The news you're not supposed to know...

Multimedia

An Introduction to Austrian Economics: Understand Economics, Understand Everything

The Century of the Self: The Untold History of Controlling the Masses Through the Manipulation of Unconscious Desires

The Disappearing Male: From Virility to Sterility

The Obama Deception: The Mask Comes Off

Operation Gladio: The Hidden History of U.S. Sponsored False Flag Terrorism in Europe

The New American Century: The Untold History of The Project for the New American Century(more)

Article posted Feb 25 2013, 11:10 AM

Category: Big Brother/Orwellian

Source: TorrentFreak

"Six Strikes" Anti-Piracy Scheme Starts Today, With Mystery Punishments

by Ernesto

Today the controversial "six-strikes" anti-piracy system kicks off in the United States. Soon the first BitTorrent users will receive so-called copyright alerts from their Internet provider and after multiple warnings subscribers will be punished. But, what these punishments entail remains a bit of a mystery. None of the participating ISPs have officially announced how they will treat repeat infringers and the CCI doesn’t have this information either.

Today the MPAA and RIAA, helped by five major Internet providers in the United States, will start to warn BitTorrent pirates.

The parties launched the Center for Copyright Information (CCI) and agreed on a system through which copyright infringers are warned that their behavior is unacceptable. After five or six warnings ISPs may then take a variety of repressive measures.

The scheme was initially announced during the summer of 2011 and after a series of delays it goes live today.

“Over the course of the next several days our participating ISPs will begin rolling out the system,” CCI Executive Director Jill Lesser just announced.

“Practically speaking, this means our content partners will begin sending notices of alleged P2P copyright infringement to ISPs, and the ISPs will begin forwarding those notices in the form of Copyright Alerts to consumers,” she adds.

Strangely enough, none of the Internet providers has officially announced what mitigation measures they will take to punish repeated infringers. TorrentFreak asked CCI to fill us in, but the organization doesn’t have this information either.

“Unfortunately the ISPs have not yet provided us with the exact mitigation measures,” a CCI spokesperson told us.

From leaked information we previously learned that AT&T will block users' access to some of the most frequently visited websites on the Internet, until they complete a copyright course. Verizon will slow down the connection speeds of repeated pirates, and Time Warner Cable will temporarily interrupt people's ability to browse the Internet.

The two remaining providers, Cablevison and Comcast, are expected to take similar measures. None of the ISPs will permanently disconnect repeat infringers as part of the plan.

Some skeptics have pointed out that the copyright alert system wont have much effect since there are many ways to beat the system. BitTorrent users, for example, can protect their privacy and prevent monitoring by using a VPN, proxy or seedbox.

Alternatively, some determined pirates may switch to other platforms that are not monitored, including Usenet, cyberlockers, streaming sites or offline swapping. Those who use private BitTorrent trackers may be safe for now, but monitoring company MarkMonitor was advised to start eyeing these sites as well.

For CCI and their partners these workarounds are not a major problem. They have said from the start that the program aims to educate the public, in particular more casual file-sharers.

While the copyright alert system is much more reasonable than the equivalents in France and New Zealand, there is the worrying possibility that it will be used to gather evidence to start legal action against individuals.

As we reported previously, Internet providers will have to inform copyright holders about which IP-addresses are repeatedly flagged. The MPAA and RIAA can then use this information to ask the court for a subpoena, so they can obtain the personal details of the account holder.

This possibility was also confirmed by leaked documents from AT&T.

"After the fifth alert, the content owner may pursue legal action against the customer, and may seek a court order requiring AT&T to turn over personal information to assist the litigation," AT&T explained.

There's no concrete indication that repeated infringers will be taken to court, and if this happens it’s not part of the copyright alert system.

More on this, and the other missing details on the “six strikes” system, will become clear during the coming months.

SHARE:

Email This

Latest Big Brother/Orwellian
- The War On Journalists: DOJ Claimed Fox News Reporter Was An 'Aider, Abettor, Co-Conspirator' With Leaker
- Eric Holder Claims Terrorists Are Involved In 'IP Theft'
- Kiwis Want To Spy On All Communications, VPNs, And Be Able To Use Secret Evidence Against You
- VP Joe Biden Believes There's 'No Legal Reason' The Government Can't Slap A Sin Tax On 'Violent Media'
- College Students Petition to Ban Black Backpacks After Boston Bombing
- State Department orders firm to remove 3D-printed guns web blueprints
- CNN: Will 3D Printers Make It Easier For Terrorist Operate Gun Factories In Their Homes?
- Are all telephone calls recorded and accessible to the US government?

Comments 1 - 4 of 4

Add Comment

Page 1 of 1

Anonymous

Posted: Feb 25 2013, 12:25 PM

Link

66213

if your accused of something false its slander so sue,and if they slow down your connection then sue for fraud or something like that for them claiming that you get and pay for eg 10 MB/sec and you only 5mb

L.S.

