backtop


Print 70 comment(s) - last by Creig.. on Feb 28 at 2:35 PM

Those who wish to avoid system should quit Verizon, AT&T, Comcast, or Time Warner service

After months of delays, a "six strikes" system designed to curb copyright infringement will go live in the United States, affecting customers on many of the nations' top internet service providers (ISPs).  While avoiding the most draconian of punishments proposed in past plans -- severing offenders' internet connections -- the system will carry serious consequences including connection throttling and forced "education" from anti-piracy groups.

The nation's top two mobile carriers -- Verizon Communications Inc. (VZ)/Vodafone Group Plc. (LON:VOD) joint subsidiary Verizon Wireless and AT&T, Inc. (T) -- are both participating (as is Verizon Communications’ cable network).  Also onboard is top cable internet provider Comcast Corp. (CMCSA), a company that knows a thing or two about throttling.  Rounding out the early adopters is Time Warner Cable, Inc. (TWC), a company known for its tireless efforts to stomp out municipal cable.  The group, along with its big media partners, is known as the Center for Copyright Information.

The Daily Dot was the first to report that the system would go online this week.  The system had been delayed for months due to issues with testing servers getting knocked offline by Hurricane Sandy.

The CCI's so-called Copyright Alert System (CAS) just had a shiny new website and promotion video pop up on YouTube, lending credence to the report that the system will be deployed next week.


CCI Website
CCI's new website just went live.

Under the plan, copyright watchdogs like the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) and Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) -- groups that have been internationally involved in convictions or settlements involving their own "theft" of independent artists' work -- will join peer-to-peer networks or BitTorrent transfers and log internet protocol (IP) addresses of people who are downloading "confirmed infringed content".

The first warning carries no action, but later warnings carry ISP-specific "Mitigation actions".  The (sort of) good news is that there is a path to appeal warnings.  Writes the CCI:

There is a $35 filing fee, which may be waived if you meet affordability criteria. The fee will be refunded if your challenge is successful.

Still, the system is a concern for real estate owners and Wi-Fi cafe owners, in that their services could be limited due to their customers’ actions.  In many cases, it would be near impossible for such entities to police their customers’ actions.

The simple solution for business people in that situation is to cancel their service with AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, or Time Warner and seek a local alternative.  

Of course that approach could be difficult in some regions, and may become infeasible if more ISPs jump on the CCI bandwagon.  For now, though, there are alternatives for many customers who want to avoid the system.

Source: Daily Dot



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

My alternatives are Comcast or Verizon FiOS
By quiksilvr on 2/25/2013 1:13:14 PM , Rating: 3
So in short, screwed?




By JasonMick (blog) on 2/25/2013 1:20:00 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
So in short, screwed?
http://xkcd.com/945/


RE: My alternatives are Comcast or Verizon FiOS
By Samus on 2/25/2013 1:53:14 PM , Rating: 5
Well there goes public WIFI from McDonalds, Starbucks, etc, and practically any internet cafe.

This is such a backwards agression to piracy prevention. It isn't going to stop real pirates who use private trackers on torrent communities, anyway, which is where 'real' piracy happens. It will hurt clueless people, not those who do the yet-unproven "monetary damage" to the industry.

Just ridiculous.


RE: My alternatives are Comcast or Verizon FiOS
By Jeffk464 on 2/25/2013 2:18:01 PM , Rating: 2
This has already ruined a lot of free wifi. It used to be you could find access points all over the place when away from the home. Now everybody is pretty careful to lock them down.


RE: My alternatives are Comcast or Verizon FiOS
By chrnochime on 2/25/2013 4:13:58 PM , Rating: 2
Is your free wifi the starbucks kind or the using people's unprotected home wifi kind?


By RufusM on 2/25/2013 5:15:59 PM , Rating: 1
Well, there are still tens of thousands of WiFi routers on the Internet with UPNP enabled on the WAN, just waiting to be hacked into providing free WiFi.

http://www.upnp-hacks.org/devices.html


By Jeffk464 on 2/25/2013 8:52:58 PM , Rating: 2
Actually to tell you the truth since I got my smartphone I don't really look for wifi anymore.


RE: My alternatives are Comcast or Verizon FiOS
By Jeffk464 on 2/25/2013 2:20:49 PM , Rating: 2
Yup, nothing media has ever done has been able to stop the major pirates who actually distribute and profit from pirated movies and software. The vast majority of piracy for profit is going on in other countries.


