Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

AT&T Won't Terminate User Service For RIAA Without a Court Order

Soulskill posted more than 5 years ago | from the somewhat-less-lame dept.

The Internet 165

On Wednesday, we discussed news that AT&T had begun sending takedown notices to users whom the RIAA has accused of illegally downloading copyrighted works. Cox and Comcast are both cooperating with the RIAA in that regard as well. However, while Cox seems willing to shut off service in the case of repeat offenders, Comcast denied that it was considering a similar penalty, and AT&T said they'll flat out refuse to terminate service on the RIAA's word alone; it will take a court order. They seem satisfied with the effect letters have had on inhibiting such downloads: "'It's a standard part of everybody's terms of service,' [AT&T senior executive vice president Jim Cicconi] said. 'If somebody is engaging in illegal activity, it basically gives us the right to do it ... We're not a finder of fact and under no circumstances would we ever suspend or terminate service based on an allegation from a third party. We're just simply reminding people that they can't engage in illegal activity.' Cicconi said the company began testing this kind of 'forward noticing' late last year and even experimented with sending certified letters. Cicconi said the notices worked. The company saw very few repeat offenders."

cancel ×

165 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Good for AT&T! (5, Interesting)

javacowboy (222023) | more than 5 years ago | (#27378593)

As much as I despise some of AT&T's business practises, kudos to them for doing the right thing in this case. I have absolutely no problems with sending warnings to people and disconnecting them only if they're found guilty after a fair trail.

The only thing I would change is giving them a dial-up speed (can check email and pay bills, but not pirate anything) internet connection if they're found guilty via a fair process. Internet access is indispensable for most people, and losing internet would be like losing phone service. The punishment should fit the transgression.

Re:Good for AT&T! (5, Insightful)

specific (963862) | more than 5 years ago | (#27378609)

I'm not sure they deserve kudos for this. Looks more like they simply don't want to axe a paying customer. After all, they aren't losing the money from all the downloading.

Re:Good for AT&T! (2, Interesting)

je ne sais quoi (987177) | more than 5 years ago | (#27378681)

I don't know about anybody else, but if I get one of those letters from AT&T, I'm going to to wait around for them to terminate my service, I'll be terminating my service as soon as it arrives. Jerks. I can live without internet or live with using a smaller wireless network.

Re:Good for AT&T! (1)

je ne sais quoi (987177) | more than 5 years ago | (#27378701)

grr, I haven't had my coffee yet this morning... That should read, I'm NOT going to wait around for them to terminate my service.

Re:Good for AT&T! (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27378765)

I don't know about anybody else, but if I get one of those letters from AT&T, I'm going to to wait around for them to terminate my service, I'll be terminating my service as soon as it arrives. Jerks. I can live without internet or live with using a smaller wireless network.

Maybe YOU can but most people have gotten used to it. In many areas, it's indispensable as there are many people that can't pay all their bills from an ATM and don't have the time to go all the way across town to find an office to pay them.

What about software developers? What would WE do without Internet?

Re:Good for AT&T! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27378857)

What about software developers? What would WE do without Internet?

umm, i don't know, maybe develop software?
moron.

Re:Good for AT&T! (2, Interesting)

Chlorine Trifluoride (1517149) | more than 5 years ago | (#27378903)

What about software developers? What would WE do without Internet?

umm, i don't know, maybe develop software? moron.

The point was that, without the Internet, the large scale collaberation typical of open-source projects would be mostly impossible.

Re:Good for AT&T! (2, Funny)

mustafap (452510) | more than 5 years ago | (#27378931)

lol. I don't think you would have to get rid of the Internet to get that to happen, just getting rid of Slashdot will do just fine :o)

Re:Good for AT&T! (2, Informative)

crispin_bollocks (1144567) | more than 5 years ago | (#27379195)

I know it's so 19th century, but there are things called checks, and an organization called the Post Office will deliver them all the way across town for 42 cents.

Re:Good for AT&T! (1)

troll8901 (1397145) | more than 5 years ago | (#27379559)

Although my senders claiming "the check is in the mail", I never seem to receive them.

Re:Good for AT&T! (1)

ushering05401 (1086795) | more than 5 years ago | (#27380795)

Wells Fargo, for one, has introduced all sorts of new fees even for their high balance metered accounts.

My only conclusion after reading all of their new fees on my business accounts is that they want to obliterate all check transactions.

They literally charge twice for checks deposited at a teller window - once for the teller touching the check, and once for clearing the check.

Re:Good for AT&T! (3, Insightful)

Kjella (173770) | more than 5 years ago | (#27378947)

In other words, you don't want to hear anything unless you get slapped with a lawsuit? In general, if I was using some service which meant there was no direct way to contact me and my use of that service eas bothering someone I'd expect there to be a way to notify me. If I was renting a car and was driving on some private road without noticing but the land owner did, caught rental logo and the registration number and just wanted to tell me "Please don't use our road" I'd expect the rental company to forward that message.

Not threaten to never rent me a car again. Not acting like a goon squad investigating the rental car's GPS. Not turn over my identiiation to the land owner of some place I alledgedly drove. Just pass the message. If they have to file trespass charges because the rental company won't forward anything without a court order that's way overkill. The analogy is a ltitle flawed since in this case the land owner could put up better signs, but I'm sure you get the point.

Let me try a geekier analogy. Imagine you wrote a script. A buggy script that got stuck in an infinite loop and kept doing http requests over and over maxing your bandwidth all day long. What would you like, a notice from your ISP that the site doesn't like the thousands of requests and 20Mbit/s bandwidth drain or a denial-of-service lawsuit? I understand that some people here watn to raise the bar for the RIAA do to anything at all, but in this case I think your position is rather absurd.

Re:Good for AT&T! (2, Informative)

je ne sais quoi (987177) | more than 5 years ago | (#27380261)

Who said anything about getting sued? AT&T is issuing take-down notices on behalf of the RIAA, not suing people. If they start working with the RIAA to sue people, you can be damn sure I'll cancel ASAP, of course I would, who wouldn't? Way to jump to conclusions there buddy....

Re:Good for AT&T! (4, Insightful)

mal3 (59208) | more than 5 years ago | (#27379507)

First off, not only did you not RTFA, but you couldn't even read the headline. The whole point of the article is that AT&T is *NOT* going to turn off your service without a court order.

As far as them being jerks for sending you a letter, I would think you'd like the heads up that whatever you're doing(legal or not) is drawing the attention of the RIAA. This is about the best policy one could hope for from an ISP.

So rare (4, Interesting)

iYk6 (1425255) | more than 5 years ago | (#27378731)

I'm not sure they deserve kudos for this. Looks more like they simply don't want to axe a paying customer.

In these days, common business sense, choosing not to mess with your own customers, is so rare that kudos may be called for.

Re:So rare (4, Insightful)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 5 years ago | (#27379237)

No. Let me make an analog sentence:

In these days, common sense, choosing not to rape and kill every child you see, is so rare that kudos may be called for.

This shows, how unacceptable giving kudos for such things is.

I think Chris Rock also had a critique about this in his program. Went something along the lines of:
Guy 1 (proud): I care for my children. And I don't steal no shit.
Chris Rock: Do you think you deserve credit for this?? NO! You are SUPPOSED to do these things!!
(Sorry, can't recite it properly. But you get the drift.)

Re:So rare (1)

artor3 (1344997) | more than 5 years ago | (#27379527)

Except your sentence is completely, and obviously false, whereas the statement that "choosing not to mess with your own customers is rare" is at least arguably true.

Re:So rare (1)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 5 years ago | (#27379833)

You have never been to a real cruel war, have you? Yugoslavia, Vietnam, and the Nazis instantly come to mind.
I would give you the phone number of that old Yugoslavian grandma that lived above me, who cried about exactly such situations. Amongst horrible things like roasting children on a spit, like pigs, or leading a whole village up to a hill, and letting them lie in the sun until they died from drying out. Women, children, even the dogs.
But unfortunately she died last year. :(

If you think something like that can't happen, you haven't seen shit.

Re:So rare (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27380221)

While sad, WTF does this have to do with the existing discussion?

Re:Good for AT&T! (1)

Cylix (55374) | more than 5 years ago | (#27379291)

Kudos or not... at least it's sensible.

I had a friend whose "kids" were apparently downloading movies through live wire.

Adelphia shut his connection off and sent a letter. He had to call back in to have it turned on.

They shut off his connection first and afterward sent letter. He naturally assumed it was due to some issue with his provider and called support. They had no idea why his account was down so they turned it on. Later, after receiving the letter he completely flipped out because he thought it meant legal action. It worked and his "kids" never pirated again.

There were several stories like this before the barrage litigation and it was effective.

A good deal of the people I knew couldn't handle a settlement fee so I'm glad it came down to a warning. Sure, they shouldn't be doing the crime unless they accept the responsibilities, but in a few real cases I've really found the parents children were responsible.

Which brings me to comment an older friend of mine said after receiving a letter, "You mean you can really download movies online?"

Re:Good for AT&T! (1)

DJRumpy (1345787) | more than 5 years ago | (#27379663)

There are two that I believe deserve kudos:

http://newscenter.verizon.com/press-releases/verizon/2003/page.jsp?itemID=29713865 [verizon.com]

AT&T as well since they are following the rule of law and requiring a court order before suspending a user account. Not only is this good business but it makes sense. Something our laws rarely get right it seems.

