how-to block ads
|
crazlunatic
join:2005-12-23
Canada | [ Extreme] Has Rogers ever shut any one down for overusage? Have Rogers ever shut anyone down for going over on bandwidth? I've gone over by several hundred gigabytes for 3 months now and paying the overage fee.
Every month they tell me they may shut me down, but has this ever happened to anyone? | |
|  
sbrook
Premium,Mod
join:2001-12-14
H0H 0H0 | Re: [ Extreme] Has Rogers ever shut any one down for overusage? Nobody has reported it happening in years. | |
| 
dirtyjeffer
Merry Christmas
Premium
join:2002-02-21
London, ON | you go over every month by several hundred GIGS?!?
wtf are you downloading? everything? | |
| |
sbrook
Premium,Mod
join:2001-12-14
H0H 0H0 | Re: [ Extreme] Has Rogers ever shut any one down for overusage? Sorry, but why should you care what he's downloading. Rogers implicitly implies that he can by setting a limit on the overage charges. | |
| | |
dirtyjeffer
Merry Christmas
Premium
join:2002-02-21
London, ON
 ·Rogers Hi-Speed
| Re: [ Extreme] Has Rogers ever shut any one down for overusage? said by sbrook  :Sorry, but why should you care what he's downloading. Rogers implicitly implies that he can by setting a limit on the overage charges. meh, i disagree...Rogers puts a cap to prevent people with $10,000 internet bills (like Bell had back in the days)...and if you are downloading 100's of GIGS per month over the amount you are given, surely there is some "questionable" content being downloaded (stolen or piracy).
also, for a mod (especially in the Rogers forum), you really seem to have a hate on for them...i would have thought the mod would have to be a little more impartial. (just my two cents)
--
Today's motto: Dearly beloved, We are gathered here today to bid farewell to personal responsibility and accountability. | |
| | | | JAC70
join:2008-10-20 | Re: [ Extreme] Has Rogers ever shut any one down for overusage? Again, it's none of your business what anyone else downloads. If Rogers chooses not to enforce a hard cap, that's up to them. | |
| | | | |
sbrook
Premium,Mod
join:2001-12-14
H0H 0H0
·Rogers Hi-Speed
Host:
Rogers
Bell Canada
| Re: [ Extreme] Has Rogers ever shut any one down for overusage? JAC70 has it exactly correct. It's between crazlunatic and Rogers, unless you live on the cable segment and it's interfering with your performance ... then it's up to you to complain to rogers about your performance and let them work out who's soaking up the bandwidth. Personally, I think it's wrong to consistently exceed the caps by a high margin, but it's up to Rogers ... I get my speed here, so I have nothing to complain about, other than maybe their pushing the price of my service up - which I've done.
You should know by now (after being told many times) that being a mod has nothing whatsoever to do with the ISP and everything to do with the site / forum. My love/hate of rogers or bell has nothing to do with the moderation of these forums. If I let that interfere with my moderation of the forums, I should quit.
If Rogers really wanted to enforce caps, then they'd set a hard limit above the pay as you go exception. So far they haven't done that. | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
sbrook
Premium,Mod
join:2001-12-14
H0H 0H0
·Rogers Hi-Speed
Host:
Rogers
Bell Canada
| Re: [ Extreme] Has Rogers ever shut any one down for overusage? Again, it's absolutely irrelevent whether it's legal or illegal. Remember that Canada's view on legal and illegal in the realm of copyright is NOT the same as that being promoted by the US or the *AAs.
You say if you get a lot of excessive downloaders then you affect the performance. True. But that is between Rogers and the downloaders. Not us here in this forum. IF you feel YOUR performance or the service you are getting (say you may feel that you're paying more than you should because of the cost in satisfyling heavy downloaders), then it's up to you to complain to Rogers and let them work it out, not to go pointing random fingers. | |
| | | | | | |
dirtyjeffer
Merry Christmas
Premium
join:2002-02-21
London, ON
·Rogers Hi-Speed
| Re: [ Extreme] Has Rogers ever shut any one down for overusage? said by sbrook :
Again, it's absolutely irrelevent whether it's legal or illegal. Remember that Canada's view on legal and illegal in the realm of copyright is NOT the same as that being promoted by the US or the *AAs.
i know, but the fact that our society is in a state of moral decay is still saddening.
quote:
You say if you get a lot of excessive downloaders then you affect the performance. True. But that is between Rogers and the downloaders. Not us here in this forum. IF you feel YOUR performance or the service you are getting (say you may feel that you're paying more than you should because of the cost in satisfyling heavy downloaders), then it's up to you to complain to Rogers and let them work it out, not to go pointing random fingers.
but you can be sure if the users were kicked off, all hell would break loose and people would be complaining about how it isn't illegal and they weren't doing anything wrong, then you wind up with some stupid class action lawsuit (or whatever)...perhaps you have a short memory...several years ago, thousands were dumped off Bell for downloading too much and every one them bitched and moaned about it, because, technically, the service was unlimited, so there was no reason why they shouldn't be allowed to consumer 500 GIGS a month.
