New US ISP sanctioned/controlled piracy database will mean the end to internet privacy.

[Jabberwock xeno]

Given that the RIAA has a history of suing dead people [http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/02/05/riaa_sues_the_dead/], laser printers [http://boingboing.net/2008/06/05/entertainment-indust-1.html] and people who don't have a computer or Internet access [http://www.techshout.com/internet/2006/24/riaa-sues-local-family-without-computer-for-illegal-music-file-sharing/#], making it even easier for them to effectively pick names out of a hat to extort might not be the best idea.

And this, my friends, is why I am conrenced with this stuff.

I don't have an issue with the plan in itself, I have an issue with the private companies being the ones in charge of it.

I didn't mean or want to start a debate over piracy, my intent was to inform and disscuss this thing, and perhaps think of a effective way to express our... disatifaction for it to the people involved.

Or not, if you think its a good idea.

 

[blarghblarghhhhh]

Private companies getting ahold of your private security details? No. . . No worries m8. Its all cool.

Nope. None at all. I'm not doing anything incriminating, so why should it bother me? The only reason you WOULD get bothered is if those details implicated you in something.

fair enough. I download roughly six to ten albums a month on average from mediafire exc. these albums have been uploaded to those sites by the artists. obviously this isnt the case with 99% of the content on those sites, but it is with the files im talking about. Seeing how there is no way to tell if a file uploaded to mediafire was done so by the copyright holder I can now look forward to having my internet connection throttled for no reason.

 

[Cephei Mordred]

I don't see the internet as a God given right, and the 'Freedom of Information' BS just pisses me off (as an excuse for piracy).

I say this is a great step in the fight against the spoiled internet thief.

Those who desire to give up freedom in order to gain security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.
So no worries mate you were never in the loop for this.

Cookies for the authors name

Ben Franklin.

He really knew the ins and outs of the internet. He was really in the loop.

EDIT: Wasn't the term he used 'liberty' tho? Not that you think there's a difference between a country during a revolution, and internet pirates.

Sorry, but the Ben Franklin quote IS the final word on all such arguments, who do you think you are to suggest otherwise?

 

[3AM]

--- snip ---
Very well said. I was going to argue that by Stall's logic people should be ok with the police raiding their homes once a month, to search for illegal activities/items, because as long as you're not doing anything wrong you have nothing to fear. But since you already used the example i'll just give you a "This" to refrain from posting something that's already been said.

This is planed to be just in the US, right? I mean, at least for the time being.

Thanks The article said it was only being done by US ISP's so hopefully it will stop there. From all I've read the European Union takes its citizens' online privacy seriously whereas in the US we consumers are thought of as cash cows to be mercilessly milked.

 

[Jabberwock xeno]

I don't see the internet as a God given right, and the 'Freedom of Information' BS just pisses me off (as an excuse for piracy).

I say this is a great step in the fight against the spoiled internet thief.

Those who desire to give up freedom in order to gain security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.
So no worries mate you were never in the loop for this.

Cookies for the authors name

Ben Franklin.

He really knew the ins and outs of the internet. He was really in the loop.

EDIT: Wasn't the term he used 'liberty' tho? Not that you think there's a difference between a country during a revolution, and internet pirates.

Sorry, but the Ben Franklin quote IS the final word on all such arguments, who do you think you are to suggest otherwise?

Can we get back on topic?

Wow, There is no way that can pass. The shitstorm that would come after that would be freaking massive.

Though I live in Sweden so this won't afftect me...Yet.

but that's the thing:

It doesn't NEED to pass.

It's not the goverment that's doing it, and even so, the goverment has shown INTREST in it.

The only legal recourse would be a class action lawsuit under invasion of privacy, and the supreme court recently ruled that class actions suites are a waste of time and money...

In short:

 

[Kopikatsu]

This. Its like people that ***** about speed cameras....if you dont break the speed limit then you have nothing to worry about. What did people think? They would continue to let people steal other peoples property and do nothing? Although i do love how people are getting really uptight about it all. lol. I liked that some one brought up freedom of information. lol.

Well since you don't seem to value your privacy how about you post your browsing history, maybe your emails for the past few months, and say the contents of your downloads folder. I mean unless you are doing something wrong you should have no problem with that right?

Allow me to repost this.

Boohoo, private companies will have access to some of your information in an effort to curb piracy. It's not like they don't already have that information. Everyone with a social networking site account willingly gave it up. Any information you give to the government is semi-public record. (Companies can pull information from the DMV and such, don't think individuals can though). You'd be surprised at what I can pull up with just your Escapist username and five minutes on Google.

People are getting worked up about nothing. If you want to talk about Orwellian whatevers, then you're much too late. I'm not sure about other places, but where I live in the US, there is literally 4-8 cameras on EVERY street corner. As for how I feel about that, see the above picture.

Companies/Government doesn't give a damn about your grandmother's super awesome recipe for chocolate chip cookies. Someone isn't going to sift through your personal information for shits and giggles.

