dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
   
spc
story category
UK's 'Three Strikes' To Cost $800 Million
Assuming it even works in the first place...
by Karl Bode 09:19AM Monday Dec 28 2009
The UK's efforts to turn ISPs into piracy police will cost citizens upward of $800 million dollars, according to the Times Online. You could imagine that cost total could be substantially higher if the filters don't work, if ISPs have to eat the additional support costs, and if an entirely new government entity has to be created to track customers as they flee from one ISP to the next. ISPs, who obviously want the content industry to foot the bill for saving their own business models -- tell politicians the plan will cost them an additional $40 per subscription to implement. Politicians expect about 40,000 people (all of which of course are potential customers) will be left without broadband connections, though one tells the Times "the overall benefits to the country far outweigh the costs."

view:
topics flat nest 

inferno4

join:2008-07-06

4 edits

Socialistic Governments = Fail

Thats what happens with socialistic governments, they control every aspect of your life... Just remember this quote:

"When the government fears the people, it is called Liberty. When the people fear the government, it is called Tyranny."

Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02
kudos:42

2 recommendations

Re: Socialistic Governments = Fail

A government controlled by giant media conglomerates isn't really socialism, it's corporatism.

Bill Neilson
Premium
join:2009-07-08
Arlington, VA

Re: Socialistic Governments = Fail

said by Karl Bode:

A government controlled by giant media conglomerates isn't really socialism, it's corporatism.
Right. I was about to say.....huh?
LowRider

join:2006-06-23
Douglasville, GA
which turns to socialism

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK

1 edit
See tagline:-

"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini

XNemesis

join:2002-11-16
Kitchener, ON
I wonder how long it's going to take on a more global scale where citizens truly have enough of this corporate bullshit and greed and actually start moving en-masse to change this nonsense.
nasadude

join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS

Re: Socialistic Governments = Fail

said by XNemesis:

I wonder how long it's going to take on a more global scale where citizens truly have enough of this corporate bullshit and greed and actually start moving en-masse to change this nonsense.
a long time.

see: frog+boiling water

go read: The Sheep Look Up, by John Brunner

Bill Neilson
Premium
join:2009-07-08
Arlington, VA
said by XNemesis:

I wonder how long it's going to take on a more global scale where citizens truly have enough of this corporate bullshit and greed and actually start moving en-masse to change this nonsense.
Not in our lifetime

If we actually did such a revolt, we would need to accept that we may deal with some initial issues (corporations initially fighting back)....and most here wouldn't be able to deal with such issues. Everyone wants to complain (as right as their complaints may be) but keep their services that they are complaining about. Nobody wants to actually take action and dump what they don't like.
ctggzg
Premium
join:2005-02-11
USA
kudos:2
No matter how poorly laws are enforced, it's not a valid excuse for you to break them. Most of the people whining about the RIAA or MPAA are just trying to divert attention from the real problem.
Desdinova
Premium
join:2003-01-26
Gaithersburg, MD

Re: Socialistic Governments = Fail

"No matter how poorly laws are enforced, it's not a valid excuse for you to break them."

It is if they're poor laws that do more harm than good, either directly or indirectly. Hence, the concept of jury nullification:

»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_nullification

I'm not arguing that there shouldn't be any laws protecting intellectual properties, but when the existing laws are so bent and distorted that they do more harm than good to the culture and its growth (including financial growth), or the enforcement of those laws grows so completely out of proportion in regard to the perceived harm of violating the laws to begin with, then it seems to me that a redress of grievances needs to come from different quarters.

And I think the Three Strikes Laws takes us there. To say that if you walk across the grass three times and we'll cut your legs strikes me as being a bit extreme.

oh_really

@uk.net
said by inferno4:

Thats what happens with socialistic governments, they control every aspect of your life... Just remember this quote:

"When the government fears the people, it is called Liberty. When the people fear the government, it is called Tyranny."
New Labour? Socialist? Don't make me laugh.

I quite like how the government has made a complete u-turn since Lord Mandelson (not deserving of his title, he's deeply corrupt and is only a Lord to be in government since no one with a brain would vote for him) went to visit someone on their yacht (I can't remember who) and since coming back, has decided the UK needs to tackle the pressing problem that is piracy. I wonder who paid Mandelson to bring it to the top of the legislative agenda? Who cares about the fact that the government is about to bankrupt the country?

Anyway, it is the government mandated lunchtime period now. I need to go and eat the food that the government told me to eat, since they control every aspect of my life now.

