Discussion
Or whatever they're called. The thing that requires ISPs to hold data on you...
How much detail do they store?
I doubt they hold every keystroke, but do they store details of what files you take off Kazaa, or just the fact you visited?
Reason I ask is the 'Music companies sue individual file-swappers' lark.
My mate* wants to know if they can determine how much you download and what it is.
Anyone have the answer?
*Sadly I'm no longer connected at home, so I couldn't care less.
How much detail do they store?
I doubt they hold every keystroke, but do they store details of what files you take off Kazaa, or just the fact you visited?
Reason I ask is the 'Music companies sue individual file-swappers' lark.
My mate* wants to know if they can determine how much you download and what it is.
Anyone have the answer?
*Sadly I'm no longer connected at home, so I couldn't care less.
I think you will find that Regulation of Investigatory Powers act 2000, is specifically related to criminal offences.
I understand that breach of copyright is not a criminal offence but a civil matter (I may be wrong) In which case the RIP powers cannot be used (I think).
It is possible that it could come under the theft act because a copyright is classed as property under the act. It is a 'thing in action' and therefore can be stolen.
I am unsure as to whether someone that breaches the copyright regulation actually steals the information/production gained by them. If they do then RIP could be used to retrieve the necessary evidence.
If it is purely civil then I think they will not be able to do so.
I will try and find out a bit more for you on this but a Solictor would be the person to ask or possibly Trading Standards that deal with this type of stuff. It is not usually a police matter.
I understand that breach of copyright is not a criminal offence but a civil matter (I may be wrong) In which case the RIP powers cannot be used (I think).
It is possible that it could come under the theft act because a copyright is classed as property under the act. It is a 'thing in action' and therefore can be stolen.
I am unsure as to whether someone that breaches the copyright regulation actually steals the information/production gained by them. If they do then RIP could be used to retrieve the necessary evidence.
If it is purely civil then I think they will not be able to do so.
I will try and find out a bit more for you on this but a Solictor would be the person to ask or possibly Trading Standards that deal with this type of stuff. It is not usually a police matter.
Depends on the ISP I suppose.
AOL now own Warner who are a lead member of the RIAA. AOL also have a tight arrangement with the CIA.
Now Blunkett has signed us up the extradition swanny I see it being entirely feasible that the RIAA find out the names of UK downloaders via AOL's records...
AOL now own Warner who are a lead member of the RIAA. AOL also have a tight arrangement with the CIA.
Now Blunkett has signed us up the extradition swanny I see it being entirely feasible that the RIAA find out the names of UK downloaders via AOL's records...
Thanks for the Info Madcop.
Any more you can give me on this would be welcome.
Cheers,
Al.
Edited to add: This is just speculation while we're bored at work, he's not really under threat under RIP as most of his MP3s are ripped from CDs he's bought.
It's just the thing about sueing people with large numbers of MP3s on their compuiter has got him worried.
That's not theft, it's... erm...
...something else...
>> Edited by Alan420 on Monday 7th July 11:55
Any more you can give me on this would be welcome.
Cheers,
Al.
Edited to add: This is just speculation while we're bored at work, he's not really under threat under RIP as most of his MP3s are ripped from CDs he's bought.
It's just the thing about sueing people with large numbers of MP3s on their compuiter has got him worried.
That's not theft, it's... erm...
...something else...
>> Edited by Alan420 on Monday 7th July 11:55
plotloss said:
Now Blunkett has signed us up the extradition swanny I see it being entirely feasible that the RIAA find out the names of UK downloaders via AOL's records...
Yip. That's another worry. Has anyone else written off expressing some hard feelings about this one-sided extradition thing?
I doubt very much that the americans will ever have cause to try me for anything, but the whole thing smacks of unfair practices and the erosion of our right to govern ourselves.
Blunkett signing our citizens away...
madcop said:
I think you will find that Regulation of Investigatory Powers act 2000, is specifically related to criminal offences.
Rather a naive point of view. The RIP Act is all about the Government "data mining" your communication traffic records (no, they don't record every keystroke, just every URL visited and the addresses of all exchanged emails).
This data *will* be abused, for the simple reason that all Governments everywhere always abuse whatever powers they are given.
While I don't doubt it will be abused at some point (like the tax office browsing celebrity accounts), I don't see what harm can be done...
The sheer amount of data surely guarantees your privacy against anything other than a focussed investigation by the police?
I suppose it could be used in blackmail if someone with a lot to loose was sniffing around some very dodgy sites, but it'd take a great deal of immagination to make it work. More than I have.
The sheer amount of data surely guarantees your privacy against anything other than a focussed investigation by the police?
I suppose it could be used in blackmail if someone with a lot to loose was sniffing around some very dodgy sites, but it'd take a great deal of immagination to make it work. More than I have.
At the moment they are looking to target individual users HOWEVER only the ones that stand out.
If one were to have about 2000 MP3's available then that is quite bad. The one they are prosecuting had somthing like 600,000 available!!
Dont keep them all in your shared folder. that way, how will they know..?
