• 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.

RIAA Concedes to the public

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Originally posted by: DrPizza
So, you think every case should be tried in a court of law instead? Isn't that what's already happening & people are complaining that it takes up too much of the court's time?
And, isn't that what's already happening and people are complaining that innocent people have to pay exorbitant costs to defend themselves in court?

I have no sympathy for anyone that breaks the law and has to go before a court to defend themselves. But RIAA to often uses the courts as a blunt instrument to randomly sue people, either from their own incompetence, bad discovery practices, or a planned campaign of legal terrorism. That is what I am aginst. Sue people that are infringing your IPs, but have the evidence to back up your claims, and do not require that I lose my rights to make it easier for you to do so.

Or, do you think the record companies should just say "screw it. We're not going to protect our property. Pirate all you want."

Personally, I think the recording companies should face the facts and accept that their business model is no longer viable and look for a new business to get into.


It's not as if the moment the ISP gets a letter from the RIAA that they're going to knock you offline. You have time to respond. Probably 999 times out of 1000, the person is going to actually be sharing songs online. And, that 1 time out of 1000, the person gets plenty of time to dispute it.

Well, this is just what we are afraid of. That RIAA will demand that they be taken at their word with no proof, and not questioned. RIAA has a history of using deals like this as a hammer to attack anyone that disagrees with them. RIAA has not so far proven they are a good steward of our faith.

So, why are you really opposed to this?

I'm opposed to this because it opens up a can of worms I would rather not see opened.
Should any one be able to write a letter to any ISP demanding that someone be denied access to the internet because of an unsubstantiated claim that a (civil) law is being broken? That seems to be your argument.

Would you be in favor of ISP's blocking people who are uploading and downloading child pornography? Yeah?

No, I would not. That is for the courts to decide, not some random tech guy at a company.
 
The ISP should be responsible for any questionable activity on their line.

Improperly citing sources for your schoolwork? Plagiarism - no more interweb

Trying to profit from a pricing mistake? Fraud! - no more interweb

Infringing on my patent? No more intarwebs

cyberbullying? no moar intrawebs

libel/slander? no moar ineeterawabs.

Where do I start reporting these?
 
Dr. Pizza, SMOGZINN pretty much summed up my thoughts. I don't trust the RIAA or the ISPs to be reasonable with their power. They have show little to no evidence of being reasonable in the past. Hopefully, my fears will not be realized but I doubt it.



Originally posted by: Turin39789
The ISP should be responsible for any questionable activity on their line.

Improperly citing sources for your schoolwork? Plagiarism - no more interweb

Trying to profit from a pricing mistake? Fraud! - no more interweb

Infringing on my patent? No more intarwebs

cyberbullying? no moar intrawebs

libel/slander? no moar ineeterawabs.

Where do I start reporting these?

Interesting point.


 
Originally posted by: Turin39789
The ISP should be responsible for any questionable activity on their line.

Improperly citing sources for your schoolwork? Plagiarism - no more interweb

Trying to profit from a pricing mistake? Fraud! - no more interweb

Infringing on my patent? No more intarwebs

cyberbullying? no moar intrawebs

libel/slander? no moar ineeterawabs.

Where do I start reporting these?

This was obviously aimed at me, and I now believe that you are harassing me, and demand you internet be removed.
You are now blacklisted and I'll sue any company that allows you access to the internet.
😛

EDIT: Oh, and it doesn't have to just be an ISP, I'll sue your job if they let you online as well! MWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!
 
Originally posted by: DrPizza
Originally posted by: Xavier434
Originally posted by: tenshodo13
I may be wrong, but what's bad about the company providing internet service, cut their service to you because they are informed that you are doing something illegal on their network?

Because they have not proven anything. All they have done is "inform" the ISP. That is too much power imo. How will you feel if you get a letter in the mail from your ISP accusing you of piracy when you have no idea how or why you got that letter? The RIAA is trying to monitor millions and millions of people. Mistakes will most certainly be made and we should be able to defend ourselves without losing our account access through our ISPs.

So, you think every case should be tried in a court of law instead? Isn't that what's already happening & people are complaining that it takes up too much of the court's time? And, isn't that what's already happening and people are complaining that innocent people have to pay exorbitant costs to defend themselves in court? Or, do you think the record companies should just say "screw it. We're not going to protect our property. Pirate all you want."

