a friendly suggestion for 50mbit users

[General Maximus]

Most of the peeps i have spoke to over the last couple of weeks have been on some variation of a 5mbit upload trial in their area with different configs. In some cases the extra upsteam bandwidth has worked and in some cases it hasn't. I have just reset my modem and now I have gone from 1.8mbits up to 3.78. It isn't the full 5 but i am not complaining :)

I know in the past a lot of people have always talked about torrents and what the optimum settings are etc.

With 1.75mbits up you got a maximum of 218k/sec which sucked your connection dry so I always capped my upload speed to 160k to give me enough juice spare to do other stuff while I was uploading.

Now that I have got 3.78mbits up I have got a maximum of 472k/sec up. I have capped my torrents at 400k leaving me the extra 72k to play around with and everything else I am doing atm is flying at warp speed.

Just wanted to let everyone know in case you were wondering what settings to use.

[broadbandking]

If you use utorrent you can the speedtest which will do the settings for you, if you need extra upstream you can then manually adjust it.

[General Maximus]

i have always been a fan of Azureus/Vuze

[roughbeast]

If you use utorrent you can the speedtest which will do the settings for you, if you need extra upstream you can then manually adjust it.


Same with Vuze.

I have moved over to UTorrent because it works better with BTGuard (https://btguard.com/). BTguard slows Vuze down for me.

Back on topic. Maximus, I did much the same as you on the 5Mb trial. I guess for 10Mb triallists a proportional approach to capping BT speeds would be best.

[Ignitionnet]

General Maximus, the same man who when I mentioned there being no current use for higher bandwidths apart from P2P and newsgroups gave a few fairly weak examples of legitimate usage which wouldn't get close giving advice on what to cap your torrent client to, surely not. ;)

I'm slightly concerned that Torrents will get shaped before the full rollout is complete. You may want to enjoy this while you can, if people pushing out shady stuff 24x7 causes an issue either STM or, more likely, use of protocol shaping may be back on the table. It's a point that's never too far away from it.

[roughbeast]

I'm slightly concerned that Torrents will get shaped before the full rollout is complete. You may want to enjoy this while you can, if people pushing out shady stuff 24x7 causes an issue either STM or, more likely, use of protocol shaping may be back on the table. It's a point that's never too far away from it.

Ignitionnet, I have mentioned BTGuard before. I use it all the time. Essentially it runs your activity through a false IP based in Canada. Canada has particularly strong privacy laws. BTGuard also allows you to encrypt. Can VM or anybody else detect that you are using torrents if you employ BtGuard technology?

[Ignitionnet]

Ignitionnet, I have mentioned BTGuard before. I use it all the time. Essentially it runs your activity through a false IP based in Canada. Canada has particularly strong privacy laws. BTGuard also allows you to encrypt. Can VM or anybody else detect that you are using torrents if you employ BtGuard technology?

They can just throttle traffic to BTGuard. No need to know, or care, what you're doing inside the tunnel.

That the service is called BTGuard and advertises itself as 'Anonymous BitTorrent Services' doesn't leave much room for ambiguity.

[kwikbreaks]

There is DPI kit which is supposed to be able to detect the torrent protocol even when encryption is in place. I believe it is expensive and have no idea if VM posses this sort of thing but just checking which IPs generate masssive traffic and throttling them back seems to be a cheap way to do the business.

That said if VM do use shaping and/or throttling outside of their published policy they need to amend that published policy. The fact that their FUP is clearly laid out is a massive bonus point in their favour so it would be a shame to see sneaky tricks employed.

I rather imagine that there will be a move away from torrents towards alternatives when the new legislation kicks in. Proxies/VPNs may be used but I imagine they would slow things down too much for the want-it-free and want-it-now folks or (perish the thought) may have to be paid for.

[Red Squirrel]

There's no good HD movie download service around.

There needs to be something for the movie industry that is what Steam is for the gaming industry.