--
Today's motto: Dearly beloved, We are gathered here today to bid farewell to personal responsibility and accountability. | |
| | | | | | | |
sbrook
Premium,Mod
join:2001-12-14
H0H 0H0
·Rogers Hi-Speed
Host:
Rogers
Bell Canada
| Re: [ Extreme] Has Rogers ever shut any one down for overusage? Off topic ...
You know, it's an interesting observation that our society today is in no worse a state of moral decay than societies before it. We often compare life with the Victorians ... but in fact the Victorians were every bit as corrupt. The major difference is that in days of yore, people and politicians were far better able to sweep their moral transgressions under the carpet.
---
Back on topic ... what Rogers must then do is to set and publish hard caps allowing a reasonable bit of elbow room above the pay more cap. Make sure every body knows they're there, AND enforce them consistently. Then there are no legit complaints about legality or class action suits etc.
Yes, Bell did eject users with hard caps AFTER Rogers indicated they were going to go with hard caps. Rogers DIDN'T implement caps, so all those Bell users flocked to Rogers. Now, both Bell and Rogers have implemented caps and are facing the same kind of issues. The problem at that time was the caps that were set were quite unreasonable (Rogers was planning 5GB and Bell 5up/5down which became 10 combined and then abandoned. The general concensus of users at that time was that 20GB would have been a far more reasonable cap.
So, all hell probably wouldn't break loose this time with reasonable caps. After all, even with pay extra caps, all hell hasn't broken loose. Where there is hell is the rest of the companies' business practices (all the major ISPs) on top of caps. | |
| | | | | | JAC70
join:2008-10-20
| said by dirtyjeffer :but when you get a lot of excessive downloaders, you can affect the performance of the network for all the people in your area...perhaps as a way to curb the degradation of performance, the company spends lots of money to upgrade the network to handle the increased loads...multiply that many times for many areas and you have a lot of money spent, when really a small amount of the people have caused this...that means a price increase comes along to help pay for all the extra costs... LOL. You took that right from your Rogers playbook, didn't you.
IF heavy users were as much as a problem as Rogers claims, they would have booted them off the network by now. They'd also be slowing everyone down instead of increasing speeds.
The fact is, they want to rape us as much as they can, bandwidth overages included. I once heard that bandwidth costs them $0.15/GB. If that's true, the $25 overage charge pays for up to 167GB past the cap before they're losing money. What percentage of people do you think use that much? | |
| | | | | | |
dirtyjeffer
Merry Christmas
Premium
join:2002-02-21
London, ON
·Rogers Hi-Speed
| Re: [ Extreme] Has Rogers ever shut any one down for overusage? said by JAC70 :What percentage of people do you think use that much? very few...my point is, there are often many people who criticize the "ethics" of the ISP's who do take actions, all the while they download DVD's and CD's they didn't pay for...one who lives in a glass house, shouldn't throw stones.
--
Today's motto: Dearly beloved, We are gathered here today to bid farewell to personal responsibility and accountability. | |
| 
newspeeds
@rogers.com | They wont do anything most likely unless your own some kind of jammed node and using your connection maxing it out 24/7.
I would think it would be people in tight nodes pushing 500-700 GB a month rogers might get a bit concerned.... | |
| crazlunatic
join:2005-12-23
Canada | What do you think  haha. I'm actually downloading many Windows 7 builds | |
| koreyb
join:2005-01-08
Etobicoke, ON
 ·Primus Talkbroadband
 ·TekSavvy Solutions..
| I personally feel that the amount you download SHOULD NOT MATTER, it's if you are causing major issues with congestion due to over downloading/uploading at one time that is more of a concern..
If each person's modem was set at a speed the ISP's network can handle, then there should not be any issues.
CAPS are just a cash grab... the amount of data flowing at one time is what is a cause for concern in a congested network.
This can be controlled by not selling speeds to customers, their backbone can not support.
To say each user can only use Email and surf websites just not realistic, nor is it realistic to expect if you use your 59.95 dollar connection to do just web surfing and email, that everyone else should be doing the same.
I use 175 gigs per month approx.. CONSISTENTLY. And most is from downloading LEGAL music downloads from napster, watching youtube and transferring files to and from work.
In the US, most companies are realistic with caps.. Rogers and Bell are both insane to think 95 is realistic and value for the money... It's just a cash grab pure and simple! | |
| teknyl
join:2009-06-02 | If he's downloading Win 7 builds, then I'd be curious where I can buy them  | |
|
dazedandconfused
@rogers.com
| There was an interesting article in the Toronto Star yesterday by Michael Geist entitled "Time to slay Canadian file-sharing myths"
»www.thestar.com/sciencetech/article/647038
Interesting that so many of us think that file sharing is legal. I'm in the sharing is fair, like borrowing a book from the library and I pay my levy on black media so f*ck to those who don't agree. I know many people are against sharing, but the article, plus the comments are interesting to read. | |
| |
sbrook
Premium,Mod
join:2001-12-14
H0H 0H0
·Rogers Hi-Speed
Host:
Rogers
Bell Canada
| Re: [ Extreme] Has Rogers ever shut any one down for overusage? Personally, I believe in fair use ... what's fair? My making a copy of a CD or DVD to preserve one I've purchased, so I can toss the copy around in my car and not worry about damage. My copying a CD/DVD from a friend/online to evaluate it. If I don't like it, I destroy it. If I like it, I buy it.
