Slashdot Log In
UK ISPs To Face Piracy Deadline
Posted by
kdawson
on Fri Feb 22, 2008 12:28 PM
from the opening-envelopes dept.
from the opening-envelopes dept.
superbrose notes that despite lots of legal difficulties regarding Internet privacy, the UK government is going ahead with plans to punish ISPs for allowing their customers to download illegal music and films. The claim is that there is "rampant piracy" in Britain with more than 6 million broadband users downloading files illegally every year. "The government will on Friday tell internet service providers they will be hit with legal sanctions from April next year unless they take concrete steps to curb illegal downloads of music and films. Britain would be one of the first countries in the world to impose such sanctions. Service providers say what the government wants them to do would be like asking the Royal Mail to monitor the contents of every envelope posted."
Related Stories
[+]
News: EU Funds P2P-Based Internet TV Standard 113 comments
oliderid writes to let us know that, even as the UK threatens ISPs who don't clamp down on P2P traffic, the rest of the EU is going the other way. (Here is a link with a a bit more technical detail.) Europe recently agreed to: "...spend 14M Euros to create a standard way to send TV via the Net. The project will create a peer-to-peer system that can pipe programs to set-top boxes and home TV sets. It will be based on the BitTorrent technology. The four-year research project will try to build a system that can stand alongside the other ways that broadcasters currently get programs to viewers."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
If you live in the UK. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:If you live in the UK. (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Petition (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Re:Petition (Score:5, Insightful)
For example:
Me: "I don't want an ID card. Police states are not good"
Reply: "Dear terrorist, having an ID card is good. It will keep you safe"
I'm not going to sign this one because I already know what the reply will be.
Parent
Re:Petition (Score:4, Funny)
Q. "Dear Prime Minister, please abolish all faith schools and prohibit the teaching of creationism and other religious mythology in all UK schools."
A. "The Government remains committed to a diverse range of schools for parents to choose from, including schools with a religious character or "faith schools" as they are commonly known. Social divisions along religious lines are definitely a good thing and have certainly never caused any problems of any sort. Anyway we didn't read what you said, we don't care what your opinion is, because we are right."
So I guess if you want to change things you just have to go out and vote. Ha ha, I split my own sides there.
Parent
Re:If you live in the UK. (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:If you live in the UK. (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:6 MILLION! (Score:5, Funny)
6 million?? This sounds like a job for . . . da - da da da . . . Hitler!!
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Wow, I think this is the first time I've ever seen a discussion about p2p Godwin'ed.....
Re:6 MILLION! (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Re:6 MILLION! (Score:5, Insightful)
2. Any law that is violated by a sufficiently large percentage of it's population is an unjust law. Governments are supposed to be representative of the people. They have power because we as a whole agreed to let them have some power to enforce ideas that society as a whole sees as worthy of enforcing. If a law reaches a certain point where the majority of the country doesn't support it (say, Prohibition as an example), then it should be repealed.
Parent
Re:6 MILLION! (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't even think it should require a "majority". If a statistically significant number of people are routinely flaunting the law then we should probably examine that law and find out whether or not it's just.
I won't argue in favor of limitless copyright infringement (even the Founding Fathers recognized the value of limited IP protection and included it in the Constitution), but off the top of my head I could mention marijuana prohibition as a policy that should probably be examined.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
It's said that 50% of drivers break urban speed limits. 20% to 65% of employees admit to various degrees of theft at work. Sounds like it's time to change those laws too?
Note that neither of those tend to result in $millions when the person gets caught, and that both of them can result in direct harm to others, physically or financially. If a speeding ticket (not even reckless driving) cost you 7+ figures, or a multimillion dollar fine was assessed for every metal clicky pen stolen, people would be all over those laws as well. That's why MOST people are using the language of "changing" the laws rather than "abolishing" them.
Yes there are a few that use the terms "imagin
Re:6 MILLION! (Score:4, Insightful)
1-5km over the limit - nobody cares. 5+km over, a speed camera will get upset - $50 fine, 1 demerit point. 15+km over, a cop gets upset - $150 fine, 2 demerit points. 30+km over, a judge gets upset - $500 fine, licence torn up.
Parent
You never know... (Score:5, Funny)
Don't give them any ideas...
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
More than 6 million I'm sure (Score:5, Interesting)
It's surely more than that. What is the total amount of people in the UK between 15 and 25, for example? Every person I know in the EU in that age bracket downloads most of the media they consume rather than buying authorized copies. P2P is mainstream. If users could only group together for political power like some are starting to do in Sweden, the course of democracy might be able to break copyright law.
Re:More than 6 million I'm sure (Score:5, Insightful)
On the other hand, this British law, if enacted, might become the fire that will trigger that reaction. Just wait and see the growth in the amount of people pissed by false positives, or just pissed, for things to start to change.
Parent
Re:More than 6 million I'm sure (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:More than 6 million I'm sure (Score:4, Insightful)
Now they have everyone convinced it's addictive (it's habit forming but not addictive), causes cancer (it doesn't, and in fact prevents cancer) and leads to harder drugs (it doesn't; the laws against it do).
