Any customer coming from an AT&T address just gets a little splash-screen that says something like "we're sorry, but your internet service provider has prevented you from accessing Netflix. Please contact your internet service provider to have this issue resolved."
Honestly, netflix is the one adding value to internet service and carriers should be paying them extra to deliver the service. Not the other way around.
It seems like most people have forgotten (or just never considered) that copyright is not real. In both literal and figurative terms. Copyright does not apply to real property, only to intellectual property. It is, therefore, impossible to steal intellectual property, since theft can only apply to real property--by taking something real (stealing), I am denying you the enjoyment of that thing. By sharing intellectual property, culture and society as a whole is enriched. In a figurative sense, copyright is also not real. It is an imaginary concept developed by the state, to grant an artificial monopoly on ideas.
If your state does not sanction it, it does not exist.
That sounds like a great idea, until... * Hackers gain access to the feeds and track your personal habits to target your house for burglary. It's not a matter of if, it is when. * You are implicated in some terrorist activity because the data analytics on your behaviour patterns turned a false positive. * The police decide they need extra revenue streams and start selling access to their video feeds to advertisers.
I think the fix for this is liability. The company that produced a device capable of participating in a DDOS or other exploit should be liable for the damages caused, AND if it can be shown that the device manufacturer was aware of the exploit and did not take actions to solve the problem by either producing a fix or a recall, then the CEO and entire BoD should be held criminally liable with fines AND a minimum of 30 days jail-time.
People often conflate authorization and authentication, but they are very different things. Authentication determines WHO you are. Authorization determines WHAT you are permitted to do.
Biometrics make a great authentication token. It is really difficult (In a properly designed system) to falsify biometric credentials, so when you are authenticated biometrically there is a very low probability of a false positive, and a really good chance that you are the correct person.
Biometrics make a terrible authorization token, because YOU CANNOT CHANGE THEM. Once authorization has been assigned to a biometric is cannot be changed. ever. That's the whole point of biometrics. They are immutable. But authorization DOES NOT NECESSARILY follow from authentication. Good authorization tokens are passwords and PINs because they CAN be changed, and there are an infinite number of them. You can assign different authorization tokens to different parts of a system. You can see this when you log in to your computer using one password, check your email with another, and connect to facebook with yet a different password. Security will always be a trade-off with convenience. Most people can't be bothered to type different passwords for every application, so they tell the system to cache the passwords, and tie that all back to their primary authentication token, and mobile phone manufacturers are very conscious of this, so it appears that authentication and authorization are the same thing and thus, commonly conflated concepts.
This is exactly the reason why copyright needs reform. A return to shorter copyright terms would achieve the exact goal of copyright, which is to ENCOURAGE innovation. It is clear that Nintendo has no intention of using that specific intellectual property, but they are using copyright to stifle creativity and innovation. If this sort of activity were legal, it would spawn an entire industry or developers, and distribution network, and who know what else!
How about a popup, when sharing an article, the requires the user to pass a comprehension an critical thinking test. The user must answer 3 questions about the article, and state whether or not the article actually cites and valid sources. Before sharing, facebook should require that the user also provide links to 3 other sources that corroborate and validate the news.
The real solution to this is mandatory licensing of content.
This solution was implemented decades ago for radio and has created a reasonable balance between content producers and consumers. It encourages innovation by allowing anyone (with a license) to broadcast any music, and pay the regulated fees.
Mandatory licensing would Kill cable TV dead, as literally hundreds (thousands?)of distributors would have the option to deliver content in a format preferred by any given audience, and restore a fair balance between the right of Intelectual property holders to earn a profit from their work, and the right of the public to use that property as they see fit.
More like global school-yard bully. There's not actually a lot of policing going on. Really though, it all just a way to justify transferring trillions of dollars into the pockets of their biggest campaign supporters via grossly inflated military procurement contracts.
solves most of the concerns with these shennanigans. If registration was required for copyright so that all media was available from all providers, it wouldn't really matter who the provider was. The business would go to whomever could provide the best rates and services.
For anyone particularly concerned about this, the solution is simply to have a task that runs every time after login that starts a self-destruct timer in the background. If you don't launch the kill-switch, or if the tether to your smartwatch isn't available, it nukes everything.
What you are talking about sounds a lot like trickle-down economics. While the theory behind this is good. The reality is, that the private corporations do NOT reinvest profits, and in cases of public funding, generally don't even complete the job.
The previous suggestion of creating a standard that ALL emergency networks MUST use, and then allowing for regional deployment of those services by the users of said service (or local/state agencies) is much more likely to meet with actual success.