OFCOM speaks on Anti-piracy measures.

[Toto]

Originally Posted by Sirius

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 ----------



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.

Why would they need DPI kit for this? I have read through the PDF file, and it appears that the evidence has to be supplied by the Rights Holder, there is no internal evidence gathering, for example.....

1.2 The DEA imposed new obligations on Internet Service providers (“ISPs�) to send notifications to their subscribers following receipt of reports of copyright infringement from Copyright Owners. ISPs must also record the number of reports made against their subscribers and provide Copyright Owners on request with an anonymised list which enables the Copyright Owner to see which of the reports it has made are linked to the same subscriber – also known as the ‘copyright infringement list’.

That does not seem to imply that ISP's must install DPI kit, it says that the evidence must be supplied by the Rights owner.

So, I am still trying to work out how this will benefit the ISP financially.

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by Toto

That does not seem to imply that ISP's must install DPI kit, it says that the evidence must be supplied by the Rights owner.

So, I am still trying to work out how this will benefit the ISP financially.

I am talking about the Detica kit presently being installed in VM's net work for monitoring p2p. That could quite easily be used for other purposes that will make money.

[Mr Angry]

Originally Posted by Sirius

My feelings are there is about to be an increase in the amount of companies offering Secure connections, Vpns and such.

I have no doubt of that.

However, ultimately this will make no difference - there are already appropriate laws in place to get access to user data and usage should Government deem it appropriate to do so.

There will come a time - in the not too distant future - when people will simply have to accept and realize that Governments, their legal systems and corporate interests are not going to allow their creative industries / GDPs to continue to be decimated just because people think it is ok to steal.

[Toto]

Originally Posted by Sirius

I am talking about the Detica kit presently being installed in VM's net work for monitoring p2p. That could quite easily be used for other purposes that will make money.

Then with respect that may be off topic and already discussed in another thread, I sense some hijacking going on here. This is about how Ofcom and service providers are now required by law to deal with Copyright piracy, none of the methodology mentioned in the extensive report from Ofcom suggests ISP's have to install expensive, intrusive and complicated monitoring kit on their network.

I'd even suggest that this requirement could lift the burden away from ISP's in not having to install such kit - by placing the burden on the Rights holders to supply the evidence themselves, but I am still at a loss to see how an ISP can benefit from this law financially.

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by Mr Angry

I have no doubt of that.

However, ultimately this will make no difference - there are already appropriate laws in place to get access to user data and usage should Government deem it appropriate to do so.

There will come a time - in the not too distant future - when people will simply have to accept and realize that Governments, their legal systems and corporate interests are not going to allow their creative industries / GDPs to continue to be decimated just because people think it is ok to steal.

So for instance

if a user is logged into a newsgroup provider who's servers are in the usa and that person is using a vpn from his location in the uk to a vpn provider in the usa and then on to the newsgroup server, who would have to supply the information, the only site in my eye's that will have the information on what has been downloaded would be the newsgroup provider in the usa as all the data would be encrypted via the vpn ??

---------- Post added at 17:28 ---------- Previous post was at 17:22 ----------

Originally Posted by Toto

Then with respect that may be off topic and already discussed in another thread, I sense some hijacking going on here. This is about how Ofcom and service providers are now required by law to deal with Copyright piracy, none of the methodology mentioned in the extensive report from Ofcom suggests ISP's have to install expensive, intrusive and complicated monitoring kit on their network.

I'd even suggest that this requirement could lift the burden away from ISP's in not having to install such kit - by placing the burden on the Rights holders to supply the evidence themselves, but I am still at a loss to see how an ISP can benefit from this law financially.

I agree the equipment is off topic but i think that the ISP's will decide its the only way forward, VM i feel has realised this already and its why they have decided to take that route. The impact that this will have on the isp's will be large to say the least. All the requests for information on who had a ip will grow and grow as the rights owners realise they have a new revenue stream to tap into.

[Mr Angry]

Originally Posted by Sirius

So for instance

if a user is logged into a newsgroup provider who's servers are in the usa and that person is using a vpn from his location in the uk to a vpn provider in the usa and then on to the newsgroup server, who would have to supply the information, the only site in my eye's that will have the information on what has been downloaded would be the newsgroup provider in the usa as all the data would be encrypted via the vpn ??

