Jump to content

ISP internet filters are ILLEGAL !


djweeble

Recommended Posts

Plans by various governments to turn Internet Service Providers into unpaid copyright cops working on behalf of Big Content have been given a thumbs down by the European Court of Justice.

 

While the Advocate General's ruling is not final yet, it should make entertainment industry bosses wake up in a cold sweat screaming "Rosebud".

 

The Advocate General, Cruz Villalón, says that no ISP can be required to filter the Internet, and particularly not to enforce the copyright.

 

He said that the installation of that filtering and blocking system is a restriction on the right to respect for the privacy of communications - and the right to protection of personal data, both of which are rights protected under the Charter of Fundamental Rights.

 

Not only that, but the the deployment of such a system would restrict freedom of information, which is also protected by the Charter of Fundamental Rights. In other words it is illegal under European Law.

 

All those ISPs who are currently filtering out The Pirate Bay and AllOfMP3 are actually breaking the law, rather than enforcing it. So FastWeb, it is time to do the decent thing.

 

France's three strikes law, Spain's proposed court action against pirates, and the UK's forthcoming laws are all a breach of European Rights laws.

 

There are ways around the ruling. Laws can be written requiring an ISP filter or block parts of the internet, but they have to conform to very strict rules that are applied to laws limiting fundamental rights, such as those preventing terrorism. But ISPs can't choose to limit what they present as "The Internet".

 

Rick Falkvinge, from the Pirate Party, said that the ruling gives ISPs the power to say "go play on the highway, parasites, we have a paper from the highest possible court saying no court can force us to do that. We care more about our customers than about obsolete irrelevance".

 

Source -> http://www.techeye.net/internet/european-court-says-no-isp-needs-to-filter-internet

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BT and Talk Talk are going to appeal

 

Well no one has tested in court an IP address as being evidence identifying a party assumed to be guilty of filesharing yet. And because ISP's cannot legally use Deep Packet Inspection technologies they can only detect that you are using P2P protocol when you are downloading content. Both torrents and streaming media use P2P protocol so how will they know that you aren't just watching a legitimate movie?

 

I can see this law being disregarded by most ISP's, as it stands it's almost unenforceable!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The IP address bit is funny.

For this to even stand a chance of working ALL IP address's will need to be static (you think they will pass this type of law 1st if they know what they are talking about)

 

I have a dynamic IP address like 95% of end users (I time shar my ip the are 255 people that can use it)

 

What happends if a Person gets he's IP listed by a program but befor it gets loged that IP passes to me.

 

If I got a letter I'd like to know who had the IP before me and after Me and who has got it on the day the sh** hit the fan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The IP address bit is funny.

For this to even stand a chance of working ALL IP address's will need to be static (you think they will pass this type of law 1st if they know what they are talking about)

 

I have a dynamic IP address like 95% of end users (I time shar my ip the are 255 people that can use it)

 

What happends if a Person gets he's IP listed by a program but befor it gets loged that IP passes to me.

 

If I got a letter I'd like to know who had the IP before me and after Me and who has got it on the day the sh** hit the fan.

 

 

Precisely!

 

Most ISP's would go under if they were made to supply all their customers with static IP's - it just wouldn't happen!

 

It's the volume of work that the ISP's are going to need to do to prove illegal file sharing too and the business is so competitive not one of them would be willing in the current economic climate to pass the cost of that, and the cost of sending out warning letters, on to their customers.

 

You know the copyright warning at the start of every film well getting a letter will be the equivalent of reading that because very little can be proved and they will just be guessing 99% of the time!

 

It's just paying lip service to the likes of Time Warner (movies) so the government can say they're doing their bit to stop file sharing, when in reality it is almost unstoppable.

 

 

 

:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...