Given the reception to Australia’s ISPs’ proposal to trial a copyright infringement regime, you have to wonder if people understand what “proposal” actually means. The ISPs offered their proposed for discussion at the end of last week, but judging by the reception the proposal has received, everyone seems to think it’s a fait …
Right or wrong
The longer the Internet becomes the comms channel of a generation, the harder it will be wrest back control (copyright) from users.
Would it be reasonable for the ISP to apply the 3 strikes principal to the content lawyers i.e. If they falsely accuse someone 3 times then all future requests for information or action will be ignored.
It's all fun and games until some uses http
HTTP is the 8th layer of the iso stack.
Web servers have no problems sending byte ranges of files over http.
What happens when you have an easy-to-guess password to a "private" web server?
The infringement is in the uploading, not the downloading.
the problem is that when these arguments are thrown out into the open, people may call them out of them, and prove just how overblown they are!
Cant be having that, much better for a Fait Acompli, and the first the consumer knows about it is when they cant connect to the internet!
Discussion takes the time and effort to come up with reasoned argument and alternative stratergies.
It's much simpler to rubbish someone elses idea as being stupid and unfair.
You may not have noticed but Politicians and PR types gave up on reasoned discussion years ago, and most executives wouldn't know a reasoned argument if it slapped them in the face.
- Review 'Mommy got me an UltraVibe Pleasure 2000 for Xmas!' South Park: Stick of Truth
- The land of Milk and Sammy: Free music app touted by Samsung
- Privacy warriors lob sueball at Facebook buyout of WhatsApp
- The long war on 'DRAM price fixing' is over: Claim YOUR spoils now (It's worth a few beers)
- Dell thuds down low-cost lap workstation for
cheapfrugal creatives or engineers