Broadband Tech > Security > Security > Copyright Alert System

Copyright Alert System

"A source with direct knowledge"? Sounds like a sold source to me.

reply to p2pistoast
Video reads like a webad for some turnkey solution. I had to run to the bathroom a few times to gag on some
of the phraseology used in the video.

"...initial alerts are merely educational..."
 

"...subscriber must ack reciept of the alert, or watch an educational video... or watch an add'n video..."
 

"...no personal information is shared..."
 

"...independent review system..."
 

"...goal is to support the creative work we love and enjoy..."
 

reply to p2pistoast
Glad that not all ISP are so stupid and rush to joint it. For example, read DSLE direct response to the query. Vote with your wallet, if your ISP wants to become a police, working for MAFIAA. That's all you can do.
--
Keep it simple, it'll become complex by itself...

reply to p2pistoast
The video mentions only people making the content available by P2P. Surely people are sharing by other means as well? Is it only P2P content that can really be monitored? The people downloading the content are not blamed?

The lawyers seems to go after the uploaders because they are the ones making the content available. But for a user name like "p2pistoast" it really isn't: »blogs.computerworld.com/internet···-strikes

quote:

---

6. Diehard "casual" pirates could ride out the Six Strikes storm, since nothing more happens after the sixth warning. At the start of WYNC’s OntheMedia interview, it was said that Six Strikes is supposed to "stop serial illegal downloaders." Later during the interview, when asked what happens if you get Strike 7, 8 or 9, Lesser said, “Once they've been mitigated, they've received several alerts, we're just not going to send them any more alerts. Because they are not the kind of customer that we're going to reach with this program." Nothing more “under this program” will happen. "For us it is reaching the casual infringer which is a large percentage of peer-to-peer piracy," Lesser stated.

---

reply to Curiosity

reply to Curiosity
@ Curiosity
Look up "deep packet inspection" on your search engine of choice. Short ver, if it's an IP packet crossing your provider's
network, it could easily be DPI'd.

Regards

@NormanS
I couldn't give you a nuts and bolts response to that question as I don't work in the ISP arena.

Nor am I a lawyer so I can't speak on the intent part of it.

I just have enough experience in the field that what they're claiming in the video is possible,
and it rather gets under my skin they're dressing this up as a "we're all one big happy family"
feelgood thing when it genuinely is a Big Brother / 1984 gong show.

Regards

reply to NormanS

Sort of difficult to make something freely available to the public, then turn around and claim infringement.

reply to HELLFIRE

Bottom line here is those who already have done so switched to using a VPN with the OpenVPN client, others having read this will learn and end up using one. The rest are either oblivious or just don't care.

This is what I dont understand why people are mostly worried about Google watching them what they download from the net.

Well, guess what...Its your ISP that knows everything what you do on the net. Period. And they have control over it, they can shut you down for life banning you forever from using a home internet.

Also, why can they just focus on the Big Fish. I mean seriously.
Lets put it this way, if a torrent site has all the pirated music and movies on that site, there the ones who should pay the price.

Because it's easier to go after the drug addict than the dealer, after consumer rather than big business, after Martha Stewart rather than Bernie Madoff with your money, or Enron. And the list goes on.

Then they can hold up those little fishies as examples to pretend they are doing their job to prevent fraud etc. to foster a safe and fair market.

Just like SEC = Scam Enabling Commission.
So too is this CAS a scam. Con Artists Scam.

--
Be a Good Netizen - Read, Know & Complain About Overly Restrictive Tyrannical ISP ToS & AUP »comcast.net/terms/ »verizon.net/policies/
Say Thanks with a Tool Points Donation

reply to p2pistoast
i am concerned about false accusations by the third-parties who are contracted to discover possible copyright violations..

then you have to pay a $35.00 fee to contest a false accusation of piracy..

in my opinion, the ISP should be required to examine evidence of piracy before taking any action.. if someone is accused of dowloading copyrighted material which cannot legally be downloaded, i think the ISP should examine the material in question to make sure that it is indeed something that cannot legally be downloaded rather than relying solely on the accusations of the third-parties who are making them..

reply to redwolfe_98