I don't want to deprive those who deserve copyright revenues from getting just value for their works.
The problem is that copyright for these works is far more complex.
1) There is the songwriter's copyright, or screenwriter's copyright for the actual music.
2) There is the performer's copyright
3) There is the mechanical copyright
The first one is easy and it's the one most of us have little problem with ... but ... there are problems ... Many songwriters and screenwriters have been forced to hand over their copyright to publishers who are supposedly responsibile for getting their material into the public eye. The author of the work gets a fraction of those royalties according to a contract with the publisher. In the music industry, fortunately, many artists have set up their own publisher and contract with a major publisher to promote the music for distribution. Turning the tables around so to speak. In the film industry, sadly it doesn't work that way ... the film producer usually employs the writers, so they don't see royalties.
Next is the performer's copyright. This is the royalty paid for simply performing a work and comes at two levels. One is for direct performance, the other for indirect performance. Again, this is usually given over to the record company, or the film maker etc, and a portion given back to the artist.
Next is the mechanical copyright, and this is the most contentious. This is the one that the RIAA and MPAA and CRIA are most at war with ... this is the copyright they claim on the performed/public work and in theory prohibits your making a copy of it. It is essentially the one that prohibits you changing media ... The radio performing a song pays the mechanical copyright because all those listeners aren't buying a CD. It's an extortion for lost sales. This is why the RIAA and MPAA and CRIA are fighting so hard. They've survived the transittion to broadcasting from limited license with the same business model, so they think they can continue to promote that same model in the digital age.
The problem here is our system of copyrights. I think we all agree that the artist and writer deserve some kind of consideration. The question is does the recording industry deserve the mechanical copyright. Do they deserve to make money from all on the basis of lost sales? | |
| | |
dirtyjeffer
Merry Christmas
Premium
join:2002-02-21
London, ON
·Rogers Hi-Speed
| Re: [ Extreme] Has Rogers ever shut any one down for overusage? said by sbrook :Personally, I believe in fair use ... what's fair? My making a copy of a CD or DVD to preserve one I've purchased, so I can toss the copy around in my car and not worry about damage. sadly, that is a far cry from what really goes on...the reality is, if you purchased a CD/DVD and wanted a backup copy, you wouldn't need to download it off the net as you would already have the original in hand.
what most of the people who steal the material fail to realize, is there are thousands of people who depend on the purchase of the material they have taken without paying for it...just because it is off the net, and virtually impossible to be caught, doesn't make it right, or in many cases, their right.
--
Today's motto: Dearly beloved, We are gathered here today to bid farewell to personal responsibility and accountability. | |
| | | |
dazedandconfused
@rogers.com
| Re: [ Extreme] Has Rogers ever shut any one down for overusage? Really. It puts me in mind of people who post comments like "P2P is only used for theft". Let me give you an example. I recently purchased two used HP laptops off ebay. Both come with legit XP home edition bulk licenses and a proprietary recovery software (with drivers specific to each laptop). The laptops didn't have harddrives, battery(s) or RAM. So. I'm stuck? I purchased the laptops that are still under warranty, but I can't get a recovery disk because HP no longer supports that model. And the system have legitimate XP licenses, but I don't have XP home. Therefore, I'm at a loss even though I have a legal right to own both of these items? So. Without P2P, I'd be SOL. Though I have the right to own this software and recover the systems. | |
| | | | |
dirtyjeffer
Merry Christmas
Premium
join:2002-02-21
London, ON
·Rogers Hi-Speed
| Re: [ Extreme] Has Rogers ever shut any one down for overusage? yea, i am sure that happens all the time. 
downloading a copy of XP that you should "legally" own is understandable...that doesn't account for hundreds of gigs per month, every month.
--
Today's motto: Dearly beloved, We are gathered here today to bid farewell to personal responsibility and accountability. | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | 
KPaul
join:2007-02-08 | Re: [ Extreme] Has Rogers ever shut any one down for overusage? but still illegal?
seems you have some points of your own you need to work out. | |
| | | | | | 
Stewy
Premium
join:2007-12-12
Kitchener, ON
| said by dirtyjeffer :that doesn't account for hundreds of gigs per month, every month. those hundreds of gigs come from hordes piggybacking on wireless connections. Sometimes people are unaware sometimes it's deliberate. | |
| | | | | | |
dirtyjeffer
Merry Christmas
Premium
join:2002-02-21
London, ON
·Rogers Hi-Speed
| Re: [ Extreme] Has Rogers ever shut any one down for overusage? there might be a few of those out there, but there are plenty of people in here who openly admit to downloading hundreds of GB or even a couple of TB per month of stuff.
--
Today's motto: Dearly beloved, We are gathered here today to bid farewell to personal responsibility and accountability. | |
| | | | | | | |
sbrook
Premium,Mod
join:2001-12-14
H0H 0H0
·Rogers Hi-Speed
Host:
Rogers
Bell Canada
| Re: [ Extreme] Has Rogers ever shut any one down for overusage? The point is that ISPs speak out of both sides of their mouths.
