Amiga.org
Coffee House => Coffee House Boards => CH / General => Topic started by: lopanas on February 01, 2008, 10:09:28 PM
-
Since the folks behind The Pirate Bay has been taken to court, accused for assisting copyright infringment, the swedish newsprogram Aktuellt had a special about illegalfilesharing this week. And it seems that Hollywood and it's lobbyists are trying to make it possible for IP owners to directly get access to information about who is behind an IP-address, something only prosecutors and the police are permitted todo today. And another discussion is if ISPs shall be enforced to check their networks for copyright infringing activities. This is not only impossible, but also idiotic. Because if other than the police can get access to IP-addresses, this will be abused and innocent people may be affected. Forcing the ISPs to hunt down and report pirates will only take away both their and the police attention to more deserving things. Such as stopping paedophilias and real crime. And it's impossible because of 1.4 million of 9 million is filesharing illegal material here in Sweden, are they going to put 15% of Sweden in prison for a crime which in the public eyes are less serious than walking against red light(Which isn't even a crime in Sweden). This is just another step to increase Hollywoods power and an Orwellian society where you're watched werever you go. We aren't against IP, but were not pro 1984. Big Brother is created thru American greed today, not Communist occupation.
-
lopanas wrote:
This is just another step to increase Hollywoods power and an Orwellian society where you're watched werever you go. We aren't against IP, but were not pro 1984. Big Brother is created thru American greed today, not Communist occupation.
Sorry but that's ridiculous. Have you read 1984? "Orwellian" society is about thought control and direct monitoring of the innocent - not about monitoring criminal activity which should rightly be punished. I hardly think that is a step towards the totalitarian regime of Oceania. If you are innocent then you have nothing to fear from Internet traffic monitoring.
Furthermore, I very much doubt monitoring Internet traffic will take resources away from fighting other crime. It's not like somebody will be employed to sit and look through all the traffic! This will be automated, and only if something is flagged up will it require human intervention. If anything, this will create jobs to fill these roles.
--
moto
-
motorollin wrote:I hardly think that is a step towards the totalitarian regime of Oceania. If you are innocent then you have nothing to fear from Internet traffic monitoring.
--
moto
You never know when private data can be harmfull to you or not. Say, if you have a certain political opinion, a future employer with a different political opinion could do a search, and decide not to employ you. Or, AFAIK, a case that Airbus lost an $6 billion order to Boeing thanks to Echelon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECHELON). See, there are many things you want to keep secret as a company, like contracts and innovations etc.. Very innocent according the law, but not to other companies/individuals.
But it also can be a lot more harmful, where ppl use violence against those who have another political opinion, or race, or sexuality.
Privacy concerns do not come out of the blue.
-
I agree with your points Speel, but I don't see how automated monitoring copyright infringement is going to lead to any of that.
--
moto
-
motorollin wrote:
I agree with your points Speel, but I don't see how automated monitoring copyright infringement is going to lead to any of that.
--
moto
It's not automated monitoring of copyright infringement, it's automated monitoring, because automated monitoring of copyright infringement is technically AND logically (you cannot filter on data without having all the data) beseen impossible.
-
Speelgoedmannetje wrote:
It's not automated monitoring of copyright infringement, it's automated monitoring, because automated monitoring of copyright infringement is technically AND logically (you cannot filter on data without having all the data) beseen impossible.
So what? Don't you think data is already being filtered? I am under no illusion that GCHQ or some other Government agency isn't listening for illegal activities. I don't care - if it helps to prevent crime then I've got nothing to worry about as a law-abiding citizen.
--
moto
-
the fact that we all know about this makes its missuse unlikely if not impossible. most corperations can be controlled with positive and negative profit control (think of what we did to intel when they tried to sell us pentium IIIs with active id number feature)
most responsible governments can be contolled in other ways. polls, petitions, protests, votes etc.
we demand that government protect us and prosecute criminals. if we technologically bust tham back to 1800's forensics and investigative tools they wont be able to do their jobs.
