The ISP Copyright Alert System Will Only Enrage Customers

The ISP Copyright Alert System Will Only Enrage Customers

Joe Romaine
International Business Times
July 9, 2011

So they're trying to wage war on customers again.

The biggest internet service providers (ISPs) have struck an agreement with content owners to crack down on piracy through a copyright alert system.

The alert system consists of six steps, which starts with a text warning, escalates to slowing the Internet connection and blocking web browsing, and culminates in possibly cutting off the Internet access.

The ISPs and content owners are trying to label this as an educational campaign, but who are they trying to kid?

This approach has a number of problems, starting with the fact that they're waging a war on customers. The big ISPs already have their problems, especially in customer service. Will they now slowdown Internet connections on their own paying customers?

That doesn't make any sense from a business perspective. In theory, the biggest ISPs (AT&T, Cablevision, Comcast, Verizon, Time Warner Cable) agreed to the crackdown, but if I were an executive of one of those ISPs, I'd "cheat" like crazy and not enforce the rule.

That way, I'd get the frustrated customers of my competitors, especially in areas with multiple choices for ISP and the availability of wireless internet service providers.

Then there is the issue of enforcement. What if pirating neighbors are stealing the wireless network of a not-so-savvy internet user? What about proxies and VPNs?

If this ISP copyright alert system really gets to be annoying, the Internet will proliferate with ways to skirt it. All people would have to do is Google "how to bypass ISP copyright."

If the 6 hackers of LulzSec made the biggest corporations look like fools, do ISPs really think the Internet collective can't come up with ways to bypass their copyright alert system?

Finally, the ISP copyright alert system wouldn't work because people have always stolen creative content. In the 1800s, Americans printed and sold copious copies of Charles Dickens books without giving him a cent. Dickens had to resort to public reading tours to make his money from Americans.

Since Dickens, the same thing has happened time and time again; the only difference the technology and medium.

Content owners should accept the reality that they can't get by with simply selling content (especially in today's digital world); instead, they need to present or organize them in attractive formats that people would pay for.

Trying to wage a war on piracy and their customers simply isn't going to work.

You know what really bugs me? Research has shown time and time again that those who pirate films and music most buy more than average. The most logical conclusion we can arrive from this is that people who download music illegally is using it as a "try before you buy".

http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2009/apr/21/study-finds-pirates-buy-more-music

Remember we are not permitted to get a refund on albums we think are awful, when the cover proclaims "the best album you will buy this year".

Many artists do not care about piracy. Why? Because sales of albums makes them very little money (about 10% of each sale), and a shitload for the label (about 40% of each sale). Now read this and tell me that pirates are taking money away from artists: http://www.nme.com/news/nme/46616. Who are the true criminals here?


No, artists make the majority of their money from touring and merchandising. I will not mourn the decline of the record label and how they continue to stifle digital media.

The_Amber_Spyglass wrote:You know what really bugs me? Research has shown time and time again that those who pirate films and music most buy more than average. The most logical conclusion we can arrive from this is that people who download music illegally is using it as a "try before you buy".

http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2009/apr/21/study-finds-pirates-buy-more-music

Remember we are not permitted to get a refund on albums we think are awful, when the cover proclaims "the best album you will buy this year".

Many artists do not care about piracy. Why? Because sales of albums makes them very little money (about 10% of each sale), and a shitload for the label (about 40% of each sale). Now read this and tell me that pirates are taking money away from artists: http://www.nme.com/news/nme/46616. Who are the true criminals here?


No, artists make the majority of their money from touring and merchandising. I will not mourn the decline of the record label and how they continue to stifle digital media.

I'm with ya on this. I pirate music (in FLAC format only). If I enjoy it, I buy it.

Guess what? I pirated my first copy of Left 4 Dead. I liked it so much after one month that I bought it.

I'm proof.

Me too. I bought so many films after having watched them pirated. There's still a couple I haven't bought but intend to do so but I've also saved myself money on watching shit.

As a writer, I have seen in writer's magazines how publishers attempt to flout copyright law to get writers to sign certain rights over to them and I'll be willing to bet that record labels pull exactly the same stunts so I have very little sympathy.

Yeah, the record labels don't look out for the artist anymore. There was a time that they did (up to the late 70s). Those days are gone.