RSS
AT&T Asking For Trouble With Filtering Plans
from the let-me-count-the-ways dept
Businessweek reports on AT&T's bizarre plan to placate Hollywood by adding antipiracy technology to its network. This is a bad idea for a lot of reasons. For starters, it's completely unnecessary; ISPs are protected from copyright liability by the DMCA's safe harbor provisions (which AT&T itself helped enact), so there's no reason AT&T needs to do anything at all other than follow the procedures specified in the DMCA. Second, the technology almost certainly won't work; the Internet is far too complex and fast-changing for any one piece of software to reliably filter out pirated content. On the other hand, filters invariably make mistakes, as we learned when Comcast accidentally blocked Lotus Notes traffic when it was trying to block peer-to-peer protocols. If AT&T starts aggressively blocking content it thinks is pirated, it will almost certainly block a lot of non-pirated content in the process, leading to angry customers and a lot more bad publicity. Finally, any move to filter Internet content will give renewed momentum to the campaign for network neutrality regulation. One of the most powerful arguments against new regulations has been that proponents' concerns were almost purely hypothetical. Between Comcast's shenanigans with BitTorrent and AT&T's anti-piracy plans, a lot of fence-sitters may decide that the danger of network discrimination is no longer so hypothetical, and that the FCC needs the power to regulate ISPs' routing policies.
I have a business...
The Future Of Commerce Will Combine Your Social Network And Mobile Device
To Understand The Data Move It Closer
I’m looking for research...
Geography Of The App Economy
Why Data Is The New Oil, With Dan Foreman Of Lumi Mobile
I’m looking for policy...
Jon Potter: Software Patent Trolls Can Be Stopped By U.S. Patent Office And Congress
Policy Resources: Data Privacy & Security
Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
They're already just screwing with your bandwidth
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
They are protecting thier hollywood interests
This is a 2 fold benefit for AT&T they prevent people from stealing thier content, as well as cutting down on the total bandwith usage of thier ISP customers.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
LOL, yeah, that'll work... :)
Oh, and tell me when it's become possible to transmit physical objects over the interwebs - until then,it is not possible to "steal" content, only infringe on copyrights...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
As usual, the pirates will go deeper underground
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
duh!, all I need to do is transcode the file/image
I write software to revere flip 17-byte words.
The software is good for encrypt as well as decrypt.
I 17-byte swap a file image, transfer over the net with instructions and boom, past the software filters.
The harder part would be to move the port number around to get past the network port filters. It may be that one day BitTorrent and the like will simply manage thru one port and download thru ftp=20/http=80.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Think about it like this...
Cars/Trucks are packets.
Government and regulation bodies and even road owners (ISPs) are trying to stop specific passengers and cargo.
But I can move passengers and cargo from car to car and truck to truck at will.
Anyway, why do ships carry cargo and cars carry shipments?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: They're already just screwing with your bandwi
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20071108-an-old-hat-with-new-tricks-fedora-8-officially-rel eased.html
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
This is why....
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Think about it like this...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Welcome to the club
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: They're already just screwing with your ba
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Bad idea all around
But more importantly from AT&T's standpoint, if they do start filtering traffic are they risking their common carrier status/safe harbor? Not only "might" they be asked by others to filter additional content, but wouldn't they almost have to comply to avoid getting sued?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: They're already just screwing with you
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
que darknets in 3, 2, 1
so they want piracy off the internet? IF that were possible (and believe me this is a BIG if) all the bandwidth in the world is available on the one network you CANNOT filter: meatspace.
the concern hollywood should have is that piracy will no only go further underground, but that it will become even higher tech, or worse, lower tech.
essentially, you have groups that swap data using cheap USB hard drives (or iPods, like in spook country) and it suddenly becomes way more expensive to track and prevent piracy.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: que darknets in 3, 2, 1
If a ruler is gentle, the people are simple; if a ruler is cruel, the people are cunning.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: They're already just screwing with
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: que darknets in 3, 2, 1
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Bad idea all around
It is a common mistake in the US to think that ISP's have common carrier status like regulated telephone companies. They don't. That's why they need safe harbor protection (and telcos don't).
The DMCA is super good for ISP's. Not only does it give them protection from lawsuits for stuff just passing through their systems but it then still lets them go on and filter information to their little heart's content. It's authority without accountability. They get to have their cake and eat it too.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Snoops
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: que darknets in 3, 2, 1
god i hope not for microsoft's sake. if they implement that, they won't be able to PAY people to use windows. the history books will all it the "DOH!" heard round the world.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: They're already just screwing
that will never happen. https is what makes internet shopping possible. no provider in the world, even one as dumb as AT&T will block https.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
at&t yahoo already blocks soulseek
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: que darknets in 3, 2, 1
As long as people are stupid, Microsoft will always be able to sell Windows. I wouldn't worry too much.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Add Your Comment