They say they don't want people downloading unlimited, and yet provide a pricing scheme that promotes, for a relatively nominal sum, just that!
ISPs currently have in their arsenal of weapons in the terms and conditions of use a clause related to the use of the service to transfer copyright material. This is why they are doing the "notice and notice" thing with the copyright holders.
It's very important to remember too that most stuff on the net is protected by copyright ... these very pages are copyright 1999-2009 dslreports.com! The fact remains that copyright in this digital age is very hard to define, to define license and to enforce.
The recording and motion picture industry associations have gone about protecting the copyright by agressive means that we rarely see in the printed media (although it is done occasionally). But the industry wants ISPs to be their police force. | |
| | | | | | | | vintagewino
join:2003-07-22
Grimsby, ON
·TekSavvy Solutions..
·magicjack.com
·Look Communications
| said by dirtyjeffer :there might be a few of those out there, but there are plenty of people in here who openly admit to downloading hundreds of GB or even a couple of TB per month of stuff.
To me, the legality of the material is irrelevant. I have a 200GB limit, and haven't even come remotely close to even approaching that limit.
But, given the general consensus that cable being faster (let's use 8000), a quick calculation tells me that still works out to something over 50 hours to d/l 200G+. Not to mention the time required to catalog and store the above mentioned files. That person must either not: (a) sleep, (b) work, and/or (c) have a life.
I'm involved in a service where a device can generate approximately 4G of data to be sent to storage within a typically busy working day (99.99% of this data is images, the remaining is automatic cataloguing, billing, history, etc.). Even they have a problem of exceeding 200GB in a month.
Even going whacko with my 12MP camera, and 8GB cards ... I donno ... | |
| | | | 
Taylortbb
Premium
join:2007-02-18
Waterloo, ON
·TekSavvy Solutions..
| said by dirtyjeffer :what most of the people who steal the material fail to realize, is there are thousands of people who depend on the purchase of the material they have taken without paying for it...just because it is off the net, and virtually impossible to be caught, doesn't make it right, or in many cases, their right. If only it was so simple. I make a living producing intellectual property, software code to be exact, so I'm saying this as someone who knows both sides of the argument. I'm not convinced that copying of intellectual property is wrong, I hate the term intellectual property, it suggests that ideas are like property, but they're not.
At the same time, I also desire to support creators of intellectual property. 95% of music I listen to is bought or copied from immediate family. I'm pretty sure that one or two copies of a disc is okay morally. I also make sure to purchase music by independent artists, major labels I'm far more lax about.
The situation is somewhat different with movies. I haven't paid for a DVD in years, download all my movies. At the same time, I see about 60 movies a year in theaters. I hardly feel like I'm freeloading on the industry.
So is what I've done really equivalent to smashing a window and grabbing something? I don't think so. That causes a loss to someone else, I took their physical property. If I took a photo of a statue in the window and carved my own it's not nearly so clear.
I encourage you to step back and consider that things aren't always so black and white.
Aside from the point about intellectual property, it's between the user and Rogers what he downloads. We don't need internet vigilantes, or even just people passing judgment. You make it sound like he was killing baby seals with his internet connection.
--
Taylor Byrnes
www.taylorbyrnes.org | |
| | | | |
dirtyjeffer
Merry Christmas
Premium
join:2002-02-21
London, ON
·Rogers Hi-Speed
| Re: [ Extreme] Has Rogers ever shut any one down for overusage? said by Taylortbb :I encourage you to step back and consider that things aren't always so black and white. i have a couple of friends who are in a band...when people download and share their music, without paying for it, that financially hurts them...they haven't spend the past year writing music, practicing, and perfecting it, and investing thousands of dollars producing a CD in order to get money for their work, only for people to own that material without paying for it...it is that black and white and the only ones who don't see it that way are the ones who want all their media for free and have to find some way to justify it to themselves.
--
Today's motto: Dearly beloved, We are gathered here today to bid farewell to personal responsibility and accountability. | |
| | | | | |
wake up
@videotron.ca
| Re: [ Extreme] Has Rogers ever shut any one down for overusage? said by crazlunatic :Have Rogers ever shut anyone down for going over on bandwidth? I've gone over by several hundred gigabytes for 3 months now and paying the overage fee. Every month they tell me they may shut me down, but has this ever happened to anyone? Let them. You paid your overage fee's. If they disconnect you, fight. If they try to charge you while being disconnected, fight. I'm sure CIPPIC or other consumer union would love to pick this fight.
It doesn't matter what you download. It's no one's business. And Rogers or anyone else for that matter has no right to question what you download.
I know I share my line with the guy next door. I don't question what he does, and I don't care.
Rogers is supposed to be a dump pie that feeds you. That's it.
Off Topic:
said by dirtyjeffer :i have a couple of friends who are in a band...when people download and share their music, without paying for it, that financially hurts them... I have more than one set of friends who write & play music at local bars.