Metatron2008
Premium
join:2008-09-02
united state

More taxes for UK residents...

As if they weren't taxed enough.

PToN
Premium
join:2001-10-04
Houston, TX

US is next

If you notice they are putting all the effort on putting strict piracy laws overseas since that's where most torrent sites are hosted. Once that's been done same laws will be placed in the US.

MPAA and RIAA just need to change their business model. Their model have not seen any significant changes for the last 100 years and selling MP3's is not a significant change.

jmn1207
Premium
join:2000-07-19
Ashburn, VA
kudos:1

Re: US is next

There will always be pirates. As long as a good quality product is made available without severe restrictions and at a fair price, consumers will continue to purchase it.

That ~$800 million dollars would be better spent lining the coffers of the ##AA executives. That's really what they want anyway, a piracy tax. Once they can establish an ISP as being liable for protecting their financial interests, they can go after a corporation with lots of money rather than a thousand grandmothers living on a meager pension. If the ISP can recover their losses through tax money or rate hikes, it's a winning solution for all parties involved; that is, all parties that consist of corporate executives, lawyers, and politicians.

FFH5
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ
kudos:5
said by PToN:

I
MPAA and RIAA just need to change their business model. Their model have not seen any significant changes for the last 100 years and selling MP3's is not a significant change.
I read this all the time. And what exactly would this new business model be? Give everything away for free? Sell it below cost? Do no advertising for new singers or groups? None of the suggestions I've seen allow for a profit for anyone but maybe pirate sites and their ad revenue.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page


PToN
Premium
join:2001-10-04
Houston, TX

Re: US is next

Why not emulate the "pirate" system..?

They make millions on ads, why cant Universal, Sony, etc have their content for free paid by advertisers..?

People would get what they want and they would make their money.

jester121
Premium
join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL

Re: US is next

said by PToN:

They make millions on ads, why cant Universal, Sony, etc have their content for free paid by advertisers..?
Because the movie and music industries are multi-billion dollar enterprises?
gorehound

join:2009-06-19
Portland, ME
This is one reason why hollywood,riaa,mpaa will no longer get a dime out of me again.now when i buy anything corporate i buy it used not new.
screw you.....................corporates are the thieves.
Kearnstd
Space Elf
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
kudos:1
remember to secure your wireless because you can bet the most basic P2P users will just jack an open AP so they dont run risk of three strikes if it comes here to the US
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports
malikeye

join:2002-09-02
Raleigh, NC

They need to change their deployment model....

Maybe if they stopped changing the damn format and gave me a perpetual license to "view/hear" their content I wouldn't need to go find it on the Internet. It is absurd that I need to pay for the same movie 3 times because the industry improves it's delivery mediums. An example : VHS -> DVD -> BluRay -> Whatever. give me a piece of paper that says "I have the right to view Star Trek" and let me download it and view it however I want, forever. Don't even get me started on the "Extended Cut", "Directors Cut", "Super Duper Unrated Cut", etc, etc that they are fleecing us with.

I own 400+ DVD's, because I wanted to be able to watch whatever I wanted, whenever I wanted to. That will NEVER happen again. I spent thousands and thousands of dollars on media, which is all collecting dust now. Yes, the argument that the media is still a viable format hasn't been forgotten.

Bottom line is, they need to change their model of distribution, so that it is fair to the consumer. Then they'll see some money flowing. Might not be the billions and billions of dollars they get for, what is essentially free, now, but maybe that will drive them to release better content, and actually work for their money?

Just my $.02.
cornelius785

join:2006-10-26
Worcester, MA

Re: They need to change their deployment model....

That make alot of sense. It expensive to buy the VHS version, then DVD, then BluRay. What really gets me is that the prices are all the same (being fairly high) and they turned a profit on the movie in weeks (typically). the least they could do is allow the end consumer to buy 'viewing rights' regardless of format/quality (viewing standard cut is X dollars, extra features is another buck or two, the '????'-cut is another buck or two, etc.).
Desdinova
Premium
join:2003-01-26
Gaithersburg, MD
The problem with that system is it locks obsolescence in place.

Let's say I released a film on VHS back in 1989. Why would I want to invest the money (sometimes substantial amounts) in going back to the source so I can remaster a higher quality version on DVD if the customers who bought the VHS copies are entitled to the newer version without paying for it? Or remastering yet again for Blu-Ray or any future formats?

