Exposing Computer Based Mind Control Of Private Corporate Governance.. The Theft Of Personal Identities And Public Data Of The World Has Ended.. Be Positive Life Is Just A Spiritual Journey (^^)// Love Mother Nature And Shine Bright Like A Super Star :) We Are Moving Towards A Dominated Female World Where Voluntary Non Profit Emotional Cooperation Is The New Way Of Living :D I Love You :X Unlock Your DNA With Love, Forgiveness And Spiritual Fire :D You Have The Right To Be A Sovereign Human :)
Tuesday, February 26, 2013
People Speak Out About The Six Strikes Policy - It's Not About Money - Is About Censorship And Right To Free Speech And Education - The Internet Is Made By Us Not By Corporations Monopoly Or Hollywood - The Collapse Of AT&T, Cablevision, Comcast, Time Warner Cable And Verizon Is Inevitable - We Are Looking For Other Internet Providers
It was widely reported that the Copyright Alert System was “turned on”
yesterday. The CAS, or more widely known as six strikes, detects the
illegal sharing of copyrighted materials over P2P networks and alerts
users via their ISP. There are a few glaringproblems with it,
but inaction on the part of government suggests lawmakers are fine with
it. One politician, however, has recently spoken up against it.
“The internet has become an essential part of living
in the 21st century, it uses public infrastructure and it is time we
treat it as a public utility. The electric company has no say over what
you power with their service, the ISPs have no right to decide what you
can and can not download”.
Bergmanson says that he doesn’t condone piracy, and added that he
finds it unethical. That being said, he says that piracy is a result of
bad laws.
“…it is not surprising that as the law evolves to
disrespect the public domain, that the public would grow to disrespect
copyrights.”
I think we can add fair use
to the number of things that laws continue to “disrespect” that lead
people to piracy. The Internet has changed the consumer/provider
dynamic, yet the content provider refuses to update their business model
to reflect this new reality.
Aside from the argument against more restrictive copyright laws, it’s
far more interesting to see Bergmanson address the idea of the Internet
being a public utility. Some of the Internet’s most outspoken
proponents have suggested such a reclassification
in order to ensure that more people get access to affordable Internet.
It’s not going to happen anytime soon, however, as major
telecommunications companies have powerful lobbying arms.
All that being said, Bergmanson and his ideas will probably not see
the light of day in New Jersey. Current governor Chris Christie is a
local favorite, and he has the support of some powerful people in the
Internet business if his recent fundraiser hosted by Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg is any indication.
[h/t: TechDirt]
People who have open
Wi-Fi signals will be held responsible for pirating through their IP
address, even if they didn't do it. Photograph: Jim Mires/Alamy
The newest attempt to thwart illegal filesharing in the United States
launched Monday and while the "six strikes and you're out" initiative
seems to offer light penalties, digital rights advocates are concerned
that it lacks transparency.
The Copyright Alert System (CAS) was devised by a coalition of internet service providers (ISPs),
content owners and the US government to curb illegal downloading by
alerting "casual infringers" when illegal filesharing is detected on
their IP address.
Under the system, content owners identify
illegally uploaded content on peer-to-peer networks. AT&T,
Cablevision, Comcast, Time Warner Cable or Verizon are alerted if the IP
address providing the content is their customer. Then, the ISP alerts
the customer associated with the account.
"This is just a great
big expensive system to snoop on and intimidate people who are probably
mostly good actors," said Corynne McSherry, a lawyer and intellectual property director at the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
Initially,
the alerts are intended to be educational. They tell the customer what
happened and how they can prevent it from happening again. If pirating
continues to happen through the IP address, users will receive the
message again, followed by messages that ask them to confirm they have
seen the alerts. The fifth and sixth alert are called mitigation alerts
and will temporarily slow users' internet speeds, depending on the ISP.
After
that, the alerts stop, even if the user continues pirating, but the
record of copyright infringement remains. How that could be used in
court is undetermined, since the system just launched.
"That kind
of backroom deal is not appropriate. It's certainly not how we should be
doing copyright policy," McSherry said. "And that's what this is, it's a
private copyright system and it doesn't have the protections and
balances that the public copyright system has."
