• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

In the future ISPs may charge you for any illegally downloaded music

A

Arkitech

Diamond Member
interesting....

http://www.techspot.com/news/3...l-music-downloads.html

ISPs testing technology to intercept illegal music downloads

By Matthew DeCarlo, TechSpot.com
Published: August 21, 2009, 5:20 PM EST

It wasn't long ago that Kevin Bermeister was in trouble with the law, coming out of pocket with $150 million for his involvement with the infamous peer-to-peer file sharing program, Kazaa. Internet brigands used the software to pirate music and other media before its demise in 2006. Kazaa has since risen from its grave with a paid structure and Bermeister too has turned over a new leaf, recently introducing a technology to prevent the theft of music online.

Dubbed Copyrouter, the technology can detect when a user is trying to download a copyright-infringing version of a song, and replace it with a legitimate paid version. When Copyrouter detects that a user has prompted an illegal download, it jumps in and requests that they instead download a copyright-protected version. Fees associated with the legal downloads are tacked on to the user's next monthly ISP bill.

Copyrouter works at the local ISP level by distinguishing a file's unique bit sequence. The identifying features of illegal songs are stored in a database owned by Bermeister's company, named Global File Registry. As many as 300 illegal versions of copyrighted songs may be mapped to the one legal copy. When a user initiates an illegal download, they are automatically steered to the legitimate version.

Bermeister, ISPs, and the music industry are all enthused about the potential widespread implementation of Copyrouter. The technology was introduced to a trial market of 8,000 Australian customers about three months ago, and is expected to make its way to the US later this year.

The full-blown effectiveness of Copyrouter remains to be seen, but in the trial, around 30% of the diverted transactions resulted in users agreeing to pay. Bermeister believes the convenience factor will sell it on a broader scale. The technology's backers hope to take it a step beyond the individual intervention of each song. If all goes well, they hope to roll out a subscription model for music to be bundled with your ISP bill.

Although most only seem concerned with Copyrouter's capacity to prevent music theft, I have to question the project's ethics. Would you be okay with an ISP intervening in your online affairs?
Click to expand...
 
just for fun here's some of the comments from that article (actually kinda funny, some of em anyway)

User Comments (29)
Post a comment kg363
on August 21, 2009
6:38 PM This is so awful. If the government searches my house, I have nothing to hide, but that doesn't mean I would let them. Its a matter of principle to give people privacy. And many who download, wouldn't buy the song/game/movie if they couldn't DL it.
Reply | Quote

Guest
on August 21, 2009
6:58 PM To be honest, this seems like the first idea to me that may actually be succesfull. If there is anything that is important to consumers, it's time.
Yeah, I think this may actually work.
Reply | Quote

Guest
on August 21, 2009
7:04 PM I'm no expert, but wouldn't this become easy to circumvent?
As I believe most music is in the mp3 format.
Can one not just pack it say winrar or whatever...
Simplistic i know, but you get my point
Reply | Quote

M1r
on August 21, 2009
7:10 PM x2 the comment above. They would only target formats in which they are sure to contain music [e.g MP3/WMA/AAC]. Anyone can easily archive the music into a rar file then upload it. In my opinion, the idea has lots of holes...easy to overcome.
Reply | Quote

Matthew
on August 21, 2009
7:15 PM @Guest: I can't comment on how difficult it would be to work around the technology, but the idea here is that by making the package seem convenient, people won't want to work around it. The original article goes on to add that, that Bermeister doesn't believe it's so much the "free factor" that draws people into stealing music - but the fact that it's so easy.
Whether or not that's true is beyond me, but I'd wager that most people are using Limewire for their music because it doesn't impact their pocket - not because they don't want to input their credit card information into iTunes. In such a case, this model would either fall or be tweaked so it was even more intrusive.
Reply | Quote

nunjabusiness
on August 21, 2009
7:29 PM This idea is poised for spectacular failure.
First off, serious downloaders are downloading archives (try blocking that)
and second, when people start getting surprise $500 charges from their ISPs for songs they downloaded, the courts will be full very quickly.
Reply | Quote

Matthew
on August 21, 2009
7:35 PM This idea is poised for spectacular failure.
First off, serious downloaders are downloading archives (try blocking that)
and second, when people start getting surprise $500 charges from their ISPs for songs they downloaded, the courts will be full very quickly.

