Comments on: Illegal File Sharers To Be Cut Off By 2011

By: Droog

Droog — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 21:14:15 +0000

Like Morgan said, hopelessly FLAWED.
All it would take would be a semi-organised resistance to overwhelm the appeal process, then see how long it stays in place.
These dorks can’t even handle immigration appeals in less than 5 years, and if a legal test case is launched and funded by appeals for donations, the law would never pass the constitutional test (UK or US).
All the frightened little sheep would probably comply though, and that’s where the challenge would be, how to motivate people to stand up for their own freedoms. There’s been a lot of slippage there since 9/11.
But having said all that, the times they are a-changin, adapt or give up and join the lemmings.
Cheers 2 All.

By: Mark

Mark — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 05:40:07 +0000

Do you really think that ISP’s will disconnect paying customers? I think not!

By: Harry Barracuda

Harry Barracuda — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 10:24:05 +0000

Yes, let the government decide what you should and shouldn’t download.

If you let this pass you are a bunch of fucking sheep!

By: Morgan Storey

Morgan Storey — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 02:58:49 +0000

@droope: Excellent idea, I think it was mentioned somewhere else (pauldotcom maybe) as basically an easy way to dos someone. No technical ability required, just send in official looking complaint to ISP x that company y (who happens to run on isp x) is downloading movie a, b and c. A day later send another letter, company y is kicked effectively downing their site(s). This would cause utter havok… and it wouldn’t take to long for the law to either be recinded or proper channels for complaints would need to be made.
Then enter the spammer who simply innundates the official complaint service, then the backlog goes from days to years, so no one gets kicked…

Horribly flawed idea that will not work, admitedly an ISP I did some work for did this. Basically on the second complaint the customer was blacklisted unless a reasonable excuse could be made, the customers details were not released to the company complaining.

By: Sambora

Sambora — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 15:02:37 +0000

It’s still a little early to see how this is all going to fall out. They have a serious legal problem on their hands because they aren’t crafting a specific law that file sharer’s would be breaking, and there’s no provision for legal due process before warning letters or notices of disconnection would be sent. The ISPs are just supposed to take the media companies’ word for it that a particular IP address was observed to be used in file sharing, and the “owner” of that IP address is automatically guilty as charged. There’s the little ditty about a right to appeal, but this is only available after the citizen has already been declared guilty by persons operating entirely outside of a courtroom with a judge and jury. Assumed guilty until proven innocent is not sitting too well with any jurist worthy of practicing the profession. I’ve read that TalkTalk is already planning to challenge the legality of this law if it is passed.

By: droope

droope — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 12:32:15 +0000

What if someone invented some evil software that would download illegal software in order to get the owner of the conection suspended?

That would be a big hit… both to the prosecuters, and the inoccent bystander. I’d bet the innocent bystander – i.e the owner of the conection – would be rather pissed… Maybe pissed enough to riot against the bill, along with the legitimate illegal file downloaders?

By: fic

fic — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 11:58:48 +0000

The hydra will just adapt with the laws and make it harder to locate the source.