-
motorollin wrote:
Speelgoedmannetje wrote:
It's not automated monitoring of copyright infringement, it's automated monitoring, because automated monitoring of copyright infringement is technically AND logically (you cannot filter on data without having all the data) beseen impossible.
So what? Don't you think data is already being filtered? I am under no illusion that GCHQ or some other Government agency isn't listening for illegal activities. I don't care - if it helps to prevent crime then I've got nothing to worry about as a law-abiding citizen.
--
moto
Do you even bother to read my posts, and think it about it for that matter? :headwall:
-
Steady on Speel, there was no need for that. Yes I read your post. Perhaps I misunderstood.
--
moto
-
While no one likes to be watched... It is the actions of those who use our technology for illegal activity that have caused the authorities to consider/take these actions.
You can't blame someone/corporations for trying to protect their rights... this is a case of an ignorant few spoiling it for the rest of us.
Like most things though this is an "arms race"... as the authorities get better at spying on us... we get better at hiding... This evolution is the crux of natural selection, and we will end up with more secure systems because of it... :-) There is a light at the end of most tunnels.
-
bloodline wrote:
While no one likes to be watched... It is the actions of those who use our technology for illegal activity that have caused the authorities to consider/take these actions.
You can't blame someone/corporations for trying to protect their rights... this is a case of an ignorant few spoiling it for the rest of us.
Of course, but in this case I think the cure is far worse than the problem. It attacks the very core of the fundaments of our system as it is today.
-
Speelgoedmannetje wrote:
bloodline wrote:
While no one likes to be watched... It is the actions of those who use our technology for illegal activity that have caused the authorities to consider/take these actions.
You can't blame someone/corporations for trying to protect their rights... this is a case of an ignorant few spoiling it for the rest of us.
Of course, but in this case I think the cure is far worse than the problem. It attacks the very core of the fundaments of our system as it is today.
Then the only solution is to police the networks ourselves.
-
I'm sorry that I may have misused the word orwellian, but my point is that the suggestion to force ISPs monitor networks doesn't just include those who actually pirate stuff, but everyone. And when already filtering out piracy, then stop kiddieporn, and why not start filter out criminal activities, and then antidemocratical views, and so on. Filtering out piracy may not be a danger alone, but when people start accepting more and more government control over their lifes than already is, then we're on a dangerous way. I'm not saying we should be free todo whatever we want, the state must have some form of control and authority over people, but you have to find the golden middleroed.
-
"Weird Al" Yankovic: "Don't Download This Song!" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yz-grdpKVqg)
"you start out stealing songs, Then you're robbing liquor stores, And selling Crack, And running over school kids with your car"
"Just buy the CD you cheap {bleep}"
:lol:
-
I understand giving rights to investigate Internet piracy to the police, but why to ISP's? What can they do that the police can't do on their own?
Also, ISP's currently control our access to the Internet (at least until widespread worldwide WiMax adoption), they can block our access to websites they don't want us to see and censor information. Unlikely? There are known cases of it already happening:
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/08/04/1219223&from=rss
ISP blocking content starts with illegal stuff, but then they have powers to block content that the ISP deems unacceptable. I wish people would understand that invasion of privacy doesn't just affect criminal behaviour.
-
Some good points have been brought up on both sides of the matter. Only thing to add is that whenever I read about XYZ trying to do ABC to protect us, I always think: what would I do in their shoes?
And my answer to these matters (online espionage, etc) is always: hire a computer junkie (like us) to do the job. No need for the Big Brother-type, uber-sniffer, StarWars type project.
What I mean is, when I was younger, I was into the "file sharing" thing. I knew the hang outs and where to go to find stuff. All that's needed by government agencies is to hire a bunch of us/these types and before long they'll have the biggest warez hubs, HPAVC forums, kiddie pr0n sites, etc. Infiltration and espionage has been successful for a very long time. No reason it won't work on this "front".
The FBI has supposedly done this to sniff out large networks of credit card scammers. The guy who was doing it was interviewed by Wired, if you care to search it up.