dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
10
share rss forum feed

redwolfe_98
Premium
join:2001-06-11
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable

2 recommendations

reply to p2pistoast

Re: Copyright Alert System

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..

OZO
Premium
join:2003-01-17
kudos:2
said by redwolfe_98:

in my opinion, the ISP should be required to examine evidence of piracy before taking any action..

I think it's not their job to examine customer's traffic in search for a piracy. It requires a lot of additional resources and slows down traffic. And I, as a customer, don't want to pay for that.
--
Keep it simple, it'll become complex by itself...


Blackbird
Built for Speed
Premium
join:2005-01-14
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Frontier Communi..
reply to redwolfe_98
said by redwolfe_98:

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.. ... relying solely on the accusations of the third-parties who are making them..

The whole process is upside down. Based on mere accusation, we now have presumption of guilt and the necessity of the accused paying a fee to obtain the privilege of proving his innocence. That kind of nonsense is not going to work out well...
--
“The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.” A. de Tocqueville


NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:12
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC
said by Blackbird:

The whole process is upside down. Based on mere accusation, we now have presumption of guilt and the necessity of the accused paying a fee to obtain the privilege of proving his innocence. That kind of nonsense is not going to work out well...

While I agree in principle, this is not about criminal complaints, so "guilt/innocence" is not an issue. It is an issue between monied interests; but the end user has no leverage in this issue.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum


Blackbird
Built for Speed
Premium
join:2005-01-14
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Frontier Communi..

1 recommendation

said by NormanS:

said by Blackbird:

The whole process is upside down. Based on mere accusation, we now have presumption of guilt and the necessity of the accused paying a fee to obtain the privilege of proving his innocence. That kind of nonsense is not going to work out well...

While I agree in principle, this is not about criminal complaints, so "guilt/innocence" is not an issue. It is an issue between monied interests; but the end user has no leverage in this issue.

When you are accused of some infraction, whether you are guilty or innocent is indeed involved as an "issue," guilt being whether you really committed the infraction. This becomes especially important if some kind of 3rd-party sanction, even a system of mere "warnings", is involved. Sanctions always include creating lingering records and involve challenges against the accused's reputation. And sanctions (especially in the oft unreal world of copyright interests and power-games) can and often do evolve in intensity, becoming harsher over time.
quote:
... While it doesn't require ISPs to cut off Internet access to repeat pirates—as is the case in France and New Zealand—it will issue escalating punishments to suspected pirates, severely reducing their connection speeds after five or six offenses. ...
Note that the term is "suspected pirates"... in layman's terms that means somebody who merely stands accused, yet tangible punishment is to be meted out to a suspect by some 3rd party (who is neither the accuser nor accused). And in Western civilization and customs of common law, that process is upside down.
--
“The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.” A. de Tocqueville


NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:12
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC

1 recommendation

said by Blackbird:

said by NormanS:

said by Blackbird:

The whole process is upside down. Based on mere accusation, we now have presumption of guilt and the necessity of the accused paying a fee to obtain the privilege of proving his innocence. That kind of nonsense is not going to work out well...

While I agree in principle, this is not about criminal complaints, so "guilt/innocence" is not an issue. It is an issue between monied interests; but the end user has no leverage in this issue.

When you are accused of some infraction, whether you are guilty or innocent is indeed involved as an "issue," guilt being whether you really committed the infraction.

"Infraction", as a violation of a law, damned well is a matter of criminal jurisprudence. In California, a speeding citation is considered an, "infraction". Do you know the process (may not be the same in Indiana, but ...)? Officer issues the ticket. Driver has the option to post bail in lieu of appearance, or go before the judge. Either way, the result is a plea; post bail, the judge declares the driver, "Guilty". Otherwise, the driver can show up, enter a "Not Guilty" plea, and be arraigned for trial.

This becomes especially important if some kind of 3rd-party sanction, even a system of mere "warnings", is involved.

Third parties can't make determination of, "Guilt". They can make allegations of criminal conduct, even make "citizen's arrests"; but guilt is determined by a judge in a court of law.

Sanctions always include creating lingering records and involve challenges against the accused's reputation. And sanctions (especially in the oft unreal world of copyright interests and power-games) can and often do evolve in intensity, becoming harsher over time.

Sanctions outside of the criminal justice justice system are awards of damages against respondents in favor of complainants. Unless the civil justice system is bypassed; as it is with CAS/Six Strikes. Then it is just summary punishment without due process.

quote:
... While it doesn't require ISPs to cut off Internet access to repeat pirates—as is the case in France and New Zealand—it will issue escalating punishments to suspected pirates, severely reducing their connection speeds after five or six offenses. ...
Note that the term is "suspected pirates"... in layman's terms that means somebody who merely stands accused, yet tangible punishment is to be meted out to a suspect by some 3rd party (who is neither the accuser nor accused). And in Western civilization and customs of common law, that process is upside down.

It is not just upside down, neither is it inside out. It is pure, oppressive barbarism.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum


Blackbird
Built for Speed
Premium
join:2005-01-14
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Frontier Communi..
said by NormanS:

"Infraction", as a violation of a law, damned well is a matter of criminal jurisprudence. ... Third parties can't make determination of, "Guilt". They can make allegations of criminal conduct, even make "citizen's arrests"; but guilt is determined by a judge in a court of law.
...
It is not just upside down, neither is it inside out. It is pure, oppressive barbarism.

It appears we mean the same thing at root. Whereas you refer to guilt in a largely judicial sense, I've been referring to guilt in a more general dictionary sense, where one can be guilty of some infraction or transgression whether or not that involves a codified law. When it comes to punishment, common custom in civilized cultures is to require that guilt for whatever infraction be reasonably established before punishment can be administered. If a child 'lies' to a parent, normally the parent makes sure the lie really occurred before punishment is meted out (even if punishment is delivered through a 3rd party: "wait until your Father gets home"). In the case where "law" is involved, guilt is established in a court setting before sanctions are imposed. The principle remains the same, however: innocent (though perhaps suspect) until shown to be guilty, then punishment occurs. And indeed, with CAS, this principle is violated... which constitutes, as you well put it, oppressive barbarism.
--
“The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.” A. de Tocqueville