Instead of it being legal, now most employers drug-test everyone. There are now people addicted to crack who switched from marijuana when their employer started random drug testing; pot stays in your system a lot longer than cocaine.
Rather than P2P being legalized, expect some nanny-state, anti-freedom, pro-corporation, anti-people asshat like Reagan to come down like a load of bricks on P2P who convinces everybody that P2P leads to cancer, terrorism, and global warming.
Indies give their MP3s away. Share those, ignore the MAFIAA bands. Don't share their music, don't buy their downloads, don't buy their CDs, don't go to their concerts. They are the problem, and if you contribute in any way, whether monetarily or by sharing their music, you are part of the problem and not part of the solution.
Just say "no."
Parent
Re:More than 6 million I'm sure (Score:5, Funny)
Yeah, that was the shortest march ever.. "WHAT DO WE WANT ?"
Parent
I Suddenly Feel Religious... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I Suddenly Feel Religious... (Score:5, Interesting)
what I mean is, if all ISPs in the UK staged a strike by cutting Internet access everywhere for two or three days and claim that would be the only possible way to ensure their customers aren't pirating anything, I am sure that the outrage would force another look at the law. And if they did this 2 different times, like once on Thursday Friday and Saturday, it could cause direct deposit information and payroll services to be interrupted. If they did this on again a week later on lets say Monday and Tuesday, there would be so much upset and confusion that those who think they wasn't effected will be.
Parent
Unenforceable? (Score:5, Interesting)
This makes me wonder, will the address/telephone line be blacklisted or the individual user whose name the line was in?
If the former, then it would suck if you just moved into a place that had been blacklisted. If the latter, what's to stop someone else in the household from signing up for another connection?
I can imagine many student houses with 4 or more people living there, assuming it takes a few months to get noticed and sent you first warning, another couple to get your second and another couple of months to get cut off, you could then sign up again under another name and go for another round...
Parent
The solution is obvious (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, this is essentially a shutdown of the WWW in the UK. So? It's what the Gov wants, right?
Re:The solution is obvious (Score:5, Insightful)
This is one of those things that will come to a head very quickly and when the egg lands, it won't be on the faces of users or ISPs. It will be on the faces of those who enacted the law.
The trouble, as we all know, is that there is no way to determine what is illegal and what is not. There will be far too many false positives, and far too many obviously innocent people will be caught by filters and such. It will go as far as MPs will let it go. Perhaps there is a manner in which people in the UK can force MPs to download LEGAL files to show them how easy it is to be caught, and perhaps demonstrate in real life how difficult it is to find the illegal stuff by asking them to PAY for additional filtering equipment/systems for businesses, schools, hospitals etc.
There are lots of people that want to help filter out illegal content, unfortunately, they also want to get paid.
Once you get buy-in on the government paying the costs for such systems, turn to appendix F and show them how these systems will be worked around in something like 24 hours of implementation.
Or perhaps you can all chip in and buy them a whack-a-mole game for the parliamentary house restaurant?
Parent
Re:The solution is obvious (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Escalation right around the corner... (Score:5, Insightful)
It's going to get even worse. Imagine asking the Royal Mail to monitor the contents of every envelope posted, after half of the mail writers get tired of these draconian measures and start sending their messages in code.
What if P2P users start encrypting their traffic? The difficulties involved would be significant, but not insurmountable. Are the ISPs supposed to treat every user transmitting & receiving encrypted data as a criminal?
Re:Escalation right around the corner... (Score:5, Insightful)
Big brother is watching you... you don't have anything to hide, do you?
Parent
Re:Escalation right around the corner... (Score:5, Insightful)
There are so many legitimate types of encrypted traffic (SSL, SSH, VPN, etc.) that they can't outlaw it. P2P programs can certainly go beyond mere encryption and specifically obfuscate the type of traffic, making it appear as another class (e.g. https) or even use steganography to hide the data in otherwise legitimate-looking data streams.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Escalation right around the corner... (Score:5, Interesting)
What bothers me is that, at the moment, there's no legal way for me to download the content I want in the UK. I suppose I'm atypical in that I'd be happy to pay for TV I watch through iTunes (or a similar service), as long as it becomes available at the same time it's originally broadcast in the US. What cheeses me off is having to wait months before it's available in the UK, then only available to a particular broadcaster I can't receive (Sky), and then it's only after it's picked up by a terrestrial broadcaster and their season ends that it's released to DVD and I can pick it up and watch it according to my schedule. This is usually a year after it's originally broadcast! Sorry, but I'm not too hot on delayed gratification for the sake of someone else's out-dated business model.
Good news is that the Beeb are catching on and starting to stick their latest programmes on iTunes, like Ashes to Ashes, but I don't just want their stuff. Who only watches one TV channel?