They told me they got more exposure on youtube and torrents than doing the local thing and selling CD's. They said as an indie the web is the best thing to happen to them. More of a crowd. More downloads to get exposed to their music and word travels by mouth. They also said they breal into market around the world as opposed to local. Not every download is a sale or would have been a sale. Those that buy will buy. Exposure to the buying people is a must.
Then there is that girl who won Canadian Idol (She is from Gatineau, Quebec). Her dad is also a musician that we have seen perform many times. He was not only giving us his CD, but also one from his daughter who won in (I think it was 2006) and told us to listen to it and share it with others.
When we went to Canada day celebrations in Ottawa I had no clue who she was when sang. But the kids sure picked up on it and told us we had her CD that the dad gave us.
So, give a CD away, download it, same chit.
It's exposure. It's what musicians want. It's what generates sales and a following.
Maybe you want to talk to your "band buddies" what exposure is to both the buying and non-buying crowd.
You seem to think each download is a lost sale. Please wake up. | |
| | | | | | |
sbrook
Premium,Mod
join:2001-12-14
H0H 0H0
·Rogers Hi-Speed
Host:
Rogers
Bell Canada
| Re: [ Extreme] Has Rogers ever shut any one down for overusage? There's the real rub ... remember that I keep mentioning the different "copyrights" ... there's the writer's copyright, there's the performer's copyright, and then there's the mechanical copyright.
Often people who download CDs will go out and buy the CD for their own genuine article. They want to test drive it first to see if there are enough songs on the CD to make its purchase worthwhile. And often people who download a CD will not have gone out to buy that CD under any circumstances.
So, there is "exposure" and it's one of those semi-tangible items of value like "goodwill" which can be assigned a value when valuing a business. Exposure offsets the lost royalties to the writer and to the performer.
The real complainer is the holder of the mechanical copyright ... the recording company label. To the label, if you copy a CD, it's lost mechanical copyright loyalty revenue (which for all intents and purposes is pure profit). They don't care about exposure ... after all, they have an exposure machine that aims to give every recording and artist the exposure that * they* want to give it, which may not be the amount that the artists involved would like. Look at the number of "one hit wonders" ... look at the number of artists who have no talent, but seem to keep selling records due to record industry hype.
This matter of copyright infringement is being driven by the loss of mechanical copyright royalties by the recording industry. Sure, they say they're acting on behalf of the artists, and it's the artists who are losing out, but it's really about their mechanical copyrights! After all, the amount they actually pass on to the artist is pathetically small amount from recording sales. | |
| | | | | | |
dirtyjeffer
Merry Christmas
Premium
join:2002-02-21
London, ON
·Rogers Hi-Speed
| said by wake up :
I have more than one set of friends who write & play music at local bars.
They told me they got more exposure on youtube and torrents than doing the local thing and selling CD's.
i am not talking about exposure, i am talking about money...that is great that they get lots of exposure, but they can't pay their bills with exposure, they need money.
quote:
They said as an indie the web is the best thing to happen to them. More of a crowd. More downloads to get exposed to their music and word travels by mouth. They also said they breal into market around the world as opposed to local. Not every download is a sale or would have been a sale. Those that buy will buy. Exposure to the buying people is a must.
almost every band has a "sampler" of their music on their site...if you want to "try it out", you can do it there...if you don't like it, don't buy it...so why do millions of people download the whole thing with no intention of buying it...the same goes for software and movies.
quote:
Then there is that girl who won Canadian Idol (She is from Gatineau, Quebec). Her dad is also a musician that we have seen perform many times. He was not only giving us his CD, but also one from his daughter who won in (I think it was 2006) and told us to listen to it and share it with others.
that's fine...HE gave it to you, you didn't take it without their permission.
quote:
So, give a CD away, download it, same chit.
no, it is not the same thing...if the band (or someone affiliated to it) gives you a CD, that is their choice, as a way of promoting their material...if you hit up the P2P programs and download the CD on your own, that is stealing it.
quote:
It's exposure. It's what musicians want. It's what generates sales and a following.
musicians want exposure, but they also want to be paid for their work...what they don't want is everyone enjoying their hard work without paying for it...that isn't how it works...and to say it generates sales is false...i can assure you more people download it and keep quiet than download and say, "Hey, that is a good album, I am going to pay $15 for that CD now"...stop kidding yourself.
quote:
Maybe you want to talk to your "band buddies" what exposure is to both the buying and non-buying crowd.
i have, and it is something that is very discouraging to them...they spend a lot of time and money creating the music, only to have people "steal" it from them...they don't mind handing out a few copies as promotional material, but they don't want their material floating around the net where everyone can have it for free...what is the point in spending all that time and money creating it if you work all year to make an album, and all you are left is a bill for $20,000.
quote:
You seem to think each download is a lost sale. Please wake up.
it is...because you shouldn't have it if you didn't pay for it.
go back 20 years, before the internet...you either bought the album, or waited for the song to come on the radio...you couldn't type a few keys on the keyboard and download the whole album in 15 minutes, burn it to disc in another couple of minutes and away you go...just because the technology exists, doesn't mean it is the right thing to do.
