  anonny55
@lamrc.com | first warning I'm surprised the % isnt higher for people stopping after the first notice. Pehaps more than expected are actually just downloading legal content! | |
|
 |  gorehound
join:2009-06-19 Portland, ME
| Re: first warning I think that because of laws like this we the consumers in this world should protest these large studios by only buying used products so they won't get any money.
I am not telling you all to not go and buy movies and CD's I am saying to just go and buy them used at a local store or Amazon/Internet sites.
I really am getting to hate the large useless corporate film and music studios.They ripoff their own artists and us too with overpriced stuff and they also lobby goverments to make laws like what this post is about in the UK.
I truly am boycotting all of these shysters. | |
|
 |  |   IPingUPing N4BFR Premium join:2002-08-30 Smyrna, GA clubs:
| Re: first warning So, you only buy something used. How does that model work in the long term? No new content since that's how the "large useless corporate film and music studios" actually pay people to write and produce content.
You are saying there is some value to the content, because you are willing to pay something for it. What's the middle ground then where people get paid for what they do? | |
|
  DataDoc My avatar looks like me, if I was 2D. Premium join:2000-05-14 Greenville, NC
·Suddenlink
| 3 strikes with what proof? How about having to PROVE it was done. I don't share files, but someone's say-so should just be ignored. Have specifics that can be matched by the ISP for starters. Oh, wait, ISPs aren't judges/juries. So go get a legal verdict first. -- When we get time travel, guess who will never have been President? | |
|
 |  k1ll3rdr4g0n
join:2005-03-19 Homer Glen, IL
| Re: 3 strikes with what proof? said by DataDoc :How about having to PROVE it was done. I don't share files, but someone's say-so should just be ignored. Have specifics that can be matched by the ISP for starters. Oh, wait, ISPs aren't judges/juries. So go get a legal verdict first. Do you think the government cares about proof? What universe are you living in? It's like speeding tickets, all it takes is a cops word to convict you. "Yeah he was speeding", boom $100 fine. I have gotten 1 speeding ticket, but I was able to take a class for it, but if I ever end up in court I would ask that actual evidence be presented that I sped. | |
|
 |  |  openbox9
join:2004-01-26 Alexandria, VA
·AT&T Southeast
| Re: 3 strikes with what proof? said by k1ll3rdr4g0n :It's like speeding tickets, all it takes is a cops word to convict you. "Yeah he was speeding", boom $100 fine. OT, but technically that's not true. You receive a court date when you receive your speeding ticket. You have a choice to appear in front of a judge, or admit guilt and accept the fine. If the police officer incorrectly fined you, you have an opportunity to defend your position. | |
|
 |  |   jimi419 Dadof3
join:2002-03-14 Round Lake, IL clubs:
| said by k1ll3rdr4g0n :said by DataDoc :How about having to PROVE it was done. I don't share files, but someone's say-so should just be ignored. Have specifics that can be matched by the ISP for starters. Oh, wait, ISPs aren't judges/juries. So go get a legal verdict first. Do you think the government cares about proof? What universe are you living in? It's like speeding tickets, all it takes is a cops word to convict you. "Yeah he was speeding", boom $100 fine. I have gotten 1 speeding ticket, but I was able to take a class for it, but if I ever end up in court I would ask that actual evidence be presented that I sped. ummm no the cop usually has clocked you with a radar gun which is enough evidence to convict you with so it isnt just his say so as you put | |
|
 |  |  |   Mashiki Balking The Enemy's Plans
join:2002-02-04 Woodstock, ON
·Bright House
·Rogers Hi-Speed
| Re: 3 strikes with what proof? Being clocked with a radar gun isn't enough to convict still. The cop has to prove that they were stationed in an area free of interference(noted in their duty book), that the reading was accurate, and that the gun itself was accurate according to the police force/services polices. On top of that there's some other misc stuff that has to be noted in the duty book depending on the force/service for it to be accurate as well. -- The Art of War "Excessive law is no law." - Cicero | |
|
 |  |  |  k1ll3rdr4g0n
join:2005-03-19 Homer Glen, IL
| said by jimi419 :said by k1ll3rdr4g0n :said by DataDoc :How about having to PROVE it was done. I don't share files, but someone's say-so should just be ignored. Have specifics that can be matched by the ISP for starters. Oh, wait, ISPs aren't judges/juries. So go get a legal verdict first. Do you think the government cares about proof? What universe are you living in? It's like speeding tickets, all it takes is a cops word to convict you. "Yeah he was speeding", boom $100 fine. I have gotten 1 speeding ticket, but I was able to take a class for it, but if I ever end up in court I would ask that actual evidence be presented that I sped. ummm no the cop usually has clocked you with a radar gun which is enough evidence to convict you with so it isnt just his say so as you put One time I have gone faster than what the cop told me I was going.
@openbox9 What are you going to do? Unless you have something like TrackMe, you have 0 evidence to prove you weren't speeding. It's your word against the cops, and guess who the judge will believe? Or unless of course you have a dying person or pregnant woman in the back...or on your way to the previous - then the officer probably wouldn't have written you the ticket in the first place.
