Illegal File Sharing - Three Strike Rule - Page 5

31-03-2008, 16:05

This idea is so flawed it is unbelievable.

They could not prove 100% that it was a customer who had downloaded the files, particularly when someone is parked in a car outside using a laptop.

Apart from which there are rights to privacy issues.

---------- Post added at 16:02 ---------- Previous post was at 16:00 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Markly Darkly

I guess you can argue as much as you like about why people download illegally but, at the end of the day, it is illegal, so their really is no argument against it being stopped, and those who do it taking the consequences.

Ofcourse, as long as the ones " doing it " are not the customers not doing it.

The idea is very flawed.

---------- Post added at 16:05 ---------- Previous post was at 16:02 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by ceedee

Another analogy would be people who stand and read the books in Waterstones without paying the author or publisher. If all the book-buying public did that, the authors would be bankrupt.
Of course, after browsing a chapter or two from a couple of books, they might decided to buy them but, by reading them without contributing to somebody's coffers, they're copyright pirates!

Would bookshops survive if all the books were shrink-wrapped?

Who do you think that guy is in the dark glasses looking over your shoulder at what you're reading.

iglu · 31-03-2008, 16:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by arcamalpha2004

This idea is so flawed it is unbelievable.

They could not prove 100% that it was a customer who had downloaded the files, particularly when someone is parked in a car outside using a laptop.

Apart from which there are rights to privacy issues.

Also, the customer's mac address could have been traded 5 miles down the road and the cloners were downloading using the customer's mac address. They have no case, period.

Sirius · 31-03-2008, 17:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by eth01

Theres more to this than what meets the eye, imo. What happens if you're using a cloned cable modem?

According to Virgin Media there is now no such thing as a cloned modem.

---------- Post added at 17:01 ---------- Previous post was at 16:58 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by arcamalpha2004

This idea is so flawed it is unbelievable.

They could not prove 100% that it was a customer who had downloaded the files, particularly when someone is parked in a car outside using a laptop.

If a user is so stupid as to leave his connection unsecured then they deserve to be fined for being STUPID.

**Kymmy** · 31-03-2008, 17:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sirius

According to Virgin Media there is now no such thing as a cloned modem.

Next VM will be saying there's no such thing as

Kymmy

31-03-2008, 17:04

Would be far easier to charge less for the original material thus cutting into the need for " illegal " copies.

Interesting to read yesterday that Tesco apparently want their suppliers of music and dvd's to sell to them at a lower price, no mention of this cut being passed onto joe public mind

Sirius · 31-03-2008, 17:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by iglu

Also, the customer's mac address could have been traded 5 miles down the road and the cloners were downloading using the customer's mac address. They have no case, period.

They can detect which UBR and cmts card the download was done from as the modems will have different ip address's but the same macc address.. Then see which ubr and cmts card relates to the real customer. If it relates to the real customer then BAM they have you. Long winded but they CAN and HAVE done it.

---------- Post added at 17:08 ---------- Previous post was at 17:05 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kymmy

Next VM will be saying there's no such thing as

Kymmy

Love the flying pig

31-03-2008, 17:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sirius

According to Virgin Media there is now no such thing as a cloned modem.

---------- Post added at 17:01 ---------- Previous post was at 16:58 ----------

If a user is so stupid as to leave his connection unsecured then they deserve to be fined for being STUPID.

Sorry that is a different scenario.

So are you saying that the snoops will have you either way? if you illegally download on a secure system you will be done, if it is proven to be you.

And also, if there is illegal downloading done it doesnt matter that somebody has been piggy backing your connection we will do you anyway because you should have secured your connection.

---------- Post added at 17:10 ---------- Previous post was at 17:09 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sirius

They can detect which UBR and cmts card the download was done from as the modems will have different ip address's but the same macc address.. Then see which ubr and cmts card relates to the real customer. If it relates to the real customer then BAM they have you. Long winded but they CAN and HAVE done it.

---------- Post added at 17:08 ---------- Previous post was at 17:05 ----------

Love the flying pig

Can you point to any cases recently in your above quote?

Sirius · 31-03-2008, 17:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by arcamalpha2004

Sorry that is a different scenario.

So are you saying that the snoops will have you either way? if you illegally download on a secure system you will be done, if it is proven to be you.

And also, if there is illegal downloading done it doesnt matter that somebody has been piggy backing your connection we will do you anyway because you should have secured your connection.

---------- Post added at 17:10 ---------- Previous post was at 17:09 ----------

Can you point to any cases recently in your above quote?

My point is that anyone that is stupid enough to leave a wireless connection wide open deserves everything they bloody well get. I would be embarrassed to admit i left a wireless connection wide open to the world and his brother.

I download my self so i know what the risks are. I try to limit those risks by using secured connections and NEVER ever downloading from a torrent site that is not very very private.

---------- Post added at 17:18 ---------- Previous post was at 17:15 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by arcamalpha2004

Can you point to any cases recently in your above quote?

No

Reason is that they were private conversations between me and a Senior Core network engineer in Virgin Media.

You can care not to believe me i dont really give a toss. Suffice to say it has happened end of story

Members of staff have been reprimanded for posting on this forum about cloned modems from within VM and i have no intention of getting a member of staff who works for VirginMedia into trouble over cloned modems.

**Stuart** · 31-03-2008, 17:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by arcamalpha2004

Would be far easier to charge less for the original material thus cutting into the need for " illegal " copies.

It doesn't work that way. Radiohead allowed people to download their last album for free. People still pirated it..

Quote:

Interesting to read yesterday that Tesco apparently want their suppliers of music and dvd's to sell to them at a lower price, no mention of this cut being passed onto joe public mind

Supermarkets do this with everything they sell. Even to the point of bankrupting the suppliers. Ask Homealone or Nugget.

31-03-2008, 17:46

Quote:

No

Reason is that they were private conversations between me and a Senior Core network engineer in Virgin Media.

You can care not to believe me i dont really give a toss. Suffice to say it has happened end of story

Members of staff have been reprimanded for posting on this forum about cloned modems from within VM and i have no intention of getting a member of staff who works for VirginMedia into trouble over cloned modems.

I know which cases your talking about, and there have been quite a few instances where they have caught people using 6-7 modems per household using the methods you mentioned, quite a few techs got fired for selling the modems as well.

Unfortunetly for VM since the introduction of STM (mistake 1), Phorm (Mistake 2) and now the 3 strike rule (really stupid mistake) the amount of cloners on the network have shot up MUCH higher than it was before, and now that they have got 50mbit already hacked and working using specific setups, VM are gonna be in for a rough ride.

ceedee · 31-03-2008, 17:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by foreverwar

I think that analogy would be more accurate if the "browsers" were scanning/photocopying the books in Waterstones, to take the complete copies home with them - would that be allowed?

hehe
I guess it depends on the branch. I'll give it a go tomorrow and, if I'm still free, I'll let you know...

Bonglet · 31-03-2008, 17:59

Just when you think virgin couldnt get any worse bam they hit you with another dumb idea for a company that supplys broadband in the 21st century there thinking like a dial up company of days gone by, 1 speed forward 10 years backward hurry and implement phorm so i can leave under breach had enough.

iglu · 31-03-2008, 18:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sirius

They can detect which UBR and cmts card the download was done from as the modems will have different ip address's but the same macc address.. Then see which ubr and cmts card relates to the real customer. If it relates to the real customer then BAM they have you. Long winded but they CAN and HAVE done it.

Good point.

Consider this:
The legitimate customer wants to reduce his carbon foot print, so he switches his modem off at 8pm and switches it back on at 4pm next day, during the off period the cloner (few doors down the road) kicks in the same ubr with the customers mac. What's wrong with this scenario?

What I am trying to say, NTL cannot identify the illegal downloader for sure, no?

**Hugh** · 31-03-2008, 18:42

And the likelyhood of this is?

Anyway, in a civil case, the standard of proof is the "balance of probabilities", not 100% proof.

sheka · 31-03-2008, 18:42

A question........................

If I set up a server that pretended to be a legitimate part of an application - but what it actually did was harvest information that I could then take and use for another purpose, would I be committing a crime under some kind of computer misuse act?

If I advertised something physically like free food or free drinks, yet filmed everyones car, took there number plate and then obtained addresses and then used that information for other purposes - do you think the police would come calling !!!

just a thought !!!