Should i worry?

[SOSAGES]

Good morning all.

I was wondering if someone could put my mind at ease and give me some rough ideas on how much i can use my 50M package.

A little background - been with virgin since day 1 of the public release of their BB started on 600k then just took every upgrade until im now on 50M.

Last year I got sent a letter as during the space of 2.5 days (a weekend) i downloaded a lot of files (it was a backup of my works server to my NAS)
The letter informed me i had a mark against my account and 2 more could result in being cut off.

I called the number and they confirmed the dates that i did download a lot did generate the warning letter.
They told me only download/upload between 9-9

I work from home and since then have mainly been worried about using it for anything other than web browsing and email during 9-9.

Now i am not a heavy user but sometimes i may need to download the odd GB during 9-9 but i dont. I asked virgin how much do they think i can get away with they couldnt give me any numbers as it all depends who else is using it on the same bit of their network as me. The guy i talked to mentioned that he wouldnt risk downloading even 1 GB between 9-9.

I love the service but for my work i sometimes need to download or upload stuff during the "peak hours" can anyone offer any guidance? from reading virgins website i cant find concreate info.
The site suggests there are no limits on the 50mb service for download:
http://shop.virginmedia.com/help/traffic-management/traffic-management-faster-uploads.html
my reading of that is the only restriction is uploading between 3pm and 8pm if you do over 6GB then its slowed down by 65% for 5 hours.

If this is the case then thats fine i doubt i will upload over 6GB in 1 day more than once a year and if i do im fine with doing it out of hours or if i do it during 3-8pm im happy for it to be traffic shapped.

So in short :) what shall i do? what do other people do to keep virgin happy?
Lets say i download 10 GB a day during the day would that get me in trouble?

in short i am just worried to use it and have been for around 7 months but reading the website kinda makes me want to use it again without any fear but really dont want to get kicked off.

[Fawkes]

How much did you down/uploadload over this weekend? I can download 9GB+ form Steam in a day and I'm yet to get a letter. If you're not a heavy user and you're not download the motherload from work you shouldn't have a problem.

[SOSAGES]

the time i got told off i was downloading full speed for 2.5 days.

on average id say i pull 5GB a day its just waiting till 9 to do it is the pain

[RB2004]

Hi, if you download that heavily, why didnt you upgrade to the 100mbit tier? ( if it is available )

As 100Mbit being the highest tier is the least traffic shaped tier,

Customers with Broadband size: 100 (100Mb) – your usage excluding file sharing traffic (see below) is unaffected.

Customers with Broadband size: XXL (50Mb) – your downstream usage excluding file sharing traffic (see below) remains unaffected and we'll soon be increasing your upload speeds from 1.5Mb to 5Mb. However during peak times we'll need to slow you back to 1.75Mb if your upload usage is particularly high.

File sharing

At peak times we also slow down the speed of file sharing traffic – that's services like Limewire, Gnutella, BitTorrent and Newsgroup (Usenet) traffic. You will, of course, still be able to use these services, but downloads and uploads will take longer during these peak periods.


So on 100Mbit only thing that is traffic shaped is file sharing.. other than that there is no download limit imposed, or temporary speed restrictions so if you are not using a file sharing platform for all intense and purposes it is unlimited.

Also see,

http://shop.virginmedia.com/help/traffic-management/traffic-management-policy.html

As it may explain why you was given a warning letter previously on a lower tier.

If you was previously on 20Mbit, there is a 3500MB limit during the evening, if you go over there is a 75% reduction in speed for 5 hours.

during the day time that limit rises to 7000mb

50mbit is listed as not having a download limit, although they may impose a speed restriction as above of 1.75Mbit if your upload usage is high.

100Mbit is the only one which has minimal traffic shaping.

[Ignitionnet]

Just do it to be honest, it is what it is and if they do write to you do what everyone else who gets those letters seems to do and write to Ofcom / ISPA / MP / PM / MEP ;)

[qasdfdsaq]

Indeed. You're paying for an "unlimited" service. You shouldn't have to worry about how you use it, that's the whole point of paying more for unlimited.

