American ISPs agree to "six strikes" enforcement

Those of you in the United States, get ready for "six strikes". The major American Internet Service Providers (ISPs), which include AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, Cablevision, and Time Warner Cable, have signed on to a voluntary agreement with the movie and music industries to crack down on copyright infringement and piracy. The ISPs say they will protect subscriber privacy and they won't filter or monitor their own networks for infringement.

According to today's announcement materials, the goal is to "educate and stop the alleged content theft in question, not to punish. No ISP wants to lose a customer or see a customer face legal trouble based on a misunderstanding, so the alert system provides every opportunity to set the record straight." This proposed one way notification system seems like shift to a more realistic solution, instead of a scorched earth tactic. Copyright holders would scan the web for infringement find out which ISP owns it, and then send a message.

After the sixth strike a subscriber wont necessarily be "out", according to Ars Technica. ISPs have agreed to institute "mitigation measures" based on the collected say-so of copyright holders. These measures begin with the fifth or six alert. They include reduction of Internet speeds, redirection to a landing page asking the subscriber to contact the ISP, or a requirement to review educational materials about copyright infringement. There is no requirement that ISPs disconnect a user's Internet connection at any point, and indeed ISPs say they will refuse any measure that might cut off a user's phone service, e-mail access, "or any security or health service (such as home security or medical monitoring)."

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Windows Embedded POSReady 7 now available

Next Story

EA's Origin service to link to mobile phones

99 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

FYI...
ISPs are private companies who (should limit themselves to) provide a service for profit, not law enforcement agencies, which are always government organizations, financed by tax payers and voted in + ruled by congress/parliament/legislature/etc.
To allow the private sector to police the internet (or anything else) this way is illegal, and [in the USA] unconstitutional. Period.
Congress/politicians/legislature elected officials [aka public servants] have no clue what the internet is and how to handle it, because they are uneducated m0r0ns, and refuse to listen to professionals/experts, who keep telling them this is very wrong.
And as you all know (or should know), all this was started by the hollywood + music industries who keep lobbying + "squeezing" the congress/legislature, and now they finally got their way.
This is the opposite of handling piracy, this is civil rights abuse.
Just wait and see the thousands of law suits that will follow shortly after this fiasco. ;-(

"The ISPs say they will protect subscriber privacy and they won't filter or monitor their own networks for infringement."

uh.. isnt this contradictory to the entire article

uhm, Question.. What if someone else is on .. your internet downloading the crap out of everything. Then suddenly you get the several warnings in the mail. .. How can you guard yourself against this?

Like.. I know for a fact Linux has several distro's that can get into Private Networks with Passwords etc etc. after that it's just a way to hide yourself from everyone else.

No I don't use Wifi, and I don't like Linux.

Geranium_Z__NL said,
uhm, Question.. What if someone else is on .. your internet downloading the crap out of everything. Then suddenly you get the several warnings in the mail. .. How can you guard yourself against this?

Like.. I know for a fact Linux has several distro's that can get into Private Networks with Passwords etc etc. after that it's just a way to hide yourself from everyone else.

No I don't use Wifi, and I don't like Linux.

Well, I thought there was a case where someone tried to use that defense but got busted on because they didn't securely lock down their router. I may be wrong though, but I'm sure they will hold you responsible if you didn't securely lock it down. If you did and you can prove it was't you, they may forgive you and go after the other person.

So serious questions that need to be informed upon.

At what point are your records erased?
Is this information tied to a specific person throughout all ISPS?
If so who monitors and regulates our private information?
When does it go in affect, and are your current warnings carried over?
At what point do I get my lawyer involved, the 6th or 7th? Heh

Honestly thoe, I find the whole thing decent at least. May help get the RIAA and MPAA off the backs of the users and put the control of warning the users in the ISP hands. I like the idea of schooling, its kinda like if you get a ticket. But I think they should remove peoples access at the 6th time. There needs to be somthing to worry about to prevent it. Yes we value your privacy but if we continue to get calls about you, we will have to take action and prevent usage on our network. Simple as that.

If you get in multiple car accidents and tickets you're license is eventually removed. You don't get sued by the goverment for driving on roads and causing accidents. Thats the way it should be I think.

I've only recieved a warning back in the day when I was stupid. That was like 10 years ago on c*mcast.

so 6th strike and the house next to me gets caught off the internet ?
LOL i love it ..hillarious !
Do it.. i don't care if you cut off my neighbours for me using their open wifi connection LOL

god people are stupid
why don't people think things through a little ?

