It feels dirty to agree with an ISP on something. But even the worst corporations are on the right side of something from time to time I suppose.

    • dumbass@leminal.space
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Ohh for sure, they know that if they get rid of the pirates, they’d lose half their customer base and will struggle to pay the CEOs bonus.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      A lot of it is the sheer bureaucracy of chasing down actual pirates and weeding them from people who just happen to be on the same IP address.

      If one guy visiting an apartment block downloads a torrent from a public connection, what is ATT supposed to do? Shut down Internet to the entire building?

      This is an undue burden for ISPs, even if the content isn’t living in a gray zone of legality.

      • BlanketsWithSmallpox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        … IP addresses are assigned to modems… They don’t assign IP addresses to… Cables going to buildings I guess lol but ok.

        And if you’re in some fucked up place that has the entire apartment complex’s internet going to one modem, then God save your soul.

        • Prison Mike@links.hackliberty.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          I don’t know why you’re being downvoted for this. Even with CGNAT and related technologies, each modem still has a unique MAC address at the cable/DOCSIS level (even without loading Ethernet on top).

          Where you could be wrong is buildings with large networks, say an apartment building with wired Ethernet to all the units but all being routed through the same WAN(s), but even still I’d hope that the network is managed in a way that it’s not hard to tell which unit is which IP internally. Unrelated but I’d also pray that each unit is on its own VLAN for security.

          • Hexarei@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            There are some apartment buildings with shared Internet connections that are just open and public; It’s crappy but cheap if someone can’t afford individual connection

            • Prison Mike@links.hackliberty.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months ago

              Personally I’d die for Ethernet straight into my unit, I had that once in a new building and it was fantastic (though you still had to pay an ISP individually), if only to avoid cable modems and the like. My current cable ISP wouldn’t provision IPv6 to their very own (old, clunky) modem so I had to go out and buy one that doesn’t care whether or not it’s provisioned.

      • the post of tom joad@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Yeah IP owners really want to have all the benefits of ownership with none of the drawbacks. After lobbying for and receiving a blank check to be able to rent seek indefinitely, they are constantly acting to outsource any cost of detection and enforcement of “their” property. Disgusting how goddamn entitled they are.

        • primrosepathspeedrun@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          this is why everyone should pirate literally anything they can, even if they don’t particularly want it.

          er, with a few very gross exceptions that shouldn’t exist.

  • Kairos@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    Internet shutoffs should require a court order. Not some emails that are “this person did a bad 🥺🥺🥺 no proof but can you please take our word for it 🥺🥺🥺🥺”

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Internet shutoffs shouldn’t be a thing, outside of non-payment or legitimate abuse. If I do something illegal, they should have to sue me, not shut off my internet.

      • Altima NEO@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Yeah, they don’t disconnect a criminals phone service because they committed a crime and made a phone call. It makes no damned sense.

        • ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          Actually, that’s been done several times over the decades. As well as banning computer access. The guy caught hacking into the fbi gets his mouse and keyboard taken away.

        • this_1_is_mine@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          Only happens as a matter by court order and is a limit on the person not on the corporations. Though if found out after by the court it can be ordered terminated. And you will face further punishment.

      • oconnordaniel@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Maybe not a court order. But I could get behind a process similar to other utilities where you have months or warning and paperwork.

      • elephantium@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        If you do something illegal, you should be arrested.

        Copyright infringement lawsuits are a far cry from bomb threats or the like.

          • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            Yeah, I’ve been ticketed for speeding, and that certainly doesn’t come with the threat of arrest unless I’m driving super recklessly or something (but that’s a different offense altogether).

          • elephantium@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            So you’re saying copyright infringement is on par with speeding or parking past the meter’s end? Eh, fair enough.

            • Jarix@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months ago

              I was just pointing out a logical fallacy. It’s literally impossible to do the thing you said.

              This is just facts, they aren’t an opinion

            • schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months ago

              Honestly it is less severe than speeding. Copyright was an invention of the pre-digital era. Now that we all use computers, so many things we do every day are technically copyright infringement that it is absurd to even have these kinds of conversations.

    • Prison Mike@links.hackliberty.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      I don’t pirate these days, but when I did (and was stupid about it) the emails/letters had pretty exact evidence.

      They included the name of the work, my WAN IP address at the time, and the amount of data transferred (uploaded) out from it.

      This was in the US and I’m unaware of how such notices work in other countries that work similarly.

