EPS
join:2008-02-13
Hingham, MA | Title... I'm a bit confused by the post title... "kicking P2P Users off their network" is a bit different than "kicking accused pirates off their network", as the former seems to imply that Verizon is now outright objecting to P2P, while the latter seems to be more what the article is saying? | |
|
  ptrowskiGot Helix?Premium
join:2005-03-14
Putnam, CT
kudos:4
 ·VOIPo
| Re: Title... said by EPS:I'm a bit confused by the post title... "kicking P2P Users off their network" is a bit different than "kicking accused pirates off their network", as the former seems to imply that Verizon is now outright objecting to P2P, while the latter seems to be more what the article is saying? You are assuming those notices are correct and valid from the RIAA etc.
--
"So, Lone Starr, now you see that evil will always triumph because good is dumb."
Have you been touched by his noodly appendage? »www.venganza.org | |
|
 | EPS
join:2008-02-13
Hingham, MA | Re: Title... No, I used the word "accused" for a reason... | |
|
|
| | Re: Title... Right. I was confused as well. There's plenty of legitimate uses for P2P. | |
|
Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
| They are P2P users, are they not? We know that. Do we know they're pirates? You know they're pirates how, because the entertainment industry just said so? DMCA warnings have been shown to be unreliable, there's no independent verification process.
As far as I know they're just P2P users. Maybe they're pirates. Maybe they aren't. How would we know? | |
|
| EPS
join:2008-02-13
Hingham, MA | Re: Title... I said "accused pirates"... and I called them accused pirates because the DMCA warnings accuse them of being pirates... I wasn't trying to give an implication of actual guilt in my statement. | |
|
| Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium
join:2002-03-03
USA
kudos:4 | said by Karl Bode:As far as I know they're just P2P users. Maybe they're pirates. Maybe they aren't. How would we know? Because of the IP addresses they are accessing to find files aren't legitimate web sites, but are well know pirate sites? I assume that Verizon at least checks that much before kicking a user off their network. | |
|
| | | | Re: Title... Because of the IP addresses they are accessing to find files aren't legitimate web sites, but are well know pirate sites? Do you even know how this BitTorrent thing works? | |
|
| | | Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium
join:2002-03-03
USA
kudos:4
1 edit | Re: Title... said by Karl Bode:Because of the IP addresses they are accessing to find files aren't legitimate web sites, but are well know pirate sites? Do you even know how this BitTorrent thing works? You will notice I said "TO FIND FILES" and not to transfer them. Also, the MPAA & RIAA run honey pots and get the IP addresses from users sucked in trying to download copyrighted material. | |
|
| | | | Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
3 edits | Re: Title... Eh, these notifications are based on claims by paid intelligence organizations, with no accountability, who claim such and such IP address was involved in sharing a file with a particular swarm. There's no verifiable evidence involved, the ISP isn't personally tracking access to "well known pirate sites," and to infer otherwise is bullocks, to snag a phrase from a Brit friend. | |
|
| | | | | | | Re: Title... There's no need for "verifiable evidence." They are not prosecuting anyone in a court of law, simply enforcing terms of service. It is all voluntary. | |
|
| | | | | | There are links to legitimate files on "those sites" as well. Google has links to illicit torrents. | |
|
|  BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | said by Karl Bode:They are P2P users, are they not? We know that. Do we know they're pirates? You know they're pirates how, because the entertainment industry just said so? DMCA warnings have been shown to be unreliable, there's no independent verification process. As far as I know they're just P2P users. Maybe they're pirates. Maybe they aren't. How would we know? I assume the Verizon knows more about that than YOU do Karl. You're bictching it's unfair for them to be kicked off when you have zero proof they are NOT pirates.
If Verizon was blindly kicking off every p2p user they'd lose a ton of customers so logically they have have SOME system of determining who is who. | |
|
| | Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
| Re: Title... I assume the Verizon knows more about that than YOU do Karl. You're bictching it's unfair for them to be kicked off when you have zero proof they are NOT pirates. Good thing I'm just bitching and not terminating Internet access then, huh?If Verizon was blindly kicking off every p2p user they'd lose a ton of customers so logically they have have SOME system of determining who is who. They're being handed an IP address generated by an organization that's completely unaccountable to any oversight within a process that's notoriously unreliable, and then using that notice to fuel a process that can lead to account termination. Call me crazy, but I think that sucks Ox buttock. | |
|
| | | | | Re: Title... Just a quick question here Karl. Strictly anecdotal, but has anyone you know gotten a DMCA notice for sharing Linux? Apart from Redhat that is (who uses trademark violations to prevent people from sharing their software distribution). | |
|
| | | |  manfmmdPremium
join:2003-01-14
Earth, TX | Re: Title... Oooooooh, can I answer for him???
I have downloaded GB's of Linux .iso's and have NEVER received one.. | |
|
| | | | Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
| Just a quick question here Karl. Strictly anecdotal, but has anyone you know gotten a DMCA notice for sharing Linux? Apart from Redhat that is (who uses trademark violations to prevent people from sharing their software distribution). How would I or anybody else know? The entire process isn't transparent. That's my point.
People think I'm defending piracy. I'm simply arguing that terminating connections based on the claims of a bunch of paid MPAA stiffs out of Reno isn't sound policy. | |
|
| | | | | | | Re: Title... I'll give you one more chance not to sidestep the question. | |
|
| | | BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | said by Karl Bode:I assume the Verizon knows more about that than YOU do Karl. You're bictching it's unfair for them to be kicked off when you have zero proof they are NOT pirates. Good thing I'm just bitching and not terminating Internet access then, huh? If Verizon was blindly kicking off every p2p user they'd lose a ton of customers so logically they have have SOME system of determining who is who. They're being handed an IP address generated by an organization that's completely unaccountable to any oversight within a process that's notoriously unreliable, and then using that notice to fuel a process that can lead to account termination. Call me crazy, but I think that sucks Ox buttock. Hey Einstein according to YOUR own article people got cut off after MANY MONTHS and MANY notices. So quit acting like Verizon is blinding cutting off access to people that have been accused one time. And if someone is indeed innocent and continues to ignore DMCA warnings and doesn't try to figure out why they are geting them then it's their own fault for getting kicked off. | |
|
| | | | Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
| Re: Title... Umm, Einstein's dead, and my article says what it says, not what you say it says. People get kicked off of Cox's network after many notices, but that doesn't make the evidence any more substantive, nor does it miraculously provide independent third party verification that the evidence being used is valid.
If you read the follow ups to my story, Verizon confirms to me that nobody's actually been kicked from the network, which means the entire warning process remains a fear-oriented RIAA placation with no actual punitive damage. | |
|
| | | | | BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | Re: Title... said by Karl Bode:Umm, Einstein's dead, and my article says what it says, not what you say it says. People get kicked off of Cox's network after many notices, but that doesn't make the evidence any more substantive, nor does it miraculously provide independent third party verification that the evidence being used is valid. If you read the follow ups to my story, Verizon confirms to me that nobody's actually been kicked from the network, which means the entire warning process remains a fear-oriented RIAA placation with no actual punitive damage. Then what are you bitching about then and what's the point of the article? You should change you name below your avatar form "news guy" to "biased guy". Your "news" is more commentary than news. You'd think you'd know the difference. | |
|
| | | | | |
2 edits | Re: Title... said by BF69:Then what are you bitching about then and what's the point of the article? You should change you name below your avatar form "news guy" to "biased guy". Your "news" is more commentary than news. You'd think you'd know the difference. While you and TK, are not biased at all. | |
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | |  KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK | Remember Karl....
... It's all Obama's fault. | |
|
|
|
