Skip Navigation


ISPs given piracy deadline - April 2009
Friday 22 February 2008 06:57:57 by John Hunt

The government is expected to inform Internet Service Providers (ISPs) today of legal sanctions if they do not take action against piracy on the Internet. This follows the leak of a paper last week which claimed to propose a "three strikes" rule against UK Internet users, which would see their Internet connection terminated. Andy Burnham, culture secretary, talking to the Financial Times denied that the three strikes rule was ever in this strategy paper, now being released, and stated that the government wants to make a clear signal that something needs to be done.

The current schedule is to consult on legislation in the spring of this year, with a view to enforcement by April 2009. The details of how have yet to be determined, and ISPs could still head off sanctions if there were considerable steps toward a solution to the problem. Self-regulation is obviously more desirable but ISPs have raised concerns over the ability to actually check and stop illegal downloaders, thought to be in the region of 6 million people, and are worried over who will cover the costs.

Comments

Posted by fusen over 9 years ago
don't you love it when governments who don't understand an issue try and push through this sort of blanket legalisation.

It's ridiculous and just makes them look foolish to anyone that has a clue. The only way for copyright infringement to stop is to go Big Brother Orwellian style and monitor every single thing we do which I doubt Joe Public would enjoy even if they don't understand the average piracy argument.
Posted by wifigeek over 9 years ago
if it ever did come into force, which i highly doubt it will, it will just bring in the need for people to use services such as https://www.secureix.com/ or usenet with SSL.

im sorry, but the govt has no place to decide what traffic should pass essentially trying to filter the internet for UK citizens.

if isps are suddenly responsible for traffic, where does it stop? are they going to be responsible for those who have had their pcs compromised by unauthorised access over the ISPs network?
Posted by CARPETBURN over 9 years ago
Agreed wifigeek, even if ISPs blocked things completely right down to individual web page level using a VPN service will not only bypass that but also depending on the service do it totally privately and scramble any data the ISP will see at their end..... This law is a joke, it will do nothing to stop piracy, those that use the net for piracy know it, the ISPs know it as usual its just the brain dead government that doesnt... My god is our internet is gonna end up like Chinas? A new low for new labour.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 9 years ago
Where the hell is ofcom again?? Surely they should be saying excuse me Mr Brown you numpty this wont work.
Posted by Newnetteruser over 9 years ago
Ive never understood why they go after torrent sites so much. No copyrighted data is held on a tracker.

When you look at giganews and newsdemon to name a few whos servers do actually hold material thats illegal. The attack plan doesnt make much sence.

Posted by mr_flibbles_twin over 9 years ago
Agreed Newnetteruser,

But alas, Government plans don't need to make sense, only headlines!

Maybe we should be kinder to the music industry, after all home taping killed music in the 80's didn't it?

Are we too late to save it from the cassette deck?

Until some sense comes from either the RIAA, BPI, or the Government I only have this comment ....


.... PAH!

Posted by herdwick over 9 years ago
"No copyrighted data is held on a tracker."

but it's primary purpose is aiding and abetting the action they are seeking to control which makes it a logical target.

(before anyone suggests somnething crass like "the same can be said of Google" why not ask yourself what the *primary purpose* of Google is).
Posted by Newnetteruser over 9 years ago
its interesting you say its primary purpose. i would say its primary purpose is the distibution of files accross the internet.

When you look at 4OD, BBCI and even Blizzards choosen patch method to say Torrents primary purpose is illegal content is a little narrow minded.
Posted by AndrueC over 9 years ago
Given the recent announcement of a government review of BB in the UK I wouldn't mind betting that this will be used as a bargaining chip.

I'm not convinced that the government is so stupid and so poorly advised as to think this legislation will work so my guess is that it's posturing so that they can haggle over the investment in next generation BB.
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 9 years ago
Be convinced
Posted by Guzzo over 9 years ago
"the govt has no place to decide what traffic should pass"

Excuse me? You have in Office the most Draconian bunch of Control Freaks for decades.

They have already succeded in stifling free speech, suppressing ALL serious debate on a range of issues. Every day a bit more freedom is covertly taken away while EVERYBODY seems to sleepwalk through it. Watching TV over the NET
So don't think they wont/cant take control of the NET. It only a matter of time
Posted by Guzzo over 9 years ago
Its not as if its very difficult to see who is behind all this crap.
You simply research the "advisers" to the Powers that be. Look into their background financial and business and social. Connect the dots
Posted by Guzzo over 9 years ago
where is Ofcom?
ruling on another issue. Remember the Boss at Ofcom probably wants in on the Honours lists so wont trouble Gordy will he/She?
Posted by CARPETBURN over 9 years ago
quote"(before anyone suggests somnething crass like "the same can be said of Google" why not ask yourself what the *primary purpose* of Google is)."

Yep have done now tell me again the purpose of googles video services like google video and youtube which they basically own. Id say a good 70-80% of material on both their services infringes copyright law in some manner.
Posted by herdwick over 9 years ago
"to say Torrents primary purpose is illegal content is a little narrow minded." but largely correct, nevertheless.

"a good 70-80% of material on both their services infringes copyright law in some manner." doubtful, but you can be sure they take it off on request if it does, can you say the same about P2P ?
Posted by bosie over 9 years ago
When will the Government question the legality of DRM, that people should pay for downloads deliberately locked to a specific device but purchase the same content on a different form of media and be able to access it anywhere they like? The internet is being singled out for a problem it didn't give cause to. To the BPI and film industry, just look at yourselves first.
Posted by armada7800user over 9 years ago
This is called "Phone Tapping"......
ISP's will be able to see all your personal data, bank details, etc etc.....
Wake up and stop them.
:)
Posted by CARPETBURN over 9 years ago
quote""a good 70-80% of material on both their services infringes copyright law in some manner." doubtful, but you can be sure they take it off on request if it does, can you say the same about P2P ?"

You are living in Cuckoo land if you dont think a majority of videos on google video and youtube do not break copyright law in some way. I spose all the clips of little billy doing something dumb with xxxxx artists song in the background are legit as he got the copyright owners permission to use the track in his dumb youtube clip did he?? (CONT)
Posted by CARPETBURN over 9 years ago
I wont even mention as an example the 25,700 results youtube gives just typing in "the simpsons" as a search... I spose all near 26,000 clips got permission to use that show did they? Honestly this law in so many ways is a complete and utter joke for an ISP to stop copyright material being listened to or viewed in any way they would have to block over half the internet... Just think about it for a split second atleast!
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 9 years ago
armada7800user - And your organisation and tactics are?
Posted by chrysalis over 9 years ago
people rant on about how we free and look at china who limits the internet, uk is steadily turning the same way. democracy what does it mean?
Posted by chrysalis over 9 years ago
carpetburn is right, however it woudnt surprise me if eg. the music industry got a closed door settlement of google to leave youtube alone. Money is their only language. They think they have some god given right for XX amount of profits each year and if it doesnt come its someone else's fault. Yeah the advisors basically run the country Guzzo the PM and other cabinet members are just public puppets.
Posted by herdwick over 9 years ago
you can be sure they take it off on request if it does breach copyright, can you say the same about P2P ?
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 9 years ago
Actually they want a 3-strikes policy for banning users on utube for uploading copyright material as well.

Indicentally, anyone considered the business issues of packet inspection? That fails so many business confidentiality clauses... (i.e. cannot use for many business uses)
Posted by 2doorsbob over 9 years ago
Just wondering if the real motive behind this is to get the public to use the net less ..to delay the investment needed on our ageing local loop for longer..the government seems in an awfull hurry to get this actioned..people forget the music and film industry still lost millions before dsl caught on ..just a thought thats all
Posted by CARPETBURN over 9 years ago
quote"Money is their only language. They think they have some god given right for XX amount of profits each year and if it doesnt come its someone else's fault."
Exactly you only have to look at the recent BPI and Tiscali story to realise its not about law but money, if it were about law they would happily cover Tiscalis cost no matter what. The days of cd of shop shelf are coming to an end the fools cant deal with that, thus instead of spending on new ways to deliver media they are happy to recoup yearly profits (or should that be loss?) through the odd downloader.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 9 years ago
quote"you can be sure they take it off on request if it does breach copyright, can you say the same about P2P ?"
Which beggers the question why is so much of it still there? Oh yeah thats right its down to money again. If the likes of the BPI tried to sue google its team of a million legal eagles would crush them in court, hence why they go after the everyday job public in multiple numbers... (CONT)
Posted by CARPETBURN over 9 years ago
Several easy small paydays rather than one huge one, so to speak. If you dont believe me read up about a site which was taken down called TVlinks, the MPAA asked the owner for the site to be taken down. The owner obeyed the request... A month later they still sued him... funny that dont happen with google and youtube huh? Are they scared of losing in court and losing even more money?? I think the answer to that is obvious.
Posted by Clearsky2 over 9 years ago
Back in the 1970's there was a mininstry that every week, pumped out green papers on the of the most rediculous notions that the law would be workable and of benefit to the nation; it was called "The Ministry of Silly Walks"

Well those over 40 know that this was only a Monty Python sketch - yet today, we have dozens of MinistERS for Silly Walks, Quangos for Silly Walks, and Advisors ON silly walks, all producing comic legislation: From ASBOs to ID Cards, 'privacy' to organ theft, sadly this bunch of comedians has lost the plot - but not their £100,000+ incomes.
Posted by Clearsky2 over 9 years ago
...also, on a technical note, will the ISP's have to report to the Police evry person using the BBCi player? It's P2P and is SHARING?

And how long will it be before some bright geek comes up with a file sharing platform that looks exactly like the BBCi player, yet isn't?
Posted by scuz over 9 years ago
So today. my ISP (entanet) responded to a MPAA/RIAA notice on my connection and suspended my connection until Timeline[2003]DvDrip[Eng]-aXXo.avi was removed from sharing and deleted from my system

the notice reads.

Hi,

We have received another notification that copyrighted material may be being distributed from this account via a file sharing programme. I have included the full notification email below, if you have any questions about it you are urged to contact the company concerned direct.
Posted by scuz over 9 years ago
Evidentiary Information:
Notice ID: 29879199
Recent Infringement
Infringed Work: Timeline
Infringing FileName: Timeline[2003]DvDrip[Eng]-aXXo.avi
Infringing FileSize: 736020480
Protocol: BitTorrent
Infringers IP Address: 87.127.xxx.xxx
Initial Infringement Timestamp: 23 Feb 2008 21:45:28 GMT

200 million notices since the beginning of the war on piracy?

Entanet were very accommodating and told me exactly how they got my IP and what i had to do to get back online, which i obviously did without fuss.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 9 years ago
quote"Entanet were very accommodating and told me exactly how they got my IP and what i had to do to get back online, which i obviously did without fuss."
Let me guess that involved saying you were so sorry for what you had done, promising you will never do it again, them plugging the wire back in and you back finishing off your download LOL
You must be logged in to post comments. Click here to login.