The bottom line is that no one's wasted money on DVD releases for the simple reason that the discs they bought still work. They can still watch them and the content they paid for remains unchanged. No one is being forced to upgrade to Blu-Ray or any future formats as the studios aren't taking away the older content they already purchased.

The same applies to different edits of the film or different levels of available extras. If the extras are worth money to you then it's worth it to purchase a disc for them alone. If it's NOT worth it to you, then boycott the product and when the studio figures out they overpriced the disc, they'll lower the cost and you can get it at a fair price (or you can buy it used or remaindered or for $3 at Big Lots, etc.).

But maybe there's a middle ground, some room for compromise. Perhaps a useful system might involve trade-ins: you can trade that VHS in for the DVD release at a much lower price (similar to a software upgrade). The value of the trade-in to be determined by what you're trying to trade it in against; say a basic copy of the movie-only DVD would be cheapest of all but a deluxe version of the same title would be a bit more (but still less than buying the copy without a trade-in of any kind).

It still wouldn't be a perfect system but it might work better for some folks (it would also raise the value of older content as folks could buy it just to use it as a trade-in).
malikeye

join:2002-09-02
Raleigh, NC

Re: They need to change their deployment model....

What about the people that will buy the BluRay version "new". As in, don't have a previous copy. That would most likely more than subsidize the cost for them to run essentially "Right click and save as BluRay". The content is already in the most high definition quality it can be. If they run it through some software/hardware filters to enhance it, I don't see it as a "major investment" on their part. Maybe one headcount for a couple weeks to do that? They are trying to milk the consumer for more money anyway, they need to invest something.
Desdinova
Premium
join:2003-01-26
Gaithersburg, MD

Re: They need to change their deployment model....

Actually, a frame of 35mm movie film has approximately four thousand lines of resolution so 1080p is about 1/4 of the resolution available on a typical feature. We're still a format or two away from squeezing every last grain out of Hollywood's library (and every dollar out of the public's walet ).

karlmarx

join:2006-09-18
Chicago, IL

1 recommendation

The real tragedy

"The real tragedy here is that politicians, through their words and actions, tell the corporations that it is ok to steal, cheat, & lie - just don't get caught. And that is why policies to enforce citzens rights aren't working. We have a generation of corporations who have been taught that anything goes; morals are relative; and if caught hire a good politician to get out of it." (c)

(c) Copyright 2009 TKJunkMail/RetireRich
--
Remember 1 in 4 people are retarded. 25% of Americans are Republican. Coincidence? I don't think so.
33358088
Premium
join:2008-09-23
kudos:2

Wrong socialist govts ok COPYRIGHT = WRONG

Wrong socialist govts ok COPYRIGHT = WRONG
95 year + another life of author is whats the problem and having corporations have copyrights of things they dont make is the issue
and i think the end way to really solve it is to BAN the RIAA and its holding companies from holding ANY copyrights they dont make
FastLearner

join:2003-09-14
Arvada, CO

Who should pay?

Why is it the UK governments/ UK citizens/ ISPs respectability to pay for this?
Shouldn't the content providers pay for this? They are the ones benefiting for this.

disconnected

@snet.net

People More Concerned with the 'Right' to Someone Else's Pro

People seem more concerned with the 'right' to someone elses property than their own. If people spent half this much energy campaigning to protect their OWN private property rights (your home, for instance), maybe we wouldn't be quite so far down the rabbit hole of Fascism.
The music companies have the right to rent you their songs. But you complain, yet believe the government has the right to 'rent' you your homes.
And you call yourselfs Americans... you all ought to be ashamed of your misplaced priorities!
zod5000

join:2003-10-21
Victoria, BC

Waste of money.

Won't this all just lead to encryption of everything on the internet.

Kinda seems like a waste of money, since my gut just says everything would become encrypted as to disguise the contents?

axiomatic

join:2006-08-23
Tomball, TX

What a waste.

Just as there is always a better mouse trap, so too is there always a better hacker. Instead of wasting all the effort on attempting to fix something that can't be fixed, why not just flush the 800 mil down the drain? Or better yet, feed the homeless.

What a waste.
33358088
Premium
join:2008-09-23
kudos:2

encryption laws

because you all are not fighting about it and have the fall back of encryption once they have you all there , they will make laws forbidding its use or ONLY FOR certain uses aka approved sites.
THEN YOUR all screwed because the laws they have now are set and have been around a while and you didn't fight them now

YUP fascism here we come
as that famous guy once said
those that forget there past are doomed to relive it