It's not as if the moment the ISP gets a letter from the RIAA that they're going to knock you offline. You have time to respond. Probably 999 times out of 1000, the person is going to actually be sharing songs online. And, that 1 time out of 1000, the person gets plenty of time to dispute it.

Oh, and in the case of grandma who doesn't even own a computer, well, I guess it solves that problem too. They can shut off her internet connection.

So, why are you really opposed to this? Would you be in favor of ISP's blocking people who are uploading and downloading child pornography? Yeah? Is it because you would support rules to stop child pornography, but don't support any rules to stop piracy?

Do i think the RIAA should sue everyone who is downloading? yes i do. BUT they should have actual proof. not cast blanket john doe lawsuits and force the school/isp to do the ivestigating for them. Also they need more then person with IP # as the defendent. they need ACTUAL proof.

I don't think anyone is against the criminal getting sued/charged. We are against the terriost tactics that they are using. We are against them suing a dead person, a old lady that has NEVER owned a computer etc. We are against them sueing someone and demanding $2500 or they will take it to court for $100's of thousands (+tens of thousands in legal fees) when they have NO proof that the person they are sueing has done anything.

I am also against the RIAA having the ability to contact my ISP And get my connection throttled or shutdown again without proof.

With actual proof i would have no trouble with the isp shutting down a persons internet connection.


seems to me you keep addign bullshit stuff to your argument to try to make people look bad. you can not compare child porn with downloading music or claim people are pirates or such because they are against the RIAA.

 
Originally posted by: SMOGZINN
Originally posted by: Turin39789
The ISP should be responsible for any questionable activity on their line.

Improperly citing sources for your schoolwork? Plagiarism - no more interweb

Trying to profit from a pricing mistake? Fraud! - no more interweb

Infringing on my patent? No more intarwebs

cyberbullying? no moar intrawebs

libel/slander? no moar ineeterawabs.

Where do I start reporting these?

This was obviously aimed at me, and I now believe that you are harassing me, and demand you internet be removed.
You are now blacklisted and I'll sue any company that allows you access to the internet.
😛

EDIT: Oh, and it doesn't have to just be an ISP, I'll sue your job if they let you online as well! MWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!

Sorry, I have a patent on the use of smiley faces on an internet forum. Bye Bye.
 
Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
Originally posted by: Xavier434
Originally posted by: SMOGZINN

Instead, the Recording Industry Association of America said it plans to try an approach that relies on the cooperation of Internet-service providers.
...
Depending on the agreement, the ISP will either forward the note to customers, or alert customers that they appear to be uploading music illegally, and ask them to stop. If the customers continue the file-sharing, they will get one or two more emails, perhaps accompanied by slower service from the provider. Finally, the ISP may cut off their access altogether.


In other words RIAA now controls who can and can not access the internet. Should an ISP fail to kick off anyone that RIAA accuses of fileshareing (with out actually needing proof) then RIAA will sue the ISP. I?m sure this will be followed by an ISP blacklist of people that they are not allowed to give access to. This will be much easier the suing every individual.

That is the kind of thing I am afraid of too. That is too much power and control.

add conflict of interest of isp companies also being media companies now and wanting to cheap out on bandwidth obligations and its a dirty mess


exactly. this gives them the ability to shut down people who use (legally) a lot of bandwith.

I don't trust the RIAA or ISP's. come to think of it i don't trust any business heh.
 
Another way to look at this situation is that both the RIAA and the ISPs that sign unreasonable contracts with them are just throwing more fuel into the fire. If that fire burns hot enough for long enough then I can almost 100% guarantee that we will start seeing more government intervention. Love it or hate it. Of course, if they would just be more reasonable and do things properly then no one would have to worry about that but nooooo. They gotta push everything to the absolute limit don't they? So stupid.
 
Originally posted by: looker001
I got many open wifi around me, guess isp will be shutting down people accounts that never pirated a single music file.

Just another reason proof should be demanded. I didn't even think about that one.
 
Originally posted by: waggy
Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
Originally posted by: Xavier434
Originally posted by: SMOGZINN

Instead, the Recording Industry Association of America said it plans to try an approach that relies on the cooperation of Internet-service providers.
...
Depending on the agreement, the ISP will either forward the note to customers, or alert customers that they appear to be uploading music illegally, and ask them to stop. If the customers continue the file-sharing, they will get one or two more emails, perhaps accompanied by slower service from the provider. Finally, the ISP may cut off their access altogether.


