http://www.smh.com.au/news/technology/war-on-music-piracy/2008/02/16/1202760662778.html

I'm betting this will happen by end of year.
So... better leach like there's no tomorrow...

AS THE internet threatens to kill the established music industry

heh. that norty internet! that article is totally clueless. as the smaller labels start offering legal mp3 downloads it compounds the difficulty to locate & prosecute illegal downloaders... & they are panicing. :P

ha ha yet again the ISPs are being called to 'do something'
they're never going to do anything. they just supply me with a big fat dumb pipe. what i choose to squeeze down there is my business, not the ISPs

as dumb as that article is, your comment isn't true according to the law and your contract with your ISP mr hardware

Rudd Government is considering a three-strikes policy against computer users who download songs illegally.
...

The second strike would lead to the offender's internet access being suspended; the third would cancel the offender's internet access.

f***! Kevin Rudd is going to ban me from the Internet!

last edited by Idol at 13:12:47 17/Feb/08

f*** them for calling it the 'War on Music Piracy'.

It's really a rebellion against the evil fat cat a******s who have had a stranglehold on musicians for 40 odd years now. People are sick of getting jacked for excessive amounts of cash for an album, artists are getting sick of getting ass raped with bulls*** low royalties and both parties feel bad for the other. The evil bastards at the record companies are scared because the musicians and fans have an easier method to share music that is better monetarily for both parties. I think the record industry should just accept that they had a good run, about half a century of scamming the entire music world. Time to let the scam go, boys.

with 700 million songs being purchased over itunes every 6 months, I'd say the internet saved the music industry, not ruined it.

"Internet service providers are not the enforcers of copyright," Mr Corones said. They are "a mere conduit" for internet connectivity.

Hahah, totally. We deny all culpability. You can tell he belongs to an industry body, because the espoused rhetoric is completely removed from reality. fact: The ISP industry was built off the back of piracy - they aren't the perpetrators of the crime, but they are certainly some degree of accomplice!

Off the face of this smh article it seems like a good start - the penalties are definitely end-user orientated, and I suppose could be proportionately tame, but you would want to to ensure the other industry body (MPAA/etc) doesn't go medieval on ISPs and end-users, by firing off twenty million infringements!

i know that jim, but they ain't gonna do s***. they don't even have enough staff to man the phones sometimes let alone worry about someone downloading britney spears' new album. no-one gives a s***. never have done, never will.

1) access annoying neighbour's wifi connection
2) leach
3) leach more
4) see said annoying neighbour get into s***
5) ???
6) Profit!

It's ok, the P2P software developers are by nature always one step ahead of the ISPs and anti-P2P hardware/software vendors. They'll just keep changing the protocols and obfuscating the data transactions, making it expensive for ISPs (like Comcast) to keep updating hardware/software to keep up with the changes.

Sure the ISPs could use traffic analysis to tag P2P without actually inspecting the content, but it's only a matter of time until that actually interferes with normal internet applications and they'll have to give up.

I'd just keep doing it until I was suspended then when the suspension is over I'd do it again. Because I don't give a s***.

nobody can be angry if you apologise though right? surely, that'll make things right.

Mr Rudd has jumped on his 400th bandwagon in less than 100 days. This country is heading in the right direction now he is making progress on his list of trendy bandwagons.

Go Kevin! (We can call him Kevin right?)

arent they trying to do this is england, but with tv shows?

This is hardly a trendy bandwagon infi.

wtf am i supposed to do with my 50gig of downloads then?

This is hardly a trendy bandwagon infi.

Tell that to the struggling indie artists just trying to feed themselves.

i hope they do this, and then when people still don't buy the s***ty product that large labels are putting out they can just go f*** off and die.

^ werd

All that needs to be done is everyone buys a wrt54g, puts DD-WRT firmware on it and link them all together forming a massive wifi network of french underground resistance proportions.

viva la revolution

edit: can't stop the signal Mal
http://img259.imageshack.us/img259/2602/0003jm3.gif

last edited by whoop at 18:20:55 17/Feb/08

fyi, everything john howard did, big business thought was trendy

As long as they don't stop us from leeching movies and tv shows I don't really care about the music thing.

What about shared internet connections. One person leeches and they suspend the whole account?

Optus already do this, though it's over a 12 months period (ie, 3 warnings in 12 months and they kill your account).


