Starkers I'm shocked, you know the answer to that, we do

That's the kind of garbage I'm hoping this might do away with.  Granted, no guarantees.

You do, me hearty wiv yer taxes.

But that doesn't obviate the need for law. But this whole thing isn't a law. Its only abuse is the shortfall of too many warnings and few teeth. Your kind of Pyrate me lurvs. The other kind gives us a bad name.

Me best to yer Missus, Cap'n.

Really? Well, I now have to be afraid that everyone I let on my network does the correct thing. Whee!

An "independent review" that I pay for? Ie: I have to come up with evidence I'm innocent? Innocence is impossible to prove, hence why the burden of proof is always on the prosecution, not the defendant.

I now have to challenge an ISP when I use something I'm legally able to use (ie: because of satire, other provisions in law that allow me to use bits and pieces of content). Content providers already abuse this: they constantly threaten/bully/force down youtube videos, articles, etc that are using their content well within the laws of fair use.

Again. This is something for the courts to enforce. Not corporations.

Blah, blah, blah. IT guys _always_ say "This is easy. <insert jargon> click here <jargon> here <jargon> here. Then <jargon>....."

Its easy to IT people because we're passionate about nearly all things computer. Unfortunately, the majority of the population doesn't care and won't take time to learn what the difference between WEP vs WPA. Jesus. If its not one click, its too damn complicated.

Then, there are very valid reasons to have an unsecured network. Public networks exist everywhere, ran by businesses for their customers, hospitals for their patients, etc. Are these public networks going to have to police their users? Please. They'll just shut them down before taking that cost.

If you don't like the ISP watching your pirated downloads, move to one that doesn't.

Personally I think it's good that the ISP's are taking proactive measure to change the internet culture about piracy. 6 warnings and then they will slow your speed and then have a chat about what you are doing wrong. I way prefer this than having lawyers involved.

Lucky we don't have this BS in OZ ... Yet

Some people have no choice to move to a different ISP. Monitoring what people do online is an invasion of privacy.

Yes, via taxes, but we don't pay extra just to have a cop come over and write a ticket, do we!  The point being, nobody willingly pays to have something 'inflicted' upon them.  In this case, it is the customer who is being outed by the provider... and last I heard, hookers don't turn their clients in to the cops, if you get my meaning. No, if the cops want an arrest, then they need to do their own legwork... and the same applies to the RIAA and FIAA.  As it is they have become a law unto themselves and have manipulated the system to support their insatiable greed. 

It wouldn't be so bad if their efforts truly benefited the artists and writers, but no, the only people to benefit are the greed driven media moguls and their scum sucking lawyers.  I'm all for protecting the copyrights of the artists, writers/creators, but these corporate giants deserve no sympathy whatsoever, given they manipulate and cheat the true copyright holders of ownership purely for personal profit and gain.

No, I won't go in to bat for the media moguls and their parasitic lawyers.. their greed excludes them from any feelings other than contempt from me.  So when I see them exploiting ISP's to shop their customers I cringe because it's one more step to a totalitarian world with greed as its leader.

The one question I've asked myself and others over the years is whether theft/piracy would exist if the upper crust wasn't so damned greedy  The problem as I see it is that corporations set prices based on what they think the market can bear, rather than setting an affordable price that allows greater consumption... and the problem with that is that many at the lower end of the socio-economic scale cannot afford what the upper echelon thinks the market can bear, hence they resort to stealing to make their meagre ends meet.  Is it right?  No, but is it any more right than the 'legalised' stealing which exists in the form of corporate greed and excessive profit margins?

Sadly, the gap between the haves and the have nots is increasing annually, and sadly, more people will be prosecuted with crimes as a result, but a day will come when there is nothing left to take [when the haves have it all and the have nots have nothing] and that is when their greed will come back to bite them... hard.  There will come a time of revolution and it will change how the world's wealth is distributed... when it is the wealthy who are persecuted and imprisoned/executed for crimes against humanity.  Yup, bring it on, the French revolution will be a Sunday picnic in the park by comparison.

"Monitoring what people do online is an invasion of privacy."

It's not as if a ISP don't monitor what you do online already.

I use to work for a local ISP on the front desk for customer service. We had a user suing the business for breach of contract, he's issue was that he was not getting enough time and too many dropouts on the connection, this was back when dial up was the only option.

They explained to him if it went to court they would table everything he did on the internet, they gave him a mountain of paperwork to prove it. Don't know what was in the paperwork but he did drop the lawsuit.

I don't think there is much privacy on the internet, it always pays to be careful.

"Not perfect" is an understatement. It is at best futile and at worst (which is more likely) it will hurt the innocent. The best techonology for this kind of matching is used in Anti-virus software to identifiy threats. However for this use the range of methods to defeat it is far greater as viruses must still be able to prefore their function, files containing pirated content do not need to be usable until after they are downloaded.

And the recievers do not need to be very skilled, the work to evade detection comes from the distributing end.

It seems like everyone has to suffer to keep the "bad guys" in line. This is just the first step in the march to TOTAL government control of the internet. What's next? The ISPs having to monitor and report every website I visit, how long I'm there, and how often?

Don't get me wrong- piracy is wrong. But I'd rather have a few pirates roaming the net than my ISP looking over my shoulder waiting to slap me on the back of the head.......

Wonderful response matey.   extra ration of grog to Starkers.

I wonder if clicking on the wikileaks torrent will earn Americans a strike.

This does seem like a perfectly reasonable solution. I don't like the implications of corporations policing their customers at all, but I can't really fault this particular instance.

You can look to Kindle, Amazon and iTunes who have all had incidences of deleting purchased music, movies and books that they didn't recognize as purchased--even though they were.

My son also was a victim of the Sony rootkit fiasco a few years back when he ripped his Best buy purchased CD in Windows media player to his hard drive and then immediately had the covert rootkit the CD had installed crash windows requiring a reinstall.

I'm all for ISP's working with law enforcement--I am not cool with the record companies and the like BEING law enforcement.

If they don't receive some well presented challenges legally, I assure you the next layer of this will be ensuring they are shielded from punitive suits when they make mistakes--just as the credit reporting agencies now are--note the, "all you get back is your $35".

Imagine if the only reliable service in your hometown is provided by a single ISP (as is the case in my town) and that your business requires regular large data transfers in real time (as does mine).  Basically, if they have a 'glitch" in my case, they have a right to shut down my business--possibly with no legal punitive options for me--and all I can do is pony up $35 and hope they note the mistake because it's inherently assumed by them that their business rights are more important than mine.

Exactly... the RIAA, FIAA don't care who else they offend, compromise or call thief, so long as they get their pound and a half of flesh from whomever... doesn't matter so long as they're nailing somebody to the cross as an example.  As I understand it, they are taking this course of action because the "pay up or else" stand-over tactics weren't working anymore... too many people were saying: "Well slap me in jail, then, cos I'm not paying you bastards a cent."

That's right, the intimidation tactics failed to secure payments, and just as those failed, so will this ISP policing fail. People will seek other ways and means if they want it badly enough, and internet cafes will pop up all over the place to accommodate file sharing, etc.  In fact there was an item on TV a few days ago about people using smart phones with encrypting apps to download illegally, and there was nothing the telcos could do to stop them. 

A change in pricing policy could be all it takes to strike a happy medium where the media moguls and pirates/file sharers are happy, but I don't see fairer pricing happening while there's an array of bully-boy tactics still available.

Thanks, mate, 2 extra rations for you, also

Another valid point supporting the argument against ISP's becoming internet police.... add network errors to system abuse, hacking and incorrect identification as to how the innocent could be wrongfully accused and/or convicted.  No single entity should ever be judge, jury and executioner, and essentially this move would place that much power in the hands of the RIAA and FIAA via your ISP's.

You ask whether robbery would exist? Yes, unless there were no laws defining it as a crime. For some, there is no 'affordable price'. This does not justify taking what isn't yours. As for "what is the proper price?", what should there be, a committee to set prices? That has been proven not to be viable. The free market enforces competition, unless unfair practices prevent it. Those can be dealt with. Is there a perfect solution? No. But I'd rather have companies competing than a dictator telling me what's fair. Far too many abuses that way.

Be assured, should they try to enact that, I'll be among the rebels. To some extent, though, that already exists thanks to the Patriot Act. I like the necessity which forced  that less than the the situation which requires it. The truism of "Those who would trade freedom for security soon have neither." is true to a certain extent: Those who are dead also have neither. It's a very unpleasant world, isn't it? Perhaps people can find a more civilized way to act, but odds are against it - at least in the short term.

There are recourses which I outlined above. I agree with you, in essence. There probably is a solution in your case and I'd encourage you to talk with the people in your ISP to prevent problems actively rather than wait for them to happen and try to play 'catch up'.

These probably won't fail, because they are being enacted with the people who have a hand on the switch. I don't favor intimidation, I'd rather see 'education' and civilized negotiation.... but really, do you see that working with a person hell bent on taking something for free? I don't.

Again, there are appeal procedures. I wish the pirates - hell, thieves, and their criminal empires didn't make this necessary, but they have. Look, if something was taken from you by force, which you were willing to sell, wouldn't you try to catch the thieves to prevent them gaining from a criminal act? Of course you would.

What's good for the goose (at least in this case) is good for the gander. Will there be problems? Absolutely. Will they get solved? Probably yes in the vast majority. Will it be 100%? No, what is?

That does not justify "Then do nothing." Because the companies and people who invest to produce things have evry right to expect lawful behavior. Why not set up cooperatives to bargain for pricing? There are many alternatives to theft.

Not sure what you mean in your last sentence. Seems to me that they'll be detected and that's fine. Their activity and usage statistics along with an ip address should be enough to nab them.

Perhaps an alternative solution to this would be branding the software in some unique way with several alternative "call home" features in them which can't be disabled nor prevented and still have the software work.

Don't know if that's possible, but it would be a good start. Doubt I'm the first to think of it, though.