AfterDawn: Tech news

France to mandate ISP monitoring of customers for copyright infringement

Written by Rich Fiscus (Google+) @ 29 Jan 2008 2:03 User comments (16)

France to mandate ISP monitoring of customers for copyright infringement Amid all the hype at the MIDEM music trade show in France around Qtrax's announcement of the free music service that wasn't, a more important story is emerging with the presentation by Jean Berbinau, general secretary of French regulatory body Autorité de Régulation des Mesures Techniques (Regulatory Authority for Technical Measures).
He officially introduced legislation requiring ISPs to monitor their networks for copyright infringement and institute a policy that would disconnect offenders after their third offense, saying "We have to do something, but it is only transitional, only to give time to the industry to adapt and maybe to encourage a new business model."

The idea for the controversial law was first discussed last November by French President Nicolas Sarkozy. It also mirrors the primary goal stated in the annual report on digital music by international music trade organization IFPI.

The suggestion that ordering ISPs to prop up the current (failed) music industry model would promote such changes is dubious at best. In fact without ISPs policing their networks for copyright violations, with the recent announcement from Sony BMG, every major label has already officially given up on DRM. This marks a major shift in strategy that makes most music downloads nearly universally compatible with portable media players from iPods to Zunes to Zens.

Ironically the reported "cost" to the labels for ISP cooperation is to make their DRM interoperable. In other words it's about a year and a half behind the advances labels have already made due to consumer pressure.

It also doesn't seem to make sense for the labels to disconnect people showing an interest in downloading music, rather than figure out a way to develop a revenue stream around them. With online music becoming nearly as common place as radio it's time to figure out where the revenue streams are rather than concentrating on efforts that don't make money (like disconnecting music lovers from the internet).

Previous Next

Related news

 

16 user comments

129.1.2008 2:47

Another law thats 10 years past its prime....

229.1.2008 3:33
nobrainer
Inactive

Another futile exercise as bittorrent clients by default encrypt all traffic already so it will take as long to bypass this as it does for someone to download and install the latest:

uTorrent http://www.utorrent.com/
Azureus http://azureus.sourceforge.net/

or any of the other clients http://www.slyck.com/bt.php?page=2

the worrying thing is they are now monitoring all traffic and using the fear of piracy to justify it to the world when they know bittorrent is already encrypted!



what are the scare monger, fear inducing tactics they use to get us to freely adopt government snooping; Paedophiles, Piracy & Terrorism!

Security vs. Privacy is really Control vs. Liberty

Originally posted by Hyperlink:
Security expert Bruce Schneier has a stirring editorial about the "false dichotomy of 'security versus privacy'" -- people who push for reduced privacy don't want more security, they want more control.

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 29 Jan 2008 @ 5:15

329.1.2008 6:52

This is pure foolishness and a complete and total waste of time on the part of the French gov't.I swear they're like the RIAA in that they can't see that the age of digital music is here. Are they gonna be the only ones besides the RIAA to keep their heads in the sand and refuse to see the new wave. Trying to force the ISP's to police their servers looking for infringement is not only NOT cost effective but as someone else mentioned a complete waste of time as torrents encrypt their files. I wish these clowns would wake up and look at the real world wherein online music stores allow access to great music and to a selection that is unheard of in the real world music stores. When you buy a CD now it has two good tracks on it, whereas if you get your music from an online store you can get all the best tracks of your favorite artist and download them to your computer for later transfer to an iPod or MP3 player of your choice. But then again, what do you expect from people like this who still reside in the 18th century mentality and refuse to come forward into the 21st Century.
DRM went the way of the dodo under pressure from consumers and ultimately so will this as, and we all know this to be true, the consumer ultimately makes the final rules when it comes to music. Look at DRM, this was something that was cooked up to prevent any sharing or copying of music from CD to CD and now it's gone. The record companies have given up on it as being unviable due to consumers. The only way to prevent music file sharing is to give the consumer what they want, good music on good albums. Even the artists are starting to get fed up with this foolishness and a lot of them have left RIAA sanctioned labels for independents where they have the ultimate control over their music not the labels. Some even have taken to putting their newest albums on the net to be downloaded by fans, and this is a big worry for RIAA and their members as they receive NO monies when this happens. The artists don't make much from album sales, only pennies per, but they DO make money on concerts and the concessions, teeshirts, guitars, CD's, Posters, etc.
Just my two cents.

429.1.2008 7:20
nobrainer
Inactive

@ logan1957

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/01/29/midem_john_kennedy/

Quote:
In an interview from the music business annual Midem, we speak to John Kennedy, chairman and CEO of the IPFI, the international trade group representing record labels. (Later in the week we'll hear the view from the independent sector – presenting a very different picture.) Here he talks about the new ISP strategy, and the future of the big label.

But isn't so much of this traffic disappearing behind encryption? When we last met six months ago that wasn't the case – now the clients turn on encryption by default. So it's difficult for an ISP to tell what's legitimate and what's infringing? Aren't you going to end up in a position much like now where most people know it's something they don't have to worry about.

I don't think it is. It's incredibly difficult, but we have two choices. We give up, and go away, and let things get worse, or we fight in very difficult terrain. Filtering can deal with encrypted material. When I started talking about filtering three years ago, it was difficult and cumbersome and not 100 per cent reliable. Now filtering is effective, it's really cheap and it works including dealing with encrypted streams.