Good idea like the concept, but too broad, I can see the broadness in turn causing issue.
Homeusers affected by this.

Another point why is it only RIAA/MPAA wanting this where other thing that get pirated in this like APP/GAMES ETC....

Looks more Like RIAA/MPAA wanting more money. Atleast software company/Gaming industry more reasonable still fighting piracy but not trying to be boss of ppl either.

got my third notice from verizon fios last month. considering I've had the service for 3 years I don't think I'm doing too bad. I wonder if you lose strikes after so many years... you know, like points on your license =P

3284lmm said,
got my third notice from verizon fios last month. considering I've had the service for 3 years I don't think I'm doing too bad. I wonder if you lose strikes after so many years... you know, like points on your license =P

Do they actually send you a letter?

It seems that if they cut your internet speed at 6 strikes then you get to pay for a lower speed.
They loose money that way as you no longer are on a higher speed or tier.

wahoospa said,
It seems that if they cut your internet speed at 6 strikes then you get to pay for a lower speed.
They loose money that way as you no longer are on a higher speed or tier.

I doubt they'd charge you less for the slower Inet infact I could see them charging you more for the privilege of being on-line IF you've had your 6th strike

God..so many folks don't know how to RTFA. It isn't "6 strikes and you are out", it is "6 strikes, and we'll be giving you a phone call" (or something).

Just one problem with this if the ISP will not be monitoring that pettey much make the RIAA / MPAA Judge, Jury and Executioner becuases some some else spoofing some else IP address.

makes the SSL more useful to block any potential chance of snooping (and i am not talking torrent crap either)

So how long do the strikes last for? does it reset every year, or if you get ur 6th strike 20 years after ur first 5 you get cut off? and what happens if you move isp?

Note that there is an inherent conflict of interest in many studio/ISP relationships. For example...

Comcast IS Universal/NBC
Time Warner Roadrunner is Warner Brothers
etc.

Those companies should be forced to divest. This vertical tiering of a cartel of companies with local monopoly control is NOT in the best interests of the nation or its citizens.

Skyfrog said,
I don't really see a problem with it, I mean if you get caught SIX times you're doing something wrong.
yep. getting caught was where they went wrong

Skyfrog said,
I don't really see a problem with it, I mean if you get caught SIX times you're doing something wrong.

Except none of this is actually LEGALLY wrong. There are only civil penalties and those challenges have in a very large part failed, proving that...

A) the public does not find these approaches just,
B) no one believes the entertainment companies deserve special treatment if they can't find a way to compete in the digital age, "build a better mousetrap...or DIE!" is the American way
C) internet access is becoming a right not a privilege across the globe,
D) the supposed "crimes" are only civil and the few fines yet levied are clearly disproportionate to their perceived severity...for EVERYONE except a handful of studio executives, of course.

etc. etc.

Copyright infringement is NOT piracy. Piracy is the illegal manufacture and sale of properties for a PROFIT. Copyright infringement is SHARING for free.

Basically, if your ISP wants, which means the 'copyright holders' wants, which means the massive labels in the US want, they could big brother you into their padded garden of what they call relevant and useful internet.

Your name would be shared between all the massive companies in the opt-in agreement in the US and you would receive the same internet play area as the rest of the so-called piracy criminals and likely be taken to court from the labels to be extorted, without any proof that you did it.

People can hi-jack cable connections, break encryption on wireless, there's tutorials all over the net on how to make a wireless repeater and a focused antenna thats good for like 18km.

The US will soon have a NetID requirement, have to take a test just like a drivers license to use the web.

More guilty until proven innocent bull****.

ISP's need a warrant or court order for things for t he police but the *PAA? All they need is a simple notice.

necrosis said,
More guilty until proven innocent bull****.
ISP's need a warrant or court order for things for t he police but the *PAA? All they need is a simple notice.

What? If they're tracing it to your modem's IP then the action is obviously coming from your network. If it isn't you, then it's somebody on your network. Find out who it is.

necrosis said,
More guilty until proven innocent bull****.

ISP's need a warrant or court order for things for t he police but the *PAA? All they need is a simple notice.


I agree with this. Anyone other than law enforcement should not have the right to "monitor" or request information out of anyone else.

The RIAA/MPAA are NOT law enforcement. And neither are the lawyers doing all the suing anymore, and neither is the company they have claiming they obtained IP's.

Its like they are giving rights to vigilantes. Its not right or fair.

