this post was submitted on 19 Sep 2024
295 points (99.7% liked)

Technology

58138 readers
4486 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Four more large Internet service providers told the US Supreme Court this week that ISPs shouldn't be forced to aggressively police copyright infringement on broadband networks.

While the ISPs worry about financial liability from lawsuits filed by major record labels and other copyright holders, they also argue that mass terminations of Internet users accused of piracy "would harm innocent people by depriving households, schools, hospitals, and businesses of Internet access." The legal question presented by the case "is exceptionally important to the future of the Internet," they wrote in a brief filed with the Supreme Court on Monday.

top 32 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] NutinButNet@hilariouschaos.com 18 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

There would be no more internet access for anyone anymore if that were allowed.

Soooo many insecure networks out there ripe for the picking if you know what you’re doing and have the tools available. And the tools are often free, not costing any money. From there, those networks are the places people will go to commit their “piracy”.

And what exactly is piracy? If I purchase an album on iTunes but choose to download it on ThePirateBay, is that really piracy? Because I have done that when the music THAT I FUCKING PAID FOR is no longer available for me to download off of iTunes and Apple won’t give me a refund for said music purchase. People do it for games that include shitty DRM and don’t allow them to easily install on another device like Linux too.

[–] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 146 points 6 hours ago (2 children)

I like the end result that ISPs are pushing back on this, but don't mistake this for altruism on their part.

Their businesses make money selling internet service. Were they to support cutting off those accused of piracy, they would be losing paying customers. Further, the business processes and support needed for this to function would be massively expensive and complicated. They'd have to hired teams of people and write whole new software applications for maintaining databases of banned users, customer service staff to address and resolve disputes, and so much more.

Lastly, as soon as all of that process would be in place to ban users for piracy accusations, then the next requests would come in for ban criteria in a classic slippery slope:

  • pornography
  • discussions of drugs
  • discussions of politics the party in power doesn't like
  • speaking out against the state
  • communication about assembling
  • discussion on how to emigrate

All the machinery would be in place once the very first ban is approved.

[–] 418_im_a_teapot@sh.itjust.works 15 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Plus, you aren’t disconnecting a person, but a whole family or business.

And since many areas in the US only have one provider, you force that family to cancel all streaming services they might have. It’s a lose-lose-lose situation.

Not if they get their universal digital ID system in place. It is the wet dream of tyrants of all kinds.

[–] BaldManGoomba@lemmy.world 24 points 4 hours ago

I think it is also the user they disconnect for piracy tend to pay more. They tend to be more premium customers also why should they enforce what happens on their lines. It is an illegal search and seizure. Let the government get a warrant prove something is illegal then the ISP can disconnect them.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 81 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Sony can't have your electricity cut off if you pirate. Because electricity is a utility.

ISPs want it both ways. They want the legal protections of a utility without the obligations.

The solution is to give them the legal protection they want by declaring them a utility.

[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 15 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (1 children)

Those moments when you can't decide if someone's username means they're a science nerd or a Venture Bros. fan.

Me_irl:

[–] Eldritch@lemmy.world 12 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Who in their right Minds would want to be a nerd but not a venture brothers fan?

[–] linearchaos@lemmy.world 9 points 5 hours ago

I'm not certain but there's a high probability that that Venn diagram is just a circle

[–] Bluefruit@lemmy.world 79 points 6 hours ago (2 children)

Not everyday i agree with ISPs but here we are. Guilty of and accused of are two very different things. Innocent until proven guilty.

[–] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 14 points 5 hours ago

Hell, I don't even want to ban users guilty of piracy. Oh no! Sony and it's BILLIONS of dollars will surely be affected by pirating their dvd of a movie! Heavens to betsy!