If Comcast is ever complicit with the RIAA in any way that violates the DMCA I for one will be more than happy to jump ship to get FIOS.

"Comcast said in a statement. "This is the same process we've had in place for years--nothing has changed. While we have always supported copyright holders in their efforts to reduce piracy under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), and continue to do so, we have no plans to test a so-called 'three-strikes-and-you're-out' policy." "

and

"Comcast was careful to state that it isn't considering terminating customers' service."

Re:Good for AT&T! (1)

DJRumpy (1345787) | more than 5 years ago | (#27379717)

Oops..Forgot the relevant AT&T response from one of the links above:

"Reached Wednesday morning, Claudia Jones, an AT&T spokeswoman, said the company's letters do include a mention that company retains the right to terminate service. She wanted to make it clear that AT&T has no intention of doing so, however. Jones also said the ISP never shares customers' names or any other personal information. What the company does do is send a "cover letter" to the accused customer along with the letter the ISP received from the RIAA stating that the person's IP address was flagged."

Re:Good for AT&T! (1)

BikeHelmet (1437881) | more than 5 years ago | (#27381261)

I'm not sure they deserve kudos for this. Looks more like they simply don't want to axe a paying customer. After all, they aren't losing the money from all the downloading.

It's funny you should mention that. Apparently the going rate for bandwidth is somewhere around $0.16/GB [slashdot.org] .

I'm of the opinion that it's probably a bit less, since AT&T is a huge backbone, and thus own all their own equipment including the buildings the stuff is sitting in. But it does raise the interesting point that if someone were torrenting 500+ GB/mo, they might be losing money.

Torrents are notoriously hard on ISP networks. Verizon even introduced torrent acceleration because of it - it connects peers to closer peers/seeds rather than farther away peers, thus dropping overall network usage.

Protocols like FTP are much lighter, which is why many companies swear by Client-to-Server downloads. They have to pay for it, after all...

Re:Good for AT&T! (2, Funny)

telomerewhythere (1493937) | more than 5 years ago | (#27378633)

Hear, Hear!! The only possible downside is my mom getting this letter and coming down to my fortress of solitude (basement), and cutting my plugs while watchmen is seeding to the requisite 1.5 and, it being 12 noon, me being so passed out I can't hear her.

/run on sentence

Re:Good for AT&T! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27378927)

You sure its not your command center Mr. Wizard?

Re:Good for AT&T! (1)

Jeff DeMaagd (2015) | more than 5 years ago | (#27378647)

Maybe they don't want to deliberately dump profitable customers any more than they have to, even if they may be still be driving them away by having a frustrating customer service bureaucracy.

Re:Good for AT&T! (4, Insightful)

ledow (319597) | more than 5 years ago | (#27378685)

No kudos required. This is the *only* sensible course of action. It's not up to AT&T to decide if people have done something or not, that's up to a court of law. Allegations are all well and good but if someone wrote to my telecoms company saying I'd been making harassing phone calls, the telecoms company can't cut me off unless they can PROVE those phone calls happened and were harassing (much easier than my ISP proving that I downloaded copyright-infringing material from a third-party without a valid copyright license to the right in question, or under fair-use laws) or a court order telling them to do so. Anything else is just bunkum from companies that have NOT checked their legal requirements and/or liabilities.

In time, all ISP's will subscribe to this way of thinking, becuase it's the only path they can follow without introducing legal problems for themselves. At the moment, it's a non-issue because your internet doesn't go off without a court order, or legal proof of breach of contract, or customers agreeing to it. There's not a single confirmed case of that ever happening. Ask yourself why.

And downgrading my speed is no different to cutting me off, if what you're alleging is breach of contract. You still have to prove that breach of contract in a court of law before you can change the terms of the contract.

Internet access is *not* a right. Neither is telephone access. If you breach the contract or misuse either, you can and will be cut off if it can be proven, not slowed down because "it's a necessity". And the day that it becomes *impossible* to do something without a telephone or internet access is the day that it will be *impossible* to legally cut someone off from either. That day won't happen any time soon.

I've just had a blazing row with a company demanding that they never contact me by telephone but only on paper. That row turned a two-month-long dispute with multiple, long, telephone calls, being passed through dozens of departments from both sides into two letters (one each) being exchanged and solving the problem within a week. Telephone and Internet communication isn't required and is in fact only a convenience that can reduce the administrative hassle of dealing with people. However, written communication is not only legally binding, easily recorded (you can't necessarily record a telephone conversation in some countries), accepted by courts - it is the one of the very few ways to provide official legal communication (serving notices, court orders, etc.). While written communication exists, your phone and Internet can be cut off without redress and continuing to allow you access to it after a breach of contract on the terms of your use opens up the phone/ISP companies to liability. The only thing to worry about is the MEANS of obtaining that cut-off.

There will be a case, somewhere soon, where an ISP cuts off a customer with no evidence who then chooses to fight. And then ALL companies will see why AT&T adopted this particular phrasing and standard. Because it's the only one that'll pass a court of law unhindered. My guess is that it won't be an AT&T customer.

Companies can spout a lot of rubbish at you, but breaching (or even modifying) a legal contract with you on the basis of a third-party's hear-say isn't something that is going to stand up in a court of law. However, don't be surprised if, in the following years, your ISP's terms & conditions include clauses that allow them to use the RIAA or similar as someone with the say-so to terminate your contract, or similar. And once you sign that (or agree to those changes, even if that's just by failing to cancel after you were notified of them), THEN you have a lot bigger problems.

Re:Good for AT&T! (1, Insightful)

jackb_guppy (204733) | more than 5 years ago | (#27378825)

Today a phone is required for many interactions with the government.

example: for a green card you must have land line to your home, period. The area code must match the land location. If not it is invalid.

example: to prove resistance, a phone bill is required many parts of the country. It shows that you are reachable at that location.

Now go to the next level with phone service via internet. Think of the fun!

Re:Good for AT&T! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27379071)

NYS unemployment claims can only be made online or with a telephone. If something goes wrong, only a telephone is possible to fix it. No offices, no email addresses, no online forms.

This is hard when you can't get someone on the phone. Longest its taken to get money from them, personal record? 8 months of not being able to reach someone.

Re:Good for AT&T! (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27379135)

example: to prove resistance, a phone bill is required many parts of the country.

I had no idea the requirements for becoming a US citizen have changed. Can't you just get a signed statement from the British embassy saying that you're recognized as resisting the rule of the Queen?

Re:Good for AT&T! (1)

Ashriel (1457949) | more than 5 years ago | (#27379491)

for a green card you must have land line to your home, period. The area code must match the land location. If not it is invalid.

That's good, I suppose. But it ignores the idea that green cards aren't a necessity, either. If you can't maintain a landline in good faith, you probably shouldn't be here anyway. Not to sound hostile, but we have enough domestic poor leeching debtors without importing more.

to prove resistance, a phone bill is required many parts of the country. It shows that you are reachable at that location.

Actually, any utility bill will do. The power bill is a bit more ubiquitous; I haven't had a landline of my own, well, ever.

Re:Good for AT&T! (4, Informative)

nine-times (778537) | more than 5 years ago | (#27378923)

It's not up to AT&T to decide if people have done something or not, that's up to a court of law.

Well yes, but it seems to me that there's another issue, too. What motivation should AT&T have to cut off access without a court order? As an ISP, there shouldn't be a business case for refusing customer money without being required to do so. I suspect that the reason other ISPs have given in is either they're frightened by the RIAA or they're in cahoots with the RIAA. Either way, that's not appropriate.

Internet access is *not* a right.

No, it's not, but it's getting to the point where loss of Internet access is a serious thing. Newspapers are getting shut down, and soon you may need Internet access to get your news. The government is putting more online (e.g. recovery.gov) and soon you may need Internet access to participate fully as a citizen. The Internet is infrastructure, and denying access is potentially as serious as denying access to roads, water, and electricity. Now it's true, we do take away people's driver's licenses, and it's possible to get your water and electrical services cut. But we usually don't take those actions lightly.

People are going to say I'm overblowing the situation. It's true that failing to have Internet access in today's world is still nowhere near as serious as not having heat in the winter. That's true. On the other hand, as a society we're becoming increasingly dependent on the Internet. I wish people would stop talking about the Internet like it's an entertainment service.

Re:Good for AT&T! (1)

Dhalka226 (559740) | more than 5 years ago | (#27379019)

What motivation should AT&T have to cut off access without a court order? As an ISP, there shouldn't be a business case for refusing customer money without being required to do so.

You're right to follow the money, but you stopped a little too soon. The business case is that pirates tend to use a disproportionate share of resources compared to people performing only legitimate activities. Slashdotters will tell you they're only using what they paid for and they would not be wrong, but that doesn't mean ISPs particularly like it.

Presumably, just for its own benefit, the RIAA is trying to find the biggest pirates they can at a given time. That also correlates well to the biggest usage. To the ISPs, they're essentially a free investigator while the ISP itself gets to be innocent of any wrongdoing ("those mp3s were from your own band? Talk to the RIAA!") and only spend money to process the RIAA information.