RE: My alternatives are Comcast or Verizon FiOS
By NellyFromMA on 2/25/2013 4:24:07 PM , Rating: 2
The industry truly doesn't discriminate against for-profit piracy and not-for-profit piracy.

Piracy at all is lost revenue for them.


RE: My alternatives are Comcast or Verizon FiOS
By christojojo on 2/25/2013 10:17:33 PM , Rating: 2
Yes along with the worst kind of pirate they face the imaginary lost profit from poor people profit. You know the ones that wouldnt buy it anyways they would just wait for it to be on tv the fast forward through the commercials. I always love the creative "we lost X many dollars due to this" mentality. Yet they never pay the stars for lost profit.


RE: My alternatives are Comcast or Verizon FiOS
By NellyFromMA on 2/26/2013 1:19:13 PM , Rating: 2
So they should just get it all for free while the working class pay? That mentality is a tough sale on all the non-dependants that continue to be squeezed for every cent possible because the rich and the poor want it all.

It seems like its a more creative idea to get the working class to always pay for everyone elses's LUXURIES, not necessitties.

Just why are 'poor people' as you refer to them entitled to everything I have to earn?


By Unspoken Thought on 2/27/2013 6:40:33 PM , Rating: 2
Well, just because I exist shouldn't entitle you to subsidize all of your financial burdens on me either.

If they raise the price on a product you desire due to low sales, you aren't going to get anywhere running around yelling at the poor people claiming it's their fault.


RE: My alternatives are Comcast or Verizon FiOS
By NellyFromMA on 2/25/2013 4:21:18 PM , Rating: 2
I agree with you, but can't come up with real alternatives that aren't 'its free now'.

Does anyone here have suggestions?


By ShieTar on 2/27/2013 10:44:28 AM , Rating: 2
Stop paying millions of $ to singer and actors and more importantly agents and managers and lawyers, so you can sell you products at prices that people won't mind to pay?


RE: My alternatives are Comcast or Verizon FiOS
By abhaxus on 2/25/2013 2:29:29 PM , Rating: 2
VPN services are super cheap, like 3 bucks a month if you pay a year at a time.


RE: My alternatives are Comcast or Verizon FiOS
By nafhan on 2/25/2013 2:40:20 PM , Rating: 2
FiOS user here; I'm planning to start paying for a personal VPN soon. Other than privacy, VPN also gets you access to region blocked content (such as the BBC, if you're an American). That in mind, I feel like $3 a month is a pretty good deal compared to ~$100+ for a premium cable package.


By Solandri on 2/25/2013 5:00:49 PM , Rating: 2
Google for expat shield (spam filter here is preventing me from posting the link. It's a free VPN (endpoint is in the UK, so you can get BBC videos). It does add ads to your browser while it's in use. I picked it up during the Olympics to bypass some of the NBC silliness.


RE: My alternatives are Comcast or Verizon FiOS
By NellyFromMA on 2/25/2013 4:23:04 PM , Rating: 2
Why go with a service? If you were really interested in privacy, why not invest in a firewall with built in vpn? You don't need enterprise class, but you basically relinquich you privacy to a different service provider and defeat the point if you go with an external service.


RE: My alternatives are Comcast or Verizon FiOS
By Solandri on 2/25/2013 5:18:23 PM , Rating: 3
It's more the principle of the thing. Not every ISP is participating in this six strikes program. It's a voluntary program. Normally, the market takes care of these things by letting people vote with their feet. If the ISP does something you don't like, you switch to a different ISP.

However, due to the government-granted internet duopolies most people face, they may not have a third choice of ISP who is not participating. You can't "vote with your feet" if both your choices are participating in six strikes. In that situation, using a VPN is your only way to protest their decision to participate. (Only realistic way. I suppose you could cancel your internet service, but that's not very realistic in this day and age.)


By NellyFromMA on 2/26/2013 1:53:33 PM , Rating: 2
How does the VPN service allow you to not subscribe to either of the local ISP options? I presumed you had to have internet to use a VPN service.


RE: My alternatives are Comcast or Verizon FiOS
By bodar on 2/25/2013 6:38:03 PM , Rating: 2
Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't you still need an endpoint to tunnel TO though, if you are trying to encrypt P2P traffic coming to your router? That's what a VPN service provides. Sure, with a VPN firewall you can VPN into your home network from the outside, but what good does that do in this case? The infringing IP address will still be yours. With a VPN service, the alert system sees the service's IP address. Unless there's something that I'm not seeing here...


