Quote:

---

"It is (...) possible for ISPs to block their customers' access to specific P2P services that are known to be predominantly infringing and that have refused to implement steps to prevent infringement, while not affecting regular services such as web and email."

---

This statement alone shows how out-of-the-loop the IFPI really is.

"refuse to cooperate"

What more need be said. Still urging for more power to abuse than they already do.

Damn the following to HELL: IFPI, RIAA, BPI, MPAA, etc.

I live in the U.S., Land of Lincoln (Illinois) to be specific and I say DAMN the U.S. for trying to police the activities of every other frakkin' country in the world. What crap. Blame it on Bush, whom I really really really really really F'en HATE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Can you say "FREE ADVERTISING"??

Although it doesn't apply quite as much to the movie side as it does to the music.

And with sites like TPB doubling it's peers, that's just more people ISP's are going to alienate and possibly lose. If they want people to stop using these sites, they should work harder to take the sites down with government aid. Not infringe on peoples rights. How about the legal uses for bittorrent? And infringing on the rights of those legit businesses that plan on using bittorrent to legally provide media? Since TPB is still up and growing, apparantley it has not been declared an illegal site. So why shouldn't a person be able to visit a legal site? Soon every country will be like China, filtering what we view. Take care of the legality of these sites first, before attacking the customer.

tester22,

Blame Bill Clinton for the DMCA. He signed it in to law. The entertainment industry needs to learn that the audience wants to be in control of their entertainment. This means that open format video and music must be used. The music industry is learning this lesson about 12 years after the fact by offering DRM free MP3 tracks. Lets hope that the movie and television industry will get the message soon and stop using the ridiculous DRM schemes that prevent watching TV shows or movies on any platform we want

If I had any stake in bittorrent I would be getting my lawyers ready to sue for huge amounts of money. Blocking a legitimately used business software is equivalent to banning the manufacturing of knifes because they have been used in murders. Maybe they should just make it illegal to use your computer for anything other than buying products from government approved websites. It takes some real balls to think they can control peoples' freedom in the name of profit.

Originally posted by jacsac:

---

If I had any stake in bittorrent I would be getting my lawyers ready to sue for huge amounts of money. Blocking a legitimately used business software is equivalent to banning the manufacturing of knifes because they have been used in murders. Maybe they should just make it illegal to use your computer for anything other than buying products from government approved websites. It takes some real balls to think they can control peoples' freedom in the name of profit.

---

Very nicely put jacsac

As sad as this is, i cannot say i'm suprised.

Only 1 way to stop filesharing of any kind.
Shut down the internet.
Long live the Hydra

All the isp's needs to do is give access to their users to programs that block ip addresses and then its up to the user to use them or not.

p2p with data encryption will sink that accoustic fingerprinting filtering bullshit.

What they really need is a Bobby 24-7 in every house hold checking for piracy! Who cares about the cost! It is for freedom of the RIAA and to put a few more Euros in the lawyers pockets! If you grease the politicians well enough they will pass any law no matter how stupid it is.

They speak of it as "cooperation", when in reality it will be the ISPs, and their clientèle that will absorb the cost of this group activity. The real kicker here is that they want the ISPs to block access to those websites that "refuse to cooperate". The words "refused to cooperate" could be interpreted in many creative and "censorific" ways. If a site publishes an article denouncing the policies and procedures of the IFPI, they could be deemed an entity that "refuses to cooperate", and thus have access to them curtailed. This is scary to think about, as the mandate of the IFPI can change, along with it the different ways a website can "refuse to cooperate", without even realizing it. It can be used to silence critics if the IFPI, and force sites to "tow the line", in as far as the IFPI is concerned.

I don't know where IFPI has been. ISPs are hungry for band width so they can put HiDef TV channels on their old antiquated networks. They are hammering P2P legal or not.