They don't want to disconnect you; indeed AT&T says they won't without a court order. So for essentially free, one of two things happen: 1) You get scared and stop the activity, in which case usage levels probably drop*, the ISP itself wins, and the RIAA wins as well, or 2) You don't give two hoots and continue the activity, in which case they're no worse off than they started and the RIAA either accepts that or goes to court.

Since the cost of these letters is fairly low, it wouldn't take a lot of people caving and stopping the activity to be good for them, and if the summary is any indication they feel it is working well. With high-speed Internet access competition being so low, and the top two players (AT&T and Comcast) both engaging in it, the risks of customer defection over the practice is low as well.

(* I've used phrases like "probably" and "tend to" a lot in this post. My intention is simply to indicate that there are many legitimate, completely legal/non-tortious ways to soak up metric asstons of bandwidth while at the same time acknowledging that pirating things is still a huge use case.)

Re:Good for AT&T! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27379163)

3) You discover your idiot offspring has been sharing massive amounts of pirated material and you put a stop to it.

Re:Good for AT&T! (1)

cadrell0 (1418649) | more than 5 years ago | (#27380187)

Most people that lose their driver's license are usually still allowed to drive to work and such. It takes a lot more than 3 strikes. Here in Ohio it's 12 points (a speed is 2 points) in under 2 years, a DUI, etc. And even then, it is only temporary.

Re:Good for AT&T! (2, Interesting)

nine-times (778537) | more than 5 years ago | (#27380775)

I wasn't aware of that, but I think it agrees with my point: we don't take such actions lightly. Even when we take away someone's license, we do it because they have shown an inability to operate a car safely, and not because we don't like what they're using the roads for. The government doesn't say, "We think you're driving someplace in order to something that may be actionable in a court of law, so your driver's license is now suspended."

Also, even when we take away someone's license, we don't try to prohibit them from making use of roads. We still allow them to travel on those roads, so long as someone else is driving. Or they can still ride a bike or something.

So once you look at the Internet as communications infrastructure, suspending someone's account because of copyright infringement appears strange and worrisome. It's like suspending your electricity because you may be running an appliance that may infringe on someone's patent. Or suspending telephone service because you may be making slanderous claims over the phone.

Re:Good for AT&T! (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27378977)

Companies can spout a lot of rubbish at you, but breaching (or even modifying) a legal contract with you on the basis of a third-party's hear-say isn't something that is going to stand up in a court of law. However, don't be surprised if, in the following years, your ISP's terms & conditions include clauses that allow them to use the RIAA or similar as someone with the say-so to terminate your contract, or similar. And once you sign that (or agree to those changes, even if that's just by failing to cancel after you were notified of them), THEN you have a lot bigger problems.

Sadly, this is exactly what happened to me. I was disconnected from CableOne last year solely because of the word of MediaSentry. They gave me a number to call to reach them, but it always just went to a machine. I tried fighting it for as long as possible, but I develop web sites for a living, and can't really afford to not have internet access.

I did drag their name through the mud viciously though, and told as many existing customers as I could what happened, and have convinced several people to switch to another service provider entirely.

Re:Good for AT&T! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27378979)

I'm not so sure you want to f' with the larger companies and actually call them out on finding proof.

Most larger ISP companies would probably not have much problem assisting the RIAA/MPAA with handing over logs or doing some sort of snooping if they believe you're breaking their ToS. Just some food for thought. I for one wouldn't want to wake the "sleeping giant". ISPs have the ability to make most of our lives miserable if the government decided to turn a blind eye or worst yet encourage such behavior. And by that last statement I mean keeping logs forever monitoring what you do on the net "for the sake of saving the children"....

But honestly I wouldn't see how threatening your ISP would turn out good for anyone. Its not like we all have deep pockets to go up against a billion dollar industry.

Re:Good for AT&T! (1)

Jeff DeMaagd (2015) | more than 5 years ago | (#27378991)

[quote]Anything else is just bunkum from companies that have NOT checked their legal requirements and/or liabilities.[/quote]

The companies probably don't want to tell you your legal rights any more than they have to. The less you know, the more it helps them.

[quote]companies can spout a lot of rubbish at you, but breaching (or even modifying) a legal contract with you on the basis of a third-party's hear-say isn't something that is going to stand up in a court of law. However, don't be surprised if, in the following years, your ISP's terms & conditions include clauses that allow them to use the RIAA or similar as someone with the say-so to terminate your contract, or similar. And once you sign that (or agree to those changes, even if that's just by failing to cancel after you were notified of them), THEN you have a lot bigger problems.[/quote]

Isn't that the very concern though? If changing the contracts is this easy, then all the fuss about breach of contract is very easily negated in several month's time. I wouldn't be surprised if AT&T already has some convenient out clauses in their contracts already.

Re:Good for AT&T! (3, Informative)

ChiRaven (800537) | more than 5 years ago | (#27380583)

Actually, in virtually all states there ARE strict legal limits on how and for what offenses an "incumbent local exchange carrier" (AT&T, in most of the areas in which it operates voice telephone service) can cut off your basic local telephone service. Such things are regulated by state commerce commissions or similar bodies, and usually enforced by them and by the public interest office of the state attorney general's office as well. That is NOT true of internet service, however, which is almost completely unregulated.

Re:Good for AT&T! (3, Insightful)

Jurily (900488) | more than 5 years ago | (#27378761)

only if they're found guilty

Repeat until it sinks in: copyright infringement is not a criminal matter.

after a fair trial

No, they don't give a shit about the quality of the decision. This is CYA, not a fight for democracy.

Re:Good for AT&T! (2, Informative)

shark72 (702619) | more than 5 years ago | (#27381425)

"Repeat until it sinks in: copyright infringement is not a criminal matter."

What do you mean by this? Copyright violation is one of many things that has both civil and criminal penalties, depending on how much you do of it. And for copyright infringement, the bar's set pretty low: share just $1,000 worth of software or music with your friends, and you're liable to face criminal charges. You could hit this threshold just by distributing a few copies of Adobe software, or just one copy of a high-end vertical market application, like specialized CAD/CAM software.

Criminal charges are typically reserved for the really big whales, and not your garden-variety file-sharing enthusiast who barely crosses the line, but it's dangerous to give the impression that copyright violation doesn't have criminal penalties. It's important for piracy enthusiasts to understand this -- if, at the very least, so they can go into law and try to get the law changed.

Re:Good for AT&T! (1)

fast turtle (1118037) | more than 5 years ago | (#27379231)

Actually this is a CYA (covering yon ass) response by ATT because by terminating/reducing a customers internet connection based on an outside claim makes them a part of a defamation/slander lawsuit due to discovery rules. Any emails/phone records in regards to such a case can be subpena'd from them at their expense, which can cost tens of thousands of dollars for what gain? The letter is cheaper and covers their ass from any claims by the accuser, while reducing bandwidth usage sufficiently to no longer be a problem.

On the dialup speed issue, I downloaded plenty of stuff on a dialup connection simply by using a download manager (kget now). If I didn't have 3 others who share the connection along with the voip package, I could easily get by with a 128k U/D connection thanks to noscript/flashblock and the hosts file.

Re:Good for AT&T! (1)

ptrace (1078855) | more than 5 years ago | (#27379477)

Puleeeese... A user then pays broadband charges to get dialup speed if he/she is found guilty? I'm sure AT&T will love that. For that you could just go to any of the $5/mo dialup providers... why continue to play with the company that dumped you?

Re:Good for AT&T! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27379565)

Hehehe, so it's like AT&T is saying:

Fuck off, RIAA. We are THE AT&T. Who you think you're, AT&T or something?!

Re:Good for AT&T! (1)

RoFLKOPTr (1294290) | more than 5 years ago | (#27379607)

kudos to them for doing the right thing in this case

While I am happy that they are adopting this policy, and hope other ISPs do the same, I'm afraid that they're not doing it to spite the RIAA or do good by their customers. They're only doing it because they don't want to terminate a paying customer's service just because the RIAA tells them to. I'm not saying this policy has no benefit to the customer... because it most certainly does... but they don't deserve kudos for being right by the customer, because that's not what they're doing here.

Re:Good for AT&T! (1)

Presto Vivace (882157) | more than 5 years ago | (#27380049)

I had the same reaction, and I think you are right about the necessity of Internet service in today's economy.

Re:Good for AT&T! (1)

Quothz (683368) | more than 5 years ago | (#27380441)

Heh, maybe someone at AT&T remembers how much trouble and backlash is caused when a service provider tries to play law enforcement. Remember when Ma Bell was practically a regulatory agency? It'd be nice to think someone learned something from that.

Obama Policies Will Bankrupt USA (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27380851)

Obama Policies Will Bankrupt USA Tsarkon Reports
(Note: We are not a GOP-sters, Republicans or affiliated with any parties, and as George Washington warned against parties We do not believe in parties and, unlike most people, We evaluate every issue on a case by case basis and do not defer to the judgments of politicians who are corrupted and untrustworthy as a group.)