People need to accept that fact that nobody cares about your private life. It's so amazingly unimportant. Nobody wants to know what you do every Thursday at 5PM. Unless it's illegal. Then they want to know, because they can make money off that.

Basically, even if you have someone sifting through your private shit, they aren't going to be going 'Aw shit! Hey, Frankie, come look at the emails this poor schlep has been sending out! God, what a loser! Let's forward it to everyone in the office. Man, the boys'll get a kick outta this!' They're looking for criminals. If you aren't a criminal, then learn to get over it.

Nobody gives a damn about you or your personal life, least of all the government and/or massive multi-billion dollar corporations. Get over it.

 

[Snotnarok]

No offence but if you hate the users on this forum so much, why are you still here? This isn't the first time I've seen you accuse the members here of being child abusers or worse and ignoring legitimate arguments against this kind of law, such as the ISP's having the power to cut off access without any legal proof of the accused actually pirating. If you want to support this law then fine, it's your right to have an opinion, but don't try to scare-monger opponents into silence by associating them with criminals.

In all 3000 posts plus time here I have seen just one person defending child pornography, this isn't exactly a forum-full of sickos.

Okay, I was angry, and I should not have stated my perception applied to the majority of the Escapist community rather than a vocal minority. I've been here since 2008, a member since 2009; I would've left long ago if it weren't for the fact that there are genuine discussions to be had on these boards. I flare up sometimes, I'll be the first to admit that; That being said, in my experience it seems I've encountered far more of these individuals than you have.

I don't necessarily view the law in a positive light either, merely as a step in the right direction. No, ISPs probably shouldn't be cutting off access without proof, but if they have said proof, then why not? It's companies protecting their property.

Also, if you're going to call me out on "scare-mongering" people opposed to this bill, at least have the courtesy to hold some amount of disdain for the people comparing their "right" to pirate to the civil and women's rights movements.

The reason is you're giving them power, and I've never seen anything like this go 'right'. Piracy will always happen and that's a fact they will always find a way around. This literally is just you giving up your right to privacy and should be fought.

I don't care what the pirates do, they will always sneak around, break some sort of wall and then theyre back to doing what they do. Then companies make a big elaborate program (like DRM) to 'protect their products' when they're just looking to control what they can; and the pirates steal it anyway and get a version without drm.

 

[mafyapenguin94]

Piracy is stealing, period. Companies protecting their property is the only conclusion to this situation, and even though this might not be the best way to go about it it's certainly a step in the right direction.

This right here is part of the problem. I don't condone piracy either but it is in no way, shape, or form stealing. People punished for piracy are punished under Copyright Infringement, not theft, larceny, ect. Blacks Law Dictionary defines stealing as : "to take (personal property) illegally with the intent to keep it unlawfully" Piracy is solely about copying property from one person for your own use.

OT:
This, while I think it will be ultimately not brought into existence, raises a couple concerns. Most notably that under current law (or what i believe was current law anyway) I am legally allowed to download torrents of copyrighted material that I own for purposes of backing up my hard copy with a digital edition. But how would the ISP know which material I own and which I don't. Subsequently, will I then be given a warning or have my internet taken away for following the letter of the law? Does following the law allow for a private company to wantonly scour my entire computer for illicit material? It is not, and never was an issue whether or not piracy is bad. This is only about privacy. There are too many ways that this can be used as an umbrella for gross abuse on normal citizens

 

[sinterklaas]

I don't see the internet as a God given right, and the 'Freedom of Information' BS just pisses me off (as an excuse for piracy).

I say this is a great step in the fight against the spoiled internet thief.

Yeah good plan, let's all post our private information on the internet for all to see.

Stop being ignorant, get your head out of your ass and stop pretending like no one is ever going to do something bad with your private information, or your lack of access to certain information.

Obligatory:

Spoiler

 

[Xanthious]

Basically, even if you have someone sifting through your private shit, they aren't going to be going 'Aw shit! Hey, Frankie, come look at the emails this poor schlep has been sending out! God, what a loser! Let's forward it to everyone in the office. Man, the boys'll get a kick outta this!' They're looking for criminals. If you aren't a criminal, then learn to get over it.

Nobody gives a damn about you or your personal life, least of all the government and/or massive multi-billion dollar corporations. Get over it.

I will say the same thing to you that I said to him. Since you seem not to value your privacy how about you show us how harmless this is and post up your browsing history, emails, and the contents of your download folder. As you said unless you are criminal you shouldn't have anything to worry about.

 

[Buccura]

And like all attempts to strike a blow into piracy this too will fail, as pirates will simply find a way to work around it.

This shit is starting to become routine. Some bill or whatever is introduced, it either gets passed or it doesn't, and if it does, it ultimately does very little to stop piracy.

 

[Kopikatsu]

Basically, even if you have someone sifting through your private shit, they aren't going to be going 'Aw shit! Hey, Frankie, come look at the emails this poor schlep has been sending out! God, what a loser! Let's forward it to everyone in the office. Man, the boys'll get a kick outta this!' They're looking for criminals. If you aren't a criminal, then learn to get over it.

