Virgin Media Adopts Three-Strikes Rule for Illegal Downloads

Discussion in 'The Front Room' started by Starman, Mar 30, 2008.

  1. Starman

    Starman Can't get enough of FH

    ISPreview - Virgin Media Adopts Three-Strikes Rule for Illegal Downloads
  2. Big G

    Big G Has a sexy sister. I am also a Bodhi wannabee.

    I think it was only a matter of time before the squeeze happened
  3. Aesgir

    Aesgir Loyal Freddie

    Fair enough, now if they are gonna start tackling copyright infringement, what they blame bandwidth hogging on, does that mean they are gonna stop throttling me at prime time for gaming? :)
  4. ECA

    ECA I am a FH squatter

    IP infringement is a civil issue, not a criminal one.

    Which means:fuckioff.

    I hope Everyone leaves Virgin Media and shows them the error of their ways but too many sheep exist.
  5. gohan

    gohan FH is my second home

    bit gash..... but means my brother will have to stop DLing shit all the fucking time and lagging me

    only gay thing is on my Zen i ahve to DL stuff to watch as i can't transfer from a DvD onto it and bollox am i paying to DL in zen format when i already have it on Dvd
  6. Ch3tan

    Ch3tan I aer teh win!!

    The problem is, leave and go to whom? Guarenteed the other isp's will follow suit.
  7. gohan

    gohan FH is my second home


    they wont follow suit, they also wont give you interweb that works but nvm
  8. Big G

    Big G Has a sexy sister. I am also a Bodhi wannabee.

    Agreed; they'll all start to squeeze.
  9. ECA

    ECA I am a FH squatter

    Also I dont think this changes much anyway, most nub donkeys use streams these days rather than more easily traceable peer 2 peer sources.

    By this I mean more people will start streaming + better encryption on torrents.
  10. Yaka

    Yaka Part of the furniture

    fucking ell is this also for usenet?
  11. Chilly

    Chilly Balls of steel

    Er, why? They are trying to reduce illegal activity on their networks. It's perfectly reasonable and they can kick you off for any reason they like - they dont have to give you three chances.

    As much as I dislike the way media distribution is currently handled, I still not try to fool myself that I have some right to get torrents and wouldn't blame any ISP for booting me if I were to do so and get caught.
  12. Draylor

    Draylor Part of the furniture

    Good good, ban the stupid people, leave more bandwidth for the rest of us.
  13. MYstIC G

    MYstIC G Official Licensed Lump of Coalâ„¢ Distributor Staff member Moderator FH Subscriber

    Virgin haven't got a fucking clue what they're doing. Every mention of them is a publicity whoring exercise. Premium rate support, then back to national rate support, bandwidth caps, etc, etc.

    Every time a thread appears about them however I'm more and more glad that I'm on Sky now.
  14. ECA

    ECA I am a FH squatter

    It's not illegal to slander you, or to libel you, but if you choose to you can sue me for damages.

    When I call you a stupid fucking **** you could technically bring a lawsuit against me, but the police won't come and arrest me, and my ISP won't throw me offline. Yet Virgin Media is acting proactively on behalf of the rights holder?

    Wanna know why?

    It reduces their costs a ton.
  15. gunner440

    gunner440 Hey Daddy Altman

    Why should people get away with these illegal activities? I don't see anything wrong with what Virgin are doing. In fact, I'm happy they've taken these actions.
  16. ECA

    ECA I am a FH squatter


  17. Scouse

    Scouse HERO! FH Subscriber

    Jeez. I didn't know there were so many trolls on these forums :)

    I'll wait until 3rd strike then move ISP...
  18. rynnor

    rynnor Rockhound Moderator

    Actually I think Virgin media may be doing this to avoid a statutory solution - they dont want an expensive to police solution forced on them - instead they opt for a voluntary solution - ban a few tards - rights holders are happy and they can get on with making money...
  19. Dukat

    Dukat Resident Freddy

    How will this be enforced without some sort of DPA-busting software to monitor everyone?
  20. DaGaffer

    DaGaffer Down With That Sorta Thing

    They don't need to monitor everyone; they'll apply it selectively (which is easy enough) and make a few examples of people. Of course the big leechers will start using encrypted files which will make for some interesting court cases if VM have a pop at someone where they're not certain what the files actually are (but are guessing). Of course, they probably won't bother, and in true RIAA fashion will go after the easy targets.

    Personally I think they're making a huge mistake. The ISPs have always maintained they are not responsible for the data carried over their networks, and are just the carrier (like the phone system); by doing this there is a tacit admission that they have responsibility for data, so next time some parent finds little Johnny looking at hardcore pr0n, they can theoretically sue the ISP.
  21. Dukat

    Dukat Resident Freddy

    Isnt that what they do already? with the "going after the easy targets and making examples" bit.

    By doing this, have Virgin set a precedent that the whole industry will be expected to follow?

    arse :(
  22. DaGaffer

    DaGaffer Down With That Sorta Thing

    Yes, but to date, the ISPs have only gone after people based on excessive bandwidth use, not based on the specific files they've been downloading. Its a fundamental change.
  23. Talivar

    Talivar Part of the furniture

    So in theory someone that buys pc games online and downloads them legally , also downloads lots of demos and betas ect , maybe some movies from xbox live, this type of person could be in trouble since virgin cant actually see he is doing it all legally?
  24. ECA

    ECA I am a FH squatter

    Also add slingbox in there.
  25. DaGaffer

    DaGaffer Down With That Sorta Thing

    No, because most of that activity is trackable; however, Kontiki-based stuff like BBC iPlayer and 40D is more of a problem because that's legitimate P2P traffic. I'm no expert though, so I guess they will have white lists and black lists of P2P traffic (based on where the trackers are hosted?) Thing is, this kind of thing is always a battle and torrent devs are usually one step ahead.
  26. Draylor

    Draylor Part of the furniture

    Nah, you are missing the point. Understandably, since the original article is shit and the folks replying to it so far are either clueless, or just too lazy to explain it to the stupid people :fluffle:

    The rights holders are already complaining to the ISPs about individual customers, due to their monitoring of torrents etc. So far UK ISPs have 2 ways of handling these complaints: filing the in the bin, or occasionally forwarding them to the person concerned with 'please dont do it again or we wont be happy' cover notes.

    They arent saying theyll start monitoring what their customers download themselves, only that theyll respond to the complaints they already receive by actually doing something.

    And that, for anyone with a clue, is a good thing - since itll leave more bandwidth for the rest of us.
  27. DaGaffer

    DaGaffer Down With That Sorta Thing

    Yeah, except that by making this formal, its only a matter of time before the rights holders can force the ISPs to do the grunt work on their behalf. This is my point, by accepting responsibility for the type of content their customers are seeing, they're setting themselves up for a world of trouble in the future. Although you could see this is as a good thing in the short term, as it may ease network congestion (although I doubt it, as legitimate P2P like iPlayer is proving to be a huge problem in its own right), in the long-term its not so good; once ISPs start getting sued by rights holders, or by customers, they're going to say they need tools to track customers in order to fulfil their legal obligations, and voila! the government gets the monitoring tools it wants.
  28. Draylor

    Draylor Part of the furniture

    Theyve 2 choices DaGaffer, something along the lines of what Virgin are suggesting, or wait for the (clueless, corrupt) government to force them to do it.

    Ill take this every time, otherwise thanks to the generous campaign contributions by the rights holders we'll have them writing the laws ...
  29. ECA

    ECA I am a FH squatter

    It really sucks though, because the RIAA and MPAA dont want to do online distribution properly ( they want DVD prices with no extra cost... ) they are basically dicking the market over.

    If you could buy a film for $5 online and download it and have your own library you'd cut out a HUGE % of copyright infringement, same for albums.

    But they need to cut that DRM shit out so I can watch my film on my desktop, my laptop, stream to my TV etc.

    And no I dont want to be locked into some shitty brand of music player and not be able to keep my downloaded and paid for library when I switch brand of hardware.

    Its really quite simple, $5/film and $5/album, without restrictive DRM and they will

    A) make more money
    B) cut piracy

    but C) they dont have the balls to do it.
  30. DaGaffer

    DaGaffer Down With That Sorta Thing

    Except the (clueless, corrupt) government would be guaranteed to implement something totally half-arsed and it would be ten years before it was workable (by which time we'll all be on fibre and the market will have fixed the problem). By doing it this way the government gets what it wants by the back door with no public oversight. I just don't think Virgin really appreciate how huge a pain in the arse this could turn out to be. There are good reasons why ISPs haven't bent over for the rights holders before now...

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.