DreamTeamDownloads1, FTP Help, Movies, Bollywood, Applications, etc. & Mature Sex Forum, Rapidshare, Filefactory, Freakshare, Rapidgator, Turbobit, & More MULTI Filehosts - Some ISPs Refuse to Help the US Block Pirates

- Piracy/LEGAL/Hackers/SPIES/AI /CRYPTO/Scams & Internet News (http://www.dreamteamdownloads1.com/forumdisplay.php?f=276)

- - Some ISPs Refuse to Help the US Block Pirates (http://www.dreamteamdownloads1.com/showthread.php?t=227027)

Some ISPs Refuse to Help the US Block Pirates

Has Your ISP Joined the US “Six Strikes” Anti-Piracy Scheme?

Posted: 03 Aug 2012 by Ernesto

Later this year, the Center for Copyright Information (CCI) will start to track down ‘pirates’ as part of an agreement all major U.S. Internet providers struck with the MPAA and RIAA.

The parties agreed on a system through which copyright infringers are warned that they are breaking the law. After six warnings ISPs may then take a variety of repressive measures, which include slowing down offenders’ connections and temporary disconnections.

While we’ve written a fair number of articles on the topic, many people assume that all ISPs are part of the agreement. However, this is certainly not the case. In fact, only five Internet providers have agreed to send out warnings to their customers.

In alphabetical order these are AT&T, Cablevision, Comcast, Time Warner Cable and Verizon.

In total the ISPs above cover roughly 75% of all U.S. broadband internet customers. This is significant, but it nonetheless begs the question – why are the rest of the providers not involved?

Quite a few prominent names are not listed. Centurylink, Charter and Cox all have millions of subscribers, but are not taking part in the “six strikes” scheme. Not to forget the 100+ smaller providers across the United States who are also missing in action.

TorrentFreak contacted several of the larger Internet providers above to find out why, but they were reluctant to comment on their motivations. A Cox spokesperson was most vocal and said that they “have decided not to participate for internal reasons.”

Luckily Dane Jasper, CEO of the much smaller Sonic.net, was willing to comment on the efforts to make ISPs responsible for online piracy. He told TorrentFreak that ISPs are not setup to police the Internet and that the entertainment industries should look for a solution closer to home.

“ISPs provide an essential utility: connection. We are not equipped to police the actions of individuals,” Jasper says.

“I think history has shown that you cannot solve piracy by force, but that industries need to adapt around it with business models that allow consumers to access the content they want easily and at a not-unreasonable cost.”

However, the above is not the reason why Sonic.net isn’t taking part in the “six strikes” scheme. As it turns out, the RIAA and MPAA never bothered to ask Sonic and many other smaller Internet providers to join in.

“It isn’t because we refused, but because we were not asked. I know at least 100 small to medium ISPs through my trade association memberships, and have heard of no independent ISPs being approached at all,” Jasper says.

It’s not clear why they were left out, but it’s likely that it would have been too much trouble to reach consensus with so many parties involved.

When it comes to finding a solution to online piracy Sonic.net’s CEO is clear. The entertainment industries should ensure their legal offering is superior in terms of convenience and availability compared to that offered by pirates.

Jasper believes that taking away people’s incentive to pirate is key, and he mentions Pandora and Spotify as good examples of services that are able to deflate piracy.

“The point is that the music business has had to evolve to survive, moving away from albums and record stores to more innovative methods of distribution that consumers have responded to rather than turning to piracy out of an unwillingness to participate in the old model,” he says.

“I suspect that Apple TV, Roku and Netflix have similar beneficial effects on video, but a lack of uniform availability plus rather high prices and restrictive viewing terms hold back this solution,” Jasper concludes.

The MPAA and RIAA would not directly disagree that innovation is an important factor to curb piracy. But nonetheless, they hope that warning emails will also help. That people can bypass the scheme by using a VPN, cyberlockers, or even switching ISPs doesn’t change a thing.

At this point it is still unknown when the first warning letters will be sent. It is expected that the first ISPs will start later this year, and each will roll out their participation at their own pace.
END

Well guys you know the answer..... go with the ISPs that refuse to co-operate with this ridiculous action, or use 1 of the many Proxies we have provided you with in this section. ;)

It has been all positive news that I have posted in here today......Pirates around the world are slowly starting to win... :thumb:

Re: Some ISPs Refuse to Help the US Block Pirates

A lot of subscribers will leave AT&T, Cablevision, Comcast, Time Warner Cable and Verizon.

Re: Some ISPs Refuse to Help the US Block Pirates

The problem in the US is lack of competition among telcos. You usually only have one or sometimes two providers to pick from and the majority of the time it will be one of the two on the list here.

Personally I am dead in the middle with the provider of AT&T or I can choose to change providers and get Time Warner instead. Neither will help me tell those providers how much I hate this idea and agreement. The only other choice I have locally is no internet.

What has happened and exactly why the internet is in such poor reputation compared to globally, is that most of the telcos have made exclusive deals with townships and cities. It runs like this. We will wire your town for cable so that your citizens can get cable tv. In return to get us in there and to invest this huge amount of money, you will guaranty us tax breaks, and allow us to be the only cable company in town. Because of this, there is no competition. No drive to improve services and drop costs. It's a take it or leave it deal.

For the now, these companies will be looking at torrenting as the big band width user. It's a bit harder to prove cyberlocker file sharing. The RIAA had this back door plan to enforce cut off of those that will not stop file sharing and until recently never mentioned it, waiting on the deal to be set into concrete. Since the telco's have found out about it, they have bucked up and that is supposedly the reason it hasn't already been put into service. For the now, it is backed up till fall while they fight over cutting off customers from the internet. Needless, none of the providers want to do that.

Re: Some ISPs Refuse to Help the US Block Pirates

Thanks for clarifying that, Photostill.

Some internet providers are monopolizing the networks, here as well. You’ve got the cable company and the phone company.
They don't make deals with the local (village/city) governments but with the regional (state) government.

In the European Community, the European lawmakers are forcing the governments to liberalize the market. So the one monopolizing company is forced to share his network with the other one. This way, also new players can come on the market. If not now, it will be for the immediate future.

Peer to peer sharing requires a lot of bandwidth, so the providers don't like it. They tried to limit bandwidth for peer to peer sharing once but the government stepped in. They said that all traffic must be treated equally.

The providers do have a problem, because a lot of subscribers pay for a fast internet connection, with much volume and high bandwidth, because of peer to peer and downloading. If they don't have the possibility to do so, they will get a slower and cheaper subscription. And the providers will lose money.

Re: Some ISPs Refuse to Help the US Block Pirates

Here their plan is to warn, warn, warn, and then slow the customers internet speeds to near 56K. When they do that, no one will want internet at that speed and will cut the account if not under contract.

The whole idea is you are guilty until proven innocent. You the accused will have to prove a negative (which is always much harder to do) to maintain your innocence. Plus it will cost you money from your pocket to dispute it. $35 per time and fair use is not a defense.

It's a rigged game. I suspect if it gets bad enough, the ISPs will buck up because the one thing none of them want to do is piss off the public. The RIAA and the MPAA have not yet understood the public's determination to have a free net nor have they understood properly the reasoning behind the failure of SOPA/PIPPA to pass.

This is likely to start a real upset public into actually doing things they haven't planned on happening. Much of Europe doesn't understand why the US public hasn't already started with protests and the like. It takes a lot to get the public out of its lack-a-daisy mood into action. Once it happens, the genie rarely goes back in the bottle quickly nor quietly.