--
Today's motto: Dearly beloved, We are gathered here today to bid farewell to personal responsibility and accountability. | |
| | | | | | | |
got it wrong
@videotron.ca
| Re: [ Extreme] Has Rogers ever shut any one down for overusage? Before the internet and during it's early years and before CD's, I used to tape the music via radio onto a cassette.
As did many many students and working folks.
Many took their LP and recorded it to cassettes and slapped it in their car.
It's no diff.
Just the means have changed.
When AC/DC or Black Sabbath or Judas priest or the Scorpions, or Bon Jovi were all the rage, do you think each kid bought their own?
No.
Maybe a couple did and the rest copied it to cassette, or recorded it off the radio onto cassettes via their "ghetto box" (a ghetto box was the rage then as well).
Before MP3's, before CD's, before internet and into the early years of the internet, people still did the exact same thing.
Nothing has changed.
Exposure has changed and technology has changed.
damn I feel old now. Thanks Jeffy | |
| | | | | | | | |
dirtyjeffer
Merry Christmas
Premium
join:2002-02-21
London, ON
·Rogers Hi-Speed
| Re: [ Extreme] Has Rogers ever shut any one down for overusage? said by got it wrong :
Before the internet and during it's early years and before CD's, I used to tape the music via radio onto a cassette. as did i, but the sound quality recording of an AM radio broadcast on an audio cassette in a $100 "ghettoblaster" doesn't compare to listening to a quality "original" on your $2000 stereo system (home or car), so in most cases, you simply went out and purchased the media.
now, you don't need that, you can easily download it, burn it to disk and enjoy all the benefits of buying it, without paying for it and unfortunately, that is what happens more often than not, whether you wish to believe it or not (so you don't feel guilty doing it yourself).
--
Today's motto: Dearly beloved, We are gathered here today to bid farewell to personal responsibility and accountability. | |
| | | | | | | |
Taylortbb
Premium
join:2007-02-18
Waterloo, ON
·TekSavvy Solutions..
| said by dirtyjeffer :almost every band has a "sampler" of their music on their site...if you want to "try it out", you can do it there...if you don't like it, don't buy it...so why do millions of people download the whole thing with no intention of buying it...the same goes for software and movies. Actually, studies (that aren't paid for by the RIAA) consistently show that P2P users buy substantially more music than most people. So obviously there's enough people that do this for it to show a consistent trend.
I also think you completely missed my entire argument and latched on to my black and white statement. Please, tell me how seeing 60 movies a year in theaters makes me a freeloader on the industry?That's $600/year in ticket sales, that's A LOT of money. Most people don't spend that on DVDs.
I wont bother repeating what everyone else has said about exposure. But there are plenty of bands and record labels that realize this. Just look at the Canadian label Nettwerk, quite successful while supporting file sharing. Or »www.musiccreators.ca , they've got a pretty good list of major and small artists that think file sharing is okay.
--
Taylor Byrnes
www.taylorbyrnes.org | |
| | xgmranti
join:2005-10-31
Almonte, ON
·Rogers Hi-Speed
·Primus Telecommuni..
| The sadness is people continue to debate about completely pointless issues in ethics and law when compared to the far more severe problems within society.
As far as I know, I haven't heard of anyone getting kicked off. I've hit 500GB consistently a few times and exceed the cap to varying degrees each month. Using Extreme Plus service. | |
| 
idlewillkill
Go Blue
Premium
join:2005-09-28
North York, ON
1 edit | I can understand arguments such as DJs; that said:
1) I doubt many, if any of us are squeaky-clean in what we download, or for that matter, upload over the interwebs.
2) Given that ISPs concern themselves as far as bit caps go, with how much is transferred rather than what is transferred, it's not germane to these discussions.
Whether someone's dropping 1 TB a month on hentai toons or linux distros, it has the same impact on the network. | |
|
Demonoid
@rogers.com
| Rogers should seriously consider upgrading to DOCSIS 3.0 and switch to fibre-optics. In the US they're paying $50 for 10/2 line with UNMETERED connections, now that's a value. It's kinda sad, we're getting ripped off downloading some 100gb, while people next to us downloading terabytes and laughing at us. Thanks to greedy Rogers and Bell. | |
| |
dirtyjeffer
Merry Christmas
Premium
join:2002-02-21
London, ON
·Rogers Hi-Speed
| Re: [ Extreme] Has Rogers ever shut any one down for overusage? said by Demonoid :
Rogers should seriously consider upgrading to DOCSIS 3.0 and switch to fibre-optics. In the US they're paying $50 for 10/2 line with UNMETERED connections, now that's a value. It's kinda sad, we're getting ripped off downloading some 100gb, while people next to us downloading terabytes and laughing at us. Thanks to greedy Rogers and Bell.
upgrading costs millions of dollars...why should i pay more (through price increases) so you can download 2 TB per month of crap...my internet works just fine...go buy your movies and music - that is why they make it.
