[viracocha]

This is a VERY well written article from the Guardian about the "Three strikes & out"-model that the Music Industry so desperately is trying to lobby through in the whole European Union now:

...You see, the big copyright companies – record labels, broadcasters, film studios, software companies – are lobbying in the halls of power around the world (including Westminster) for a three strikes rule for copyright infringers.

They want to oblige internet service providers (ISPs) to sever the broadband links of any customer who has been thrice accused of downloading infringing material, and to oblige web-hosting companies to terminate the accounts of anyone accused of sticking infringing material on a web server three times.

They're not even proposing that this punishment should be reserved for convicted infringers.

Proving infringement is slow and expensive – so much so that the Motion Picture Association of America just filed a brief with the US court considering the appeal of Jammie Thomas, a woman sentenced to pay $222,000 in fines for downloading music, in which the trade association argued that they should never have to prove infringement to collect damages, since proof is so hard to come by.

Do yourselves a favour and read the FULL article here: Cory Doctorow: Getting tough on copyright enforcers | Culture | guardian.co.uk

[Barney]

Originally Posted by viracocha

This is a VERY well written article from the Guardian about the "Three strikes & out"-model that the Music Industry so desperately is trying to lobby through in the whole European Union now:






Do yourselves a favour and read the FULL article here: Cory Doctorow: Getting tough on copyright enforcers | Culture | guardian.co.uk

Good article, but lets be honest, it is as biased as when the RIAA say that 'Illegal downloading of music is killing the music industry' (but in the opposite direction obviously). The article implies that all people who get three strikes of copyright infringement are being falsely accused . Okay, this is might be true in some cases, but I bet the majority of infringer's are guilty as sin. Lets face it, if you don't stop what you are doing or change your IP address after two strikes, you are just dumb. I strongly agree that they should have to prove that the individual has actually broken some law, rather than just suspecting so, before being cut off, but in principle this is a very good system to use.
NB. PM coming your way

[viracocha]

Originally Posted by Barney

Good article, but lets be honest, it is as biased as when the RIAA say that 'Illegal downloading of music is killing the music industry' (but in the opposite direction obviously). The article implies that all people who get three strikes of copyright infringement are being falsely accused . Okay, this is might be true in some cases, but I bet the majority of infringer's are guilty as sin. Lets face it, if you don't stop what you are doing or change your IP address after two strikes, you are just dumb. I strongly agree that they should have to prove that the individual has actually broken some law, rather than just suspecting so, before being cut off, but in principle this is a very good system to use.
NB. PM coming your way

Barney, you're obviously right that it is being biased - but its main objective is to point out the weaknesses/unfairness of such a system - and it even leaves out the MOST unjust:


That it not only punishes one individual but but maybe 4, 5, 6... family members, if the mother of the family three times in a row is SUSPECTED of doing something that an ancient and outdated industry considers illegal


VPN-services like www.RELAKKS.com and www.swissvpn.net will soon be well known and used by the majority of all internet users in the European Union - just out of fear of being labelled a copyright infringer by a self appointed biased judge as the RIAA

[Nightfly]

Originally Posted by viracocha

Barney, you're obviously right that it is being biased - but its main objective is to point out the weaknesses/unfairness of such a system - and it even leaves out the MOST unjust:


That it not only punishes one individual but but maybe 4, 5, 6... family members, if the mother of the family three times in a row is SUSPECTED of doing something that an ancient and outdated industry considers illegal


VPN-services like www.RELAKKS.com and SwissVPN - Surf the safer way! will soon be well known and used by the majority of all internet users in the European Union - just out of fear of being labelled a copyright infringer by a self appointed biased judge as the RIAA

I will do so in the US as well,because it seems the smart thing to do....

Thanks for the enlightning article which made me think.And I know
the RIAA will come up with something just as mindless here.