Solid Knight said,

What? If they're tracing it to your modem's IP then the action is obviously coming from your network. If it isn't you, then it's somebody on your network. Find out who it is.


These are not professionals/law enforcement making these requests. They are normal people, making claims, that could easily be wrong or false information given intentionally. Just like so many times you read about how grandma gets sued over something she didn't do.

jd100 said,

Its like they are giving rights to vigilantes. Its not right or fair.

Vigilantes PAID to find "violators". Yeah, that won't be abused.

Since the LEGAL system has failed the MAFIAA, this is their way of organizing a cost effective EXTORTION of their customers.

Capitalism used to be about the company innovating their way out of problems. If they don't, they go the way of sealing wax and the horseless carriage.

Now it's about holding onto the means of distribution no matter what happens, even if it means forming an illegal cartel to fix prices and stifle progress.

Very sad day for America.

I wonder if my first and second strikes will be "reset" when my ISP implements this... ?

And btw - a few years back my ISP turned off my service on my 3rd strike (and yes I have gone legit since my wife told me she would kill me if that happened again...lol)

I don't necessarily disagree with anything they're proposing except:

These measures begin with the fifth or sixth alert.

I would want some kind of notification on each and every notice they get concerning my internet connection. I need to know if someone in my household is downloading stuff illegally or possibly someone has hacked into my router. I don't want to know after it happens 5 of 6 times, because how am I suppose to correct the issue before number 6? Thats stupid.

Shadrack said,
I would want some kind of notification on each and every notice they get concerning my internet connection. I need to know if someone in my household is downloading stuff illegally or possibly someone has hacked into my router. I don't want to know after it happens 5 of 6 times, because how am I suppose to correct the issue before number 6? Thats stupid.
I din't take that to mean they won't be notifying you before the 5th or 6th event. I read that as they won't start limiting or imposing mandatory education until the 5th or 6th infraction.

shakey said,
What if I don't open my cable bills because I do everything online... ignorance is bliss

If what if your not using YOUR OWN connection ? lol

I've said it before and i'll say it again..

Go ahead and sue my neighbours i couldn't care less

Antipiracy hahha ya sure ...whatever <roll eyes>

Is there nobody out there who can get the MPAA to sign on to an agreement to stop making watching a legal movie such a hasssle? I don't pirate, but I get ****ed at all the promos that block my ability to skip 25 minutes of garbage to get to the damn movie I want to watch. Besides, their anti-piracy measures do not work and only infringe on the honest customers ability to watch their stinking product!

As for the RIAA, all they've managed to make me do is stop buying music. There are a few bands who I make an exception for (Tool is one of them), but for the most part I have quit buying any form of music. What I already own and the FM radio suit my needs.

zeke009 said,
Is there nobody out there who can get the MPAA to sign on to an agreement to stop making watching a legal movie such a hassle? I don't pirate, but I get ****ed at all the promos that block my ability to skip 25 minutes of garbage to get to the damn movie I want to watch.

You know, it's very rare that I encounter a DVD or Blu-Ray movie that doesn't let me skip the promos or jump to the menu. Have you tried pressing the "Next chapter" button?

Solid Knight said,

You know, it's very rare that I encounter a DVD or Blu-Ray movie that doesn't let me skip the promos or jump to the menu. Have you tried pressing the "Next chapter" button?

I have seen this behavior. In fact, I just recently watched Inception and it would not let me skip the promos. I tried hitting the home button which normally takes me to the main screen of the DVD where I can play or select chapters, etc. but instead I got the "prohibited" icon. I couldn't "next chapter" either. I had to fast forward through all 20 minutes of promos. I felt like I was thrown back in time to the old VHS days when you had to fast forward through all that crap. This is the first time I've ever had this happen to me. Wonder if it's a new trend?

Tim Dawg said,
I have seen this behavior. In fact, I just recently watched Inception and it would not let me skip the promos.

It's been around for years but by far is the minority. I agree that it's annoying and quite honestly, no movie should begin with advertisements at all.

The internet is a human right, they can't do this. I have a right to illegally download new albums to my heart's content, not fair!!!!

KingCrimson said,
The internet is a human right, they can't do this. I have a right to illegally download new albums to my heart's content, not fair!!!!

I think the problem stems from the figures that the MAFIAA provide. They assume that every single download is a lost sale, yet it's patently obvious that's not the case. Most people would simply not buy the music.

Microsoft_Bob said,

I think the problem stems from the figures that the MAFIAA provide. They assume that every single download is a lost sale, yet it's patently obvious that's not the case. Most people would simply not buy the music.

