Research Paper Shows How Useless It Is To Require ISPs To Be Copyright Cops

from the why-do-i-get-the-feeling-this-will-be-ignored dept

Wed, Feb 18th 2009 11:53am — Mike Masnick

A bunch of folks have been sending in the link to Boing Boing's report about a new research paper highlighting just how useless, ineffective and damaging it will be if governments or the entertainment industry force ISPs to start trying to crack down on file sharing. The researchers make a pretty compelling case (though, certainly, I was inclined to agree with them going in) that any such attempt will not do a damn thing to slow down file sharing, but will represent a significant risk of violating users' privacy or disconnecting them from the internet for perfectly innocent actions. So, the next time we hear politicians pushing such a solution, it might be worth sending them a copy of this report -- though, it probably won't do much good if that politician has received enough campaign contributions from the entertainment industry.

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: copyright, copyright cops, filtering, isps

13 Comments

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

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 18 Feb 2009 @ 12:25pm

analogy
How come they dont charge the post office with drug trafficking when people mail drugs to each other? How come the post office isnt charged with mail fraud when people exploit the mail system for fraudulent purposes? How come an ISP is any different, they are just delivering packets instead of packages?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
R. Miles, 18 Feb 2009 @ 12:30pm

Pondering.
Interesting reading on BoingBoing. It made me think of Napster of old, and what would the world be like had Napster won, instead of losing.

I'm still in awe that Napster lost that case, and it seems to me this was a huge turning point for the entertainment industry to push forward on any site "infringing".

Soon, writing anything online will be considered infringing. While we know facts can't be copyrighted, I'm just waiting for the day when Webster (et al) start suing people for using words they published.

*sigh*

To the entertainment industry: Want my money? Stop screwing me over, jerks. Ooh! Another song downloaded!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
slightlyeskew, 18 Feb 2009 @ 12:47pm

The humble opinion of an IP law student.
Analyzing the situation from a law and economics perspective begs the question, "Who can regulate this behavior at the lowest cost." I think the answer to this question has to be the ISPs. It would be more expensive for any other player in the field to try and prevent the copyright infringement. Now, this is completely avoiding the question of whether the attempt to regulate the behavior in the first place is an economically or philosophically productive behavior.

I haven't read the article yet, but I'm looking forward to it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Feb 2009 @ 12:56pm

Re: The humble opinion of an IP law student.
To be short and to the point, your opinion is wrong. Read the paper before commenting.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Feb 2009 @ 1:05pm

I dont care, I will continue to download, copy and share until they (RIAA, MPAA ETC. ) stop treating paying customers as criminals.

If my ISP agrees to police file sharring, I will turn off my connection.

Then I will start copying my media and giving it out to the masses.

Not 1 cent to them or anyone that supports them. ISP(S) included!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
JoeP, 18 Feb 2009 @ 1:05pm

Who can regulate for < $$
"Who can regulate this behavior at the lowest cost."

Isn't that like asking "Who can extinguish the sun at the lowest cost?" Once you figure out that 1) it's not technically feasible and 2) it's not really a good idea to extinguish the sun because our world be become an uninhabitable ball of ice in short order... Isn't it kind of a moot point who can do it for the least monetary cost?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Chris, 18 Feb 2009 @ 2:07pm

A new era of encrypted traffic coming soon to a home near you.
While I definitely don't agree with any kind of monitoring of internet usage, these actions, if successful, will help give the online community the push it needs toward completely encrypted traffic. For years I've hypothesized that GPG and the likes hasn't caught on because people are lazy and don't feel that they need to protect what they say and do online. This feeling might change finally!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Your Gawd and Master, 18 Feb 2009 @ 3:23pm

Re: A new era of encrypted traffic coming soon to a home near you.
I agree. I'm all for a totalitarian rule because I've observed that those who try to control chaos will find themselves surrounded by it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Feb 2009 @ 9:52am

One step further
"How come they dont charge the post office with drug trafficking when people mail drugs to each other? How come the post office isnt charged with mail fraud when people exploit the mail system for fraudulent purposes? How come an ISP is any different, they are just delivering packets instead of packages?"

How come they don't charge the government with drug trafficking each time people exchange drugs in the USA?

How come the government isn't charged with fraud every time someone in the USA is defrauded?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Gene Cavanaugh, 19 Feb 2009 @ 11:38am

Entertainment Industry Abuses
Right on, Michael! Without campaign finance reform, we can expect that eventually China, Iran, et al will be the more progressive nations compared to the US. Long way in the future, so maybe people will come to their senses in time.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Kharn, 19 Feb 2009 @ 11:56am

Re: analogy
Dammit thats what i was going to say. They need to force UPS who knows that people must sending illegal stuff in some packages to search every package.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Phillip, 19 Feb 2009 @ 1:14pm

Re: The humble opinion of an IP law student.
Even if you were correct, who should "monitor file sharing" (if at all) shouldn't be about who can do it the cheapest. It's the job of law enforcement to enforce the laws, not businesses.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
another mike, 23 Feb 2009 @ 2:21pm

Re: A new era of encrypted traffic coming soon to a home near you.
Encrypted anonymizing proxy networks will become very popular in short order. My ISP will never know where I'm going or what I'm doing. Long live TOR!
[ link to this | view in thread ]