ISPs To Begin Filtering Illicit Music ?

[HellasVagabond]

Yesterday an advocate general for the European Court of Justice, the highest court in the EU, released an opinion saying that ISPs are not required to disclose information that could identify subscribers in civil copyright infringement cases....Today a ruling in Belgium, has given Scarlet a local isp six months to begin filtering out illicit music on its network. The court even recommended Audible Magic (an audio fingerprinting application which dips into files as they are being transferred and tries to determine whether they are in fact copyrighted musicand if they are it can then block their transfer) to local isps.
[---]
This ruling sets an important precedent in the fight against piracy internationally stated The International Federation of the Phonographic Industry and because the ruling implements EU legislation it may mean that ISPs in the UK would have to use filters too.

Source: Guardian (http://technology.guardian.co.uk/weekly/story/0,,2123663,00.html)

[DR.Death]

yay more loss of privacy

[Atech]

Okay MAFIA, I get the point. Your music is yours, I won't listen to it.

Just so long as these filters don't filter P2P transfers of copyleft and Creative Commons music. :rolleyes:

[quickie]

i don't think ISPs should get involved in this issue. i mean, why not first block child porn and emails between terrorists ...those are far more pressing issues for society.

[Atech]

i don't think ISPs should get involved in this issue. i mean, why not first block child porn and emails between terrorists ...those are far more pressing issues for society.
Lobbyists, money from said lobbyists.

[DR.Death]

the thing that annoying me is that i down load movies only the ones i think i will like and if i like them i buy them if i don't i saved myself $10.50 to go see it in theaters

[Atech]

the thing that annoying me is that i down load movies only the ones i think i will like and if i like them i buy them if i don't i saved myself $10.50 to go see it in theaters
The problem with the try before you buy model is that film and music publishers would have to publish decent music/films to get any money.

[DR.Death]

yes but u go buy a 20$ CD if u don't like it u are out 20$ so i think it is a good idea like if u get a new band that u want to listen to but u cant anywheres then its all good like were i live i have no good music stores that are close to me i have to drive about 30 mins to get to one so in my mind its not that bad to down load one or 2 songs rather then wast money on a shitty cd that u might listen to once or twice

[mdm-adph]

Okay MAFIA, I get the point. Your music is yours, I won't listen to it.

Just so long as these filters don't filter P2P transfers of copyleft and Creative Commons music. :rolleyes:

Oh, they probably will -- I expect these "filtering" technologies to be extremely lazy and will probably just start blocking all MP3's, whether legitimate or not. Independent artists don't have much financial clout behind them, and thus are not much of a legal threat to the RIAA if the RIAA starts getting ISP's to block all music transfers. (Yes, I know this is Belgium, but the RIAA has quite the long reach. Just look at AllOfMp3.com and what happened to it.)

However, once the file sharing community starts to use encryption on a much larger scale, these "snooper" technologies will become useless, and the arms race will start over again.

[newconroer]

Eh? If you aren't doing anything illegal, what does it matter?


As for buying a music album and being out $20 bones...the new generation has it easy. They have internet, marketing in their face, and 'professional' music critics with their reviews all over the place to promote music. Twenty years ago, we used reel to reel and cassette tape copies to spread the word by hand and mouth. We listened to our peers, and went to the clubs to hear people play.


I find that a terrible excuse with media, especially music. Good albums, aren't noticed by the listener to be enjoyable all the way through, until they've listened to it several times or more. Man I still listen to albums from twenty years ago, and sometimes I'll hear a sound, something very miniscule I never caught before, and think 'wow, nice...' If you think an album is great within the first time listening, you're probably being roped in by the popular single tracks, and just tolerating the other crap songs.

For someone to 'try before you buy,' you'd have to try quite a lot before buying. So how long do you 'try' for? Ten listens or one month? With that logic, you'd just wear out the enjoyment of the songs to an extent and then just chuck it.

Some people buy movies. For the life of me, I've never understood why. I know there's a special exception sometimes when they put out a really good multipack of a trilogy movie series with extra goodies and it's in DVD format so it's convenient. But I've seen bookshelves of hundreds of DVDs and I'm thinking 'Christ mate, you'll never watch the whole lot of them, especially not twice or three times...?!?!?' So if you 'try before you buy' on a movie, you've seen what you want, and you won't go buy it.

Ya I'm sure there's persons who actually do follow up and purchase the media, but it's not as much as they'd like us to believe.

Like the government phone tapping, if we don't want our privacy invaded, then we should stop being immoral and unethical. We have noone to blame but ourselves.

[Atech]

Eh? If you aren't doing anything illegal, what does it matter?
So long as it's discriminatory and manages to accurately distinguish between copyleft music and music which artists otherwise allow their fans to share, and files which users don't have permission to share, it doesn't matter.

But come on, are they really going to install the supercomputers required to distinguish between the two in real time?

[error_f0rce]

yes but u go buy a 20$ CD if u don't like it u are out 20$ so i think it is a good idea like if u get a new band that u want to listen to but u cant anywheres then its all good like were i live i have no good music stores that are close to me i have to drive about 30 mins to get to one so in my mind its not that bad to down load one or 2 songs rather then wast money on a shitty cd that u might listen to once or twice

Well between Amazon and iTunes, you can listen to 30 sec clips of songs from almost any band out there that has made a name for itself. That's what I use to determine if I like a band's sound or not. I don't need to hear the whole album, or even the whole song to get the idea if they fit my taste. Works for me! :)

[kwchang007]

Well this sucks...there goes my limewire installation when US ISPs start this

[newconroer]

For artists who want to promote their music by offering it free, then they should sign legal documentation regarding such with companies that work solely in distributing free music, or 'copyleft.'

