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!

How Verizon's 'Six Strikes' Plan Works

Soulskill posted about a year and a half ago | from the that-is-not-how-strikes-work dept.

Piracy 505

An anonymous reader writes "With the 'six-strikes' anti-piracy plan set to begin in the U.S. soon, TorrentFreak has gotten its hands on a document showing how Verizon in particular will be dealing with copyright-infringing users. For your first and second strike, Verizon will email you and leave you a voicemail informing you that your account is involved in copyright infringement. For your third and fourth strikes, the ISP will automatically redirect your browser to a page that requires you to acknowledge receiving the alerts. They'll also play a video about the dangers of infringement. For your fifth and sixth strikes, they give you three options: massively throttle your connection for a few days, wait two weeks and then throttle your connection, or file an appeal with an arbitration service for $35. TorrentFreak points out that the MPAA and RIAA can obtain the connection information of repeat infringers, with which they can then take legal action."

cancel ×

505 comments

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

Problem solved quickly.... (5, Interesting)

sofar (317980) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563337)

If everyone runs their WIFI AP's open.

Re:Problem solved quickly.... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42563425)

Why would that be the case? I read in an european country (Germany?) customers are responsible for the traffic on their network. You have to secure your network to have any hope of a "it wasn't me" defense working.

Re:Problem solved quickly.... (3, Interesting)

Catbeller (118204) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563437)

So, everyone has to sit outside, start naked, their hands in front of them where the police can see them, and speak clearly into the cameras forever... or they are guilty.

No.

Re:Problem solved quickly.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42563461)

And why would I do that? Bad enough my wifi is crap because of the 20 Routers around me

And I'm going to open mine to the world so leechers can suck up my bandwidth?

Re:Problem solved quickly.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42563467)

If everyone runs their WIFI AP's open.

That's exactly what I'm going to do so I can see the "video about the dangers of infringement." I wonder if it will be like that movie The Ring [wikipedia.org] ?

captcha: sixfold (I shit you not)

Re:Problem solved quickly.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42563495)

I heard a while back when I was living in Germany, I assume it was there that it was the case, that the customers are responsible for all traffic on their network. I even heard of the owner being sued because they left an open wireless router up and someone used it for child porn. I can see this quickly being the case with Verizon too. Here is a page telling you how to secure your wireless, you have 2 days to do so and than we assume everything is coming from a computer which you control.

Re:Problem solved quickly.... (4, Informative)

Wesley Felter (138342) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563623)

You're allowed to use the open wifi defense one time. (And you have to pay $35 to defend yourself, which pirates are too cheap to do.) After that it's assumed that you learned how to secure it.

Re:Problem solved quickly.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42563921)

"Allowed"?!? What ever happened to a preponderance of evidence? Oh yea, the Supreme Court took that away.

Re:Problem solved quickly.... (1)

lorenlal (164133) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563895)

Also worth noting... Not all of us have unlimited bandwidth to work with.

strikes? (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42563347)

Aren't there only 3 strikes in baseball?

Re:strikes? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42563647)

Seriously. Please mod the fuck out of the parent post.

Re:strikes? (2)

Austerity Empowers (669817) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563681)

And unlimited usually means well over 4 billion, but telco's have a different understanding of numbers than the rest of us.

Does it go both ways? (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42563349)

Can I place copyright infringements with Verizon to get people blocked? We all know that the MPAA and RIAA use their internet connections for infringement, so it should be no problem for us to throttle their access.

Somehow I bet that only a select anointed few will be allowed to make these evidence-free complaints against the rest of us.

Re:Does it go both ways? (1)

Em Adespoton (792954) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563815)

Can I place copyright infringements with Verizon to get people blocked? We all know that the MPAA and RIAA use their internet connections for infringement, so it should be no problem for us to throttle their access.

Somehow I bet that only a select anointed few will be allowed to make these evidence-free complaints against the rest of us.

This is for Verizon's home plans; I doubt the MPAA and RIAA use those plans, except for snooping on torrents (which may get them throttled unless Verizon has those IPs flagged as "investigatory")..

I live a few hundred feet from a coffee shop (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42563385)

So, basically, Verizon is saying if some kids go there and hack my wireless router, they'll shut me down forever?

Seriously?

Good thing I encrypted it ... but most people don't know how to do that.