If one were to have about 2000 MP3's available then that is quite bad. The one they are prosecuting had somthing like 600,000 available!!
Dont keep them all in your shared folder. that way, how will they know..?
There are really two issues here I think.
1. What the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America), and the copyright laws they have managed to get passed in the US, are trying to do.
2. What powers under UK law can be invoked to track and prosecute Internet copyright abusers.
Well, the RIAA are trying all sorts of tricks to get the names and addresses of copyright abusers. Once these names are found then US law has been stacked in favour of the RIAA and American citizens are probably pretty screwed.
If they try to prosecute British citizens then they have to satisfy British courts that British laws have been broken. They will also have to win a civilian copyright prosecution. They may also find it too expensive as the British courts are unlikely to award the same damages as US courts.
So my guess is that they will first hit American users. This will probably then dry up a large amount of the material available and so they pretty much achieve their goal. If they think it's still bad they will probably try a few test cases in each country and then start issuing warning notices of a "stop or we will sue" nature.
Oh, and I very much doubt that they could use the RIP or get the police t help them with their search. They will us the logs of American ISP's etc. They are already trying to force the software providers (eg KaZa etc) to give them details of everyone who is running the software.
>> Edited by icamm on Monday 7th July 14:14
1. What the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America), and the copyright laws they have managed to get passed in the US, are trying to do.
2. What powers under UK law can be invoked to track and prosecute Internet copyright abusers.
Well, the RIAA are trying all sorts of tricks to get the names and addresses of copyright abusers. Once these names are found then US law has been stacked in favour of the RIAA and American citizens are probably pretty screwed.
If they try to prosecute British citizens then they have to satisfy British courts that British laws have been broken. They will also have to win a civilian copyright prosecution. They may also find it too expensive as the British courts are unlikely to award the same damages as US courts.
So my guess is that they will first hit American users. This will probably then dry up a large amount of the material available and so they pretty much achieve their goal. If they think it's still bad they will probably try a few test cases in each country and then start issuing warning notices of a "stop or we will sue" nature.
Oh, and I very much doubt that they could use the RIP or get the police t help them with their search. They will us the logs of American ISP's etc. They are already trying to force the software providers (eg KaZa etc) to give them details of everyone who is running the software.
>> Edited by icamm on Monday 7th July 14:14
It will be interesting to see what happens to Kazaa specifically.
Kazaa is dutch, but Kazaa Lite isnt.
With Kazaa you sign onto the network as a user with an ID but with Kazaa Lite everyone signs on as KazaaLiteUser so it will be down to who has an IP address at a given time.
Given that these are P2P systems the amount of IP permutations is truly ginormous even in a given hour.
Kazaa is dutch, but Kazaa Lite isnt.
With Kazaa you sign onto the network as a user with an ID but with Kazaa Lite everyone signs on as KazaaLiteUser so it will be down to who has an IP address at a given time.
Given that these are P2P systems the amount of IP permutations is truly ginormous even in a given hour.
As mentioned earlier, I lack immagination.
Please enlighten me.
I tend to check email 15-20 times a day, and depending how busy I am I'll spend more time on here.
In the good ole days of broadband I'd download music off Kazaa & Napster, (I got about 4 gb over 4 yrs)
How can this be used against me?
Please enlighten me.
I tend to check email 15-20 times a day, and depending how busy I am I'll spend more time on here.
In the good ole days of broadband I'd download music off Kazaa & Napster, (I got about 4 gb over 4 yrs)
How can this be used against me?
Alan420 said:IIRC that is only for criminal cases and isn't breach of copyright a civil offence?
If they try to prosecute British citizens then they have to satisfy British courts that British laws have been broken.
Alan420 said:Basically the idea is that they get a list of users who have downloaded or shared files of copyrighted material. They then sue you for breach of copyright and damages.
As mentioned earlier, I lack immagination.
Please enlighten me.
I tend to check email 15-20 times a day, and depending how busy I am I'll spend more time on here.
In the good ole days of broadband I'd download music off Kazaa & Napster, (I got about 4 gb over 4 yrs)
How can this be used against me?
This only applies if you are not using this data in accordance with the "fair use" copyright rules. IE if you have bought a copy, you can make backups for yourself/put it onto other media (ie like the old days of buying a record and taping it for the car. That is an example of fair use).
Couple of points on RIP etc:
1) As far as I am aware, no ISP in the UK currently complies with the RIP act with the storage and supply of information to the Police / Government. This is a case that the law is there to support rather than burden companies. You know, they suspect something on say Freeserve, and they can then use the RIP act to get them to log something.... they wont use it to force all ISP's to log everything.
2) The RIP act as a whole is deeply flawed and technically / practically impossible in several areas. In fact when you think about the volumes of emails that Freeserve process per day - the costs for their service would over treble (my company know worked out the numbers if you are interested - for a risk assessment). Therefore effectively putting them out of business overnight.... its just not going to happen.
3) ISP's do keep some generic information for billing and quota records. However, its so generic and contains little real information. Its usually total data sent and received and maybe some demographics stuff to allow them to profile themselves better. But data refering to "downloaded 3 x MP3 files from the Sony label" - its just not practical or cost effective....