Now we've always dealt in the real world where there's an 80:20 rule: 80 per cent legal and 20 per cent pirate. In the online world we may never get to 100 per cent legal, and we may never even get to 20 per cent illegal, but it's a question of people getting into the habit of buying, and now even parents have got into the habit of following their kids onto P2P networks. So we need that change of behaviour on the ISPs. I fervently believe that will make a dramatic difference.

And I think you're right, we need to increase the share of wallet in that context. But at the moment trying to increase the share of wallet against free is virtually impossible.

Filtering vendors can't cope with encryption


[Editor's note: Filtering equipment vendors, for example, Sandvine say they do not have the ability to look inside an encrypted stream. However, unless a BitTorrent user has taken steps to conceal their IP address, the IP address is visible to other users sharing the same Torrent.]

I expected when I went to our technology guys for them to tell us that they we're completely done for with encryption. But that's not what they're tell us. So I'm not an expert in the field, but if our technology guys say they can deal with it then they have to deliver.

You can decrypt a stream if you throw enough computer resources at it, but that leaves you with one or two people you can make examples of. Which is making a moral statement rather than an effective real world deterrent, which you seem to want.

That's not a bad end in itself. It sends the message to people that P2P file-sharing is wrong. I think a large percentage of people will stop.

Certainly parents in the main think, "If this is so easy, then it can't be wrong. I heard that Kennedy guy going on about this, but I'm on AOL, I'm on BT – it must be OK."

Now I accept that this is an arms race, but if we can improve the terrain we will do much better. But frankly, if we don't, it's a disaster for everybody.

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 29 Jan 2008 @ 7:21

529.1.2008 7:24

As though it's not being done already.

629.1.2008 8:06

I think this says it best:

Quote:
It also doesn't seem to make sense for the labels to disconnect people showing an interest in downloading music, rather than figure out a way to develop a revenue stream around them. With online music becoming nearly as common place as radio it's time to figure out where the revenue streams are rather than concentrating on efforts that don't make money (like disconnecting music lovers from the internet).

Way too much focus on alienating those who are more interested in downloading than storebuying music. Can't see the forrest for the trees kind of thing.

No they can't focus on trying to turn this into a viable market. No, no. Just try and shut 'em down.

Great idea. Not.

729.1.2008 9:19
2colors
Inactive

Sounds like "1984" to me. You think their going to stop there. If this passes I see them looking at everything you do on line, and possibly scan your computer while their at it.

829.1.2008 9:47

The French Government is making ISPs monitor traffic

Quote:
only to give time to the industry to adapt and maybe to encourage a new business model.
The original Napster was launched back in 1999. That was almost 10 years ago. How much more time does the industry need to adapt? They should have realized then, that their business model was deteriorating!

Glad I dont live in France.

929.1.2008 17:35
Kerpalguy
Inactive

Ah yes, another brilliant idea. Just wait till they turn off the internet connection of some French lobbyists sibling - the law will soon and quietly be revoked. What a draconian way of thinking, but typical for the Government in that part of Europe.

1029.1.2008 20:14
varnull
Inactive

They forget.. that encrypted p2p traffic may be just private communication.. and since when did governments have the right to spy into our mail... Oh I forgot.. the day after 9/11 when some people got killed on the other side of the world because they are stupid enough to allow their government to threaten, invade and bully smaller countries.

So across the world we are supposed to sit back and watch our privacy rights taken away because of US and UK vested interests have an all consuming greed for oil..

I'm not playing.

1230.1.2008 8:09
varnull
Inactive

So I wonder where the French stand with regards to http://www.afterdawn.com/news/archive/12741.cfm

As a nation they are very strongly opinionated when it comes to peoples rights, as a full on public sector strike proved when the government tried to force an increase in the statutory working hours. Mind you.. they still know what it is like to be oppressed by another nation, and I can't see some profiteering US business paid lobbyist getting very far with this.

1330.1.2008 12:00

Originally posted by nobrainer:
@ varnull

don't get me started dude!


WE ARE NOT IN IRAQ FOR OIL !!!! Video.


George Carlin Consumer capitalism Video:

George Carlin: American Bull Video

George Carlin Who owns you Americans? Video


And this is what we have got to come: TRAMP 'O' CLAUSE Video

No Blood For Oil: http://www.thedossier.ukonline.co.uk/


Ummmm look at the greed for oil in general and you will see governments and corperations screwing the consumers over daily, and we are in iraq due to lies, decite and plain arrogance from our dear leaders in office.

Copyright infringement is nothing more than civil disobedience to a bad set of laws. Lets renegotiate them.

---
Check out my crappy creations
http://zippydsmlee.deviantart.com/

1430.1.2008 12:02

Originally posted by varnull:
So I wonder where the French stand with regards to http://www.afterdawn.com/news/archive/12741.cfm

As a nation they are very strongly opinionated when it comes to peoples rights, as a full on public sector strike proved when the government tried to force an increase in the statutory working hours. Mind you.. they still know what it is like to be oppressed by another nation, and I can't see some profiteering US business paid lobbyist getting very far with this.
Meh aristocrats can and will screw governments over on a whim.

Copyright infringement is nothing more than civil disobedience to a bad set of laws. Lets renegotiate them.

---
Check out my crappy creations
http://zippydsmlee.deviantart.com/

153.2.2008 11:07

Hate to say it, but...

Another reason why it sucks to be French.

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 03 Feb 2008 @ 11:43


1620.2.2008 0:41

France is showing that they are no pushovers its wat the call the French Risistance :)

Comments have been disabled for this article.

News archive