Nobody gives a damn about you or your personal life, least of all the government and/or massive multi-billion dollar corporations. Get over it.

I will say the same thing to you that I said to him. Since you seem not to value your privacy how about you show us how harmless this is and post up your browsing history, emails, and the contents of your download folder. As you said unless you are criminal you shouldn't have anything to worry about.

That would be fairly impossible as I have well over 3,000 emails alone.

Also, notice how I made no mention of showing the entire world your personal information, just government/huge companies. (This law/bill/whatever it is falls under 'huge companies', and they're both the only ones who would need to know if you're doing something illegal.)

Individuals can't be trusted with that information. Companies/Government can, simply because they don't care enough about any one (average) individual to do anything with it.

As proof that I'm not just blowing smoke, though...

Spoiler: Just the inbox is 1,400+. The Poems folder has well over 2,000+

 

[Kopikatsu]

Double Post

 

[mafyapenguin94]

Piracy is stealing, period. Companies protecting their property is the only conclusion to this situation, and even though this might not be the best way to go about it it's certainly a step in the right direction.

This right here is part of the problem. I don't condone piracy either but it is in no way, shape, or form stealing. People punished for piracy are punished under Copyright Infringement, not theft, larceny, ect. Blacks Law Dictionary defines stealing as : "to take (personal property) illegally with the intent to keep it unlawfully" Piracy is solely about copying property from one person for your own use.

Gaming, watching movies, as well as listening to music and the like are luxuries that are ultimately not necessary. Downloading a torrent off of the internet and subsequently not paying for the experience that is being provided to you is the exact same thing as walking into a Wal-Mart and taking a bunch of CDs/Games/Movies and walking out with them. That, in my book, is stealing.

Thats all well and good, and someday I would love to read your book, sounds a lot more fun than US law, but the fact remains it doesn't matter what definition you use, the law clearly states otherwise. Necessity has nothing to do with this conversation unfortunately. Yes it is still illegal, and yes it is still wrong, and while you can have an opinion, the word of law ultimately triumphs in this one.

 

[sean360h]

This. Its like people that ***** about speed cameras....if you dont break the speed limit then you have nothing to worry about. What did people think? They would continue to let people steal other peoples property and do nothing? Although i do love how people are getting really uptight about it all. lol. I liked that some one brought up freedom of information. lol.

Well since you don't seem to value your privacy how about you post your browsing history, maybe your emails for the past few months, and say the contents of your downloads folder. I mean unless you are doing something wrong you should have no problem with that right?

That is the best reply ever well played

 

[Snotnarok]

The reason is you're giving them power, and I've never seen anything like this go 'right'. Piracy will always happen and that's a fact they will always find a way around. This literally is just you giving up your right to privacy and should be fought.

I don't care what the pirates do, they will always sneak around, break some sort of wall and then theyre back to doing what they do. Then companies make a big elaborate program (like DRM) to 'protect their products' when they're just looking to control what they can; and the pirates steal it anyway and get a version without drm.

So companies should just completely give up, remove all DRM from all of their products and hope for the best out of the population? Something tells me they won't do that, nor should they. Eventually, DRM will be perfected. Maybe not so much for music and movies (recordings can be made no matter the protection software) but definitely for games. And I, for one, think the games industry would be better for it.

DRM will not ever be perfected because there's groups working around the clock to fight it. They don't worry about pay, they don't worry about when their shift is over, they go, and they go, and they go till they crack it. There's other ways to protect their products but they're going the oppressive route and if you're fine giving up your rights because of something you say you're not doing that's your business.

I'm not for companies having more access to what I look at online, and neither should you. If you and I have nothing to do with piracy but they're going to invade our privacy to monitor what we do why should we be for this? This takes away rights for basically what will be cracked in a matter of days, then what?

What is their next move? To do what Bush wanted and install back doors in all routers? Don't give up your rights for companies right to protect their shit because they don't care about stepping on you and what you're doing is letting them.

Should they be able to protect their stuff? Yes but without breaking/circumventing the law and stepping on people who don't know any better. Look at steam, I'm pretty sure they have the right idea when sales are up 1200%, as in profit not just individual sales. Better deals, more buys instead of oppressive bullshit, less deals and less sales for them.

 

[matoasters]

You know, if you didn't pirate things, you wouldn't have to worry about it. Saying you are concerned with this sort-of thing is more or less admitting to piracy, since it wouldn't bother you in the slightest if you didn't illegally download things.

So it wouldn't bother you if the cops searched your house without a warrant and without asking you, because you're not a drug dealer, right? There's absolutely nothing in your house that you don't want everyone knowing about, right? You're ok with having everything you've ever done, as well as your name, address, and daily activities known to the entire world, because at least none of it is illegal, right? You don't need privacy, because only people who have something to hide could possibly want privacy.