Comcast Working On 'Helpful' Copyright Violation Pop-ups 284
gregor-e writes "Comcast is said to be preparing to snoop on your internet browsing to detect when you attempt to download a copyright-protected item. On detection, Comcast will pop up a helpful window that contains information about where you can obtain a legal version of whatever you're downloading. 'While sources familiar with the new initiative emphasized that it is being seen as a complement to CAS [a.k.a. six strikes] and not a replacement, the very emergence of an alternative raises questions as to the viability of CAS, which has been criticized for myriad reasons ranging from the questionable strategic rationale of punishing subscribers to an implementation that has been characterized as scattershot. How the two systems would coexist is unclear.'"
Comcast will be inviting other ISPs to join its new system as well.
Re:Fuck comcast... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:uh... downloading isn't illegal... (Score:5, Informative)
Sorry, but your own link contradicts your statement.
Please cite for us one (and preferably more) cases where someone was sued and received a judgement against in a court of law for DOWNLOADING a file.
Your own link says:
"Most downloading over the Internet of commercially available copyrighted works, such as music or movies, through file sharing systems is illegal. In a widely followed case, a federal Court of Appeals held that users of Napster were infringing copyright when they shared MP3 files of copyrighted music."
As far as I am aware, every single case that has ever existed has hinged on the act of distribution. That is, uploading the file. People have found themselves in hot water because they downloaded content and left it in an accessible folder that is shared back to the other users, publically, of the download program - like Napster or used bittorrent, where you usually have to also upload content back (though you are of course only ever uploading small snippets and never an actual entire file).
Yes, people go around saying "oh noes, downloading a copyrighted file is infringement and somehow now days an instance of copyright infringement is a criminal offense punishable by a decade in prison or forfeiting your life into indentured servitude!", but the fact is (last I checked and I would be glad to know if this has since changed in the States if someone knows of legitimate examples) it is only uploaders/distributors of said content that are cornered.
Re:Fuck comcast... (Score:4, Informative)
Yeah, I eventually looped back around and saw that story too. However, as you say the recommendation is:
Adopting the same range of penalties for criminal streaming of copyrighted
works to the public as now exists for criminal reproduction and distribution.
While the willfully infringing reproduction and distribution of
copyrighted works can be punished as a felony, willful violations of the
public performance right are punishable only as misdemeanors. This
discrepancy is an increasingly significant impediment to the effective
deterrence and criminal prosecution of unauthorized streaming. Since
the most recent updates to the criminal copyright provisions, streaming
(both audio and video) has become a significant if not dominant means
for consumers to enjoy content online. The Administration and the
Copyright Office have both called on Congress to amend the Copyright
Act to ensure that illegal streaming to the public can be punished as a
felony in the same manner as other types of criminal infringement.
Which is exactly the opposite of what the GP claims. Also, Obama Administration != Obama, but for a certain class of jackass that's a very fine point.
Re:Is this so bad? (Score:5, Informative)
Son, do you realize TPB has been around longer than Facebook?
That's complete bullshit. There's a community of artists here in my town who are making decent middle-class livings as musicians without having to be like any of those people. With health insurance and homes and everything.
Maybe you need a refresher course in what capitalism really means. You can find several very good syllabi and reading lists online. You will learn that "SOMEBODY will make big money from content" doesn't have anything to do with "capitalism", when capitalism is actually working. Corporatism is not capitalism.
Re:Is this so bad? (Score:5, Informative)
Musician here. Spot on, at least as to the record labels having historically horribly abused & cheated the artists.
To get some idea how this works and how bad it typically is for the majority of artists who are, or are trying to become, "signed" with a label, check out this piece by Steve Albini on negativeland.com
"This oft-referenced article is from the early â(TM)90s, and originally appeared in Maximum Rock ânâ(TM) Roll magazine. While some of the information and figures listed here are dated, it is still a useful and informative article."
http://www.negativland.com/news/?page_id=17 [negativland.com].
One of the record labels' top priorities is controlling the means of distribution. That's the actual, underlying reason they are pushing DRM and copyright-related laws/regulations, particularly those that involve the internet and digital (copyable) media formats, streaming, etc. It's aimed ultimately at erecting barriers to entry for independent artists in both marketing & distribution channels using the internet as a vehicle.
Once it becomes commonplace for artists in the top-100 to be independents without a mainstream "label" contract, the old recording labels and their associated parasites will be truly doomed. They know this. That's the reason for the war on sharing, various forms of independent distribution/marketing channels, and internet radio.
Want to support artists? Go to shows. Buy CDs & merch. Share their music with those who haven't heard of them. Encourage those friends to do the same. Tell the bar/club/venue owner when you like the band, and that you'd come back and bring friends when they play there next time.
There are tons of amazingly-talented and hard-working artists & bands playing in bars/clubs/festivals/etc all over. Simply not buying cookie-cutter record-label music is not enough. You need to support the bands and artists you would rather see take their place.
Keep in mind that even the members in most above-average-talent bar/club bands could make more money working part-time at McD's or Walmart. A modest-but-decent used bar-gigging-quality guitar can easily cost over $500. Used modest-but-decent amp easily over $1,000. Let's not even talk drum sets.
That's also not counting the PA and lights that many small/medium bars/clubs do not provide, and then a vehicle/trailer to haul all that crap around with and all the costs associated with that.
Strat