Verizon's Piracy Effort Includes Throttling Repeat Offenders

[ethicalfan]

In the US, UK, France, Germany and Japan the "philosophical debate about stealing" is irrelevant. In the US, the copyright owner (anyone who creates content - all of us) has the exclusive right to determine who may distribute that copyrighted content Title 17 United States Code Section 106. Anyone who violates the copyright owners rights (i.e. distributes their music on BitTorrent), with certain exceptions, can be sued by the copyright owner for up to $150,000 per instance of infringement. The exceptions are for "fair use" which is parody (Weird Al), scholarly (putting it in a scientific paper or disertation, i.e. not for profit). Distributing to 200 million people on BitTorrent is not fair use - ISPs made $50B on broadband subscriptions that come with unlimited illegal free content - that is not fair use. Posting on Youtube is not Fair Use - Google made $14B profit in the last 12 months.

 

[Scar89]

Wow, so many anti-pirates. Acting like its destroying these corps, why then, do they continue to post billions in earnings? Costing jobs? I say too much is going to the guys at the top and actors are over valued. Do some people pirate because they can? Sure, but others do because they simply could not afford the content otherwise. Others do not not want the rest of the crap on the disks(sometimes up to 3 things on the disk telling me not to pirate on something I bought!!!??! Ads, ads, more ads).

We need something like steam for movies and shows.
I used to get alot of games without paying, but with the rise of good internet speeds and steams excellent pricing and sales, that number has dropped to 0.
Examples:
Borderlands 1 GOTY, friends and I bought a 4 pack for $20 on sale, $5 per copy. Price at stores: $40+ single copy!
Borderlands 2, friends and I bought a 4 pack pre-order, with Mechromancer DLC and other stuff, 10% discount for owning the first one: $160, $40 per copy. Price at stores: $70+ single copy!
Sleeping dogs: $25 steam sale. Price at stores: $70+

If someone makes a content distribution program for movies and shows, that's like steam I'm in. Maybe the files are encrypted and can only be played in the program, but you can transfer and play these on any of your devices with it installed. Also it should have great sales and deals!

 

[anonymous_user]

[citation][nom]edogawa[/nom]but times have changes where there are quick and cheap avenues to access media.[/citation]
I am not going to defend piracy, however, there are instances where content is available in one country but not in another (or at least not yet). I repeat: this does not justify piracy, however, it does show that the distribution of media is not perfect and there aren't always legal avenues (short of moving to another country or waiting).

 

[AnUnusedUsername]

Eventually, SOMEONE will figure out that piracy isn't a problem, it's a symptom of trying to sell something that costs nothing to produce.

Find a way to fund the actual production of music/software/media/etc before you do it. Don't take out a loan and then expect people to pay for what costs nothing for you to reproduce.

Is it stealing if it costs nothing to produce the copy? I don't know, or really care (I think plagiarism is a more accurate term). I'm not concerned with the piracy issue, I'm concerned with the fact that digital files are incompatible with capitalism.

 

[unimatrixalpha]

It's about time!

 

[jaquith]

Hmm...Music use Spotify/Pandora or similar streaming service, Movies use HULU or similar streaming service, Applications use a 'free' ones (OpenOffice, GIMP, ... you name it), OS use Linux (Ubuntu), etc..etc. There's SOooo much free stuff there's little reason to waste your time.

Now for 'Games' I really prefer to purchase them especially if you're going to Multiplayer. If you have an Xbox then a rental service e.g. GameFly.

If you've got money then (paid) Music Spotify or Rhapsody, Movies Netflix, etc.

Bottom-line, there's very little reason to 'steal' via BitTorrent services not to mention the very high risk of infecting your PC.

I'm not judging and frankly I don't give a rip what other folks do -- as long as it doesn't affect me. However, stealing crap only makes everyone else's costs go up!

 

[ethicalfan]

Can music, movies, software, books and games truly be infinitely duplicated and infinitely distributed on the internet at zero cost? It seems unlikely that Verizon shareholders and bondholders would agree that there is no cost to distributing information on the Internet. After Verizon’s $23B investment in their super-high-speed FiOS network they found that it was costing $4000 per subscriber to build out the new service. Google spends as much as a billion dollars a quarter on infrastructure. Indeed, during the initial growth of the Internet, from the first quarter of 1996 to the fourth quarter of 2000, investment in communications equipment grew from approximately $62 billion per year to over $135 billion per year in constant 1996 dollars. Additionally, the more than 85 million broadband internet subscribers in the United States pay an average of $42 a month for service, totaling $39 billion annually. What then is AnUnusedUsername referring to when he says zero cost?