      • histic@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        That’s all they can get though they have no proof it was actually you and not someone else using your Internet, how they find out is they join the public trackers and just log everyone in it generally even without a VPN on private trackers they have no idea what you are doing

    • person420@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      I had to process these requests at a company I used to work for. They do send “proof” (proof in quotes because you have to believe in good faith they didn’t just make it up, which I have to believe they didn’t).

      We never shut anyone off though. We worked with business exclusively and only ever sent “scary” letters. Though we had one client that was a major music venue (a very known venue that’s pretty famous) who would get these letters all the time. The irony was too much for me. I ended up calling them personally most of the time because it was too funny.

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        I’ve never gotten a scary letter, and I’ve certainly torrented my fair share of stuff, both legal and otherwise.

        The trick, I think, is to not use cable. I’ve had municipal fiber, Google fiber, DSL, and small local ISP (RJ45 hookup at the wall), and never once had an issue. The last one is probably annoyed at me because I tend to submit tickets and call them within a few minutes of my service going down (happens once/month or so). It’s extra funny when they ask me to check my wifi settings on my router, and I tell them my router doesn’t have wifi (it’s a Mikrotik router, my AP is separate), and that my wifi is absolutely fine, it’s the uplink that’s busted (i.e. I can access all the stuff on my NAS).

        I made a promise to myself that once I left the house, I’d never get cable. And that’s a promise I’ve kept across multiple apartments and now my house. We’re finally getting muni fiber, so I’m pretty excited.

        • BlanketsWithSmallpox@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          It’s more likely you aren’t using popular freely indexable trackers on currently airing popular media.

          Try torrenting a current episode of a top 10 watched show within a week of release and see how fast you get one lol.

      • fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        I remember getting a scary letter because I was torrenting. I thought it so funny because I had to the only person in the world only torrenting freeaoftwarr and public domain works.

          • barsquid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            They don’t give a shit about targeting accusations only towards people torrenting copyrighted stuff. Why would they? They have no consequences for being incorrect.

            They are doing this automatically. They just grab all the magnet links they can find and target any IP they connect to, regardless of the content.

            • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              4 months ago

              They have no consequences for being incorrect.

              Which is why the DMCA shit is also bullshit.

              Multiple false claims should result in you being banned from making future claims.

              • person420@lemmynsfw.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                4 months ago

                That’s not how it would work for us. We’d receive a report from the MPAA/RIAA that showed the torrent they were downloading, the IP address involved, if they were seeding or leeching and an affidavit saying that all the information was correct to the best of their knowledge.

                The letter we sent basically was a notification that we received that letter (with a copy) and that if we received two more for the same IP (three in total) we would have to release their information to the reporting body and that they could be open to legal action. It also included some information on how to secure their network and check for viruses in case that was the cause.

                In my 15 years working there, we never once released information about a client. Because this was business accounts, most clients had multiple IPs (at least a /29) and would cycle what IPs they showed up as on the public Internet to keep them from getting multiple notices on the same IP. The music venue I mentioned had an entire /24.

  • Lord Wiggle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Here in NL the ISP’s are refusing to give client info to the government due to privacy policy, giving a big “go fuck yourself” to any agency trying to convict internet pirates. A judge needs to sign for an ISP to release information on soneone, which only happens with large criminal cases like drug sales and child porn distribution. The fight to change the law so ISP’s are forced to release all client info has been going on for years and years now, constantly ending in favor of privacy. ISP’s are asshole companies lurking for your money, but at least they protect client privacy over here.

  • peanutyam@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    I’m glad I live in Australia where this doesn’t happen thanks to previous attempts by IP copyright holders (mainly US based ones) to have similar policies forced upon ISP’s here and being told by judges here that the penalties and expectations and demands made by these said IP copyright holding companies was over the top and excessive and thrown out of court……

    • overload@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      I think the precedent set here was that downloading a copy of a movie carried the penalty of the monetary cost of obtaining the movie lehally, so its just not worth pursuing. I might be wrong about that.

  • MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    This is less than interesting.

    ISPs don’t want to cut off their income here. I’m certain they have a very good idea of how many of their customers, especially those paying for higher tier plans, are either getting constant DMCA requests, or have a persistent connection to a VPN service. They have a good idea of how much money they’re making from people pirating content, so this position for them is hardly surprising.

    At the same time, I’d rather they fight with the copyright trolls than me. Regardless of the reason for why they’re doing it, it’s a good thing to fight for.