4) The RIAA people who are going to go after MP3 pirates on the internet?!?!? Not going to happen. They might get some of the big traders with large collections, but beyond that the numbers are just astronomical (and therefore not worth it). For example, there are 57M registered users of P2P software in the USA alone - almost all have downloaded some MP3 music files. So, what are they going to do? Print out the usernames and manually process through them? Thats 57,000,000 users..... the numbers mean that it would be far too costly for them to even attempt to wade through that....even when you could get say $5000 per person, it would cost them more than that to get the lawyers to chase for it - a loss making exercise...!
Personally not bothered about this stuff anymore. Its just another example of a desperate corporation who's greed is getting carried away in their attempt to fulfil their own stock options. So shallow that it stinks..... Real pity that it has got this far.... give us value with a music CD (like lyrics, extras and PC enabled CDROMs) and make it a reasonable price of music we WANT to listen to and they would clean up.... but they peddle this meaningless drivel from PopStars and AmericanIdol .... what are we supposed to do....
Would you pay for it?
Cheers,
Paul
P.S. Just upgraded my "music" disk to 80GB and running at around 10GB. Then again most of that is MY music that I bought.....
1) As far as I am aware, no ISP in the UK currently complies with the RIP act with the storage and supply of information to the Police / Government. This is a case that the law is there to support rather than burden companies. You know, they suspect something on say Freeserve, and they can then use the RIP act to get them to log something.... they wont use it to force all ISP's to log everything.
2) The RIP act as a whole is deeply flawed and technically / practically impossible in several areas. In fact when you think about the volumes of emails that Freeserve process per day - the costs for their service would over treble (my company know worked out the numbers if you are interested - for a risk assessment). Therefore effectively putting them out of business overnight.... its just not going to happen.
3) ISP's do keep some generic information for billing and quota records. However, its so generic and contains little real information. Its usually total data sent and received and maybe some demographics stuff to allow them to profile themselves better. But data refering to "downloaded 3 x MP3 files from the Sony label" - its just not practical or cost effective....
4) The RIAA people who are going to go after MP3 pirates on the internet?!?!? Not going to happen. They might get some of the big traders with large collections, but beyond that the numbers are just astronomical (and therefore not worth it). For example, there are 57M registered users of P2P software in the USA alone - almost all have downloaded some MP3 music files. So, what are they going to do? Print out the usernames and manually process through them? Thats 57,000,000 users..... the numbers mean that it would be far too costly for them to even attempt to wade through that....even when you could get say $5000 per person, it would cost them more than that to get the lawyers to chase for it - a loss making exercise...!
Personally not bothered about this stuff anymore. Its just another example of a desperate corporation who's greed is getting carried away in their attempt to fulfil their own stock options. So shallow that it stinks..... Real pity that it has got this far.... give us value with a music CD (like lyrics, extras and PC enabled CDROMs) and make it a reasonable price of music we WANT to listen to and they would clean up.... but they peddle this meaningless drivel from PopStars and AmericanIdol .... what are we supposed to do....
Would you pay for it?
Cheers,
Paul
P.S. Just upgraded my "music" disk to 80GB and running at around 10GB. Then again most of that is MY music that I bought.....
zumbruk said:
Rather a naive point of view.
Not so much niave as factual. I am long enough in the tooth to know what happens with Govt legislation
The RIP powers have to obtain authority before they can be used to delve into personal data etc. This has to be on the written authority of a Police Superintendent, a Chief Officer of Police or the Secretary of state, depending on the degree of information required and the seriousness of the implication around the offences investigated.
I doubt that any person investigating copying of music from the internet under copyright would get a Police Supt or above to sign the authority for the powers to be used to gain that information. I may be wrong as I am not fully conversant with how RIP works other than basic working knowledge.
zumbruk said:
The RIP Act is all about the Government "data mining" your communication traffic records (no, they don't record every keystroke, just every URL visited and the addresses of all exchanged emails).
Now that is niave
RIP was bought into being to stop people in authority gaining an unfair advantage through misuse of or underhand methods to gain information about criminal offences. Surveilance was one of the prime reasons for its coming to fruition.
It was also a requirement when the UK signed up to the ECHR, as one of the convention rights was for everyperson to have the right to a private life. If the Police/authority start to interfere with that right, then they need to have a legal basis to do so. The rights of certain ECHR can be infringed providing that there is authority in law to allow it. RIP covers that area where this right is breached for the purposes of fighting crime etc.
Other rights under ECHR are absolute and cannot be breached under any circumstances without punishment such as Toture, the Death Penalty etc. No legislation can be drawn up to exempt these rights by lawful authority.
zumbruk said:
This data *will* be abused, for the simple reason that all Governments everywhere always abuse whatever powers they are given.
You are not wrong entirely, but if you are prosecuted for an offence that information/evidence gained about you and showing your guilt is used without the proper authority to obtain it, then you seek to be acquitted of the offence and make a tidy sum of compensation too!
>> Edited by madcop on Monday 7th July 17:40
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff