Get Accused Of Copyright Infringement Under New Five Strikes Plan? It'll Cost You To Challenge
from the guilty-until-you-pay dept
I wanted to do another follow-up on the post earlier today about the new five strikes plan “voluntarily” put in place by most of the major US ISPs and the RIAA/MPAA. One of our key concerns is the fact that it’s all based on accusations, rather than any actual proof of infringement. The defenders of the plan say that it’s okay because there are so many warnings and you can counter the strikes by asking for an “independent review.” But… the details show that you actually will need to pay $35 to get that independent review. So it’s not just guilty until proven innocent, but you need to pay up just to claim you’re innocent.
Filed Under: challenges, five strikes
Comments on “Get Accused Of Copyright Infringement Under New Five Strikes Plan? It'll Cost You To Challenge”
Billing?
Shouldn’t the accuser be the one forced to pay?
Re: Billing?
That concept would run counter to the MAFIAA’s “you’re all criminals who owe us money” policy.
Re: Billing?
Shouldn’t pirates have to pay for their music?
You people are so far gone. It’s very amusing.
Re: Re: Billing?
As amusing as the fact that they don’t actually have to prove you’re a pirate.
Re: Re: Billing?
Shouldn’t you stop diddling kids out of rational thought?
Re: Re: Billing?
I Accuse Anonymous Coward of Murder in the First Degree, To refute this claim you have only one option, have me launch an “independent” Investigation for the minor fee of $10,000.
You People have your head so far in the sand. It’s very sad.
Re: Re: Re: Billing?
And how independent is this review. The guy in the next cube over?
5 or 6?
Why is Ars Technica calling this a “six strikes” plan?
Re: 5 or 6?
The last 2 strikes appear to be the same, just they can avoid punishing you for the 5th at their discretion if they don’t feel like doing it.
Wow
I’m amazed it’s only $35.
I guess that shows how jaded I am.
Re: Wow
yeah, “moving violations” aka “shit that gets tossed out in 5 minutes if you have a lawyer”, cost you about $200 to prove innocence.
isnt’ justice great?
(sarcasm)
Re: Re: Wow
isnt’ justice great?
Yea, if you’ve got the money.
Re: Wow
If they made it free then they’d be “forced” to add a $5-per-month fee to everyone’s bill to compensate. They’d probably call it a “dispute review compensation fund” fee or something like that.
Re: Wow
I’m sure it’s just a misunderstanding… It’s $35 to dispute the first ‘strike’, the dispute fees increase exponentially from there so the cost to dispute future ‘strikes’ is as follows….
2nd Strike: $1,225 (35^2)
3rd Strike: $42,875 (35^3)
4th Strike: $1,500,625 (35^4)
5th Strike: $52,521,875 (35^5)
One **AA representative was heard to say, “We are sure this plan once properly implemented will restore the excessive and obscene profits that our executives have become accustomed to for doing nothing over the years.”
Before anyone tries it, this ‘business model’ is patented and I’ll sue anyone who tries to implement it without appropriate licensing fees….
Time For Action
it seems to me that the ISPs will need to amend their terms of service to implement this. So, when you receive the updated TOS simply notify them that you do not agree to the updated TOS and that you will be leaving to a more enlightened ISP. If you are in a contract (not sure how ISPs work in the USA), them changing the terms of said contract should be enough for you to walk from it without having to pay any termination penalties.
If a significant portion of their subscribers do this, they will get the message loud and clear. Hit them where they will notice: their bottom line.
Re: Time For Action
Most of us don’t have termination fees on our internet contracts; they keep us because we have no other options.
Re: Time For Action
I would do that, but my choices for ISP here are Comcast and Verizon.
Re: Re: Time For Action
I have a feeling some satellite company is not going to sign on a start expanding by leaps and bounds
Re: Re: Time For Action
Mine are AT&T, AT&T, and AT&T. Time to google up satellite ISPs.
Re: Re: Re: Time For Action
careful you start googling competitive products and you might find the shortcut from stike zero to strike 5
Re: Time For Action
I will just cancel my internet service, it’s not like it’s a human right or anything… oh wait it is, then I’ll just change my ISP to one of the following options: Time Warner, Time Warner and Time Warner.