RE: My alternatives are Comcast or Verizon FiOS
By NellyFromMA on 2/26/2013 1:22:57 PM , Rating: 2
I am possibly also missing something. Could you elaborate?

If the point is that because the public IP doesn't actually belong to you irrespective of encryption, that's only gonna last for so long before these services start being cracked down on I would venture to guess.

If the gov can compell an ISP to ID a user, I would imagine it's only a matter of time before they could compell a service provider of this nature.

Sounds logical.


By bodar on 2/26/2013 10:21:04 PM , Rating: 2
Many VPN services don't keep activity logs at all and they advertise this fact. They cannot be compelled to reveal what they don't know. My understanding is that the MPAA finds out that somebody using the VPN service downloaded a movie (or whatever) from BitTorrent, but they can't connect it to a user because all they have is one of the VPN service's external IP addresses. They can lobby Congress to make a law requiring logs for VPN, but that's another story.

This is just what I've read on various tech sites. I don't use VPN services, because I don't download stuff from P2P, so take with a grain of salt. I still maintain that VPN is useless without a network to connect to, though.


RE: My alternatives are Comcast or Verizon FiOS
By FITCamaro on 2/25/2013 2:50:50 PM , Rating: 3
Proxy.


RE: My alternatives are Comcast or Verizon FiOS
By RufusM on 2/25/2013 5:21:28 PM , Rating: 2
An anonymous proxy or TOR client/server implementation would help, although with all of the logging going on by ISPs I would think the authorities *could* still track you down if they wanted to. There are many countries with laws on the books, or probably soon to be on the books, requiring ISPs to log activity making it easier to track someone internationally if they all cooperate.


By abhaxus on 2/25/2013 9:28:36 PM , Rating: 2
If you are actually participating in serious piracy, sure, they will track you down. But if you are mainly concerned with casual P2P use by your kids, etc, when big media looks at the IP address and sees another country (or anything NOT provided by one of their 6 strikes partners) they will just pass because the effort is too high.


By Reclaimer77 on 2/25/2013 10:07:16 PM , Rating: 2
No just be smarter. BitTorrent's are for idiot kids. There are other more secure methods to get your stuff these days.


constitution vacation
By DockScience on 2/25/2013 1:30:24 PM , Rating: 3
If someone invents a better mousetrap, they have 20 years to exploit it before it becomes the property of mankind.

But if somebody DRAWS a Mouse, they have 70 years after Walt Disney's death to exploit the cartoon.

This is insane. At the time of the Constitution, copyright was 14 years, renewable for another 14 only if the author was still alive.

It's time to reestablish the idea that the copyrights are ONLY for a very limited time, not however long it takes to protect Mickey Mouse.




RE: constitution vacation
By FITCamaro on 2/25/2013 2:54:08 PM , Rating: 2
14 years was a long time when the Founders were alive. Roughly half to 1/3 the average life span.


RE: constitution vacation
By AEvangel on 2/25/2013 3:35:57 PM , Rating: 3
It also was not mandatory, but required the author to come in and file for copyright.

14 years with an option to renew for an additional 14 is plenty of time to profit from a single idea or work.


RE: constitution vacation
By 91TTZ on 2/25/2013 3:51:21 PM , Rating: 2
The average life span was about the same as it is now. It was the average life expectancy that was lower, primarily because people dying while infants.


RE: constitution vacation
By NellyFromMA on 2/25/2013 4:25:32 PM , Rating: 2
LOL at people citing the founders when it suits there need, and then saying they are too outdated when it doesn't. Pick a side!


RE: constitution vacation
By NellyFromMA on 2/25/2013 4:26:49 PM , Rating: 2
Btw, thats not actually directed at you FITCamaro, more so the op that mentioned the founders.


RE: constitution vacation
By TSS on 2/26/2013 2:41:52 AM , Rating: 2
14 years is still a long time today. 14 years ago, i was 12 and a year away from my first "modern" PC, a pentium 3 600 mhz. Around that time the first kid in highschool got a nokia that could run 1 game, Snake. Monochrome ofcourse on a 2" screen.

Now my 4,7" smartphone with 1280x720 resolution carries a quadcore 1,5 ghz, and it's not even one of the top models anymore. Desktopwise people are running around with octacores, 32gb of ram and 4 connected graphics cards each measured in terraflops.

