Copyright infringement (DMCA) notices for unlicensed anime

[Skarredmind]

Originally Posted by Kirarakim

I wish this was true where I live but while Comcast is slightly more expensive than Verizon it has double the speed. Also having Verizon in the past I constantly had problems with their service. I was knocked off every day, I really don't want to switch to them again because of this.

Yeah Cable beats DSL... We're talking about FiOS though, which from all reports is way faster and more reliable (My dad has it and its sweet)

[niwroc]

This smells like a bunch of false positives to me. Something tells me that BayTSP either accidentally or intentionally sent emails to American ISPs, and Comcast was the only provider silly enough to listen.

It stands to reason, since several of the letters I've heard of have seemed to believe the user was in Singapore, not America.

[DesoNoto]

Wow! I used to have Comcast until recently because they were getting really annoying so my mom and dad decided to switch over to Verizon Fios. Probably best ISP choice ever made in my life.

[Kirarakim]

Originally Posted by Skarredmind

Yeah Cable beats DSL... We're talking about FiOS though, which from all reports is way faster and more reliable (My dad has it and its sweet)

I just looked into switching to FiOS and unfortunately it is not available in my area yet. Hopefully Verizon will bring it over here soon. Their TV service is already here but that doesn't really help much in this situation.

[Kamui4356]

Originally Posted by Kyuusai

I just wanted to offer some perspective on this point.

Practically speaking, random folks on the internet can't know who you are based on your IP address. That's information your ISP has. At least in civilized countries, an ISP is not going to reveal customer information for anything less than a court subpoena (It has happened before--see what happened in Singapore--but the ISPs generally end up in hot water).

For that reason, the copyright holder (or their representative) contacts your ISP, who in turn contacts you. If you get something directly, it either means that your ISP sold you out or that your ISP had no choice in the matter as it was a court order (in which case, pray for mercy).

Yes, those two points on their own might not mean much, but when combined with the other ones I mentioned it does seem to suggest it's comcast behind this. Though personally I think the second point is the strongest on it's own, as fansub groups have been the target of c&d notices in the past, and going after individual downloaders seems like wasted effort when you can go after the source. Unless of course these "individual downloaders" happen to be continously uploading these files.

Originally Posted by bayoab

In all ISPs Terms of Service conditions, there is always a clause on both file sharing and bandwidth usage. If this was really about bandwidth issues, they could just as easily have sent a "cut down your bandwidth or we cap you" notice. This seems more like they want to scare people away from bittorrent.

That's basicly what these are though. At no point does that one posted threaten any legal action. You're right they want to scare people away from bittorent, but the reason they want that comes down to bandwidth in the end. I doubt comcast has some irrational hatred for the bt protocol itself, they just want their users to not download as much.

The real test would be to download as many legit torrents as possible, like various versions of linux and the like and see if it gets any kind of response from comcast.*

*Disclaimer: Kamui is not responsible for any accounts that might get capped or dropped as a result of this advice.

[Skarredmind]

Originally Posted by Kirarakim

I just looked into switching to FiOS and unfortunately it is not available in my area yet. Hopefully Verizon will bring it over here soon. Their TV service is already here but that doesn't really help much in this situation.

Their TV service is good too actually, but if they have the FiOS tv it will be at most a few months until the high speed internet is also available. They had the internet first where my dad lives, then they added the TV within 3-4 months

[GrapeSoda]

Any news on the source of the complaints? I think I remember reading that some people were looking into where they came from.

[MegoHulk]

I remembered reading a while back how Crapcast was monitoring and blocking BT downloads...well the battle has begun:

Comcast Sued Over BitTorrent Blocking
http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/200...t-sued-ov.html

Funny how the e-mails went out this weekend after this lawsuit huh?

Good luck to Plaintiff Jon Hart!

[toshirodragon]

I'm rather suspicious that the cease and desist notices are coming in the form of an email. I would expect that ANYTHING valid that I should be worried about would come in a nice legal written notice from Comcast.

In all honesty, if I got an email telling me to stop, I'd junk it same as I do all those "your information is about to expire please log in here and renew your info" emails I get from people claiming to be my bank.

[Kyuusai]

Originally Posted by toshirodragon

I'm rather suspicious that the cease and desist notices are coming in the form of an email. I would expect that ANYTHING valid that I should be worried about would come in a nice legal written notice from Comcast.

In all honesty, if I got an email telling me to stop, I'd junk it same as I do all those "your information is about to expire please log in here and renew your info" emails I get from people claiming to be my bank.

It's quite common to inform you of these things via email. I know, because I often do so. Email is no less legitimate than snail-mail. You should judge the message based on its content... and if it's from your ISP and has details of what you've done online that only you or your ISP could have, I'd think that would be a good indicator it's legitimate.

