American ISPs to launch massive copyright spying scheme on July 12
Old 1st April 2012
  #91
Gear Guru
 
chrisso's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by LimpyLoo View Post
Citizens (in a true democracy) should have free, unfettered access to information.
You do.
Go to a library, whatever.
A true democracy in 2012 shouldn't accept one section of society (content creators) being bullied and down trodden by fellow citizens.
That seems more of an issue than access to free information.
there are many, many ways to access information, there is only one way content creators can sell their content.
Old 1st April 2012
  #92
Quote:
Originally Posted by initialsBB View Post
Who said anything about free?
free is the issue. if it wasn't, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by initialsBB View Post
But receiving mail in the US is in fact a universal free right guaranteed by law. You technically don't even need an address.

The idea of universal telephone service started with the Communications Act of 1934 which called for "rapid, efficient, Nation-wide, and world-wide wire and radio communication service with adequate facilities at reasonable charges” to “all the people of the United States." and was later amended to include "without discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, or sex…" To that end, subsidies are available for those who can't afford telephone service.

Can somebody be banned from using the US mail? The telephone? Reading a newspaper? I don't see how that's logistically possible. Banning people completely from internet access for copyright violations is wrong in my opinion. I'm pretty sure that people who are convicted of mail fraud are not banned from sending a letter.
Ahem... Mail Fraud is a Federal Crime... Since 1872... jus sayin'...
Mail and wire fraud - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Quote:
In the United States, mail and wire fraud is any fraudulent scheme to intentionally deprive another of property or honest services via mail or wire communication. It has been a federal crime in the United States since 1872.
hmmmm....
Old 1st April 2012
  #93
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianVengeance View Post
Years of abusive legal action by the RIAA hasn't helped the foster good will along the way either, which is easily a contributing source of much of the public's mistrust.
and by "abusive legal action" you mean enforcement of existing laws? by "abusive legal action" you mean protecting Artists Rights by shutting illegal pirate sites like limewire, grockster, kazaa, napster, etc? by "abusive legal action" you mean offering a plea to Jaime Thomas and Joel Tenenbaum, both of whom were convicted by a jury of their PEERS and not a judge or the RIAA?

seriously? are you just reading from the big tech disinformation handbook or what?
Old 1st April 2012
  #94
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
You do.
Go to a library, whatever.
A true democracy in 2012 shouldn't accept one section of society (content creators) being bullied and down trodden by fellow citizens.
That seems more of an issue than access to free information.
there are many, many ways to access information, there is only one way content creators can sell their content.
We weren't talking about content creators. We were talking about whether having the internet is a right.

And libraries won't keep you updated on how many innocent civilians my/your government are currently slaughtering overseas.
Old 1st April 2012
  #95
Gear Guru
 
chrisso's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by LimpyLoo View Post
We weren't talking about content creators. We were talking about whether having the internet is a right.

And libraries won't keep you updated on how many innocent civilians my/your government are currently slaughtering overseas.
Mobile phone then, or talk to friends.
You think no one was concerned about governments and human rights before the internet?
Old 1st April 2012
  #96
Quote:
Originally Posted by LimpyLoo View Post
We weren't talking about content creators. We were talking about whether having the internet is a right.
no more than driving... it's a privilege, abuse it and it can be taken away...

Quote:
Originally Posted by LimpyLoo View Post
And libraries won't keep you updated on how many innocent civilians my/your government are currently slaughtering overseas.
and yet we had a free press and access to controversial information prior to the internet... Vietnam, Watergate... and in many ways we're worse off as we no longer have papers investing in the same type of meaningful investigative journalism... you're getting pawned by those who profit and don't even see it...
Old 1st April 2012
  #97
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonythecat View Post
... So how does the copyright holder know that a particular user has downloaded something?
For person-to-person "sharing" of a given file, every downloader's IP address is known to everyone else in that "sharing" group. The copyright holder joins the group and collects the IP addresses of all the other sharers.