Who would be hurt by the making public of the patents on any of those machines 14 years ago? How could they possibly be relevant today, other then in ways their original creators will never think of?


RE: constitution vacation
By marvdmartian on 2/26/2013 8:16:01 AM , Rating: 2
That being said, 70 years seems like an excessive amount of time.....unless people are living to see the age of 200??

Sharing has moved so far beyond peer to peer, and bittorrent is so last decade.....people will find a way to pirate and share, no matter what the RIAA and MPAA do to prevent it. I only hope those two groups have invested a HUGE amount of their ill-gotten gains into this program.

And NO, I'm not for, or against, pirating. I simply acknowledge its existence, and realize the impossibility of stopping it.


RE: constitution vacation
By sprockkets on 2/25/2013 8:34:10 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
But if somebody DRAWS a Mouse, they have 70 years after Walt Disney's death to exploit the cartoon.


Since Disney was responsible last time for extending copyright as soon as Mickey was about to go into the public domain, you can pretty much say it is now infinite.

And since Disney the corporation never dies, well, IANAL.


RE: constitution vacation
By JediJeb on 2/25/2013 9:50:18 PM , Rating: 2
That is why corporations should not be able to own copyrights. Copyrights should apply to the original creator/creators and not extend past their death. This would prevent copyrights from being traded or sold. Also there is no reason that I should make money from something my father did. If he earns money from his work and passes that on to me at his death then that is ok, but if he had a patent or copyright I should not be entitled to make money from that after his death.

This would put an end to the silly thing like some current publisher trying to charge kids at summer camps with copyright infringement when they sing a century old campfire song without paying royalties.


April fools came early
By mike66 on 2/25/2013 5:50:30 PM , Rating: 2
It's a joke right. Nobody could be that stupid,do you all relise that you can download past this system without any effort. PirateBay has Anonymous Downloading links which simply sets up a VPN to an online server, your ISP can't see what's being downloaded and where from. So thank you MS ( and the piratebay ) for the obvious solution. Are we learning yet!




RE: April fools came early
By Bytre on 2/25/2013 10:25:03 PM , Rating: 2
Your ISP isn't monitoring your data. MPAA / RIAA is. They join all the torrents on tpb and other popular and open trackers with a custom bittorrent client that logs the IPs of the other peers on the torrent. They hand those IP addresses over to your ISP.


RE: April fools came early
By mike66 on 2/26/2013 3:03:00 AM , Rating: 3
They will only get the IP for the server I VPN too, that address changes all the time as the bay does not want it's customers punished for being their customers, it's all done from other countries which would tell MPIAA and the like to take a flying leap. Oh and by the way I belong to a ISP which refuses to deal with the copy right clowns, yah for Australia's biggest telephone company telstra.


RE: April fools came early
By Shadowmaster625 on 2/26/2013 11:07:23 AM , Rating: 2
He's right. I remember reading years ago about setting up a VPN to get around all this crap. Now its so simple its just transparent. You dont even set anything up. There is no way for these power mongers to stop this. They are 5 years behind. Once they figure out a way to stop VPNs, we will have already moved onto something else. You can encode large amounts of data into any audio or video stream. If the sender and receiver both possess the original video, then all the data on the stream can be altered slightly to store encrypted data. But it would still be a perfectly valid video file too. What are they going to do to stop that, block video streams? It is absolutely pointless, just like it is pointless for the FBI to try and spy on hardcore criminals who have smartphones with custom basebands that frickin encode voice data into a completely different voice data stream before sending. They have absolutely no clue what the criminals are saying, or even who is talking. All they hear is "honey, pick up some eggs at the store on your way home". Encoded within that bitstream is the actual data. They or anyone else has no frickin clue whether something is buried in there or not. It is way over the bureaucrats' heads how any of this stuff works, or how unstoppable it all is. But they continue to suck off a hundred billion a year for nothing.


