Skip Navigation

Calls again for illegal file sharers to be disconnected
Tuesday 12 May 2009 12:58:59 by Andrew Ferguson

It seems the creative industries are once again trying to get some form of the three strikes and you are out for illegal file sharing up and running. This is not really new news, but what is different is that we have an alliance of nine creative bodies and five trade unions backing the call.

The history of this dates back really to when the first MP3 files were made available online and services like Napster took off. With broadband speeds increasing the ability for people to download complete films at a good quality in a reasonable length of time we are seeing history repeating itself. While music downloads have dropped in price and people have more freedom as the amount of DRM (Digital Rights Management) is decreasing, with film downloads there is still limited availability and portability so that people can transfer it across the various devices they own due to DRM.

The Internet Service Providers Association has issued a response to this latest statement.

"The statement rightly calls for a Government policy that 'must ensure that the future of Broadband in the UK will be the safe and secure delivery of legal content'. Internet companies remain extremely frustrated by the ongoing difficulties in securing licensing that is needed to offer consumers legal alternatives through new models of online content distribution. It is our view that legislation on enforcement should only be introduced on the condition that the rights holder industry commits to significant licensing reform.

ISPA continues to dispute calls from some elements of the creative industries for the disconnection of users or technological measures as a method of dealing with potential infringers of copyright online. ISPA members have consistently explained that significant technological advances would be required if these measures are to reach a standard where they would be admissible as evidence in court. ISPs and consumer groups consider disconnection of users to be a disproportionate response, a view that was recently supported by the European Parliament.

ISPA is disappointed that the creative industries continue to advocate legislation on enforcement without considering how the complicated licensing processes that many stakeholders believe are at the root of the problem can be reformed. ISPA understands that the Government is currently considering legislative proposals and is in regular contact with relevant officials.

ISPA Secretary General Nicholas Lansman said, 'ISPA recognises that there is a problem with unlawful P2P file sharing, but it is important to recognise that a major part of the solution lies in licensing reform and the availability of legal content online. ISPA remains committed to working with the Government and the creative industries to find a solution which balances the needs of all parties and is fair for consumers'"

ISPA Response to the Creative Industries Organisations

While the alliance of UK creative industries makes some very strongly worded points, it is not clear whether they are simply trying to protect a distribution chain that is threatened by broadband and its ability to bypass middlemen, or actually have a replacement to offer people. The Davenport Lyons cases back in 2008 revealed some of the dangers of how file sharing can be tracked and the possibilities for getting things wrong. If providers were to start disconnecting people they would want to be sure it was the right connection. There is no denying the amount of material pirated is very large, but we still have a flourishing live music and crowds of people going to the cinema. There are some who do hold their hands up to downloading music, but then do buy the tracks they like, or pay for content but use the peer to peer networks to get it at a higher quality than is available online.

If the creative industries wants to push ahead with punitive measures, it needs to ensure that fair use is clearly defined, e.g. people owning a CD or DVD can download the same music or movie in another format suitable for playback on other devices, or be allowed to rip it onto their portable devices.

No industry can stay static. Innovation and fresh ideas are always needed and at a time when people are cutting back on spending, this is even more the case. Perhaps the broadband revolution means an end to production line pop.


Posted by Gzero over 8 years ago
Draconian rules from an alliance that breaks their own rules, do as we say and not as we do, that is all.
Posted by TonyHoyle over 8 years ago
Next they'll be calling that the electricity board cut off anyone who use electrical power for listening to pirated music.
Posted by Gzero over 8 years ago
Asking the Queen to have us evicted and deported for using a house as a 'base of operations' for piracy.
Posted by Gzero over 8 years ago
Oh and the representative for the alliance was on BBC 5Live this morning. It was a one sided rant from him, and did the usual 'not interested in what others have to say' using the point: "you wouldn't take a dvd without paying for from a store so why do it online?"
Erm people do steal from stores, and there is a punishment for it yet people still do it so why would cutting people off from the net act like a deterrent if it already is shown not to work...
Posted by herdwick over 8 years ago
We're guaranteed a good laugh whenever piracy is in the news.

"there is a punishment for it yet people still do it" - perhaps more people would do it if there wasn't a punishment ? Using your argument we need have no laws as they are all shown not to work every time one of them is broken.
Posted by Rroff over 8 years ago
And if they pushed this through... what will they blame when sales fall even more... as they will... they shouldn't underestimate how much they make from people sharing files with friends who are then exposed to new material or artists and go on to buy more of their stuff.
Posted by Rroff over 8 years ago
Online piracy is nothing like stealing a DVD from a store... there tends to be plenty of stores a good choice of places to buy and you can usually find an ok price if you hunt around... the online alternatives are pretty poor and lacking in comparison...