Maybe at first, but I believe the idea is to package it as a set subscription fee when they go wide spectrum with it. Accumulated fees probably wouldn't be an issue at that point.
Reply | Quote

Guest
on August 21, 2009
7:38 PM This looks like tons of lawsuits to me. My wife buys LPs. cassettes, and tapes and converts them to digital format. She painstakingly edits out the clicks, pops, hum, and other distractions she thinks she finds in the music (sigh). We now buy multiple copies of albums (and incidentally CDs) so she can share the music with my daughter in another state. We, literally, have 4 or 5 legal copies of the same songs.
I truly look forward to receiving a rerouted notice about "copyrighted" music. I think I will be able to walk the 20 miles to Federal court (without touching the ground) on the backs of the lawyers wanting in on the class action suit and violation of privacy law. With any luck at all, we could even send the interceptors to Federal prison for interstate violations. Pity we can only get the music industry surrogates.
js
Reply | Quote

Relic
on August 21, 2009
7:44 PM While I can see this working in Australia as they have officials censoring the internet to there standards (or trying). I am a bit skeptical to how this would work in the US. This seems to be a huge privacy concern for one, and as many have pointed out with the vague information they've given this seems rather easy to circumvent as well. While I understand Kevins point that easy access is a motivator in downloading that isn't the only reason.
Reply | Quote

tengeta
on August 21, 2009
9:00 PM I tell you what, next time that thug walks into the convenience store to rob it, why not just put a hand on his gun and offer him a more civil activity to do instead?
Then enjoy as you get shot in the face.
This won't literally backfire like that, but it will be damn close. This might make 30% of the people want to pay, but it likely made the other 70% so offended that they will stop at nothing to steal it after that.
Reply | Quote

Rage_3K_Moiz
on August 21, 2009
9:14 PM Meh. This will hardly stop anything.
The best hackers/crackers do not work for ISPs or the RIAA\MPAA. There is always a way around these things, and it will be found sooner rather than later.
Reply | Quote

TomSEA
on August 21, 2009
9:18 PM "This might make 30% of the people want to pay, but it likely made the other 70% so offended that they will stop at nothing to steal it after that."
And that's the inherent problem with online theft regardless of music, games or movies. The feeling of "entitlement" that these abusers show. All you have to do is look at the laundry-list of utterly lame explanations they offer, i.e."the song sucks anyway," " I would have never bought it," "the artist makes plenty of money without my one download," yadda, yadda, yadda. Just 100% "it's all about me" entitlement attitude.
Not sure if this packet sniffer software will fly here in the U.S. as it has in Australia, but I think electronic surveillance is just one type of mechanism to prevent theft. Somehow, the prevailing attitude of entitlement needs to be addressed also. Good luck coming up with that project....
Reply | Quote

Brewskie
on August 21, 2009
9:35 PM I upload some of my stuff to my own web site. For my own personal backup. If my ISP tried this on me I would have them in front of a judge ...they would not win.
Reply | Quote

darkshadoe
on August 22, 2009
4:09 AM No software is foolproof. I can't wait to start reading the about the lawsuits where someone tried downloading some free software program (like Open Office or the such) and they get charged by their ISP because this program mistakes it for an illegal music download.
ISPs will love this because it gives them another reason to add more hidden charges to your internet bill. You'll get hit with the price of the song, some kind of delivery charge and taxes. A $.99 song will end up being $3-4 dollars by the time the your ISP gets done with you.
I have the best music delivery system in the world. I get all the music I want and I'm not breaking any laws. It's called...a radio
Reply | Quote

Guest
on August 22, 2009
6:05 AM Does this mean I would be best downloading my tracks around a mates house? or say on a relatives internet connection? let them have the bill lol or does it now work like that?
Reply | Quote

darkshadoe
on August 22, 2009
7:26 AM I would imagine you would definately be able to play "screw your neighbor" with this technology. Good point.
Reply | Quote

JDoors
on August 22, 2009
8:41 AM Looks like it satisfies the needs of nearly one third of Kazaa's customers, the other two-thirds can do what they wish (continue to look for access to stolen property, for example -- though some are probably just not able to, or comfortable with, paying for online music). If you compare this 30% "click-through" rate with other paid content online, it's quite a success.
If by using the site you "agree" to have your downloads scanned, I don't see a legal problem with it. My downloads (and e-mail) are ALREADY scanned (for malware) and intercepted when there's a problem, then I'm given a choice as to what to do about it. If THAT were a pay-as-you-go option (free malware scan, but pay-per-resolution) I dont' think there'd be a problem with that either (business opportunity guys!).
Reply | Quote

Guest
on August 23, 2009
3:31 AM As a musician for 32 years, I say to those who download my music without paying for it: You belong in jail.
Reply | Quote

Guest
on August 23, 2009
4:29 AM So what happens when i download an 80s giga pack off of my favorite tracker? Theres around 5000 songs on there, At 4 dollars a pop thats 20,0000 dollars! I dont have that kind of money lying around! Send me to jail. Music companies get no money, jail system gets a new happy to learn new tricks inmate, 3 squares and no rent in a low security "facility". Tax payer gets the bill.
What a lot of nonsense!! If i had a job where i was continually robbed, id change my job. People will still make music and realease it on to the net because they love the music and not the money as most of todays greedy "Manufactured bands" do,
I hope they send out a 200 dollar bill to everyone as soon as this software is realeased, And watch the shizzle hit the fan! Fat cat muso bastards think they can control when we have a **** these days...
Reply | Quote