--
Today's motto: Dearly beloved, We are gathered here today to bid farewell to personal responsibility and accountability. | |
| | |
Stewy
Premium
join:2007-12-12
Kitchener, ON
| Re: [ Extreme] Has Rogers ever shut any one down for overusage? said by dirtyjeffer :go buy your movies and music - that is why they make it. is this the same guy who said the following just a day or two ago.
said by dirtyjeffer :I bought a CD (Yea, I know, I could have downloaded it for free). Are you telling me that you bought a CD that was available to download for free ! can you provide us a link to said treasure? | |
| | | |
dirtyjeffer
Merry Christmas
Premium
join:2002-02-21
London, ON | Re: [ Extreme] Has Rogers ever shut any one down for overusage? yea, i could have downloaded the disc, but that isn't right...i did the right thing and purchased it.  | |
| | |
KrappyInternet
@rogers.com | You're going to pay more regardless and for less service. | |
| | | |
dirtyjeffer
Merry Christmas
Premium
join:2002-02-21
London, ON
·Rogers Hi-Speed
| Re: [ Extreme] Has Rogers ever shut any one down for overusage? said by KrappyInternet :You're going to pay more regardless and for less service. no, i pay less than i paid Bell and get 2.5 times faster service...no issues either.
--
Today's motto: Dearly beloved, We are gathered here today to bid farewell to personal responsibility and accountability. | |
| Poser
join:2002-07-28
| I was kicked off rogers during the @home days. Back then the max upload speed was 40kB/s, but I was able to get over 800kB/s. I would send large files to my friends and family. When you upload at 800kB/s during peak times, it pisses off a lot of people. People complained, they looked into it, and I got kicked off for degrading the service. So it wasn't for over usage, because back then everything was unlimited. | |
|
KPaul
join:2007-02-08 | legally, if you own a copy of the windows key, you cannot download a copy of the cd to supplement it.
99% sure of that | |
| | 
mlerner
Premium
join:2000-11-25
Nepean, ON
·Rogers Hi-Speed
·TekSavvy Solutions..
·Bell Sympatico
| Re: [ Extreme] Has Rogers ever shut any one down for overusage? said by KPaul :legally, if you own a copy of the windows key, you cannot download a copy of the cd to supplement it. 99% sure of that You shouldn't have to, if it's a retail copy you can call Microsoft for a replacement disc for a nominal fee, same with computer manufacturers, most of them still offer disc replacements. | |
|
sbrook
Premium,Mod
join:2001-12-14
H0H 0H0
·Rogers Hi-Speed
Host:
Rogers
Bell Canada
| Exposure is what sells music and movies. No exposure, few sales. Exposure has a value.
For indie artists, exposure is exceptionally important ... but indie artists have ALWAYS had problems getting exposure and therefore sales. Long before the digital age, to be indie meant starvation. The music industry has always favoured the label tied artists, because the industry provides the exposure and the means to get sales.
At the same time, the industry charges their costs to the artists for exposure, for the production, for the distribution. Then they also charge the buyer for all these things. Crediting the artist for sales to reduce their bill. Talk about double dipping.
I really hate the idea of stealing from the performers ... but except for the indies, the performers and writers get so very little out of a record sale. As an artist, you have to sell millions of CDs to break even. The old idea of silver and gold records are nothing these days to the artist - they see so little benefit. | |
| |
dirtyjeffer
Merry Christmas
Premium
join:2002-02-21
London, ON
·Rogers Hi-Speed
| Re: [ Extreme] Has Rogers ever shut any one down for overusage? said by sbrook :
For indie artists, exposure is exceptionally important ... but indie artists have ALWAYS had problems getting exposure and therefore sales. Long before the digital age, to be indie meant starvation. The music industry has always favoured the label tied artists, because the industry provides the exposure and the means to get sales.
At the same time, the industry charges their costs to the artists for exposure, for the production, for the distribution. Then they also charge the buyer for all these things. Crediting the artist for sales to reduce their bill. Talk about double dipping.
it doesn't matter what their business model is...just because you don't like it, or you disagree with it, doesn't make it any more a right to do.
the reality is, large labels invest millions into bands, through marketing and distribution along with a variety of promotions and other retail initiatives...there are lots of people involved in the music business who rely on the sales of those products for their livelihood...and i am not talking about millionaire Bono, i am talking about all the "little people" involved in the process.
remember, during this economic collapse of the auto sector, it isn't the big car company exec's "feeling the pinch"...it is all the workers in the plants that are gone, as are many of the workers who work in all the supporting industry as well.
--
Today's motto: Dearly beloved, We are gathered here today to bid farewell to personal responsibility and accountability. | |
| | |
sbrook
Premium,Mod
join:2001-12-14
H0H 0H0
·Rogers Hi-Speed
Host:
Rogers
Bell Canada
| Re: [ Extreme] Has Rogers ever shut any one down for overusage? Don't think that I don't agree with you that there is a potential element of "theft" in copying copyright material.
What I'm talking about though is that the industry model is such that the amount lost to copying for the artists and writers is pennies from the cost of the CD. So to go around implying that the number of sales lost is theft from their arists of their rightful royalties may be true, but in terms of real dollar value in the artists pocket, it's pathetically little compared with what the labels themselves are making.
What so many people want of the industry is to tell the whole truth about who is being impacted and by how much.