Re: Re: Time For Action
You forgot Time Warner. Ain’t capitalism grand?
Re: Time For Action
The problem with your reasoning is that there are local monopolies in most of the country. If I want an Internet connection with decent speed I have one choice. A half mile down the road they have a different one choice. My wife needs a good Internet connection for her job so the phone company’s copper wire is not an option. Believe me, I would dump Comcast in a second if there was another viable option but there isn’t. In my old town there is actually competition and they pay $20 less a month for the same service I do. I just hope nobody around here knows how to break my wifi encryption. It’s a lot easier than you think it is.
Re: Time For Action
The problem with this is that, in many areas, customers do not have the option to subscribe to an ISP that doesn’t implement this policy. For example, only Comcast services my home with broadband Internet. Nobody else, unless I want to go satellite, which I don’t consider to be a viable alternative for performance reasons. Even in a more urban area, there may only be Comcast and AT&T or Time Warner.
Re: Time For Action
Sounds great. So when AT&T implements this I can tell them I’m leaving to go to Comcast. Oh crap, they’re implementing this too.
This is America. We don’t have competition in this market.
Re: Re: Time For Action
America is owned by the money.
Reminds Me of Something
Last year, I got a notice from the water company that they were going to be vigorously enforcing water restrictions that limit what days and times people were allowed to water their lawns. If they caught you violating the restrictions, they said, they would hit you with a $100 fine. You could appeal this fine, of course, but first you had to pay a non-refundable filing fee to do it. How much was said filing fee?
$100.
If they don’t get you coming, they’ll get you going. Both, if they think they can get away with it.
Can I personally send in infringing IP addresses? It should be ok, since I would be unlikely to include RIAA/MPAA/ISP company IP addresses or any personal IP addresses of almost every employee of those groups. It certainly would be very unlikely to happen any more than the alloted warnings.
Re: Re:
IF you can I am just gonna generate a list of every ip address available and send it in daily, that should keep them busy for awhile
Re: Re: Re:
x,y,z,a as Int
For x,y,z,a = 0..255
Output(file[new(./EveryIpAddress.txt],x+”‘”+y+”‘”+z+”‘”+a)
End For
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I’m using an obscure dialect, but it should be obvious to any programmer that this will generate every possible IP address.
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
Was wondering about the dialect. Also about the fact that what appears to be the new file creation command is inside the loop. (and, to nitpick, you appear to be missing a closing parenthesis inside the brackets – unless it’s a really obscure syntax…)
Er… and shouldn’t those be periods, not apostrophes?
(and does this language really do four-dimensional loops that quickly and easily? because that’s pretty cool)
Re: Re: Re:
Simpler solution here, have every bittorrent tracker (or client for trackerless torrents) randomly throw ten or so addresses owned by the big 5 into the pool on every active torrent. Given the thoroughness with which the **AA lot do their evidence gathering, every single customer should be cut, and pissed, off within a week.
Yeah, there's one--who gets to do the accusing?
Is there a phone number or email address where average Jane can contact the ISP and say “so-and-so is infringing my content”? Or is there only the big-red-MAFIAA hotline?
Not supposed to happen
It would certainly be horrible if politicians felt the pain of such poor guilty until proven innocent policies. I’m sure they continue to be sympathetic to the content industries if they were caught up in their attacks on consumers. Their spouses and children would have to nod their heads in agreement how this is the right thing to do when their internet is slowed to a crawl or terminated.
Re: Not supposed to happen
This is the only way to get the point across. We the people have to spam the accusation system. Write a short phrase, or a song, or draw a simple image, publish it. Submit dozens, hundreds of accusations that the company reps and politicians have infringed.
what happened to infringment
I love how they snuck the disingenuous language in “content theft” as apposed to “infringement”.
Re: what happened to infringment
Does that mean you don’t have to worry about strikes since it is impossible to move goods that can be stolen through the photons of all that fiber optic?
Re: Re: what happened to infringment
pretty much.
what content is “Stolen” if it’s copied?
Re: Re: what happened to infringment
What photons?
America only has dark fiber.