That argument is ridiculous, they went through the hoops to misapropriate the material, therefore it has value to the pirate. Therefore it should count as a lost sale, the utility obviously exists to the pirate.

Microsoft_Bob said,

I think the problem stems from the figures that the MAFIAA provide. They assume that every single download is a lost sale, yet it's patently obvious that's not the case. Most people would simply not buy the music.

People were pirating music long before the RIAA started suing people.

schubb2003 said,

That argument is ridiculous, they went through the hoops to misapropriate the material, therefore it has value to the pirate. Therefore it should count as a lost sale, the utility obviously exists to the pirate.

It does not count as a lost sale when these agencies do not at least sell a comparable product. I buy my music from Amazon's MP3 store. It's easy, fast, and my purchases go directly to my Amazon cloud drive. I do not see any justification for pirating music anymore.

Video is another story. Where is a DRM free source of video content that uses a commonly used format? Or at least a streaming provider that has a decent selection of videos? Something better than what we currently have, where every other video I look for is not available online because of studio licensing nonsense?

On the subject of your argument about lost sales, the "hoops" you refer to are almost nonexistent, and amount to launching P2P software, queuing a download, and maybe waiting for it to finish downloading. Pirates' alternative is to spend $20-$40 on a DVD or Blu-ray disc, subscribe to a streaming service (with a hit or miss selection due to anti-competitive licensing), or to purchase DRM encrypted video from Amazon/iTunes which can only be played on certain devices.

Edited by Feritas, Jul 8 2011, 2:39am :

schubb2003 said,

That argument is ridiculous, they went through the hoops to misapropriate the material, therefore it has value to the pirate. Therefore it should count as a lost sale, the utility obviously exists to the pirate.

The VALUE the copyright infringer places on it is not nearly what you are thinking. If it wasn't free, they just wouldn't buy it, period. They'd watch it at a friend's house or wait for it to come on HBO, etc.

In no case was the studio ever going to see a sale from this person...period.

BUT, the reverse IS true, in that it is proven by a century of studies and evidence that some people DO buy after they've heard a free version (re: radio airplay, TV series bought on DVD, etc.).

Torrents, etc. are just the equivalents of modern digital radio...free sales and marketing.

excalpius said,

The VALUE the copyright infringer places on it is not nearly what you are thinking. If it wasn't free, they just wouldn't buy it, period. They'd watch it at a friend's house or wait for it to come on HBO, etc.

In no case was the studio ever going to see a sale from this person...period.

BUT, the reverse IS true, in that it is proven by a century of studies and evidence that some people DO buy after they've heard a free version (re: radio airplay, TV series bought on DVD, etc.).

Torrents, etc. are just the equivalents of modern digital radio...free sales and marketing.

HAHAHA, now you go back to saying they will buy it...please stick to the side of the discussion you start on. The "some" people you refer to are not the hard core pirates. I can get just about any song to listen to from yahoo, last.fm, pandora, etc. so pirating music has no logical, I'll torrent then listen and buy it.

You miss the point about them not buying it, it is still worth their time and skirting the law to get the material, therefore it has a value to the pirate and that is what matters. If I don't ever plan to buy something, I will wait until it comes out on Hulu or my cable OnDemand, not illegally get it from another source. Difference between me and the pirate - I don't assign a value to it worth breaking the law over.

Divide Overflow said,

It does not count as a lost sale when these agencies do not at least sell a comparable product. I buy my music from Amazon's MP3 store. It's easy, fast, and my purchases go directly to my Amazon cloud drive. I do not see any justification for pirating music anymore.

Video is another story. Where is a DRM free source of video content that uses a commonly used format? Or at least a streaming provider that has a decent selection of videos? Something better than what we currently have, where every other video I look for is not available online because of studio licensing nonsense?

On the subject of your argument about lost sales, the "hoops" you refer to are almost nonexistent, and amount to launching P2P software, queuing a download, and maybe waiting for it to finish downloading. Pirates' alternative is to spend $20-$40 on a DVD or Blu-ray disc, subscribe to a streaming service (with a hit or miss selection due to anti-competitive licensing), or to purchase DRM encrypted video from Amazon/iTunes which can only be played on certain devices.

The hoops are most definitely their, except for the hard core pirate who is a thief, plain and simple. You have to find a torrent, which is becoming harder and harder, then you have to find a real download, and even a small video file on the average US connection is double digit hours of download.

Netflix has quite a selection of new and old movies, and it is available on just about every device now.

