Japanese ISPs To Cut Net Access For File Sharers 167
modemac writes "Four major Japanese telecom organizations, which represent 'about 1,000 major and smaller' domestic ISPs, have agreed to forcibly cut the Internet connection of filesharers. They're specifically targeting users of the 'Winny' program, trading copied gaming software and music. The article states that a new set of ISP guidelines will be drawn up on how to cut off users who 'leak illegally copied material onto the Net.'"
Proof (Score:1)
Filesharers (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Filesharers (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
"All of them?"
"Good boy."
Lets hope this really happens (Score:5, Insightful)
Lets hope this really happens, let hope that ISP's in Japan really are this stupid and the Japanese citizens do the only thing that is logical. Cancel their service since it is no longer of any use to them so that ISP after ISP goes tits up.
At least in holland a lot of ISP's are happy to advertise with 'download music fast' without having any music service whatsoever. Copyright infringement is one major reason to get one of the more expensive subscriptions, if everyone just went with the cheapest most minimal subscription, you know the one that is plenty for email, the web, gaming etc etc, then ISP's will really feel it in their revenue.
On the longer term, lets hope the japanese ISP's learn very quickly that they opened the flood gates. If they can monitor this, expect everyone to come out. Just block winny? Don't count on it, every P2P program will be on it, and why just P2P, why not home run MMORPG servers, why not material that the goverment doesn't want you to host. Why not check every email for illegal material? Congrats, the ISP's in japan just become the enforcer for everyone with a gripe about the internet. There is reason the old telecoms never ever wished to do that with telephone services and they claim they have to keep a line open unless they get an outside complaint even if it is bloody obvious a phone line is only used for criminal activity. You do NOT want to become the police of your customers.
Lets hope that this turns sour for the Japanese ISP's very quickly, because if this doesn't go totally wrong for the ISP's in question, we will get it elsewhere.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
So cutting winny will do more good than harm... And maybe they will try to understand that software used by dirty foreigners called bittorrent...
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Lets hope this really happens (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
This is kind of annoying, since a lot of BitTorrent folks put their torrent clients to use ports 25 or 80, and Comcast's net-traffic tools cannot tell the difference between connecting to a remote BitTorrent client, or sending spam. And of cours
That's what 587 is for (Score:2)
They actually do cut off users, sort of. Comcast, if you connect on port 25 somewhere more than some threshhold like 2-3 times a minute, they shut down your outgoing SMTP on port 25. And will never, ever turn it back on, so you have to start using alternate ports.
But why should a residential end user be using SMTP on port 25? That's the port that SMTP servers use to talk to each other. You should be using port 587 [ietf.org] + authentication [ietf.org] anyway to send e-mail through your smarthost.
Re: (Score:2)
1) Not all sites use port 587; though most major ISPs do, smaller businesses with their own mailservers, or small shell-account providers sometimes only have port 25. Very annoying.
2) Many mail clients still auto-configure for port 25, which is arguably an increasingly outdated behavior, but still affects many home users who never really figure out how to go and change their SMTP server settings from the defaults.
3) Some residential users run home Linux mailservers (w
Re: (Score:2)
Not all sites use port 587
Organizations with their own mail servers should upgrade their software. Organizations that rely on a "shell-account provider" or other third-party smarthost should complain to the provider, and if that fails, switch to one that offers port 587 once their contract runs out.
Many mail clients still auto-configure for port 25, which is arguably an increasingly outdated behavior, but still affects many home users who never really figure out how to go and change their SMTP server settings from the defaults.
But the MUA's default for SMTP server settings is an empty string for the hostname, which doesn't get the mail sent in any case. If users (or ISP-provided configuration software) can set the hostname, why not the port?
Some residential users run [...] servers
Each cable or DSL
Re: (Score:2)
The second point -- mail software often picking port 25 instead of 587 by default -- has bitten less-computer literate friends. I
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds like they should be using their own ports, not abusing known ports for their file-sharing. The reason they dont do so is because ISPs cut them off. Now youre complaining about... ISPs cutting them off?