Yes, and there are international agreements to facilitate the transfer and exchange of such data - take for example the provider blacklogic whom you referenced earlier.

From their own T&C's:

You agree not to use our services for receiving and the distribution of pirated copyright materials, such as, but not limited to Pirated DVDs (such as movies), Pirated CDs (such as music), Pirated Softwares. This includes, but not limited to the following: The trading, selling, bartering, sharing, transmitting or receiving, of such materials.

And further

If we have reasonable grounds to suspect that an end user is involved in criminal activities, we reserve the right to notify law enforcement agencies.

These people are not fools - they are business operators who will take your money whilst protecting their own interests - anyone handing over money in exchange for these services who thinks that they are "safe" from prosecution is not well.

To assume that the entertainment and creative industries have not already infiltrated and road tested all of these services with a view to litigation in respect of the facilitation of infringement (especially on foot of the Limewire ruling) would be very, very naive.

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by Mr Angry

Yes, and there are international agreements to facilitate the transfer and exchange of such data - take for example the provider blacklogic whom you referenced earlier.

From their own T&C's:

You agree not to use our services for receiving and the distribution of pirated copyright materials, such as, but not limited to Pirated DVDs (such as movies), Pirated CDs (such as music), Pirated Softwares. This includes, but not limited to the following: The trading, selling, bartering, sharing, transmitting or receiving, of such materials.

And further

If we have reasonable grounds to suspect that an end user is involved in criminal activities, we reserve the right to notify law enforcement agencies.

These people are not fools - they are business operators who will take your money whilst protecting their own interests - anyone handing over money in exchange for these services who thinks that they are "safe" from prosecution is not well.

To assume that the entertainment and creative industries have not already infiltrated and road tested all of these services with a view to litigation in respect of the facilitation of infringement (especially on foot of the Limewire ruling) would be very, very naive.

thanks for the explanation.

[Lord Nikon]

And the point I was making is being missed. The ebook scenario could easily be applied to the music / movie industry. embrace the digital revolution, make e-distributions of some material free, ditch the DRM and the related expense of developing and using DRM. price the material accordingly to the reduced costs of production, stop being quite so greedy when it comes to per unit pricing. Think of it this way, if you make 2 pounds each on the sales of 5 DVDs you are making more money then 4 pounds each on the sale of 2 DVDs.

Legislation won't stop people waiting and using a library or DVD rental to avoid purchasing an expensive DVD, and those methods are legal. Has the music / movie industry complained about those methods of distribution yet?

[Toto]

Originally Posted by Lord Nikon

And the point I was making is being missed. The ebook scenario could easily be applied to the music / movie industry. embrace the digital revolution, make e-distributions of some material free, ditch the DRM and the related expense of developing and using DRM. price the material accordingly to the reduced costs of production, stop being quite so greedy when it comes to per unit pricing. Think of it this way, if you make 2 pounds each on the sales of 5 DVDs you are making more money then 4 pounds each on the sale of 2 DVDs.

Legislation won't stop people waiting and using a library or DVD rental to avoid purchasing an expensive DVD, and those methods are legal. Has the music / movie industry complained about those methods of distribution yet?

They are probably aware of the issue, but obviously feel that online piracy is a greater risk to their revenue stream, and therefore requires urgent attention.

You also need to understand that it is a little more complicated to lift DRM material off its original source. I would imagine that the P2P network is awash with DRM free material, and therefore a much easier medium for piracy.

I'd suggest that anyone who has any interest in this should read the whole Ofcom report, it makes for very interesting reading.

[Sirius]

To be honest most of my stuff i stream these days. I use certain sites for streaming tv and movies and spotify for my music.

[Lord Nikon]

Originally Posted by Toto

They are probably aware of the issue, but obviously feel that online piracy is a greater risk to their revenue stream, and therefore requires urgent attention.

You also need to understand that it is a little more complicated to lift DRM material off its original source. I would imagine that the P2P network is awash with DRM free material, and therefore a much easier medium for piracy.

I'd suggest that anyone who has any interest in this should read the whole Ofcom report, it makes for very interesting reading.

DRM is not present in the original source, it is included at the duplication / distribution stage. After all, the studios want to make multiple copies to send to the duplicators, the duplicators also want to be able to make multiple copies. to simply not include the DRM would be the easiest step possible and remove a stage of the duplication process.