As to the argument about being played on certain devices, every device I have has a video out, so I can plug in my Xoom, iPod, even my wife's droid and watch those movies from Amazon or iTunes, in 720p or better. That argument really no longer has value. So you say they chose to pirate because they have no other option, but list what four?

The MPAA and RIAA should pull their heads out of their *******s and wake up to the benefits the Inet can bring, instead of clinging to their old get people to go to the cinema and buy over priced DVD/Bluray/CD discs mentality, that or lower the prices, they would make money if they didn't pay crap artists millions of $$$$ and gave the consumer a reasonably priced product most can afford

Microsoft_Bob said,
The simple fact is they are no longer relevant. It might take a decade, but these middle men will eventually disappear.
Can't happen fast enough!!

Dark Atheist said,
The MPAA and RIAA should pull their heads out of their *******s and wake up to the benefits the Inet can bring, instead of clinging to their old get people to go to the cinema and buy over priced DVD/Bluray/CD discs mentality, that or lower the prices, they would make money if they didn't pay crap artists millions of $$ and gave the consumer a reasonably priced product most can afford

Agreed, some people are getting to rich and to many. The gap is widening and a start would be targeting actors, musicians, sport players and useless people in companies. They need to slim down, streamline and embrace the internet. They can still have life's I just think that no one should be able to retire altogether at the age of 30 or 40.

This is what it's about it's so that the thousands of them can retire at 30 or 40 with a house bigger than my street.

Dark Atheist said,
The MPAA and RIAA should pull their heads out of their *******s and wake up to the benefits the Inet can bring, instead of clinging to their old get people to go to the cinema and buy over priced DVD/Bluray/CD discs mentality, that or lower the prices, they would make money if they didn't pay crap artists millions of $$ and gave the consumer a reasonably priced product most can afford
Agree with all this, well said gentlemen. They are totally defunct and now only serve to add to the music/film industry's costs and workload. They should actually be better serving their respective industries by embracing new distribution methods and concepts.

Microsoft_Bob said,
The simple fact is they are no longer relevant. It might take a decade, but these middle men will eventually disappear.

Indeed. These are the last dying gasps of the ice age studio mammoths as they sink in the tar pits of digital distribution. These behemoths have consigned themselves to being nothing more than library content holders because they refused to adapt.

Dark Atheist said,
The MPAA and RIAA should pull their heads out of their *******s and wake up to the benefits the Inet can bring, instead of clinging to their old get people to go to the cinema and buy over priced DVD/Bluray/CD discs mentality, that or lower the prices, they would make money if they didn't pay crap artists millions of $$ and gave the consumer a reasonably priced product most can afford

Exactly!

Part of the article says it's about educating people about stealing/infringing. The RIAA and MPAA need to educate themselves to the fact of what century this is!!

the whole cutting off your internet thing is stupid, too much depends on the internet now that its almost like saying you use too much heating oil / natural gas you are banned, good luck in the next freezing winter!.... too many places now want you to do bills online, register stuff online, government services are going online...... phones are VoIP now for a lot of people..... etc...etc..

Stewart Gilligan Griffin said,
the whole cutting off your internet thing is stupid, too much depends on the internet now that its almost like saying you use too much heating oil / natural gas you are banned, good luck in the next freezing winter!.... too many places now want you to do bills online, register stuff online, government services are going online...... phones are VoIP now for a lot of people..... etc...etc..

So either don't get caught pirating, or stop pirating. They don't "Owe" you this service, if you can't comply with their rules, you don't really deserve it, I mean, they're giving you SIX chances to comply.

iamawesomewicked said,

So either don't get caught pirating, or stop pirating. They don't "Owe" you this service, if you can't comply with their rules, you don't really deserve it, I mean, they're giving you SIX chances to comply.

in the mean time, several countries are working on making internet access a basic right...

Tim Dawg said,
Read the article. It says they won't be shutting off anybody's internet.

They will however effectively render your pipe unless by throttling it. It's tantamount to cutting you off.

Stewart Gilligan Griffin said,
the whole cutting off your internet thing is stupid, too much depends on the internet now that its almost like saying you use too much heating oil / natural gas you are banned, good luck in the next freezing winter!.... too many places now want you to do bills online, register stuff online, government services are going online...... phones are VoIP now for a lot of people..... etc...etc..

You do realize that this only happens if you pirate right...?

iamawesomewicked said,

So either don't get caught pirating, or stop pirating. They don't "Owe" you this service, if you can't comply with their rules, you don't really deserve it, I mean, they're giving you SIX chances to comply.