Re:I live a few hundred feet from a coffee shop (2)

icebike (68054) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563521)

So, basically, Verizon is saying if some kids go there and hack my wireless router, they'll shut me down forever?

Seriously?

Good thing I encrypted it ... but most people don't know how to do that.

Most people DO know how to encrypt their wireless traffic.
Most routers come with that set ON out of the box.
Most routers are now forcing password changes and or have unique passwords (serial number embedded).

It takes more effort to run a modern router wide open, without encryption these days than to run it correctly out of the box.

Re:I live a few hundred feet from a coffee shop (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42563561)

Yeah, because Verizon would never setup their FIOS routers with an easy to crack password [dylanmtaylor.com] by default that many people may leave in place. Never.

Re:I live a few hundred feet from a coffee shop (1)

LordLimecat (1103839) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563661)

Thats slightly hillarious, and more than a litlte useful.

Re:I live a few hundred feet from a coffee shop (2)

ganjadude (952775) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563567)

That is new to me, granted i havent had to buy a router in quite some years. username blank and password admin by default, no protection on by default, but plug it in and it just works. so I would wager that 90% of the moms and dads out there have open wireless. I personally see millions of "linksys" points out there...

Re:I live a few hundred feet from a coffee shop (1)

PopeRatzo (965947) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563699)

Most people DO know how to encrypt their wireless traffic.

Most people don't know how to wipe their ass, much less encrypt their wireless traffic.

Seriously, let's talk a walk through any town in America and let's see how many of the people we see look like they know how to encrypt their wireless traffic.

Re:I live a few hundred feet from a coffee shop (4, Insightful)

man_of_mr_e (217855) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563539)

My experience is that it's damn hard to find an open Wi-Fi router these days. That tells me that in fact, most people DO know how to do it (or at least get someone else who knows how to)

Re:I live a few hundred feet from a coffee shop (1)

TubeSteak (669689) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563857)

My experience is that it's damn hard to find an open Wi-Fi router these days. That tells me that in fact, most people DO know how to do it (or at least get someone else who knows how to)

When encryption was an opt-in choice, few people enabled it.
Now that encryption is the default on routers, almost no one opts out.

Re:I live a few hundred feet from a coffee shop (2)

YrWrstNtmr (564987) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563595)

Good thing I encrypted it ... but most people don't know how to do that.

Verizon FiOS routers are installed, by the installer guy, to not be open.
However, they use the Verizon version of WEP. My installer, 18 months ago, was really shocked when I informed him that WEP was a completely broken protocol. Most of my neighbors on FiOS, however....

Re:I live a few hundred feet from a coffee shop (2)

Catbeller (118204) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563669)

Next step: encryption violates terms of service.

This is about power, not movies. To monitor the internet is to control everyone, eventually. We will have to be Good Children, for ever and all.

What's a strike? (5, Insightful)

jaymz666 (34050) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563389)

Is a strike an accusation of copyright infringement? Or does it need to be proven?

Re:What's a strike? (1, Informative)

Delarth799 (1839672) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563579)

We all know its going to be about your IP address being flagged and no questions asked.

Re:What's a strike? (3, Insightful)

LordLimecat (1103839) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563679)

I dont think we know that, which is why the question was asked.

I mean I know its slashdot and its super hip to make wild assumptions and go off on a rant based on them, but lets humor the guy.

Re:What's a strike? (5, Insightful)

Catbeller (118204) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563701)

No proof. No evidence. No names, just you gone. No penalties for lying - and who would you penalize? Some third party security company that won't name themselves?

What they've always wanted.

Getting off easy (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42563391)

They should be reporting you to the police at the first notice of copyright infringement.

Re:Getting off easy (1)

Xicor (2738029) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563475)

no, they really shouldnt... the MPAA and RIAA are being totally ridiculous... they are just stealing from ppl. all of their lawsuits are insane. you cant charge someone 100 million dollars because they download a few songs... imo, the lawsuit for these should be double the cost of buying the song legally.

Re:Getting off easy (5, Interesting)

icebike (68054) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563541)

I agree. Because this would require them to provide evidence and a sworn statement under penalty of perjury.
As it stands, any unsubstantiated claim by anybody or any automated process seems to convict you in Verizon's eyes, and even to contest the claim costs you money.