Verizon FiOS doesn’t count is like unicorns.
To spite this kind of behavior of the RIAA and MPAA I’ve heard rumors of folks who fill their multi-TB hard drives with music and movies and then share then with everyone they trust via sneakernet.
Re: Re:
In other news, the RIAA and MPAA have begun lobbying efforts to ban external hard drives and so-called “hotswap pirate toasters”
Re: Re: Re:
no why ban when you can tax?
http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/Oesterreich-Neuer-Vorstoss-in-Sachen-Urheberrechtsabgabe-1080864.html
They assume I guilty and Slander my good name with the ISP. I have not been found guilty of anything and yet they can slander me to the point where I can lose my ISP connection, and my job as I rely upon internet access for my job.
This need to have major consequences for false accusations. By that I mean if you prove you have been false accused 3 time then they can not accuse you any more (three strike to get you). I would also like to see $1 million penalty (split between you, your ISP, judge, and local politic’s favorite charity) for a proven false accusations. The point is to make the RIAA/MPAA really think about the accusations.
Re: Re:
why 1 million, i mean based on their logic they own you aroun a trillon for that defamation 🙂
Remember: those companies are as powerful as we, the consumer, make them. They are big and have deep pockets because stupid steve has to watch the new movie about talking cars.
Re: Re:
True, but he doesn’t have to pay to watch it.
What could possibly go wrong?
Given the history of the companies involved. how likely is it that they will have a chance in hell of even identifying the correct subscriber? (I’m recalling incidents like Verizon’s decision to block all email from Europe — ostensibly to stop spam — at the same time that Verizon’s network was one of the top spam sources on the planet.)
They're just selling a new scarcity of "justice", Mike.
Typical capitalism. Aren’t you conservatives and libertarians pleased now that anti-trust and anti-cartel enforcement is gutted? Here’s a consortium openly deciding how they’ll fleece you. Giving The Rich their “freedom” is going to bite you.
Re: They're just selling a new scarcity of "justice", Mike.
The government created these monopolies in the first place. “Anti-trust” laws and lawsuits were only created for use on companies not approved by the the ruling economic czar.
As libertarian that opposes the creation of these monopolies by the government in the first place, I don’t really see what I have to apologize for. The public is getting exactly what they lobbied for; less free market, more central control.
I don’t understand why you pirate types can’t understand that the party is over.
oh and btw, music sales are up.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/2011/07/music-sales-up-9-percent-in-first-half-of-2011-says-nielsen.html
Re: Re:
“oh and btw, music sales are up”
With no mention of copyright enforcement ANYWHERE in your linked article. Instead, it mentioned strong albums and artists and aggressive pricing.
Now where have I heard that before….
Re: Re: Re:
PIRACY OVER!!!
Re: Re: Re:
sales have been up since Limewire got shut down.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Yes but piracy STILL has nothing to do with sales!!!!
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Now, if only one of you people would prove causation rather than looking at correlation then we wouldn’t be having this argument. Until then, you only get to try to be smug until the next inevitable dip in sales – who’s your next scapegoat?
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
I love when you idiots bring up the causation/correlation theory.
You might want to read up on it again. At no point does the theory state that when an obvious cause and effect event occurs does that mean the opposite is true, and there is no connection.
I know you guys love to hang your hat on that, but just a little heads up that you might want to pick something else to look silly over.
You have plenty of previous statements to choose from.
Re: Re: Re:3 Re:
So, you’re admitting that there might not be any direct link between the Limewire shutdown and the increased sales? Also admitting that there might be other factors that have nothing to do with “piracy” or the attempts to “fight” it?
If so, you’re coming dangerously close to admitting that the black & white fantasy world most ACs pretend exist isn’t real. Just because I questioned your logic, that doesn’t mean I’m suggesting the exact opposite – the real world can be complex like that. Then, we can get back to discussing real ways of improving the industry for both artists & consumers.
If not, then you have a very simplistic view of the issues at hand, so I don’t think you can really grasp what’s actually being argued in most of these threads.
Re: Re:
Sales are up and it happened before this 5/6/whatever strikes plan was enforced. Thanks for the tip! Looks like we won’t be needed this extra ISP nannyism after all.