Center for Copyright Information explains the Copyright Alert System process.
CAS has also been criticized because the person who audited the MarkMonitor software to ensure that it fairly identifies copyright violations is a former lobbyist
for the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), one of the
industry groups fronting money for system. The Center for Copyright
Information, which is implementing the system, said they would do a new
audit, but if they have, the results have not yet been published.
"If
you were in a court of law and you were faced with an accusation of
infringement I assure you, you would be able to examine the system that
identified you," said McSherry. "We don't have that here, it's all
secret."
People who have open Wi-Fi
signals or share their internet with others will be held responsible
for pirating through their IP address, even if they didn't do it. The
system allows for people to contest charges by requesting a review from
their ISP, which costs $35 and must be done within two weeks of
receiving a mitigation alert.
McSherry said that people engaged
in wholesale commercial infringement wouldn't be fazed by the system
because they are familiar with ways around the system. Average users can
also easily hide their IP address with a variety of free online
services. Users can also switch ISPs, though in most places, those five
providers are the only option for internet service.
Jill Lesser, executive director of the Center for Copyright Information said in an interview with On the Media that the program is meant to abet the "casual infringer".
"We
hope that by the time people get to alerts number five or six, they
will stop," Lesser said. "Once they've been mitigated, they've received
several alerts. We're just not gonna send them any more alerts because
they're not the kind of customer that we're going to reach with this
program."
The method of educating and alerting is a departure from
the industry groups including the RIAA and Motion Picture Association
of America to stop pirating earlier attempts to stop pirating. In the
early 2000s, content providers launched tens of thousands of lawsuits
against individual users. Most chose to accept settlements to avoid
cases, but one person who chose to fight saw $675,000 in damages for illegally downloading music in high school.
This
failed to have a significant effect on pirating, and the industry
stopped suing these type of casual users several years ago.
Address the Six Strikes plan being pursued by AT&T, Cablevision Systems, Comcast, Time Warner Cable and Verizon
Several internet providers have unveiled their "Six strike" plan.
The purpose is just as it seeks to fight copyright infringement and
protect IP. The problem however is that to due so would require the
providers to monitor data use and compile records of said use,
infringing on privacy. On top of that if they believe you to be
infringing they will begin throttling with no due process, unless you
pay 35$ for an appeal, making it hard for you to connect to and search
on the internet. The internet is increasingly becoming far more than a
luxury every day. It is the fuel of our economy; enabling commerce,
spurring innovation around the world, and spreading the ideals of the
future. This plan will halt the flow of information and lock the poor
out with no reprieve. The costs are not worth it.
'Six Strike' System, Slowing Or Suspending Internet For Illegal Downloads, Takes Effect Monday
The Huffington Post
|
By Gerry Smith
Posted: 02/25/2013 2:50 pm EST | Updated: 02/25/2013 7:41 pm EST
Six strikes and you're out. (Alamy)
A controversial strategy to combat Internet piracy took
effect Monday, meaning subscribers who illegally share movies or songs
could be punished by losing Web access or having their broadband speeds
slowed to a crawl.
The new "Copyright Alert System," or "six strikes" system, is the
result of a partnership between major Internet service providers and the
entertainment industry to deter theft of copyrighted material online.
The film and recording industries say online piracy costs them billions
of dollars in lost revenue each year. A trade group representing the
entertainment industry and Internet providers announced the move in a blog post on Monday.
Under the new system, Internet subscribers accused of online piracy
will receive a series of alerts. Critics have called the system "six
strikes" because the sixth copyright violation is expected to lead to
punishment from the Internet providers.
The details of each Internet provider's alert system are still unknown, but each one is expected to be slightly different. Under Verizon's proposed plan, which leaked online last month, alleged copyright violators could have their Internet speeds slowed to dial-up speeds for two to three days.
Under Time Warner Cable's plan, the company will temporarily suspend
Internet service to alleged copyright violators until they call a
customer service representative and agree to stop pirating copyrighted
material, Time Warner Cable spokesman Alex Dudley told The Huffington Post last month.
In a blog post Monday, Jill Lesser, executive director of the Center
for Copyright Information, wrote that the alerts "are meant to educate
rather than punish" and will direct them to legal alternatives and allow
them to seek an independent review if they believe they are innocent.