[pip08456]

General Maximus, the same man who when I mentioned there being no current use for higher bandwidths apart from P2P and newsgroups gave a few fairly weak examples of legitimate usage which wouldn't get close giving advice on what to cap your torrent client to, surely not. ;)

I'm slightly concerned that Torrents will get shaped before the full rollout is complete. You may want to enjoy this while you can, if people pushing out shady stuff 24x7 causes an issue either STM or, more likely, use of protocol shaping may be back on the table. It's a point that's never too far away from it.

Nice one Igni :D:D:D:D

[General Maximus]

I'm slightly concerned that Torrents will get shaped before the full rollout is complete. You may want to enjoy this while you can, if people pushing out shady stuff 24x7 causes an issue either STM or, more likely, use of protocol shaping may be back on the table. It's a point that's never too far away from it.

Soooooooo, if you admit that there are very few legitimate uses for 50mbit, let alone 100 or 200mbit, and VM want to hammer the services that do take advantage if the bandwidth, why bother with faster connections. If they are going to be like that they had might as well tell us that we can all have gigabit connections now because anything we do to use them they are going to come down on under the guise of a fair usage policy and using a disproportional amount of bandwidth.

This is where I start to put my moaning hat on and agree with chrysalis & co and say that if they provide a connection, it is there to be used, and if they havent got the network capacity to run that connection as advertised then they shouldnt be offering it. The whole thing is so backwards it is doing my head in.

"We want you to pay for a 100mbit connection but if you actually manage to find something which gives you 100mbits/sec, we are going to stop you from using it".

[pip08456]

"We want you to pay for a 100mbit connection but if you actually manage to find something which gives you 100mbits/sec, we are going to stop you from using it".

Why say that when they don't do it with 50Mb - yet

[Ignitionnet]

Public Relations.

Most people use sub-30GB/month combined traffic in both directions. Roughly what you're uploading in a day right now.

The services are not, and will never be designed for sustained maxing out at the current price point. It's not about finding something to max the connection out, it's about having it sitting there full pelt in either direction 24x7.

The attitude that if it's there it should be used is not applicable to contended residential services. Leased lines are the only real connection with that usage in mind.

Oddly you didn't seem too worried last month (http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/35024800-post5.html) back when your only use for the speed was apparently gaming and downloading files from Steam, not a massively bandwidth intensive activity in the grand scheme of things. You said this was a great driver for faster speeds, doing things more quickly so avoiding leaving the PC on all night to complete a download.

Must've discovered the darker side in the interim ;)

[|Kippa|]

Would they ever shape traffic on ports 21 FTP and 22 SFTP? Shaping torrents is one thing, shaping ftp would be too much in my opinion.

[roughbeast]

One of the services VM say they will be offering come 100Mb+ is access to cloud filing. This would have to be infinitely better than Vstuff :disturbd: Then increasingly, of course, we have on-line applications from Google etc.

Given that many files would be legitimate video, photo and music collections, not just office files, would we not require significant bandwidth for accessing these? Imagine a household of people. Here I am thinking of, not just student houses, but ones like mine. ie 2 boys accessing school homework on Moodle-do and playing online games, my wife, a headteacher, tunnelling through to her school system, me watching a film and leeching and seeding meantime. All this happening simultaneously requires as much bandwidth as you can get, for smooth seamless running. Accessing via the cloud needs to feel as if the files are on your own system and media server.

Someone here is going to say 50Mb is enough for that, but experience in my house tells me it is not. VM's target of 10:1 down / up ratio may change that experience, but I will always contend that the more bandwidth you throw at peeps the more applications they will find.

[kwikbreaks]

Most people use sub-30GB/month combined traffic in both directions. Do you have a source for that or is it guesswork?

I strongly suspect that most people on 50Mbps would be using more than that. If they aren't then why pay for 50Mbps? If not for downloads then it can only be for willy waving rights because the the only reason you'd need that speed with current applications is for downloading.

[Ignitionnet]

Do you have a source for that or is it guesswork?