Question: Do those making such claims have to put up money up-front?

can someone please explain to me (3, Informative)

decora (1710862) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563393)

why you would use torrent freak when there is Amazon, Netflix, Youtube, Hulu, and dozens of other ways to get video online.

unless you are trying to find some hard to find video -- (like Aleksandr Ptushko's 1972 Russian fantasy film, Ruslan and Ludmila?.. oh wait, thats on fucking youtube for free) -- what is the point of "avoiding paying for" transformers 3 or harry potter? I mean can you not afford the massive 4 dollar price or whatever that they charge you to watch this stuff online? Is 5 bucks going to break you?

Re:can someone please explain to me (4, Informative)

dadelbunts (1727498) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563433)

Because i dont always have the bandwith to stream movies when i want, as other people use the internet as well. Because i like having media that i can enjoy when i dont have internet, when im not at home. Because 5 dollars for every movie or episode of a show id like to watch will break me.

Re:can someone please explain to me (5, Insightful)

LordLimecat (1103839) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563703)

Because 5 dollars for every movie or episode of a show id like to watch will break me.

In other words, based on some undisclosed justification, you are entitled to all-you-can-eat entertainment.

Care to share what that reason is? Are you also entitled to free internet, free Office software, free MS SQL CALs, free vSphere enterprise licenses?

Re:can someone please explain to me (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42563779)

Yes.

Re:can someone please explain to me (5, Funny)

LordLimecat (1103839) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563783)

You didnt share your reasoning, I was hoping to present it to our VMWare sales rep and ask if they could also hurry up with version 6, and perhaps deliver it with a free cake.

Re:can someone please explain to me (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42563855)

In other words, based on some undisclosed justification, you are entitled to all-you-can-eat entertainment.

Care to share what that reason is?

TV shows have already been shown on TV, FOR FREE.

Re:can someone please explain to me (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42563911)

Are you also entitled to free internet, free Office software, free MS SQL CALs, free vSphere enterprise licenses?

Yes [wired.com] , yes [libreoffice.org] , no [microsoft.com] , somewhat [vmware.com] .
(although "free" is not made explicit in the first link, "basic human right" seems to hint in that direction)

Re:can someone please explain to me (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42563435)

Dude, look at the people who buy android phones just because it's easier to pirate a bunch of $2 apps. It's sad but there really are people that cheap. Having a Samsung phone is like having a nametag that says "hello, i'm a cheap fucker" on it.

Re:can someone please explain to me (5, Insightful)

bobthesungeek76036 (2697689) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563479)

... Having a Samsung phone is like having a nametag that says "hello, i'm a cheap fucker" on it.

Or maybe it says "I want a phone with a bigger screen than 3.5". Maybe is says "I want a phone with features I want rather than what Steve Jobs thinks I want"...

Re:can someone please explain to me (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42563549)

GS3 owner here, never even thought about pirating an app. Troll harder next time.

Re:can someone please explain to me (2)

stanlyb (1839382) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563441)

I have a "royal card". It shows that i watched close to 100 movies per year. For this amount of money, i do expect a free pass to watch them online, offline, anytime, anyformat and anywhere. Don't you think so? Oh, and yes, there are only 10% worth watching, so i should be payed for watching the crap these guys are producing.

Re:can someone please explain to me (1)

foniksonik (573572) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563471)

Game of Thrones, Weeds, Dexter, etc

Any TV programming that requires $30 / month for access to maybe 2 titles per month.

No, they are not available on streaming services ala carte.

I've tried Netflix. I get maybe 2 titles I care about and the rest is crap or available on cable to DVR.

Time shifting when a DVR only has a few receivers.

Watching shows you missed but have paid for access. Prior seasons of something if only you had happened upon it the year before (reruns can be hit or miss)

Just a few uses for torrenting or as I call it Tor Renting.

I buy lots of movies on iTunes btw. AppleTV is great when it has the movie.

Re:can someone please explain to me (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42563605)

> Game of Thrones, Weeds, Dexter, etc

This! I live in downtown Bellevue, WA between Expedia's HQ and one of the Microsoft towers. Comcast is not available in my building, and the city doesn't allow any competition for cable on my block. David Kerr, the city IT manager, says they're working on options to provide more of the city with cable TV, but that was four years ago and nothing has happened since. My condo is on the north side so getting a satellite dish is not an option. Bit Torrent is my only option for watching Game of Thones or Dexter.