For file sites such as Megaupload, all they can readily do at present is to request that the file be removed. If they want to go after the uploader or downloaders, they have to request their details from the file site. This usually takes a court order.
Old 1st April 2012
  #98
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by rack gear View Post
... Ahem... Mail Fraud is a Federal Crime... Since 1872... jus sayin'...
Mail and wire fraud - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ...
True, but irrelevant. The point is whether or not someone convicted of mail fraud is allowed to send a letter. Since you've demonstrated some knowledge of the subject, you should be able to say whether the penalties for mail fraud include provision for a period of prohibition from using the service, as for example someone convicted of a moving violation may be prohibited from driving for a period.
Old 1st April 2012
  #99
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by rack gear View Post
... you're getting pawned by those who profit and don't even see it...
Ah, a malapropism that makes just as much sense as the correct word... I like it.
Old 1st April 2012
  #100
Gear Guru
 
chrisso's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Hills View Post
The point is whether or not someone convicted of mail fraud is allowed to send a letter.
As I said, you can use the web from a library.

My question...... is someone who illegally downloaded using their internet service, allowed to illegally download again??

* Sending a letter is not really the same as being able to send and receive many things via an internet connection. You know that of course, so arguing the point seems little more than an amusement for you.
Old 1st April 2012
  #101
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
... My question...... is someone who illegally downloaded using their internet service, allowed to illegally download again??
I'm not falling for that one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
* Sending a letter is not really the same as being able to send and receive many things via an internet connection. You know that of course, so arguing the point seems little more than an amusement for you.
It isn't an amusement. Its disapproval of Rack's attempts to derail trains of thought that he doesn't like.
Old 1st April 2012
  #102
Lives for gear
 
Beat Poet's Avatar
 

Old 1st April 2012
  #103
Gear addict
 
BrianVengeance's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by rack gear View Post
paying your ISP bill doesn't give anyone the right to steal from artists while propping up tech companies that profit from making the work of artists available for free and without compensation or consent.
Ad hominem. Paying an ISP bill has absolutely nothing to do with stealing music or not stealing music. Disagreeing with the industry's tactics does not put anyone on the side of the lawbreaker. Your fight is to punish the thieves, my fight is to not have the law abiding treated as thieves in the due course of punishing the thieves. Nuanced difference, but certainly not on the side of the terrorists / pirates / whatever. Take a moment to let that soak in.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rack gear View Post
don't confuse the container with the product. you pay for both. you may pay for the convenience of particular container/s, but the product is both the music and container in the form it takes. if you want worthless bits buy a harddrive or a usb stick.
And most containers are thrown away to get to the product... anything that makes the product useful is part of the product. This is like arguing that when you buy a pair of shoes, you have to wear the box as well in order to use them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rack gear View Post
give it a break... obviously you are not trying to protect your own work, if you were you'd understand the failing of the DMCA to do so...
You assume to much.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rack gear View Post
well, paying customers who aren't doing anything illegal have nothing to worry about - so you should be fine... we're jaime thomas and joel tenenbuam innocent victims, NO, and both we're convicted by their PEERS not a judge or the industry...
If you're not doing anything wrong you have nothing to worry about - tell that to Trayvon Martin.

Jammie Thomas - found guilty of stealing 24 songs, with purchased value off of iTunes... $24. Punishment?

Trial 1 - Statutory damages of $222,000 ($9,250/song).
Trial 2 - Statutory damages of $1,920,000 ($80,000/song).
Reduction 1 - Statutory damages reduced to $54,000 ($2,250/song). The plaintiffs rejected this adjustment.
Trial 3 - Statutory damages of $1,500,000 ($62,500/song).
Reduction 2 - Statutory damages reduced to $54,000 ($2,250/song).

All this over $24? And this doesn't strike you the least bit unbalanced or out of whack?


Quote:
Originally Posted by rack gear View Post
right, it's about tech and pirates money and profit versus the artists money and profit. personally I'd rather support artists rights than pirates and greedy tech companies ripping them off... I don't know why you would not want to do the same...

right, it's tech and the pirates money and profit versus the artists money and profit. personally I'd rather support artists rights than pirates and greedy tech companies ripping them off... I don't know why you would not want to do the same...

so when big tech and pirates profit it's OK, but if artists want to be compensated for their labor which big tech and pirates are profiting from, than that's not ok? really? seriously?
The discussion is about the deal between the content industry and the ISPs. Disagreeing with this particular set of tactics does not put anyone on the side of your favorite enemy.

I find it amazing that there has still yet to be one post answering how the content / ISP deal will be transparent, accountable and fair... so in this sense redirecting the conversation towards Google is a red herring.