I strongly suspect that most people on 50Mbps would be using more than that. If they aren't then why pay for 50Mbps? If not for downloads then it can only be for willy waving rights because the the only reason you'd need that speed with current applications is for downloading.

Yes, VM themselves are the source for that one.

Note I said 'most', there are only 70,000 50Mbit customers and it should be noted that 50Mbit's price increment over 10Mbit isn't huge. VM's average usage is skewed hugely due to people trying to download the entire Internet 'because it's there' but the median and mode are both under 30GB a month.

---------- Post added at 08:41 ---------- Previous post was at 08:32 ----------

One of the services VM say they will be offering come 100Mb+ is access to cloud filing. This would have to be infinitely better than Vstuff :disturbd: Then increasingly, of course, we have on-line applications from Google etc.

Given that many files would be legitimate video, photo and music collections, not just office files, would we not require significant bandwidth for accessing these? Imagine a household of people. Here I am thinking of, not just student houses, but ones like mine. ie 2 boys accessing school homework on Moodle-do and playing online games, my wife, a headteacher, tunnelling through to her school system, me watching a film and leeching and seeding meantime. All this happening simultaneously requires as much bandwidth as you can get, for smooth seamless running. Accessing via the cloud needs to feel as if the files are on your own system and media server.

Someone here is going to say 50Mb is enough for that, but experience in my house tells me it is not. VM's target of 10:1 down / up ratio may change that experience, but I will always contend that the more bandwidth you throw at peeps the more applications they will find.

You were doing really well until you got to the bolded bit :)

Cloud computing has suddenly become the cool thing it seems with VM mentioning it as a future application :) Doesn't change that the options are very limited at the moment. Companies are actually also finding that bandwidth isn't so much the issue, it's protocol-based inefficiencies and latency. Moddle-do and online games use relatively minimal bandwidth, VPN to work rarely uses bandwidth in any quantity, the main bandwidth driver in your list there remains the torrents.

Apart from bursts of high speed downloading P2P and newsgroups remain the primary driver for anything over 20Mbps or so with the 10:1 ratio kicking in.

[General Maximus]

Public Relations.

Most people use sub-30GB/month combined traffic in both directions. Roughly what you're uploading in a day right now.

The services are not, and will never be designed for sustained maxing out at the current price point. It's not about finding something to max the connection out, it's about having it sitting there full pelt in either direction 24x7.

The attitude that if it's there it should be used is not applicable to contended residential services. Leased lines are the only real connection with that usage in mind.

Oddly you didn't seem too worried last month (http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/35024800-post5.html) back when your only use for the speed was apparently gaming and downloading files from Steam, not a massively bandwidth intensive activity in the grand scheme of things. You said this was a great driver for faster speeds, doing things more quickly so avoiding leaving the PC on all night to complete a download.

Must've discovered the darker side in the interim ;)

I completely agree and I don't run my connection at full whack 24/7. The point I was trying to make is that if and when i do want to download something, whether it be off steam or torrents or anything else, I want to be able to do it unrestricted. I usually pull between 3-4mb/sec off steam these days which is sweeeet when you want to play a game asap, but are VM going to say "hmmm, too many people are downloading too many 17gb games off steam, lets block them".

I just want to be able to download what I want when I want. I have always said that I appreciate the fact there are busier times of the day/week and if I don't get my max speed fair enough. Tbh, I would rather go back to being stm'd and being able to download what i want rather than being told i cant download it full stop.

[Ignitionnet]

Downstream and downloading isn't likely to be an issue.

[kwikbreaks]

Downstream and downloading isn't likely to be an issue.
So are you saying that the limiting factor is purely upstream?

[Chrysalis]

General Maximus, the same man who when I mentioned there being no current use for higher bandwidths apart from P2P and newsgroups gave a few fairly weak examples of legitimate usage which wouldn't get close giving advice on what to cap your torrent client to, surely not. ;)

I'm slightly concerned that Torrents will get shaped before the full rollout is complete. You may want to enjoy this while you can, if people pushing out shady stuff 24x7 causes an issue either STM or, more likely, use of protocol shaping may be back on the table. It's a point that's never too far away from it.

why dont VM just say stop using residental service for serving content? and stick a usage cap on the upload.