Re:can someone please explain to me (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42563737)

Or wait till they're out on DVD.

Re:can someone please explain to me (1)

FireFury03 (653718) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563489)

Maybe you just want to watch the film instead of battling with the DRM that all the legit formats have...

Re:can someone please explain to me (5, Insightful)

martin-boundary (547041) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563527)

why you would use torrent freak when there is Amazon, Netflix, Youtube, Hulu, and dozens of other ways to get video online.

Sorry, but ads and drm are showstoppers. I much prefer pirated content, as it is packaged nicely with attention to the details I care about: good file size and codec, no extraneous content, easily archivable, and no buffering delays.

Re:can someone please explain to me (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42563671)

Well then sorry, you deserve to have your Internet shut off.

God forbid we pay money for things which have value

Re:can someone please explain to me (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42563755)

Well then sorry, you deserve to have your Internet shut off.

God forbid we pay money for things which have value

If it has ads and/or drm, it doesn't have value. The value was added by the pirates, who went to the trouble of removing those things. I'd be willing to pay them.

Re:can someone please explain to me (4, Interesting)

Catbeller (118204) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563547)

Because the world should not be a police state run for the express purpose of making sure someone isn't reading a book or watching a movie or listening to a song without permission. We did not build this world for that. The "copyright" crimes hurt no one. The police state... that is the ultimate evil, the last evil, the evil that eats all the freedoms we could ever have, because without the right, the ability to read, or think, or speak without Secret Father, Yahweh of the Internet, taking down your name and activity in the Great Book for use in any sort of case anyone might want to build against you, at any time, for any reason... without privacy, you are a fool and a prisoner and a joke of a human being, a toy for the tyrants that are here now and their successors, who will not be looking for your records of watching movies, but for seditious or anti-corporate, anti-authoritarian thought of any sort. Without that, no government, no corrupt cop, no black-hearted corporation or combination of all three will ever face a threat that they won't have warning of. Programs will monitor everything Johnny reads, watches, says, or hell, someday even thinks, and they will at their earliest ability set flags for those who watch so they can nip rebellion in the blood. Ask Occupy. They were monitored before they even existed.

With total awareness comes the total police state. The last one.

Re:can someone please explain to me (1)

rockerito (2791051) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563851)

Well said. Somebody mod this guy up!

Re:can someone please explain to me (5, Interesting)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563573)

why you would use torrent freak when there is Amazon, Netflix, Youtube, Hulu, and dozens of other ways to get video online.

Torrent freak is a news website. I expect you meant bittorrent - or more generally piracy in any form.

I've got two problems with all those "legitimate" sources:

1) Privacy - I believe it is fundamentally unfair to require that a person's viewing habits be tracked in a profile in a database somewhere that he has no control over or even the right to see the contents of -- especially when combined with all of the other cyber-stalking that corporations do nowadays. Bittorrent at least only identifies you down to an IP address and other forms of piracy are even less trackable.

2) Copyright Business Model - I belive people do deserve to get creative works for free (both cost-free and freedom to tinker-free). That doesn't mean I think the creators need to work for free, I just think that a policy of digital scarcity neuters the potential of the internet to benefit humanity as a whole. We need to be working towards methods of compensation that do not rely on distribution fees, but as long as digital scarcity is a money-maker for the entrenched interests there is little incentive to explore alternatives. I don't think any individual pirate is going to make a difference in that regard, but in aggregate it can.

Re:can someone please explain to me (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42563593)

If I pay for it, I expect it to be DRM-free. If the pirates can figure out how to publish a quality product, I'm sure the real distributors can do so as well.

My home media distribution injects weather/sports/gcal alert tickers into video streams that get sent all over the house. I've put quite a bit of time and effort and money into building a nifty system. I'm perfectly willing to pay for my content, but if you demand I use HDCP and disable useful features that my family has enjoyed for years, then you can go fuck yourself.

Re:can someone please explain to me (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42563603)

why you would use torrent freak when there is Amazon, Netflix, Youtube, Hulu, and dozens of other ways to get video online.

1. because it does not work on linux
2. because you are not allowed to save the media
3. because some of them do not allow movies licensed under CC
4. because not everyone is entitled to a credit card

it is like saying you can only walk when green light is on. problem is that red is constantly put into your eyes. this is how fucked up this system is.

