Items tagged "BitTorrent"
Three Reasons Why Google’s Censorship of “Piracy-Related Terms” is a Terrible IdeaJanuary 27, 2011 BitTorrent , DMCA , Filtering , MPAA , Piracy
Earlier today, word spread that Google, presumably bowing to pressure from Hollywood and the recording industry, had begun blocking certain “piracy-related terms” from its autocomplete search feature. As it turns out, the terms in question are “BitTorrent,” “Rapidshare” and “Megaupload”. There are plenty of reasons why this is a terrible idea but for brevity’s sake, I will limit myself to three:Read More
RCN Settlement Demonstrates the Perils of ISP Self-RegulationApril 20, 2010 BitTorrent , Network Neutrality , Non-Discrimination , P2P , Regulatory Reform
When the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals called into question the FCC’s ability to protect broadband users earlier this month, the ongoing debate about the legal classification of broadband services took on a new urgency. While we’ve argued that the Commission should waste no time in reclassifying broadband as a “telecommunications” (Title II) service, others have suggested that no action from the Commission is necessary, seeing how Comcast’s blocking of BitTorrent was an isolated act that no other ISP is likely to emulate. As if on cue, cable provider RCN has provided us with a timely reminder that Comcast isn’t the only ISP that has stood accused of blocking its users’ traffic. In a proposed settlement for a suit brought against the ISP for throttling its users’ peer-to-peer traffic, RCN is not only not held accountable for its actions, it’s also not prohibited from using similar network management techniques in the future. As this series of events demonstrates, if we’re going to rely on the ISPs to self-regulate, we might as well kiss the open Internet goodbye.Read More
The FCC Lacks the Authority to Protect Internet Users–Now What?April 6, 2010 BitTorrent , Broadband , Comcast , FCC , Network Neutrality
Ever since the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of Comcast in the Comcast/BitTorrent case this morning, the tech policy blogosphere has been scrambling to unpack the court’s decision and figure out what it means for the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), ISPs, public interest groups and various other stakeholders. But what about the rest of us? Who will protect the Internet user whose connection is blocked, filtered or throttled? Who will stop ISPs from blocking services that compete with their own offerings (VoIP or Internet video services, for example) or from instituting separate pricing tiers for those who wish to use their connection for gaming or video streaming? Who will ensure that tomorrow’s innovative web service can reach users without being blocked or degraded? The answer to these questions might surprise you: no one.Read More
Landmark Australian Ruling Deals a Blow to Three Strikes Down UnderFebruary 4, 2010 BitTorrent , DMCA , Filtering , Safe Harbor , Three Strikes
For those of us who believe that the Internet should remain an open, democratic and non-discriminatory platform, with few exceptions, the last two years have brought a steady stream of bad news from Down Under. First, there were rumblings that Australia was seeking to implement a “three strikes” policy toward those accused of online filesharing. Next, New Zealand came close to instituting its own three strikes mandate, though thanks to the efforts of activists, that deeply-flawed law was struck down at the last minute. Finally, after a number of previous, failed attempts, the Australian government announced that it plans to mandate the use of real-time filtering technologies on public ISPs sometime during the next year. Just when it seemed like no one in the Australian and New Zealand governments appreciated the damaging effects of such policies, an Australian federal court judge has ruled that the ISP iiNet is not responsible for the actions of its subscribers. In the landmark ruling (full text here), which will likely have ramifications in the U.S. and elsewhere, the judge rebuffs Hollywood’s attempt to require iiNet to act as a copyright cop, dealing a blow to three strikes in the process. Let’s take a closer look.Read More
Since When Did Nearly 10 Years of Study Become a “Rush.”October 18, 2009 BitTorrent , Comcast , Network Neutrality , Spectrum
Sometimes, the Network Neutrality debate makes me feel like a grumpy old policy wonk. Well, I suppose I am a grumpy old policy wonk, but its rather unfair of the folks in the NN debate to make me feel that way — especially when they know better.
The most recent reminder of my age and wisdom/oncoming decrepitude is the rather silly argument that we are somehow "rushing" into network neutrality — because nearly ten years of study and debate cannot possibly be enough to justify this being the first major policy initiative for the Genachowski FCC.
Yes, it was 9 years ago last month when the FCC launched its first inquiry asking how to classify "high speed access to the Internet over cable and other facilities.Read More
This would have been a funny story, destined for the “weird” section of the hallway bulletin board. Unfortunately, someone is taking this so seriously that we’ve now had a Congressional hearing that lambasted the publisher of LimeWire software for security flaws that the software doesn’t have!
But now, a public-service announcement: top-secret files don’t belong on computers that have unrestricted access to the Internet. In fact, there are a whole set of rules to keep classified material from mixing with “normal” computers. If some classified file has wound up on the Peer-to-peer file-sharing networks, then something has gone terribly wrong many steps before that happened!
So, here’s the breakdown:
Limewire is file-sharing software. It’s feature-rich, stable, and mature. It’s also not very popular — a distant third in the popularity polls behind #1 BitTorrent and #2 Emule.Read More
TV Anywhere Gets A Boost: Paging Christine Varney! (and Jon Lebowitz and, eventually, Julius GenachoJune 24, 2009 BitTorrent , Broadband , Data Caps , FCC , Network Neutrality
Time Warner and Comcast have announced a new pilot program for their TV Anywhere initiative. The 5,000 customers in the pilot will get access to cable programming content not otherwise available online — as long as they prove they subscribe to a subscription video service — or "MVPD" — like cable or FIOS. (MVPD stands for "multichannel video programming distributor" and means anything that sells you a whole bunch of cable channels.Read More