ISPs to RIAA: "go away!"

Grok Headline matches for ISPs to RIAA: "go away!"

Court: ISPs Not Required to Comply With
RIAA

Court: ISPs Not Required to Comply With
RIAA 12/21/2003 05:55 PM

Intl MPAA/RIAA to ISPs: cut your own
throats

Intl MPAA/RIAA to ISPs: cut your own
throats 04/08/2005 05:28 AM
Cory Doctorow: The MPA and IFPI (international versions of the MPAA and RIAA, respectively), has produced a report describing the code of conduct they'd like ISPs to embrace -- basically, they want ISPs to act like AOL in the old days. Any ISP that adopts this code of conduct is cutting its own throat -- seriously, this thing is a frigging embarrassment, it really makes the IFPI/MPA people look like they live in Narnia. The MPA/IFPI people I've met on the road are generally lightweights, prone to telling easily countered lies, ignorant of the law, fumble-tongued and ham-fisted. This report tells me that my impression of them was dead on. Here are some callouts from CoCo:

* "remove references and links to sites or services that do not respect the copyrights of rights holders".'

* "require subscribers to consent in advance to the disclosure of their identity in response to a reasonable complaint of intellectual property infringement by an established right holder defence organisation or by right holder(s) whose intellectual property is being infringed"'

* terminate contracts of recidivist'

* implement instant messaging to communicate with infringers'

* implement filtering technologies to block sites that are 'substantially dedicated to illegal file sharing or download services.'

* voluntarily store data for copyright enforcement...

"To enforce terms of service that prohibit a subscriber from operating a server, or from consuming excessive amounts of bandwidth where such consumption is a good indicator of infringing activities."

Link (via Copyfight)

Boing Boing: Intl MPAA/RIAA to ISPs: cut
your own throats

Boing Boing: Intl MPAA/RIAA to ISPs: cut
your own throats 04/09/2005 05:16 AM
Intl MPAA/RIAA to ISPs: cut your own throats .. Run a ISP here is how to go Bankrupt! .. BoingBoing

boingboing.net/2005/04/07/intl_mpaariaa_to_isp.html
track this site | 4 links

ISPs look for the value-add

ISPs look for the value-add 04/13/2004 11:30 AM
vnunet.com Apr 13 2004 3:40PM GMT

Regulate ISPs Now

Regulate ISPs Now 02/01/2005 09:44 PM
I keep thinking about our experience at Christmas, when we set up my Mom for broadband, and the local ISP thought it was just fine to send her home with a DSL modem to plug into her Win98 box; no warnings, no education, no firewalls. This is just not OK. We have all sorts of regulation in place to ensure that drivers are equipped with reasonably safe gear and have some basic education on how to proceed safely. Similarly, we regulate residential construction and investment dealers and employers and manufacturers, and this is a good thing. So I think we need some legislation in place that says if someone’s computer gets hacked through no fault of their own and inflicts damage on some Internet user somewhere, the ISP is liable for that damage unless they can show they took some minimal effort to explain to their customers that the Internet is a dangerous place, but that you can be safe if you follow a few simple precautions.

Should cities be ISPs?

Should cities be ISPs? 06/24/2005 03:23 PM
ZDNet Jun 23 2005 2:00PM GMT

Which ISPs Allow Sharing?

Which ISPs Allow Sharing? 05/20/2004 01:12 PM
Some Internet service providers allow connections to be shared, but they're few and far between: I mentioned in passing yesterday that Speakeasy Networks was the only ISP to encourage sharing access to anyone and everyone for any of their personal or business DSL and T-1 accounts. Dana Spiegel of NYCwireless wrote in to note that three New York providers allow sharing. She also pointed to PersonalTelco's run-down on ISPs and their sharing policies, but the information is largely out of date, or includes ISPs as allowing sharing which have only confirmed this by phone or in email but not in their AUP. EFF had a list as well which they've intended to update for two years, and may happen soon. I don't take a statement from an ISP via email or by phone that sharing is permitted as legitimate: it has to be in the publicly posted terms of service. NYCwireless lists Bway.Net, Cloud9.Net, and Ace DSL. I checked their terms of service to see how they word it. Bway.net explicitly allows it, but you have to notify them to be legit. Cloud9.Net doesn't really state you can share, and you can read their terms to state you can't. They say, in summary: The customer may permit a member of their immediate household to use the customer's account subject to the account holder's supervision and the customer agrees that Cloud 9 reserves the right to prevent other Internet users from accessing its network, either in part or in whole, for any reason. Ace's policies are even vaguer, making it a gray issue that you can share a connection. But they do say In conjunction with the terms of Section "III c.", above, I agree not to resell any of the Services provided hereunder or the passwords thereto; Speakeasy allows resale of any part of any connection. You can help compile a newer list of sharing-friendly ISPs: email me if you're an ISP that specifically allows sharing in your usage agreement or if you work with such an ISP. Please include a link to the terms of service Web page for confirmation....