Quote:
Originally Posted by rack gear View Post
again, these arguments are made by the tech companies EVERY TIME ANY anti-piracy legislation or solution is proposed. you should educate yourself, you are being played and pawned...

detailed here:
Dispatches from the SOPAcolypse | Copyhype
While I appreciate the condescending tone, I still just happen to disagree... in spite of your assertion of my obvious inability to think for myself. Hold on, the chess master is calling, I need to go do his bidding. Get real.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rack gear View Post
Right, but the methods that allowed for the megaupload bust are useless against The Pirate Bay... what's your solution to that problem?
Why does once again the proposed solution target the consumers? Your fight is with Pirate Bay, not your customers.
Old 1st April 2012
  #104
Gear addict
 
BrianVengeance's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
My freedom of speech and right to work are infringed when people take my work without paying for it.
It seems odd to fret about law breakers being given 6 separate warnings before any action is taken against them, while not supporting the rights of artists to sell their work.
I get no 6 warnings that someone is about to download my product.
Your freedom of speech has clearly NOT been infringed. You still have the right to speak about your beliefs... as you're doing right now. Nobody has taken that right away from you, nor have they told you that you can no longer work. You still have retained all of these.

It seems odd to habitually not understand that disagreeing with your tactics to protect the lawful from undue circumstances is not the same as supporting the lawbreakers.
Old 1st April 2012
  #105
Lives for gear
 

Just some random thoughts on this:

1. It will ultimately cost the end user in higher fees.

2. They *will* make an example of some poor soul.

3. Like prostitution, drug sales, gray market goods and so forth, they have to go after the source in order to have any effect.

4. Piracy will just move off shore and onto physical media. IOW $20.00 gets you a USB key loaded with cracked programs.

5. Trying to stop the crackers is like playing a worldwide "Whack-A-Mole" game. Stop one of them and 5 more appear. these guys do it for the challenge and they look at this proposal as just another challenge for them to circumvent.

WRT to #3, just take a look at those Internet Child Porn sting shows on MSNBC with Chris Hanson I believe. How many times do they catch the same guy?

Same thing with prostitution and drugs.
These guys aren't going to stop so it's best to shut down the source.

I don't know what the solution is but I suspect Open Source Software might start becoming more popular. At least to the point where it becomes commercially viable and then some entrepreneur will invest and make it proprietary at which point the cycle starts again.
Old 1st April 2012
  #106
Lives for gear
 
AwwDeOhh's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by loopy View Post
Just some random thoughts on this:

1. It will ultimately cost the end user in higher fees.

2. They *will* make an example of some poor soul.

3. Like prostitution, drug sales, gray market goods and so forth, they have to go after the source in order to have any effect.

4. Piracy will just move off shore and onto physical media. IOW $20.00 gets you a USB key loaded with cracked programs.

5. Trying to stop the crackers is like playing a worldwide "Whack-A-Mole" game. Stop one of them and 5 more appear. these guys do it for the challenge and they look at this proposal as just another challenge for them to circumvent.

WRT to #3, just take a look at those Internet Child Porn sting shows on MSNBC with Chris Hanson I believe. How many times do they catch the same guy?

Same thing with prostitution and drugs.
These guys aren't going to stop so it's best to shut down the source.

I don't know what the solution is but I suspect Open Source Software might start becoming more popular. At least to the point where it becomes commercially viable and then some entrepreneur will invest and make it proprietary at which point the cycle starts again.
1) as in... people will have to actually pay for the stuff they were used to stealing? hmm.. sounds like it balances out. The overall cost for the ISP -per customer- probably isn't even noticable.... (fraction of a penny?)

2) i'll be in tears... i'm sure
Little johnny can't download his daily porn, what a crime...

3) They tried that... and the people were a hysterical mess, in an election year..

4) good... stay out of my main market please.

5) Crackers aren't the concern. Average Joe Downloader is the concern. Let the NSA, FBI, CIA, ect deal with the crackers...
Old 1st April 2012
  #107
Gear addict
 
BrianVengeance's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by AwwDeOhh View Post
Really? wasn't it you who said:
Due process is for criminal proceedings... not the fine print on a service contract.
And it was you who mistakenly took this as me saying that an internet connection is a right. To wit, due process if for criminal proceedings, but contracts do not supercede law. The concern is that internet service providers are not in an open market and this sort of deal unfairly (potentially illegally) leverages federally granted market position in an unfair manner.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AwwDeOhh View Post
Yes, they are. If someone is using their service for criminal activity, it's in the ISPs best interest to not do buisness with such persons (once the criminal activity has been pointed out), or they can become enablers/accomplices/ect.
If it has been pointed out that criminal activity is happening on their lines... the ISPs can't claim no knowledge.. and thus safe harbor.
I agree, it is in noone's best interest to deal with criminals, however, my original questions centered around the "pointing out" of criminal activity. The DMCA has routinely been abused, as well as the litigation campaign of previous years... so "trust us, if you're not doing anything wrong you've nothing to worry about" is not an acceptable answer. It has never been an acceptable answer.