In other words RIAA now controls who can and can not access the internet. Should an ISP fail to kick off anyone that RIAA accuses of fileshareing (with out actually needing proof) then RIAA will sue the ISP. I?m sure this will be followed by an ISP blacklist of people that they are not allowed to give access to. This will be much easier the suing every individual.

That is the kind of thing I am afraid of too. That is too much power and control.

add conflict of interest of isp companies also being media companies now and wanting to cheap out on bandwidth obligations and its a dirty mess


exactly. this gives them the ability to shut down people who use (legally) a lot of bandwith.

I don't trust the RIAA or ISP's. come to think of it i don't trust any business heh.

now i guess we wait, see how much money was given to obama by hollywood.
 
Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
now i guess we wait, see how much money was given to obama by hollywood.

I remain hopeful. Link was giving me trouble but here is the article. I think this might have been in a thread some time ago. Not sure.


http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=13374

Obama is recruiting a transition team of former tech executives will help to push his vision of low-cost, fast, private internet

President-elect Barack Obama has an ambitious and comprehensive national agenda that seeks to put into effect many initiatives and changes. To assist him in implementing this vision, he is recruiting top leaders to his transition team, which will prepare his plans and flesh out his plans, and ready them for proposal to the new House and Senate.

Top on Obama's agenda are many technology-related efforts. President-elect Obama is no stranger to technology and has said that he wants more expansive protection of users rights to online privacy, a stance which surely runs counter to the RIAA, MPAA, and other groups' aggressive litigation efforts. Also on the list are plans to free up unused government spectrum for public use. Obama during his presidential campaign referred several times to the White Space, a section of the spectrum which Google and Microsoft have been lobbying for the government to free up.

Finally, Obama wants to fight bandwidth caps and mandate faster internet from internet service providers. He is concerned of what he sees as a trend among companies like AT&T and Time Warner to give the customer less for more.

Among those whom Obama has recruited for his team are Google.org's Sonal Shah and Julius Genchowski, a former IAC executive. Both individuals bring with them diverse and varied backgrounds to the table.

Sonal Shah is a part of Google's global development team. She also served as a Vice President at Goldman, Sachs and Co. in the environmental protection department. She is the founder of Indicorps, a U.S.-based non-profit organization offering one-year fellowships for Americans of Indian origin to work on specific development projects in India. She's an expert on a diverse range of tech topics and an expert in global trade and the internet.

She also has government experience, serving in the Department of Treasury in a variety of roles, working in Europe, Africa, and Asia.

Julius Genachowski, an executive with Barry Diller's IAC/InterActiveCorp, likewise has government experience. He worked with the Federal Communications Commission as chief counsel to former Democratic Chairman Reed Hundt. He has been advising Obama on tech issues as is chairing the President-elect's Tech & Innovation Plan.

The pair first met in Harvard Law School, and he has helped sway Obama into making tech a focus of the campaign. Mr. Genachowski is pushing for laws that would ban ISPs from slowing, blocking, or placing other controls on internet content over their networks, a plan tentatively approved by President-elect Obama. The proposal has drawn harsh criticism from ISPs who argue that place limits on what their customers receive is critical to their business.

Rick Whitt, Google's Washington telecom and media counsel, says Mr. Genachowski is the perfect advocate with the technical know-how and desire to represent the average American, and the perfect leader for Obama's team. Mr Whitt states, "Julius is a true believer in the power of technology to change lives and I think that bodes well for the Obama administration that someone like him is part of the transition team."

Both advisers eschew the traditional lobbyist background that many of the advisers from the past several administrations had hailed from. Supporters say that this is a sign that Obama-administration really is about change, including in the tech industry. With his party in firm control of the new House and Senate, barring a conservative filibuster, it looks like he may be able to pass through some impressive legislation which will protect citizens' rights on the internet.
 
Originally posted by: looker001
I got many open wifi around me, guess isp will be shutting down people accounts that never pirated a single music file.
That's a pretty douchebaggy thing to do. I'm not against using open routers just for browsing the net or stuff like that, but it's pretty messed up to use them for anything that is bandwidth intensive, or especially anything that could get the owner in trouble.

Good move by the RIAA, although I don't know if I really like the idea of ISPs throttling based on complaints. As others have expressed concern about, it'd really depend on how the complaints were handled and how transparent the process is. I do think this is much better than litigation, though.

