dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
32
share rss forum feed
« RIAAextortion »
This is a sub-selection from Shame on the ISP's


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

Re: Shame on the ISP's

said by hottboiinnc:

very true. If you get three and four notices; you are in deed knowingly doing illegal activities online.

Right because the letter I could just send to your ISP concerning your activity associated with my copyrighted work is totally legit.
--
Say no to JAMS!

hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH
once notice maybe....3 and 4?? com'on. there is NO way 3 and 4 notices are going to be fake.

thedragonmas

join:2007-12-28
Albany, GA
kudos:1

1 recommendation

reply to firephoto
said by firephoto:

said by hottboiinnc:

very true. If you get three and four notices; you are in deed knowingly doing illegal activities online.

Right because the letter I could just send to your ISP concerning your activity associated with my copyrighted work is totally legit.

and because the ISP's check to make sure the so called "movie" was actually downloaded. i.e. 4GB "movie" but user only used 400MB's that day.

because we know their record of never ever ever making an error is so high right?

hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH
ISPs don't check to see what was downloaded only because we'd have people on here claiming its in violation of their rights and the Network owners have no right to be able to do that. So you can't have your cake and eat it to.

Maybe they should just refuse to service you with one notice? Sounds fair to me.

thedragonmas

join:2007-12-28
Albany, GA
kudos:1
said by hottboiinnc:

ISPs don't check to see what was downloaded only because we'd have people on here claiming its in violation of their rights and the Network owners have no right to be able to do that. So you can't have your cake and eat it to.

Maybe they should just refuse to service you with one notice? Sounds fair to me.

i never said to verify the CONTENT, but if the MPAA says i suposadly downloaded a freakin movie on X day, but i used all of 1GB the ENTIRE week. its obvious there full of it. and the DMCA is eronious. so i should be punished for their lack of verification? i dont think so.

for the record, i do not do illegal file sharing. (i DO use bittorrent for LEGAL content, i.e. linux distro's once or twice every few months)

as to that one notice remark, fine by me, if they pay each person falsely accused say $10k for the slander/liable aspects of falsely accusing them of a crime alone.

FandBal

join:2011-03-16
Whittier, CA

1 recommendation

reply to hottboiinnc
said by hottboiinnc:

Maybe they should just refuse to service you with one notice? Sounds fair to me.

Yes. Chances are his malicious kids are up to no good if he stoped infringing and STILL got notices. They shouldn't discriminate and just disconnect the whole family at that point.
They deserve it for their criminal activities.
It's not like they use the internet for any other useful activities anyway (like real education, we got schools for that) Besides, the MPAA and RIAA will educate them far more than a wikipedia ever will, at least in matters of copyright.

I mean, it'd just be like a time machine. Who didn't like the 80's?
I liked them a lot. Back then Copyright was broken in a much smaller scale, this law will bring the 80's back, it's a win for the MPAA, RIAA and fans of the 80's. A win/win as they say.

We would really just be much better off if ISP's handed over control of who is worthy enough to use the internet and who isn't.
I'd trust someone like that to make very good judgements on who deserves the service and who doesn't.

And before people get all defensive on me. You have to remmember, the sole reason people use the internet is to watch videos and music, nothing more.
It has no educational value, and sharing files with people isn't all that important, so the top 200 sites should be enough for people like that. (everyone, except those pirates of course)

Or better yet... they should just go ahead and just allow only the top 200 sites for EVERYONE. that way there would be no risk what so ever of copyright being infringed on.
What do you guys think?

And if they still managed somehow to download a pirated picture, book, moving picture or sound. well, they could still go ahead and just disconect them altogether like planned.

As i said... the internet is not an important tool outside of watching movies and listening to music, so it wouldn't be too much of a loss to those pirates, i'd say it would be letting them off the hook easy if you ask me.
I can think of much better ways of dealing with them, but i won't get into that right now.


Gbcue
Premium
join:2001-09-30
Santa Rosa, CA
kudos:8
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
reply to hottboiinnc
said by hottboiinnc:

Maybe they should just refuse to service you with one notice? Sounds fair to me.

What would the ISP shareholders think when the company they invested in knowingly disconnects a profit stream?
--
My Blog 2.2


cordwainer

@rr.com
reply to FandBal
Um...you do realize the Internet is how all email is sent? Just for example.

I thought at first your post was sarcastic, but you really do seem to think the "Internet" is something different from what it is: a worldwide network of millions of computers we rely on for hundreds of things every day.

I'm still hoping you were joking, but if you really do think the Internet is used only for listening to music and watching, videos, and should be restricted to whomever ISPs decide is "worthy", then I hope you're also wiling to live in a world where only the "worthy" can send e-mail, access reference materials from home, pay bills without having to write a check and put it in an envelope...where there are no ATMs, or affordable merchant accounts for small businesses, where software such as TurboTax no longer exists...where there is no longer any possibility of "telecommuting", or a mother with children running a profitable small business from home, even if the children are crying...

Also good luck at this point easily booking a cheap plane flight, or finding all the products you would like in stock at your local grocery store, or sending a letter without paying 3 times as much for postage. Say good-bye to attending college while working, no matter what your schedule is, and go back to correspondence courses by snail mail, or having to take time off from work to attend a class that is offered only during work hours on a weekday.

The vast majority of Internet traffic is still NOT music or video...and not all the video or music is for entertainment purposes anyway.

So tell the businesses and individuals who rely on off-site backups they can no longer access them, because they are not "worthy" to have Internet access since they waste part of their time accessing educational videos or attending on-line traffic school or posting their resume online looking for a better job so they can support a family...

And tell the military, so sorry...but soldiers will no longer be able to see their families while they chat with them over webcam, and, for that matter, will be waiting in line a long time for their turn at the telephone, because IM and VOIP are no longer available to them...oh, and also sorry that overseas call, instead of being free, is going to cost you or your family $50.

Yes, again, I hope I've read the message wrong, and you are being extremely sarcastic...but I have to say, it sure doesn't sound like it.

Prepared to be laughed at, but willing to risk it,
cord