#3
...but Virgin Media has emphasised that it just wants to measure the overall level of illegal file sharing, not keep records on individual customers.


Not a Virgin Media user, though.
#4
What the hell? Surely this is illegal? If they do monitor my stuff and give me restrictions I'm changing, screw them.
Blog Of Awesome UGers.
Quote by OddOneOut
I seem to attract girls.
Which is annoying, cos I'm a girl and I like cock.

Quote by IRISH_PUNK13
Being an idiot should be illegal too.
#5
...and only attempt to determine the proportion of file sharing traffic that infringes copyright.


It'd be interesting to see the criteria for determining that. I sometimes download songs/films I already have if the discs get a bit scratched. Obviously if you're downloading a recording someone's made in a cinema of a film that hasn't been released onto DVD yet then it's infringing copyright, but how do you determine how many of the downloads of released media are illegal? Sounds like a lot of guesswork.

Edit: Spying scum, 1984 etc etc.
Last edited by Robbie n strat at Nov 27, 2009,
#6
Quote by Robbie n strat
It'd be interesting to see the criteria for determining that. I sometimes download songs/films I already have if the discs get a bit scratched. Obviously if you're downloading a recording someone's made in a cinema of a film that hasn't been released onto DVD yet then it's infringing copyright, but how do you determine how many of the downloads of released media are illegal? Sounds like a lot of guesswork.

Edit: Spying scum, 1984 etc etc.


this is true, since buying a CD or DVD is akin to buying the rights to it you are intitled to download it for free if you have bought it i believe, maybe i'm wrong but tbh it only seems right to me
#7
They can fuck off.
Is it still a God Complex if I really am God?

America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between.
Oscar Wilde
#8
Well I'm too poor to support bands I like, so I buy the odd shirt and go to as many concerts as I can, but I'm going to be downloading my music from now on, just to spite these assholes.
My Blog
New bands you wish you knew about!

Check This Band:As Blood Runs Black
Guitarist of the month: Quorthon


Got a good band that you want to share with the world? PM me and I'll write them a review.
#9
Crap.

Oh well, i'm not too fussy. I'll just get my music by download anyways, it's not as if everybody ends up getting prosecuted for this shit.

Watch me be the one that does... >,<
Posted from Ubuntu.

Squier Precision Bass Special in Antique Burst (LH)
Rotosound Swing 66s, 45-105

On slapping on a bass:
Quote by supersac
pretend its a woman
i have no helpful advice

#10
Quote by imthehitcher
this is true, since buying a CD or DVD is akin to buying the rights to it you are intitled to download it for free if you have bought it i believe, maybe i'm wrong but tbh it only seems right to me

still technically illegal as far as I can tell. when you buy a CD you're entitled to use the data (the files) on that disc in certain ways. you do not have an unrestricted right to use the media (i.e. the songs/film) however you want. It's still technically illegal to rip a CD you have bought. That's why DRM is acceptable.

I still think this is a huge invasion of privacy.
Rhythm in Jump. Dancing Close to You.

Quote by element4433
Yeah. people, like Lemoninfluence, are hypocrites and should have all their opinions invalidated from here on out.
#12
I love the guy who commented the article saying he'd "Rather live in Afghanistan" so as to get more freedom
I know you think that I'm someone you can trust.
But I'm scared i'll get scared and i swear i'll try to nail you back up.



Female SouperHero
#13
Quote by Lemoninfluence
still technically illegal as far as I can tell. when you buy a CD you're entitled to use the data (the files) on that disc in certain ways. you do not have an unrestricted right to use the media (i.e. the songs/film) however you want. It's still technically illegal to rip a CD you have bought. That's why DRM is acceptable.

I still think this is a huge invasion of privacy.


As I recall making a single "back-up" copy of something you own is still technically legal as laws are not in place to stop you doing so. This was the case a year or so back but I'm not sure if that has been addressed since.
#15
Quote by JackalUK
As I recall making a single "back-up" copy of something you own is still technically legal as laws are not in place to stop you doing so. This was the case a year or so back but I'm not sure if that has been addressed since.

Well you could argue that you're using it for private study but I don't know how far you'd get with that.