The crux of the argument is that an industry is using legislation to a) protect their out-dated and increasingly irrelevant business model, and b) keep artists under their thumb so they can use them up and then discard them when the cash cow dries up. These BPI and BFI people are talentless vampires, sucking the life out of creative geniuses - don't protect them, eliminate them. And reward the content creators! Now they've got their pay deals sorted, for the love of FSM buy the content off the interweb or on DVD if you like it. If you've already downloaded it on the sly, think of it as pro-active timeshifting.
Parent
So let it be (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Quite correct, unfortunately the 0.001% that's running the country is in fact criminal, so there's not much we can do about it -- except leave. Seriously, this is but one further step, out of many already taken, towards totalitarianism.
The sun has set on the British Empire
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't know about in England, but in the US that's considered a poor argument in favor of mob rule.
You're right that just because "everyone is doing it" doesn't mean something should be legal. However it does mean we should take a moment to re-analyze why the law exists, and whether the law is achieving its aim.
For instance, driving speed limits are routinely broken, yet this doesn't mean we should abolish speed limits. The purpose they serve (increasing safety) may outweigh the consensus opinion. (Nevermind for a moment that a strong argument for raising speed limits could also be made.)
What's di
Government response (Score:4, Funny)
In response, a government minister said, "What a great idea! We'll need to get going on that, too!"
How Far Will It Go? (Score:3, Insightful)
Extraordinary lack of procedural clarity (Score:5, Insightful)
Then your ISP writes to you. You say the allegations are false and libellous. What happens next? Do you get to cross examine the industry spokesperson who made the allegations?
Then three strikes, they disconnect you. You sue them. Who is liable? Them? The industry body?
Its not so much iniquitous as unworkable in its present form. You basically cannot do this without all the expense of the courts, which is what they're trying to avoid.
Easy answer to this (Score:5, Insightful)
All UK ISPs should shut down for a day! (Score:4, Insightful)
When will they learn (Score:5, Insightful)
OUR COLLECTIVE INTELLIGENCE IS GREATER THAN YOUR OWN! We have got hordes of geeks working on ways to circumvent every single way you have ever conceived to censor what we do.
What happened with iTunes DRM? It got owned by qtfairuse.
What happened when you blocked bittorrent? We started encrypting it.
What happened when you blocked the port that bittorrent runs on? We started running it on a different port.
What happened when you throttled NNTP connections? We started using lots and lots of simultaneous connections, each of them throttled, but collectively adding up to our original speed.
What happened when you started blocking NNTP all together? We started running it over port 80 and disguising it as legitimate SSL traffic.
What happened when you started listening to our phone calls? We started using encrypted VOIP.
Every single time there has EVER been ANY attempt at stopping people from doing what they want it has only caused them to grow stronger. Don't challenge us to develop stronger encryption, because we will. Its like spraying a weed with weed killer, eventually you're just going to create stronger weeds.
What you are trying to do in the UK will absolutely fail. History has shown this. Non tech-savvy users will be alienated for a while, until we create yet ANOTHER work around for your idiotic bureaucratic attempt at pleasing your own appetite for money and power.
I cannot repeat enough that this WILL fail.
The community welcomes your attempt at censoring us. It will only present us with yet another challenge and cause the gap between our skills and your own to grow.
There are only two ways I can see this going (Score:3, Insightful)
Solution 2: The Great Firewall of Britain. This is what I see the Government doing if the ISPs don't. I doubt it'll be terribly effective because the government will outsource providing appropriate technology to a consultant like EDS (a company that specialises in taking money off UK government departments in exchange for half-baked systems which don't really work properly) and once the technology is ready, ISPs will be obliged to deploy it.
Welcome to censorship (Score:3, Insightful)
The media giants have too much power, they just can't face decline. There's a massive amount of music, films and media out there, the demand and supply doesn't always match. I for example don't want much that Hollywood churns out, I don't like a lot of popular media. So am I to be prosecuted because I don't purchase rubbish commercial music and use p2p?
The outcome of this will be... (Score:4, Insightful)
2. ISPs will be more expensive, as Internet service providers will have to relay the costs of scanning all the packets onto their customers.
So basically, this has failed before it has even begun as far as I'm concerned. As per usual for this government, it doesn't benefit the population in any way.
Where does the government's authority come from? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The government is given (indeed, by its people) the authority to do whats best for the country for the present and the future. Remember, these are not democracies, but democratic republics, or variations of it. Its job is to handle issu
Meanwhile, in Springfield... (Score:3, Funny)
Well, a young Springfield woman was found dead in her home. Her face had been chewed off by two pit bulls, which were taken to the animal shelter on suspicion of murder, no bail had been set for the dogs.
The coroner says she overdosed on cocaine before getting her face chewed off. Her live-in boyfriend had an airtight alibi- as the Springfield paper reports [sj-r.com]:So for those of you who are against downloading music, I say SO THERE! =P
Sweden's Pirate Party (Score:5, Insightful)
In other words: Your need to make money isn't going to infringe our freedom of speech.
Figure out a different way to make money.