[Barney]

Originally Posted by viracocha

That it not only punishes one individual but but maybe 4, 5, 6... family members, if the mother of the family three times in a row is SUSPECTED of doing something that an ancient and outdated industry considers illegal

My guess is it is alot more likely that it is the son / daughter who is doing the downloading & mum is the one who is going to get the shock when the letters start arriving. I guess people have just got to take responsibilities for what goes on in a house / office & not just blame it on someone else. The problem at the moment is that p2p is illegal, so if you can't do the time; don't do the crime.

Originally Posted by viracocha

VPN-services like www.RELAKKS.com and SwissVPN - Surf the safer way! will soon be well known and used by the majority of all internet users in the European Union - just out of fear of being labelled a copyright infringer by a self appointed biased judge as the RIAA

I guess I am missing a point here, but if they are going to be tracking computers via IP addresses, why don't they just 'turn off' the router for five minutes, which usually give you a new IP address once it is switched back on (or at least it does with my computer / router ). My guess is I am over simplifying things here

[viracocha]

Originally Posted by Barney

My guess is it is alot more likely that it is the son / daughter who is doing the downloading & mum is the one who is going to get the shock when the letters start arriving.

You're such a male chauvinist, Barney

Originally Posted by Barney

I guess people have just got to take responsibilities for what goes on in a house / office & not just blame it on someone else. The problem at the moment is that p2p is illegal, so if you can't do the time; don't do the crime

I can't believe my own eyes here: What you are in fact saying, Barney, is that if the MOTHER of the house do something illegal, like rob a bank, her whole family is supposed to be sent to jail for accessory by relation

Originally Posted by Barney

I guess I am missing a point here, but if they are going to be tracking computers via IP addresses, why don't they just 'turn off' the router for five minutes, which usually give you a new IP address once it is switched back on (or at least it does with my computer / router ). My guess is I am over simplifying things here

Because by resetting your router you will still get an IP, which belongs to your ISP, who will then be able to find out that YOU were the one misusing it at any given time

Using RELAKKS or SwissVPN will make it appear to the Media Mobsters that you are either Swedish or Swiss...

[kyletroy]

Originally Posted by Barney

The problem at the moment is that p2p is illegal, so if you can't do the time; don't do the crime

Just wanted to point out that there is absolutely NOTHING illegal about using P2P

Many people use it to distribute their own home made photo albums to family and friends or as a distribution channel for Linux-applications

[Barney]

Originally Posted by kyletroy

Just wanted to point out that there is absolutely NOTHING illegal about using P2P

Many people use it to distribute their own home made photo albums to family and friends or as a distribution channel for Linux-applications

Sorry, you are right. But for what 95% plus of p2p is used for (sharing music / dvds), it is illegal.

[Barney]

Originally Posted by viracocha

You're such a male chauvinist, Barney

Hey, I said son & daughter and if you had said father instead of mother, my comment would still stand true (I'm an agist, not a male chauvinist )

I can't believe my own eyes here: What you are in fact saying, Barney, is that if the MOTHER of the house do something illegal, like rob a bank, her whole family is supposed to be sent to jail for accessory by relation

If the rest of the family knew about the robbery, then yes. If not, they should have tried to figure out where she got the Porsche from (or the 200 albums on her computer / ipod).

Because by resetting your router you will still get an IP, which belongs to your ISP, who will then be able to find out that YOU were the one misusing it at any given time

Using RELAKKS or SwissVPN will make it appear to the Media Mobsters that you are either Swedish or Swiss...

See, knew I was missing something .

[viracocha]

Originally Posted by Barney

If the rest of the family knew about the robbery, then yes. If not, they should have tried to figure out where she got the Porsche from (or the 200 albums on her computer / ipod)

Try to make that one hold up in court


This kind of collective punishment doesn't apply in any other aspect of the justice system (in the more democratic part of this Globe, anyhow):

If 10 people are gathered in a dark room and one of them gets stabbed to death, then it is up to the police to find out EXACTLY who did it - and put him/her behind bars.

You simply can not charge them, sentence them and put them ALL behind bars as a collective punishment for accidentally being in the same room as the perpetrator - not even if they all did in fact know that one of the others might have had a motive to do the crime - and withheld that information from the law enforcement regardless