by Mike Masnick
Thu, Jan 28th 2010 8:16am
One of the major concerns about various "three strikes" laws that kick people off the internet based on three accusations (not convictions) of copyright infringement, is that beyond being a stunningly disproportionate punishment to the action, it also potentially punishes many others: for example, a teenager can be accused three times of file sharing and his parents and siblings all lose their internet access because of it, that does not seem reasonable nor fair. And yet, in a rather odd statement, an IFPI representative, Shira Perlmutter, seems to be claiming some sort of magical ability to just block the single user from accessing the internet, saying to conference attendees that three strikes would only require cutting off "one account." Perhaps the folks at the IFPI don't quite understand how the internet works (or perhaps that's a given) but generally speaking, when you have internet access at your house, you don't set up separate access accounts for every family member... And if others in the family have access, what's to stop the "cut off" one from using the other's access?
If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- Recording Industry Has 'Virtually Eliminated Illegal File-Sharing' In Norway -- By Offering Better Products
- Music Publishers, With Help From Rightscorp, Test Legal Theory That DMCA Requires Kicking Repeat Infringers Off The Internet
- Revealed: How To Get The IFPI To Issue Bogus DMCA Takedowns On Just About Anything, With No Questions Asked And No Review
- Australia's Attorney General Ignores All Evidence And Experts: Decides To Obey Hollywood's Commands On Copyright
- Hollywood Has Been Pressuring Australian Attorney General To Pressure ISPs Into Being Copyright Cops