Report: ISPs

Report: ISPs 02/10/2004 02:41 AM
Readers discuss Comcast's big rate hike, performance, costs and alternatives.

UK May Require ISPs To Tag Porn

UK May Require ISPs To Tag Porn 06/07/2004 11:45 PM
Following the news that BT is going to make an effor t to block all child porn, there's news that UK telecom regulator Ofcom is floating an idea to have ISPs tag content as being potentially "adult" in nature to make it easier to filter out. It's not hard to figure out the many reasons why this plan sounds like both a waste of time and money. ISPs are never going to be able to effectively tag the content. For all the filters already out there, none of them work all that well. Having people sit there and actually review the content is more effective than any automated system, but it's also slow, expensive, and very, very subjective.

Windows worms tax ISPs

Windows worms tax ISPs 05/27/2004 09:03 AM
European ISPs hit for €123m in 2004

ISPs line up to Rumba

ISPs line up to Rumba 06/22/2004 10:11 PM
Sunday Times South Africa Jun 23 2004 2:50AM GMT

70 UK ISPs in anti-BT uprising

70 UK ISPs in anti-BT uprising 08/11/2004 09:53 AM
ADSL prices threaten small operators

Complaints? About ISPs? Surely not!

Complaints? About ISPs? Surely not! 11/19/2003 02:20 PM
ISPA unveils new complaints outfit

Courts allow ISPs to read your email

Courts allow ISPs to read your email 07/05/2004 06:04 AM

UK ISPs to Shut Down Spamvertised
Websites

UK ISPs to Shut Down Spamvertised
Websites 08/19/2004 12:58 PM

Working Toward Roaming For Wireless ISPs

Working Toward Roaming For Wireless ISPs 12/24/2003 12:11 PM

ISPs Gang Up on Spammers (PC World)

ISPs Gang Up on Spammers (PC World) 06/22/2004 07:13 PM
PC World - Even unwitting spammers could lose Internet access under tough proposal.

How ISPs May Quietly Kill VoIP

How ISPs May Quietly Kill VoIP 03/19/2005 02:33 AM

Largest ISPs Attack 'Zombies'

Largest ISPs Attack 'Zombies' 06/23/2004 07:33 AM

ISPs are Ready to Deal for Customers

ISPs are Ready to Deal for Customers 12/05/2003 06:41 AM
SiliconValley.Internet.com Dec 5 2003 6:26AM ET

Canada songwriters eye royalties from
ISPs

Canada songwriters eye royalties from
ISPs 12/03/2003 07:25 PM
Boston Globe Dec 3 2003 6:17PM ET

Canada Songwriters Eye Royalties From
ISPs

Canada Songwriters Eye Royalties From
ISPs 12/03/2003 07:25 PM
AP via Newsday Dec 3 2003 6:10PM ET

ISPs, FCC Spar on Cable Access

ISPs, FCC Spar on Cable Access 09/07/2004 02:13 PM
Top court may rule on broadband issue.

NJ Ruling Threatens ISPs Authority

NJ Ruling Threatens ISPs Authority 06/29/2004 01:37 PM
theWHIR Jun 29 2004 5:22PM GMT

Australia Wants ISPs To Block Porn

Australia Wants ISPs To Block Porn 08/17/2004 01:29 PM
Add some members of the Australian government to the group of politicians who seem to think that secretive filters at the ISP level are the solution to porn. They're recommending that ISPs be responsible for blocking certain hardcore porn. The reason for the recommendation appears to be the realization that regulation isn't working. However, they seem to immediately assume that filtering will work, ignoring plenty of historical evidence that it doesn't. Even worse, filtering at the ISP level has often been shown to block perfectly legitimate sites. Since the details of what sites are being filtered are always kept secret, there's often no way for anyone to know if legitimate sites are included in the block. Those behind this plan claim this plan "is a proposal that has merit because it gets to the problem at the source and it would make it much harder for the industry to duck responsibility." There are plenty of problems with that statement. First, this plan is exactly the opposite of getting at "the source" of the problem. It's clearly focused on getting at the problem in the middle -- the ISP, who has nothing to do with the porn itself. If they really want to get "at the source" of the problem, they should go after those who are putting illegal porn online. Second, to suggest that it's the ISPs' "responsibility" is again backwards. The ISPs are simply a service, and requiring them to set up a system to filter all content through their service isn't a responsibility, it's a pointless burden that will add expense without doing much to stop the real problem. If the government wanted to go after the real source of the problem, they'd go after those truly responsible for the problem -- not the folks in the middle who are simply transporting bits.

