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.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month 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.

      • the post of tom joad@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 month 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
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month 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.

      • BlanketsWithSmallpox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month 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.

        • undefined@links.hackliberty.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month 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
            ·
            1 month 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

            • undefined@links.hackliberty.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 month 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.

  • Kairos@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 month 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
      8
      ·
      1 month 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
        4
        ·
        1 month 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
          ·
          1 month 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
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 month 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. But this is levied against the person. As in “You are not allowed to do a thing and if we find out you did the thing you will face further punishments.” Corporations should not have the responsibility or ability to determine any ones eligibility. They are a businesses not a government.They are responsible for their own tos and should never be anything more.

      • elephantium@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month 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
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month 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
            ·
            1 month ago

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

            • schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 month 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.

            • Jarix@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 month 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

      • oconnordaniel@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month 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.

    • person420@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 month 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.

      • fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 month 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
            2
            ·
            1 month 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
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 month 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
                2
                ·
                1 month 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.

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month 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.

  • Lord Wiggle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 month 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.

  • michaelmrose@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 month 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
      1
      ·
      1 month 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…

      • isles@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month 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
          3
          ·
          1 month ago

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

    • figaro@lemdro.id
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

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

  • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Why should ISP lose revenue enforcing laws for another corpos benefit?

    If media industry was serious, they should pay for it 🫢

  • antonim@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    Absolutely the correct stance, nothing dirty about it. At this point, for better and for worse, the Internet is a basic necessity. Imagine having your water turned off because you threw water balloons at your neighbour.

    • fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Not water baloons, but some companies will cut off your water if you’re sharing it with a neighbor. (especially if that neighbor had their water cut off for not paying a bill)

      • Uriel238 [all pronouns]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        Garbage collection services dislike when people throw their garbage in neighbor’s cans even when the neighbor is paying for the larger can (e.g. the disposal volume being used). This has led to some garbage distribution piracy alongside recycling collection crews.

        In case you wanted some cyberpunk dystopia in your cyberpunk dystopia.

  • AlexWIWA@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Small ISPs have zero interest in enforcing piracy. They don’t want to lose the customers on their highest tiers. Comcast though, they suck

    • Zwiebel@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      enforcing piracy

      NOTICE

      YOU HAVE NOT MET YOUR MONTHLY PIRACY QUOTA

      YOU WILL BE TERMINATED,

      THANKS.

      • yamanii@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        This is actually how private trackers operate lol, I got banned from one because I forgot to torrent anything in over 3 months since I was playing a huge game during that time.

  • MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month 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.

    • would_be_appreciated@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month 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.

  • Max-P@lemmy.max-p.me
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month 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?

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month 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
        ·
        1 month 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
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 month 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.

  • 4lan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    I had Verizon threatened to shut down my internet. I had been receiving notices for close to a decade via email, I assumed they were all toothless. And that was true in the past

    I just called the Verizon copyright office and told them that it wasn’t me and I would change my Wi-Fi password 😂

    It was suspiciously easy as if they really don’t care and are just trying to be compliant

    I got a VPN and no longer have to deal with it

    • Majestic@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Just FYI. Comments nearly exactly like yours on Reddit were used in copyright troll lawsuits against ISPs as evidence they didn’t do enough to enforce copyright and were negligent and legally liable.

      Further when that didn’t work the copyright agency sued Reddit to try to unmask the identities of those people to bring legal proceedings against them to coerce them into testifying against their ISP at threat of being in trouble for their activities. Reddit was big enough to fight off the lawsuit luckily but be careful.

    • RaccoonBall@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      I feel like most people don’t even check their ISP email anymore. Why use that instead of the Gmail you’ve had for 18 years.

      • 4lan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        No they sent it to my main email, I don’t even know if I have a Verizon email address

  • BossDj@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

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