Re: Re: Re:
Looks like your wife is still wondering when you’re going to grow up and get a real job, Tim.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Gee, why don’t you just drop a “yo momma” joke while you’re at it?
Looks like you’re a juvenile asshole. And before your juvenile ass points it out, yes, I’m aware that calling you a juvenile asshole makes me a bit juvenile too. I can live with that.
Re: Re:
I don’t understand why you pirate types can’t understand that the party is over.
oh and btw, music sales are up.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/entertainmentnewsbuzz/2011/07/music-sales-up-9-percent-in-fir st-half-of-2011-says-nielsen.html
Guess the ample CD’s I can buy used for next to nothing won’t factor in with that?
Re: Re:
Perhaps you should do some research.
“An irony, however, is that although album sales have been bolstered this year by sales of blockbusters from superstar artists such as Lady Gaga and Adele, the net gain is more due to strong response to sales of older albums — those released 18 months ago or earlier.”
The Beatles perhaps ?? Its a one time anomality.
Re: Re: Re:
“The Beatles perhaps ??”
It appears you are right:
http://macdailynews.com/2011/05/12/nielsen-the-beatles-on-itunes-store-help-u-s-music-sales-post-dramatic-increase/
“Its a one time anomality.”
Its not the first time
http://allthingsd.com/20091005/musics-sales-slumped-slowed-but-not-stopped-by-michael-jackson-and-the-beatles/
and it won’t be the last time the beatles make someone richer. They are about to release the collections on itunes:
http://macdailynews.com/2011/05/31/the-beatles-anthology-makes-digital-debut-on-itunes-store-on-june-14-pre-orders-now-available/
and I am sure the documentaries (that are just a collection of old footage) will be rerelease on itunes in 6 months. Then 6 months later they will release something else beatles related that isnt on itunes yet. After the run out of stuff they will start releasing “new” digital collectors bundle, which has one unreleased song. Then if they run out of old shitty versions of songs that didn’t get onto an album for a reason they will release the music with a new photo of yoko’s tit or come with a special forward by paul mcartney’s dog.
The fact that the beatles stopped making music decades ago has never stopped the industry from making a shit ton of money from them before.
Re: Re: Re:
“Its a one time anomality.”
Anomality? Sounds like someone getting bent over at random.
Re: Re:
I don’t think you realize just how big the ‘party’ is these days, let alone where the ‘party’ is even happening. It’s already moved to the ‘encrypted’ party… Have fun with your gestapo web and good luck with that!
Re: Re: Re:
People that think the concept of sneakernet is a new thing are so funny.
And wait, I thought you said all record labels were disappearing? That all music by everyone would be given away for free on the internet to promote t-shirt sales? LOL
Re: Re:
I don’t understand why you pirate types can’t understand that the party is over.
Then what are you worried about? If you think the public will forgive you for stealing their public domain and throwing them in jail for creating YouTube mashups, then start paying you money because you seem to think that you produce some content they simply can’t live without, then what is it that brings you here?
Re: Re: Re:
He’s just celebrating, because he never gets invited to parties
Re: Re:
So music sales are up.
That shows that such anti-piracy legislation is pointless as they’ve already achieved their aim.
Re: Re:
Seems to be the result of some of the planned ideas reported here: http://www.alligator.org/the_avenue/music/article_4d882ba4-3fd4-11e0-89d3-001cc4c03286.html
but yeah, items at competitive prices and somethings that’s actually scarce (vinyl) will sell, who knew?
Re: Re:
“I don’t understand why you pirate types can’t understand that the party is over.”
Have you uninvented digital media files? Because that’s the only way the “party” will stop. Either put on a hat and join in or continue to decline in relevance.
Re: Re:
Heh
correlation = causation
good one
Re: Re:
Actually this would also coincide with companies stopping aggressive lawsuits towards consumers…so what now?
Re: Re:
I don’t understand why you monopolistic types can’t understand people don’t buy CD’s, it doesn’t fit on peoples MP3 players.
Re: Re:
oh and btw, music sales are up.
So no need for this agreement then, right?