I don't see how there could be any confusion then. All parties are agreed upon the terms.

If you're caught with material from an artist who has not offered their music for free, then it's illegal obviously and action should be taking.

So yes, if the companies providing the 'copyleft' music make their business aware to the ISPs, then it should be fine.

Error Force, that's exactly right. Now days you can easily slip into a book or music store and put on some headphones and check out an extensive library of music for free, or you can get clips on the internet.

I remember hanging out for hours in rinky-dink music shops back in the day, having the shop owners pull out tons of different vinyls and letting them play, so all the kids inside could groove and talk about everything that was music. Shame those types of places do not exist anymore, but at least now things are a lot easier to sample.

[a111087]

some P2P programs have the ability to encrypt data, what about that?

[Atech]

For artists who want to promote their music by offering it free, then they should sign legal documentation regarding such with companies that work solely in distributing free music, or 'copyleft.'

I don't see how there could be any confusion then. All parties are agreed upon the terms.

If you're caught with material from an artist who has not offered their music for free, then it's illegal obviously and action should be taking.

So yes, if the companies providing the 'copyleft' music make their business aware to the ISPs, then it should be fine.

Error Force, that's exactly right. Now days you can easily slip into a book or music store and put on some headphones and check out an extensive library of music for free, or you can get clips on the internet.

I remember hanging out for hours in rinky-dink music shops back in the day, having the shop owners pull out tons of different vinyls and letting them play, so all the kids inside could groove and talk about everything that was music. Shame those types of places do not exist anymore, but at least now things are a lot easier to sample.
How do you propose that ISPs disciminate between authorised file sharing and unauthorised file sharing?

An MD5 lookup for every single packet and patterns thereof? Somehow I don't think even a Blue Gene running Plan 9 could do that. Who's going to fund the supercomputers required (supposing for a moment such supercomputers exist)? Such computers are well out of even the gross income of small ISPs.

[HellasVagabond]

some P2P programs have the ability to encrypt data, what about that?


They will most propably block most ports so we cant use them...Some ISPs already do that by handing out routers with locked ports so you have to call them , tell them what you need a port for and they open it remotely....

[mdm-adph]

How do you propose that ISPs disciminate between authorised file sharing and unauthorised file sharing?

An MD5 lookup for every single packet and patterns thereof? Somehow I don't think even a Blue Gene running Plan 9 could do that. Who's going to fund the supercomputers required (supposing for a moment such supercomputers exist)? Such computers are well out of even the gross income of small ISPs.

You know, it's stuff like that that makes me start to think the whole idea is bullshit, and is just some way for the main company responsible for this technology (Audible Magic (http://audiblemagic.com)) to swindle money from the RIAA and other ISP's...

If you look at their site's page (http://www.audiblemagic.com/products-services/copysense/) on this CopySense fingerprinting technology, you'll see that they make some pretty dubious claims...

Block tranfers that contain pornographic content? Please -- someone tell me how the hell they're going to pull that off.

I didn't know supercomputers existed that could rate content on a "hittable" meter...

[Jonnycat]

Block tranfers that contain pornographic content? Please -- someone tell me how the hell they're going to pull that off.

I didn't know supercomputers existed that could rate content on a "hittable" meter...

It's like that facial recognition software, only it looks for boobies. :roll:

[newconroer]

Lol @ Johnny



I don't know how they would do it. Man if I knew that I'd be in a conference call right now!

So until we find a full proof way, we're left to govern ourselves. And as previously mentioned, if we continue to take the piss, and pirate material, then it's going to make it that much more difficult to police anything with accuracy.

Look at all the problems web sharing based companies like Rapid Share cause? Because they cannot(or I would think they probably don't even bother)filter out what is illegal as it's being uploaded, then the only way to manage such is to wait until someone complains that it's pirated. Then they take action.
They have ridiculous laws that support them, so they aren't responsible. We all know they know full well what people majorily use their service for, but it's like a tobacco shop that sells water bongs. It's legal, because it's "for tobbaco," technically.

Technicality is a mother ******

[Darknova]

*sigh* *hands over what little privacy is left to the big corporations*

I completely agree with the people saying "If you aren't doing anything illegal then what have you got to hide?" Well...just about everything. My life...I don't want records of every single packet sent (which there will be).

Anyone noticed how this world is so fucked up they care more about money than catching paedophiles, murders, and generally making the world a nice place to live?

Pfft....and people wonder why the suicide rate is going up...

[Jonnycat]

*sigh* *hands over what little privacy is left to the big corporations*

I completely agree with the people saying "If you aren't doing anything illegal then what have you got to hide?" Well...just about everything. My life...I don't want records of every single packet sent (which there will be).

Anyone noticed how this world is so fucked up they care more about money than catching paedophiles, murders, and generally making the world a nice place to live?

We live in an ever-increasing nanny state, where we are all subject to an ever-increasing degree of scrutiny over everything we do in our lives. The social result of such a system is that the average person becomes less and less able and willing to make their own conscious decisions, instead relying on society and the government to make their decisions for them.

[WarEagleAU]

Wait, first the courts stick up for ISPs, then turn around and tell them to do this? WTF is going on over there?