 

[Scar89]

Hulu: Not available in your country yet.
Netflix: Not available in your country yet.

 

[AnUnusedUsername]

[citation][nom]ethicalfan[/nom]Can music, movies, software, books and games truly be infinitely duplicated and infinitely distributed on the internet at zero cost? It seems unlikely that Verizon shareholders and bondholders would agree that there is no cost to distributing information on the Internet. After Verizon’s $23B investment in their super-high-speed FiOS network they found that it was costing $4000 per subscriber to build out the new service. Google spends as much as a billion dollars a quarter on infrastructure. Indeed, during the initial growth of the Internet, from the first quarter of 1996 to the fourth quarter of 2000, investment in communications equipment grew from approximately $62 billion per year to over $135 billion per year in constant 1996 dollars. Additionally, the more than 85 million broadband internet subscribers in the United States pay an average of $42 a month for service, totaling $39 billion annually. What then is AnUnusedUsername referring to when he says zero cost?[/citation]

Broadband internet is going to expand regardless of what it's used for. You aren't seriously arguing that we wouldn't have broadband if people didn't pirate things, are you?

The cost of copying a file is exclusively what it costs to actually process the copy and transmit the file, which is approximately zero. Here's an oversimplified estimate if you REALLY want one:

R&D cost is zero. The file you're copying was already created. You pay ~$50 a month for your internet connection. Obviously, this is enough for the ISP to cover their infrastructure costs. It's most likely much higher than their costs. Lets say it takes ten minutes to download a file. Those ten minutes equate to about a penny of service cost. (50/31/24/6=.0112). Let's say the download is coming from someone's desktop that isn't currently doing ANYTHING else (if it was a server it would be serving multiple people so the cost estimate is much more complex. Even a desktop would be running an OS, but nonetheless) Lets say it's a $2000 desktop and it takes a second of the hardware's five year lifespan to copy the file. That equates to 1.2x10^-5(2000/1825/24/60/60). So the ACTUAL cost of copying a file that takes ten minutes to download is about a penny. So no, it's not zero. But it is EFFECTIVELY zero compared to the $60 it would cost to purchase it retail.

And no, I don't actually support piracy. I just want people to understand that it's a symptom of a much larger problem.

 

[kdw75]

This is a big deal to everyone, even those that never download copyrighted material, because it means the ISP is sifting through your data. Time for a new ISP that respects your privacy. If the government tried doing this is would violate your rights.

 

[jonjonjon]

"However, termination of a consumer’s Internet service is not a part of any ISP’s Copyright Alert System program."

no kidding. you think any isp is going to loose customers to make some movie studio happy. if verizon throttled my internet i would switch isp's instantly. lets just face it piracy is here to stay and there is nothing ANYONE can do about it. the sooner the movie industry realizes this the better off they will be.

 

[edogawa]

[citation][nom]zoobiewa[/nom]This IS a philosophical debate about what constitutes stealing. That is where you misunderstand. There are a million ways to complicate this issue and show it is full of nuance. Let's start with things that used to not be considered stealing but could be:A song is playing on the radio. You have not paid to listen to it. Society has allowed you to hear it for free because it has negotiated something out. A microscope discovers that when meat is left out, flies deposit eggs on it. You "know" that information for free, despite careers spent on developing those systems that led you to wash your hands and cook your meat. The discovery was published in a peer-reviewed journal which you never paid for. You have stolen that knowledge. Your education was paid for by neither yourself or your parents, but a small percentage of everyone's. You own almost nothing in your mind. It was created by a thousand generations of millions of hard workers standing on top of hard workers, sweating thinkers. Just about everything you have was given for free.The planet grew thousands of forests on top of thousands of forests, only to have your burn this coagulation of millions of years in order to get to the gym and work out. The sun burns for free.It is pure arrogance to feel as if some product was so full of toil and accomplishment that they can deny other people their liberty. This is just one angle of attack, just one perspective that causes the category of "stealing" to become destabilized. This says nothing of cultures by which respect is gained by giving the most away. This does not bring in the eloquent argument ad absurdum of illegal primes. I simply say that a "legal right to use" is not as concrete as you appear to think. It is nothing less than an expression of power that understands a contract is only such as its ability to enforce it. This is merely an argument about power. Verizon is attempting to figure out how to flex that power. Illegality, stealing, piracy, etc. all whirl and dance as blurred, unlocalized spectres in a global conflict of ideas that we use to define concepts like freedom, expression, entertainment, work, value, money, fairness, and humanity.[/citation]

This is one giant pile of "no-***," Sherlock, there are many ways to complicate it, but none of those.

