A series of what are claimed to be leaked training manuals show that AT&T will get a lot more aggressive with its customers over suspected internet piracy, beginning this November. The documents, allegedly obtained by TorrentFreak, say that AT&T will contact customers who have been identified as pirates by copyright owners. The …
"In an effort to assist content owners with combating on-line piracy, AT&T will be sending alert e-mails to customers who are identified as having been downloading copyrighted content without authorization from the copyright owner,"
Ok, I'm no advocate of piracy but AT&T works for the customers, not the content owners. If the content owners have a legitimate claim then this should be taken up with the courts. This can't be compared to the French version because, rightly or wrongly, that has been imposed by the government. It is the government's job it is to balance the rights of the content owners and the content consumers.
to be educated..........
I agree, who are they actually working for, and if it is not the customer?
Sounds to me like they will take the word of a third party that you are an offender without so much as an investigation. A bit like walking past the front door of a house that had been burgled and being arrested for on the assumption you must be guilty because you walked past.
How easy is it to fake an IP address?
>Ok, I'm no advocate of piracy but AT&T works for the customers, not the content owners.
Nope. AT&T is desperately trying to not just be just another low margin fat pipe provider for the customer. They need to lick Hollywood's balls to get access to their content so they can resell it to their customers with the %25 cut or whatever. The reason Comcast and others are buying media companies is they know where the margin is at.
How Much Were ATT Paid To Steal User's Time?
So Kid looks at dodgy site and parent sits through half an hour of mind numbing rubbish they have had tp pay to see. A bit like a typical modern film really.
re: ... but AT&T works for the customers
Relax - it's only CAS
Which was announced this year:
"Music, Movie, TV and Broadband Leaders Team to Curb Online Content Theft
Announce Common Framework for “Copyright Alerts”
NEW TOOLS TO EDUCATE CONSUMERS, PARENTS AND REDUCE ONLINE
AT&T Verizon TimeWarner and Comcast are signed up.
Good news: the party's over, kids. Listen to free on YouTube - don't steal.
Bad news: no disconnections.
Fast cheap access to justice
"Ok, I'm no advocate of piracy but AT&T works for the customers, not the content owners. If the content owners have a legitimate claim then this should be taken up with the courts."
You sound a lot like an advocate of piracy to me.
Jamming up the courts with thousands of idiots is a huge waste of taxpayer cash. The US can't afford it. I shouldn't have to go to court because you've used my Flickr photos either, I want justice cheaply.
Copyright infringement should be a very minor misdemeanor - keep doing it and you get a fixed fine. Keep things proportionate.
Re: Fast cheap access to justice@AC 18:45
Down voted for being pompous.
Re: Fast cheap access to justice
I realise it may get you a little bit less attention but the reply button should be used when you are replying to a topic.
Also, the courts are there to give people a chance to defend themselves. When you have companies demanding huge amounts of cash for copyright infringement you need a court to keep an eye on things. Or are you under the illusion that the companies in question just want justice?
These same companies that you are saying should be able to get people fined are the same companies that employ lawyers to send letters to try and bully people into paying fines with threats of expensive legal action that they have no intention to take because they know the proof they have may not be as concrete as they like.
Your thoughts have dangerous implications.
Re: Fast cheap access to justice
Like any good NZ partner would say: Baaaaaaaaaaaa
Honestly when are sheeple like you going to realise that piracy is majorly overblown by the media and the RIAA as something that will destroy the fabric of society, OMG Brad Pitt is only going to earn $30mil on the next movie, how will he feed his children..
Pleaseee, Cinema prices (in general maybe not at "your" local cinema) were increasing at a substantial rate well before this "huge" craze to pirate movies, add to that the price of cable/satellite and various other content delivery systems and you will see that any standard household is paying far too much for the rubbish Hollywood produces.
Weinstien and the rest of them are not going hungry any time soon, so whilst you may be a good and correct citizen you certainly won't become a rich one... (the old adage of: Show me a millionaire and I'll show an thief or some other such analogy)..
Re: Fast cheap access to justice
The actual statement says it all "suspected piracy."
When was the last time you were imprisoned for suspected murder, or suspected arson, or suspected rape, or suspected shoplifting? What, never? However you CAN be punished for suspected piracy. And as for the courts being jammed, that's only because the music industry has insisted on trying to make a civil offence a criminal offense, and if it IS a criminal offense it should follow the same rules and procedures as any other criminal offense, sorry you can't have a criminal offense of being suspected, it has to be proven in a court of law if the accused denies liability.
Re: Fast cheap access to justice
To the photographer:
What makes you think they will enforce YOUR copyright? I suspect this is all about 'Big Content's IP'
Every photograph taken in the USA has an instant copyright - either to the photographer or if its a work for hire to the entity who hired her / him.
Will notices go out to everyone who downloads an image? Downloads might be an infringement, or not depending on the terms offered by the copyright owner.
Im a photographer too. Ive never been asked by 'big content' about my copyright terms.
You see, all copyright owners are equal, its just that some are more equal than others.
The futilty of it all
When did Napster start? June of 1999? PirateBay, et al, still as busy as ever.
Just upgraded the InterNet feed to my SaiGon condominium to a new 35 Megabit fibre optic feed. Fifty dollars installation fee and thirty-seven dollars a month unlimited. They even tossed in IP TV, free. Had to buy a couple of humongous hard dives to handle the loads.
Just like having a pipeline to the Hollywood film vaults! Up yours, Weinstein!
I can't help but wonder.
What're the copyright mafiaa paying? Or is it more of a "hassle your clients for us on nothing but our fully automated allegations lest we sue you" type of racket?
You could perhaps even argue that this risks their "common carrier" status. They're meddling with the service under contract on behalf of some third party because of what is alleged to have gone over the line. Or maybe their "measures" open them up to breach of contract. Is some third party (NOT party to the contract for service) their allegation enough to trigger contract clauses about "thou shalt not be a naughty pirate"?
I'm sure there's people out there who wouldn't mind eliciting a trial just to find out. Especially if the contract turns out to be old enough to come without the necessary clauses allowing for mafiaa hassle.
So if my ISP redirects me to a page that insinuates that I have committed a crime can I sue them for libel?
At that moment they don't have any proof, only the content owners word.
Legal experts needed.
any IP address it suspects of harboring pirates...
...so the RIAA or MPAA or CCI will provide some sort of evidence to the ISP before all the Gestapo tactics start? Or do the ISP have to take the word of the RIAA or MPAA. I know how much I trust them.
so visiting piratebay will make me booted?
once the "re-education" steps don't work and I keep visiting those nasty terrorist-pirates?
So they're going to EMAIL you? Sure all of the phisers are getting all excited over this? Image it now:
"AT&T has detected that your account has been used to illegally download copyrighted material. We are charging a $50 administrative fee. If you do not submit payment immediately, your account will be terminated and your personal information will be supplied to the RIAA/MPAA.
Please click here to pay the $50 fee:
F**k this, are there any alternatives to the ISP's?
In America? Most home users in the US only have once choice for high-speed broadband - their local cable company. In relatively small number of cities, people might have a choice between a "traditional" cable company (Comcast, TWC, Charter, etc) that also offers telecommunications service, and a telecoms company (AT&T, Verizon) that installed fibre-optic runs, and now offers TV service. The telecoms companies have made almost no investment in DSL infrastructure, so DSL just doesn't compete against cable broadband.
When it comes to High-Speed Broadband, for the vast majority of Americans, "competition" is just a theory.
Send them an email?
If my ISP sent me an email I'd never receive it unless they know my email address cos I don't use their email. Don't even know if they have an email service though I presume they do.
What do you do if someone falsely accuses you here?
Barratry n. creating legal business by stirring up disputes and quarrels, generally for the benefit of the lawyer who sees fees in the matter. Barratry is illegal in all states and subject to criminal punishment and/or discipline by the state bar, but there must be a showing that the resulting lawsuit was totally groundless. There is a lot of border-line barratry in which attorneys, in the name of being tough or protecting the client, fail to seek avenues for settlement of disputes or will not tell the client he/she has no legitimate claim.
There are avenues of recourse in the event anyone is falsely accused.
Costs of losing customers
I do not pirate, so if I received a letter like this from my ISP I would know it was a mistake but I would still immediately switch to another ISP. I have no loyalty to my ISP and there are lots of others (this is in the UK -- I realise that in the US that is not the case).
My ISP should bear in mind that if they do that they will lose customers due to other people's errors. I hope they have factored that into the costs they are demanding from content owners for DEA implementation.
- Vid Hubble 'scope snaps 200,000-ton chunky crumble conundrum
- Bugger the jetpack, where's my 21st-century Psion?
- Windows 8.1 Update 1 spewed online a MONTH early – by Microsoft
- Google offers up its own Googlers in cloud channel chumship trawl
- Something for the Weekend, Sir? Why can’t I walk past Maplin without buying stuff I don’t need?