: Contract Law
said by fiberguy :The provider has a right to take actions against those who violate 'the rules'.. and, to this day, distributing copyrighted material is not legal. The TOS clearly states you are not allowed to do it.. if it's against the TOS to do so, they certainly have the right, based on the TOS as it is, to simply pull your access on the first violation if they really wanted to. What calls into play, more so than your opinion of favoring one side, is if the provider has enough evidence to be sure that you were in violation. Here comes the flames for this.. I really don't think the xxAA is just sending out letters at random with out first having obtained the material they reported. Since they have the "rights" to the protected work, they also have a right to make the allegations. This "contract law" is based on actual law.. the TOS agreement is simply stating they are going to enforce laws. What you're talking about is the action they take while enforcing them, to which I agree. Fair enough, but how many people are going to abuse this like they do with youtube take down notices?
Someone you don't like? Craft a complaint, send it to the ISP and one strike it is with no way to appeal. Unless the ISP is going to hire a panel of technically smart Judges, I see this as one big goat screw to the customer and just another abuse of the court systems/laws by business.
--
Fight NebuAD and the like:
Click Here to pollute their data |
|