Also you should be using 587 for email submission not 25.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
That will only work... (Score:2)
Re:That will only work... (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't for a second think it's because they are concerned about copyrights. I doubt they'd admit this though.
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
This idea wont work in the west with modern IP laws protecting copyright. The companies will be held liable. Its the same reason alot of universities ban file sharing here in the US. The legal bills are not worth it not to mention they can save with infrastructure.
Re: (Score:2)
DMCA safe harbour provisions: the ISP can't be held liable, as long as it removes infringing material once notified of its presence by the copyright holder. Of course once the material is removed, some user uploads it straight back, but that's not the ISP's fault; the copyright holder just has to issue another takedown notice ;-)
Re: (Score:2)
Problem solved. (Hint: plausible deniability.)
Re: (Score:2)
It mostly died out because binaries on usenet are a pain in the arse, and he storage needed for a full usenet server (including the binaries groups) nowadays is phenomenal.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I personally think that 99.99999% of the reason ISP's are coming round to the idea of punishing file sharers is that doing so will cut their costs, thus extending the profitable lifetime of their current levels of infrastructure. After all, they need to make room for this new media on demand thing.
I don't for a second think it's because they are concerned about copyrights. I doubt they'd admit this though.
Of course they aren't going to admit to their fraudulent business.
~Dan
Re: (Score:2)
They just want to scare everybody off this infra and onto their centrally coordinated GSM/GPRS network.
Re: (Score:1)
Over what last mile? (Score:2)
So the FCC won't let me be or let me be me (Score:2)
That's what I would do, build a high bandwidth, high throughput network were the customer gets what he wants. This is the free market right?
tepples wrote:
Over what last mile? If the cable/phone duopoly refuses to offer its copper to your ISP[...]
Anonymous Coward wrote:
With this magic technology I call "nowire", or perhaps "wireless", if you will.
What you've done is replace the land-line duopoly, which holds exclusive rights to easements over non-subscribers' land backed by municipal regulation, with the mobile phone oligopoly, which holds exclusive rights to electromagnetic spectrum backed by federal regulation. Neither market is exactly free. Does this make a big difference?
Re: (Score:1, Interesting)
grow up.
Re:Lets hope this really happens (Score:4, Insightful)
grow up.
You want money? Sell your art. Want more? Make more art and sell it too.
Not enough money? Get a better job. You don't hear anyone crying over the walmart worker for not making millions due to their career choice.
Copyright specifically says your work of art belongs to the public to further the arts and sciences.
Those works of art belong to us, after a short time. Until that short time is up, we will keep hold of what is owed to us, since we clearly can not trust you to hold up your end of the deal anymore.
DRM, trying to claim and define 'limited' as 70 years after you die, are all proof positive you have no intention of keeping your end of the copyright deal in good faith. Don't bitch when we don't either.
Deal with it
Re: (Score:1)
You want money? Sell your art. Want more? Make more art and sell it too.
Re: (Score:2)
Quite frankly I'd rather hear the music of people who are in it because they love it than those who are in it for the money. Bear in mind that up until the point where recording industry companies could make billions off each artist by artificially increasing the price of their works, most artists were poor. I'm an artist and I don't really have any wild expectations of getting rich off my work (I sell screenprints and photographs for booze money), because I recognize that I'm selling basically a few dollar
Re: (Score:2)
"Furthering" the arts and sciences implies that a copyright or a patent is an incentive to others with significant talent and the ambition to create something new and something better.
It has nothing whatever to do with your "right" to download a free screener of a movie not in theatrical release.
Until that short time is up, we will keep hold of what is owed to us
The creator owes you nothing. He is not o
Re:Lets hope this really happens (Score:4, Interesting)
I work in the media. We long since gave up giving a shit what teenagers want from TV. The marketplace is the 30+ viewer who isn't scared of buying the DVD.
It's not that the media doesn't understand the youth. its that the youth get what they pay for, ie: fuck all.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
High School Musical [imdb.com] cost Disney $4.2 million to produce.
HSM took off like a rocket with a young audience that bought the DVD. Tickets to the arena stage show. The home-town theater production...
Re:Lets hope this really happens (Score:4, Interesting)
What a fucking shock. The person who actually creates something is modded as a troll, and the person who's whining about how it's his god-given right to copy anything he possibly can gets called insightful.
I didn't say it was my god given right. I said it was my legal right, and it is.
Personally I question how someone can be an artist, and yet know so little correct information about the laws that protect your trade.
Either way however, yes, your post is a troll. You were being spiteful, mean, insulting, and injecting no useful information into the conversation, and your statements are factually incorrect (possibly lies, depending)
Where as MY info however is reflected in US law, and also quite insightful as some of these 'artists' clearly are trying to 'steal' from me (DRM serves no other purpose.)
[* Steal used in the same sense you were using the word, not in the legal, moral, or dictionary sense of the word.]
I admit, my 'get a job' comment, while true, was a tad of a flame. But that was about it.
Finally, it is Quite hard to form a perfectly insightful non-flame non-troll reply to someone who is being irrational in their posts. I seriously would love to debate the issue, but I want my words to not fall on deaf ears, and by the tone of your post I don't believe you even care to discuss this rationally, only to push your agenda. If I come off as a troll at all, it is out of my frustration at that fact.
But I will try anyway. Please read this before blowing it off as BS, or hitting reply.
If you still after reading it through disagree with me, then I will leave you to it...
The only reason you or any artist is granted copyright, is NOT just for profit. Profit is a side benefit.
Copyright in its first forms was 100% a control method used by kings and rulers to silence those that would say bad things against them. I'm not claiming you are, but if you were to try to argue for that style of copyright again, you will have no friends here, or in any first world nation for that matter.
Afterwards, copyright became a tool to better man kind with science and art. This was the last version of it before now.
That is to say, if your work of art could not benefit man kind at all, there is no point in offering you a copyright at all. I also highly doubt you are arguing for that, as then you would have no recourse what so ever, nor anything to complain about anyway.
So, clearly, the only reason you get a copyright on your work at all is to benefit man kind. This used to be a deal struck between the people and the artists. The people give up some rights so the artist can gain, and at the same time, the artist loses some rights so the people can gain. This deal was, the people lose for a few years the right to copy that work, so the artist gains a monopoly on distribution to recoup their costs. In exchange, the artist loses the right to 'own' that work for ever, and the people gain the right to do with that work as they please.
Yes, that second part comes after the first, thus the 'limited time' part of copyright.
The problem here is, artists are not paying their end of the deal. They are NOT giving up the full rights to their work to better man kind. When I say 'they' I don't mean ALL of them of course. But they tend to use things like DRM which is effectively (assuming it would work at all) a lock that keeps it from the public once you stop caring about it. It's a little like writing a bad check, post-dated, but knowing it won't be good at that time.
So the reaction happens. Similarly, once you write a person bad checks enough, they will simply stop accepting them. If you try to pay with credit that never gets repaid, they start demanding their stuff back (repo.)
What we are doing now is not accepting your bad check type payments any longer, thus not honoring your copyright.
Granted, there are artists that have NOT screwed the public at all, and yes they are being harmed by the actions of
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
Blah blah blah.
You, as an artist, anger me. I would do without the product you're selling, but it's easily copied and I want it, and therefore I will take it, not pay you, and use a lot of flowery language to make *you* seem like the bad guy.
Blah blah blah.
My ability to easily take the fruits of your labor without recompense is *your* problem, and my doing so is in no way an indication of a moral failure on my part. I want free music because Sonny Bono was a dick and Mickey Mouse should be
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You only made that music once. I paid you once.
What did you personally do that makes you deserve being paid a second time just so I can play my music on another device?
But thanks, glad to know the artists care
Re: (Score:2)
This is true for the Angloamerican concept of "copyright".
... and Japanese "chosakuken", all of which are often imprecisely rendered as "copyright" in the English language.
It has never been the case for Continental European "droit d'auteur", "Urheberrecht",
These are n
Re: (Score:2)
If someone takes the time to create music, they have the right to decide on what terms it is sold,
What?! Why?
just like my local plumber has the right to turn down work, or my local store has the right to set its own opening hours.
So if all the plumbers in your area decide that whenever they work for you, you've got to pay a yearly "X fee" or else they won't work... You don't need the plumbing to live, you could learn to do it yourself.
Then the mechanics decide they're going to insert a mechanism that makes your car stop after a year, unless you go to the mechanic again. Resetting the device for another year now costs 1% of your car's price.
After all the mechanics have the right to choose on what terms their work is sold
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Shut up you greedy fuck and start smelling the shit your clearly shoveling.
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
I create plenty of content as well. I do it for the love of putting it out there in the hope that others will get some joy out of it or that it will create more time for some. Apparently, if it is really worthwhile content, society will reward me and I will live forever.
Shut up you greedy fuck and start smelling the shit your clearly shoveling.
The difference between him and you though, is that he makes a living from it to pay taxes which ultimately provide the welfare cheques and food stamps you rely on to survive.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Personally, I feel that if you value it so much, you can keep your precious crap. I want to see a bullet proof method of copyright enforcement implemented so that free sources can finally flourish. Do you honestly think the likes of Microsoft or Adobe would hav
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Let's set aside the moral high ground and the sensationalism for a moment.
Even if I agreed with your sentiment, the problem with your position is it denies reality. These people helping themsel
Re: (Score:2)
"Stealing" is not the same as duplicating. And no, you don't have the right to tell others what they can, or can not, share with others.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Lets hope this really happens (Score:5, Interesting)
Um, yeah. You haven't lived here in Japan have you? People don't push back. They let companies plow them over and say nothing. There are no consumer rights in Japan. If they really do this and I lose my net access, that's it. I just lost my net access.
I'm already really throttled. I DL US TV slower now that I have FTTH than I did on ADSL. I have 83Mbit, but it only seems to work when I downloading something from a website or something.
This is going to do nothing to subscription rates. People get the fast service because it isn't much more expensive than the slow, and because the guys from SMAP are in the commercials. It has nothing to do with the speed, because, honestly, most Japanese people can barely even type.
This is not a good development for me...
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
In Japan, change often happens in response to customer complaints, which is extremely rare, if not nonexistent in the US.
Re: (Score:2)
Also, downloading music and movies (but not software, unless otherwise specified, e.g. in the case of op
Re: (Score:2)
Japan has
Re: (Score:2)
~Dan
I am pleased that Japan has chosen to do this (Score:2)
I was worried that we might face more competition from Japan that we have. But now it's clear that they are taking steps to ensure that the vast majority of their citizens will never have net access. This is a great relief.
Nothing new (Score:5, Interesting)
This is pretty much what companies in the U.S. do too. People that seed a bunch of copyrighted files often get cease and desists from their ISPs and if it keeps happening the ISP will sometimes (not always, as it's beneficial for the ISP to keep them around) cut their service off. TFA seems to claim that the majority of this is going to focus on "leakers" of copyrighted material: this means mass-seeders and probably scene groups. It's doubtful that the ISPs are going to end up cutting off many _downloaders_ of the material, but mostly focus on the _distributors_: which is pretty much precedent for ISPs at least in the U.S. and I would assume globally.
Now according to Wiki, Winny is intrinsically anonymous [wikipedia.org], and the only way the police were able to track those sharing the files was by them boasting on the Winny forums of their upload. So we probably would have heard about this earlier had Winny not been built to be as anonymous as it is now - it seems that the issue has been prompting arrests and controversy for five years or more.
Also, expect 2ch to go bananas over this in the next couple of weeks.
ISPs responsible for users? (Score:1)
Winny is so 2003 (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
All your ip's are belong to
Perfect Dark (P2P) does sound better, but with all products the real fun is an insider.
