Four more large Internet service providers told the US Supreme Court this week that ISPs shouldn’t be forced to aggressively police copyright infringement on broadband networks.
While the ISPs worry about financial liability from lawsuits filed by major record labels and other copyright holders, they also argue that mass terminations of Internet users accused of piracy “would harm innocent people by depriving households, schools, hospitals, and businesses of Internet access.” The legal question presented by the case “is exceptionally important to the future of the Internet,” they wrote in a brief filed with the Supreme Court on Monday.
Wow, unusual for them but based
They’re ensuring their money keeps flowing. This isn’t about altruism - it’s just their Greed incidentally benefits us.
ISPs are trying to mitigate exposure to lawsuits, prevent costly tracking and tracing responsibilities, and make sure customers can keep paying instead of losing their internet privileges (and their internet bills!)
That peasants like us find this favorable is an unintended bonus.
Exactly. ISPs want to do as little work as possible and collect as much as possible. If they have to monitor for torrents, track which customers they’ve warned, etc, that’s extra cost that, ultimately, could take away paying customers. So there are no benefits for them unless the piracy is causing problems for other users (i.e. could result in more customers cancelling service).
Not everyday i agree with ISPs but here we are. Guilty of and accused of are two very different things. Innocent until proven guilty.
Not for potato supreme. I’m sure labels and sony bought vacations for those sub human coup supporting shits
I am not familiar with that, I’m guessing potato supreme is a username or something?
Probably a delicious baked potato dish. Not sure whether cheesy potatoes really care if you’re guilty of piracy, they just want to be eaten.
Never dehumanize fascists or fascist-sympathizers (redundant but ok), it’s always important to remember that bad faith actors or their stooges are human and cannot be entirely eliminated from society, which is why people that fight for positive change have to set the rules such that bad faith actors’ actions are either quickly recognized and mitigated, or have society structured such that even those motivated solely by unempathetic selfishness can only achieve status by masking and contributing positively anyway.
Hell, I don’t even want to ban users guilty of piracy. Oh no! Sony and it’s BILLIONS of dollars will surely be affected by pirating their dvd of a movie! Heavens to betsy!
You joke but that’s how Sony feels when you buy a used DVD… They just can’t admit it publicly
They must HATE me…There’s a thrift shop just up the street from me. I bought Deadpool on DVD/Bluray combo pack. Still sealed new from factory, for $2.50.
I buy lots of DVDs there. My sisters say my collection is rediculous. She means it in a bad way, like I need to get rid of some stuff. But hell, when it’s $2.50, why NOT buy like 20 movies in an afternoon? And why NOT do that same thing several times a year? Although I will admit I’m running out of room…help! My apartment is filled with DVDs, and I can’t see the walls anymore!
I like the end result that ISPs are pushing back on this, but don’t mistake this for altruism on their part.
Their businesses make money selling internet service. Were they to support cutting off those accused of piracy, they would be losing paying customers. Further, the business processes and support needed for this to function would be massively expensive and complicated. They’d have to hired teams of people and write whole new software applications for maintaining databases of banned users, customer service staff to address and resolve disputes, and so much more.
Lastly, as soon as all of that process would be in place to ban users for piracy accusations, then the next requests would come in for ban criteria in a classic slippery slope:
- pornography
- discussions of drugs
- discussions of politics the party in power doesn’t like
- speaking out against the state
- communication about assembling
- discussion on how to emigrate
All the machinery would be in place once the very first ban is approved.
I think it is also the user they disconnect for piracy tend to pay more. They tend to be more premium customers also why should they enforce what happens on their lines. It is an illegal search and seizure. Let the government get a warrant prove something is illegal then the ISP can disconnect them.
Plus, you aren’t disconnecting a person, but a whole family or business.
And since many areas in the US only have one provider, you force that family to cancel all streaming services they might have. It’s a lose-lose-lose situation.
Not if they get their universal digital ID system in place. It is the wet dream of tyrants of all kinds.
I think a big problem we don’t want to address is now that we’re so interconnected, internet access is a necessity that should be classified as a utility. You can’t just cut off someone’s electricity without notification or process because they did something bad with it and it should apply here too
I agree with all this, but I think it is all to say: ISPs support Net Neutrality when it behooves them.
Sony can’t have your electricity cut off if you pirate. Because electricity is a utility.
ISPs want it both ways. They want the legal protections of a utility without the obligations.
The solution is to give them the legal protection they want by declaring them a utility.
Those moments when you can’t decide if someone’s username means they’re a science nerd or a Venture Bros. fan.
Me_irl:
Who in their right Minds would want to be a nerd but not a venture brothers fan?
I’m not certain but there’s a high probability that that Venn diagram is just a circle
I wonder if would you get your electricity cut off if you plugged in a 750kW industrial oil drill in your backyard
The 200A main breaker on most homes would trip a little above 50kW. Could you even start up 1000hp without 3 phase?
The people who sell electricity are surprisingly happy to sell you electricity. If you happen to do something horribly wrong and don’t burn your house down, an electrician will be happy to do the repairs. If you have 200 Amp service and draw the full 200 all year long, the most significant reaction would probably be getting a personalized Christmas card.
it’s a nice argument from the users point of view, but it won’t be allowed
copyright holders will need to be thrown a bone, and given some level of enforcement, else, copyright law is meaningless
celebrate all you want, this won’t pass muster
~ signed, a jolly roger
copyright holders will need to be thrown a bone,
Is there a law to support this position?
If so, where is limit? Deep packet inspection of VPN traffic? At whose expense?
We have to accept that there is a way to break the capacity of pirating, which has been tolerated by companies by decades. VPNs can be banned, the US defense department deeply knows about Tor. So, if there is political incentive, those capacities can be banned at any time.
I think the fight needs to be a legal one. It needed to be a legal one since the inception of piracy. It just has its flaws that can be exploited by politically invested institutions.
There is a limit on how much the state will abuse the plebs on behalf of corpos… they still. need us paying taxes and consuming.
piracy itself is a minor form of civil disobedience, the fun part is seeing these clowns triggered. people should not be paying for the engagement slop propganda owned by some mega corp rights holder anyway. fuck 'em