Quote:
Originally Posted by AwwDeOhh View Post
Not really relevant as the laws were not adopted, but i'll oblige anyhow:
The ONLY reason Kim DotCom got busted was because he was stupid enough to have a server in the US (Washington D.C. no less..), and that the country he was in has extradition agreements with the USA.
If he were like most ALL the other pirate dedicated sites (the ones that still operate with impunity..), he would be located in a country that doesn't give a shit about IP, and especially so if it's American IP.
The SOPA/PIPA was about those places.. the ones that don't recognize the Bernes Convention. It wasn't even about taking those sites down either, just disallowing them to do buisness within the US.
It is actually entirely relevant, and thank you for the thoughtfully considered answer. All of the factors that you have described are the reason why Kim DotCom was able to be brought down... due to legal frameworks and agreements with the US and geography. Without these in place, there unfortunately is no recourse. We can no more force another country to recognize or participate in our legal perspective than can an Islamic theocracy compel us to implement Sharia law. Social conservatives cannot deny gay marriage in states where it is legal, and so forth... that is simply the way things are.

In spite of the bemoaning by the content industries, SOPA and PIPA were widely seen as being overbroad and providing unprecedented power to the industry outside of the legal frameworks that govern our societies. This deal between the content industries and the ISPs once again seems to display the lack of concern for collateral damage... that little thought has been given towards ensuring that legally acting citizens, corporations and organizations are not unfairly put under the same crosshairs as those who are actually committing crimes.

To suggest "if you're not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about" suggests an inherent benevolence and justice on the part of those wielding this power, and history has time and time again shown this simply to be an untruth.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AwwDeOhh View Post
Side note: if you think the ISPs are implimenting the 6-strike rule because of the Music Industry, or the RIAA... you're sorely mistaken. We [musicians] don't have that kind of sway. I would look to much much bigger players in the IP world... we just happen to be in the position to benifit from the ISPs decision.
A bold assumption, but I make no such claim. The content industries, while lumped under the same umbrella, are considerably diverse... and as a musician myself, I am all to aware of exactly how little sway I have. An interesting point though... could you provide an example of larger player than the RIAA / MPAA in the content creation IP world?
Old 1st April 2012
  #108
Gear addict
 
BrianVengeance's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
That's not happening.
Verizon might remove their contract, just like being barred from a local restaurant.
They aren't banned from the internet, their ISP has said they don't want their business.

Again, it's funny that you don't post angrily at the rights of artists being removed, and yet feel so strongly about people who have had six separate warnings that they are doing the wrong thing.
Given the lack of choice in ISP providers, saying "I don't want your business" is tantamount to being banned from the internet. If the only restaurant in town bans you from eating there (and there are no grocery stores), I'd say you're pretty solidly boned.
Old 1st April 2012
  #109
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by AwwDeOhh View Post
1) as in... people will have to actually pay for the stuff they were used to stealing? hmm.. sounds like it balances out. The overall cost for the ISP -per customer- probably isn't even noticable.... (fraction of a penny?)

2) i'll be in tears... i'm sure
Little johnny can't download his daily porn, what a crime...

3) They tried that... and the people were a hysterical mess, in an election year..

4) good... stay out of my main market please.

5) Crackers aren't the concern. Average Joe Downloader is the concern. Let the NSA, FBI, CIA, ect deal with the crackers...
1. Of course people should pay, but they aren't and this campaign is not going to change a thing. It's similar to the trickle down theory of economics where the rich just got richer.

2. You might not be in tears if they happen to mistakenly target you as their example.

3. People were "hysterical" for good reason. The govt is slowly eroding the citizens rights and hiding behind thinly veiled reasons like "homeland security".