Posted: Feb 25 2013, 1:49 PM

Link

i just read, perhaps, the most stupid comment, i've seen written by a network node in a long time. it was regarding the catholic mafia and their ritual abuse system.

<I would say that ANYONE accusing of sexual abuse be it by a parent, guardian, priest, friend or the pet dog, should not wait any number of years to come out and accuse and ruin a persons reputation be they alive of posthumously. It is time an international bill of rights came out that the world adheres to and states .... If you were abused you have three years from now to come out and say it or forever shut your mouth. I am sure genuine cases are traumatic and people in positions to threaten the abused happens but there still should be a time limit to when a person can be accused. Its hard to defend yourself when you are dead!> - network node Trish[something or other...]

since most people have read-up on the legion mind-set, i don't think i need to detail the ritual rape that goes on in the catholic church. however, the age that rape takes place, usually starting around 3 years old, continues forever if not brought to light.

Trish is clearly a good example of a ritual abuse victim. she herself would rather accept her fate, and be rewarded for not talking. her plea for everyone else to be silenced is doublethink programming at work. she, doesn't like who she is, she doesn't like what she is. but in the mafia's system of things, she has found acceptance or, people that are willing to accept her, as long as she keeps quite.

having to re-live such trauma is difficult. it shapes so much of a persons personality, that when/if such rape is addressed by that person, they find their entire life has been lived by someone else, and not themselves. it's scary, no doubt. Trish's plea called for the protection of her abusers - that alone should speak to her mind-set, that she is not talking but her abuser is talking through her.

as for "time limits," i'm not bound by time but the catholic mafia is. if people keep their children out of church, the legions lose power. now that just leaves us the queen to bring down, (finish bringing her down).

the truth behind the *windsor* brand is out. people don't like nazis, and especially not leaders who have changed their nazi last name to "windsor."

i read something like: why do the royals rule?
the response read along the lines of: they have no right to, other than their say-so.

well, i suggest that their say-so doesn't matter, and the world is realizing that too.

mind-control victims should speak out, but only when they are ready. and i would suggest telling a real-life person, rather than the church of abuse.

Anonymous

Posted: Feb 26 2013, 3:13 PM

Link

7567

Maybe everyone should pull their $$$ out of "the big 5", and make it clear why they are switching to alternative providers such as Net10, even if they have to settle for inferior service for awhile until such alternative providers put to use their billions of new revenue towards raising their technology and standards of service to the standards of the newly bankrupted "big 5". Really, it's not that difficult once the people have spoken.

Anonymous

Posted: Feb 27 2013, 3:11 AM

Link

98250

this is a huge problem!

Youtube runs all video through an algorithm detection program updated by \"rights management companies\" like sony and BMG who \"fight piracy\" by having youtube block all video matching one of these algorithms that identify their \"3rd party content protected by the Title 17 of the copyright law\"... problem is there a bazillion exceptions to the law in which it does not apply.

However, the companies like bmg and sony have $ for lawyers that we don\'t and few people even realize or know these content partner claims would NEVER reach a court room or have a hand at \"copyright\" bullying using the courts, the way the courts are designed to PROTECT INDIviDUALS

This is why the constitution is so critical, it limits runaway powers from squashing individual rights: we have due process, probable cause, and \"show cause\" requirements whereby the \"rights management companies\" have to establish evidence THAT a violation of the law has occurred and damage resulted BEFORE bringing a case to court.... most all of what we do does not violate the copyright law!

THIS IS A RUSE to squash freedom!
What happens in the case of youtube.... is the EXACT problem of fascism- properly defined- where corporate bastards work with the govt to circumvent the court of law and the standards of protections we the people built into the the court system to limit the courts power and secure our right.

By letting youtube or at&t arbitrate instead of the constitutionally restricted courts (no case without preponderance of evidence of a crime having been committed and damages) we become subject to an arbitrary law enforcement and lose our constitutional protections of our GOd-given rights!

what is important about this is the fact that when a monopoly like youtube/google/at&t is able apply the law to restrict individual liberty without ANY of the safeguards of the court we as individuals can be accused of anything, it can be enforced and there is no way to appeal-

. It would be very different if there were viable competition that did NOT subject us to tyranny so the removing videos, shutting off account, slowing bandwidth speed actions could be circumvented.. but there is no competition of equal audience or scope so essentially, these goliaths have harnessed MORE power to arbitrarily enforce the law than the SUPREME COURT

and that kind of power...always ALWAYS, ends in lots and lots of dead people.... last major event in history where this was permitted was hitler and Mussolini....and their neighbor stalin-

Add Comment

Name

Comment

* No HTML

Verification *

Please Enter the Verification Code Seen Below

PLEASE NOTE

Please see our About Page, our Disclaimer, and our Comments Policy.

FAIR USE NOTICE

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (found at the U.S. Copyright Office) and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.

About Us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy