The beginning of the end?

FenriR

Member
Oct 10, 2007
2,063
0
36
England
http://www.metro.co.uk/news/article.html?in_article_id=98499&in_page_id=34

Web users who illegally download films and music could be cut off from the internet by their service providers under proposals which are set to be unveiled next week.

The Government wants to force internet service providers (ISPs) to clamp down on the six million people who access pirated material every year as companies are claiming the practice costs them billions of pounds in revenue, it was reported.

Internet users who illegally download music or films will receive an email warning for a first offence, face a suspension for a second offence and have their internet contract terminated for the third offence.

The proposal comes from a Green Paper on the creative industries called The World's Creative Hub, which is due to be unveiled by Culture Secretary Andy Burnham and Gordon Brown next week.

According to the paper the government will 'move to legislate to require internet service provider to take action on illegal file-sharing'.

A consultation document on the proposal is expected to be issued within coming months.

Britain's four biggest internet providers - BT, Virgin Media, Tiscali and Orange - have been in talks with music companies and film distributors and studios about a voluntary code.

One of the disputed points is the problem of 'wifi piggy-backing' - the practice in which someone accesses the internet using another person's wifi network.

But Roz Groome, vice-president of anti-piracy for NBC Universal, welcomed the prospect of legislation.

'We welcome the signal from Government that it values the health of the creative industries and takes seriously the damage caused by widespread online copyright infringement,' she said.

'We call upon ISPs to take action now.'

A spokesman for the Internet Service Providers Association said he hoped a voluntary arrangement would be preferable to legislation.

'Every right thinking body knows that self-regulation is much the better option in these areas,' he told The Times.

And Ed Vaizey, the Conservative's Shadow Arts Minister, said: 'David Cameron called on the internet providers to address this issue last summer.

'The credibility of the Government's latest threat is underminded by the fact that ministers have spent so many years dithering on whether to legislate.'
 
That's the way the system works. I doubt you would hear many musicians complain about fewer people stealing their music.
 
The trouble is it'll be difficult to tell which downloads are legal and which aren't. There'll be a workaround for downloads imho, and those who download legally are going to get hit badly.
 
That's just something that would have to get worked out as it gets implemented. It's no reason to abandon the idea altogether.
 
Pretty much - although it's hard to point fingers since so many people do it. I think the music industry has a right to do something about it, though, as long as it's not overly harsh or inconvenient for a lot of people.

This idea seems like a better one than the whole DRM movement, anyway.
 
Never. Going. To. Happen.

Aside from the obvious legal issues involved here, it is also unfeasible from a technical perspective. Protocols such as bittorent already have been developped with encryption features that make it extremely difficult for service providers to detect and block "illegal" traffic, especially without also crippling perfectly legal technologies (bittorrent protocol is also used for many legal applications because of its efficient use of bandwidth).

Just like CD copy protection this idea is a total pipe dream and a few yers down the line people are going to realize this and abandon it altogether (again, just like CD copy protection).
 
Exactly, they may be able to shut down things like Limewire and the like but they will never be able to shut down torrents. The Pirate Bay, I know for sure, has diplomatic immunity to copyright laws and I imagine quite a few other sites do as well, and the technology itself can't be shut down due to the reasons Cairath said.
 
Never. Going. To. Happen.

Aside from the obvious legal issues involved here, it is also unfeasible from a technical perspective. Protocols such as bittorent already have been developped with encryption features that make it extremely difficult for service providers to detect and block "illegal" traffic, especially without also crippling perfectly legal technologies (bittorrent protocol is also used for many legal applications because of its efficient use of bandwidth).

Just like CD copy protection this idea is a total pipe dream and a few yers down the line people are going to realize this and abandon it altogether (again, just like CD copy protection).

Fair enough. It just annoys me that people always hold it against them for trying. Barring shit like encryption and copyright law immunity, there's no good reason why they shouldn't have some way of protecting their business.
 
The Brits have gotten pretty serious about this. A few months ago they raided the house of the guy who ran tv-links.co.uk, a site which hosted countless TV shows, movies, cartoons and what not.