Guest
on August 23, 2009
4:50 AM I used to be a big prince fan, Until he took one of his own fans to court for sharing a video of him at a concert ( which she attended ) on his own fan site..
Now i will never buy anything prince related ever again.
Get over yourselves entertainment industry please. If your job sucks so bad and people treat you so badly get a diffrent one!
Reply | Quote

JudaZ
on August 23, 2009
7:09 AM ...*lol* yeah good luck with that ISP who dares to try . It does not take time to cirumvent .. I can do that right now .. Encrypt the traffic .. .the problem solved. If the ISP what to use massive computer power to decrypt highly incrypted traffic instead of delivering high speed and preformance to their custokmers..the failure will be theirs .
After all, you have to decrypt ALL traffic to be able to find out if I'm sending mp3's
.. then you have to dechipher if its an "illegal" music file or not.
But before you even do that, you will have to get the courts approval to decrypt information that you maybe can determain is torrent traffic because of the nature of the traffic..but you cant be sure the client is not just downloading drivers from Asus site, the latest Linux distro of choice .. or corpoprate secrets that you have no leagal right what so ever to even think about decrypting.
...good night and good luck .... you have no chance in hell of doing this....so give it up..just give it up.
Reply | Quote

JudaZ
on August 23, 2009
7:11 AM besides Bermeister and Kazaa couldnt even stop 1000's apon 1000's of vierus files posing as music in thoer system....what do they know about filtering traffic?
Reply | Quote

Guest
on August 23, 2009
10:03 AM Put out decent music and we'll be happy to pay for it. People download shared music because "free" is what it's worth.
Reply | Quote

Guest
on August 23, 2009
12:21 PM I can buy 100 blank cds for a tenner.
I can get free studio quality recording software.
I could knock a studio quality album together in an hour on my own.
I can distribute it, And advertise it for free.
Why the hell would i pay 12 pounds for an album when its completely obvious you are ripping me off...
Reply | Quote

strategic
on August 23, 2009
12:51 PM Is it me, or am I missing something???
If you guys actually read the article, it doesn't say anywhere that peoples houses will be raided or fines charged. If a certain site allows this to happen, they are shut down, and they are punished. Why is it that everyone wants to interpret their own version of the story?
Reply | Quote
Click to expand...
 
And the day after ISPs implement this, torrent connections start using encryption.
 
Originally posted by: yllus
And the day after ISPs implement this, torrent connections start using encryption.
Click to expand...

Everybody claims "oh, I'm just downloading such and such distribution of Linux".
 
Originally posted by: skace
Something, something, encryption....
Click to expand...

Exactly.

The best DRM out there would be to sell shit at a reasonable price. $1 for a song from an album that is 10+ years old is ridiculous. $16 for the whole CD that is 10+ years old is complete insanity.

This is essentially how the DVD market is (though slow to get to the $5 bin).
 
Kazzaa?...who the hell uses Kazaa?....Oh I know...inept computer users and kiddies....which is fine because they the more they focus on that POS the less they pay attention to the good stuff.
 
That sounds like a brilliant way to cut down on most of the illegal activity. Sure some can get around it but your precious P2P encryption can also be spoofed by the ISP.
 
Originally posted by: nakedfrog
Originally posted by: yllus
And the day after ISPs implement this, torrent connections start using encryption.
Click to expand...

...start?
Click to expand...

I don't download illegally, so I wouldn't know. Would you like to admit to anything in this public forum of ours? 😛
 
You know it's true, something really should be done about how files are shared on the internet. This doesn't look like it's going to work. Nor would I want this to work. I don't want something scanning my packets constantly which may perhaps slow my ping or intrude on my privacy.

And what of musicians on the internet who are composing and collaborating songs with other people? I'm sending mp3s back and forth between people all the time with material we are writing together. Will these transfers get blocked because they don't have proper authentication attached to them?

A half-ass ISP located packet-sniffing system is going to fail. Something big needs to be created. Something non-intrusive..

Maybe a 'key' system.. similar to what you see on video games.. You may have the game, but if you don't have the cd key it won't install. You don't have the music key it won't play.
Of course there are always ways around this.. server spoofing would be one such way. Mimicing the server that sends the comfirmation back for the key. I'm sure a complex algortythm could be set-up with several keys to make this impossible somehow though. Somebody really really smart would have to design this.

Well, not everybody has internet or is going to put their music on a device that has access to such internet. Somebody of genius level intelligence should be able to devise a way for this to work though without being restricting or intrusive.

 
Question. Why are they focusing on Music so much when by volume the majority of "pirated" stuff out there is something else like software,movies,tv, etc.. etc...
 
Originally posted by: Locut0s
Question. Why are they focusing on Music so much when by volume the majority of "pirated" stuff out there is something else like software,movies,tv, etc.. etc...
Click to expand...

Low hanging fruit.
 
I always knew pirates would be the reason that all of our packets were sniffed.


But if it wasnt them, it would have been child porn.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top