Obama is controlled by the same people as Bush see The Obama Deception documentary [youtube.com]

Yuan Forwards Show China May Buy Fewer Treasuries, UBS Says [bloomberg.com]
Anemic Treasury auction effects felt beyond bonds [reuters.com]
The Sherminator Kicks Some Wall Street Ass [dailybail.com]
China Angry That Fed Is Deliberately Destroying The Dollar [bloomberg.com]
China suggests switch from dollar as reserve currency [bbc.co.uk]
What are the reserve currencies? [wsj.net]
Anatomy of a taxpayer giveaway to investors [ml-implode.com]
Geithner rescue package 'robbery of the American people' [telegraph.co.uk]
Geithner just put only the rich in Titanics lifeboats [examiner.com]
Geithner Plan Will Rob US Taxpayers [cnbc.com]
A False Choice [viewfromsi...valley.com]
Bargain-hunting house buyers wearing on sellers ajc.com [ajc.com]
Time to Take the Steering Wheel out of Geithner's Hands [alternet.org]
Socialising and Privatising [freeradical.co.nz]
Fannie, Freddie to pay out bonuses [politico.com]
Fitch Raises Prime Jumbo Loan Loss Estimates Sharply [researchrecap.com]

Chinas central bank on Monday proposed replacing the US dollar as the international reserve currency with a new global system controlled by the International Monetary Fund [ft.com]

- Russia on an new world reserve currency: It is necessary to work out and adopt internationally recognized standards for macroeconomic and budget policy, which are binding for the leading world economies, including the countries issuing reserve currencies - the Kremlin proposals read. [en.rian.ru]

- President Barack "The Teleprompter" Obama is deeply connected to corruption. Rahm Emanuel, his Chief of Staff, is radical authoritarian statist whose father was part of the murderous civilian-killing Israeli terrorist organization known as IRGUN who is obsessed with gun control and compulsory service to the country in a capacity which he has yet to define. (Think brown-shirts.) Barack is intimately connected to disgraced Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich (Rahm inherited Rod's federal-congress seat). Barack Obama is also connected to William Ayers (who ghost-wrote his books); Ayers is a man who promotes the concept that civilian collateral damage is ok in a war against freedom. Saul Alinsky, a man who made the quote as follows, "From all our legends, mythology, and history (and who is to know where mythology leaves off and history begins or which is which), the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom - Lucifer," is a man who had much influence on the young Barack Obama. A man who admired Lucifer for gaining his own kingdom in an act of rebellion. Barack also subscribed to Preacher Jeremiah Wright, who is himself a Afro-elitist who wants all the people who largely "pay the freight" to suffer at the hands of angry African-American mobs. There are over 30 million Americans on food stamps, and more blacks are in prison and on food-stamps per capita than anyone else. The problem with Wright is simply this: the facts are "racist." There is no conspiracy against African Americans here by citizens.
- Obama himself is a racist, an AIPAC-bootlicker, corrupted to the bone Chicago-style and a traitor to the US Constitution and a liar whose real "legal" name could very well be Barry Sotero and an Indonesian citizen (The US does not allow plural citizenship) (If you care, not that it matters anymore under a lawless authoritarian totalitarian regime such as Barack Obama's, you can see more here at an aggregator; obamacrimes.info [obamacrimes.info] )
- Raytheon lobbyist in Pentagon, many lobbyists getting exemptions even though Obama promised not to have them. This is one of many things Obama has lied about.
- Goldman Sachs insider second in command at Treasury. Bumbling tax cheat idiot Timothy Geithner in "command" of Treasury, with 17 positions unfilled as of late March 2009.
- Obama's cabinet has had several nominees and appointees with multiple tax fraud issues.
- Obama lied about having a new degree of accountability and a "sunshine" period for new laws; Obama has signed bills with little or no time for public review at whitehouse.gov as promised. In fact, one of the largest spending bills in US history was passed into law with several members of the House and Senate telling the public there was no time to review the bill, let alone the public.
- Pork Spendulus Bill (The Stimulus Bill) contained language that came directly from Tom Daschle (who published a book detailing his machinations to slip healthcare under the radar in some back portion of a budgeting bill). This language included the funding and authority to set up a central database of all medical treatments rendered, and the Stimulus bill also contains language that alters the Medicare-style instructions to doctors: The most economic treatments should now be used, no longer use the treatments with the most efficacy. Rationed health care, courtesy of a disgraced tax cheat, Tom Daschle. When you relatives are dying in a state hospital because their quota was reached, see how you feel.
- Obama appointed a Second-Amendment violating-denying Rich-pardoning treasonist Eric Holder as AG, a man who helped a fugitive evade justice and thinks of Americans and cowardly racists.
- Obama has put no money at all in for a single new nuclear power plant but wants to help bridges and roads - apparently to promote more driving.
- Obama, Blagojevich and Rahm Emanuel have a lot to hide. They literally lived very close to each other, Rahm had (until being Obama's Chief of staff) Blagojevich's old federal congressional seat. Blagojevich helped "The Teleprompter" Obama cheat his way to the Illinois senate by getting other candidates thrown off the ballot in Illinois. Why do you think Blagojevich was so mad? Obama did owe him, big time. Rahm and Obama are preemptively using Blagojevich and trying to publically malign and discredit him because he has information that can bring Obama and Rahm Emanuel down. This is the true face of Obama, ruthless, calculating conniving cheat that will stop at nothing to gain and retain power at any cost breaking any rule.
- Tony Rezko, Iraqi Arms Dealer Nahdmi Auchi, and of course Aiham Alsammarae. Barack "The Teleprompter" Obama is so corrupted it's a joke. He is connected to international arms dealers, shady property dealings and people of ill repute to gain what he needs from them: financial bootstrapping of his campaign to rule America.
- Fools and "useful idiots" twist the US Federal Budget pie charts by leaving welfare, workfare, interest on debt, social security, Medicare and Medicaid out and focusing only on non-whole "discretionary" pie charts.
2007 high level pie chart, Federal Budget, USA [wikimedia.org]
2009 Pie chart, detailed, Federal Budget, USA [wikimedia.org]
Now Obama wants to drastically expand the areas of the budget which are getting the most funding by far. There is simply not enough money to fund the obligations made to the public thus far (Unfunded debt obligations which are to pay for the guarantees of social security), let alone Medicare, Medicaid, welfare and other social spending which seeks to guarantee a standard of living to people which is lower what they could gain for themselves. This is an attempt to break the middle class' back so they now need government aid to survive.
- Barack Obama is drastically increasing spending and creating more entitlements that will make the US less competitive (especially against China, India, East Europe/Russia). This will be a huge disaster and "change you can believe in" will strap you, your children and your grandchildren with more debt. "No taxation without representation!" Obama is spending money for the next two-three generations and they can't even vote yet, or even have been born. This is co-opting those who cannot vote to pay for this man's reckless and illegal endeavor to make everyone a feudal serf of the federal government.
- An alternative to the dollar and a forex and a reserve currency came up at the last G20 meeting. The world will not take faith in Obama's liar-socialist spending and welfare state, why should the taxpayers (plebian citizen-slaves of a police state)?
- The spending going on now vastly eclipses all previous spending. In fact, the massive trillion plus debts is a thing of the 80's onwards. Congress signs the checks, remember that year after year, as egregious as the pentagon spending is, that the social spending is completely a waste of money and it is unfunded over the long term. Eisenhower built the interstate highway system, the USA could build a new power infrastructure with this money but instead this money is being pissed into creating more of an entitlement system that is still unfunded, and without massive head-taxes and far more aggressive progressive taxes, could never be funded.
- The budgeting being done today were recently reported by a non-partisan auditing commission will lead to about 10 TRILLION in new debt over the next 10 years. Obama is going to double the national debt while doing nothing to address the unfunded debt obligations of Social Security, or address any of the out of control egregious spending going on today via the budgets, the federal reserve and its taxation via inflation, or by bailouts and stimulus bills. This is the worst, most unintelligent and most hated congress in the history of the United States, and we have a seriously incompetent and potentially dangerous-to-the-free-constitutional-republic Barack Obama rubber stamping this bloody mess.
- Clinton appointed David Walker of the GAO, he recently quit; the unfunded debt obligations have rendered the USA insolvent according to accounting standards. The USA is already broke and cannot conceivably pay its obligations today.
Taxpayers on the hook for $59 trillion [usatoday.com]
US Public Debt Unfunded Debt Obligations [wikipedia.org]
- Most of the world population gets nothing from their governments, or a very bare minimum or services that benefit only the upper echelons of society. However, the liar Barack Obama says the USA needs his universal "state-hospital" rationed health care to be competitive. This is pure folderol and a lie. China and India give nothing, and they are the biggest threat to the American worker. By forcing healthcare and higher taxes, Americans will be less competitive.

- If you think 60% tax rates end to end (income, accounts receivable tax, building permit tax, CDL tax, cigarette tax, corporate income tax, dog license tax, federal income tax, unemployment tax, gasoline tax, hunting license tax, fishing license tax, waterfowl stamp tax, inheritance tax, inventory tax, liquor tax, luxury tax, Medicare tax, city, school and county property tax (up 33 percent last 4 years), real estate tax, social security tax, road usage tax, toll road tax, state and city sales tax, recreational vehicle tax, excise tax, state franchise tax, state unemployment tax, telephone federal excise tax, telephone federal state and local surcharge tax, telephone minimum usage surcharge tax, telephone state and local tax, utility tax, vehicle license registration tax, capital gains tax, lease severance tax, oil and gas assessment tax, airport and FAA taxes and fees, estate tax, misc internet sales tax and many more taxes that I can't recall at the moment) will make the US competitive, along with compulsory programs to provide everyone with health care is going to make the US competitive in the age of India and China, you are incapable of understanding what it takes to build and maintain a successful industrialized republic.