You would have a point if it were free, but most PAY for this service so it is "OWED". Or do you understand how the market works?

Foub said,

You would have a point if it were free, but most PAY for this service so it is "OWED". Or do you understand how the market works?

how are you owed the right to pirate that's like saying your city built roads to drive on so I'm owed a car.... The only thing your owed by your ISP is what their tnc's allow you or did you not read them

DukeEsquire said,

You do realize that this only happens if you pirate right...?

No, it only happens if some nameless MAFIAA drone CLAIMS you've violated their copyright. There is no chain of evidence, no due process, nothing LEGAL about this at all...

And guess what the nameless drone is PAID to find, whether it's there or not?

Foub said,

You would have a point if it were free, but most PAY for this service so it is "OWED". Or do you understand how the market works?

LOL... Just because you pay for a service does not make you the owner ! You are only paying for the use of the service that is OWNED by the ISP and it's partners under their terms and rules. The ISP can easily dump you anytime they want for any reason.

how is this different from what it is now though? if said person was downloading/sharing copyrighted materials, one would get a letter in the mail stating what he/she downloaded/shared and why they're being notified. Don't understand how this is different.. except they're sort of taking on the "Three Strike" rule that EU had (or has?)

presence06 said,
how is this different from what it is now though? if said person was downloading/sharing copyrighted materials, one would get a letter in the mail stating what he/she downloaded/shared and why they're being notified. Don't understand how this is different.. except they're sort of taking on the "Three Strike" rule that EU had (or has?)

EU doesnt have these laws.. all the pirate is getting closed here well in Denmark; no TPB or all the others websites. its pretty hard to find anything here.

Shaydx said,

EU doesnt have these laws.. all the pirate is getting closed here well in Denmark; no TPB or all the others websites. its pretty hard to find anything here.

lol ..you must be seriously out of the loop.

Shaydx said,

EU doesnt have these laws.. all the pirate is getting closed here well in Denmark; no TPB or all the others websites. its pretty hard to find anything here.

you should try IRC

Shaydx said,

EU doesnt have these laws.. all the pirate is getting closed here well in Denmark; no TPB or all the others websites. its pretty hard to find anything here.

I think what you meant to say is that The Pirate Bay is filtered out and NOT that Pirate users are getting shut down. There are millions of other alternatives to TPB so there is really nothing to worry about.

Plus the Danish Anti-Pirate Group went out of business so you can feel save.

SpecialK. said,
So if the RIAA catches you, your ISP will send you a letter in the mail?

Sigh. Time for me to update my blacklist for Peerguardian / Peerblock.

IP FTW.

Oh and MPAA: people will continue to pirate when you walk into a walmart and see an advert. for a new movie release and at the bottom 'NOT AVAILABLE ON NETFLIX OR REDBOX.' I shouldn't be punished because I pay for netflix. Or when your studios delay a movie from netflix for a month to increase dvd sales people are going to pirate.

SpecialK. said,
So if the RIAA catches you, your ISP will send you a letter in the mail?

My question is how many people have actually been warned after downloading pirated material. Torrents are not exactly the only way to get said material.

Nexus- said,
Sigh. Time for me to update my blacklist for Peerguardian / Peerblock.

Those are pretty useless by the way; not only can they easily get around it just by using a different IP that's not on the list, but they don't even need to connect to you to see you in a swarm.

Max Norris said,

but they don't even need to connect to you to see you in a swarm.

Therein lies the problem. So i'm supposedly in the swarm - what's to say i'm actually downloading, much less infringing on copyright?
They need to nail this down, or it'll be cause for trouble...

Raa said,
They need to nail this down, or it'll be cause for trouble...

Oh I agree, it's hardly concrete proof, but as far as they're concerned it's good enough as it'll be a case of "what else would you be doing in that swarm?" I'm mostly just mentioning not bothering with PeerGuardian and the like, the only thing it's good for is giving a false sense of security. All they need to do is look at the list (hardly a big underground secret), get an IP that's not on it, and then get the infringement letters printing.

Max Norris said,

Those are pretty useless by the way; not only can they easily get around it just by using a different IP that's not on the list, but they don't even need to connect to you to see you in a swarm.

Ok then if they cant prove I downloaded or uploaded, but that I am only in the swarm I will say it was research material for a book I'm writing on internet piracy. They could not contest that if they only saw me in the swarm but couldnt prove i was downloading or uploading infringing content.