Then sell a £100 a month service for the serial p2p users. :)

[Ignitionnet]

So are you saying that the limiting factor is purely upstream?

Not purely just mostly.

You can only download so much data. Upload on the other hand? Leave your torrents seeding, that's it.

[Chrysalis]

Not purely just mostly.

You can only download so much data. Upload on the other hand? Leave your torrents seeding, that's it.

never understood the obsession with seeding, private torrent sites you donate a fiver then they give you a load of upload stats that should last for months.

[General Maximus]

why dont VM just say stop using residental service for serving content? and stick a usage cap on the upload.

Then sell a £100 a month service for the serial p2p users. :)

I would be up for that, I have always said I dont have a problem paying more for a reliable service

[Chrysalis]

I would be up for that, I have always said I dont have a problem paying more for a reliable service

the worse thing they can do is simply do nothing. As I said before repeatedly, if an isp sells a unlimited high speed service they should 'expect' people to utilise it as such, its human nature to want value for money.

I suspect within a few months after the higher upload tiers are released protocol shaping will be introduced following a statement by VM stating that it is due to 'unexpected' high utilisation of bandwidth on the new services. I think this will hurt legacy a lot because if I understand correctly legacy isnt even getting docsis upgrades they just going to sell higher speeds on it. Although I am sure ignition will jump in to say so if this isnt the case. :)

[Ignitionnet]

I would be up for that, I have always said I dont have a problem paying more for a reliable service

So what's the problem with paying for the stuff you're getting from P2P networks if you're so happy to pay so much for Internet?

EDIT: Though this may be a conversation better had in the 3 strikes thread.

---------- Post added at 09:49 ---------- Previous post was at 09:44 ----------

the worse thing they can do is simply do nothing. As I said before repeatedly, if an isp sells a unlimited high speed service they should 'expect' people to utilise it as such, its human nature to want value for money.

I suspect within a few months after the higher upload tiers are released protocol shaping will be introduced following a statement by VM stating that it is due to 'unexpected' high utilisation of bandwidth on the new services. I think this will hurt legacy a lot because if I understand correctly legacy isnt even getting docsis upgrades they just going to sell higher speeds on it. Although I am sure ignition will jump in to say so if this isnt the case. :)

As far as I know the 1.1 network stays 1.1, however modem movement to the shiny newly upgraded overlay network alongside resegmentation of the 1.1 network should ensure no issues.

There will be no 20Mbit modems at all on the 1.1 network at upgrade time, 1Mbit upstreams are perfectly doable with that in mind.

[TheDon]

So what's the problem with paying for the stuff you're getting from P2P networks if you're so happy to pay so much for Internet?

EDIT: Though this may be a conversation better had in the 3 strikes thread.

No pay for service that offers the convenience of downloading would be a best guess.

However you could easily argue why someone would stick with p2p when newsgroups offer a far superior service and remove the need for constant uploading to maintain ratios.

[Ignitionnet]

No pay for service that offers the convenience of downloading would be a best guess.

Indeed. Pity that such a service even on the rare occasion it is offered just ends up getting used to seed torrents and newsgroup uploads :(

However you could easily argue why someone would stick with p2p when newsgroups offer a far superior service and remove the need for constant uploading to maintain ratios.

Newsgroups can cost money, and are the next big target for the legal people, as is absolutely proper given they make money out of serving hundreds of TB of other people's content without any compensation to the content producers.

[TheDon]

Newsgroups can cost money, and are the next big target for the legal people, as is absolutely proper given they make money out of serving hundreds of TB of other people's content without any compensation to the content producers.

Indeed, that they cost money was my point. The OP is claiming they don't mind paying more for a better service, so logically you'd think they'd use newsgroups, as they're far better than p2p.

They've been the target for a while tbh, there's just not much they can do about them without major law changes.

[Ignitionnet]

Indeed, that they cost money was my point. The OP is claiming they don't mind paying more for a better service, so logically you'd think they'd use newsgroups, as they're far better than p2p.

They've been the target for a while tbh, there's just not much they can do about them without major law changes.

Yep. With the current drive towards more 'International' rights enforcement though these changes are a work in progress.

[Chrysalis]

As far as I know the 1.1 network stays 1.1, however modem movement to the shiny newly upgraded overlay network alongside resegmentation of the 1.1 network should ensure no issues.

There will be no 20Mbit modems at all on the 1.1 network at upgrade time, 1Mbit upstreams are perfectly doable with that in mind.

interesting, so on overlay 5mbit user on 18mbit channel and on legacy 1mbit user on 4.5mbit channel (my area qpsk). The legacy having the slightly better user to capacity ratio.

We know the 70k reported 50mbit users so confirmed my thoughts 50mbit takeup is very low, any 20mbit customer numbers?

---------- Post added at 12:11 ---------- Previous post was at 12:08 ----------

Yep. With the current drive towards more 'International' rights enforcement though these changes are a work in progress.

I would think newsgroups providers are defenitly an easier target than torrent providers since they actually store the content and charge for it.

[TheDon]

I would think newsgroups providers are defenitly an easier target than torrent providers since they actually store the content and charge for it.

You'd think but you'd be wrong. Safe harbour provisions make it extremely hard to effectively prosecute newsgroup providers. As long as they comply with the relevant removal processes (such as dmca requests in the US) they are perfectly legal regardless of what they host and what they charge.

[Ignitionnet]

interesting, so on overlay 5mbit user on 18mbit channel and on legacy 1mbit user on 4.5mbit channel (my area qpsk). The legacy having the slightly better user to capacity ratio.

We know the 70k reported 50mbit users so confirmed my thoughts 50mbit takeup is very low, any 20mbit customer numbers?

No - the upstreams would all be 16QAM once everything were done. Areas will have the capacity to run 16QAM throughout as part of the uplift process.

[Chrysalis]

You'd think but you'd be wrong. Safe harbour provisions make it extremely hard to effectively prosecute newsgroup providers. As long as they comply with the relevant removal processes (such as dmca requests in the US) they are perfectly legal regardless of what they host and what they charge.

but surely easier than torrent providers. I take your point of course, as I understand it youtube won their case on the grounds you just said as they react very fast to take down notices.

[TheDon]

but surely easier than torrent providers. I take your point of course, as I understand it youtube won their case on the grounds you just said as they react very fast to take down notices.Not really. Many torrent sites actively promote the infringement of copyright. That's what makes them easier targets. Newsgroup providers are just that, allowing access to newsgroups. They never make any claims over what is hosted on there.

The Oink case shows how it's not even that clear cut when the sites themselves are actively promoting infringement. The only people found guilty there were the ones initially providing the content, not the sites administrator who was cleared of all charges.

Essentially BT is a massive target because on every download you have thousands of people actively distributing copyright material. That makes everyone guilty of a crime. With newsgroups the downloads don't actually commit a crime, the newsgroup providers have safe harbour, and the only person doing anything criminal is the person that initially posts it to usenet, and tracking them is an impossible task as usenet postings are about as secure as email where the header information is taken for granted and easily forged.

[General Maximus]

just to set the record straight, i have been using newsgroups for donkeys years, i pay for my tv license and Sky and all the tv series i download through torrents which are perfectly legal i buy on dvd when they come out. What progs I choose to use and what I do on the internet shouldnt matter, I want the freedom to do whatever I want. I have had BB from ntl/virgin for 10 years but if they introduce protocol shaping I'll gladly move to BT and get 40/15.

I suspect within a few months after the higher upload tiers are released protocol shaping will be introduced following a statement by VM stating that it is due to 'unexpected' high utilisation of bandwidth on the new services.