I’m getting awfully tired of living next door to the US.
…only because where the US treads, Canada is sure to follow (eventually).
Anybody can make an accusation without proof, and the accusee has to pay for that privilege too?
Nah. No thanks. We don’t want any.
Re: USian
We don’t want it either but we’re never invited to the discussion.
Re: Re:
Thanks to our new conservative government I’m sure we’ll see a steady stream of decades old failed US policies brought into Canada so we likely have at least 10 years before this one comes up. The Cons will want to be good and sure it failed like the War on Drugs and Tough on Crime policies before they implement them.
This is only the first step
This will make it less likely that small entities and individuals will make any kind of content available since a “competitor” or simply somebody you once pissed of can shut you down or cost you money by claiming everything on your site infringes.
A “read only” Net is just television through wires so big media will be on top again.
Then they can bitch that the bandwidth is a “scarce resource” and get Congress to enact an “FCC for the Net” limit transmitters to “licensed” and “approved” ones only and then censoring becomes just a threat to yank your license.
And they will certainly put in Government Firewalls, not to censor foriegn sites mind you, just to prevent them from consuming OUR PRECIOUS BANDWIDTH.
Re: This is only the first step
but but but Piracy….
http://torrentfreak.com/pirates-steal-your-bandwidth-110707/
?Content Theft Means Less Internet Bandwidth For You: A recent study found that digital content theft, including the use of P2P networks, streaming and cyberlockers, accounted for almost a quarter of global Internet bandwidth consumption.?
BTW Netflix accounts for a full quarter of net traffic, so lets get them first!
Sue ISP for first amendment violation.
Charging the accused to challenge, in my opinion, is wrong and I think that maybe taking the ISP to court for violating the first amendment might make them realize that side stepping the law isn’t a good idea. Once in court the ISP will have to provide evidence of any copyright violation you have been accused of by others.
I’m not a lawyer, but making them provide proof of their actions might make them think twice before charging the innocent money in order to prove they are innocent.
Re: Sue ISP for first amendment violation.
Wouldn’t work, especially in “right to refuse service for any reason” states like Wisconsin. The First Amendment does not empower an individual to force a company to serve as a soap box or venue for free speech.
Defemation may have a shot, though…especially if an unproven accusation forces businesses offline that rely on the internet.
Just goes to show..
what happens when the RIAA/MPAA flex their political muscle (via bribes). I don’t pirate, have no P2P software (I’m not interested), but I could still be accused based on what?
This is justice of the rich, by the rich, and for the rich.
Re: Just goes to show..
You too can be accused by the super secret tracking technology employed by the presettlement shakedown industry.
The technology that in its early days send multiple notices to a laser printer for sharing the movie “The Matrix”. (With its massive 2 meg of ram, I am guessing it was a frame at a time.)
And that technology only gets better as a recent USCG filing names 8.8.8.8 as a evil pirate stealing crappy movies. (If your playing the home game – 8.8.8.8 is one of the Google Public DNS Servers.)
Okay, so after someone spends the $35, what will be considered proof? A printout with an IP address and the name of a movie? Will that strike be removed or all?
After getting a notice could someone file for summary judgment and get an injunction against their ISP to stop the strikes?
Re: Re:
Brings to mind that we have not heard of the minimal interval between “strikes”.
I mean could five accusations in one day get the account disabled ?
How about one per week ? Month ?
Do the five need to be for different items or can the same “target” be cited more than once ?
BitTorrent and fake IPs
Some BitTorrent trackers add fake IP addresses to their responses. And your IP address can be added to the tracker response if your browser is made to follow a specially-formatted link.
So, if your IP address happened to be randomly generated when their bots requested the list of peers from a BitTorrent tracker, or if someone on a forum you frequent added a hidden image or iframe pointing to the specially formatted link, you are going to be added to their lists and be falsely accused.
And knowing the mentality of a well-known group of Internet users, which I shall not name, they will be doing everything they can to add as much people as possible as many times as possible on as many of these lists as possible. For the lulz.
Re: BitTorrent and fake IPs
For the lulz, sure. But only because your friends are sociopaths.
