Illegal downloaders 'face UK ban'

[clocktower]

People in the UK who go online and illegally download music and films may have their internet access cut under plans the government is considering.


A draft consultation Green Paper suggests internet service providers would be required to take action over users who access pirated material.

Under a "three strikes" rule they would receive an e-mail warning, suspension, and then termination of their contract.

Six million people a year are estimated to download files illegally in the UK.

Read More here

CODE
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7240234.stm

[Alien5]

http://filesharingtalk.com/vb3/f-file-sharing-8/t-the-end-near-illegal-filesharing-uk-277195

[clocktower]

ooops soz :blush:

[J-dye]

http://www.torrentfreedom.com/

i hope that service can save you guys :unsure:

[Submission]

$17/month for VPN? try sh3lls or another place thats alot.

[xJohnxSmithx]

well the simple solution is to rename everything so they say grandmas birthday #1 etc... Sites can stay as is and just rename the torrents being transferred. Maybe we should start making the move now.

[SenorBubbz]

well the simple solution is to rename everything so they say grandmas birthday #1 etc... Sites can stay as is and just rename the torrents being transferred. Maybe we should start making the move now.

Well if we start now, they'll take note and configure whatever plan they have so that when they start this campaign, they'll be ready.

[xJohnxSmithx]

ok good call but if the files are named X, how are they gonna know its really Y unless they go through the contents. That would be a major invasion of privacy.

[fOrUmAs]

People in the UK who go online and illegally download music and films may have their internet access cut under plans the government is considering.


A draft consultation Green Paper suggests internet service providers would be required to take action over users who access pirated material.


this is nothing new and then again nothing will happend,the only thing what will happend is that ISP-s will lose they customers..and im sure they dont want that...

[SenorBubbz]

ok good call but if the files are named X, how are they gonna know its really Y unless they go through the contents. That would be a major invasion of privacy.

Very true.... Either way, I doubt they'll go through with this because as Forumas said, they would lose tons of customers and they wouldn't like that at all.

[monk3y]

damn people are getting their noses where they shouldn't

isn't it some kind of a privacy violation ?!?!?!

[clocktower]

http://torrentfreak.com/illegal-downloaders-will-not-face-uk-ban-080212/

[Sylar666]

Yes, that TF - article rocks. Good read.

[SgtMajor]

And we would just go the SSL route anyway if push came to shove, via newsgroups or seedboxes, it's all bluster and posturing by the suits, they got their 15 minutes (and more again) of fame of putting downloading in the headlines once more, it was all scare tactics and therefore nothing to worry about.

[popcop23]

what a bummer...

[TYPE R]

ffs! thx 4 the info m8.

[dunson]

Hopefully those of you across the pond are not seriously effected.

But a point about the loss of customers and the ISP's profits. It is important to consider that the customers they would be losing use more bandwith and create a need for more oversight (staff to receive & enforce infringement notices etc.) and filesharers are likely a very unprofitable group for the ISP's. So, cutting the worst offenders of the 6 million out (hypothetically-since they would surely net a few modest offenders who were simply unlucky or naive) is probably a good move for their bottom line since it cuts costs and reduces the stress on the network.

Some actual numbers would clear this up of course.

[bikernin]

the TF article is brilliant. nothin left to be said :)
anybody have a copy of the book by the author? sounds like a good read