4. Huh?

5. Crackers and distributors *should be* the concern. For every downloading Joe they make an example of, their are tens if not hundreds of thousands who have not been caught. Cut the supply line and you've eliminated all those other pesky Joe's in one swoop.
Old 1st April 2012
  #110
Quote:
Originally Posted by rack gear View Post
no more than driving... it's a privilege, abuse it and it can be taken away...



and yet we had a free press and access to controversial information prior to the internet... Vietnam, Watergate... and in many ways we're worse off as we no longer have papers investing in the same type of meaningful investigative journalism... you're getting pawned by those who profit and don't even see it...
Old 1st April 2012
  #111
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
Mobile phone then, or talk to friends.
You think no one was concerned about governments and human rights before the internet?



Not. The. Issue.
Old 1st April 2012
  #112
Lives for gear
 
AwwDeOhh's Avatar
 

@BrainV: According to every TOS i've ever read for an ISP, (ever since they've existed) they reserve the right to terminate your account, WITHOUT prior notice, if they feel like you've violated the agreement (and that includes breaking the laws of copyright). This NEW TOS is actually giving LEEWAY to the ISP customer (ie, 6 notices).
For example, the first ISPs TOS i came across (this is BEFORE the change)

Verizon Online - Policies - Terms Of Service
Quote:
Originally Posted by Verison TOS
Verizon reserves the right to change, limit, terminate, modify or temporarily or permanently cease providing the Service or any part of it with or without prior notice if we elect to change the Service or a part thereof or if you violate the terms of this Agreement.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianVengeance View Post
And it was you who mistakenly took this as me saying that an internet connection is a right. To wit, due process if for criminal proceedings, but contracts do not supercede law. The concern is that internet service providers are not in an open market and this sort of deal unfairly (potentially illegally) leverages federally granted market position in an unfair manner.
Your mixing Anti-Trust legislation with personal rights..

Quote:
I agree, it is in noone's best interest to deal with criminals, however, my original questions centered around the "pointing out" of criminal activity. The DMCA has routinely been abused, as well as the litigation campaign of previous years... so "trust us, if you're not doing anything wrong you've nothing to worry about" is not an acceptable answer. It has never been an acceptable answer.
I agree.. the Tech sector has been abusing the DMCA for years now..
Content creators are on the shit end of the DMCA stick, if you ask me.

Quote:
It is actually entirely relevant, and thank you for the thoughtfully considered answer. All of the factors that you have described are the reason why Kim DotCom was able to be brought down... due to legal frameworks and agreements with the US and geography. Without these in place, there unfortunately is no recourse. We can no more force another country to recognize or participate in our legal perspective than can an Islamic theocracy compel us to implement Sharia law. Social conservatives cannot deny gay marriage in states where it is legal, and so forth... that is simply the way things are.
It wasn't about forcing other countries to do a dang thing.
Simply put: if you [country] don't respect international law, you don't get access to our credit card companies and customers to do illegal activity. It was a firewall that would be incredibly hard/thourough to even be eligable to be blocked.

Quote:
To suggest "if you're not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about" suggests an inherent benevolence and justice on the part of those wielding this power, and history has time and time again shown this simply to be an untruth.
Is that quote from me?
I dunno what the criteria is exactly for the burden of proof.. but i'd imagine, in the ISPs OWN legal interest... that they WOULD require some sort of proof before willy-nilly sending out notices...

Quote:
A bold assumption, but I make no such claim. The content industries, while lumped under the same umbrella, are considerably diverse... and as a musician myself, I am all to aware of exactly how little sway I have. An interesting point though... could you provide an example of larger player than the RIAA / MPAA in the content creation IP world?
funny how the Film lobby got thrown in with musicians...
But yeah, they themselves [film] are a much bigger power than the music industry.. so is the Pharma lobby, the military contractors, anyone who designs anything.. pretty much Half of the ENTIRE US ECONOMY relies on IP...

US Chamber of Commerce
Quote:
Originally Posted by from link
  • IP-intensive industries account for approximately 60% of total U.S. exports
  • U.S. intellectual property companies in the manufacturing and nonmanufacturing sectors generated nearly $7.7 trillion in gross output, accounting for 33.1% of total U.S. GDP
Old 1st April 2012
  #113
Lives for gear
 
initialsBB's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
That's not happening.
Verizon might remove their contract, just like being barred from a local restaurant.
They aren't banned from the internet, their ISP has said they don't want their business.
The article in the O.P. mentions the possibility of ISPs sharing information to create a blacklist.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
Again, it's funny that you don't post angrily at the rights of artists being removed, and yet feel so strongly about people who have had six separate warnings that they are doing the wrong thing.
I'm not angry about anything All I've said in this thread is that:

- I would prefer a legislative solution over a private solution with no accountability.