BUT that said, they also need to find a way to work with technology, not fight it, or they need to find new ways to earn their money and stop relying on the mechanical copyright. I have no problems feeding the artists for their works. | |
| | |
Stewy
Premium
join:2007-12-12
Kitchener, ON
| said by dirtyjeffer : it doesn't matter what their business model is...just because you don't like it, or you disagree with it, doesn't make it any more a right to do. the reality is, large labels invest millions into bands, through marketing and distribution along with a variety of promotions and other retail initiatives...there are lots of people involved in the music business who rely on the sales of those products for their livelihood...and i am not talking about millionaire Bono, i am talking about all the "little people" involved in the process. I don't think I agree, in my opinion everything that is broadcasted over the air is fair game. I can record a TV show and put it on my portable display and watch it over and over again. For example, I pay for my cable that has 30 digital music stations why can't I record parts of it and play it on my portable player and listen to it at a time of my choosing over and over again.
Fair is Fair use. | |
| | | |
dirtyjeffer
Merry Christmas
Premium
join:2002-02-21
London, ON
·Rogers Hi-Speed
| Re: [ Extreme] Has Rogers ever shut any one down for overusage? said by Stewy :
For example, I pay for my cable that has 30 digital music stations why can't I record parts of it and play it on my portable player and listen to it at a time of my choosing over and over again.
Fair is Fair use.
while i don't know if that is technically possible, your example isn't the same thing...the key part is how you started your sentence - "I pay for..."...those radio channels are included in your monthly subscription cost...Rogers then pays the "creator/distributor" of those channels, and the money feeds down the stream.
in the case of downloading everything you want for free, there is no money exchanged, and no one is being paid for the content that is "for sale".
a great example is two posts above you:
said by RogersCustomer :
The max you'll be charged by going over is $25, I've paid that fee twice now and don't mind since the purchasing the particular things I've downloaded would have cost more :\.
now do you see what i mean?
--
Today's motto: Dearly beloved, We are gathered here today to bid farewell to personal responsibility and accountability. | |
| | | | |
Stewy
Premium
join:2007-12-12
Kitchener, ON
| Re: [ Extreme] Has Rogers ever shut any one down for overusage? said by dirtyjeffer :sentence - "I pay for..."...those radio channels are included in your monthly subscription cost...Rogers then pays the "creator/distributor" of those channels, and the money feeds down the stream. in the case of downloading everything you want for free, there is no money exchanged, and no one is being paid for the content that is "for sale". What I'm trying to get to is if I pay for all of those TV channels and Music channels and pay for a DVD Movie rental with unlimited rentals.
"just because you don't like it, or you disagree with it, doesn't make it any more a right to do."
I do disagree with the business model, but I also believe that I do have a "fair" use right to do so.
In the end, on some months I may end up downloading 250 Gigs which is way over my allocated bandwidth, of perhaps tv show and music that's being broadcasted over the air (but I never download or care for music anyway) or DVD's that I already PAY a monthly subscription for.
If I'm paying for it, no matter what the business model is, I believe that I have a fair and ethical moral right to do so. | |
| | outFire
join:2009-05-13
Toronto, ON
| Dirtyjeffer,
"you go over every month by several hundred GIGS?!? wtf are you downloading? everything?"
I think you should watch what you said, and this is the gentleman issue with rogers and not with you, so do not over rage yourself please.
If you ever feel you are one of those who have been effected by network abuser then go fight it off with rogers. "but when you get a lot of excessive downloaders, you can affect the performance of the network for all the people in your area...perhaps as a way to curb the degradation of performance, the company spends lots of money to upgrade the network to handle the increased loads...multiply that many times for many areas and you have a lot of money spent, when really a small amount of the people have caused this...that means a price increase comes along to help pay for all the extra costs...so all of us pay for the reckless use of the network by a few."
It is none of your business how the uses his internet, you have no right to swear at the man. | |
|
sbrook
Premium,Mod
join:2001-12-14
H0H 0H0
·Rogers Hi-Speed
Host:
Rogers
Bell Canada
| OK, let's leave this alone please. Forum rules do state that this particular discussion is not appropriate for the forum. I let it go to see where it would go, and it's gone down the toilet. Should have known. SO ... either go back to the original topic or leave it alone. Thank you. | |
| | | | |
RogersCustomer
@on.ca
| I've been over the past few months, due completely to my downloading of full series of shows instead of just episodes (I'd run out of things to watch while commuting).
I've been over by 5-50GB, however this isn't a regular occurance. Normally I'm between 25-50GB/month and that's with heavy podcast (13 or so) downloading, gaming (including demos and updates), and the usual internet traffic.
The max you'll be charged by going over is $25, I've paid that fee twice now and don't mind since the purchasing the particular things I've downloaded would have cost more :\.
Not wanting to start that debate though.
This month I'm trying to stay under the limit.
- D | |
| Daphoid
join:2005-01-04 | Yes, I've gone over the limit on 3 occasions. Yes, I've been charged the $25 overage fee, No my service has not been throttled. I am attempting to stay under the limit this month.
Nice and simple.
- D | |
| | | (topic locked) | |
|
