RIAA turns to ISPs instead of individual users

[Sazelyt]

Originally Posted by Demongod86

So if an ISP threatens and they lose a customer, what next?

Nothing. You need either a collective riot or an ISP that will attract such users. Second option is not currently available. And, the companies will not allow the first option to get realized. They will never target all the people who are doing such sharing. They will target enough people to make this become a widespread info, but RIAA will not suffer the painful criticism.

[Vexx]

Aye, very few people actually have more than one practical choice for broadband, so its pretty threatening. However, the ISPs really have no interest in doing the RIAA's work for them.

[Takeru]

Originally Posted by Vexx

However, the ISPs really have no interest in doing the RIAA's work for them.

Exactly. This is making the ISP the middleman who basically transports information from one person to another.

It would be like someone coming to me about someone I just met and expecting me to discipline them for something that has nothing to do with me other than providing a service that they took advantage of someone else though. Ex: "Sure, I lent him my car. No, I didn't know he was going to heist a bank with it."

[Sazelyt]

Considering Comcast's response, I am sure they are very willingful to get rid of some customers (especially the ones who download a lot, who are also expected to upload some) with the help of file sharing excuse. Since they don't need to prove anything (especially for the 1st warning), at the end.

[Vexx]

Comcast is a strange entity in that they also have their *own* content they're pushing. They hate the idea that internet content is competing with their cable channel offerings.
Now that Verizon is starting to get into the FIOS television arena, it might get a bit weird (though FIOS is actually so UNavailable its hard to call it a service quite yet.. more of a pilot project).

[Thingle]

Too bad for you Americans. But they can't trace IRC downloads, can they? It's a good thing our country doesn't pay any attention to stuff like these. Internet here is a completely unregulated, free for all wild west, and our ISP's are too busy vying for more subscribers to consider taking them off the net.

[Ending]

Here, in Finland, it's taking a similar turn and I heard that in Britain and France they are going to take even stricter hold. IMO, the discussion is turning slowly but steadily towards the regular topics:
a) "We must protect the children",
b) "We must protect intellectual rights", and
c) "We must weed out potentially harmful content to ensure safer networking."
Just replace the culprit with Kopiosto or Gramex.

So it's not just RIAA who is trying to seize control of Internet, but also governments and other official sources. Is it going to work? Eventually yes, which means that a lot of content will disappear.

[Thingle]

Originally Posted by Wordplay

Here, in Finland, it's taking a similar turn and I heard that in Britain and France they are going to take even stricter hold. IMO, the discussion is turning slowly but steadily towards the regular topics:
a) "We must protect the children",
b) "We must protect intellectual rights", and
c) "We must weed out potentially harmful content to ensure safer networking."
Just replace the culprit with Kopiosto or Gramex.

So it's not just RIAA who is trying to seize control of Internet, but also governments and other official sources. Is it going to work? Eventually yes, which means that a lot of content will disappear.

If politicians try to do the same here they would be chastised for wasting their time and taxpayers' money.

[kyon.haruhi.suzumiya]

Originally Posted by Thingle

If politicians try to do the same here they would be chastised for wasting their time and taxpayers' money.

Well, yeah. After all, the US has lots of money to fritter away, especially on Chrysler and GM, you know what I mean?

They can also do it the Odex way.

[greatpower2]

I think it's obvious what any intelligent person will do. Use a proxy, also why do "they" think this is the best way to solve this. Artists need to stop getting sponsored or whatever it is ( sorry can't remember the word I'm tired) remember what Radiohead did. They said pay us what you think it's worth and made more money.

@Thingle I think you're wrong these big corporations could and probably would bribe/fund the law through.

[Ending]

I think it's obvious what any intelligent person will do. Use a proxy, also why do "they" think this is the best way to solve this.

Highlighted the important part. The sad thing is that proxies can be blacklisted too. I know, because I work as a city employee and our department is responsible of filtering out certain Internet content for schools, libraries, and so forth. So, once people start using some particular proxy, we spot it from the most popular listing and add it to the filters. Eventually there are no proxies left and what are you going to do then?

Who are "they" that think what is right for us? In my case, mayor and town council. In government scale it has to be the prime minister, president, and parlament members. In truth, only a few of them really know what is going on, so the decision will usually come from a select few people in leading position that think it's a great idea. They say do this and we make it possible because that's what we are paid for.

I wouldn't blame government alone, though, because every decision must be carried out by willing people. Namely: ISPs and IT-departments. There are countless ways to undermine censoring, so if that isn't done, it must be because people are willing to accept it as a necessity.