P2P pirates: three strikes and you're out

Angus Kidman
21 February 2008, 5:17 AM


The Australian Government is contemplating introducing '3 strikes and you're out' laws for online copyright offenders, mimicking a proposed similar policy in the UK.


The Australian Government is contemplating introducing '3 strikes and you're out' laws for online copyright offenders.

Broadband minister Senator Steven Conroy told the Sydney Morning Herald that such an approach, with ISPs being required to first warn offending users, then suspend their access temporarily, then cut off access altogether, was being seriously considered by the government.

The proposal is said to mirror similar suggested policies in Britain, though the details leaked of that plan suggest that the exact model for prosecution hasn't been finalised. Using a system that mimics baseball also seems a tad un-Australian, though presumably being bowled out on the first offence would be even less popular.

It's long been expected that Labor's promises to implement online filtering to block pornographic content would also come with an unpleasant copyright-killing aftertaste, with ISPs playing a central policing role. "At the moment, the favoured target is ISPs," University of Queensland law lecturer Kimberlee Weatherall warned earlier this year. "Don't underestimate the power of this push."

So far, Labor's activities in the Internet space have been relatively consumer-friendly: distant promises of faster broadband for everyone and a short-term extension to the life of the CDMA network. Cracking down on online piracy isn't likely to be as popular, especially amongst younger voters. After all, what's the use of faster broadband if your torrents get cut off?

ISPs are also certain to sternly object, citing the costs and difficulties involved in any sort of monitoring. Given that market leader Telstra has spent several years simply trying to get single bills for its customers in place, we dread to think how long a warning system might take to implement.

While some ISPs do impose shaping on P2P packets, effectively slowing down file sharing, such policies are normally presented as traffic management designed to ensure reasonable performance. While common sense suggests the vast majority of P2P content probably does violate copyright, torrents are used to legally exchange podcasts, source code and other large files. Shaping systems don't try to determine the legality of the information being exchanged; in practice, it's hard to see how they could do so, and any ban would have to be outright.

Despite the manifest technical and operational difficulties (do people end up on a permanent blacklist? how do you keep them out of Internet cafes?) the concept of making ISPs responsible for monitoring content is being heavily promoted, particularly in the "content creation industries".

"For ISPs in general, the days of prevaricating over their responsibilities for helping protect music must end," Paul McGuinness, career-long manager of rock dinosaurs U2, commented during a speech at the MIDEM music industry conference earlier this year. "The ISP lobbyists who say they should not have to 'police the internet' are living in the past - relying on outdated excuses from an earlier technological age."

Of course, U2 selling out to the man is no big shock; how else do you explain the U2 iPod, or Bono appearing in a Bill Gates comedy skit?

No firm time frame for any local regulatory proposal has been set, but APC will keep watching with interest.


Post your comment



Comments

RSS feed Email alert

Me in Oz:

Another government fumbling around our with our rights as a free society ......
"We'll give you superfast broadband but we'll restrict what you are allowed to do with it."
Personally I think this will be a minefield for the Labor party if they want to risk getting re-elected next time.
And the ISP's will not care what the costs of policing this draconian concept will be ... because the consumer will pay for it in the end ......
To the Labor Party and U2 ....... Booooooooooooo

29 February 2008, 8:33 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Anonymous-:

i totaly agree. we are turning into america with our freedoms diminishing. next thing you know our telephones are being monitored for "anti-terrorism"

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Arrrrrrgh:

GOOD LUCK .. Stephen Conroy and Paul McGuinness !
I've only got one word for you ... ENCRYPTION .... Nudge Nudge Wink Wink :P

29 February 2008, 8:33 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

MrCupHolder:

This means extra work on the part of the ISP's. Extra work which is going to cost them money. Who is going to pay for that? Most likely the customer, the very person they're going to hurt by having to implement this.

So now I'll get charged extra for 2nd rate internet service. Just what I always wanted.

29 February 2008, 8:33 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Ratch:

Actions and consequences. Drop a brick on your foot it is going to hurt.

What happens when the ISPs start monitoring content? The p2p clients will encrypt the connection in fact this is likely to happen anyhow due to traffic shaping. You cannot monitor traffic if you don't know what it is.

Action: ISPs spend millions to monitor p2p traffic.
Consequence: P2P traffic is encrypted before the roll out is even near finished.
Action: Calls to outlaw encrypted internet traffic.
Consequence: Banks and any site that uses credit cards scream murder.


This ISP monitoring idea is just like the brick and only time will tell whose foot it will land on and who is going to foot the bill.