I wonder what ISPs they're working with. Surely Comcast and AT&T. Maybe even Verizon? Might suck for the FiOS people who "fully utilize" their connection. 😛

edit: Also, does this mean they're involving litigation they're currently involved with? If so, a lot of downloaders may have lucked out.
 
Seems to me they're just going after the uploaders who are sharing the songs. I'm guessing it would be too hard to track the people who do the downloading unless they set up some type of sting operation.
 
so why exactly did the ISPs agree to this?

And I don't think it is to "do the right" thing or to get rid of high bandwidth users. They could do the same thing right now if they wanted to.

Money exchanged? Guess where does it stop, if I have enough money can I go to the ISPs and make a deal to be able to kick anyone off the internet that I want?

I don't see this sticking, I bet what happens is after the first round of kciking people out, a bunch of lawsuits are filed against the ISP by the people. Then we have courts deciding whether this is legal. My guess is no.
 
Originally posted by: MikeyLSU
so why exactly did the ISPs agree to this?

And I don't think it is to "do the right" thing or to get rid of high bandwidth users. They could do the same thing right now if they wanted to.

Money exchanged? Guess where does it stop, if I have enough money can I go to the ISPs and make a deal to be able to kick anyone off the internet that I want?

I don't see this sticking, I bet what happens is after the first round of kciking people out, a bunch of lawsuits are filed against the ISP by the people. Then we have courts deciding whether this is legal. My guess is no.

Less complying with warrants, more kicking off bandwith users
 
Originally posted by: Xavier434
Originally posted by: SMOGZINN

Instead, the Recording Industry Association of America said it plans to try an approach that relies on the cooperation of Internet-service providers.
...
Depending on the agreement, the ISP will either forward the note to customers, or alert customers that they appear to be uploading music illegally, and ask them to stop. If the customers continue the file-sharing, they will get one or two more emails, perhaps accompanied by slower service from the provider. Finally, the ISP may cut off their access altogether.


In other words RIAA now controls who can and can not access the internet. Should an ISP fail to kick off anyone that RIAA accuses of fileshareing (with out actually needing proof) then RIAA will sue the ISP. I?m sure this will be followed by an ISP blacklist of people that they are not allowed to give access to. This will be much easier the suing every individual.

That is the kind of thing I am afraid of too. That is too much power and control.

If after the third letter you dont get the hint. I dont have a problem with an ISP yanking your access. Why would you? Sharing songs is against the law is it not?
 
Originally posted by: looker001
I got many open wifi around me, guess isp will be shutting down people accounts that never pirated a single music file.

If those people are dumb enough to allow people to use their network in an illegal fashion bye bye. They wont be missed.
 
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: Xavier434
Originally posted by: SMOGZINN

Instead, the Recording Industry Association of America said it plans to try an approach that relies on the cooperation of Internet-service providers.
...
Depending on the agreement, the ISP will either forward the note to customers, or alert customers that they appear to be uploading music illegally, and ask them to stop. If the customers continue the file-sharing, they will get one or two more emails, perhaps accompanied by slower service from the provider. Finally, the ISP may cut off their access altogether.


In other words RIAA now controls who can and can not access the internet. Should an ISP fail to kick off anyone that RIAA accuses of fileshareing (with out actually needing proof) then RIAA will sue the ISP. I?m sure this will be followed by an ISP blacklist of people that they are not allowed to give access to. This will be much easier the suing every individual.

That is the kind of thing I am afraid of too. That is too much power and control.

If after the third letter you dont get the hint. I dont have a problem with an ISP yanking your access. Why would you? Sharing songs is against the law is it not?


and if you are not sharing song and the RIAA has sccrewed up?
 
Originally posted by: Xavier434
Another way to look at this situation is that both the RIAA and the ISPs that sign unreasonable contracts with them are just throwing more fuel into the fire. If that fire burns hot enough for long enough then I can almost 100% guarantee that we will start seeing more government intervention. Love it or hate it. Of course, if they would just be more reasonable and do things properly then no one would have to worry about that but nooooo. They gotta push everything to the absolute limit don't they? So stupid.

How would you "properly" squash people stealing your Intellectual Property?
I find this a much better method than draggin people into court and wasting money for everybody involved.
 