*VM guys* "lets advertise the new 100mbit connection but pray that nobody actually uses it for anything other then emailing"

[Chrysalis]

Not really. Many torrent sites actively promote the infringement of copyright. That's what makes them easier targets. Newsgroup providers are just that, allowing access to newsgroups. They never make any claims over what is hosted on there.

The Oink case shows how it's not even that clear cut when the sites themselves are actively promoting infringement. The only people found guilty there were the ones initially providing the content, not the sites administrator who was cleared of all charges.

Essentially BT is a massive target because on every download you have thousands of people actively distributing copyright material. That makes everyone guilty of a crime. With newsgroups the downloads don't actually commit a crime, the newsgroup providers have safe harbour, and the only person doing anything criminal is the person that initially posts it to usenet, and tracking them is an impossible task as usenet postings are about as secure as email where the header information is taken for granted and easily forged.

Makes no sense to me, the piratebay case was flawed and did not follow the letter of swedish law.

Promoting copyright infringement is an offense?

[RainmakerRaw]

The MPA(A), BPI et al. have been 'at war' with torrenting for a long time, and have barely made a dent. I don't think NSPs (News Service Providers) have anything to worry about just yet. Especially, as was said earlier, given the safe harbour provisions. It'd be likes suing Google for indexing torrents, MP3s, and goodness knows what. Now there's a court case I'd like to see!

VM are pushing towards 400Mbps, and offer news.virginmedia.com with 7-14 days binary retention from Highwinds servers. That's all I'm saying on the matter.

[roughbeast]

[QUOTE=General Maximus;35047129]just to set the record straight, i have been using newsgroups for donkeys years, i pay for my tv license and Sky and all the tv series i download through torrents which are perfectly legal i buy on dvd when they come out. What progs I choose to use and what I do on the internet shouldnt matter, I want the freedom to do whatever I want.


The film and audio recording industries couldn't really contest what you are saying in a court of law, just as they couldn't complain about you burning DVDs off your VM TV box hard disc. However as a torrent user you are a seeder, not just a leecher. Torrents would not be viable without seeding.

[broadbandking]

just to set the record straight, i have been using newsgroups for donkeys years, i pay for my tv license and Sky and all the tv series i download through torrents which are perfectly legal i buy on dvd when they come out. What progs I choose to use and what I do on the internet shouldnt matter, I want the freedom to do whatever I want. I have had BB from ntl/virgin for 10 years but if they introduce protocol shaping I'll gladly move to BT and get 40/15.

Couple of things BT use DPI for traffic shaping so you will be no better off than if VM start using DPI for traffic shaping, I wasn't aware downloading TV programmes was legal, so that means I can download say all the lost eps and then buy them from a shop thats legal?

[RainmakerRaw]

Couple of things BT use DPI for traffic shaping so you will be no better off than if VM start using DPI for traffic shaping, I wasn't aware downloading TV programmes was legal, so that means I can download say all the lost eps and then buy them from a shop thats legal?

Downloading isn't particularly illegal, more unlawful. It's a civil matter not a criminal one. Uploading (i.e. torrents) is where it becomes a criminal matter as you're distributing copyright material not just consuming it.

[Hugh]

Downloading isn't particularly illegal, more unlawful. It's a civil matter not a criminal one. Uploading (i.e. torrents) is where it becomes a criminal matter as you're distributing copyright material not just consuming it.
Good luck with that proposition in a legal situation....:D

Oxford English Dictionary -
illegal
adjective contrary to or forbidden by law.
— DERIVATIVES illegality noun illegally adverb.
— USAGE Both illegal and unlawful can mean ‘contrary to or forbidden by law’, but unlawful has a broader meaning ‘not permitted by rules’: thus handball in soccer is unlawful, but not illegal.

unlawful
adjective not conforming to or permitted by law or rules.
— DERIVATIVES unlawfully adverb unlawfulness noun.
— USAGE The adjectives unlawful and illegal can both mean ‘contrary to or forbidden by law’, but unlawful has a broader meaning ‘not permitted by rules’: thus handball in soccer is unlawful, but not illegal.

[RainmakerRaw]

No the definition is legal, not dictionary based. You can be arrested, tried and (potentially) imprisoned for an illegal act but not an unlawful one. Mugging a poor granny is illegal. Uploading copyrighted material is illegal. Both carry criminal penalties.

Simply downloading (with no sharing) is not illegal. It is unlawful. Those are legal terms. You can't be arrested, raided or tried in a criminal court for downloading copyright materials. You can "only" be sued by the rights holder, privately in a county court. Big difference. :)

[General Maximus]

I wasn't aware downloading TV programmes was legal, so that means I can download say all the lost eps and then buy them from a shop thats legal?

imho downloading an episode of Lost off the internet which I could record off Sky is no different from being allowed to legally copy a dvd for backup purposes. I am paying for the right to view it either way so what difference does it make if I watch it at whatever time it is on on TV, or miss it because I am working and download later?

Fyi, I know a private torrent site that only does tv eps and they are very strict about what is and what is not allowed and only allowing made-for-tv eps/series (i.e you would be able to watch it on tv anyway) has stopped them from being sued/taken down

[Ignitionnet]

Shame you aren't actually allowed to legally copy a DVD for backup purposes - we've no lawful fair use in the UK :)

Downloading TV isn't lawful - why would we need subscription TV if we could perfectly legitimately download it?

You need to have the copyright holder's permission to circulate their content. Just because HBO / ABC / NBC / Sky have broadcast something doesn't make it open season on that content.

Only reason they haven't been sued is disinterest - all doing what they are does for them is ensure the MPAA aren't going to be interested, doesn't stop HBO, ABC etc from pursuing them.

[General Maximus]

Shame you aren't actually allowed to legally copy a DVD for backup purposes

you are, that is why i used it as an example

[Ignitionnet]

you are, that is why i used it as an example

Nope. No facility to do so at all.

Acts that are allowed
Fair dealing is a term used to describe acts which are permitted to a certain degree without infringing the work, these acts are:
Private and research study purposes.
Performance, copies or lending for educational purposes.
Criticism and news reporting.
Incidental inclusion.
Copies and lending by librarians.
Acts for the purposes of royal commissions, statutory enquiries, judicial proceedings and parliamentary purposes.
Recording of broadcasts for the purposes of listening to or viewing at a more convenient time, this is known as time shifting.
Producing a back up copy for personal use of a computer program.
Playing sound recording for a non profit making organisation, club or society.
(Profit making organisations and individuals should obtain a license from PRS for Music.)

Downloading isn't recording or time shifting. Copying a DVD is none of the above.

[General Maximus]

that sounds like it is geared more towards music than video

anyways, I am 100% sure I am right with the dvd thing, when I have got more time tomorrow I'll look it up

[Hugh]

that sounds like it is geared more towards music than video

anyways, I am 100% sure I am right with the dvd thing, when I have got more time tomorrow I'll look it up
You may be confusing the US concept of "fair use" with UK Copyright law.

Link (http://www.cio.co.uk/news/3213720/copyright-law-confuses-73-of-brits/) Research by the consumer-advocacy organisation revealed that only 17 percent knew it was breaking copyright law to rip a CD to a PC, while even less (15 percent) knew it was illegal to copy a CD to a digital music player, such as an iPod.

[Chrysalis]

I think shamefully ignition is right, in other countries it is 100% legal to backup dvd's for own use.

In this country it seems there is no section for it in the law and as such is a breach of copyright however the chances of someone been sued for it is minimal, unofficially a blind eye will be turned for it. Is like I said a few times the uk copyright law is probably the most agressive in the world in favour of the content providers.

[Ignitionnet]

I think shamefully ignition is right, in other countries it is 100% legal to backup dvd's for own use.

In some other countries.

No-one has ever been taken to task over backing up their own tunes / movies / whatever though. Just one of those things that isn't enforced.

[pip08456]

And practically impossible to enforce.

[RainmakerRaw]

In the UK things are only illegal if they are legislated against. Our law is a list of "must-not's", not a list of "you are allowed to"... In that case the question isn't "is there an exemption in law for creating backups/CD rips to PC/whatever; rather it is "is there a specific prohibition for transferring format between your original copy and a backup medium?

Interesting one. I dunno the answer. :D

[Hugh]

Not sure if my friend (and childrens' godparent), who is a Regional Crown Prosecutor, and has 27 years post-qual experience, would agree with your definition of British Law (actually the law of England and Wales). ;)

In this case, she may point you to the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, Chapter 48, Part 1 (Copyright) , Chapter 1 (Subsistence, ownership and duration of copyright), Section 17 (Infringement of copyright by copying) - link (http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1988/ukpga_19880048_en_2#pt1-ch2-pb1-l1g17) - where it states (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.hth

[the-cable-guy]

you are, that is why i used it as an example

making a copy of/recording any copyrighted works is illegal it doesnt matter if its recording from the radio, TV or photocopying a book etc all are illegal.

---------- Post added at 01:55 ---------- Previous post was at 01:53 ----------


Producing a back up copy for personal use of a computer program.


although in some countries doing that is legal in the UK it isint as your not allowed to make any backup copies, why do you think that alot of games & software say 'Do Not Make Illegal Copies Of This Disc'.

[broadbandking]

So if I own a CD of a band, its illegal for me to copy it to my PC?

[Hugh]

Following the letter of the law - yes.

[kwikbreaks]

Imposing unenforceable restrictions on what most would consider to be perfectly legitimate actions (copying a purchased CD to an MP3 player, recording from TV and radio etc.) is probably why many do not take any copyright seriously. IMO the copyright owners are pretty much to blame for the current situation. Putting the genie back in the bottle is going to be very hard indeed.

[|Kippa|]

Getting back to the 50mbit with 5mbit upload, what are VM more worried about cost wise? The upload being hammerd or the download being hammerd? Which costs more or are they both the same?

If users uploading costs more are there going to be big problems with VM brining out 5mbit upload, and 10mbit upload for 100mbit users?

[the-cable-guy]

So if I own a CD of a band, its illegal for me to copy it to my PC?

yes it is as you dont own the copyright for the recording, i know it sounds crazy however thats the law.

[General Maximus]

If users uploading costs more are there going to be big problems with VM brining out 5mbit upload, and 10mbit upload for 100mbit users?

There won't because they'll just find some gay excuse to use dpi and traffic manage whatever applications/protocols are consuming the bandwidth under the guise of a fair usage policy

[Alexander]

a friendly suggestion for 50mbit users
is change provider!!!!

[pip08456]

is change provider!!!!

And why would we want to do that? Some of us are quite satisfied with the service.

[|Kippa|]

50mbit works wonders for me, I sure as hell won't be changing to another isp. Anyone know if there are going to be any announcements planned soon about 5mbit upload rate increase?

[roughbeast]

50mbit works wonders for me, I sure as hell won't be changing to another isp. Anyone know if there are going to be any announcements planned soon about 5mbit upload rate increase?


Yes, pretty soon. Now the World Cup is over the freeze on developments is lifted. A 'quiet' roll out of 5Mb has been happening to some extent before the WC. VM, I understand, is planning a ratio of 10:1 down:up on all its cable broadband products.

[deed02392]

Yes, pretty soon. Now the World Cup is over the freeze on developments is lifted. A 'quiet' roll out of 5Mb has been happening to some extent before the WC. VM, I understand, is planning a ratio of 10:1 down:up on all its cable broadband products.

They're always "planning" improvements or so we hear rumours of it. If you ask me a good up to down ratio is long overdue and I won't be satisfied it's coming to Virgin until I see it there on my cable modem's configuration.