Re:can someone please explain to me (1)

LordLimecat (1103839) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563725)

because you are not allowed to save the media

I believe that is kind of the point, and kind of the agreement.

because some of them do not allow movies licensed under CC

If the MPAA came after you for CC media, I believe your case would be fairly simple to win.

because not everyone is entitled to a credit card

I think theres a LOT of things people arent de-facto entitled to. Doesnt seem to stop them from thinking they are.

Re:can someone please explain to me (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42563615)

How about TV from other countries?

Re:can someone please explain to me (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42563663)

Er, some of us pay Comcast TV, Amazon Prime, Neflix, HuluPlus, Movie theaters once a week and also use torrents (torrent freak is a news source FYI, their competitors would be NY Times, CNN etc). Youtube has the shittest quality of them all, I would rather gauge my eyes out that watch or listen to something on Youtube. Netflix streaming is good for a while, they never update their subscription though. So after a while I use it to only rewatch things with someone who hasnt seen it yet. Amazon is good for some TV series, very very limited selection. HuluPlus has Criterion, which good for some foreign films. What do I torrent? I just watched Between Two Worlds (1944). Try getting me a watchable copy elsewhere.

Re:can someone please explain to me (4, Insightful)

Nexzus (673421) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563695)

I want to watch my local NHL team, the Vancouver Canucks, online through the NHL's own streaming service, NHL GameCenter, as I don't have cable. I am perfectly willing and able to pay the approximately $20 per month to do this. I want to pay the NHL to consume their content.

However, the NHL has imposed geo-IP lockouts for local games, meaning I can't watch my local team play on the service I'm paying for. There's two ways around this - use a VPN/proxy (which is expressly forbidden in the GC ToC [nhl.com] ) or watch an illegal stream.

Re:can someone please explain to me (1)

Austerity Empowers (669817) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563723)

The best reason is that the vendor has chosen not to release the video you want in a streaming format, or is delaying it arbitrarily, etc.

Re:can someone please explain to me (4, Insightful)

Catbeller (118204) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563731)

Is your collective Puritan hatred of freeloaders really worth turning the entire internet into a police state?

Yup.

Re:can someone please explain to me (2)

PraiseBob (1923958) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563841)

There are indeed dozens of ways to get video online. So in order to find out which service your video of choice uses, you simply need to search each provider, setup an account with each one, know which film and tv distributors use which service, then make sure you are within the correct window of time (lots of tv shows implement a 30 day waiting period before allowing their content onto online services, movies can vary even more), make sure your device or OS is compatible with their system, determine if they are selling it at a price you are willing to pay, then figure out who and how you need to pay, and then you can watch your show.

Or you can go to one site that probably has what you are looking for.

Why does Verizon care??? (1)

bobthesungeek76036 (2697689) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563395)

I wonder what they are getting out of this deal???

Re:Why does Verizon care??? (1)

Xicor (2738029) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563515)

they are probably getting payed a huge amount by the RIAA and MPAA to do this.. and by huge i mean in the hundreds of millions to billions

Re:Why does Verizon care??? (1)

nospam007 (722110) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563517)

"I wonder what they are getting out of this deal???"

After the first strike, the customer strikes a new deal with another company.

Re:Why does Verizon care??? (1)

subanark (937286) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563619)

Where I live internet options are Time Warner, or various companies that resell Time Warner. Not everyone lives in a big city where they have choices on what ISP they get.

Re:Why does Verizon care??? (2)

icebike (68054) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563559)

Back pockets filled by media companies funding the entire operation I suspect.

I'm anti-piracy, but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42563401)

As a longtime Verizon customer I can see a problem here. Verizon is not known for its customer service - I think they have people in India reading scripts. So if you collect strike two or four, and want to dispute it or get an explanation of what it's about, you're probably out of luck. Strike four (or maybe strike two?) means it's time to find a new ISP because if you stay with Verizon you're going down.

Re:I'm anti-piracy, but... (1)

Bodero (136806) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563427)

I think they have people in India reading scripts.

You have no idea what you are talking about. Neither Verizon nor Verizon Wireless have any call centers outside America.

Re:I'm anti-piracy, but... (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42563607)

They had them imported from India?