All this is common sense that anyone with half a brain can figure out. This isn't philosophical debate, it's common sense, straight to the point, stuff people create is being "Un-Rightfully used.

Excuse me language earlier, but really...it's not that difficult to tell what is theft and what isn't. If I created a song that became popular, and wanted to sell it, I would put it on a distribution site like Amazon or iTunes. If people started to share it, I would lose money or potential customers, so would I be upset? Yes. Those people never got my permission to listen to the song, nor should they ever unless they pay.

Verizon has nothing to benefit from by causing people to stop pirating, it will force people to buy stuff legally from stores and get people off their backs about piracy.

 

[edogawa]

[citation][nom]anonymous_user[/nom]I am not going to defend piracy, however, there are instances where content is available in one country but not in another (or at least not yet). I repeat: this does not justify piracy, however, it does show that the distribution of media is not perfect and there aren't always legal avenues (short of moving to another country or waiting).[/citation]

I can only hope other countries can get access to media more and more, lack of content in other countries has always been a problem.

 

[jaquith]

[citation][nom]Scar89[/nom]Hulu: Not available in your country yet.Netflix: Not available in your country yet.[/citation]
I assume you meant to say 'my' as in your Country. Search 'Free TV Streaming', heck if I can watch TV Shows all over the World then I assume so can you. Regarding 'Netflix', I don't know what Country you're in, as a substitute try Amazon 'Prime' under (Unlimited Instant Videos).

 

[jehanne]

"Toring, toring, toring, keep those boxes toring, rawhide!"

 

[BriboCN]

[citation][nom]ethicalfan[/nom]In the US, UK, France, Germany and Japan the "philosophical debate about stealing" is irrelevant. In the US, the copyright owner (anyone who creates content - all of us) has the exclusive right to determine who may distribute that copyrighted content Title 17 United States Code Section 106. Anyone who violates the copyright owners rights (i.e. distributes their music on BitTorrent), with certain exceptions, can be sued by the copyright owner for up to $150,000 per instance of infringement. The exceptions are for "fair use" which is parody (Weird Al), scholarly (putting it in a scientific paper or disertation, i.e. not for profit). Distributing to 200 million people on BitTorrent is not fair use - ISPs made $50B on broadband subscriptions that come with unlimited illegal free content - that is not fair use. Posting on Youtube is not Fair Use - Google made $14B profit in the last 12 months.[/citation]

Nice try buddy. This is a legal issue pure and simple. Google and ISPs use teams of lawyers to protect their positions. Verizon and Time Warner are coming up with this throttling system not because they believe it is morally right to stop people who pirate games and movies, but because if they do nothing they will find themselves in a lawsuit they will likely lose. They are doing what they believe is the bare minimum that will keep themselves on a solid legal footing.

Want to prove a moral right to download "illegal" content? Raise a ton of money and hire a top notch legal team and begin bribing, I mean donating to the campaigns of politicians that will support you.

 

[BriboCN]

^ Linked the wrong post. My bad, but you get the idea

 

[azxcvbnm321]

And where does good content come from? Does it just appear by magic or do people have to spend time and effort, not to mention money, to create it? Do the actors in a movie work for free? Are all the cool special effects put in by volunteers?

There is no philosophical debate because the vast vast majority of humans agree that people should be paid for work they do. I don't know one person who still supports slavery. Humanity also agrees that the creators have the moral and legal right to do what they want with their creations, that is they own it and it is up to them if they want to allow people to use what they created and at what price.

As for the phony "intellectuals" defending piracy who can't understand how piracy hurts legitimate businesses, have you considered the effects of substitution? What do I mean? If you steal an apple and eat it, you are no longer hungry, thus the baker or whatever food outlet loses the sale you would have made if you didn't steal and satisfy your hunger. Likewise, there is a need for entertainment and only so many hours in the day. Spend 16 hours watching pirated movies and playing pirated games and you've satisfied your need for entertainment. Plus there is no more time for you to purchase or consume legitimate entertainment. Therefore the legitimate sellers lose out.