@both jimi419 and Mashiki Yes the cop has to make several reports that you were going speed X, but that doesn't mean he can't make it up. It's not like the radar gun spits out a receipt with your speed and license plate - and you aren't even legally allowed to see the radar gun. I really think we need a better system in place than just trusting "radar guns", in fact I had passed one of those "the speed limit is X and you are going Y" signs and it was 5 MPH off (it said I was going 5 MPH faster than what I was going). | |
|
 |
 |  |
 |  |
 |
  Kilroy Premium,MVM join:2002-11-21 Ann Arbor, MI
·WOW Internet and C..
| Broadband is a Utility We are to the point where broadband is just as necessary as electric and water. Those who have it will maintain it to the last. How do you deal with it when the ability to connect to the Internet is almost required to function?
That and those pesky little things like tracking and verifying the complaints are accurate and so on, and so on. Let's just pass a law and let someone else worry about the details. -- When will the people realize that with DRM they aren't purchasing anything? | |
|
 |  |
 |  |  Roop
join:2003-11-15 Ottawa, ON | Re: Broadband is a Utility holy shit. i can't believe mussolini said that 60+ years ago.
well everyone, i guess we've been living in facist states for a while. | |
|
 |  |  |  sonicmerlin
join:2009-05-24 Cleveland, OH
| Re: Broadband is a Utility Well... something most people seem to fail to understand is that historically powerful dictators have always been political geniuses. They understand how things worked at a bureaucratic level, and had a keen understanding of the psychology of the masses.
People often bemoan the ineffectiveness and lack of true leadership skills of modern day democratic politicians. But in many ways this is a boon to a democracy, as this prevents those with the highest concentration of power from intelligently abusing that power.
Imagine if Bush was actually an intelligent and profound man, with vision and foresight? His totalitarian leanings and complete disregard for the constitution would have been frighteningly more malevolent and pervasive. | |
|
 |  |  |  |   Mr Neutron Hopped up on what you mopped up Premium join:2005-05-30 Gorham, ME
| Re: Broadband is a Utility said by sonicmerlin :Well... something most people seem to fail to understand is that historically powerful dictators have always been political geniuses. Until, that is, they start believing their own press releases.  | |
|
 axiomatic
join:2006-08-23 Tomball, TX | Awww jeez... not this crap again. All the P2P I do is 100% legal. Why the hell is this plan back again? So friggin' stupid.
Someone has to clue these idiots to the fact that P2P (bittorrent) is a protocol. It has many more legal uses than stealing music. | |
|
 |   KrK Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy Premium join:2000-01-17 Tulsa, OK | Re: Awww jeez... not this crap again. Ironically, in theory, everything is "File trading". | |
|
 |  |  iansltx
join:2007-02-19 Golden, CO | Re: Awww jeez... not this crap again. Except streaming. That's the only thing that isn't file sharing per se. | |
|
 |   IPingUPing N4BFR Premium join:2002-08-30 Smyrna, GA clubs:
| That's terrific, it's good that you get beneficial use of that application.
I think the question is, if someone is so persistent at violating the laws that exist today, specifically the copyright laws, how do you hold them accountable? That seems like the problem that the UK is trying to solve.
If you don't agree with the copyright laws, then work toward changing them. We have a whole city built on changing laws here in the U.S. | |
|
 |  |  axiomatic
join:2006-08-23 Tomball, TX
| Re: Awww jeez... not this crap again. My commentary is more towards the scope of what they call "P2P." If the Brits are calling the infringing of musical intellectual property "P2P" I have a major problem with this. It's stupid and inaccurate and could make this one specific problem in to a much larger problem for legit P2P users. | |
|
 chronoss2009
join:2008-09-23
·TekSavvy Solutions..
| in more important news the last UK citizen to have internet died of a mysterious car crash that saw a black van rushing away form the scene.
Citizens now are trading cards and playing board games with dice and getting out to parties in underground parking lots....
CRITICAL HIT | |
|
  KeepOnRockin Music Lover Forever Premium join:2002-11-08 Beaverton, OR
·Comcast
| Not "three strikes" again Another country obsessed with the mythical "three strikes" copyright enforcement plan. These plans are flawed and aren't a holy grail of IP policy.
It's no suprise that these plans are not being signed into law.
If ISPs have to devote more resources/manpower to keeping a tab on people (based on mere accusations of copyright infringement); who says they won't raise costs for everyone (ie subscribers) to make up for it?
This would negatively effect honest subscribers who aren't pirating. I wouldn't want my bill potentially raised due to other peoples' disregard for copyright. | |
|
 |  Roop
join:2003-11-15 Ottawa, ON
·Cybersurf Corporat..
| Re: Not "three strikes" again who cares if you are pirating or not. it's a huge invasion of privacy.
the only workaround is to encrypt everything you do. P2P makes this hard because you cannot always trust your peers. Stuff like peer gaurdian is great but what if the ISPs start looking at the clear-text sites you're visiting (mininova, piratebay). there's barely anything legal there.
it goes back to privacy. let's have an open internet. if people chose to use it one way, a srong business will find a way to profit from this without forcing states to change their laws.
but then again, the corporations influence the states in this fascist world we live in. | |
|
 |  sonicmerlin
join:2009-05-24 Cleveland, OH | I think the reason ISPs are annoyed is because they *can't* raise prices to accommodate the increased costs of their watchdog duties, lest their customers flee to their competition (well, whatever passes for "competition" in Britain). | |
|
 |
|
 |