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: Xavier434
That is the kind of thing I am afraid of too. That is too much power and control.

If after the third letter you dont get the hint. I dont have a problem with an ISP yanking your access. Why would you? Sharing songs is against the law is it not?

Read the entire thread. No one is trying to defend those who are participating in illegal activities. Many of us are just upset that people will be punished based on claims without adequate proof. We are also nervous about the throttling issues due to conflicts of interest as mentioned by OrooOroo in a previous post.



Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: looker001
I got many open wifi around me, guess isp will be shutting down people accounts that never pirated a single music file.

If those people are dumb enough to allow people to use their network in an illegal fashion bye bye. They wont be missed.

That's bullshit. That is like saying people deserve to get robbed if they don't do everything necessary to prevent a thief from breaking into your house.
 
Originally posted by: waggy
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: Xavier434
Originally posted by: SMOGZINN

Instead, the Recording Industry Association of America said it plans to try an approach that relies on the cooperation of Internet-service providers.
...
Depending on the agreement, the ISP will either forward the note to customers, or alert customers that they appear to be uploading music illegally, and ask them to stop. If the customers continue the file-sharing, they will get one or two more emails, perhaps accompanied by slower service from the provider. Finally, the ISP may cut off their access altogether.


In other words RIAA now controls who can and can not access the internet. Should an ISP fail to kick off anyone that RIAA accuses of fileshareing (with out actually needing proof) then RIAA will sue the ISP. I?m sure this will be followed by an ISP blacklist of people that they are not allowed to give access to. This will be much easier the suing every individual.

That is the kind of thing I am afraid of too. That is too much power and control.

If after the third letter you dont get the hint. I dont have a problem with an ISP yanking your access. Why would you? Sharing songs is against the law is it not?


and if you are not sharing song and the RIAA has sccrewed up?

You dont think the ISP can monitor the traffic over their network? They can look and see what you are doing.
 
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: Xavier434
Another way to look at this situation is that both the RIAA and the ISPs that sign unreasonable contracts with them are just throwing more fuel into the fire. If that fire burns hot enough for long enough then I can almost 100% guarantee that we will start seeing more government intervention. Love it or hate it. Of course, if they would just be more reasonable and do things properly then no one would have to worry about that but nooooo. They gotta push everything to the absolute limit don't they? So stupid.

How would you "properly" squash people stealing your Intellectual Property?
I find this a much better method than draggin people into court and wasting money for everybody involved.

You failed to cite the intellectual property in your sig.
 
Originally posted by: tenshodo13
Originally posted by: Xavier434
Originally posted by: SMOGZINN

Instead, the Recording Industry Association of America said it plans to try an approach that relies on the cooperation of Internet-service providers.
...
Depending on the agreement, the ISP will either forward the note to customers, or alert customers that they appear to be uploading music illegally, and ask them to stop. If the customers continue the file-sharing, they will get one or two more emails, perhaps accompanied by slower service from the provider. Finally, the ISP may cut off their access altogether.


In other words RIAA now controls who can and can not access the internet. Should an ISP fail to kick off anyone that RIAA accuses of fileshareing (with out actually needing proof) then RIAA will sue the ISP. I?m sure this will be followed by an ISP blacklist of people that they are not allowed to give access to. This will be much easier the suing every individual.

That is the kind of thing I am afraid of too. That is too much power and control.

I may be wrong, but what's bad about the company providing internet service, cut their service to you because they are informed that you are doing something illegal on their network?

Guilty until proven innocent.

Same reason why it sucks that you have to prove to Microsoft that the software you are selling on ebay is valid and legal before your auction will be re-instated.

They should have to prove that you stole before they can do anything about it.
 
Read the entire thread. No one is trying to defend those who are participating in illegal activities. Many of us are just upset that people will be punished based on claims without adequate proof. We are also nervous about the throttling issues due to conflicts of interest as mentioned by OrooOroo in a previous post.

I have and where do you get the idea people will be punished without adequate proof?
They will packet shape your traffic and kill your bit torrent or other p2p service. Quite frankly I would be happy if they did this 100% of the time. p2p services eat upwards of 70-80% of the network resources while only representing about 1-2% of the users.

That's bullshit. That is like saying people deserve to get robbed if they don't do everything necessary to prevent a thief from breaking into your house.

If you leave your doors wide open at night and get robbed quite frankly I think you do.

 
Back
Top