But what about the argument that pirated files are crap and you would never pay for them anyway? It ties in to the above where you have only a limited amount of time and CHOOSE how to best use that time to satisfy your needs. If pirated files were crap, then you wouldn't spend your precious time on them. You would find something else more entertaining and better to do. The very fact that people are pirating proves that these are valuable and worthwhile goods. People do not spend their leisure time digging holes and filling them up again. The fact that you are using the pirated good means that it's the best option to satisfy whatever need you have at the time. If there was something better to do, like sex with a supermodel, you would stop using the pirated file.

Stop pretending there's a defense to piracy, there is none. No "intellectual" argument can stand up, it is plain wrong.

 

[zoobiewa]

[citation][nom]edogawa[/nom]This is one giant pile of "no-***," Sherlock, there are many ways to complicate it, but none of those.All this is common sense that anyone with half a brain can figure out. This isn't philosophical debate, it's common sense, straight to the point, stuff people create is being "Un-Rightfully used.Excuse me language earlier, but really...it's not that difficult to tell what is theft and what isn't. If I created a song that became popular, and wanted to sell it, I would put it on a distribution site like Amazon or iTunes. If people started to share it, I would lose money or potential customers, so would I be upset? Yes. Those people never got my permission to listen to the song, nor should they ever unless they pay.Verizon has nothing to benefit from by causing people to stop pirating, it will force people to buy stuff legally from stores and get people off their backs about piracy.[/citation]

Common sense was completely decimated by Clifford Geertz as a subjective cultural construction. You are arguing from within the system. I am saying that there are other systems. We negotiate in and out of them. Everything is philosophical.

 

[bourne077]

[citation][nom]edogawa[/nom]Well, your statement made a lot of sense in a way, but this isn't a philosophical debate of any kind.There is no debate if they are or not stealing, they are in one way or another, and that has to stop. Pirates have, people who download something without paying for it, have no legal "RIGHT" to use or view that content. The illegal piracy of content, if it hurts sale or not is irrelevant too, even if 10% of pirates were forced to buy something, that is profit gain. In a sense, it is a moral issue too, but you have to be really cheap to pirate content, most things are not that expensive.[/citation]

Here's some links to articles perhaps you'd like to peruse over? In essence what they're saying is that people who download actually spend more purchasing content than people who do not. Go figure must be lost sales right?

http://www.metalinjection.net/lates...l-downloaders-purchase-the-most-music-legally

http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkai...tudy-finds-internet-downloads-increase-sales/

http://carpanatomy.earlhaig.ca/the-non-existent-threat-of-online-piracy-may-actually-help-sales

In the last article particularly I like these lines.........

Also, a study in 2005 by the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) found that college students illegally downloading movies were responsible for 44% of the industry’s domestic losses. With numbers like that, it is easy to see why private corporations would want to end online piracy. After all, if the studies were to be believed, billions are lost to piracy every year.

The validity of these studies, however, is questionable at best. Almost all studies conducted on piracy share something in common: they were sponsored by corporations in the entertainment industry.

In reality, the entertainment industry only stands to gain by putting out inflated numbers. Interestingly, the aforementioned study by the MPAA was later corrected, bringing the percentage of industry loss down from 44% to 15%. The MPAA apologized and blamed the mistake on an “isolated error.”

Oh and I've saved the best one for last just for you ;-)

There is also evidence that contradicts the idea that every illegal download results in a lost sale. Four years ago, the Journal of Political Economy released a study on the relationship between illegal music downloads and the sale of music. They found that illegal music downloads had indeed affected sales… by a whopping 0.7%.

Enjoy!!

 

[AnUnusedUsername]

[citation][nom]azxcvbnm321[/nom]And where does good content come from? Does it just appear by magic or do people have to spend time and effort, not to mention money, to create it? Do the actors in a movie work for free? Are all the cool special effects put in by volunteers? There is no philosophical debate because the vast vast majority of humans agree that people should be paid for work they do. I don't know one person who still supports slavery. Humanity also agrees that the creators have the moral and legal right to do what they want with their creations, that is they own it and it is up to them if they want to allow people to use what they created and at what price.As for the phony "intellectuals" defending piracy who can't understand how piracy hurts legitimate businesses, have you considered the effects of substitution? What do I mean? If you steal an apple and eat it, you are no longer hungry, thus the baker or whatever food outlet loses the sale you would have made if you didn't steal and satisfy your hunger. Likewise, there is a need for entertainment and only so many hours in the day. Spend 16 hours watching pirated movies and playing pirated games and you've satisfied your need for entertainment. Plus there is no more time for you to purchase or consume legitimate entertainment. Therefore the legitimate sellers lose out. But what about the argument that pirated files are crap and you would never pay for them anyway? It ties in to the above where you have only a limited amount of time and CHOOSE how to best use that time to satisfy your needs. If pirated files were crap, then you wouldn't spend your precious time on them. You would find something else more entertaining and better to do. The very fact that people are pirating proves that these are valuable and worthwhile goods. People do not spend their leisure time digging holes and filling them up again. The fact that you are using the pirated good means that it's the best option to satisfy whatever need you have at the time. If there was something better to do, like sex with a supermodel, you would stop using the pirated file. Stop pretending there's a defense to piracy, there is none. No "intellectual" argument can stand up, it is plain wrong.[/citation]