- I believe that universal internet access should be enshrined as a right in the US as it already has been in several other countries.

The internet isn't a restaurant, It's a public utility. Local monopolies are granted to ISPs by the FCC and in return they should have the responsibility to act in the public interest.

And by the way, no rights have been "removed." IP is still legally protected in the US. The problem is an issue of enforcement and again that's something that should be left to the government to oversee, not left to a private industry to police on its own.

I'm surprised that you would approve of this plan since you seem convinced that the ISPs are part of a tech conspiracy to profit off of piracy. Why would you trust them to actually follow through with this? How do you know they won't just send out a few warning notices and pretend like it's all working without carrying through any real consequences?
Old 2nd April 2012
  #114
Gear Guru
 
chrisso's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianVengeance View Post
Your freedom of speech has clearly NOT been infringed.
My freedom to create music is shut down when I can't cover costs due to illegal downloading.
You're just not getting it!

Quote:
It seems odd to habitually not understand that disagreeing with your tactics to protect the lawful from undue circumstances is not the same as supporting the lawbreakers.
Not at all.
I see it incongruous to push aside methods of reducing illegal activity that impacts me and many like me, with NO evidence the lawful will be impacted, and over the top safety measures such as 6 strikes in place before anyone suffers anything.
I'm not saying you support piracy, I'm saying you lack a reasonable balance.
Old 2nd April 2012
  #115
Gear Guru
 
chrisso's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by initialsBB View Post

- I believe that universal internet access should be enshrined as a right in the US as it already has been in several other countries.
Really? Where?
Internet access isn't a right, nor should it be, as mail access and access to radio aren't rights.
Old 2nd April 2012
  #116
Gear Guru
 
chrisso's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianVengeance View Post
Given the lack of choice in ISP providers, saying "I don't want your business" is tantamount to being banned from the internet.
Is a market issue, not a rights issue.
Maybe more isp's will pop up if the only one in town bans half the town's citizens.
But again, it's 6 separate strikes before you even have to remotely worry.
I'd love 6 warnings before John Doe downloaded my music product!!!
Old 2nd April 2012
  #117
Lives for gear
 
initialsBB's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
Really? Where?
Right to Internet access - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
as mail access and access to radio aren't rights.
As I mentioned before, there IS a universal right to receive mail in the US. You don't even need an address. Google "general delivery" and the issue of homeless people receiving mail. And receiving a radio transmission is a de facto right unless you know some way to block certain people from receiving radio waves. Maybe you could make somebody wear a court-mandated tinfoil hat?

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
Is a market issue, not a rights issue.
Maybe more isp's will pop up if the only one in town bans half the town's citizens.
And again, as mentioned multiple times, in the US, the cable and telephone companies are granted monopolies by the FCC. A new ISP can't just "pop up."
Old 2nd April 2012
  #118
Gear Guru
 
chrisso's Avatar
 

Quote:
Some other interesting thoughts on the matter:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2012/j...-a-human-right
Vint Cerf: Internet access isn't a human right | The Digital Home - CNET News

Quote:
And again, as mentioned multiple times, in the US, the cable and telephone companies are granted monopolies by the FCC. A new ISP can't just "pop up."
How come there are about 7 ISP's in Washington, and a similar amount in San Francisco?
Old 2nd April 2012
  #119
Lives for gear
 
AwwDeOhh's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by initialsBB View Post
And receiving a radio transmission is a de facto right unless you know some way to block certain people from receiving radio waves.
If someone doesn't have the money to buy a radio.. they can't recieve radio waves.
Old 2nd April 2012
  #120
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrisso View Post
...
I'd love 6 warnings before John Doe downloaded my music product!!!
I'm sure you didn't mean that the way you said it.

Edit: ...although, I can see why you might want it the way you said it. Never mind...
Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook  Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter  Submit Thread to LinkedIn LinkedIn  Submit Thread to Google+ Google+ 
 
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
Tim L / So many guitars, so little time!
19
jbuzz / So much gear, so little time!
10
kellyr52 / High end
8

Forum Jump
 
Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.