PeerGuardian+Safepeer and you're fine :)

What about shared internet connections. One person leeches and they suspend the whole account?

If you read the EULA (which no one does) it says the account holder is responsible for the account and anyone who uses it. If you don't want your internet being suspended then tell the people sharing it not to leech illegal s***.

roflmao just cause they say they will do it.. doesen't mean they will,

they aren't the perpetrators of the crime, but they are certainly some degree of accomplice!

I blame Energex, all those electrons supplied for nafarious uses.

But anyhow, the sooner the music "industry" dies the better. Power to the Muso's I say. Music executives can support thier coke snorting habits off someone elses back for a change.

last edited by CaptainCaveman at 00:20:22 18/Feb/08

sif the ISP's would actually be fastidious in this approach on downloaders. I'd like to know the figures for sure, but based on my loose and poorly educated guess, I'd say maybe 40-50% of broadband users were downloaders of music/movies from the internet. The revenue the ISP takes from these users per month, would be more than enough to make them become "lazy" on warning and disciplining people with account disconnections. I mean, if I got cut from an ISP from downloading, I'd sign up with a different ISP in my wife's name, and I sure as hell wouldn't be using the same bastard ISP who cut me off!.

As the legal cases the RIAA has brought against "downloaders" in America has shown, the quality of the information their investigators collect is dubious at best. I would like to know what recourse they plan to give people who have been incorrectly warned and subsequently disconnected without any burden of proof.

Also, this system will only work for people who use torrents and other forms of open peer to peer networks. I think it will just create new ways of transferring files anonymously or result in the use of previous methods such as sharing stuff with friends via MSN/ftp/whatever.

Legitimate downloaders / creators of mp3's need to form a Union to resist the corporate exploitation

The ISP industry was built off the back of piracy - they aren't the perpetrators of the crime, but they are certainly some degree of accomplice!

That makes the goverment responsible for building roads that are used by felons to get away from bank robberies though, amirite (obCarAnalogy).

I don't think the ISP industry was built on piracy at all. The ever-lasting gobstopper statement that is thrown around by ISPs and users alike of "5% of users use 95% of the traffic" or whatever lends strength to that argument - most people don't use the internet for hardcore piracy, and its certainly not their sole reason for having an internet connection. There's a lot more compelling reasons to have internet; the marketing arms of big ISPs are more responsible than anyone else.

But this isn't about hardcore piracy, it's about casual piracy. It's not about the 5% using the most traffic, it's the much larger percentage of people that think downloading major label music without paying is acceptable. I know plenty of people with what I would consider minuscule usage caps that download tunes to fill their ipods from illegitimate sources.

looks like britteny spears will get her gulfstream 2 back.

From what I understand, they don't know exactly what you are downloading. If you do lots of peer-2-peer stuff you may be flagged. I'm sure there would be various automatic methods in place to help filter those people. I imagine there would be some sort of digital footprint that is left by p2p music traders, however it would certainly be vague.

I think the UK ISP's wanted to be immune from being sued for wrongfully banning someone, instead wanting to pass that on to record labels.

That makes the goverment responsible for building roads that are used by felons to get away from bank robberies though, amirite (obCarAnalogy).

I thought of the road analogy before, but imho it's not quite a fit because in a sense one can argue that it's like building a 50 lane direct expressway between highly travelled points A and B, which lawfully has a 40km speed limit imposed, but is practically un-enforced along that segment - meaning everyone travels as fast as their car will take them. Meanwhile new lanes keep being added, but as long as we keep paying the toll to the operator, everything's hunky dory.

I don't think the ISP industry was built on piracy at all.

TBC..

Historically the wholesale ADSL ISP industry I think has, to an extent. Telstra retail and wholesale share much of the same transport infrastructure, so to subsidize the higher cost of supporting high-bandwidth customers, they were expunged from retail and left for the nimble and cost-effective ISP to make a buck from. This is reflected in higher end-user costs for Bigpond and lower usage caps. Telstra made more money this way because of the port/spectrum/backhaul/AGVC fees the ISP pays. So really Telstra are just as guilty by 'contracting' out the dirty work to ISPs.

When I say ISP I include bigpond in this as well (they probably have more than their fair share of 'casual' downloaders). I agree with Dan that this is about re-introducing risk to the equation and taking ISPs to account for their complicit inactions on this front.

I mean, it's pretty simple. We know what we want, and they know what we want. And I continue to pay iiNet for the privilege. :)