17. Infringement of copyright by copying

(1) The copying of the work is an act restricted by the copyright in every description of copyright work; and references in this Part to copying and copies shall be construed as follows.

(2) Copying in relation to a literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work means reproducing the work in any material form.

This includes storing the work in any medium by electronic means.

(3) In relation to an artistic work copying includes the making of a copy in three dimensions of a two-dimensional work and the making of a copy in two dimensions of a three-dimensional work.

(4) Copying in relation to a film, television broadcast or cable programme includes making a photograph of the whole or any substantial part of any image forming part of the film, broadcast or cable programme.

(5) Copying in relation to the typographical arrangement of a published edition means making a facsimile copy of the arrangement.

(6) Copying in relation to any description of work includes the making of copies which are transient or are incidental to some other use of the work.


I don't actually think it's a valid defence I just think that nobody has bothered to sue someone for downloading something which they already own a copy of. In fact I think that there was a report which suggests that the law should be changed to allow people to rip music from CDs they own.

Common sense says it should be allowed, but I'm just saying I wouldn't rely on saying "the person is possibly downloading a backup copy of something that they already own" to object to this plan. especially as there are much greater points that you can attack.

EDIT:

http://www.ippr.org.uk/pressreleases/?id=2404
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/click_online/6457369.stm
Rhythm in Jump. Dancing Close to You.

Quote by element4433
Yeah. people, like Lemoninfluence, are hypocrites and should have all their opinions invalidated from here on out.
Last edited by Lemoninfluence at Nov 27, 2009,
#16
Calm down tinfoil hat wearers, they are only monitoring people who use the default ports assigned to file sharing, 80-somethings.

Just change your ports like any knowledgeable file sharer does.
#18
Quote by Mistress_Ibanez
Calm down tinfoil hat wearers, they are only monitoring people who use the default ports assigned to file sharing, 80-somethings.

Just change your ports like any knowledgeable file sharer does.

isn't port 80 HTTP?
Rhythm in Jump. Dancing Close to You.

Quote by element4433
Yeah. people, like Lemoninfluence, are hypocrites and should have all their opinions invalidated from here on out.
#20
Quote by Lemoninfluence
isn't port 80 HTTP?


80xx then, whatever. I don't know anything about default ports.

I read it on the vm intraweb at work and I can only remember a few details. I'll look for more tomorrow if you want me to risk my job

but basically, it's only the 'obvious' filesharing ports they are monitoring.
#21
Hai guiz, how do i fix my ports so i dont get caut downloadign musik ellegaly?

k thnx
Quote by david9d5
You, my friend, win in epic proportions




Quote by sharpshootr55


Man... now I gotta clean my laptop screen.




Quote by ozzyismetal
^That has too much win for me to handle....
I think I need a glass of water and a nap.


#22
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_TCP_and_UDP_port_numbers

80xx ports don't seem to have much to do with filesharing.

the only one I can see is 8080 which is used by filephile but can also be used for http and apache tomcat.

I still don't like how it's decided to do this but didn't send out any info to its customers.
Rhythm in Jump. Dancing Close to You.

Quote by element4433
Yeah. people, like Lemoninfluence, are hypocrites and should have all their opinions invalidated from here on out.
#23
I have an encrypted line so it doesn't really concern me that much, it's still a massive invasion of privacy and with anything of this type leaves it open for sophisticated attacks that could end up stealing an entire wealth of sensitive data.
#24
Quote by Lemoninfluence
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_TCP_and_UDP_port_numbers

80xx ports don't seem to have much to do with filesharing.

the only one I can see is 8080 which is used by filephile but can also be used for http and apache tomcat.

I still don't like how it's decided to do this but didn't send out any info to its customers.



At least they don't use phorm like BT. Phorm records every website you visit without consent. "lesser of 2 evils" in my opinion.
#25
Quote by Mistress_Ibanez
At least they don't use phorm like BT. Phorm records every website you visit without consent. "lesser of 2 evils" in my opinion.
Uh oh. O__O
#26
No doubt there is actually some fine print in the VM T&C spiel that allows them to do this.