Skip Navigation


Further changes to Karoo policy on illegal P2P file sharing
Friday 14 August 2009 12:01:25 by Andrew Ferguson

Back in July it emerged Karoo was disconnecting customers as soon as they received a letter from a copyright holder; then the policy changed to one that was less harsh. It seems that perhaps the legal team at Karoo has been busy, as now the policy has changed once more to require a court order before any disconnection will take place.

We spotted this latest change thanks to Mark of ISPreview, but it seems TorrentFreak has been the ones putting the questions to Karoo in the last few weeks.

"Going forward, we will provide customers with three written notifications to make them aware that a copyright owner has alleged that their internet account has been used to infringe their copyrighted material. These letters do not accuse the customers of any wrongdoing and will offer help and support so that those customers whose internet access is being used unknowingly are able to address it.

We will no longer suspend a customer’s service unless we receive a court order from a copyright owner taking legal action. As a result it is the responsibility of the legal system, not Karoo, to ensure the accuracy of the information provided by the copyright owners."

Comments from Karoo to TorrentFreak

While the talk of a court order sounds like a good degree of proof will be required, court orders in the past have been processed forcing providers to reveal customer identities based on little more than their IP address appeared in a log for an application that watched what files were available for downloading via torrents. A case back in 2008 showed that an IP address is not enough because there are many ways to fake this information, or inject false information into systems to reduce the chances of the major sharers not being found. Of course with the rules requiring providers to keep lists of sites someone has visited, if this was available to a court it could be used to back up a case for or against someone.

The Digital Britain report is meant to address the area of illegal file sharing, and it may result in a consistent approach across Britain, whereas at present what happens seems to vary from provider to provider. Just maybe the biggest problem facing those in charge is that they face an uphill struggle getting a generation of teenagers to listen. The in your face glamorous life-style of a few artists and music execs probably does little to help as many will believe the artist will not miss the money.

One interesting change in the UK political scene this week was the launch of the Pirate Party, who intend to have candidates standing at the next General Election, though for them to appear on TV in a Party Political Broadcasts they will need to be standing in more than 108 seats across the UK.

Comments

Posted by kamelion over 7 years ago
So in other words they are adhering to the voluntary code. Sarecly newsworthy , which explains the lack of comments really.

The thing of note is that "...the artist will not miss the money"

I think few believe that its the artist ripping people off , rather the publishing companies that not only exploit the consumer but also the artist(s) who receive a tiny percentage of the money from a CD sale.

I'm not condoning copyright theft at all but its a bit rich for these people to use the word theft when they charge £10+ for something that costs at the most £2 to produce
Posted by TGVrecord over 7 years ago
I always thought it strange that record companies would charge £10 for CDs which are part of their back catalogue whilst movies on DVDs are often discounted to £5 a year after release. Another thing that annoys me is that some CDs can only be purchased as imports and often cost £20 each. Is it any wonder people do not buy many CDs.
You must be logged in to post comments. Click here to login.