I have no idea, nor do I care. I just did a quick google and they were saying what common sense already told me. there are tons of other commentators also making the connection between the caps, the rise of netflix and the telcos own competing streaming video services. http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2011/...roadband-caps/
besides, freepers are hardly in favor of net neutrality. the free-market approach would be to let the telcos create the tiered internet they desire.
I know it's popular on the piracy forum to imagine all sorts of evil tech company conspiracies but I'm having trouble picturing what sort of freeper/anti-telco/pro-net-neutrality alliance you're seeing here.
Average UK speeds drop by 35% during evening peak hours. Best speeds are after 3am ...
According to the story linked below, one NZ ISP experiences speed drops of up to 25%. The ISP I use experiences drops of up to 15% (seems about right in my experience.) The rest seem to be almost unaffected.
The simple fact of eliminating listings of pirated material in mainstream search engines will cut casual piracy rates by at least 75%, probably more. And casual piracy accounts for 80%-90% of music piracy.
Says who? Do you have a citation for this? Any proof?
And if it can be demonstrated that a primary use of those proxies is facilitating piracy the proxies can be blocked and the sites linking to them can be blocked.
And how would you demonstrate a proxy was doing something like that?
Most kids aren't geeks, nerds, or hackers and don't want to be.
Once again, you are clearly clueless when it comes to how savvy kids are with computers today. This isn't brain surgery. These kids won't have to be geeks, nerds, or hackers to steal music if this bill, as written, is passed.
As long as piracy is a no-brainer it will be popular. Eliminate the no-brainer aspect and it loses its appeal pretty rapidly because, popular fiction notwithstanding, actually DOING all that stuff is BO-RING!
And nothing in this bill will stop it from continuing to be a no-brainer.
And I still don't see you coming up with any more effective suggestions. Or as even as effective. Or any practical suggestions at all, for that matter.
It isn't my job to write the laws. It's Congress'. And they had better do a better job writing this one or nothing is going to change.
We're not getting any more piracy legislation after this.
Sites which are truly bent on counterfeiting and piracy are unlikely to pay much attention to a US-based cease and desist order, of course, so the new plan envisions two remedies. If such an order is issued, Internet advertising firms and financial providers would have to stop offering credit card payments and ads to the site in question.
Website blocking by ISPs and DNS providers is not part of the plan, nor would search engines or others be required to remove links to such content.
we'll what we get, but thus far looks like any redraft will do little for music piracy. what I don't understand is if we can already do this...
I think the main point of this bill is just to make piracy less accesible to the average person by targeting the source, which IMO is a good thing. Sure it probably has flaws, and will have revisions before it is passed so skepticism isn't necessarily a bad thing either. Kids are more tech savvy these days, but the average kid still isn't a hacker or a programmer. Cutting off the source is really the only way to start taking action, otherwise you're just looking for after-the-fact compensation because you couldn't stop it in the first place... and if you can't stop it, it's only a matter of time before you won't get any compensation for it either.