- As the US nationalizes/rations healthcare to the least common denominator of affordability without regard to efficacy, people with money will simply look into medical tourism so those with money can go to medical parks in India and get real health care. Those who have lived in Canada or in the UK can tell you "free" healthcare is not a panacea. If you think this, you are again, a useful idiot. The NHS in the UK has given bad blood and Hepatitis and AIDS infected blood to people, and Jade Goody who just died was misdiagnosed twice resulting in her death (She was "all cleared" twice of the cervical cancer which she just died of). The NHS in the UK is not able to be sued or held accountable. Neither will Obama's rationed health care service for America.
- Sorry to bust the socialist bubble, but support of these types of policies will simply lower the standard of living in the USA, particularly for the middle class. At least at the end of the Eisenhower projects the USA got roads to show for the spending, and with this new spending, the USA could have built power plants that get the USA out of funding the middle east via constant demand for middle-eastern oil, but the age of government for the sake of government is upon us, and the useful idiots line up and believe empty promises.
- The pentagon along with Bechtel, Kroll, Bluewater, Halliburton, etc, could get less than half of what they get today, but that will fix nothing fundamental in terms of government spending. It is simply not enough to make a difference when compared to the Medicare, Medicaid, welfare, workfare and social security entitlements.
See: YouTube - US Government Immorality Will Lead to Bankruptcy [youtube.com]
- If Obama thinks its ok to lie to 300 million people about being able to "take care of them" without even being honest about what that care would look like, then being an idiot and believing in Obama is for you.
- The head of the IRS and the head of the Treasury, Timothy Geithner, is a Tax Cheat
- Lied about no lobbyists - their numbers are growing within Obama's ranks as he issues exemptions.
- The US Government already has over 50% of the budget spent on Medicare, Medicaid, welfare, workfare and social security. Socialists: Good job on that one, its working great. Solution to the current near-collapse-due-to-over-spending: add more unfunded entitlements! And this is still a "George Bush" budget. Over half is being spend on Medicare, Medicaid, welfare, workfare and social security.
- This man is such a propagandist that he invented "The Office of the President Elect," the seals, the flags, the podium and that forum was all props and the media never once questioned any of it. It was an invention. This is the power of Obama, technicalities and rules do not apply.
- The Socialist-liars can break my spirit and my financial back to force me to "need" a federal government that is turning this country into a police state and is turning it into a quasi-socialist lie, but I will, I must put up a fight. I have kids to educate and feed, and the stuff the pseudo-socialist authoritarian Obama sells (which is failing to various degrees everywhere else as implemented) is simply forcing a culture of failure on a once great, libertarian free country.
- I will not be complacent with your "change," and there will be a point where civil war will become an option. See how hard you can push before you get it. How much more than half can the truly productive workers in this country afford to pay. Keep pushing to find out how to start a civil war. The scariest thing about Obamabots is the amount of pleasure they derive from completely defying the US Constitution and giving the government non-enumerated non-extant powers to rule over everyone's quality of life.
- The socialist-lie of a plan will not work, its not fundable, it will destroy the currency to fund it, and its really as simple as this: if this insanity is funded by borrowing from the US's economic and military adversaries then Obama and his socialist cabal is not fit to administrate society. Rome fell. Kings who mis-manged their treasuries all fell. Every example of unhinged spending leads to the same result: systemic collapse.
- Obama and his sycophantic lunatics would want to have a civil war to get Obama's way and force the socialist-lie system on my already tax paying law abiding ass. And as far as "no new taxes" for those under 250k, its a lie, the tax is called inflation, which is set to begin just about now that the Chinese wont want the USA's worthless treasuries to fund the socialist-lie fantasy (one that COMMUNIST China doesn't even try and sell to its people!) Also, what Obama fails to mention is the states are now compelled to implement his new rules, and to follow the rules the states must raise taxes. Obama may not tax those under 250k, but every last one of the 50 states will.
- Barack Obama's numbers don't add up. There is a $59 trillion dollar hole (UFDO) in social security alone. AIG $150 billion here, TARP $350 billion there. $800 billion for a highly dubious pork laden stimulus package. Another one on the way. $59 trillion hole in the balance sheet IGNORED. China saying they aren't going to buy treasuries, calling for new reserve currencies, Clinton clamoring to find buyers now. $3.6 trillion dollar budget, potential military action on Mexico, Iran still a "terrorist state" at the behest of the AIPAC, spending up, dollar about to fall, inflation over time since Breton Woods extremely easy to document, yet, the socialist-liars question when the numbers (the Federal Government numbers) simply don't add up to the point where if the US-GOV was a company it would be insolvent.
-How dare the taxpayers question what Barack Obama's drastic spending increases are going to do to the purchasing power of our savings because Barack Obama wants to recklessly spend and try to maintain and American empire AND guarantee a standard of living, and Obama doesn't even want to build a single nuclear power plant to do it? Barack Obama must be a complete and total lunatic moron at best. He is a man child, akin to Michael Jackson, who does not live in the real world. This guy has turned the White House into a Neverland Ranch.
- Obama is either a negligent idiot or an unhinged maniac with delusional fantasies. Meanwhile, Obama's tax dodging Treasury Secretary has 17 unfilled positions, the Treasury Dept. isn't even functioning at this point while the rest of the world steadily loses faith in one of the two things that makes the USA relevant in the world at all: the dollar as a "hard" or reserve currency and the US military.
- "General welfare" in the constitution was, according to the man who wrote it, Madison, meant to be extremely limited in scope. The federal government per the constitution doesn't even have the enumerated POWER to deal with economic messes. A lot of these "POWERS" were created while there is a crisis to dupe the public into accepting an un-constitutional authoritarian regime as the government and to usurp authority over the people.
- The USA is a constitutional republic. A democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting to eat a sheep. Also a constitutional republic isn't about using a barely-majority or a plurality to stuff your (un-fundable disastrous) crap down the disenfranchised other-half's throat.
- With Obama's authoritarian corrupted criminal (aiding and abetting a criminal in flight of prosecution, Rich case) Eric Holder in charge, we won't have our inalienable and enumerated rights to firearms much longer. For a constitutional law expert, Obama must have never read the federalist papers or he would simply hand himself as a traitor. Already there is talk of banning firearms to help Mexico's fight against the cartels. What they fail to mention is the firearms that are being used there are Mexican Military firearms being used by those who defected from the Mexican Army into the cartels directly! The firearms in question were sold to the Mexican military, over 170,000 soldiers are gone with the guns. And now the US citizens have to give up inalienable and enumerated rights? This is insanity.
- The arbitrary expansion of "general welfare" is not only unconstitutional, it may very well lead to a serious conflict on the issue.
- Here is a debate on general welfare and how stuff like this came to pass, but was clearly no intended by the authors of the document of root law.
In Federalist No. 41, James Madison asked rhetorically: "For what purpose could the enumeration of particular powers be inserted, if these and all others were meant to be included in the preceding general power?" (In reference to the general welfare clause)
So strongly did the founders believe that "general welfare" wouldn't be expanded as written:
In Federalist No. 84, Alexander Hamilton indirectly confirmed Madison's point. (That the "general welfare" clause was "clearly" not a free pass for government)
Hamilton argued that a bill of rights, which many were clamoring for, would be not only unnecessary, but dangerous. Since the federal government was given only a few specific powers, there was no need to add prohibitions: it was implicitly prohibited by the listed powers. If a proposed law a relief act, for instance wasn't covered by any of these powers, it was unconstitutional.
"why declare that things shall not be done which there is no power to do? Why, for instance, should it be said, that the liberty of the press shall not be restrained when no power is given by which restrictions may be imposed?"
Hamilton goes on to argue that making Amendments (e.g., enumerating Free speech, press and assembly) and enumerating the 'right' would have the following effect:
(A bill of rights) "would furnish, to men disposed to usurp, a plausible pretence for claiming that power that is, a power to regulate the press, short of actually shutting it down. "
"With respect to the words 'general welfare,' I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers (enumerated in the Constitution) connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators." --James Madison [The US Supreme Court has found the meaning of "general welfare" in the Constitution to be much more elastic than did Mr. Madison. But as the "author of the Constitution," what does he know?]
James Madison, when asked if the "general welfare" clause was a grant of power, replied in 1792, in a letter to Henry Lee,

If not only the means but the objects are unlimited, the parchment [the Constitution] should be thrown into the fire at once.