[Ignitionnet]

Hand out the stuff DRM free it just speeds its' progress onto the P2P networks and newsgroups.

You can't compare Baen's works with music, movies, games or even more mainstream publishing, you can hardly say the following about J K Rowling:

Most of the authors are brand new writers, who got their start as published authors in Baen's Bar.

You think people will pay for an album or movie after getting the finished product for free?

The 'costs of production' in terms of physical media are a fraction of the cost of music and movies, the majority of the costs are those involved in producing the content itself and, yes, marketing it.

Much as I wish I shared your faith in humanity I very simply don't. I see very little benefit in offering full, finished products to people for free, I know I would struggle to justify paying for something I already own.

---------- Post added at 19:05 ---------- Previous post was at 19:00 ----------

Originally Posted by Lord Nikon

DRM is not present in the original source, it is included at the duplication / distribution stage. After all, the studios want to make multiple copies to send to the duplicators, the duplicators also want to be able to make multiple copies. to simply not include the DRM would be the easiest step possible and remove a stage of the duplication process.

Remember how optical media is made. It's not with a great big bank of DVDRW drives.

DRM is an automated process, the content is delivered already encoded to the media producers to be 'pressed' onto optical media. There's next to zero overhead there in most cases.

Even PC games, the 'cutting edge' of DRM are usually protected automatically, the publisher sends the unprotected files to a 3rd party who return the files protected and ready to be pressed. Alternatively there's some integration on the part of the programmers, but hey it's what they are paid to do.

[Lord Nikon]

It takes on average 90 minutes to turn a DVD with DRM into DRM Free Xvid/Divx/MKV files, less to turn it into a DVD Image burnable by 99% of all software. The same process will remove any 'ads' such as the 'Piracy is theft' garbage.

So, tell me again how much of a speed increase not putting DRM onto the media would cause? The encryption identification and removal stage of the above takes less than 10 seconds.

---------- Post added at 19:10 ---------- Previous post was at 19:07 ----------

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

Remember how optical media is made. It's not with a great big bank of DVDRW drives.

DRM is an automated process, the content is delivered already encoded to the media producers to be 'pressed' onto optical media. There's next to zero overhead there in most cases.

Even PC games, the 'cutting edge' of DRM are usually protected automatically, the publisher sends the unprotected files to a 3rd party who return the files protected and ready to be pressed. Alternatively there's some integration on the part of the programmers, but hey it's what they are paid to do.

you save the money involved in applying DRM. You stop the current EA debacle where to play games such as C&C4 you MUST have an internet connection even to play an offline skirmish game. Even if you bought the game in a retail store.

[Mr Angry]

Originally Posted by Lord Nikon

And the point I was making is being missed. The ebook scenario could easily be applied to the music / movie industry. embrace the digital revolution, make e-distributions of some material free, ditch the DRM and the related expense of developing and using DRM. price the material accordingly to the reduced costs of production, stop being quite so greedy when it comes to per unit pricing. Think of it this way, if you make 2 pounds each on the sales of 5 DVDs you are making more money then 4 pounds each on the sale of 2 DVDs.

Your point is not being missed - at least not by the various media industries. There are multitudes of avenues for free music similar to the ebook model. Many, if not all, major labels and distributors have abandoned DRM since 2007 lead by Apple. That said it has not, to any great degree, made much difference.

It has been highlighted many, many times that the costs of music (cd and download) and movies (specifically dvd) have both decreased very considerably over the past few years yet there are no signs, whatsoever, of your "surprises" to be had from doing so as piracy is as rampant as ever.

Most labels have also subscribed to free streaming services such as Spotify but even the free delivery of streams does not stop or dilute piracy and furthermore the figures to date show that the adoption of these models result in a vastly inferior return for artists over traditional models (even with piracy factored in).

You can keep driving the so called merits of Baen but it is a niche provider whose contributors voluntarily elect to give their works away "for free" (it's not actually free as Baen have already furnished them with a publishing advance).

Originally Posted by Lord Nikon

Legislation won't stop people waiting and using a library or DVD rental to avoid purchasing an expensive DVD, and those methods are legal. Has the music / movie industry complained about those methods of distribution yet?

No, because as you have pointed out those services are legal. You do yourself a terrible disservice by asking such silly questions, really.

[Lord Nikon]

Not really, both methods could also be construed as lost sales...