29 February 2008, 8:33 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Anonymous123456:

I'm constantly amazed how many people blame piracy for everything wrong with the music industry. Here's a good article about it
http://arstechnica.com/articles/culture/state-of-digital-music-2007.ars

29 February 2008, 8:33 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

McBanjo:

Yeah I agree with you. I want to buy music, I really do. But at the moment I can get it faster, easier and at higher quality off off the P2P networks and without any DRM (never mind cheaper.) I understand that the way DRM is conducted in Australia, in its current state, doesn't even adhere to the essence of Australian law. I understand they bypass it by introducing these EULAs and Terms and Conditions.

Downloading it online has only recently become an option since they introduced some DRM free stuff like iTunes Plus, but still, no store has an online catalogue like the pirates do. And as for buying CDs, I don't want to buy a whole CD for one song, never have, never will.

Anyway, I really don't think there is a way to block P2P/torrent traffic at the ISP level. Maybe for the everyday Joe, but there's encryption, port shuffling etc. It's only a matter of time before some program comes out that automatically bypasses ISP blocks, so this is a futile effort IMO.

These media industries need to offer something that people want to pay for if they want people to buy. There's a huge market of P2P users out there and to tap it, while not easy, would be worth a lot of money.

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

The Doctor:

Yeah, if the music was actually any good the sales might be better. :P

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Me in Oz:

Agreed ... How bad is music in this generation ? .... Ptoooey !
Suppose my parents said the same thing !

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Vico:

hahaha lool...sooo true!

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

ThyGoodPirate..Arrr:

I have to say that: using, listening, watching etc. pirated content that I have become much more aware of "great" and "crap" software, movies, series, anime(although it isn't considered to be piracy in Japan, and they actually encourage the fan base it builds [Henry Jenkin's Convergence Culture]), music etc. then ever before.

Now one question to anyone, including anti-piracy people.... what do you think these people who use pirated products (generally the people who wouldn't be in the finical range of the companies products) will do when they become in a more finical position or go out shopping?... they will turn to the brands, artists, directors, series and software which they know and have been using for years. I have brought more songs from more artists in the last year since listening to pirated content, why? because I trust those bands, as they continue to create great products; this applies to all products in general.


REASONS WHY PIRACY IS NEEDED IN A HEALTH SOCIETY:

- Piracy promotes more awareness of products internationally (not just locally), this will extend the potential buyers and may even open up markets in country where the publisher would not have originally thought to distribute to, eg anime.

- Pirated content allows for a free extended trial. This allows for consumers to actually "try" the products before they "buy" allowing for consumers to access a larger base of products to figure out the GOOD products from the BAD. This will stop the companies who produce crappy products getting away with it, and allows for more decent products to gain recognition and to be rightfully purchased.

- It promotes a democratic society, to be open and free. Where a person on the doll or a tradesman can gain access to products which were once only available to big companies or high classed people.

- Piracy increases competition as companies have to lower their prices and create better products to attract a large audience. Because of this competition people have more access to cheaper software and it also allows the company to sell it to a wider audience.

I think freedom and competition are vital to society especially in the copyright realm. Take this away and your left with monopolies and companies which would love to dis out the crappy products and charge a premium. Micro$oft anyone?

Any comments or views on this subject? It could make for quite an interesting discussion, and it would be great to see what an anti-piracy person has to say about this view on piracy.


NOTE: I do not support people who actual SELL pirated products, they are taking away the money which should rightfully go to the creators of the products.

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Ruboing:

Great article.

What I'm also amazed at is that the Big music labels consider that CD sales should stay the same or increase year on year. I'm in my thirties and when I was in teens, I bought lots of music (Records then CDs). Compare that with someone today, if you go and buy a brand new game for a console for $90-$100, well that's around 4-5 CDs they didn't buy.

People have many more entertainment options today. DVDs, CDs, games for their PC, console, handheld etc..

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

UniverseJDJ:

Great.. We elect the government that seems to be anti-internet. This is the same government that wants to introduce a firewall similar to that of China isn't it?

29 February 2008, 8:33 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

McBanjo:

If you're referring to pr0n content, that's an optional free extra that they're introducing to the ISPs. The government is just making it more accessible and better for people who want to use it i.e. families.

But yeah, no one is gonna be happy about their blocked torrents. Even those work choices laws are starting to seem justifiable.

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

tin:

Ha!
Free as in Windows Movie Maker is free. Someone will have to pay, and it's the end user that usually does... Regardless of whether they want/need/use it.

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Anonymous12345:

LOL this is just STUPID, i only use P2P for TV episodes so if this is enabled then i could be banned but hey i can go and use my VCR or PVR or DVR and record a tv episode ??? ( which is technically illegal)

ISP's will lose so much business and Rudd wouldnt get re-elected ! if this disaster is ever unleashed !

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Anonymous89:

actually it's perfectly legal to record a broadcast of something, provided you wipe the tape when you've watched it (it was only last year this law was changed so i'll forgive you). it even used to be illegal to put songs on your ipod

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Embarrassed to be Australian:

"The ISP lobbyists who say they should not have to 'police the internet' are living in the past - relying on outdated excuses from an earlier technological age."

I see, and the music industry *isn't* living in the past -- relying on an outdated business model from an earlier technological age.

It's not the ISPs that need to adapt, Mr McGuiness, it's the industry you represent.

As for our government -- this immense display of short sightedness, and distinct lack of understanding of the information age, makes me embarrassed to be Australian.


29 February 2008, 8:33 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

HoHum:

I do not support piracy. It is dishonest & the wrong thing to do. However I do not support charging so much money for music either - I think that is also the wrong thing to do. So in a world where 2 wrongs do make a right, this might be a good karma thing.

My suggestion? Why doesn't the music industry make half of something rather than all of nothing? Simply offer a WHOLE album for $1. i.e. make it so cheap that you wouldn't bother risking piracy.

What do you guys think?

29 February 2008, 8:33 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

ch13ft5ta:

to say our rights are deminishing (like the u.s) is an understatement at least they have the bill of rights and guaranteed freedom of speech, we've only got an "implied" freedom of speech

Give me ambiguity or give me something else

29 February 2008, 8:33 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Clay:

At the moment the average AU cost of an album is no less than $30. Maybe if the retailers would lower their prices, buying CD's my become an option. At the moment, u can get all the music u want through P2P, ripping CD's, or ebay.
An the artists make plenty through concerts. I wouldnt mind paying extra for a concert ticket, paying $30 for an album..no way!


29 February 2008, 8:33 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

dvin:

Maybe the government should rethink about this draconian law, In the end they will only alienate the internet generations, these are future voters!


29 February 2008, 8:33 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

jtjt145:

Can't believe I voted for these idiots. Must have been brain damaged!

There you have this unproven Conroy ministerling, and the first thing he does is get into the pockets of the *IAA highway robbers.

BTW:
Why do musicians deserve a lifelong guaranteed stream of income for work done in the past? Why not the doctor who safes lives too? or an architect? or anybody else for that matter?
What happened to that old principle: you work you get money - you don't - no pay. For aging musicians and stage ballerinas that would mean: get off that lazy a..e and onto that concert train!

I hope I am not the only one to question that.

John Wilkies


29 February 2008, 8:33 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Me in Oz:

" ... Can't believe I voted for these idiots. ..."
So you're the one to blame ;)

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

UniverseJDJ:

Most of the country is to blame.. Did they mention this *before* the election?

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Anonymous-:

and i thought that we would finally get better internet like the rest of the world.....

29 February 2008, 8:50 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

hohum (New user):

I know this will be an unpopular comment, but infringing on copyright is wrong. Because we've been allowed to get away with it for years, enforcing it now will be unpopular because it'll be seen as a right being taken away. P2P sharing of copyrighted material has become embedded in our culture.

The solution to this is not to spank the P2P community or turn ISPs into police, but to fix the actual problem in an intelligent way. For example if you made P2P completely legal but charged $0.14/MB downloaded via it, then that would make a dent. You then give that $0.14/MB back to the industries it's hurting in the same way as they did with blank cassette tapes. I dunno - this is something I can think of in 30 seconds & I figure if I can do that, then some brainiac can do better.

17 April 2008, 10:57 AM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

hohum (New user):

I know this will be an unpopular comment, but infringing on copyright is wrong. Because we've been allowed to get away with it for years, enforcing it now will be unpopular because it'll be seen as a right being taken away. P2P sharing of copyrighted material has become embedded in our culture.

The solution to this is not to spank the P2P community or turn ISPs into police, but to fix the actual problem in an intelligent way. For example if you made P2P completely legal but charged $0.14/MB downloaded via it, then that would make a dent. You then give that $0.14/MB back to the industries it's hurting in the same way as they did with blank cassette tapes. I dunno - this is something I can think of in 30 seconds & I figure if I can do that, then some brainiac can do better.

17 April 2008, 11:04 AM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

hohum (New user):

totally true. Why get really fast broadband or bigger download quotas if you remove P2P? Policing P2P will hurt the ISPs badly.

17 April 2008, 11:10 AM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

hohum (New user):

you know you're average Joe Blow downloading copyrighted material to avoid having to pay for it looks at mega-stars in the entertainment industry and thinks "bah - not hurting them, am I?" and are they? They earn stupid amounts of money ANYWAY.

When we paid for music because we couldn't download it, were we paying only for the ability to listen to that music when we chose to? Or were we also paying for the media, distribution of that media etc?

I'm in the camp of making material cheap so that the industry gets half of something rather than all of nothing.

17 April 2008, 11:20 AM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

anonymous user Anonymous user