Virgin Agrees To Be IFPI's Copyright Cop

from the but-why? dept

Mon, Mar 31st 2008 11:50am — Mike Masnick

Back in February, there were reports that the entertainment industry had somehow convinced the UK gov't that the "file sharing issue" should be the responsibility of ISPs, rather than the record labels whose obsolete business model caused the problem in the first place. The UK gov't then issued a very public threat that ISPs had better start kicking file sharers off the internet, or it would pass a law requiring them to do so. It appears that rather than push back, Virgin Media has jumped right in and will start kicking those accused of unauthorized sharing off their system using a "three strikes" policy. Of course, some might find this a bit ironic, considering that part of Virgin's entire marketing campaign was around how you could get free stuff via its internet connection. In the meantime, it's still not clear why ISPs should be responsible for propping up a different industry's business model.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: file sharing, isps, uk
Companies: ifpi, virgin media

17 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 31 Mar 2008 @ 12:13pm

Some would view it as not propping up a failed business model (although that may in fact be true) but one of just enforcing the law. Until you change the law, companies will push for the law to actually be enforced.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Mike (profile), 31 Mar 2008 @ 12:23pm
  
  Re:
  Some would view it as not propping up a failed business model (although that may in fact be true) but one of just enforcing the law. Until you change the law, companies will push for the law to actually be enforced.
  
  So enforce the law properly: if it's a civil matter, have the companies sue the folks responsible. If it's a criminal matter, have the police take on the case.
  
  In this case, they're asking a 3rd party to take on the situation.
  
  So, no, it's quite different than just "enforcing the law."
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Matt, 31 Mar 2008 @ 12:31pm
    
    Re: Re:
    I agree with you. This is just the music companies complaining to the government about people sharing music/movies online, whether its downloading from a P2P or even going as far as saying that streaming music/movies on sites like yahoo is illegal. The ISPs should fight back. This is just governments and the music/movie industry trying to bully someone else into doing the work for them.
    
    You know that once these people are kicked off virgins internet, that the music/movie companies will want to get their IP address, name, etc so they can sue them for illegal downloading
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - PaulT (profile), 1 Apr 2008 @ 12:39am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      I've been predicting that as soon as this sort of thing starts to become widespread, the next major worm attack will be one that automatically downloads MP3s to peoples systems. The ISPs will stop enforcing these rules if it means that 50% of their client base is "infringing" without being aware of it.
      
      I'd also predict that Virgin will see an exodus of its tech-savvy consumer base at some point soon. Not because the people leaving are "pirates" but because they don't appreciate being spied on by service providers. It also depends on how they do the monitoring - protocol? (WoW and Linux users won't be happy at piracy accusations over downloading patches and ISOs) filenames? (what if the songs are legal but the filenames are similar to an illegal file?) bandwidth? (again, gamers won't be happy...). The article suggests that the IFPI will be doing the monitoring to begin with, so if they're as accurate as the RIAA data, it'll fail very quickly as innocent people complain.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Ima Fish, 31 Mar 2008 @ 12:47pm
  
  Re:
  "Some would view it as not propping up a failed business model (although that may in fact be true) but one of just enforcing the law. Until you change the law, companies will push for the law to actually be enforced."
  
  What law are you talking about? Did you even read the blurb from above? The blurb said, "The UK gov't then issued a very public threat that ISPs had better start kicking file sharers off the internet, or it would pass a law requiring them to do so."
  
  In other words, there is no law to be enforced!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- GT, 31 Mar 2008 @ 6:46pm
  
  Re:
  I thought the infringement was uploading, not downloading?
  
  Besides, this is a civil matter, not a legal one.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Leo, 4 Apr 2008 @ 11:15am
  
  Re: .....
  File sharing isn't illegal......sharing software, movies, and music is.......so technically they setting themselves up to lose alot of customers.......
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Crosbie Fitch (profile), 31 Mar 2008 @ 12:15pm

Virgin self-sacrifice
Think of it as a Virgin self-sacrifice.

All their users will leave them in droves and they can thus demonstrate the folly of this policy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Jez, 1 Apr 2008 @ 2:38pm
  
  Re: Virgin self-sacrifice
  Problem is that most of Virgins customers are from the old NTL (Virgin took them over) ... it means they are on Cable. It would be difficult (but not impossible) to simply switch to BT.. Someone would have to install a phone line.
  
  Who knows how to encrypt my .torrents ? ;)
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bill, 31 Mar 2008 @ 1:07pm

You're partially right
While I'd agree that it's not the responsibility of an ISP to monitor the actions of their customers, there's no way I can make the judgment leap that the reason people pirated music on P2P networks is because they couldn't buy the songs online legally.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- mike allen, 31 Mar 2008 @ 1:31pm
  
  Re: You're partially right
  Just for starters try to buy a Beatles track on line legally!!!!!!!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
comboman, 31 Mar 2008 @ 1:08pm

Why is anyone surprised?
Didn't you know Virgin is also a record company?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- mike allen, 31 Mar 2008 @ 1:34pm
  
  Re: Why is anyone surprised?
  In name only Branson had to sell it when he set up virgin radio.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- UK Boi, 31 Mar 2008 @ 2:53pm
  
  Re: Why is anyone surprised?
  EX-Music company, they are in the process of getting out Thank god.
  
  NVD, no comcast over here :)
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
mike allen, 31 Mar 2008 @ 1:12pm

It appears
Tiscali tried this last year without telling anyone, (like customers) they had a list of "offenders" supplied by the record companies all 19 of them 4 of those nineteen lost their connection. Hang on didn't the record labels say over 70% of people download unauthorized content does that mean tiscali have only 26 customers!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I hope Branson's company can afford to lose about 2.5 million customers (glad Im with a different devil.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Danny, 14 Dec 2008 @ 9:10pm

Hi, I agree with "mike allen". Yes, he is correct.
------------------------------------------
Danny
Visit Sexxat.com - Free Live multi cam videochat community
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Danny, 14 Dec 2008 @ 9:10pm

Hi, I agree with "mike allen". Yes, he is correct.
------------------------------------------
Danny
Visit Sexxat.com - Free Live multi cam videochat community
[ link to this | view in chronology ]