Being harrassed for using too much of something you shouldn't be able to use too much of is something you should complain about, not put up with.

[Sirius]

Indeed. You're paying for an "unlimited" service. You shouldn't have to worry about how you use it, that's the whole point of paying more for unlimited.

Being harrassed for using too much of something you shouldn't be able to use too much of is something you should complain about, not put up with.

Dam well said sir :tu:

[General Maximus]

The guy i talked to mentioned that he wouldnt risk downloading even 1 GB between 9-9.

I think if VM had their way nobody would use their connection. I wouldn't worry about it dude, I have downloaded over 60gb during the day before and I have never had a letter

[AbyssUnderground]

Indeed. You're paying for an "unlimited" service. You shouldn't have to worry about how you use it, that's the whole point of paying more for unlimited.

Being harrassed for using too much of something you shouldn't be able to use too much of is something you should complain about, not put up with.

Dam well said sir :tu:


^ That. You pay for it, use it as you see fit. If they start sending you letters, then complain to OFCOM about their use of "UNLIMITED" when it's clearly not.

[Ignitionnet]

Nothing to do with Ofcom that would be the ASA and it's currently fine however a report on this and broadband speed advertising is due Thursday which should clarify.

[bigsinky]

pah!!!!! try 1.2TB in 20 days. yes i did get a letter asking to move my downloads to after 9pm. :D only 900GB this month so far. slowing down in my old age ;)

[Ignitionnet]

We're leaving the summer so it's a quieter period, less movies to copy at this time of year.

Will warm up towards Christmas for obvious reasons. Decent peeps will give their Amazon, play.com etc, accounts some exercise, the digital chavs will give their Usenet accounts some exercise. :)

[bigsinky]

the digital chavs will give their Usenet accounts some exercise. :)

hey i resemble that remark. i like to get my 45 quids worth every month ;)

[Ignitionnet]

hey i resemble that remark. i like to get my 45 quids worth every month ;)

The remark was aimed at you, so the idea was that you resemble it.

Copying stuff without paying is hardly something to be proud of and what you pay Virgin each month is absolutely nothing to do with it :)

I resemble the part of the people who use Amazon or Play to get Blu Rays, I do occasionally wonder what they'd cost if it weren't for people helping themselves, but then I like a quality original in an original case with special features intact, and knowing I've rewarded the people who invested the money and time in making the product gives me a warm, fuzzy feeling.

I should patent the term 'digital chav' - I quite like it, and it's very appropriate :)

[crazyronnie]

Can't patent it but you sure can trade mark it.

[Ignitionnet]

Can't patent it but you sure can trade mark it.

I'll give that a pop. I'm sure people will help themselves to it anyway but couldn't hurt ;)

[Chrysalis]

The prices would be exactly the same ignition.

Although broadband might be cheaper if there was no usenet/p2p.

[Ignitionnet]

The prices would be exactly the same ignition.

Although broadband might be cheaper if there was no usenet/p2p.

The contrapositive could equally be true, the same volumes of scale you ignore as far as sales of content go conceivably apply to broadband in much the same way.

[AndyCalling]

With regards to this debate about 'unlimited', I don't think the term should be used in advertising because we are not paying for an unlimited service. Technically. We are paying for an unmetered service, as I do with my water supply. The amount of bandwidth available is a communal resource and with 50meg we can pretty much use it for normal use type purposes without concern, as I do with water. If I left all my taps on all day, which may compromise the resource for my neighbours, I would expect a letter telling me to wind my neck in. Same with broadband.

That said, it is the responsibility of the company to ensure enough supply to cover normal use without problem (occasional breakdowns not withstanding). Once Youview gets started next year, which I am hanging out for, all broadband suppliers are going to have to change their definitions of normal usage. Combined with the new Onlive service for gaming, the internet landscape in the UK is about to evolve bandwidth wise. I hope and expect that VM is getting the infrastructure in place to cope or there will be a serious butting of heads with the community as a whole. In that one, VM will lose.

[Chrysalis]

Bang on regarding unmetered.

[bigsinky]

The remark was aimed at you, so the idea was that you resemble it.