So. Proxies and VPN's - will they get around this? (5, Insightful)

Catbeller (118204) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563419)

Deep packet inspection, volume of data, targets and returned IP addresses... will a securely tunneled and encrypted connection to a proxy service thwart this monitoring - or will they simply use such as indirect evidence of torrenting, since the standards of such evidence are set by the MPAA/RIAA?

As for commercial proxies - how probable is it that such services are more-or-less instantly compromised - as in a visit from FBI agents conscripted to work for movie companies ? Whom do you trust to manage connections?

How does one pay for such connections, if the act of using a credit card automatically locks down your identity? Does the use of pre-paid money cards such as Vanilla work (if you buy them from someone who doesn't care much about taking your real name down)? I understand that many say they do not, but other posters have mentioned that one merely has to provide Vanilla a zip code on the registration page to make them usable to pay online services.

I'd do all the above just to watch Netflix. I'm that much of a bastard. We managed to use the postal system and phones for over a hundred years without a spy system reading our every word and listening to every call, and I don't see why we need to start now. Especially now that ATT is about to shut off the old phone system and go completely IP, which means the old laws mean nothing.

And for the generation who never knew privacy, I preemptively say: yes, it matters. It is sad you may never care or even understand why it does. Your are happy goldfish, exhibits in a zoo. Think about who is outside your bowl, watching. You've spent your lives being told to be afraid of strange adults and white vans - yet you let actual, secret versions of those kinds of people follow your every move and listen to your lives? Think about it. The creeps you've been told to fear your entire lives aren't really real, for the most part. The creeps who are locking down human existence, building the last and only secret police the world will ever need - they are real and they are here and you need to fight them.

Re:So. Proxies and VPN's - will they get around th (2)

mark-t (151149) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563501)

And for the generation who never knew privacy...

Which generation would that be, exacty?

Re:So. Proxies and VPN's - will they get around th (5, Insightful)

Catbeller (118204) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563625)

The current one. And the next one.

Schools are basically jails, and train kids to accept prison conditions - look at it objectively. Tracking devices in the phones. Recorded calls, recorded messages, emails. Soon, tracking built into the computers in cars, unkillable. Ebooks recorded, times, dates. Anything that flows in packets, recorded. Your movements, recorded, even if you ditch a phone and a car, 'cause cameras will watch you - and listen, too. The cameras and trackers and mics are shrinking, and with zero societal will to stop it, will be everywhere.

Yes, this generation. It starts in the schools, the acceptance of strip searches, phone tracking, drug searches, notebooks with cameras that watch the student... come on, the new crop of adults have been in jail since they were born, figuratively, and have been trained to accept it.

The next generation? Just keep exponentially increasing the surveillance, and the acceptance. Police states are not, historically speaking, unwelcome. People trade freedom for safety all the time, always have, if they are scared properly. The few who become bullied and targeted by the people behind the cameras and trackers are not interesting to people. "They" are by definition criminals, anyway.

I ain't afraid of evil bastards half as much as I am afraid of a population that doesn't understand what freedom actually means, and what they give up to be "safe". They has been zero effective backpush against this era, and it will get worse.

Re:So. Proxies and VPN's - will they get around th (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42563511)

I like what you have to say. I'm a male.

Little weasels... (4, Interesting)

Anachragnome (1008495) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563443)

Little weasels...

I noticed that there is no mention of a complete disconnection--leaving the door open for continued billing even though you have an almost useless connection for two weeks. Me thinks Verizon is afraid they will start losing customers permanently if they disconnect them, even for a short time. There is no discussion of a 7th strike, or an 8th...what happens then? You get another two weeks of shit connection. Will they charge you less? Doubtful.

Make their fears a reality.

The solution is to drop them the moment they throttle you...and never come back...and NEVER COME BACK. Trust me--when they start seeing ANY loss of revenue, they will rethink this. Verizon is obligated, by law, to act in the best interest of their shareholders--how long do you think shareholders will put up with lost revenue?

Re:Little weasels... (1)

mark-t (151149) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563523)

It's a fairly safe bet that there won't be enough people doing what you describe to really make a significant difference.

Re:Little weasels... (3, Interesting)

Anachragnome (1008495) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563659)

"It's a fairly safe bet that there won't be enough people doing what you describe to really make a significant difference."