Re: Re: BitTorrent and fake IPs
Oi! That’s offensive to true sociopaths! Like the RIAA!
What to do?
Is there anything we can do about this? Is there a politician I can send a letter to or a petition I can sign?
Bye-bye Verizon
It’s been hard to choose between fast downloads and real internet provided by a company serving its customers.
But this crap has clinched it for me that I can handle whatever DSL speed I can get from some non-telco ISP that’s serious about customer service.
This will give encryption a huge boost.
Re: Re:
And VPNs.
The sky is falling on the recording industry so ..
Comcast signed? Well, in the words of Gomer Pyle “sur-prise, sur-prise, sur-prise!”.
Since the Recording Industry is losing ground to new technology and artists using modern internet techniques to sell music I am not surprised at this move to tax people. Furthermore, I think the EFF did not see this new agreement landing at this early date; We?re still working through the details of the actual agreement?more thoughts to come. Uh, Huh.
Seems everyone has a version of this agreement’s story to tell. Here is Arstechnica’s Headline: Major ISPs agree to “six strikes” copyright enforcement plan complete with an image of menacing Star Wars Stormtroopers.
Should be an interesting enforcement headache for ISPs wanting to protect their Safe Harbor. OMG! A Category Minus One hurricane!
.
Hmm, what would happen if I intentionally download lots of music from torrents that I’ve already legally purchased? Drat. Pesky hard drive failures always messing up stuff and creating fair use defenses. When I get whacked for infringement, guess who’s getting sued for defamation and breach of contract causing severe damage to my job–online legal research for my corporate clients. I’m not paying $35 to tell them I’m innocent. They’re going to pay my partners $375 an hour plus costs.
Oh and to the guy who says you can’t sue the ISP for First Amendment violations, that’s true because they’re a private corporation. But you can argue that a term of a contract is unconscionable or the court enforcing it would violate the First Amendment and that you wouldn’t have agreed to it if you had any other reasonable choice. In today’s world, having no ISP is just not reasonable.
Re: Re:
Never said there weren’t other valid legal arguments. This whole thing has the potential to backfire very, very badly on ISPs.
Re: Re: Re:
yay social mores.
Re: Re: Re:
Yeah, I really don’t get why ISPs would want to take on the potential liability shitstorms that could erupt from this agreement.
As a few mentioned above, how do I prove I didn’t do something? Where are my defenses against false positives? Why do I have to pay someone for a *chance* to defend myself from false accusations?
I envision making it sort of a life’s mission to OWN an ISP for inflicting such on a paying customer like myself, or at least make them extremely regretful for it.
I don't pirate anything, and have no need or desire to.
However, should I ever get a bogus accusation and resultant service cutoff, there will be some really, really sorry executives in the ISP. Or rather, I should say really, really sorry families of these executives.
Par for the course. In Ontario, Canada we have a privately-operated toll road – 407 ETR (ETR stands for Electronic Toll Route). There are no toll booths. Toll calculations are based on transponders or photographs of your licence plate.
Sometimes errors are made. What to dispute your fees? It will cost you $100. I kid you not. If you choose to not pay, your plate renewal will be denied until the fees (plus any additional fees and charges) are paid. Pick your medicine.
I think it’s time that the term “piracy” no longer be used – it’s a false flag and a means of misdirection. The act should be called what it really is – sharing. Let’s see the MAFIAA try to explain to people why they’re trying to stop people from sharing, which we’re all taught as kids is the right thing to do. As long as we keep using their loaded terms, it’s harder for the truth to spread and be known. It’s not “piracy.” It’s sharing. And sharing is caring.
Re: Re:
Which is why if you really and honestly “care”, you’ll “share” your money with me.
Just paypal me at blowmepiratecocknose@douchebagwarehouse.com
Re: Re: Re:
No intelligent response, so an ad hominem is used instead. Typical. Which means I’m right, since you have no logical, empirical response you can make. I want either a complete chain of causality showing exactly how the sharing of a specific file has harmed a specific artist at a specific time in a specific way, backed up with empirical non-industry data, or a complete retraction of everything you have ever said on this site. Now. Choosing to do neither is admitting you are wrong and I am right.