"...We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it...it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government , and to provide new Guards for their future security. ...--The Declaration of Independence
- Monetizing failures causes more. Japan showed us this for decades. But hey, Barack Obama is actually dumb enough to think you can fix a problem DECADES in the making with a quick fixer-upper. He is screwed in the head or, more likely, lying to the American public to quickly get done the things he wants to get done before he gets thrown out on his ass.
- The complaints are with the Federal government (in general) since Breton Woods. The Federal Government and Obama's minions STILL didn't listen to David Walker, a Clinton appointee and former head of the GAO. This isn't about political parties anymore- its about spending the future to the point where today collapses. History is replete with examples of fiat currencies and deficit spending leading to collapse.
- Show me a single federal budget that was less than the previous. If this $3.6T budget goes, it is never coming back barring systemic collapse. The only President to ever see the US Public Debt at $0 dollars is Andrew Jackson.
- The United States Federal Government, The United States Federal Reserve, and the banks which were enabled to continue down reckless paths by a quasi government agency known as the Federal Reserve whose actions are not subject to congress and whose members are unelected. This situation is untenable and unconstitutional.
- Every inflationary road taken in history ends in collapse. Keynesian policies are widely regarded as no longer workable. And while Ron Paul, Peter Schiff, David Walker, Nouriel Roubini, Warren Buffet and Jim Rodgers warn about or predict all the failures, people still refuse to listen to the possibility that the US economy may contract for many years, and spending at these levels is something that can give way to a collapse.
- Inflation is a tax: What ignorant tax and spenders don't take into account here is the relative percentages of people's wealth (both net and gross) and the costs of owning and maintaining houses, cars, standards of living.
- Inflation via deficit spending is going to make it such that you will be paying a lot more by percentage of your income to maintain a given standard of living. Obama's arguments are so poorly thought out and seek to blame "Republicans" for the mess, its really simply laughable - this unhinged budgeting and currency management crisis needs cleanup now, not worsening.
- You can't spend your way out of a hole if the creditors (e.g. China) start telling the USA they won't buy. It is that simple. Now America starts to have to collateralize the debt with assets. The USA will be selling off chunks of American assets to back the new debt. One day, it may even be necessary to sell Alaska back to Russia because no one will take greenbacks to prop up a failing version of a modern Rome.
- Ah, here we go with the Matthew Lesko arguments. [lesko.com]
Interest rates were on the rise before the government stepped in with free money for everyone (the fine print of course indicate massive strings attached).
Other economies, for example, India, have the central rates set to far more reasonable/realistic rates (at the moment ~ 8+%), which is still tends to be too low, but shows that if you need someone else capital you need to pay a premium for it, and given that capital is in short supply, it would stand to reason that a premium must be charged for it.
The problem is the unrealistic growth rates of mature economies don't allow for profiting via growth projections (rather than simply earning money). So the government steps in, turns on the free money spigot, gets the interest rates for savings down in the 1-2% range while diluting the value of the whole currency in order to prop up dying companies that ran the business like a Madhoff Ponzi scheme. Ponzi schemes need new money or they cease to exist. This is why the Federal Reserve is trying to issue more Reserve Notes. Without this fresh input of printed money, the Ponzi scheme will collapse.
- The Republicans aren't solely responsible for the crisis as Obama's minions would have you believe, congress is (no particular congress), the Executive of the US government (no particular one) and the US Federal Reserve System are all at fault.
- Fundamentally, the government is trying to fix the prices of various things to "make it all work." This pulling on the invisible hand is a fools venture. It was predicted long ago the housing collapse (and those, such as myself, in the know, wished while realizing the housing collapse coming that we were wrong for everyone's sake - but the truth is the truth) . It may be that the Austrian (von Mises) economists will ultimately be proven right.
- We are a nation of partially educated whiney grabby idiots, and we got the government that represents this. The Chinese, India and other up and coming nations will show no mercy for this arrogant abuse of our status as the world's forex reserves.
- War and asset sales will continue to be the only option for this scheme until it is corrected at the core. And to say that the government has already averted a depression by doing what they did (most of the monies injected wont be "felt" for some time), is just arrogance and stupidity. Price fixing prolonged the Great Depression. Price-fixing (or attempting to) houses will do the same, but probably worse.
- Obama's minions simply don't care if the US is bankrupted and rendered insolvent, they just want a say in how its done, presumably to "feel safe." Rather selfish.

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." AND "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -- Benjamin Franklin (Possibly Richard Jackson)

- Everyone better realize that inflation will pay a major role in funding un-fundable fantasies, wiping the savers and the middle class out. The problem is, that other countries are growing tired of making our Federal Reserve notes worth something by buying our debt as treasuries. Obama's minions talk about spending, but in order to "get what YOU want" you will sell debt to potential economic and military adversaries? Real bright. What's really sad is that despite David Walker being an authority on these issues, people refuse to even watch him and listen to what he is saying. Instead of seeing the truth and the bottom line of the unfunded debt obligations, they want HOPE and CHANGE, which are simply concepts which the foolish change into their own personal hopes and changes, but Obama never bothered to outline what to hope for exactly or what he will be changing.
- We have a fraud, a huckster, an empty suit for a President, a Community Organizer. This man does not have the ability to formulate an original thought, or to command action. He is a know nothing that lives in a pretend world just like Michael Jackson ensconced himself in Neverland ranch, he will hide behind those who surround him, which happen to be incompetent people who have no compunction about spending the country into oblivion to achieve personal agendas.
- On the success of Canada and its form of Socialism: A huge country like Canada with massive amounts of uranium and tar sands and natural resources and a huge land mass with a scant 30 million people is an order of magnitude less of a problem to manage than a country with 10x its population, a serious leaky southern border, backfiring aggressive foreign policy, particularly with Iran, and the US is competing with countries like India and China whose middle classes are larger than the US's entire population. The top 5 students in every Indian and Chinese primary school out numbers all the kids in primary school in the US. Canada is a idyllic island, the USA is front and center in an all out economic and political clash of ideologies.
- Cap and trade (and pollution control for solving global problems) will never work unless the top 10 countries in the world (in terms of GDP, manufacturing capacity and population) are on board. Period. end. If the world doesn't quickly move to nuclear now and fusion shortly, it is over. Possibly not if every home on the planet gets a wind vane, but that seems unlikely to happen (since its possible now).
- Keynes calls it "the paradox of thrift" and suggested that policies forcing people not to save is a "good idea." The guy wanted people spending all the time, or if he didn't, he never conveyed that to his protégés well enough for them to not do what they are doing. Right now the plebeians in the US are actually stashing cash, and everyone from Obama to the media is trying to get people to spend spend spend. The best thing for the long term is for people to prepare for the coming hell, not set out with no reserves.
- I have seen Keynes invoked to justify nearly every bad move in the past decade, and its warming up to be a potential currency collapse, the collapse of the US Treasury and Federal Reserve notes, and a collapse of the NYSE. And then they invoke Keynes to suggest the best way out of the mess is to spend out of an already near-critically debt massed black hole.
- A house is run like a town is run like a country or business is run like a state is run like a government. If there are things the government is doing that would either force your home into bankruptcy or into jail via fraud charges, then the government and banks shouldn't be operating in that fashion. A certain degree of stretchy liquidity is in order, but in terms of percent of GDP, there is no way of justifying what they US has now.
- Iceland failed at 850 percent debt to GDP. The US is at 350 and rising. It is not a good thing at all.
- What is happening to the dollar as a forex standard. [youtube.com]
- March 19, 2009 C-SPAN - "Let's Quit Destroying Our Dollar!" [youtube.com]
- HR 1207 (A bill to make the Fed more accountable and to answer questions regarding the dollar policy) [loc.gov]

Title: Obama sidetracked by fiscal mess, but presses on [yahoo.com]
"Being heard above the din may prove difficult. Lawmakers are wrangling over taxing people who got big bonuses and worrying the president's budget could generate $9.3 trillion in red ink over the next decade."
- Kremlin to pitch new global currency [infowars.com]
Russia proposes creation of global super-reserve currency.

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.

- Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1961

Cover your arse. (4, Insightful)

Pig Hogger (10379) | more than 5 years ago | (#27378621)

This is sensible. One of those days, the "collaborating"* ISPs are gonna cut the wrong guy by mistake and will be slapped with a breach of contract suit with the usual astronomical claims...

After all, we're all entitled to proper due process.

* In the same negative sense as those french who collaborated with the nazis during WW-II.

Re:Cover your arse. (5, Funny)

DamienNightbane (768702) | more than 5 years ago | (#27378639)

You know, this may be the fastest that I've ever seen a thread go from 0 to Godwin.

Re:Cover your arse. (1)

BACPro (206388) | more than 5 years ago | (#27379157)

Nope, here's one better... http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=170422&cid=14202218 [slashdot.org]

Re:Cover your arse. (1)

DamienNightbane (768702) | more than 5 years ago | (#27379191)

I don't think it really counts if the initial article is about Nazis.

Re:Cover your arse. (1)

troll8901 (1397145) | more than 5 years ago | (#27379739)

I think it's a special case ... if the probability starts at 1, then the total time taken is 0, and ...

Oh no, I can feel the brainfreeze coming ... Owwwwwwwwwww!! Owww owww oww oww ow ow ow ow ... *whimper*

Re:Cover your arse. (3, Interesting)

Chlorine Trifluoride (1517149) | more than 5 years ago | (#27378711)

This is sensible. One of those days, the "collaborating"* ISPs are gonna cut the wrong guy by mistake and will be slapped with a breach of contract suit with the usual astronomical claims...

After all, we're all entitled to proper due process.

* In the same negative sense as those french who collaborated with the nazis during WW-II.