Nice to see some optimism.

A lot of people said that about SOPA and PIPA, as well. I am willing to bet your opinion on the matter might change if you were to try streaming Netflix over a 256k connection...and knowing that it isn't getting better for two weeks (also realizing that you are still paying full price to Netflix, but not able to access it for two weeks). And then realizing that they are essentially increasing your cost of internet access anywhere from 1000% to 20000% (depending on your previous connection speed). How long do you think you could sit through that before you'd had enough?
 

Re:Little weasels... (1)

YrWrstNtmr (564987) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563719)

The solution is to drop them the moment they throttle you...and never come back...and NEVER COME BACK

Locally, my options are Verizon FiOS, Verizon DSL, Cox Cable, or satellite. I have 25/25 FiOS, for multiple reasons. 1), it is fast and stable, 1) COX sucks major donkeyballs, and 1) the one time I needed repair from Verizon, they were quick and complete.

Re:Little weasels... (0)

YrWrstNtmr (564987) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563771)

Verizon is obligated, by law, to act in the best interest of their shareholders--how long do you think shareholders will put up with lost revenue?

[Citatoin needed]

Re:Little weasels... (4, Informative)

fahrbot-bot (874524) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563789)

I noticed that there is no mention of a complete disconnection--leaving the door open for continued billing even though you have an almost useless connection for two weeks. Me thinks Verizon is afraid they will start losing customers permanently if they disconnect them, even for a short time. There is no discussion of a 7th strike, or an 8th...what happens then? You get another two weeks of shit connection.

For fuck's sake, stop jerking you knee and take 2 minutes to read TFA dumb ass or, if you did, learn how to read.

It's a 2/3 *day* slowdown after strikes #5/6:

Alert 5 and 6:

“You can: Agree to an immediate temporary (2 or 3 day) reduction in the speed of your Internet access service to 256kbps (a little faster than typical dial-up speed); Agree to the same temporary (2 or 3 day) speed reduction but delay it for a period of 14 days;

And after strike #6:

If more infringements are found after the sixth alert “nothing” will happen. The user will receive no more alerts and can continue using his or her Internet connection at full speed.

However – and this is not mentioned by Verizon – the MPAA and RIAA may obtain the IP-addresses of such repeat infringers in order to take legal action against them. While the ISPs will not voluntarily share the name and address linked to the IP-address, they can obtain a subpoena to demand this information from the provider.

Better option (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42563465)

Wow. And to think we still have people that don't think Net Neutrality legislation is necessary. When carriers link up with trade industry groups to unilaterally dictate what you can and can't send over public networks, we have a problem. If you don't think this (and systems like it) will be be abused to stifle competition and censor speech.. Well, let's just say I have a bridge to sell you.

Libertarians/shills about post some angry screen about the govt picking winners:
Stop. Just stop. The adults are talking now.

Re:Better option (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42563569)

Even in a perfect world Net Neutrality legislation wouldn't prevent this. Net Neutrality says bits from X source cannot cost more or be throttled more than bits from Y source. It has nothing to do with your connection being throttled for doing something illegal six times.

What's their definition of "piracy"? (1)

Animats (122034) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563503)

Does most of YouTube qualify?

If you think this is bad (2)

hguorbray (967940) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563513)

wait until the ISPs that are also content owners or carriers get in on this (ie. comcast and AT&T)

there won't be a Chinese wall in the world big enough to keep the isp departments from ratting you out to their big content departments and to the MAFIAA

and they will probably use this to crack down on Linux .iso s and other homegrown or otherwise free legitimate content and then homogenous corporate media will have won....

-I'm just sayin'

Pay them to abuse you. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42563525)

Just more evidence that these regional monopolies could use a dose of heavy regulation.

Internet, like water or electricity, should be a utility, and not subject to arbitrary and reckless slowdowns or shutdowns to meet the concerns of an unrelated third party. We'd look at it as reckless and stupid if they could cut off the electricity to a house for watching pirated movies, right? (Yes, yes, Internet's not -quite- as important as electricity, except perhaps when it's necessary for work, banking, school, tax filing, etc.)

Hopefully people are looking for an alternative to their ISP on the very first "strike", and loudly complaining if there isn't one. Unless they're paying the bill there's no reason for copyright interests to have any say whatsover in how ISP service is delivered. Seriously, these ISPs need to remember who their customers are.