Someone gets in the application, to the forum or irc sites thats one degree separated from the use of application.
All the encryption and "mixnet" will not save you then.
You still need to find the community of people with the same interests - thats where the feds will be waiting.
Chatting with
I am not using (Score:3, Interesting)
In US there were reports that customers are cut off just because of the sheer volume of the data they are uploading or downloading. At least Japan is not doing that...
Re: (Score:1)
It's extremely annoying, as I'm on a 100Mbps FTTH link, and somehow all the media in Japan fail to mention that these terrible "bandwidth hoggers" aren't getting even 1% of the maximum that they pay for.
Re: (Score:2)
General, the more you tighten your ISPs ... (Score:2)
For the unenlightened.. (Score:5, Informative)
The main target for this act is to stop a file sharing program / network called Winny. Winny [wikipedia.org] is one of the top File sharing program / network in Japan.
Many Japanese anime fansub groups get their original copy of the show via this network. I am sure there are tons of other stuff being shared on Winny, judging from the fact that they have a Software Download board where copyrighted materials are shared.
The creator is facing similar claims to that of the Bittorrent creator, where he has created a tool that can be used to share files with the advantage of being anonymous.
Re: (Score:1)
The trick is that many (but not all) Japanese users have moved onto a replacement program called Share and other software, after vulnerabilities in Winny's anonymity features were discovered. Then vulnerabilities were discovered in Share, too, so some users have moved onto yet another replacement.
Re: (Score:2)
Just tax it (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Interesting bits from the article (Score:5, Interesting)
Also, aside question: how can a copy be illegal? I get that it can be illegal to create and to posses, but how can the copy itself be illegal? If it's made on a USB stick and then thrown out (ownership of the copy has ceased), the copy by virtue of not having changed is still illegal. Who do you sue, the USB stick?
(I figure they mean illegally possessed copies, but imprecise language like this bugs me a bit.)
However, the provider abandoned the idea after receiving a warning from the Internal Affairs and Communications Ministry that such an approach was regarded as Internet snooping and might violate the right to privacy in communications.
According to the new agreement, copyright organizations would notify providers of Internet protocol addresses used by those who repeatedly make copies illegally, using special detection software.
Re: (Score:2)
Little Winny won't go ... (Score:2, Funny)
Little Winny, Winny wears the crown,
P2Ps the king around town
Downloads, uploads
Winny drives them silly with its
file sharing shimmy shuffle down
Way past one, and feeling allright
'Cos with little Winny round
they can last all night
Hey down, stay down, stay down down
'Cos little Winny, Winny won't go
But you can't push Winny round, Winny won't go,
try tellin' everybody but, oh no
Little Winny, Winny won't go
Not surprising (Score:2, Informative)
Meh. (Score:1)
Yes. I went there. Unabashed declaration of intention to steal shit.
Legit file sharing? (Score:2)
All debates aside about IP, there millions of files shared like this with ZERO question of the legitimacy of doing so.
So will this only apply to Winny? (Score:2)
Winny (also known as WinNY) is a Japanese peer-to-peer (P2P) file-sharing program which claims to be loosely inspired by the design principles behind the Freenet network, which keep user identities untraceable.
So, this begs the question, how do they know what the user is downloading? Is there a vulnerability in WinNY that allows identities to be traced, or do they just assume that any WinNY user is filesharing?
According to a 2006 report by the Recording Industry Association of Japan, upwards of three million people had tried Winny, and it has alternated with WinMX as the most popular file-sharing program in Japan...Critics of Kaneko have stated that the main purpose of Winny is to violate copyright law, unlike Freenet, another peer-to-peer system that Winny is often compared to, which claims to protect freedom of speech. These critics also claim that 2ch's Download Software board, where the software was first announced, is a haven for copyright violators, and that Kaneko himself had said that the aim of development of Winny is to push the tide towards a world filled with copyright infringement, quoting several posts from 2ch.
So, this is a curious question. Is WinNY being singled out because its developer is promoting copyright infringement, because of its popularity, or because of its anonymity? I'm curious how this would affect other p2p technologies in Japan.
