I’m often reminded of the Monty Python line “Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition” as being the perfect analogy for the unexpected, so its apt that I use it here because it looks like what you download online in the United States could soon be monitored and blocked (presuming it breaches copyright) if new plans by AT&T are implemented.
At a panel discussion at the CES conference Tuesday, Senior Vice President of external & legal affairs for AT&T James Cicconi said that “what we are already doing to address piracy hasn’t been working” and further AT&T has been talking to technology companies, the MPAA and RIAA and “we are very interested in a technology based solution and we think a network-based solution is the optimal way to approach this.”
But just in case you think this might be a per-download basis, the target could be much larger than that. General Counsel for NBC Universal Rick Cotton has P2P downloading as his first target, saying “The volume of peer-to-peer traffic online, dominated by copyrighted materials, is overwhelming. That clearly should not be an acceptable, continuing status…the question is how we collectively collaborate to address this.”
This ISP level blocking would be fairly unique, given that most countries that implement censorship online do so at a national level, and usually target porn, moral or political subversion, such as in Australia and China.
Although this would be implemented by AT&T only at this stage giving customers who prefer their internet access without the hand of big brother the ability to change providers, remember that nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition. It could well spread to other ISPs as well, particularly once the MPAA and RIAA have one big win on the board.
With apologies to Monty Python again
“Amongst our weaponry are such diverse elements as fear, surprise, ruthless efficiency, an almost fanatical devotion to copyright, and nice red uniforms.”
(via Engadget)
Engadget got the story from a Blog of the New York Times
Not sure if the measure is feasible. After all, the traffic could be encrypted all the way from point A to point B…
That is a very strong step, I wonder if that may go to far with privacy rights. Do you really think it’ll go through?
Great, I have been waiting for this. I am sure that crapcast is drifting right behind AT&T, even though they hate each other.
The only way they would be able to monitor content is to reach into the IP data. So they would have access to all the traffic going through them including communications like email and browsing habits. Since they also have billing records, they know whom accessed this data.
Honestly, sounds like selling what the NSA has been using them for in the past as a service to the recording industry
Let “Senior Vice President of external & legal affairs” do what he does best - send cease&desists letter and leave technology talk to somebody more knowledgble in th area. ISP blocking is not new: http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/.....nt-traffic
While ISP’s are developing detection tools P2P networks are evolving to evade them:
http://www.emule-project.net/h.....pic_id=848
http://www.torproject.com
Unfortunately, the real victims will be innocent consumers caught in a crossfire.
Come on, we all know that the real reason they’re doing this is because they’re upset that they can’t cash in on peer-to-peer traffic with their current revenue models.
Too much bandwidth being used with static revenue per connection.
Well, folks, we already have a great immigration program here, in the EU, you’re welcome
(This was an unpaid advert :])
Very bad precedent. Not even China ISP’s are required of that, to the best of our knowledge. Also have negative implications towards net neutrality, whatever the latest status of it is.
Please visit http://www.freepress.net
It is being reported that the FCC is investigating Comcast’s attempts at this behavior, in addition the FCC faces a possible shake up.
This type of behavior is clearly a violation of net neutrality!
Why would anyone stay with AT&T as their provider once this is implemented?
I forecast a huge dip in broadband subscriber numbers for AT&T if they apply this, in favor of the other telcos. They might even have to close down their broadband operations in a couple of years.
This is really a good move by AT & T since piracy is increasingly looming large in US too. But, is it really important that you continue with AT & T after this? I don’t think so.
I’m not sure how it would be possible to differentiate between pirating traffic and legit traffic…
Or, to continue the Monty Python analogy…
The worst AT&T can do is start poking us with soft cushions or make us sit in comfy chairs…
I suggest boycotting the iPhone until AT&T comes to its senses.
@Vijay, of course whether we will continue to AT&T after this is none of your business and not important to you ^^ point is, there will be no net neutrality, and we hate that
It’s a misconception that China is a country with evenly implemented national policies. The local branch of the national Telecom company has been spamming me with province specific ads on and off since 2006: http://wtanaka.com/node/62
There *have* been instances of sites being blocked in one part of the country but not another. It’s likely that the internet censorship in China is distributed, and I would be surprised if most local ISPs didn’t implement their own customizations.
It’ll probably be good way to reduce people’s bandwidth too. It’ll make the net faster, especially with the predicted bandwidth shortage that will come with the increasing online videos.
@17.. the same reason that ppl predicted the death of the internet when video sites starting to become popular.. the death didn’t happen.
Mr. Recycle (#14)
no need to boycott the iPhone, simply buy it and run it on another carrier, that way only AT&T misses out. It’s not Apple’s fault that AT&T are doing this, indeed Steve Jobs has been a strong opponent to DRM for example (well, vocally anyway).
Wasn’t this July 2007 news ?
Late Story
the comments were this week, so not that I know of.
http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.....filtering/
http://www.downloadsquad.com/2.....-the-mpaa/
June, not July. My bad.
Unbelivable stupid move. Why do they think that their (movie, music industry) revenue model is STILL good? They need paradigm shift, not total controll on what I download.
Looks a bit contradictory that DRM is being dropped and Copyright being pursued. It will take lot of resources to monitor online activities,. Better to fine the offenders.
http://tekno-world.blogspot.com
To filter copyrighted material ot the ISP level is totally impossible.
First, because material can be encrypted, either for private communications (via e-mail of FTP) or via P2P encrypted networks. And everybody can use encryption to send whatever he wants, in a protected way.
Second, because even uncrypted, a file available on P2P networks comes to your PC by the way of millions of separate packets, rassembled once the download is finished. By analizing each packet at the IP data level, nothing copyrighted appears.
Sorry Duncan, but thisarticle is not very accurate, simply for technical issues.
a huge + to #2, #5 and #24.
a huge fuqu to AT&T.
Umm change your business model! X amount of monthly bandwidth and anything you go over you are charged for.
This will make broadband cheaper and more affordable for those who can’t afford it!
Also, this follows all that the Internet is all about! Innovation and providing access to all information - copyrighted or not!
Any other way stifles innovation and is a wrong step in the history of the net!
#24, great points. Plus there is an incredible amount of legal P2P data flow. Joost, for example, to my knowledge, is based on the same P2P technology that powers Kazaa. To some extent, I think Skype uses P2P too.
It’s about time that pirates begin to discover what their piracy has wrought. You can blast AT&T all you want…the others will all follow suit as well. Stealing hurts everyone except the thieves, and it cannot be long tolerated in a law-abiding society.
Unfortunately, since you couldn’t say no to your own personal “need” to steal and thumb your nose at “the man”…a grownup has to come solve the problem it for you.
Stop acting like children, and police yourselves…then you don’t need Big Brother anymore. Then again, you might find that you’ve waited too long. Big Brother, once in the door, may not be so eager to leave.
ISP as the Big Brother? Perhaps only AT&T would like it — their right choice, perhaps.
Pierre Col | UbicMedia (#24)
I’m going on what they are saying. Is it a challenge tech wise? hell yes, but read those comments
“we are very interested in a technology based solution and we think a network-based solution is the optimal way to approach this”
I think that this is what they are working towards, not sure if this means they can do this tomorrow, but that’s the intent.
And lets take the NBC’s guy quote into perspective, he’s saying that P2P is all about copyright theft. As we already know with Comcast it’s not that hard to throttle BitTorrent. Unfortunately with these guys, it’s a case of where there’s a will, there may well be a way.
#28 : I believe that “stealing” copyrighted material can, on the long term, generate a deep crisis for musicians, directors, actors and so on, and that something has to be done. Just click on my name above and you will see what I’m working on, and how smart solutions can prevent the generalized piracy of digital media while allowing the internet consumers to recommend, share and redistribute the movies, videos and music they like without staling the right owners.
But filtering, at the ISP or telco level (on the backbone nodes) or at the consumer level (on the DSL or cable box) is really a totally unefficient solution.
Can we change the headline to: “Insane AT&T ISP joins RIAA in suicide pact”?
Jon Smirl
lol
Technically — particularly if simplistically — it’s “easily” done at the ISP level, either with this Cisco-enabled deep packet inspection technology, or something similar.
But the implication is bad; being allowed to do step 1, they’ll proceed to step 2 and step 3, eventually hurting this net neutrality thing — its exact definitions aside.. and not hard to imagine that one day they’ll simply block the majority of p2p traffic (or charge extra — to compensate their “investments” in their filtering technology and staffing, and whatnot.)
For example, this ISP I’m on, simply block all the outbound email (SMTP port 25) for all their residential broadband customers (for over a year by now), because the administrative cost for them to curtail email spammers became a burden. Sure, they provided one solution, that all emails be first routed to their smtp relay host — certainly not to the liking of many. Why I’m still using them? Good question (fixed contract term), but not for too long very soon. Their [not invalid] reason - people use webmail these days anyways. That’s right. So they dare to do it heavy handed and worry no massive attrition. Good for them.
I will ban AT&T from my network if they take this sort of illegal activity. Just as i have banned Comcast.
WOW! AOL will be the only one with video
One more reason to leave United States
There are lot of old school thinkers here… “you shouldn’t steal cause look what you brought upon yourself,” LoL Not that many forward thinkers posting comments!
Piracy brings innovation and innovation equals a better quality life for everyone! Media and innovation always but heads, but in the end innovation wins and media does too. THey (media) just fight their way to better fortunes … silly of them to do so!
This is not the solution …. rather a new market is!
Huh: I wonder if you felt the same way if my hypothetical piracy served to seize the digital information in your bank account. You shouldn’t be so attached to it anyways. All you’ll have to do is find a new way to survive, adapt, become a better person. “Owning” is so passé. Just be a forward thinker ! It’s all information anyways; it wants to be free. I want it to be free. (If you could drop by Western Union and save me the trouble, that would be great too.)
Moderators: I`ve posted links to the past stories about this in June of 2007; they are still awaiting moderation. Could someone get to it ?
Correct me if I’m wrong but France is doing this too right?
So everybody builds encryption. https anybody? Encrypted bittorrents? This will accomplish nothing to prevent piracy except wasted money.
Dear AT&T,
About 5 months back I decided to get away from comcast as a cable and internet provider. So I cancelled my internet service with comcast and went with you (only because you were the only other option). Later I discovered that DirectTV wont work from my apartment because of a tree right outside blocking the signal.
So now I have Comcast for cable and you guys for internet. If you start interfering with my internet traffic (which you don’t need to because it’s none of your business. I pay you my hard earned dollars to bring me the fucking internet as is) I promise you that I will go back to comcast (atleast they are faster).
Regards
-Random Guy
In many areas of the country - particularly more rural areas - there is only ONE broadband provider.
The EU is looking like a better and better place to be…
Unless the US start sticking up for its citizens, it looks like we’re going China-Lite.
Kiss our rights goodbye….
you are a bit let we already have now the French Inquisition
france has a law which compels providers to do so but tech problems are almost as big as those of the famed Berman proposal
And we all know what is the issued for which copyright is just fish bait
maybe if alla artist federated making independent labels and pooling staffs for organizing tours …
well they did…this has nothing to do with P2P….this is how they are going to get rid of netradio…..UNLESS you play by their rules…..I guess it’s time to get rid of my Iphone
The censorship will start with piracy and then certain high level traffic use programs like gamimg. Then it will move over to speech and political dissidence websites. It will get soo bad that they will attack sites that don’t pay to allow their site to be accessed.
It will just turn into something not worth using. They will just bring in Internet 2 — total censorship. Government will say its for better “performance” and the kiddy gamers will fall for it.
@28 Your comments about piracy mirror failed arguments of a hundred years ago. John Philip Sousa once said “If these infernal talking machines are allowed to continue we won’t have a voice box left in America. We will lose our voice boxes as we lost our tails when we came down out of the trees.” He was arguing against recording technology because it would move the focus of profit from the sheet music industry to the recording industry. RIAA used to be a bunch of pirates pillaging the sheet music industry. Now they’re the establishment fighting the same rearguard action. They had a good 100 year run (Sousa made that statement in 1908). Time to stop fighting creative destruction and evolve or die.
@26 The speed of your connection is a de facto limit, since you can only use as much bandwidth as the speed of your connection allows. More important, *this is priced in* by the ISPs/telcos already. Your suggestion lets us pay twice for the privilege of a high speed connection. Bandwidth limiters are generally a bad idea. Look at broadband penetration and costs in countries where this is the norm, vs. countries where it isn’t.
Also look at it this way. I pay my ISP for a connection. A web site pays their ISP for a connection. One set of packets routes between them. So we’re already paying twice for transmission. Your suggestion actually allows us to pay 3 or 4 times depending on how it’s implemented.
Telcos simply want to suck more money out of the pipes because they don’t like the flat rate models. Hence QoS bullshit, “the pipes are full” arguments, and trying to meter high-bandwidth applications.