Illegal downloaders 'face UK ban'- VM to Pilot Scheme

Actually... it aint a "Get-Out-Clause" .. at least here it aint.. you "might not" get the harsh penaltys as you would if you got it all secured but just because you're to stupid doesn't mean you don't have to pay the price... and if it all backfires.. how about accessory? And if they can prove you did it on purpose to cloak your activities...blabla...

anyway... you're done... if ya own a gun and leave it layin around.. someone shoots a person with it: you get humped big time.. although it might not be the same ...in terms of punishment,.... perhaps its more like with Creditcard Fraud....You haven't protected your data enough.. so its your own fault..

 

Exactly. Unless you have a private torrent network running encrypted torrents, anyone can join and see a list of peers' IP addresses. This is a fundamental problem that cannot really be coded around through fancy encryption etc. - in order for a person to be able to download a file using any peer-to-peer network (especially bit-torrent with its segmentation of files and transfer by 'swarm') they (or at the very least their client software) need to be able to see the IP addresses of other peers. Even if the software attempted to cloak the IP addresses of other peers, it can easily be attacked either at the software level (by reverse engineering, which could in principle be made quite difficult by deliberate obfuscation of the code) or, more straightforwardly, at the protocol level by trivial packet inspection.

If you do have a private torrent network running encrypted torrents, theoretically, you are safe provided you can vet your members suitably. This has the disadvantage of being a pure barrier defence - as soon as law enforcement get credentials to access your torrents (either by masquerading as a legitimate new user and being given a login or by effectively extorting credentials out of an existing member in exchange for leniency), they have full access to the IP addresses of all members joining torrents from then onwards.

 

if they do this i can see the current party loosing the next elections.... and ISPs going down in flames.....

 

That's fine for the US, but over here in the UK (where this legislation is being pushed through) we have no right to provacy outside of our homes. That means phones conversations can be tapped, and internet traffic can be monitered. It is not illegal for a company or the government to do that.

As you see there is nothing stating an individual's right to privacy, just their right to free speech and free expression (within the law). Now it may be another amendment you're talking about, frankly I can't be bothered to find it.

Also, product, service, it doesn't really matter. ISPs offer an internet service as a product to their customers, they still have a right to do whatever they like regardless of it's correct economical term.

 

Your right your phone can be tapped, however only at the authorisation of the office of the home sectary. Its not as easy as your making out. We don't have a right to privacy (we should) we have an expectation of privacy which can only be over ruled under certain (fairly) strict circumstances.

 

He was probably thinking of the fourth.

 

The fourth only offers protection against unreasonable searches and seizures from the government.

 

Basically the courts take it to mean the police can't just go snooping around; they can get whatever they want if a judge will issue a warrant, but that requires evidence. It's like the encryption debate; the police are allowed to see the data but the holder doesn't have to give up their key.

Personally I'd consider random inspections of data unreasonable and thus unconstitutional. We're screwed in the UK though

 

Just because it's unreasonable doesn't mean it's unconstitutional. I think the death penalty is unreasonable but it's not unconstitutional.

 

It does in this case, the fourth specifically protects against unreasonable searches.

 

before the patriot act..... now they consider you a terrorist and you have no rights....... but that's not for this conversation.....

 

it actually fits in fine, why? because its the same, cutting back the rights of the people and at the same time expanding the power of the government.

 

Actually no, it isn't. The First Amendment is the rights to freedom of religion, freedom of press, freedom of speech, assembly, and to petition for redress of grievances. I think you mean the fourth amendment:

 

i dnt get how it will be possible for them to track, say you are downloading a film split in to zips and not having a name like Filmname.rar how can they tell what you are downlaoding?,

also wont ISP be reluctant to strike there users off as they can just go elseware lol?

 

Meh, watch them lose paying customers...

 

yup and add to that the massive amount of data to monitor.... if you download something when you are 20 you prolly get a letter that they will disconnect you when you are 50.

 

No system could claim to differentiate legal from illegal, automated packet monitoring could flag traffic for manual human intervention but who one individual decides whether the data in transit to be legal or illegal. It would cost service providers thousands if not hundreds of thousands to implement.. Not to mention the legal implementations of such a system!

Scare tactics from fat politicians under pressure to police something they don’t understand

 

Greetings!

ISPs will be happy to "strike" heavy users and there wont be a "elsewhere" if all ISPs follow the same set of rules.

 

*

 

just think about the abuse possibilities it creates...