    IMO, they shouldn’t be responsible for this because they’re not tasked with enforcing laws. They must abide by them, and they have a legal, or at least, moral obligation to report any felonies/crimes that they’re aware of (with varying degrees of obligation depending on the severity of the crime. Eg, I’m less bothered if they don’t report, say, piracy, than I would be if they don’t report CP/murder/violent crimes, etc).

    If the LEO’s want a service cut off for a good reason, then let them get a court order for it. They should not be obligated by law to enforce such laws. Any enforcement should be handled by an independent organization, and be filtered through the court system as a check/balance for the whole cabal. They shouldn’t be forced to both find and enforce infractions. Reporting suspected infractions, maybe. Forwarding legal requests to customers, sure (like DMCA notices). Oblige disconnect requests from law enforcement by request (when confirmed necessary by courts in the presence of reasonable evidence), absolutely.

    But having the ISPs do all that themselves with little oversight, is both a danger to their clients, to their liability, and to the public at large, mainly in the context of free speech. The ISP is just the middle man, the messenger. They don’t host the content, nor should they police it, or the access you can get to it. I’m all for collaboration in the interest of enforcing the law, but putting the entire obligation on the ISP seems foolish to me.

    Cyber crimes is one area of law enforcement that I don’t think should be defunded. It may be that ACAB, but those doing the investigative work, away from public interaction (and possible abuse), are not the root of the problem there.

    I dunno, just my opinion man.

    • SkaBunkel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      I’m not sure how real companies handle this, but I can share what we did in a student organization at my university that provided internet to its members.

      Not only could we monitor who was downloading a lot of data, but we also received emails from legal organizations informing us that a specific IP in our network(All members had a public IP) had downloaded copyrighted content. They would ask us to disconnect that user. These emails typically came with an XML file attached, filled with legal information and details about the content being downloaded, often including the exact torrent filename.

      We built a system that would automatically parse the XML and forward the email to the user responsible. The subject line may or may not have been “Use a VPN, you idiot!” at some point.

      We also maintained a “high score” list to track what was trending. The last time I checked, Rick and Morty was in the top 3, but that was a while ago.

    • would_be_appreciated@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      those doing the investigative work, away from public interaction (and possible abuse), are not the root of the problem there

      They’re the root of privacy problems, which is a non-trivial issue for many of us.

    • figaro@lemdro.id
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      I use proton VPN for torrenting. It doesn’t show I’ve downloaded anything. I think that means my VPN is working? 😅

      • isles@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Especially since it specifically highlights porn in a different color, it labeled my VPN IP as “Likes Porn”.

        • modus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          Weird… I looked up the IP for my church group’s forum and it said the same thing.

      • FierySpectre@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Didn’t find anything from me… Then again I’m using a private tracker, which should insulate me from that. (Random people knowing, the ISP probs does know… But I don’t think they care)

        • SkunkWorkz@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          I didn’t find anything from me either. Since I’m using Alldebrid to download torrents. It’s a torrent cache that downloads the torrents to their own server and then you can download directly from those servers at high speed. And most of the time the files are already cached so you can download immediately.

  • BossDj@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Can’t wait to find out which industry benefits the SCOTUS justices more.

  • bulwark@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    So I’ve rented a server for years. It’s in the US and it’s a couple bucks a month. It’s fun to play with and I use it however I want. I’ve had an email server, a next cloud instance, and an open VPN instance to name a few things on it. Well I decided to connect a torrent client from my home to the openvpn instance on my server to see if I could do it. It worked really well until the company I rent from forwarded the DMCA hit back to me for downloading Rick and Morty. I should’ve known better but I thought a nameless faceless server farm wouldn’t be worth the hassle of a DMCA but I was wrong.

  • Max-P@lemmy.max-p.me
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Meanwhile, VPN providers be like “come on download stuff 😉😉😉”, wouldn’t that be a much easier case for them to prove willful disregard for piracy?

    • Uriel238 [all pronouns]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Well,

      a) even the labels and studios pirate stuff that isn’t theirs. They don’t really believe what they preach.

      b) All that content they produce involves unethical treatment of the actual creators and technical staff who are under-compensated, and often lose all rights to their own creative work. and

      c) regional blocks are just marketing bullshit, and is the primary thing VPNs advertise they’ll circumvent for you.

    • RickRussell_CA@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Yeah, but ISPs are rich and VPN providers are not. The most recent numbers I can find for Cox (2020) show $12.6 billion in revenue.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      A day is going to come when the VPNs are going to be targeted for regulation.

      It’s only a matter of time before someone shoots up a school with a 3D printed gun or Epstein’s a terabyte of child porn to a Senator’s office or some other silly bullshit, and then VPNs will become the whipping boy for our litany of problems.

      • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Considering how many corporations rely on VPNs for their workers, I don’t think this would gain much traction.

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          A number of countries are experimenting with registration of VPNs and blocking of TOR traffic.

          And there are more than a few VPN series that are explicitly or implicitly compromised by the security services in their own countries.

          I wouldn’t try planning to do the next 9/11 on a ProtonVPN, for instance. The NSA is all over that shit.

      • Uriel238 [all pronouns]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        In autocratic states where VPNs are blocked, they use VPNs that are harder to detect. So by the time they decide to criminalize VPN use in the free (read slightly less un-free) world, we’ll still have a cornucopia of options.

        It’s like FBI trying to ban encryption or get it regulated when we already have encryption technology that is deniable.

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          n autocratic states where VPNs are blocked, they use VPNs that are harder to detect

          Paying for the VPN that’s harder to detect with my credit card which is very easy to detect.

          It’s like FBI trying to ban encryption

          https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/the-fbi-is-secretly-breaking-into-encrypted-devices-were-suing

          Devices are already riddled with backdoors imposed by federal authorities. The only real way to avoid them is to obtain a device not designed or assembled within the NATO block.

          Incidentally, import of these devices has become increasingly difficult, on the grounds that these devices may have backdoors implemented by foreign governments.

          • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            Devices are already riddled with backdoors imposed by federal authorities. The only real way to avoid them is to obtain a device not designed or assembled within the NATO block.

            this smells distinctly russian for some reason, anyway, just use open source software and hardware, the protection net while not perfect, is entirely open, and theoretically, capable of perfect safety.

            • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months ago

              this smells distinctly russian

              Of course, disregard everything Snowden and Assange leaked. Your devices are secure, citizen. Carry on.

              • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                4 months ago

                my brother in christ you literally referred to it as the NATO block.

                What makes you think chinese devices don’t have backdoors for example? It’s also likely russian devices do, though idk how many if any they produce. We do know that russian malware often has a russian locale kill switch because apparently they’re a little silly like that.

                • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  What makes you think chinese devices don’t have backdoors for example?

                  Incidentally, import of these devices has become increasingly difficult, on the grounds that these devices may have backdoors implemented by foreign governments.

          • djsoren19@yiffit.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            In case you weren’t aware, it’s actually pretty easy to pay for a VPN in unmarked funds. Most will allow for BTC transactions, but some VPNs will even allow you to use giftcards for a place like Target.

            • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months ago

              Most will allow for BTC transactions

              This is the dumb guy panacea for committing every financial crime. You’d never even know the block chain is a public ledger.

            • Alk@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months ago

              Mullvad even lets you send them an envelope with cash in it, with no identifying info other than your account number.

    • marx2k@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      I’ve had VPNs email me that they’ll terminate my account if they find me pirating again after getting notified of DMCA. That was a few years ago by the same VPN I’m still with and have been pirating ever since. I haven’t gotten any more emails so either I didn’t get caught again or they’re just not notifying me any more.

      I didn’t want to lose the VPN though since it gives me a long term IP and allows incoming port for torrenting

  • C126@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    Shut down their access to computer stores and the power companies while you’re at it. Only fair. No piracy without computers or power.

    • LunchMoneyThief@links.hackliberty.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      The road that we’re slowly headed down actually leads to a reality not too far from what you describe.

      Computers are increasingly becoming a nested-doll situation wherein the end user is only given access to a lower privileged portion of hardware that exists within a larger supervisory system, of sorts. It will all be (and currently is) marketed as “for your security” “features” while owner control of computer systems is slowly being eroded.

  • michaelmrose@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    I want to say as an employee of an ISP I literally dealt with users who essentially couldn’t get high speed internet anymore at their address because we were the only option and their grandkids downloaded movies. This put the entire household at a grave disadvantage educationally compared to other households. It shouldn’t be a thing.

    • Tryptaminev@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      That this is even legal in the first place is insane. Digital communication is at least as vital, if not more vital that postage. Image someone is just banned form getting post delivered or he gets throttled to only once every other week…

  • dogslayeggs@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    This is capitalism 101: whatever makes the most money is what they support. It doesn’t matter who is hurt (or not hurt), or what is right/wrong. As long as they can make more money than they are losing by lawsuits, they will keep doing this. If they can avoid doing anything at all and not get sued while getting paid by customers, that’s even better.