Under Verizon's proposed plan,
alleged copyright violators must pay $35 to have an arbitrator review
whether they are guilty of Internet piracy. If the arbitrator rules in
their favor, their money is refunded and their Internet speeds go
untouched.
Some industry observers have questioned whether the alert system will be effective. Some note
that Internet users who frequently engage in illegal file-sharing often
use private networks or proxy services to disguise the location of
their computers. Others worry
that small businesses that provide Wi-Fi access could be accused of
copyright violations if their customers engaged in illegal file-sharing
on their networks.
Gigi Sohn, president of Public Knowledge, a public interest group,
said the new copyright alert system "will be a significant test of
whether a voluntary copyright enforcement system can work while at the
same time protecting the rights of Internet users."
"I urge both the participating Internet service providers and the
content companies to be more open and transparent about how the CAS
works and, after the system has been in place for a time, to provide the
public data that shows how the system is working," Sohn said in a
statement.
Today the controversial “six-strikes” anti-piracy system kicks off
in the United States. Soon the first BitTorrent users will receive
so-called copyright alerts from their Internet provider and after
multiple warnings subscribers will be punished. But, what these
punishments entail remains a bit of a mystery. None of the participating
ISPs have officially announced how they will treat repeat infringers
and the CCI doesn’t have this information either.
Today the MPAA and RIAA, helped by five major Internet providers in the United States, will start to warn BitTorrent pirates.
The parties launched the Center for Copyright Information
(CCI) and agreed on a system through which copyright infringers are
warned that their behavior is unacceptable. After five or six warnings
ISPs may then take a variety of repressive measures.
The scheme was initially announced during the summer of 2011 and after a series of delays it goes live today.
“Over the course of the next several days our participating ISPs will
begin rolling out the system,” CCI Executive Director Jill Lesser just
announced.
“Practically speaking, this means our content partners will begin
sending notices of alleged P2P copyright infringement to ISPs, and the
ISPs will begin forwarding those notices in the form of Copyright Alerts
to consumers,” she adds.
Strangely enough, none o
f the Internet providers has officially
announced what mitigation measures they will take to punish repeated
infringers. TorrentFreak asked CCI to fill us in, but the organization
doesn’t have this information either.
“Unfortunately the ISPs have not yet provided us with the exact mitigation measures,” a CCI spokesperson told us.
From leaked information we previously learned that AT&T will block users’ access to some of the most frequently visited websites on the Internet, until they complete a copyright course. Verizon will slow down the connection speeds of repeated pirates, and Time Warner Cable will temporarily interrupt people’s ability to browse the Internet.
The two remaining providers, Cablevison and Comcast, are expected to
take similar measures. None of the ISPs will permanently disconnect
repeat infringers as part of the plan.
Some skeptics have pointed out that the copyright alert system wont
have much effect since there are many ways to beat the system.
BitTorrent users, for example, can protect their privacy and prevent
monitoring by using a VPN, proxy or seedbox.
Alternatively, some determined pirates may switch to other platforms
that are not monitored, including Usenet, cyberlockers, streaming sites
or offline swapping. Those who use private BitTorrent trackers may be
safe for now, but monitoring company MarkMonitor was advised to start eyeing these sites as well.
For CCI and their partners these workarounds are not a major problem.
They have said from the start that the program aims to educate the
public, in particular more casual file-sharers.
While the copyright alert system is much more reasonable than the
equivalents in France and New Zealand, there is the worrying possibility
that it will be used to gather evidence to start legal action against
individuals.
As we reported previously, Internet providers will have to inform copyright holders about which IP-addresses are repeatedly
flagged. The MPAA and RIAA can then use this information to ask the
court for a subpoena, so they can obtain the personal details of the
account holder.
This possibility was also confirmed by leaked documents from AT&T.
“After the fifth alert, the content owner may pursue legal action
against the customer, and may seek a court order requiring AT&T to
turn over personal information to assist the litigation,” AT&T
explained.
There’s no concrete indication that repeated infringers will be taken
to court, and if this happens it’s not part of the copyright alert
system.
More on this, and the other missing details on the “six strikes” system, will become clear during the coming months.
Today in the United States, the Copyright Alert System has reached
the first mark of its “implementation phase.” Thus, after months of
delay, the six strike system by which consumers will be directly
contacted, dinged, and slowed for pirating and sharing copyrighted
information is slowly coming online.
The Copyright Alert System (CAS) is known in most circles as ‘six
strikes,’ a reference to its main deterrent method: escalating response
to activities that violate copyright.
In short, here’s how it will work: content folks – think movie
studios, labels and the like – will “join public peer-2-peer (P2P)
networks” to see if their content is up for grabs, according to the
Center For Copyright Information. Given that it will be – nearly
everything is – the content denizens will ping ISPs about the issue, and
the ISP will then reach out to the offending subscriber.
In the words of the Center,
“[s]ubscribers are responsible for making sure their Internet account
is not used for copyright infringement.” Thus, if your Internet
connection is used by your sister’s husband’s dog to download Kanye when
you are on vacation and they are house sitting, too bad. It’s still on
you.
In a practical sense, we have reached a new age of copyright infringement and enforcement. This is now, for real:
Over the course of the next several days our
participating ISPs will begin rolling out the system. Practically
speaking, this means our content partners will begin sending notices of
alleged P2P copyright infringement to ISPs, and the ISPs will begin
forwarding those notices in the form of Copyright Alerts to consumers.
Six Degrees of Pain
Naturally, the amount of pain that can be brought to bear through the
six strikes system will determine how much you have to fear if you are a
fan of pirating your content. If you are a subscriber, as WebProNews notes, of ”AT&T, Cablevision, Comcast, Time Warner [or]Verizon,” this is worth listening to.
The warnings are tiered into three categories: education, acknowledgement, and mitigation.
In the educational phase, users will be informed that they have been
busted. This will be something of a shock, I would think. It’s no
lawsuit but to be told that you have been caught pirating someone else’s
content won’t be a welcome note. The infringing party will be given
links and information on how to snag their content legally in the
future. If this will drive iTunes sales or Spotify downloads remains to
be seen.
The second level of warning, the acknowledgement phase, will force
users to complete an action, watch a video, or something else to get
past the system. The goal here, it appears, is to disrupt the user in a
small way to make an impact.
Finally, the last phase, for strikes five and six, appears to differ by ISP, but via The Verge, here is what Verizon customers will be served with:
Fifth and Sixth Alerts:
Redirect your browser to a special web page where you will be given several options.
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;or
Ask for a review of the validity of your alerts by the American
Arbitration Association. There is a $35 review fee (that you will get
back if you win). For subscribers who meet certain need-based
eligibility criteria. the review fee will be waived by the AAA.
Key: Your ISP will not be able to cut off your Internet connection as
part of the CAS. So, the worst you can be is marked as a serial
offender and slowed down.
So What?
What matters here is that the CAS is a system that is hard to bemoan
overmuch: it doesn’t cut off your Internet connection, is slow to slow
you, and doesn’t share your personal information from your ISP to the
copyright holder in normal operation. It is far more intrusive than what
was in place before.
Naturally, the CAS won’t deter those most determined to get around
it. You can VPN, private share, or simply switch to streaming services
that serve illicit content instead of downloading files directly, as ComputerWorld notes.
Still, most folks don’t know about that sort of thing. Instead, they
will be about their merry way when the warnings start to pile up. This
will put immense pressure on them, especially once the later tiers of
warnings appear. Many will, I suspect, switch to the proffered free
offerings.
And in the age of Spotify, Pandora, Netflix, and Amazon Instant
Video, the reasons to pirate are on the decline. Certainly, there are
endless asinine content restrictions online, as television studios and
channels are slow to embrace the Internet as little more than a
step-child delivery system, but change has been afoot for long enough
now that the reasons to pirate are diminished.
The CAS exists now. It’s a new era. Top Image Credit: Kheel Center
The Copyright Alert System, an anti-piracy plan also known as "Six
Strikes" which goes into effect the week of Feb. 25, is getting mixed
responses from Internet activists who one year ago banded together to
ward off the much-hated Stop Online Piracy Act.
CAS is an effort by content owners (mostly in the entertainment
industry) to monitor public data on peer-to-peer networks for what they
consider illegal sharing of their music, movies or software. Content
owners can share the Internet Protocol addresses of alleged offenders to
the accused's ISPs, which then sets off a series of escalating actions
in an attempt to put the kibosh on illegal activity. These range from
emails with links to legal media consumption methods to severely
throttling connection speeds or terminating access. Copyright owners,
meanwhile, can open lawsuits against users who don't stop pirating
content after repeated warnings, a power they have always held.
Some groups already view CAS as technology advocates' next big showdown: Demand Progress is boldly accusing ISPs
of being "mega-corporations" which "serve as judge, jury and
executioner." Evan Greer, campaign manager at Internet advocacy group
Fight for the Future, argues that Six Strikes will "create a
non-transparent system where your ISP is literally spying on you —
watching everything you download and share."
The claim that ISPs will actually be empowered to "literally spy" on
people is questionable — it's the content owners that will monitor
peer-to-peer networks and give publicly available IP data to ISPs. The
Center for Copyright Protection (CCI), where CAS originated, insists
that safeguards to protect consumers' private data are in place. When
pressed on his argument that CAS allows ISPs to spy on users, Greer
explained she believes CAS violates people's reasonable expectation of
privacy.
"CCI is claiming that this information is public — technically,
anything you send over the Internet that is not encrypted is public to
someone — but that doesn’t make it fair game to systematically use
against individual Internet users," she said.
"Most people have no idea that their information is being tracked in this way."
"Most people have no idea that their information is being tracked in this way."
Demand Progress and Fight for the Future, groups which have worked
together on technology policy advocacy before, advise concerned users to
install a Virtual Private Network (VPN), software which masks Internet
users' online activity.
Meanwhile, many of those against CAS have taken to Twitter to express their views:
Other groups, however, are taking a "wait-and-see" approach before
sounding the alarms of advocacy. David Song, Director of the Center for
Democracy and Technology's Project on Copyright and Technology, is
cautiously optimistic the program could help cut down on copyright
infringement in a way "that doesn't impair online openness or cause
major problems for users."
"Our ultimate take is it's kind of a wait-and-see, this could work
out OK, it could play, in fact, a positive role, but how it plays out in
actual practice is just something that we're going to have to closely
scrutinize, because
there are certainly ways where if something were to go wrong it could
end up having an unfair, negative impact on users," said Song.
there are certainly ways where if
something were to go wrong it could end up having an unfair, negative
impact on users," said Song.
Song added that CDT doesn't "believe it would be appropriate to
suspend users' Internet accounts based on allegations that haven't been
tested in court," though he also doesn't believe ISPs will actually go
so far as to cut infringing consumers off, even though the CAS agreement
allows such a move.
A spokesperson for Time Warner Cable, one of the major ISPs implementing CAS, told Mashable
that it will not throttle data or terminate customers' access as a
penalty under CAS, though he did add the provider has long maintained
the right to do so under its terms of service.
Factors likely keeping potential opponents of CAS at bay are several
privacy and civil liberties safeguards that Song and others are hoping
will prevent undue violations of consumers' Internet experiences: First,
account holders accused of piracy can appeal those claims for a small
fee, with that fee waived if an appeal is granted or if the consumer
demonstrates financial hardship. Second, several well-known Internet
advocates sit on a CCI advisory board, which ostensibly exists to give
consumers a voice in CAS implementation.
However, it's not yet known how either of those provisions will
function in practice. Transparency at CCI, CAS and the involved ISPs has
been poor; CAS has been in the works since 2011 but details about the
program are only now being public. Among those who acknoledge the need
for greater openness in the process is Gigi Sohn, present of Internet
advocacy group Public Knowledge and member of CCI's advisory board.
" ... I urge both the participating Internet service providers and
the content companies to be more open and transparent about how the CAS
works and, after the system has been in place for a time, to provide the
public data that shows how the system is working," said Sohn in a statement Monday.
Are you concerned about Six Strikes? Share your thoughts in the comments. Photo via iStockphoto, pReTeNdEr
Today the MPAA and RIAA, helped by five major Internet providers in the United States, will start to warn BitTorrent pirates.