Breach of Contract? You mean that part of ISP contracts where they say that they can terminate your service for any reason?

Re:Cover your arse. (1)

Pig Hogger (10379) | more than 5 years ago | (#27381025)

Breach of Contract? You mean that part of ISP contracts where they say that they can terminate your service for any reason?

"Any reason" must still be justified.

now if only the courts... (1)

Speare (84249) | more than 5 years ago | (#27378651)

It's a start. Now, if only the courts would actually pay attention to the technical merits-- that an IP address is not an individual, that giving anonymous WiFi service is like any other conduit, that just using BitTorrent or Kazaa is not illegal in and of itself, etc.

Re:now if only the courts... (1)

Todd Knarr (15451) | more than 5 years ago | (#27380561)

The courts do take notice. But the courts don't like trivial technicalities. An IP address doesn't identify an individual, for instance, but in the typical residential case it does identify a household. There may be 2 adults and 2 children in that household, but the account holder will be one of the adults, has legal responsibility for what the children do and is presumed to have a certain degree of knowledge of what all of them are doing. The attitude of the court will be "If the account holder doesn't know who's responsible, they reasonably should. If they choose to shield the responsible party, on their head be it.". The court distinguishes between family, or two roommates at a college, vs. two random people who don't know each other. Try treating the former types of relationship between the possible responsible parties as the latter and the court'll school you on the matter. As for open wireless access, the court's simply going to treat that as an attractive nuisance: you knew or reasonably should have known about the possibility, you failed to take any steps to mitigate or eliminate the problem, you accept responsibilty for what happens next.

Rules lawyers. Judges, like GMs, have many tools for dealing with them.

Re:now if only the courts... (1)

shark72 (702619) | more than 5 years ago | (#27381463)

Thanks for pointing this out. Lots of file sharing enthusiasts hope to find loopholes -- you can avoid trouble if you keep an unencryped wireless network, you can avoid trouble if the activity could be blamed on your kids, etc. The reality is that the courts generally don't like loopholes, as they don't want their time to be wasted. It's like tax loopholes: if you can think of one, somebody probably already thought of it years ago, and it's been closed.

ATT FiOS came knocking last week (1)

TinBromide (921574) | more than 5 years ago | (#27378663)

We're getting ATT FiOS in our area soon, I might have to give them a call if this is true and not just marketing.

Re:ATT FiOS came knocking last week (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27378753)

Oh don't worry it's just marketing. Anything the executives say, much like congress, expect it to be nearly the opposite in implementation. You're talking about the same company that allowed the government to spy on everyone for free sans warrant, right?

Re:ATT FiOS came knocking last week (1)

shentino (1139071) | more than 5 years ago | (#27378785)

Actually, we can leave the finger pointed at the government for making it an issue of national security, threatening to brand any non-cooperators as terrorists, and make sure that anyone who didn't play ball would disappear.

AT&T probably didn't have any choice in the matter, in so far as the execs were probably damned if they did and damned if they didn't.

This is the reason we like our police to arrest people publicly. I would rather be shamed and embarrased as I walk away in cuffs, then taken quietly and then never heard from again.

Re:ATT FiOS came knocking last week (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27378925)

FiOS is verizon, not at&t. Verizon has said they will not cooperate with the RIAA.

Re:ATT FiOS came knocking last week (1)

TinBromide (921574) | more than 5 years ago | (#27378965)

The guy who was knocking had an AT&T shirt.

From ATT's site for stuff available for my area.

" Fiber

Learn how AT&T is taking the existing fiber that's going into your home today and turning it into the vehicle that's delivering all your entertainment to your television, computer and phone.

*

What It Is
*

Fiber is glass or plastic hair thin threads that deliver data over a network. The threads are bound tightly together and use waves of light to transmit the data.
"

Re:ATT FiOS came knocking last week (1)

RCSInfo (847666) | more than 5 years ago | (#27380683)

FiOS is a registered trademark of Verizon. AT&T's competing triple play service is called U-Verse. In areas spun off by Verizon to FairPoint they rename former FiOS service FAST.

Of course I wouldn't be surprised if the guys that AT&T hires to go door to door mistakenly used the term FiOS as a generic term for fiber services. Verizon's service has been out longer and has better name recognition.

Re:ATT FiOS came knocking last week (2, Interesting)

adolf (21054) | more than 5 years ago | (#27381183)

On the plus side, U-Verse works very well with torrents.

With Roadrunner, I had to do clever QoS traffic shaping stuff inside of a custom firmware on a WRT54G in order to keep torrents from swamping the connection with high latency.

With U-Verse, I don't. I can just leave Azureus run wide-open, and it'll occupy the entire 6mbps/1mbps connection with hundreds of connections, while latency always stays low. My wife no longer complains about me downloading torrents while she plays WOW.

It works so well that I've bypassed the fancy WRT54G altogether, since the supplied U-Verse 2-wire router seems to work quite well enough for everything I do without extra help. (It also includes a battery backup, so I can continue to use the laptop during a power outage.)

Re:ATT FiOS came knocking last week (1)

deraj123 (1225722) | more than 5 years ago | (#27381125)

Fiber != FiOS. FiOS is a brand name service offered by Verizon. As far as I know (at least in my area), AT&T's "fiber" offering is uVerse. It differs slightly from FiOS in that it is (usually) fiber to the node, then VDSL to the home, rather than fiber to the home as FiOS does.

That being said, I recently switched to uVerse and I'd say it's worth at least looking into. Personally, I was delighted at having a non-satellite alternative to Comcast, which I've been dying to get rid of.

A company with Balls....for once (2, Interesting)

Ozlanthos (1172125) | more than 5 years ago | (#27378673)

I like AT&Ts move here. While they could have been little wimps and acquiesced to the mafRIAA's demands they said,"Sorry, we here at AT&T care more about providing service to our customers than making sure Lars Ulrich and Madonna get every red cent they feel must be extorted from their fan-base". "Oh and by the way,(in the immortal words of Bender), "Bite my shiny metal ass"! Although... I am a bit discomfited with the idea that my traffic is being monitored so closely that the mafRIAA can tell that "I" downloaded "copyrighted works". That alone could be enough for some users to drop the service upon receiving such a notice. None the less, bravo AT&T. In a world of ever pussifying people, you've shown me that you still have a pair!

-Oz

Just Shamwow and poof, they're gone! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27378683)

The company saw very few repeat offenders.

Emphasis mine. You're damn skippy you won't see them again. They'll be more careful after asking their friends about alternate replacements.

Correlation, please? (2, Insightful)

c (8461) | more than 5 years ago | (#27378687)

> Cicconi said the notices worked. The company saw very few repeat offenders.

If the RIAA is randomly selecting from IP addresses on P2P networks, the probability of any particular user being hit twice... I'm thinking that the notices might not have much to do with the lack of repeat offenders.

c.

Re:Correlation, please? (5, Insightful)

langelgjm (860756) | more than 5 years ago | (#27378703)

Cicconi said the notices worked. The company saw very few repeat offenders.

And by "worked", he means "got subscribers to download PeerGuardian."

Re:Correlation, please? (2, Interesting)

Richard_at_work (517087) | more than 5 years ago | (#27378897)

How does PeerGuardian actually protect you? Its pretty easy for the RIAA to cycle adsl lines, oe heck even dialup accounts, on a monthly basis, even to the extent of renting an apartment with 5 phone lines and rotating the ISPs every other month - are PeerGuardian fast enough to catch those IP addresses before they are actively used by the RIAA? Is there any real way to actually accurately identify those IP addresses at all?

Re:Correlation, please? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27380669)

Its pretty easy for the RIAA to cycle adsl lines, oe heck even dialup accounts, on a monthly basis, even to the extent of renting an apartment with 5 phone lines and rotating the ISPs every other month...

whois 66.250.46.0
whois 66.250.47.0
whois 209.133.121.0
whois 209.133.122.0

Fortunately they're a lot lazier than you think.

Re:Correlation, please? (1)

Richard_at_work (517087) | more than 5 years ago | (#27380997)

Fortunately they're a lot lazier than you think.

Or so you hope...

Bizarre result (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27378783)

Seeing as the vast majority of bittorrent use is for legitimate purposes, such as Linux distros, why would it be possible to detect a reduction in bittorrent use for those who received such letters?

Comcast is happy to shut off your service (2, Interesting)

SuperBanana (662181) | more than 5 years ago | (#27378813)

Comcast denied that it was considering a similar penalty,

Maybe not for RIAA stuff, but for the first time in a DECADE (I'm including Mediaone, Roadrunner, AT&T, and Comcast- ie all the various incarnations of the same cable company here) they're suddenly strictly enforcing their policies regarding hosting services. If you have any incoming SMTP or WWW traffic, expect to be canned if you haven't been already...even if it is for personal use.

It astounds me that people get bent out of shape about bittorrent throttling, but not terms of service that force you to be a "consumer" of the internet; the ToS specifically ban "web discussion forums" and internet email lists (I was running neither.)

This is how compaines use the TOS as a weapon ... (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27379239)

If you look at the average TOS agreement, say from Comcast, you'll notice that it's almost impossible to be in agreement based on the standard that Comcast service customers must meet.