Its simple business - if you don't supply the market with what they want - someone else will. The challenge is to find a way to get the freeloading scum to part with their money.
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 8 years ago
"it needs to ensure that fair use is clearly defined"

No, it dosn't. There is virtually no fair use in British law, and they want to make you pay every penny.

I work in a creative industry, and this call is Not In My Name. Failing business models are not something the government should prop up. (And it's unliscenced copying, not piracy!)
Posted by dale303w over 8 years ago
Surely in a year or two, the vast majority of access to this content is going to be via the web whether it's being downloaded legally or not.

If they completely disconnect the 'abusers' from the net, they will have far less opportunity to download other content legitimately.

I'm sure there are a proportion of the community that won't pay for anything but I suggest that the vast majority of 'illegal' downloaders still contribute something, somewhere via the net.

It's the best case of cutting off the nose to spite the face if I've seen in a long time.
Posted by Dawn_Falcon over 8 years ago
Oh, incidentally? The government can't do this. even if it wanted. Ammendement 138/46 of the EU telcoms package as-passed defines internet access as a fundermental right and prevents negociated or civil sanctions from cutting off access.
Posted by Celery over 8 years ago
The creative industry needs to make its products available at a reasonable price, without DRM and in a much wider spectrum of formats if it wants to make inroads into piracy. Trying to manage their parental Hollywood Head Offices' requirements through law and politics is not the way to go. For years they have ripped off the consumer (remember when CD's were £17.99 in HMV!).
Posted by Celery over 8 years ago
cont....Most people would rather own the original content in whatever format that might be. However, they don't want to be stung for having the same content in a different format or even to rent. Since Amazon brought out 256kbs music with no DRM, I've purchased from them exclusively for content that I don't mind being at a lower quality rate than CD. If I want an album, I generally purchase it on CD through them as I want the high quality....
Posted by Celery over 8 years ago
cont....If the creative content owners gave the shop fronts the licence to increase quality to 320kbs then this would be a step forward also. The same applies to movies, Blu-Ray at RRP's of £20 and above is just a joke. Make it a reasonable price and people won't mind paying for the original content. That said, some people will always pirate stuff (ie South East Asia) in massive quantities. You are not going to stop that by turning off UK residents internet connections.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 8 years ago
How about these idiots crack down on illegal sites that charge a subscription fee to download content which does not have the copyright owners permission first... Will that be one strike against peoople who thought they were subscribing to a legitimate service??? I could name several sites that look legitimate and offer films, TV and music for monthly fees but in fact are obviously illegal as the files you download are the exact versions (hash code matches) to those on torrent and other P2P sites.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 8 years ago
Perhaps the tards should get the government to clean up the net first see we all know what services are legal and which are not... Its not as straightforword to say someone using P2P or bit torrent is breaking the law, there are plenty of sites out there that look legit and have a similar pay model as something which is legit like say itunes but ultimately atleast in this country the services are not legal. (Id post linked examples but i doubt this site wants links to illegal content, especially sites that try to charge you for it).
Posted by CARPETBURN over 8 years ago
How are we as individuals supposed to know if say a film site is legal or not if we come across one that claims to be 100% LEGAL when infact it is not?
The idea is so demented for so many reasons, chances are if you spent a whole day randomly viewing videos on Youtube you would use up your 3 strikes due to either seeing a clip from a known film or hearing copyright protected music.... Their idea is nice in theory too bad they dont have the brains to think it FULLY through though.
Posted by Rroff over 8 years ago
The potential for false positives and other problems is staggering... and I can just imagine people abusing someones connection maliciously coz they think its funny to get them cut off...
Posted by chrysalis over 8 years ago
the ISPA has basically said what I have been saying, basically the creative industry supplies the isp with evidence that would be luaghed out of court and expect an isp to disconnect a user without a court order with very weak evidence. I do wonder how much money the creative industry has thrown at this cause they just wont give up and accept it.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 8 years ago
Indeed Chrysalis, what happened to Innocent until proven guilty? Do these fools not realise all they are doing is alienating people who actually want to remain legal.
Posted by Groovehound over 8 years ago
Mafia-like businesses telling government what to do in the name of the little man, the employees in the creative industries... when it's really the cartels who cream off the top that are being represented and who are refusing to budge (I'd pay for good quality content online but where is it without some undeserving middleman getting too much?) Makes you proud of this country that the government won't listen to the people on Iraq, but maybe WILL listen to a minority on file sharing?
Posted by CARPETBURN over 8 years ago
quote"Makes you proud of this country that the government won't listen to the people on Iraq, but maybe WILL listen to a minority on file sharing?"