Also keep in mind that this is not the ISP trying to take action of their own accord, but it is the ISP relaying the message to the customer. Essentially, it's a courtesy to you. That being the case, they're not likely to spend extra money or effort to send you a letter. By informing you, they're giving you a chance to correct the situation before they're obligated to stop the infringement themselves (which would involve cutting off your service).

[Aoie_Emesai]

Originally Posted by Kyuusai

It's quite common to inform you of these things via email. I know, because I often do so. Email is no less legitimate than snail-mail. You should judge the message based on its content... and if it's from your ISP and has details of what you've done online that only you or your ISP could have, I'd think that would be a good indicator it's legitimate.

Also keep in mind that this is not the ISP trying to take action of their own accord, but it is the ISP relaying the message to the customer. Essentially, it's a courtesy to you. That being the case, they're not likely to spend extra money or effort to send you a letter. By informing you, they're giving you a chance to correct the situation before they're obligated to stop the infringement themselves (which would involve cutting off your service).

Of course ^_^ The ISP would be in a whole lot of trouble if they knew you were still infringing your rights yet they did nothing to stop it themselves knowing that it was illegal.

[Kamui4356]

Originally Posted by Aoie_Emesai

Of course ^_^ The ISP would be in a whole lot of trouble if they knew you were still infringing your rights yet they did nothing to stop it themselves knowing that it was illegal.

Not true. The dmca specificly states isps are not liable for actions of their users unless they store a copy of the file in question or initiate the transfer themselves. If they just allow the user to download and don't do anything to help, they aren't liable.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/...4shk9B:e57376:

[Broccoli]

Finally made it to the front page.
Comcast Targets Unlicensed Anime Torrenters

[Kyuusai]

Originally Posted by Kamui4356

Not true. The dmca specificly states isps are not liable for actions of their users unless they store a copy of the file in question or initiate the transfer themselves. If they just allow the user to download and don't do anything to help, they aren't liable.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/...4shk9B:e57376:

The link doesn't work. I assume you're linking to section 512 of the DMCA? Here it is, available on chillingeffects.org (I'd link to it on Cornell's site, but they're having issues).

The key here is that the "Safe Harbor" provisions for ISPs have some conditions. One of those conditions listed is that "the service provider responds expeditiously to remove, or disable access to, the material that is claimed to be infringing upon notification of claimed infringement".

If the ISP doesn't move to disable the infringement, they can become liable.

Of course, downloading is not infringement (except by technicality). Uploading is.

[bayoab]

Originally Posted by Broccoli

Finally made it to the front page.
Comcast Targets Unlicensed Anime Torrenters

And the fact that its likely Odex/BayTSP behind this is likely to be lost.

If you search the chillingeffects DB, you will find out that these letters are standard for comcast. There is nothing that differentiates them from the edonkey or other p2p program ones.

And someone else pasted this, but Odex has struck again, in France:
http://www.bikasuishin.org/odex-en-france

[Messerschmitt_Bf-109]

^^^ Will the French ISP do anything?

Sound slike it would really suck to live in Singapore.

[cicido]

Randomly enters. I don't use comcast so no problem for me. What is interesting is:

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 181 (14 members and 167 guests)

What's up with all the guests?

[GHDpro]

I've added a notice on the front page. However I agree with bayoab in that I don't really think that Comcast made these up, but rather repackaged the DMCA notice they received in their own house-style copyright infringement notices.

In other words, I too believe now that it's likely that Odex/BayTSP is behind all of this and I've updated the main post to reflect this.

Originally Posted by cicido

Randomly enters. I don't use comcast so no problem for me. What is interesting is:

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 181 (14 members and 167 guests)

What's up with all the guests?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slashdot_effect

[Messerschmitt_Bf-109]

Companies watching?

[Kamui4356]

Originally Posted by Kyuusai

The link doesn't work. I assume you're linking to section 512 of the DMCA? Here it is, available on chillingeffects.org (I'd link to it on Cornell's site, but they're having issues).

The key here is that the "Safe Harbor" provisions for ISPs have some conditions. One of those conditions listed is that "the service provider responds expeditiously to remove, or disable access to, the material that is claimed to be infringing upon notification of claimed infringement".

If the ISP doesn't move to disable the infringement, they can become liable.

Of course, downloading is not infringement (except by technicality). Uploading is.

Yup that's the one. That removal upon notification requirement applies to section (c), "Information Residing on Systems or Networks At Direction of Users" This should fall under section (a) "Transitory Digital Network Communications". (c) appears to refer to material hosted on a server owned by the ISP while (a) appears to refer to the actual data transmission.