Anti-Spam Filters, ISPs, and the Law

Anti-Spam Filters, ISPs, and the Law 06/10/2004 02:47 AM
Why should we let ISPs dictate the source and content of the e-mail they allow us to receive? That's the question posed by ImagineNation in a recent white paper on mail filters and the consequences of ISPs using mail filters and other schemes to block spam mail. The white paper is a free report from the company available at http://eMstamp.org/Documents/ [PRWEB Jun 10, 2004]

Indy ISPs Fight for Survival

Indy ISPs Fight for Survival 04/15/2004 04:59 AM
Recent FCC rulings and the growing crush of spam are putting the pressure on small Internet service providers, but they aren't packing it in yet. Michelle Delio reports from Washington.

DOJ seeking to deputize ISPs to aid law
enforcement

DOJ seeking to deputize ISPs to aid law
enforcement 06/17/2005 07:12 PM
The two favorite excuses for eviscerating privacy are 9/11 and child pornography. Put them together and it could mean a permanent log file for every person in the US using the Internet.

DOJ Wants ISPs to Retain All Customer
Records

DOJ Wants ISPs to Retain All Customer
Records 06/17/2005 03:38 PM
Slashdot Jun 17 2005 8:08PM GMT

Broadband ISPs must wise-up to small.biz
needs

Broadband ISPs must wise-up to small.biz
needs 07/21/2004 04:12 AM
Listen and learn

IP address fight in N.J. worries ISPs

IP address fight in N.J. worries ISPs 07/02/2004 12:03 AM
University Communications Inc. this week secured a temporary restraining order allowing it to keep using its current IP addresses -- even after terminating its contract with the assigning service provider.

Canadian ISPs win on copyright ruling

Canadian ISPs win on copyright ruling 06/30/2004 05:35 PM
Court says service providers aren't responsible for cached copies of music on their servers.

Independent ISPs Plot Survival Course

Independent ISPs Plot Survival Course 04/16/2004 09:08 PM
Internet.com Apr 17 2004 1:25AM GMT

Legal Liability For ISPs Revisited

Legal Liability For ISPs Revisited 04/19/2004 04:15 AM
Last month we wrote about the ISP in Pennsylvania who had their serve rs seized for providing a Usenet tool that some people were using to access child porn. Now, the law is pretty clear ISP liability on such things. The liability falls with those who actually possess the child porn, and not the ISP used to access it. This is for a few very good reasons - including the fact that passing liability on to the ISPs would basically require them to first analyze every packet that went across their network. This, obviously isn't practical. Now, the Associated Press has picked up on the story and are running their own article with more details about the potential legal ramifications of the case. Unfortunately, because it's focused on the third rail issue of "child pornography" many people are going to miss the legal importance of what's happening and focus on why it's important to stop child porn. That's absolutely true, but the way to do that is to go after those actually responsible for the child porn and not the ISP that people used to access it. This is yet another case where people are going after enabling technology that has plenty of legitimate uses, rather than going after those who actually broke the law.

ISPs gang up on spammer-run websites

ISPs gang up on spammer-run websites 08/18/2004 10:50 AM
The LINX effect

LINX links smaller ISPs

LINX links smaller ISPs 04/23/2004 08:17 AM
'Piggy-back' onto the information superhighway

ISPs share hacker info

ISPs share hacker info 03/29/2005 11:18 AM
Big name backing for security network

ISPs Win Canadian Music Downloading Case

ISPs Win Canadian Music Downloading Case 06/30/2004 02:25 PM
AP via Los Angeles Times Jun 30 2004 6:36PM GMT

ISPs Win Canadian Music Downloading Case
(AP)

ISPs Win Canadian Music Downloading Case
(AP) 06/30/2004 11:01 AM
AP - Canada's Supreme Court ruled Wednesday that Internet service providers do not have to pay royalties to composers and artists for music downloaded by Web customers.
Grok Description matches for ISPs to RIAA: "go away!"
GrokA matches for ISPs to RIAA: "go away!"

ISPs to RIAA: "go away!"

The following phrases have been identified by the grok system as matching this entry: