OFCOM speaks on Anti-piracy measures.

[Mr Angry]

here.

[Sirius]

And so it begins

Names and the number of times individuals infringe will be logged.

Music firms and movie studios can request details from the list so that they can decide whether to start their own action against serial infringers.

I bet now that this will be used all the time. This is a licence to sue, Why do they have to release electronic download services now when they can just set the lawyers on people and earn there money that way.

[punky]

Ugh.

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by punky

Ugh.

??

[Ignitionnet]

Seems fairly reasonable, a key point is that people aren't going to be cut off arbitrarily.

The 'licence to sue' seems ok so long as it's not abused in the manner Sirius describes as a substitute for offering content in more convenient ways.

My one major frustration is that this does nothing for serial downloaders from newsgroups but will instead punish those who use P2P which will perversely push them into giving money to Paedoshare and newsgroup services who profit from supplying content.

[Kymmy]

How will the data be accessed??

Does the copyright holder say to VM I own such a film please tell me who's been downloading it (even though the filename might be bogus and the P2P hash might not match)

or

Will the copyright holder first have to catch the IP downloading the exact hash and then request full log details off the ISP??

Also will this not just push everyone towards SSL enabled downloads/shares??

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by Kymmy

How will the data be accessed??

Does the copyright holder say to VM I own such a film please tell me who's been downloading it (even though the filename might be bogus and the P2P hash might not match)

or

Will the copyright holder first have to catch the IP downloading the exact hash and then request full log details off the ISP??

Also will this not just push everyone towards SSL enabled downloads/shares??

Or will the ISP be using Detica and have a complete breakdown of everything you have done on line anyway ready to be supplied at the drop of a hat.


This is going to be a Licence to print money for both the isp and the Movie and Music industries, Why bother to supply legal downloads when you can get the isp and its deep packet inspection kit to supply ready made suing material

[Mr Angry]

Originally Posted by Sirius

Why bother to supply legal downloads when you can get the isp and its deep packet inspection kit to supply ready made suing material

Could it be because not everybody considers theft as a first or only option?

[Kymmy]

Originally Posted by Sirius

Or will the ISP be using Detica and have a complete breakdown of everything you have done on line anyway ready to be supplied at the drop of a hat.

Surely though even Detica (phorm or any other tap) on an SSL connection can only see your to/from/port as the rest of the data is encrypted, so for example they know that the SSL connection is downloading from a usenet site but not what they're downloading???

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by Kymmy

Surely though even Detica (phorm or any other tap) on an SSL connection can only see your to/from/port as the rest of the data is encrypted, so for example they know that the SSL connection is downloading from a usenet site but not what they're downloading???

I agree. I use SSL when ever i can now.

---------- Post added at 09:20 ---------- Previous post was at 09:16 ----------

Originally Posted by Mr Angry

Could it be because not everybody considers theft as a first or only option?

Maybe, but the fact is that certain cowboy law firms now see the ability to sue p2p users as the best way to make money and have made it clear they intend to carry on. Could this be the next no win no fee but in reverse

[Mr Angry]

Originally Posted by Sirius

Maybe, but the fact is that certain cowboy law firms now see the ability to sue p2p users as the best way to make money and have made it clear they intend to carry on. Could this be the next no win no fee but in reverse

Whilst I don't agree with the current buckshot blanket issuing of letters on the part of some of these firms the fact still remains that were it not for people engaging in illegal downloading to steal media / softwares then these firms would not have the inclination to operate that particular business model.

[Toto]

Originally Posted by Sirius

This is going to be a Licence to print money for both the isp and the Movie and Music industries, Why bother to supply legal downloads when you can get the isp and its deep packet inspection kit to supply ready made suing material

How does an ISP benefit from something that they will have to pay for in order to enforce?

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by Mr Angry

Whilst I don't agree with the current buckshot blanket issuing of letters on the part of some of these firms the fact still remains that were it not for people engaging in illegal downloading to steal media / softwares then these firms would not have the inclination to operate that particular business model.

I fully agree with you. My main worry is that the isps will see this as a reason to push for access to the data from the equipment they are forced to install. They could say that the money made from access to the data will help fund the cost of supplying the large amount of data that COULD be requested by the lawyers who jump on the bandwagon of sue sue sue.

Its a lot of could's or if's but it makes me worried as to where we will end up with this.

---------- Post added at 09:48 ---------- Previous post was at 09:45 ----------

Originally Posted by Toto

How does an ISP benefit from something that they will have to pay for in order to enforce?

I feel that the Deep packet inspection kit to be installed in half of VM's network will not only be used for p2p checking. It will in my eye's evolve very quickly when they see the benefits of a phorm type off shoot.

[Lord Nikon]

Several points here.

1) If Phorm is an invasion of privacy / breach of human rights, is this not the same? It is an invasion of privacy on people who are presumed innocent in order to see if they are attempting to break a law? Could not the same argument against phorm be brought into play to stop this from taking place?

2) It has been PROVEN in the literary environment that downloading of content for free INCREASES legitimate sales. Even when those downloads are free from DRM and of exactly the same quality as the paid for version.

3) The reason piracy is so prevalent is the COST of the legitimate version. When an office package, plus an OS upgrade exceeds the cost of an entry level computer. When you can have 5 people going to the cinema, or 2 people plus snacks for the cost of a new issue DVD. When someone who is visually impaired is expected to pay over 600 for a piece of software to read the screen to them, why do people think piracy is so prevalent? The money for films is made back at the cinema, the cost per unit for a DVD on a mass production run is pennies. Make the films more affordable, Make back catalogs available longer, Ditch the DRM that prevents some people from watching the films. Ditch those ****** annoying 'piracy is theft' commercials you HAVE to watch on a legit DVD. (Guess what. Pirate versions don't have that crap, they don't MAKE you watch 20 minutes of trailers. They just let you watch the film.)

[Angua]

Originally Posted by Lord Nikon

Several points here.

1) If Phorm is an invasion of privacy / breach of human rights, is this not the same? It is an invasion of privacy on people who are presumed innocent in order to see if they are attempting to break a law? Could not the same argument against phorm be brought into play to stop this from taking place?

2) It has been PROVEN in the literary environment that downloading of content for free INCREASES legitimate sales. Even when those downloads are free from DRM and of exactly the same quality as the paid for version.

3) The reason piracy is so prevalent is the COST of the legitimate version. When an office package, plus an OS upgrade exceeds the cost of an entry level computer. When you can have 5 people going to the cinema, or 2 people plus snacks for the cost of a new issue DVD. When someone who is visually impaired is expected to pay over 600 for a piece of software to read the screen to them, why do people think piracy is so prevalent? The money for films is made back at the cinema, the cost per unit for a DVD on a mass production run is pennies. Make the films more affordable, Make back catalogs available longer, Ditch the DRM that prevents some people from watching the films. Ditch those ****** annoying 'piracy is theft' commercials you HAVE to watch on a legit DVD. (Guess what. Pirate versions don't have that crap, they don't MAKE you watch 20 minutes of trailers. They just let you watch the film.)

Exactly