Im not a lawer but….
Surely if your Innocent and your ISP cut’s your connection this would be a DOS attack by the ISP against you? or at the very least, unless the ISP’s word there contracts well, a breach of contract?

And…that model for making opensource stone soup out of freebie music downloads is…what again? Um, selling some t-shirts?

Document that please?

Because what it’s demonstrably about is CONSUMPTION. Why do you believe that you are entitled to endless consumption?

Whether a Bible concordance, a WoW patch, a pirated movie, an instructional movie, or the software with which you will call 9/11, it doesn’t matter, the net IS ALREADY neutral to their CONTENT; what it is NOT neutral is to their CONSUMPTION. Consume a lot — pay a lot, or be blocked.

ISPs do not care about the content, they care about the type of content, it’s external packaging, i.e. a big file for a game or a movie. That’s all. No need to start invoking Christians needing to download Bibles and all the other underhanded tactics that the copyleftists use on this campaign for “net neutrality” which should be called “campaign for net congestion”.

The RIAA isn’t going above the Constitution, any more than the police are going above the Constitution if they raid a shop off Broadway that has Gucci knock-offs. Crime is crime; theft is theft. It’s not about privacy and free speech, your right to those rights doesn’t extend into commiting crimes with them.

It’s customary for geeky copyleftists on blogs like this to say RIAA and ISPs are evil. But they aren’t in any demonstrable way, just because they protect private property which you technocommunists think you have a right to endlessly. They are merely protecting the interests
of creators. That’s ok. That’s how they make a living.

The people who produce CDs need to be paid, but they aren’t the ones paying for the advertising and the distribution. And that’s why CDs cost more, and that’s why RIAA protects *those* investments as well. And if you a musician can just go sell his CD on a Myspace page, well, uh, try that, and see if it works *for the majority*. The system may not be one you like, but it’s one that has worked. If in fact you could really access good artists without any PR middleman, CDs and the RIAA would have completely disappeared by now. But…they haven’t. Deal with it.

7.90 isn’t a “shipping cost” you moron, it’s the cost of everything involved in production, the plastic, the factor, the pressing of the CDs, the shipping, marketing, distribution, accounting, inventory, etc. etc. Have you ever worked in a real-life business with marketing and inventory, or do you just code and sit and download tunes all day?

You are laughable, with your fake research. The most popular YouTubes are often movies that people had to invest fantastic sums to make, with huge costs, and people steal them. So the companies are right to sue YouTube. Get a life.

The technical problems are of course clear: How can you differ between lawful and non-lawful content? Only a judge can do that. But judges have to much to decide on this topic so the industry thinks they can automate it.

What I found more alarming though is the fact that we talk about people cutting off the internet. Automatically. What can you do in the future without having internet? Nothing!

And just because the music industry is unwilling to adjust their business model?

Wow, Prokofy Neva has solved the age-old dilemma. (sigh..)

I’d like to say I don’t agree with file sharing, but I also try to be very centre minded in my own thinkings with issues such as this. The RIAA is full of morons… From personal experience… all ISP providers have only morons working at them… I say, screw them, everyone has a right to choose to torrent or not. Even music ARTISTS hate the RIAA. Disturbed has said it themselves, and left a former record label due to it’s connection to the RIAA. If the musicians move away from something, there’s obviously something wrong.

Lastly, I would like to say that the RIAA is full of corrupt and greedy bastards. People that produce CDs make almost nothing, and the RIAA pockets most of the profit. I know the guys from Bloody Sunday, and they made little profit from CDs, maybe 10 cents each one (Yes, it is true.) though they sold thousands o copies. Meanwhile, I talked to my Hot Topic friend and, the same CD they got 10 cents for, comes into store for about 7-8 dollars. That um… 7.90 difference was NOT the shipping cost, gimme a frickin break. All of these people are corrupt and need to be shut down. If the world DOES need to turn to torrenting, let them. The RIAA is not a honest corporation, and neither are the movie industries. If I could find a youtube vid, I’d show you what I mean. I’ll find it later an put it here. In it a guy is selling the movies he produced, pirated for 5 bucks a copy. He makes more that way than through the company. Yeah, it’s a real video, nothing fake. I make sure to do my research before believing anything.

I agree with the second commenter in that they either need to evolve/innovate or get a new job…it’s like trying to save the calendar business at this point…it’s just not a necessary industry.

Good! They don’t get to force everybody else to a slowdown due to their Bittorent habits.

The EFF should have a field day with this one.

If they do, they’d be terribly copyleftist and ideologically suspect. This issue of net congestion — propagandistically re-named by the left as “net neutrality” — has nothing to do with freedom of speech. Don’t mistake your sense of entitlement to endless “freedom of consumption” with free speech.

>Oh, and special shout out to France, the only EU country willing to consider legislation around this abhorrent concept, giving it legitimacy it doesn’t deserve.

Well, France has a socialist system. Not every country wants a socialist system. See how France really does with this when the bill comes to pay ultimately.

And they’re absolutely right. Bandwidth is a scarce resource and needs to be paid for — you don’t keep getting to demand a free ride. They should cut off those who overuse resources, and they should figure out how to meter. You didn’t pay ENOUGH for your “multimedia bandwidth” — that’s absurd. The fees for ISPs are woefully inadequate and ungranulated. They will have to come up with a metered system giving the overuses of the system. It’s no different than electricity. Why would you think you have unlimited access at some flat rate for electricity just because you’re a geek?

>Fortunately, in the US, if you have DSL service, you have alternatives. (AT&T has to open their DSL lines so 3rd parties can also offer you DSL service, which is how I consume my home bandwidth.) Not everyone has a viable DSL solution, so looks like Cable Monopoly wins all around with this one, and the customer gets screwed.

Er, no, that won’t be lasting for long. It’s geekily fashionable to dump on Comcast and demonize them for this, but they are merely the first to be pragmatic about this obvious problem, and others will follow suit. We *will* be seeing pay-to-play and metering just like other forms of media and energy. There’s nothing “special” about the Internet, which is merely a combined form of media and energy. Tripod.com and other sites used to have tiered levels of membership based on the bandwidth consumed by your visitors to your site. That was normal. That is the future.

And they’re absolutely right. Bandwidth is a scarce resource and needs to be paid for — you don’t keep getting to demand a free ride. They should cut off those who overuse resources, and they should figure out how to meter. You didn’t pay ENOUGH for your “multimedia bandwidth” — that’s absurd. The fees for ISPs are woefully inadequate and ungranulated. They will have to come up with a metered system giving the overuses of the system. It’s no different than electricity. Why would you think you have unlimited access at some flat rate for electricity just because you’re a geek?

–Fortunately, in the US, if you have DSL service, you have alternatives. (AT&T has to open their DSL lines so 3rd parties can also offer you DSL service, which is how I consume my home bandwidth.) Not everyone has a viable DSL solution, so looks like Cable Monopoly wins all around with this one, and the customer gets screwed.

Er, no, that won’t be lasting for long. It’s geekily fashionable to dump on Comcast and demonize them for this, but they are merely the first to be pragmatic about this obvious problem, and others will follow suit. We *will* be seeing pay-to-play and metering just like other forms of media and energy. There’s nothing “special” about the Internet, which is merely a combined form of media and energy. Tripod.com and other sites used to have tiered levels of membership based on the bandwidth consumed by your visitors to your site. That was normal. That is the future.

>It wouldn’t surprise me if we saw a lot of high-bandwidth consuming customers in areas without competitive DSL service getting dropped.

Good! They don’t get to force everybody else to a slowdown due to their Bittorent habits.

—The EFF should have a field day with this one.

If they do, they’d be terribly copyleftist and ideologically suspect. This issue of net congestion — propagandistically re-named by the left as “net neutrality” — has nothing to do with freedom of speech. Don’t mistake your sense of entitlement to endless “freedom of consumption” with free speech.

>Oh, and special shout out to France, the only EU country willing to consider legislation around this abhorrent concept, giving it legitimacy it doesn’t deserve.

Well, France has a socialist system. Not every country wants a socialist system. See how France really does with this when the bill comes to pay ultimately.

You mean like that big Internet ad agency called Google?