Maybe this clueless organisation will give the government another bung, god knows some of them need it after having to pay back things like their Sky TV subscription.
Posted by top_cat_999 over 8 years ago
Who will police this stupid idea? How will they know they have the right person, when almost all internet connections use DHCP in some form to allocate IP addresses, the IP address cannot be unique to an individual, as it can change every 24 hours! Why don't the creative industries wake up to the fact we are now in the 21st century and not the 18th!
Posted by TerFar over 8 years ago
Will ISPs become liable for any trojan that infects my network? Will ISPs be responsible for spam? Will BT take responsibility for paying calls charges collected on behalf of international criminals?

I thought not.
Posted by edwardmac over 8 years ago
I have to admit I download films. I am aware of copyright. I understand that technically I'm breaking the law. Do I care? Not a hoot!
Why should I pay £6 to see a film and have my ears blasted to deafness, my seat-back kicked and have to get stuck to the floor by spilled Coca Cola, not forgetting the smell of that rip-off popcorn. Why should I buy a DVD for £12 (plus) only to watch it once or twice? I'm for change.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 8 years ago
quote"I have to admit I download films. I am aware of copyright. I understand that technically I'm breaking the law. Do I care? Not a hoot!
Why should I pay £6 to see a film and have my ears blasted to deafness, my seat-back kicked and have to get stuck to the floor by spilled Coca Cola, not forgetting the smell of that rip-off popcorn. Why should I buy a DVD for £12 (plus) only to watch it once or twice? I'm for change."

One word for you... RENTAL... Actually make it 2 words...... CHEAP
Posted by CARPETBURN over 8 years ago
Honestly i hate so called ideas like this that will wrongly boot people off the internet but seriously if the planet was full of people like you there would be no new films or music. Anyone that just downloads every album and film deserves a kick in the nuts.
Posted by beeflin over 8 years ago
Nobody will be able to go along with the "creative industries" while that (a) value their contribution to the product more than the artist's and (b) continue to describe unauthorised copying as "theft". Theft deprives a person of an object which they will either have to pay to replace, or cannot replace. Unauthorised copying does not. It's like all the vague nonsense talked about "drugs". All it does is entrench prejudice, not enable clear judgement.
Posted by beeflin over 8 years ago
Also CDs are incredibly overpriced. Let's keep saying this until the industry listens.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 8 years ago
quote"...ust that if i can get it free why should i pay for it also i am already paying my isp £25 so it's not free internet also the electric will all add up i have already downloaded 700GB of movies..."

Clearly you are an idiot that does not comprehend that if nobody went to the cinema, nobody bought films on DVD or paid for them in some other format there would be no cash made to make new movies to drive your dumb i want it "free" attitude.

ISPs dont give money to the film industry, what you pay for your internet doesnt even come into things, film and music has to make money.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 8 years ago
People like beardy Lucas dont just spend millions on a Starwars film to give it away to stupid people.

The industry is scum, but the old "CD/DVD are too expensive" argument from certain people does not wash, especially when your attitude already is why should i pay if i get it for free.

CDs and DVDs could cost 1p each for the latest releases, morons and pikeys still wouldnt pay for it.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 8 years ago
Infact this story has nothing as such to do with downloading of copyright material. Anyone with a brain will agree those that deliberately download millions of pounds worth of material need a kick up the backside. The tradegy and real point of this story is INNOCENT people could suffer, as one of their three strikes could be just for watching a video on youtube of someone giving their life story which has decided to use copyrighted music in the middle of their video. The point of this story is legit people will suffer and be treated like the real pikey oinks of the net.
Posted by CARPETBURN over 8 years ago
Oh and.....
You do realise with that rant ladden, swear ridden, dyslexic like tripe you have just produced it proves my point even more, the decent members of society will be treated like you should be treated IE Like dirt. Now be gone, run along and download some cinema recorded movie you silly little boy.
Posted by fivish over 8 years ago
The music and film industry will eventualy come to realise that people will gladly pay for a live performance, but any recording is just an advert and they will not pay for.
Its that simple.
You must be logged in to post comments. Click here to login.