Copying stuff without paying is hardly something to be proud of and what you pay Virgin each month is absolutely nothing to do with it :)

I resemble the part of the people who use Amazon or Play to get Blu Rays, I do occasionally wonder what they'd cost if it weren't for people helping themselves, but then I like a quality original in an original case with special features intact, and knowing I've rewarded the people who invested the money and time in making the product gives me a warm, fuzzy feeling.

I should patent the term 'digital chav' - I quite like it, and it's very appropriate :)

it's all Linux distros :nods:

[Ignitionnet]

it's all Linux distros :nods:

Indeed. Bit odd being happy to pay for a souped up Impreza but not wanting to pay for 24 'Operating Systems' in 20 days and a mere 18 this month but to each their own.

[crazyronnie]

Look everybody uses their internet connection in different ways. If someone wants to download movies without paying for it or wanna rent movies online for example xbox live marketplace or the PS3 equivalent let them. Lets keep this thread to the point.

[Ignitionnet]

That was sorted a while ago, I believe the recommendation was to just get on with it and if VM want to complain they can get on with it.

[bigsinky]

Indeed. Bit odd being happy to pay for a souped up Impreza but not wanting to pay for 24 'Operating Systems' in 20 days and a mere 18 this month but to each their own.

what can isay. i like LINUX. and it's a modified Impreza not souped up ;)

[Ignitionnet]

Indeed though evidently not paying for it like most of the rest of us do, which is just as well given it wouldn't be getting made if not for us fools who pay for it for you :)

Sosages you've gone awfully quiet - did you start the upload and get disconnected? ;)

[SOSAGES]

got worried :0
only times i will use it a lot is for work - i sometimes have to move a lot of files around. This happens 1-2 a year but due to the size of stuff it can take some days.
Just hate waiting until 9 to do anything.
Thing is i asked the guys at VM what to do and they said there isnt a limit they can say is safe it depends what everyone else is doing /cry

[vmfriend]

Not sure I agree with the water analogy, my water is metered and if I left my taps on all day my 'flow' wouldn't be restricted. I would just get billed for what I used. I wouldn't get cut off either.

I suspect downloading habits would change if people were charged by the gb.

I think it's a sad indictment of society when people get lambasted for pointing out that downloading movies by torrents etc etc is illegal.

[Chrysalis]

Not sure I agree with the water analogy, my water is metered and if I left my taps on all day my 'flow' wouldn't be restricted. I would just get billed for what I used. I wouldn't get cut off either.

I suspect downloading habits would change if people were charged by the gb.

I think it's a sad indictment of society when people get lambasted for pointing out that downloading movies by torrents etc etc is illegal.

of course they would change but that would be a huge backwards step.

It seems people can only think extremes either unlimited or charge per gig.

What about a viable solution such as a monthly usage cap eg. 250 gig month.

When I use 3G the experience is I have to think twice about doing things like watching youtube videos because on the daily gig allowance one video will typically chew a 3rd of that up easy. Quite often I havent restrained myself and paid silly money, but luckily I am not on 3G often its just when I am not at home.

[vmfriend]

I am not advocating one option (unlimited) over the other (per gb) I was just using it as an example.

There appears to be a status quo at present where illegal downloaders are tolerated to a degree and the average Joe (in general) can use the Internet as they would reasonably expect. (I'll let you make your own mind up as to what reasonable is)

Personally I don't know if the current system works, I can only say that I personally am happy with the service, however like most people I would want any issues resolving, such as my service being impacted by others downloading torrents etc 24/7

[Chrysalis]

Well if we use 250gig as an example figure.

on 10mbit VM's bottom tier once can do 3.2tb a month if full speed 24/7.

250 gig a month is probably enough for 98% of customers.

Whilst for downloading 24/7 its less than a 10th of capacity.

Better to do this then pretend its unlimited and have issues with trying to curtail usage.

[AndyCalling]

Not sure I agree with the water analogy, my water is metered and if I left my taps on all day my 'flow' wouldn't be restricted. I would just get billed for what I used. I wouldn't get cut off either.

I suspect downloading habits would change if people were charged by the gb.

I think it's a sad indictment of society when people get lambasted for pointing out that downloading movies by torrents etc etc is illegal.

You appear to be trying to compare a metered service to an unmetered service. I think you have the wrong end of the stick, I compared an UNMETERED water service to an UNMETERED broadband service. That makes my example comparable. You have made a mistake there, your example is not comparable.

The current system works fine, and is dead reasonable. Unless one actually tries to break the system by going all mental and turning it all the way up to 11 24h a day the system works fine. We do not need to go back in time to a metered system, if we do things like Youview will not be practical and we'll all have to switch away from VM in 2012 which we mostly don't want to do.

So long as VM and other ISPs keep up with normal usage developments we'll all be fine.

One other comment. Downloading torrents of copyrighted material is not illegal. I am not one for doing this, but I am fed up with trolls coming on here and trying to claim this is covered by criminal law in some way when we all know this is a civil matter. Stop trolling. It's not big and it's not clever.

[vmfriend]

Trolling ?

Oh dear. Instead of reasoned discussion you start calling people names.

I have my view you have yours, we'll leave it that shall we.

[General Maximus]

like most people I would want any issues resolving, such as my service being impacted by others downloading torrents etc 24/7

I am going to jump in the middle and agree and disagree with both of you. With respect to vmfried, I too find the service good 99% of the time and as a whole never really have cause to grumble. That being said I disagree with the assumptions you make in assuming torrents are the cause of VMs poor network performance. The reason why speed and latentcy are so pants in during peak time, especially evenings around 7 and the weekend is because everyone is online and VM can't handle it which is why they had to introduce traffic shaping and stm. Whilst I am not affected by stm, their traffic shaping makes downloading torrents and using newsgroups impossible (yipee I hear you say) which is why I don't bother using either during these periods and I would assume most people don't. During peak time network perfornace is poor and gaming and youtube sucks ass and you can't blame it on protocols which VM are actively blocking as an excuse to solve the problem.

I agree with Chrysalis and they need to do stop fobbing people off with the "unlimited" service and instead provide minimum guaranteed speed/qos with monthly data caps instead

[qasdfdsaq]

Didn't we figure out already torrents (and all other P2P combined) use something like less than 1/4 of VM's network capacity?

[AndyCalling]

Trolling ?

Oh dear. Instead of reasoned discussion you start calling people names.

I have my view you have yours, we'll leave it that shall we.

Oh no, you don't get away with falsely accusing people of criminality that easily.

Whatever your view is, whatever your or my ethical position is, downloading copyrighted material is still not illegal. Criminal law has nothing to do with it. You might just about say it is illicit (though since the advent of tape recorders that is debatable), but it is certainly not illegal. You can pretend all you like, but it won't make it so. This is not a point of view, it is the current state of the law in this country. It has been discussed to death all over the internet so you know it, I know it, we all know it.

Why then would you come on to a forum and claim otherwise, accusing people of criminality when you know your claims have no foundation, knowing it will just wind people up? Are you saying it is not for trolling purposes? If so please explain your reasoning, since you're so fond of reasoned discussion.

[Efour]

100mbit - Digital Theft Licence and i bet if you checked the users storage you would find 99 out of 100 have Gigs of copyright infringed stuff, some are also some dumb they will openly gloat about it ??

I honestly wish ISPs would come crashing down on some of you retards.

Yes im pee'd off cos i can see clear as day light the effects that 5mbit uploads being maxed by teenage torrent ***** has destroyed my gaming experience for the past 5 months

[General Maximus]

Didn't we figure out already torrents (and all other P2P combined) use something like less than 1/4 of VM's network capacity?

sweet, so if less than 25% of throughput is torrent traffic and VM supposedly only stm the 1% of users that are having a detrimental impact on the network, this then proves VMs network isn't fit for purpose during peak periods and can't handle what most people would call normal usage for gaming, youtubing and whatever else they do. Sooooooooo, efour's and vmfriend's assumptions appear to be incorrect :)

[Chrysalis]

Didn't we figure out already torrents (and all other P2P combined) use something like less than 1/4 of VM's network capacity?

No idea what the figure is. But any congestion during traffic management hours is more likely due to over selling rather than p2p/nntp considering they are throttled during those hours.

the last 2 nights in a row my utilisation (tbb latency graph) has peaked at midnight which suggests significant p2p/nntp activity on my port however prior to these last 2 nights I hadnt noticed a jump.

http://www.thinkbroadband.com/ping/share-thumb/b57b99f28b6b0dc40e4df3690c2401fe.png

Can see there how late at night my peak is, and that my port appears to be congested for almost the entire day. Congestion at dusk suggests background downloading/uploading activity aka p2p/nntp as the amount of people online then should be minimal.

Sandvine who manage traffic for comcast I believe said now days the % of download activity that is torrents is barely a 1/5 but its a significant amount of upload traffic.

http://www.sandvine.com/news/global_broadband_trends.asp

[Ignitionnet]

Didn't we figure out already torrents (and all other P2P combined) use something like less than 1/4 of VM's network capacity?

During shaping periods, in theory, yes. If they didn't use more than that unshaped though people wouldn't notice much of a performance hit when using them during managed periods.

It's also been noted that the shaping seems as much use as a chocolate fireguard when people really try and hide what they're doing, which is why protocol agnostic solutions are the future and will be on a cable ISP near you in time.

---------- Post added at 10:12 ---------- Previous post was at 09:57 ----------

<Snip>

Sandvine who manage traffic for comcast I believe said now days the % of download activity that is torrents is barely a 1/5 but its a significant amount of upload traffic.

http://www.sandvine.com/news/global_broadband_trends.asp

Check the European bit, we don't have Netflix and iPlayer uses considerably less. Given the discussion is congestion the table below is probably most relevant, and the upload section most relevant of all.

http://img256.imageshack.us/img256/4310/sandvinereadout.jpg

In the United Kingdom, BBC iPlayer comprises 6.6% of peak downstream traffic

P2P, etc, according to Sandvine will be as a minimum 65% of upstream traffic. There'll be some torrent traffic which wasn't identified due to obfuscation, some of the SSL will be NNTP, the Teredo will pretty much 100% be torrents.

59.68% torrents + 3.64% PPStream + 1.76% ED2K gives you 65% without even needing assumptions.

It's not a huge leap to imagine areas where an upstream is running at 50% 24x7 due to P2P or NNTP encapsulated in something else, this is a problem for cable companies throughout the world and one VM are addressing, however it's a more complicated process than the initial shaping deployment.

[Chrysalis]

I did say its significant on upstream ;)

The table clearly shows we behind the times in live media entertainment tho.

VM really simply need to enforce a quite strict upload usage that applies 24/7 (given congestion isnt just peak) and that severely restricts upload speed when this limit is reached, it should apply to 'all' traffic. Basically if you like a much stricter STM thats 24/7. As well as forcefully keep upstream ports to below 40% utilisation, to allow the optimistic 10mbit upload for 1 user per channel.

[Ignitionnet]

Once we get Netflix, and the UK is a priority market for them to move into, things will change a bit. We benefit from iPlayer and other things in the interim though.

Keeping upstreams forcibly below 40% utilisation is silly, 10Mbit up on an 18Mbit channel is fine depending on circumstances as previously discussed repeatedly. There are uplifted areas with over 200 modems on a single channel running just fine.

The next iteration of traffic management you will find much more to your liking though Chris :)

[kwikbreaks]

I do occasionally wonder what they'd cost if it weren't for people helping themselvesSame as it does now - costs are based on what they can get away with rather than the income they receive or what they cost to produce.

[Chrysalis]

Ignition I agree 40% is silly.

This is due to the fact they released 10mbit upload on 18mbit channels tho. When in reality they should have used minimal 36mbit QAM64 channels or 2 bonded 18mbit channels for 36mbit.. That would then allow utilisation to hit the 80% figure and still support a top tier customer starting an upload without causing noticeable congestion.

40% of 18mbit is about 8mbit, which gives the 10mbit free for a user to max out their upload, one out of 200 users uploading at any given time is hardly a remote possibility.

---------- Post added at 12:17 ---------- Previous post was at 12:12 ----------

Same as it does now - costs are based on what they can get away with rather than the income they receive or what they cost to produce.

indeed.

couple of ladies were on dragons den last week with their wedding filming service.

They were asked why they charge what they do.

The story was they started at about £250 and ended up at £850 with gradual price increases, initially they were making a loss so had to increase, however it turned out their current price is way above their costs at around £500 and was decided on based thats how far they could push without losing sales.

Barring the uk adsl market which is somewhat weird most business charge what they can get away with and can often bear no relation to costs.

There is a new contract drawn up between the US media sector and various governments, some are apparently signing it soon, the EU not yet. This contract will mean new laws which violate various privacy rights and mean a much more restricted internet for the sake of the 'minor' issue of reducing copyright infringement. That sounds bad? Here comes the more scary part. It will make it law for them to count every infringement as a lost sale without any supporting evidence other than the infringement and they can also value the lost sale at something different to what the product is sold for, eg. a mp3 might be on itunes for 99pence but they can value it at £10. This is clearly going to be a new revenue stream for them and probably has very little to do with lost sales but rather simply a new way for them to make money. Oh and of course it wont have any affect on prices of legal content.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Counterfeiting_Trade_Agreement

[Ignitionnet]

Ignition I agree 40% is silly.

This is due to the fact they released 10mbit upload on 18mbit channels tho. When in reality they should have used minimal 36mbit QAM64 channels or 2 bonded 18mbit channels for 36mbit.. That would then allow utilisation to hit the 80% figure and still support a top tier customer starting an upload without causing noticeable congestion.

40% of 18mbit is about 8mbit, which gives the 10mbit free for a user to max out their upload, one out of 200 users uploading at any given time is hardly a remote possibility.

64QAM upstream channel capacity is 27Mbit, a channel hitting 80% is going to show noticeable congestion regardless of its capacity as it shouldn't be spending significant periods of time at 80%, and as you alluded to below the aim of the game is to ensure that that there are few enough users sharing the capacity that the balance of probabilities are far as usage goes are in your favour, or that historical usage levels indicate that MAC domains have an appropriate mix of users.

While torrents eat 60% of upstream bandwidth way less than 60% of people torrent, many people barely use a GB of upload per month.

[Chrysalis]

I stand corrected on the 27mbit I thought QAM64 doubled QAM16. So that would put at nearer 60%, and yes the % will have variances as its only an average figure but my point was if you got 10mbit users on a 18mbit channel then a single user can swing the utilisation by 60%, thats just scary.

Now you have corrected me on the QAM64 I now feel the minimal that should be used is 2xQAM16 or 2xQAM64. They seem to be realising that the same issue on the downstream isnt ideal (hence them adding downstreams) but are prepared to let the upstream suffer.

Regardless of how many torrent I still feel a user uploading out of 200 is more than a remote possibility, that comment had no reference to torrent users. People do other things like speedtests, uploading videos, pictures, streaming that can max out upstream bandwidth. We even have the trend now of people starting hosting companies on their cable connections because VM for some bizzare reason didnt add anything to their t&c's forbidding non gaming servers.

I agree with you on reducing users, but that is in my view is less effective than increasing pipe size. Also evident is that some areas clearly havent had users reduced much with 100s of users sharing upstream channels. That is not a low number. I would consider something like 10 users on my channel been low not 200. Better to have 100 sharing 54mbit than say 20 sharing 18mbit.

[Skie]

I'm expecting some heavy downloading over the next few months. Loads of huge games coming out via steam or other digital distribution methods. Rage alone is 25GB. I'm Betting Skyrim will be just as big, and there are plenty of other titles due soon.

So even if people weren't using torrents to watch the new season of American TV shows, you can assume bandwidth usage will be increasing. Here is my own monthly usage :o

Date Download Upload Total
2011-10 9.66 GB 2.06 GB 11.72 GB
2011-09 87.69 GB 12.57 GB 100.26 GB
2011-08 128.92 GB 21.07 GB 149.99 GB
2011-07 94.34 GB 18.06 GB 112.40 GB
2011-06 73.86 GB 15.22 GB 89.08 GB
2011-05 70.65 GB 13.08 GB 83.73 GB

[Ignitionnet]

64QAM = 6 bits per symbol, 16QAM = 4, 50% increase, exponential.

The real world sadly isn't as accommodating as just adding channels. RF noise and network restrictions can restrict the amount of usable bandwidth, upstream bonding is still not a finished article within the software on the Cisco and Motorola CMTS and carries its own restrictions, along with how the various CPE interoperate.

Statistical contention through wider channels is the ideal but gives its own issues, node splits are good for bandwidth and good for network condition due to noise funneling effects, higher order modulations require smaller nodes.

Unsure what you refer to by letting the upstream suffer, given that the uplifts were released on a single upstream and a second and depending on the area third channel have been put in place, however VM know they are behind the curve in some areas.

It's not ideal, work on bonding is underway, but we can debate ideals all we want, the real world is a bitch and constantly interferes, depending on area channels can house a lot of 3Mb, 5Mb, 10Mb upstream customers even on 18Mb without causing problems.

It's never as simple as on paper, what you feel is the minimal really isn't, very few MSOs have upstream bonding widely deployed, for example these guys and these guys don't and UPC sell 120Mb/10Mb on 4 x 256QAM down, 1 x 16QAM up, Comhem 200Mb/10Mb on 5 or 6 x 256QAM down and 1 x 16 or 64QAM up.

[Chrysalis]

Well I was already aware of the planned bonding.

You have now told me the traffic management is due to change (I hope soon).

So I will leave it at that for now and see if things get better.

[vmfriend]

Oh no, you don't get away with falsely accusing people of criminality that easily.

Whatever your view is, whatever your or my ethical position is, downloading copyrighted material is still not illegal. Criminal law has nothing to do with it. You might just about say it is illicit (though since the advent of tape recorders that is debatable), but it is certainly not illegal. You can pretend all you like, but it won't make it so. This is not a point of view, it is the current state of the law in this country. It has been discussed to death all over the internet so you know it, I know it, we all know it.

Why then would you come on to a forum and claim otherwise, accusing people of criminality when you know your claims have no foundation, knowing it will just wind people up? Are you saying it is not for trolling purposes? If so please explain your reasoning, since you're so fond of reasoned discussion.

I am not a legal expert, I was under the impression that downloading copyrighted material without paying for it was illegal under the terms of copyright infringement. However if that impression is incorrect then I stand corrected.

[Kymmy]

Not illegal as only the copyright holder can take you to court via a civil case. Now piracy (making money through copyright infringement) is illegal.

[General Maximus]

buuuuuuuuuut, look at this hypothetical sceniario:

I pay for my tv license and pay for Sky. Ming mongs like my sister who don't have a tv because they don't want to pay for a license watch stuff on channel and bbc on demand (or whatever they are called) for free on their pc.

I decide I am going out tonight and will miss Greys Anatomy and the X Factor so I download it off torrents tomorrow so i can watch it at my convenience.

Where is the problem in that? I am paying to watch stuff that is on tv but I am downloading it instead yet you have got people who don't pay who watch it online (terrestrial channels)?

I would apply the same to any tv series, current or old. Terra Nova is a new sci-fi series which started last week in the US. Hypothetically speaking, I have no problem whatsoever downloading it and watching it now, knowing that I am paying for it come on Sky some time soon and that I will buy it on dvd when it get released. The same can be said over the years for Buffy, Star Trek, Stargate, Alias, 24 and I could go and on and on.

[Chrysalis]

Maximus there is no real issue in that other than you have removed control from the copyright holders :D

I have figured out now copyright is not just about maintaining profit, its also about control. Its used to control content that isnt even generating revenue.

This is why I have said a few times now I think copyright is out of control and far beyond its original concept.

The original idea of copyright was to protect the earning rights for the creator of the content, nothing more. It originally expired after only a few years rather than the lifetime they have now, and it was never used on free content or content that wasnt available for sale.

How times have changed eh.

It will be interesting to see if these companies carry on adding copy protection to media after the laws are passed that will specifically allow people to make personal copies of media they have paid for.