Surface Pro (2017) vs Surface Pro 4
or yet another erosion of internet freedom? French Internet users who persistently download copyright-protected music and films could soon find themselves without any internet access, in a legislative move that has been hailed by President Nicolas Sarkozy as a "decisive moment for the future of a civilised internet".
"The group who brokered the deal said the measures were intended to curb *casual piracy* rather than tackle large scale pirate groups."
So they are going after the minnows and not treating the core of the problem? That's the way I'm reading it anyway.
Until the tackle the large file sharers on a world scale it's not going to go away.
Large scale pirate groups are being targeted separately, and it is happening on a world scale, although with less enthusiasm in the far east, and some parts of Eastern Europe.
A step, albeit a small one, in the right direction. octal makes the key point and I suppose in the context of the wider problem the action has a hint of window dressing.
I doubt if 'window dressing' is the term that will be used by those who suddenly find they have no internet access.
The French mean business with this, they have worried away at internet piracy for a long time, and now they're going to do something about it. This is a first step, there'll be other initiatives as time goes on.
Yes of course. "Window dressing" I think in terms of the overall impact on the issue.
I am pleased the French are taking a stand, I simply question how effective it will be looking at the bigger picture. Mixing my metaphors slightly perhaps it's at least a piece of the jigsaw in the bigger picture.
The additional point which laurie53 makes is interesting. A similar approach to other breaches of national law is very attractive. Part of me says however that it could be a slippery slope.
(Sorry another metaphor)
I favour, just, a regulated internet to allow for the effective prosecution of national law. My dilemma is I really do not know how it could be achieved without some perhaps unacceptable loss of personal freedom. More than anything else I think the ethical issues of freedom are staring us in the face in the UK.
It seems to be a reasonably sensible idea and they are going to give a warning, before removing the internet access.
But what happens if the thief isn't the only one in the household using the internet connection. I presume the households internet access will be blocked, so all members of the household will suffer, not just the wrongdoer.
That would be down to whoever has the internet connection in their name to control.
Nobody has picked up on the point that laurie53 made about why can't they do the same for child porn.
Also this would be a very good insentive to get any wireless networks encrypted ie all those poeple who say "I don't care if someone else uses my connection" they might if it gets their connection terminated.
from a headline grabbing politician. If everyone cared to look into their respective isp's t&c's they would find adequate coverage. By example the following is from virgins t&c:
4.1. You are prohibited from storing, distributing, transmitting or causing to be published any Prohibited Material through your use of the Services. Examples of "Prohibited Material" shall be determined by us (acting in our sole discretion) and shall include (but are not limited to) material that:
4.1.1. is threatening, harassing, invasive of privacy, defamatory, racist, obscene, indecent, offensive, abusive, harmful or malicious;
4.1.2. infringes or breaches any third party's intellectual property rights (which shall include, but not be limited to copyright, trade mark, design rights, trade secrets, patents, moral rights, paternity rights and performance rights) - this includes the use, distribution and/or copying of any material without the express consent of the owner;
4.1.3. is in violation of any law or regulation that is enforceable in the United Kingdom;
4.1.4. unsolicited promotional or marketing material;
4.1.5. chain letters or pyramid selling schemes; and
4.1.6. programs containing viruses, hoaxes or any tools designed to compromise the security of other websites and/or systems. However, you may pass samples of malware in a safe manner to appropriate agencies for the purpose of combatting its spread.
4.2. For the avoidance of doubt, the storage upon and/or distribution over our systems by any User of "pirated" software, or any other materials that are not expressly licensed to the User, will constitute a violation of this section 4 of the AUP.
4.3. We reserve the right to inform and/or report the storage, distribution, transmission, retransmission or publication of Prohibited Material (and/or any other materials which may constitute unlawful conduct by Users) to relevant authorities and/or regulators, in addition to any action we may take as outlined in this AUP.
I think that does a good job of covering most things. So the mechanisms are already in place in most places.
But meaningless without enforcement.
There may be examples of ISP intervention but I am not aware of any. Are you aware of any proactive ISP's?
This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.