RIAA To Stop Suing File Sharers
The Wall Street Journal and Ars Technica are reporting that the RIAA has announced a fairly dramatic change in its strategy to fight piracy.
Beginning immediately, it will no longer sue individual file sharers or do dumb things like harass universities.
Instead, the RIAA will report suspected infringers to ISPs, who will then investigate their customers and issue warnings or implement restrictions as needed. The benefit to ISPs who play along (participation is voluntary) is they'll be able to better control congestion by applying this policy—something they've been trying to do for a while now as their customers keep using more and more bandwidth.
Ars Technica notes:
Suddenly, ISPs gain a tremendous new tool. One study in the UK showed that most people sharing music would stop when made aware that their activity was being tracked and that they were not, in fact, anonymous. Should that hold true in the US, ISPs would presumably see massive decreases in P2P traffic. The customer notifications can be blasted out by e-mail, making the whole process quick and easy for ISPs. As is usual for these sorts of schemes, questions still remain about what sorts of judicial processes will be in place to contest notifications and penalties, and what happens to a household Internet connection when Dad finds his access canceled even though he's never shared a file in his life?
"No more lawsuits: ISPs to work with RIAA, cut off P2P users" [Ars Technica]
(Photo: Getty)
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Nam malesuada commodo erat et molestie. Duis pellentesque aliquam bibendum. Suspendisse venenatis lobortis eleifend. Mauris id est sed lectus convallis aliquam.
Post a comment
Comments:
I thought the current strategy of the ISP is to just indiscriminately charge the user a fee if he exceeds some secret data transfer allowance. Why would the ISP want the user to stop using p2p software?
A sound idea, expect the ISPs to take on extra work for the RIAA in order to boot it's customers. I'm sure it's no fun having a higher bandwidth user, but if you start to get a net nazi reputation as an ISP, you'll have no customers.
@rpm773: Ive never heard of that one...
I know years ago, when I had mindspring dialup, they gave me the business for downloading several Linux distros over dialup.... I thought unlimited meant unlimited!
But, as ISPs go, the less bandwidth you use, the better it is for them. This is the whole problem behind ISPs using traffic shaping to hinder torrents and such.
@Roclawzi:
I actually think it is an interesting Idea, the RIAA has much fewer entities to hassle and a market will likely develop for an ISP that is very 'laissez faire' with its network traffic (for a premium of course) and just pays off the RIAA.
Not sure if this strategy will work, but its a decent stop-gap until the industry can get itself into the 21st century.
Great so now they want to try to pit ISP's against their customers. Maybe it is time to get that T1 line after all.
This is all pretty presumptuous. I don't doubt that P2P programs are eating a lot of bandwidth, but with tons of legal streaming video and audio available for free or on the cheap, bandwidth usage iikely going to see a negligible decrease at best should they go through with this. Personally, I use tons of bandwidth every month streaming video over Netflix and Hulu, etc. I also use WMP, VLC Media Player, and Winamp to stream radio stations over the internet. I have Comcast, and they recently capped my bandwidth, so I use software to monitor my usage. I routinely use approximately 200GB a month doing all of this on top of my regular surfing. My family also uses the internet, and none of us use P2P programs, and still we eat up about 200GB a month. Now I may be the exception rather than the rule, but I use a shit-ton of bandwidth even without ever firing up a P2P program, so I dunno. Maybe I'm being a bit myopic here, but I have to wonder whether or not it really is going to make all that big a difference....
I guess the best thing you can hope for is that your ISP won't participate. Then you'll be home free since the RIAA isn't suing people anymore.
@cynical_bastard: Yeah, you're probably right. While ISPs are thinking about zinging customers for going over some level of usage, it's probably in order to deter such usage rather than as a means of increasing revenue.
@SudhamayiKabong: That was convoluted. What I'm saying is that ISPs may find that it's not neccessarily P2P users that are eating bandwidth, and that complying with the RIAA may not make as big a difference as they'd hope.
@Roclawzi: Sadly I wish that was the case for everyone. Where I live I only have 2 choices for ISPs. One is AT&T, the other is Comcast. They both suck, just one less than the other.
@rpm773: It's to deter usage. See, ISP's sold a service for many years that they couldn't really provide, calling their internet plans "Unlimited". When customers suddenly started using their serice unlimitedly, it caused problems. The companies spent their money on marketing instead of upgrading their infastructure, and now it's starting to show.
Notice hw they don't advertize "Unlimited" internet anymore?
I pay for 5mbit but god forbid I actually use it to even 10% of it's potential. Just be a good little customer and send in your bills but don't exspect to actually use what you're paying for.
I have Comcast and I don't think limiting us anymore is going to be good for their business, ESPECIALLY when everyone already hates you in the first place!
My parents have been looking for any excuse to go to DSL and I think I'll persuade them if Comcast tries to pull this crap on us. They'll listen when their wallets start hurting, just like any business out there :/
@SudhamayiKabong: I understood that completely. Music is not the "bandwidth hog" that they say it is. Movies streaming or not, and downloadable content (i.e. games) are. ISP's need to focus on expanding and increasing bandwidth. Not stifling the advancement of the net.
For instance Left4Dead requires a 5gb download if you buy it off Steam (add another 4 if you want to try the demo first), if I were using say AT&T that's my entire months 'quota' in a matter of hours. Fortunately my ISP isn't trying to force any limits on my use, in fact they upped my speed from 6mb to 10.