This basically allows Comcast to have indiscriminate powers that can terminate customers at will with any "infraction" they deem violating the TOS with no recourse.

High bandwidth customer? Like online Netflix and Hulu? Looks like Comcast needs to look at little closer at you traffic to so if there are any "violations".

Didn't anyone learn anything from George Orwell's 1984?

Re:Comcast is happy to shut off your service (2, Informative)

deraj123 (1225722) | more than 5 years ago | (#27381267)

Maybe not for RIAA stuff, but for the first time in a DECADE (I'm including Mediaone, Roadrunner, AT&T, and Comcast- ie all the various incarnations of the same cable company here) they're suddenly strictly enforcing their policies regarding hosting services. If you have any incoming SMTP or WWW traffic, expect to be canned if you haven't been already...even if it is for personal use.

While I have definitely seen restrictions on running "servers" in Comcast's TOS, I am consistently unable to find them in AT&T's. This is one of the major reasons that I am currently an AT&T customer, and not a Comcast customer (my two choices at the moment).

I don't have the DSL service anymore, but at the time I read through the TOS and was unable to find "no server" clauses. I currently have uVerse, and am likewise unable to find any "no server" clauses in that TOS [att.com] .

how do they know? (2)

perryizgr8 (1370173) | more than 5 years ago | (#27378823)

one thing i do not understand. how can riaa know if my friend sent me a song by email, or i searched on google and downloaded an mp3? or that i downloaded a film using piratebay? how can they trace online activity to real world people?

Re:how do they know? (1)

novakyu (636495) | more than 5 years ago | (#27379097)

Maybe you are just trolling (but then, given your UID, maybe you are just new to the whole "Internet thing"), but it's very easy.

They either run trackers (or some trackers publish list of connected IPs somewhere, although I'd hope not many do these days), or they simply connect to a torrent, the way anybody connects to it, and collect the list of IPs connected to that torrent.

For other P2P networks, like Kazaa (i.e. the Napster style networks), it's even easier—to find out, and to prove in court, at least as far as "making available" goes.

Once they have a record of a particular IP sharing a particular file at a particular time, it's usually not that difficult to find out (at least with proper court orders) who was using, or at least paying for the Internet connection.

Re:how do they know? (1)

perryizgr8 (1370173) | more than 5 years ago | (#27379295)

thanks, but i was not trolling. i actually knew about the whole "bittorrent broadcasts your ip" thing, but i forgot. my main question remains: how does someone know if i downloaded an mp3 without using bittorrent?

Re:how do they know? (1)

Midnight Thunder (17205) | more than 5 years ago | (#27379581)

thanks, but i was not trolling. i actually knew about the whole "bittorrent broadcasts your ip" thing, but i forgot. my main question remains: how does someone know if i downloaded an mp3 without using bittorrent?

Different protocol.

Re:how do they know? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27379661)

ISP collaboration, or infiltrated websites.

Fro5t pist! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27378881)

They Aren't Seeing Repeat Offenders (5, Insightful)

TechWrite (1172477) | more than 5 years ago | (#27379005)

Of course, there could be many reasons that ATT and others aren't seeing many repeat offenders after forwarding takedown notices. Personally, after a "friend" received one such notice, they very quickly learned about using IP tables and exclusively connecting to encrypted peers when using bit torrent. A year later, and my "friend" still hasn't received another notice so it seems to be working very well. Of course, it isn't for the reason the RIAA and the ISP would like.

Re:They Aren't Seeing Repeat Offenders (1)

lazy_nihilist (1220868) | more than 5 years ago | (#27380383)

I'm not sure about using IP tables, but connecting to encrypted peers only would prevent from your ISP snooping. I'm not sure it would be of much help if the RIAA is seeding them, because they would get to know your IP address. A better "solution" would be to use a VPN service like http://ipredator.se/ [ipredator.se] where they say that they don't keep any logs.

vero (1)

MikeURL (890801) | more than 5 years ago | (#27379041)

This could be worse. AT&T could model the program after Ebay's VeRO program. That is a program so frustrating and enraging that I closed a 10 year old Ebay account with 100s of 100% positive ratings.

Never have I been treated in such an arbitrary and capricious manner as I was by the VeRO program. So by comparison this policy looks enlightened.

Who in there right mind.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27379057)

Who in their right mind would deny service to paying customers based on the legal issues of another company? Don't know why some ISPs want to be so charitable to the RIAA.

Please tell... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27379223)

Cicconi said the company began testing this kind of 'forward noticing' late last year and even experimented with sending certified letters. Cicconi said the notices worked. The company saw very few repeat offenders."

How would they see if their customer was a repeat offender?

Today (1)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 5 years ago | (#27379499)

When it becomes financially more efficient to cut people off, you can be sure they will do it.

An MPAA warning worked for me (4, Interesting)

Fookin (652988) | more than 5 years ago | (#27379549)

I'm a TWC customer and came home one night to find my computers not able to get online. It was really weird, the cable modem got a DHCP address, gateway, DNS info, etc but I just couldn't get to any online locations. I called tech support and they said I had been "quarantined" for a Copyright violation notice they received from the MPAA / Viacom. Apparently they didn't like my sharing of a couple episodes of The Mentalist.

That really pissed me off because at the time, I couldn't view episodes at the CBS website, they weren't on Hulu and I couldn't get them through iTunes. Also, there were no Season boxsets available for purchase. So if I couldn't watch it live or if the DVR didn't pick it up, I was out of luck.

Tech support basically told me to stop doing what I was doing and there would be no problems going forward. So I did. Maybe I'm a coward, I dunno - but I just don't want to tempt a lawsuit.

In all fairness, I think I got popped because I was using TPB. Maybe I should just stick with private trackers that use encryption or maybe that doesn't really matter and I'll get popped anyways. Still haven't decided what I'll do going forward ...

AT&T is lying (1)

acoustix (123925) | more than 5 years ago | (#27379633)

First off, AT&T has been providing data on P2P users to Mediacom for well over a year now. Mediacom uses AT&T as their provider and apparently Mediacom does not have the staff to monitor their network so AT&T does it for them.

Mediacom has also been disconnecting customers for excessive P2P usage as well as alleged copyright infringement. 2 coworkers that I know of had their service cutoff by Mediacom due to alleged copyright violations.

This behavior starts a slippery slope. Where does it end? If ISP are going to start monitoring traffic for specific content then are they liable for traffic that they don't catch?

Re:AT&T is lying (1)

telek83 (1350439) | more than 5 years ago | (#27379937)

There has been a way around this for years now, all one has to do is use a few free shell accounts that have a proxy between one or two boxes, now just make sure you sign up for shell accounts that are in country's that downloading via P2P is not a problem, using SSH with a 4096bit RSA + SHA-256 GnuPGP key between each box should take care of prying eyes. By the time they decrypt the packets the universe would have been through at least 18-23 life times.

Re:AT&T is lying (1)

fishbowl (7759) | more than 5 years ago | (#27380489)

You make it sound easy to find that kind of service.

Besides that, I don't really understand why hard crypto hasn't already put a wall of privacy between user and service provider, period. What needs to change? This is a bigger issue than just "file sharing."

Re:AT&T is lying (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27379995)

First off, AT&T has been providing data on P2P users to Mediacom for well over a year now. Mediacom uses AT&T as their provider and apparently Mediacom does not have the staff to monitor their network so AT&T does it for them.

Mediacom has also been disconnecting customers for excessive P2P usage as well as alleged copyright infringement. 2 coworkers that I know of had their service cutoff by Mediacom due to alleged copyright violations.

This behavior starts a slippery slope. Where does it end? If ISP are going to start monitoring traffic for specific content then are they liable for traffic that they don't catch?

exactly or what if a guys drives by parks acroos the street and leec hes ur wireless signal and yes if u have a wep key that is easily broken downloads a pireted movie and then drives offf all done from his wireless laptop or your neighbor upstairs then ur is turns off ur internet and u have done nothing then u get sued and once again not ur fault see this is why these things have to go to court

Re:AT&T is lying (1)

KahabutDieDrake (1515139) | more than 5 years ago | (#27381163)

The humor in all this will be a few years down the road. After P2P monitoring and enforcement of third party ownership is standard fair. That is when someone will point out that if they can monitor and stop movie and music trading, they can go after child pornography... or hold the ISP's responsible when they don't.

I can't wait. Just deserts and all.

well of course they didnt see repeat offenders (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27379905)

most of the people who received letters started using ip filters

Fp fag(orz (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27379951)

YES! iirecoverable

Absolutely (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27380535)

The fact that someone is paying for Internet service gives them the complete right to use that service for whatever purpose they wish. Period. And unless someone installs a camera in my home, they cannot ever prove what user was performing an (allegedy) illegal act. An IP does not identify a person.

As along as there is one ISP that is on the user's side in this, piracy will be impossible to stop. Media companies might as well just get used to the idea of passing out stuff for free. If they don't do it, someone will - and whoever does it will be more popular.

After all, it is all about popularity, ads and eyeballs, right?

As long as AT&T responded with anything short. (1)

John Hasler (414242) | more than 5 years ago | (#27380899)

...of a punch in the face the RIAA would have claimed they were "cooperating". Looks to me as if they are doing the minimum that their lawyers told them they were legally obligated to do.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>