Proof (1)

WizADSL (839896) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563531)

Is there anything in there saying you will be told exactly what caused their system to flag your account? I mean in detal such as what a firewall log might show, not some general "infringing activity" at such and such a time crap.

So, Will This Apply to Corporations, Too? (1)

theodp (442580) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563551)

If, say, six Verizon employees cut-and-paste web images into corporate PowerPoints, will Verizon go by the book and shut itself down?

Re:So, Will This Apply to Corporations, Too? (1)

game kid (805301) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563651)

Close. The six strikes don't quite give them that power. Instead the management will hire their tech-gofer grandsons to

  1. replace the CPUs inside the offending PowerPoint laptops with Celerons for a few days,
  2. add a bunch of toolbars to their browsers-of-choice, and
  3. tell the MPAA the slides used Comic Sans.

That'll learn 'em.

Hmm (1)

BeTeK (2035870) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563601)

After few notices they will make sure that dl'ers are not found dl'ing any illegal stuff. For example by using vpn's.

Seems relevant, Kim Dotcom's tweet (2, Insightful)

Rougement (975188) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563627)

How to stop piracy: 1 Create great stuff 2 Make it easy to buy 3 Same day worldwide release 4 Fair price 5 Works on any device Either do that or go after your customers and threaten them with a lawsuit. See how much they like being your customers after that.

Re:Seems relevant, Kim Dotcom's tweet (1)

hjf (703092) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563825)

It sounds all nice but then you hear the "pirates" discussing on forums "I don't like to pay for stuff, i never will, and i will pirate for as long as i can".
Truth is: people like free stuff. There will ALWAYS be a justification to not to pay for something.

Mine? Netflix doesn't have the stuff I want.

Re:Seems relevant, Kim Dotcom's tweet (2)

hibiki_r (649814) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563859)

Those pirates will never go away, and wouldn't buy your stuff if it was cheap, so stopping them from pirating doesn't accomplish much. It's much better to use pricing and convenience to compete. I can buy a very large amount of songs without drm in a convenient fashion. I can listen to internet radio legally to discover new music. Why can't they do something similar for video?

Re:Seems relevant, Kim Dotcom's tweet (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42563945)

There will always be people too cheap to pay. What the content producing companies and their trade organizations don't seem to be able to grasp is that torrent sites are their competition and they are doing often offering a superior product. A few examples, I like iTunes, decent pricing and selection. Even so, they can't even sell me files that are of the same quality as on CD, let alone of better quality than this decades-old format. FLAC files on a torrent site at least provide uncompressed 44.1 kHz, 16 bit files. I'd happy pay HBO cold hard cash to watch a couple of their shows. They won't let me. I've no interest in a cable or satellite contract and they won't allow streaming without one. The Pirate Bay has their content available right now for download in a range of different formats and sizes. I'd also love to buy a few EPL soccer matches. The only legal way I can do that is via a cable or sat contract, plus a whole bunch of extra channel subscriptions. Last I looked this equalled $100+ per month. For a few games. Dozens of sites illegally stream the games live for free. You'll never win over the cheapskates but there are plenty of people like me who want to do the right thing. Make it easier for us.

Just Block IPs (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42563631)

Just run some blocklist software and keep yourself out of their radar.

easily fixed (2)

PopeRatzo (965947) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563657)

I have a "One Strike" plan. If an ISP threatens to interfere with my use of the Internet without illegal activity on my part having been proven under due process, then I will never, ever do business with them.

The list of corporations to whom I pay no mind continues to grow, apace.

Fuck the MP/RIAA (0)

linebackn (131821) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563667)

Just fuck them. The universe doesn't and shouldn't fucking revolve around them.

Don't do the crime ... (2)

stevez67 (2374822) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563673)

... if you can't do the time. Don't do it!

Re:Don't do the crime ... (1)

fredprado (2569351) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563741)

Crime? Since when non commercial piracy is a crime? Not even in US. Yet...

Hey U$A, (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42563845)

the world is rofl at you.

Common carrier (3, Interesting)

SuperMog2002 (702837) | about a year and a half ago | (#42563937)

This does mean they're giving up their common carrer status and are now legally liable for any criminal activities their network is used for, right? Right?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?