This ensures Japanese cultural isolation (Score:3, Interesting)
Japan has never been a democracy. It has always been a rigid authoritarian culture. When the authorities decide to act, they simply announce their decision and everyone obeys. Japan did close themselves off from the west before for centuries between the late 1600s until the 1850s. This happened after the authorities decided that Western ways were becoming too powerful and were beginning to threaten their power. It may be happening again.
And, of course, it may be a total clusterfuck by a group of totally clueless bullies who have no idea of what they are fooling with. But then again, for young Japanese, what's the difference?
Re: (Score:2)
You do realize that you can actually BUY content without pirating it right? How the fuck does stopping Japanese people using bit-torrent to steal stuff represent cultural isolation? If US music stores started banning sales of western DVDs to japan, you may have a point. The prosecuting of people for copyright infringement is just the Japanese enforcing the law, not censorship or cultural isolation.
get a grip.
Re: (Score:2)
Not even slightly (Score:2)
Times are changin'... time to get retro (Score:2)
Pirates can only operate on the fringes of civilization. Too far out and the prey be too scarce to keep a pirate in booty. And ye be wanting enough civilization to have ports to put in for supplies, to spend de booty on grog and whores and such. The Spanish Main was an all too brief time, when booty was plentiful for the takin' but the Navy wasn't. The good times came to and end, but not before bold men made their fortunes.
This here Intarnet tube thing was a new fron
The Japanese are such sheep! (Score:2)
Yet another illustration (Score:1)
Distorted and overblown. as usual... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
a. Rental is not illegal, so they are all legitimate businesses. And neither is selling blank CDs, no matter where they are stacked.
b. Manga cafe's are also legal. They are protected under fair use. Each cafe has their own copy. However, one cafe company tried to scan all their mangas and upload them as ebooks. They were arrested.
c. The magazines you are refering to are slightly naughty in nature (often bundled with porn, etc). So it isn't like the mainstream media is
*shrug* (Score:3, Interesting)
Human civilization can and will devour itself trying to bring this sort of thing to a halt. Why? Because it's always gone on, on some level or another, and always will go on, on some level or another.
Prostitution is more illegal than file-sharing is. There are always efforts in most places in the world to stop it, but the best those efforts are ever able to do is slow it down a little. We're talking tens of thousands of YEARS here, people, and it hasn't been stamped out -- and never will be either.
Want to really stop it, and everything else society at large deems "unacceptable"? Then you need the ability to mass-erase an idea from people's minds all at once, along with every material reference to said idea, because you can't kill an idea: You can't stop the signal, Mal. Ah, but there's a problem there, too, isn't there? If any government or individual had that sort of power over people, then we're living in a world that makes 1984 [wikipedia.org] look like amateur night -- and from there the human race would likely last about another two generations, tops, before completely dying out.
Want another example of what I'm talking about? Drugs. The world, for all of recorded human history and beyond, I'm sure, has had a problem with intoxicants of all kinds. Every culture does or has, at one time or another, tried to stamp them out. They all failed, didn't they, and for the most part our own efforts here in the U.S. are largely a waste of time, money, and resources; none of those efforts have or can really do much of anything to affect the idea of intoxicants. Remember Prohibition [wikipedia.org]? Yeah, that worked real well, didn't it?
As I see it we, as a race, have three directions we can go to address this class of issue:
1) We can stop fighting it, accept it, and try to develop ways to work with it so that it doesn't necessarily have to be a zero-sum game all the time.
2) We can fight it tooth and nail to the last, hoping that it's actually possible to erase an idea from human consciousness.
3) We can continue the cat-and-mouse games that this class of things has always been surrounded by and interwoven with, and the people who get caught at them pay the penalty for being careless.
Where we are now is #3. What I WANT to see is #1 -- but I don't think we're evolved enough to get there yet. Where some authorities and most corporations want to go is #2 -- and they're ice-skating uphill if they try.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)