You're missing the point. Piracy isn't the problem. It's a SYMPTOM of the problem. The problem is that there's no reasonable way to fund development of media in a capitalist society.

No matter WHAT you try, you aren't going to be able to sell something that costs nothing to produce without people (i.e. pirates) undercutting you. The only real solution is a universal tax that pays musicians/developers/etc. But we all know that isn't going to happen.

You just have to realize that it's not an issue of pirates being morally wrong. It's an issue of our society not funding artists until AFTER they've already finished "production" being morally wrong. We try to make up for it by selling the copies, but A:That primarily benefits the publishers and B:It causes piracy.

 

[madjimms]

[citation][nom]edogawa[/nom]This isn't a big deal unless your a pirate who is illegally downloading content. I honestly don't get the mindset of pirates, they know(or should know) what their doing is wrong, and that they have no legal right to download said file. I always see pirates say it won't hurt sales because it's not physical goods, but it's not different to entering an amusement park, you have no "RIGHT" to be there or to use said file.Only thing I disagree on is the punishment for pirates being caught, some people are charged 1 million dollars? They should just pay 3-4x the cost of what they downloaded as punishment.[/citation]
Making a duplicate copy of something isn't TAKING from anyone, its CLONING!

 

[bystander]

[citation][nom]Scar89[/nom]Wow, so many anti-pirates. Acting like its destroying these corps, why then, do they continue to post billions in earnings? Costing jobs? I say too much is going to the guys at the top and actors are over valued. [/citation]

You fail to understand that pirating has killed many companies, and many great games that we'd otherwise have. Due to pirates, we get only the games which they believe they can make a lot of money on, because most games will lose money and companies are not in it to lose money.

I'd love to have no piracy. The PC platform would have a lot more focus, rather than consoles. We get a lot more types of games, as they afford to produce more niche games, but because these games will lose money, as pirates have run rampid, we don't.

 

[bystander]

I find it puzzling that so many people believe they have a right to pirate. Entertainment is not something that is required, and entertainment can be found in many ways, most of which are healthier activities than being glued to a PC.

 

[Scar89]

You fail to understand that pirating has killed many companies, and many great games that we'd otherwise have. Due to pirates, we get only the games which they believe they can make a lot of money on, because most games will lose money and companies are not in it to lose money.

I'd love to have no piracy. The PC platform would have a lot more focus, rather than consoles. We get a lot more types of games, as they afford to produce more niche games, but because these games will lose money, as pirates have run rampid, we don't.

Well, I that comment was aimed more at the movie/television industry. You see them claiming big damage from piracy and then looks at their profits, that are through the roof. As I said before, alot of people download stuff they wouldn't have bought anyway, so there's no loss of profit there. I agree that there are some that pirate no matter what, when they could buy it and this can do damage.

There seems to be a rift in the old distribution models. Content is released free on tv/pay tv/pay at the cinema->6months to a year later its release on disk for high price at retail(full of adds and crap). If you miss a show/movie, you either have to wait for a re-run or wait a long time for it to come to disk.
Most pirates are in this rift because they want to download it and watch it(without ads) at a time of their choosing.
I imagine Hulu and Netflix are taking the edge off of this but they aren't available outside of the US.

Also, the whole DRM thing is a real turn off to some people buying games. I know Steam is like DRM but I've yet to have a problem with it and you can do offline mode if you want. I'm talking about those games with the stupid install limits, or always on Spyware like stuff. I avoid these games all together, I stopped buying Ubisoft games for this reason, (I have heard that got rid of this, might check them out again soon).

Sidenote: Yay for crowd funding, already donated to Star Citizen, Interstellar Marines, Planetary Annihilation and Overgrowth.