[–] j4k3@lemmy.world 10 points 6 hours ago (2 children)

Not for potato supreme. I'm sure labels and sony bought vacations for those sub human coup supporting shits

[–] metallic_z3r0@infosec.pub 8 points 5 hours ago

Never dehumanize fascists or fascist-sympathizers (redundant but ok), it's always important to remember that bad faith actors or their stooges are human and cannot be entirely eliminated from society, which is why people that fight for positive change have to set the rules such that bad faith actors' actions are either quickly recognized and mitigated, or have society structured such that even those motivated solely by unempathetic selfishness can only achieve status by masking and contributing positively anyway.

[–] Bluefruit@lemmy.world 1 points 5 hours ago (2 children)

I am not familiar with that, I'm guessing potato supreme is a username or something?

Probably a delicious baked potato dish. Not sure whether cheesy potatoes really care if you're guilty of piracy, they just want to be eaten.

[–] baronvonj@lemmy.world 4 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

It's an Idaho-exclusive new dish at Taco Bell.

[–] Bluefruit@lemmy.world 2 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Well it sounds delicious, and definitely not guilty of piracy

[–] baronvonj@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago

No, of course not. Piracy would sour the cream.

[–] GreenEngineering3475@lemmy.world 28 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Heartbreaking: Worst Corporation(s) you know, just made a good stand

[–] SuiXi3D@fedia.io 10 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

[–] VindictiveJudge@lemmy.world 1 points 10 minutes ago

Unless it's a 24 hour clock.

[–] Shdwdrgn@mander.xyz 14 points 6 hours ago

So Sony wants to punish ISPs for continuing to "allow" illegal things to happen? Hmm remind me again which company it is that has had so many data breaches that users have come to just expect it? Sounds to me like if they are allowed to pursue attacking internet providers then they themselves should start seeing lawsuits for continuing damages until such time as Sony is able to successfully recover all stolen personal data and other parties can no longer use it for profit.

[–] Juice260@lemmy.world 9 points 5 hours ago (2 children)

It still makes me feel some type of way that Sony (a Japanese company) gets so much sway over US business and policies. It’s something I thought about a lot when Microsoft was trying to close its deal with Activision. I don’t care much either way about multi-billion dollar conglomerates (or trillions in Microsoft’s case) butting heads but it did strike me as odd that a foreign company had that much of a hold on the deal. I get that piracy of media is frowned upon but like the ISP’s are arguing here, the affects of cutting off access to their clientele would have a lot of negative impact. I once again sit here wondering why a foreign company should have that kind of power over American citizens… you know?

[–] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 5 points 5 hours ago

May I introduce you to Nintendo?

[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 2 points 4 hours ago

This may have something to do with it. One hand washing the other, as the saying goes.

[–] Kowowow@lemmy.ca 5 points 5 hours ago

There's got to be a way to just decriminalize piracy

[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml 5 points 5 hours ago

Looks like an old-politician idea to me; a generation late. Nowadays, cutting internet is as bad as cutting electricity.

[–] JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee 7 points 6 hours ago (2 children)

Wow, unusual for them but based

[–] samus12345@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago

Not really unusual. They don't care if you pirate stuff, they just want you to pay for internet access. They only sent notices and such to keep the rights holders happy.

[–] ChocoboRocket@lemmy.world 28 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

They're ensuring their money keeps flowing. This isn't about altruism - it's just their Greed incidentally benefits us.

ISPs are trying to mitigate exposure to lawsuits, prevent costly tracking and tracing responsibilities, and make sure customers can keep paying instead of losing their internet privileges (and their internet bills!)

That peasants like us find this favorable is an unintended bonus.

Exactly. ISPs want to do as little work as possible and collect as much as possible. If they have to monitor for torrents, track which customers they've warned, etc, that's extra cost that, ultimately, could take away paying customers. So there are no benefits for them unless the piracy is causing problems for other users (i.e. could result in more customers cancelling service).

[–] shoulderoforion@fedia.io 1 points 6 hours ago

it's a nice argument from the users point of view, but it won't be allowed

copyright holders will need to be thrown a bone, and given some level of enforcement, else, copyright law is meaningless

celebrate all you want, this won't pass muster

~ signed, a jolly roger