Illegal downloaders face internet ban

[one eyed jack]

No doubt some of you will be poo- pooing this but be interesting to hear your thoughts

[Steve R]

Not much point in having a computer then.

[Sam Slater]

Not sure how I feel about this.

Technically, I've downloaded illegally when I downloaded the Atom series that I missed on BBC1 over Christmas. Morally it was a victim-less crime and I'd already paid to watch the series through my licence fee anyway.

Just last night I downloaded Sunday's Lost episode that I'd missed because I was fucking around with some drivers that were crashing my pc. Little did I realise the episode was repeated on Sky 2. Again, I'd paid for watching Lost through my subscription to Sky.

I've never downloaded anything that I've not paid for....at least not intentionally.

However, the law's the law. It just seems to me that the internet is shopping, socialising and education all rolled into one, and denying anyone those three is very harsh, unless these bans are to just be temporary - which seems fairer.

I mean, I can buy a stolen dvd from HMV today and while illegal, HMV wouldn't ban me from their stores. They'd ban the guy that actually stole it. Dowloading stolen material is just receiving stolen goods, not stealing itself. I agree with fines, but not bannings.

I just remembered.... I read up on George Orwell's essays last summer. Somebody had been kind enough (or stupid enough) to gather them together onto one web page. Were these essays under copyright? It never said and I never checked. How do you know that when we quote somebody on here via a sig or in conversation, that latin/Shakespearian quote isn't copyright by someone?

Isn't quoting a line, or verse from a song technically illegal?

[Flat_Eric]

Big Brother again.

It's bollocks anyway, because a lot of the the pirate servers are all offshore and untouchable (at least by UK legislation), so all it will do is sweep up the little fish like Sam for downloading the occasional missed TV episode.

Basically it's fannying about round the edges to try to be "seen to be doing something" while ignoring the root of the problem.

But what else would you expect from NuLabour?

- Eric

[Sam Slater]

I wasn't trying to make excuses. I was comparing physical theft to theft over the net. A receiver wouldn't be banned from a store, a thief would.

They're talking of banning both thieves and receivers over the net which doesn't mirror traditional thieving and receiving. Why not fine and ban illegal uploaders and just fine downloaders?

Imagine HMV banning receivers? They wouldn't have much custom. Lets not beat around the bush here; not all of us know a thief, but it's more likely we know someone who's purchased a cd/dvd in a dodgy market stall, or purchased a pair of jeans/ps2 game from a character in the local pub. (I haven't btw - I like e receipt and shiny pamphlet with my cds!).

There are many more receivers than thieves and it would be bad business to ban all receivers from your store. Banning the thieves means less items stolen and more customers for them. Banning all receivers would just encourage the receivers buying more stolen goods because they'd be cut off from buying legally due to their ban!

I'm not arguing over the illegality of illegal downloading, just questioning the theorised punishments. What would an isp do if it did a proper, full invastigation and found 50% of their customers had downloaded something illegally at one time or another? I'd love to see a company ban 50% of their customers and survive !laugh!

[one eyed jack]

Eric wrote:

a lot of the the pirate servers are all offshore and untouchable.

True and not true. If they hav e aphysical server they can be touched. I reckon we will see a task force that wil be dealing with that.

If that wasnt the case, how come a lo to fo us surfers dont accidentally happen across real nasty stuff like kids and snuff flicks then.

I think freedom of the internet has been abused and you'd be sur[rised as part of the governemtns white paper and europe will have to tow the line too to start regulating it and this is all because left unregualted, people who abuse this have torn the proverbial arse out of it that various authorities are sitting up and now having to pay attention, ie the tax folk listening to the constant moans about loss of revenue. the police with regard to obscene material (mainly peadophilia, squishing and other nasties) and there are think tanks thinking already they can make a fortune providing the services to police this.

It is only a matter of time Eric.

[Sam Slater]

I was listening to a podcast -I think it was ABC in Australia- about economics and philosophy. The success and boom of the internet outstrips any other invention for the margins of success over such a relatively short period.

They concluded that is was mainly due to it being unregulated that it's become so successful. In countries where the internet is heavily regulated, it's hardly changed life at all, with their users feeling increasingly left behind the rest of the world.

They compared it to the success of America during the gold rush and treks into the wild west. Open for abuse, sure, but it was boomtime in spite of the outlaws.

[one eyed jack]

Yeah but a lo to fpeople missed the gold rush sam and with every boom time, comes a recession and that is the shadow of authority that is going to bear down upon us sooner than some people think and I'm not talking about the BBFC...It is more far reaching than that.

But there wil be good to ocme out of this darkness though. more money, faster broadband. You wait and see.

Control is the word I think people should fear.