How government will save you from P2P deviance
It's stealing, you know...
Thousands - or to be more precise, six thousands - of lucky alleged infringers a week are to be informed of the error of their ways, according to the terms of the deal struck this week between the British government and six major ISPs. They will in the first instance be "informed when their accounts are being used unlawfully to share copyright material and pointed towards legal alternatives."
And in the second instance? That is yet to be determined, and the ISPs and rights holders signing the Memorandum of Understanding with the government have been sent off for four months to figure out the 'or what?' bit of the deal.
In the meantime those letters will be cranking out. The targets will be identified by "music rights holders" who will pass the data on to the ISPs, who will then run the system as a trial for three months. So that's about 70,000 letters in total, the number of suspects being dependent on whether they're going to bombard the same people with information regarding the unlawful nature of some of their account's activities, or whether they go for a 'one per deviant' rule.
The evidence of this trial period will be analysed, and depending on what that tells them they'll agree with Offcom an escalation in numbers, a widening of content coverage (presumably to video), and "a process for agreeing a cap." That is, not a cap in itself, but a process for agreeing one. This (we speculate) might take into account factors such as cost of stamps to ISPs, level of music business profitability, percentage of deviants in total user base, ratio of ridicule experienced by music industry to ridicule experienced by ISPs, and the price of sardines. Or something.
The two aspects of the letter - drawing the user's attention to the infringement and pointing them at legal alternatives - are likely to be important in determining the success of the trial. Some users - possibly, as Feargal Sharkey thinks, most - are likely to be scared off when they learn that somebody's watching them, but adequate legal alternatives (which the ISPs say they're going to set up) will have to exist in order for the customers to be directed to them, and to carry on using them.
It seems doubtful that this will be the case in four months time, when the working group is due to report back back with proposals to deal with the hard cases. Despite fevered reporting in some newspapers, 'three strikes' doesn't figure in this and the measures being considered are light on savagery. "The group will... look at solutions including technical measures such as traffic management or filtering, and marking of content to facilitate its identification. In addition, rights holders will consider prosecuting particularly serious infringers in appropriate cases."
Re: Why not just block file-sharing?
I thank you for the ad hominem attack, but I am afraid you have not listed anything which cannot be achieved by the good-old (basic) download-form-a-server method.
So there really is no legal use for P2P. Thanks for confirming what I suspected.
I downloaded 400mb not gb via GigaNews. I live a long way from the exchange so get around 4mb encrypted but after 60k on Pipex then spit Tiscali blocked on port 119 (paying 32 quid a month) was over the moon. It seems to do around 4mb all the time but I only usually download overnight. I'm happy with the service I don't know how they do it for a tenner. I've never used broadband support for sky but rumour has it that most ISP's are crap at support and expensive with it. These days my biggest downloads are OS and similar stuff which being an ex mainframe man I always do off peak.
Thanks for that info - I have been paranoid and panicking after the engineer said it was deliberately cutting me off and I'd not heard anything for days about it, infact, I still haven't, but when I got home yesterday (7.30pm) I tried downloading a little bit, so far so good - I managed about 600mb at my max speed (15mb), didn't have time to test anything really big - but usually it disconnects me after 5mb so I'm hoping it was some sort of glitch they fixed that won't be repeated - I switched from mid to max package around the same time as the announcement so maybe it was a coincidence.... mid worked perfectly for me until I upgraded.
Anyway - the Sky service seems to be alot better than people led me to believe - I get good speeds and their customer service people are really friendly and helpful, but god forbid you have a problem, their first-line support engineers were nice, but dumb, and read from scripts - second-line were rude, confused as to why I wouldn't want my connection reset, and basically called me a liar for an hour until they saw the problem, and their third line guys never even rang me back - so I'm not sure if I hit a limit or they fixed anything, it just started working again.