RE: April fools came early
By Shadowmaster625 on 2/26/2013 11:07:24 AM , Rating: 2
He's right. I remember reading years ago about setting up a VPN to get around all this crap. Now its so simple its just transparent. You dont even set anything up. There is no way for these power mongers to stop this. They are 5 years behind. Once they figure out a way to stop VPNs, we will have already moved onto something else. You can encode large amounts of data into any audio or video stream. If the sender and receiver both possess the original video, then all the data on the stream can be altered slightly to store encrypted data. But it would still be a perfectly valid video file too. What are they going to do to stop that, block video streams? It is absolutely pointless, just like it is pointless for the FBI to try and spy on hardcore criminals who have smartphones with custom basebands that frickin encode voice data into a completely different voice data stream before sending. They have absolutely no clue what the criminals are saying, or even who is talking. All they hear is "honey, pick up some eggs at the store on your way home". Encoded within that bitstream is the actual data. They or anyone else has no frickin clue whether something is buried in there or not. It is way over the bureaucrats' heads how any of this stuff works, or how unstoppable it all is. But they continue to suck off a hundred billion a year for nothing.


RE: April fools came early
By tecknurd on 2/25/2013 11:34:34 PM , Rating: 2
A packet firewall can read if a packet for a VPN is being used. Then the connection could just be cut off at that point.


RE: April fools came early
By mike66 on 2/26/2013 2:47:38 AM , Rating: 2
being cut off for using a VPN? That's only half the users out there, will not happen.


RE: April fools came early
By bodar on 2/26/2013 3:49:09 AM , Rating: 2
"Oh I'm sure you were just 'working from home and needed to access the corporate network.' Do you take me for an idiot, sir? Only pirates use VPN. We're onto you and your shenanigans."


Don't advocate Pirating
By Ammohunt on 2/25/2013 1:31:32 PM , Rating: 2
But a simple way around this is to us encryption such as Ipsec tunnelling embedded in whatever p2p software client. Assuming all they are doing is snooping on the data stream.




RE: Don't advocate Pirating
By othercents on 2/25/2013 1:42:49 PM , Rating: 2
Create an encrypted VPN tunnel from your router/firewall on your network to a privacy system. This will make sure that whatever vendor you are using is not looking at your data.


RE: Don't advocate Pirating
By edge929 on 2/25/2013 4:25:57 PM , Rating: 2
Between Tor Browser, PeerBlock, VPNs and services like BTGuard this shouldn't be an issue for those who want to stay anonymous. All but BTGuard are free and it's still cheaper, per year, than contesting one notice ($35).


RE: Don't advocate Pirating
By NellyFromMA on 2/25/2013 4:30:06 PM , Rating: 2
Using a VPN service is sort of contradictory to the intent of the service, especially when people choose to do illegal things with them, don't you think?

Piract isn't supported in a VPN. You're just trying to use that service to hide your illegal activities.

How long do you thin kbefore the owners of those companies get similar notices that if they want to stay in business they must ensure all network activity is in legal good standing?

If you insist on uber privacy for your 'very legal torrenting activities' then for the love of god, don't get a friggin external service!?!?

Pony up and get the hardware. 100 bucks should do just fine and you never have to worry about your other 'service provider' (because now you shifted the onus from your ISP to you VPN SP) having the onus shifted to them to crack down.

C'mon peeps, where's the network admins?!?!


RE: Don't advocate Pirating
By Kragoth235 on 2/25/2013 5:13:26 PM , Rating: 2
Care to explain how your own hardware which must have an external facing IP in order to have traffic routed to it can fool anyone analysing your packets?

I'm not questioning if it can be done. I'm curious as to how it works.

I was always under the impression that you would have to go through a proxy/external vpn to hide your real IP.


RE: Don't advocate Pirating
By NellyFromMA on 2/26/2013 1:32:13 PM , Rating: 2
Well, on the illegal side, there are ways of course. I wouldn't even make that comment normally but seeing as how the nature of this discussion is obfuscating or ultimately hiding your illegal activities I figured I'd say so...

With that said, you make a point in that you'll need a static IP assigned for your use when configuring the VPN/Firewall/Router so I take your point on where you are going with that.

Honestly, unless you are ok with stealing IPs or using a legit obtained one, you probably couldn't hide your identity.

Don't you have to supply ID for these vpn services? At least in payment if nothing else? Or, are there free ones?

Personally the thought of free VPN is kinda scary IMO if that even exists.

I think either way you have the potential to have your packets analyzed though. It will just be more burdensome (but not too substantially) to hunt the provider down for payer info.

Could be wrong but I think the truth is unless you're ok with illegally setting up the VPN or proxy (one way or the other) you are effectively in the same boat.

Then again, pirating is illegal and so maybe some people are ok since they are already involved in the activity.

Idk... is it worth it really?


RE: Don't advocate Pirating
By Ammohunt on 2/26/2013 2:10:00 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Idk... is it worth it really?


My point was not whether is was worth it but more about how easy it would be to defeat this kind of nonsense. A friend has a machine at a colo and runs his entire home network through an ipsec tunnel terminated to it. The larger issue is net neutrality why would ISP's be in league with copyright owners other than bowing before the pressure of litigation. Net neutrality laws would and should indemnify internet Service Providers from this crap.


Law Enforcement
By drlumen on 2/25/2013 4:43:33 PM , Rating: 2
Since AT&T and Verizon are so interested in enforcing the law then they should stop all the telemarketers disregarding the do-not-call laws.

Oh well, since they are taking it on themselves to enforce the copyright laws I think they have, in effect, killed their safe harbor provisions. If I find someone is getting any of my from the internet I guess I can sue AT&T and Verizon for being negligent. If they want to take on the responsibility then they should be held liable.




RE: Law Enforcement
By Jeffk464 on 2/25/2013 8:56:39 PM , Rating: 2
dump your land line, no more telemarketers.


RE: Law Enforcement
By tecknurd on 2/25/2013 11:28:30 PM , Rating: 3
I still get telemarketers on my cell phone, so ditching landlines does not work.


RE: Law Enforcement
By jeffkro on 2/26/2013 1:37:10 AM , Rating: 2
Huh, you got on a list somehow. Time for a new number I guess.


secret weapon
By DockScience on 2/26/2013 7:34:25 PM , Rating: 2
Hollywood has a secret weapon to stop copying, and it's working.

Make movies and music SO BAD, that NO ONE would want to copy them.




RE: secret weapon
By ShieTar on 2/27/2013 10:50:08 AM , Rating: 2
Meh, that only works for a short period, then there are new people born who do not know that movies and music could be better.


RE: secret weapon
By Creig on 2/28/2013 2:35:45 PM , Rating: 2
e.g. - Justin Bieber

*shudder*


Snarktacus
By Cluebat on 2/25/2013 1:49:37 PM , Rating: 3

I AM AARON SWARTZ!




RE: Snarktacus
By Regected on 2/25/2013 7:08:25 PM , Rating: 1
No, you are Cluebat


Works for me
By kmmatney on 2/25/2013 3:55:11 PM , Rating: 2
I received a Copyright Violation Notice from Comcast a few months ago, and haven't downloaded a movie since then. So I guess it worked for me. I'm not buying more movies, but I've been using Netflix more, and renting/ripping from Redbox. I did have to download a fresh Windows XP OEM CD (untouched and requires a valid key) - I hope that isn't copyrighted...




RE: Works for me
By ritualm on 2/26/2013 11:46:50 AM , Rating: 2
Tell Comcast that they have essentially two options:

1) They rescind that "copyright violation notice" and let you off guilt-free

or

2) They don't do anything, and you're canceling their services

ISPs go on damage control the very moment a customer threatens to cancel accounts. That is your leverage.


Revenue
By btc909 on 2/25/2013 5:47:01 PM , Rating: 2
Nice way to rack up money from companies that offer free WiFi internet access.




RE: Revenue
By Skywalker123 on 2/26/2013 2:30:05 PM , Rating: 2
they're not going to monitor free wi fi spots


This is insane
By Beenthere on 2/25/13, Rating: 0
RE: This is insane
By Skywalker123 on 2/26/2013 6:50:12 AM , Rating: 2
I wondered how long till idiot posted. Must be internet time at the prison. How are you and your boyfriend Bubba doing? Are they finally going to let you two get married in there?


RE: This is insane
By ritualm on 2/26/2013 11:56:16 AM , Rating: 2
Care to explain how the criminals who make these laws are not punished themselves when they do the very same things as everyone else?

It's funny how you can pirate all day long while working for the MPAA/RIAA and their member corporations without going to jail, yet the outside folks can't.

China has a better idea than you. If you like losing, don't pirate.


May I ask...
By geekman1024 on 2/26/2013 2:50:15 AM , Rating: 2
what if the case of "I borrowed my friends laptop to check mail, and now my ISP blocked my account." scenario?




RE: May I ask...
By vectorm12 on 2/26/2013 11:19:10 AM , Rating: 2
That's the kind of question they don't want to answer.

There's no way RIAA/whatever could possibly make a mistake, or just be plain ignorant/stupid.


“We do believe we have a moral responsibility to keep porn off the iPhone.” -- Steve Jobs














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki