Are we back to the 2000's again?
Apparently the RIAA is back suing ISP's (Cox in this case) for users pirating music. It was pretty bogus back then, but with the uptake of TLS for almost everything and DoH to conceal DNS requests what exactly is an ISP supposed to do these days? Throw in a VPN and the pirates completely cut out the ISP. Am I missing something? https://yro.slashdot.org/story/23/06/02/2043209/music-pirates-are-not-terror... Mike
It’s like blaming water companies for people stealing boats :) -mel beckman
On Jun 3, 2023, at 2:06 PM, Michael Thomas <mike@mtcc.com> wrote:
Apparently the RIAA is back suing ISP's (Cox in this case) for users pirating music. It was pretty bogus back then, but with the uptake of TLS for almost everything and DoH to conceal DNS requests what exactly is an ISP supposed to do these days? Throw in a VPN and the pirates completely cut out the ISP.
Am I missing something?
https://yro.slashdot.org/story/23/06/02/2043209/music-pirates-are-not-terror...
Mike
On Sat, Jun 3, 2023 at 2:51 PM Mel Beckman <mel@beckman.org> wrote:
It’s like blaming water companies for people stealing boats :)
It's been a while and the article is light on the facts of the case, but IIRC what happened was: RIAA made some DMCA complaints to Cox. Cox decided that since they were the network rather than the host, they couldn't "remove" the offending material, wouldn't cut the user's access and, because they have such respect for customer privacy, wouldn't tell the RIAA who the customers were unless RIAA subpoenaed them under a John Doe suit. The court decided that Cox's behavior was sufficient to waive the DMCA's liability shield for Internet providers and off they went to trial. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William Herrin bill@herrin.us https://bill.herrin.us/
On 6/3/23 4:01 PM, William Herrin wrote:
It’s like blaming water companies for people stealing boats :) It's been a while and the article is light on the facts of the case, but IIRC what happened was: RIAA made some DMCA complaints to Cox. Cox decided that since they were the network rather than the host, they couldn't "remove" the offending material, wouldn't cut the user's access and, because they have such respect for customer privacy, wouldn't tell the RIAA who the customers were unless RIAA subpoenaed
On Sat, Jun 3, 2023 at 2:51 PM Mel Beckman <mel@beckman.org> wrote: them under a John Doe suit.
The court decided that Cox's behavior was sufficient to waive the DMCA's liability shield for Internet providers and off they went to trial.
How can the RIAA even know? I mean, are they putting up honey pots or something? Mike
On Sat, Jun 3, 2023 at 4:09 PM Michael Thomas <mike@mtcc.com> wrote:
How can the RIAA even know? I mean, are they putting up honey pots or something?
IIRC, they went after folks sharing the files via bit torrent rather than folks who only downloaded them. -- William Herrin bill@herrin.us https://bill.herrin.us/
On 6/3/23 4:24 PM, William Herrin wrote:
How can the RIAA even know? I mean, are they putting up honey pots or something? IIRC, they went after folks sharing the files via bit torrent rather
On Sat, Jun 3, 2023 at 4:09 PM Michael Thomas <mike@mtcc.com> wrote: than folks who only downloaded them.
Oh yeah. This oh-so-two decades ago. I can't believe this sort of thing is still going on. What a pointless waste of money. Mike
On Sat, Jun 3, 2023 at 2:03 PM Michael Thomas <mike@mtcc.com> wrote:
Am I missing something?
That it's old news from 2019? Cox and RIAA are in the appeals process from the 2019 verdict. -- William Herrin bill@herrin.us https://bill.herrin.us/
William, But still, boats :) -mel
On Jun 3, 2023, at 2:58 PM, William Herrin <bill@herrin.us> wrote:
On Sat, Jun 3, 2023 at 2:03 PM Michael Thomas <mike@mtcc.com> wrote:
Am I missing something?
That it's old news from 2019? Cox and RIAA are in the appeals process from the 2019 verdict.
-- William Herrin bill@herrin.us https://bill.herrin.us/
participants (3)
-
Mel Beckman -
Michael Thomas -
William Herrin