@RichasB: I agree, though the limit we were given on Comcast is decent, the size of data keeps growing every year and that number will decrease easier as time passes, so I hope they are smart enough to continue increasing the limit every year.
We've been looking at DSL as well since FIOS isn't in our area yet. I won't make the switch until I feel I have no other option. For now, I stick with Comcrap.
@thaJack: They made no such statement, they merely stated that they would stop actively going after individuals. This isn't a legally binding contract, merely a placating statement because some suit finally realized they need some good press for once.
In fact the 1000's of cases they have currently going are still in effect. Give them time to wrap those up and they'll start again. Add to that if they partner with ISP's it will be even easier for them to target individuals.
I think you have missed something. In another article I read they are not giving up suing sharers. They are just doing this as a first time action. If they continues to share they will still sue.
Nice going, RIAA. Get the ISPs to shoulder the increased administrative costs and the hassle of harassing your customers for you, plus they get to soak up the bad PR as well. Brilliant move. With all the brain power that went into coming up with this solution, I'm amazed you couldn't find a business model that would actually work. Ah, well, maybe next year.
I'll give them a couple years until I know they're serious, then I may be able to start buying RIAA music again.
*sigh*
From my experiences this seems like standard practice for other organizations. When i was on time warner, i got a letter for distributing movies via usenet from time warner on behalf of the mpaa.
When i was at college, i got a letter for distributing anti-virus software via kazaa from the school on behalf of symantec.
It doesnt make it right, but the ISPs acted as a buffer. So time warner only gave me a warning and my school only made me write a 1000 word essay. I found these both a lot better than being sued.
@rpm773: FWIW, I'm paying a lot to have top-tier internet speeds at home and that's specificly so my [completely legitimate] p2p activities don't gum up other things like Tivo synchronization, online gaming, etc.
If they're going to go all narc on the p2p stuff then all of a sudden I don't need such high bandwidth. Hell, I'd probably be able to go back to dialup when the party being over.
@Ayanami: Our local cable company trotted out its cable Internet in 1999 by trumpeting how you could download music on the tubes - gee, I wonder how you could do it in the days before iTunes and Amazon....could it be *Napster*?
Awesome.
I dont exactly see this as a good thing. If the RIAA starts issuing lawsuits against ISP's you can bet ISP's will start to enact strict content filtering which would be another step away from net neutrality.
I dont know about you but I dont want some ISP Bot blocking something because it thinks it may be copyrighted, nor do i want my account killed for the same reason.
How about we abolish the RIAA and move on instead?
@Graham Kilmon: Yea and in both cases if you ever did it again you were all done and would have still been sued.
@RichasB: If Comcast does this you can bet your ass whatever DSL ISP you go to will do the same...it will just take longer since your downloads will have 1/3 the speed.
@parad0x360: yeah, but it was a buffer, so i didnt get an automatic john doe suit from either case the first time
so, if the isps treat this the same way, then theres a warning before the $2000 settlement out of court
Where I work (at a college) we often get a notice of infringement that is usually just a request to make it stop. We then deal harshly with the perp so they learn their lesson and don't do it again. We also use software that blocks most p2p clients. I think it's to the RIAA, MPAA, and BSA's benefit to work with people like us to put an end to this sort of thing, instead of against us.
/er, speaking for myself and not my employer, of course.
"Non-government entity announces they'll start asking other non-government entities to enforce copyright for them."
@Applekid: just use an ssh client. that way they can't tell what your doing on the intertubes. Can't stand the idea of other companies looking at what i do. Any other suggestions out there?
Wasn't it recently made a felony to download copyrighted material without the express consent of the owner (in the U.S.)?
I get the feeling the lawsuits and criminal charges will still be coming. It just won't be only from the RIAA.
I have no idea how much we download each month. Streaming Netflix and radio uses a lot I know.
What good program(s) are there that reliably show a user how much bandwidth they are using?
@Coyote: Why does the RIAA need good press? It is an group of record companies. People do not buy music based on the company the music is released by, it is purely the artist. The RIAA, can SAY whatever they want, but there is nothing to stop them from suing for breaking the law
nice of the government agencies to keep stepping in and being so nice to these failing businesses. poor bastards got ground under the wheel of capitalism and progress...
time for some socialism, eh RIAA?
@weave: That's exactly what's going to happen--attempts to block all file transfers. Not just on a college network but on the internet. Porn or FOSS distributed p2p is none of the RIAA's business.
@oregongal: If you have a compatible router you can install DD-WRT (Google it?) firmware and track your bandwidth usage day to day and over time.
It also has a lot of other cool features, but it isn't particularly easy to install since you have to flash your router's firmware.
Hooray for the minor pirate
who shall squeak by
on the fact that
there are bigger fish to fry.
oh snap, is it April 1 already?
@Demonbird: And me in China where the RIAA has absolutely zero pull. I'm downloading all I can before I get home.
Lol @ RIAA
You'll never catch me
How much did the RIAA pay to make this look like a good thing?
It's really not. Now instead of appealing to the courts, you have no recourse.
For many people who work from home (either VPN every so often) or work from home full time, their ISP cutting off access could mean essentially loss of livelyhood. Not every place has multiple broadband offerings either.
I'm waiting for the first person to be wrongly accused (it's happened before) and need to move so they could work. I'm hoping for a super lawsuit.
I suppose this is better than being sued, yeah you don't get to contest it in court, but you can just get another ISP.
And who is to regulate this? Does this go strictly on the word of the RIAA?