| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 97295 | 2009-02-11 04:49:00 | How is the new piracy-disconnection law going to be implemented, technically? | Kindel (6640) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 746683 | 2009-02-16 02:22:00 | Am I correct in understanding Hotspot shield is a web proxy service? Or is it a full network proxy? I'm wary of proxying all my information through a private company's servers. Especially because in the privacy policy it says: * “Automatically Collected” Information: When you utilize any of the AnchorFree Services including download or use the applicable software, we automatically record certain information from your web browser by using different types of proprietary technology, all of which is stored locally on your computer (“Automatically Collected Information”). Automatically Collected Information gathered at when you sign up for an AnchorFree account may include your Internet Protocol address (“IP Address”), the date and time of your visit to such AnchorFree Site, and your web browser type. Other Automatically Collected Information gathered by AnchorFree may include searches you perform, geographic location data, and all web sites that you visit and pages you view on such sites. Additionally, AnchorFree may store some combination of this data locally on your computer to aid its advertising targeting capabilities. If you use public torrent trackers, anyone can see what torrents you are uploading and downloading unless you go through a proxy. |
utopian201 (6245) | ||
| 746684 | 2009-02-16 02:46:00 | Proxy/anominiser sites can/do get raided & forced to hand over all details of who was using the service Has happened in the past(again a few years back the example Im thinking of) for some reason the owner of the Proxy/anominiser site's owner kept a permanent record of everyone who had used the service(why???). Got raided & forced to hand over all details. And just exactly who really runs these sites?? (putting on tinfoil hat here):banana:banana |
sroby (11519) | ||
| 746685 | 2009-02-16 06:03:00 | You guys should check these out that I also use: vidalia-project.net :thumbs::thumbs:and www.ixquick.com for my search engine!!!!:thumbs::thumbs::thumbs: | memphis (2869) | ||
| 746686 | 2009-02-16 19:02:00 | There must be millions of printer drivers being downloaded from p2p and torrent sites ! No more need for data caps ? |
Digby (677) | ||
| 746687 | 2009-02-16 20:34:00 | A few things come to mind here, after I had a rant on DarksideRG a while ago, which it turns out wasnt even 100% accurate: a) No matter what, you're going to be showing some sort of an IP address to somebody. The question becomes: do I trust the person in between me and what I want b) Torrents from the likes of TPB are the worst / easiest to get busted from, not to mention they've been raided a few times c) SSL encryption prevents your ISP from seeing what you're doing, but to be honest, ring the likes of Xnet and they really dont care Food for thought |
Chilling_Silence (9) | ||
| 746688 | 2009-02-16 21:37:00 | I have heard (in the past) of an ISP intercepting a download, then asking the user for the RAR password so they can check it & wanting an explaination for the size & amount of downloads. They will make an example of a few downloaders just to get the word 'out there' ISP's will never snoop on their customers. It's not their job to, the only reason this law is implemented is because ISP's are currently flogging off all the copyright notices sent to them (except Xnet). Anyway a majority of the bigger ISP's are going to be charging for these notices so if the holders don't pay up the user wont get a warning (a lot of notices are automated anyway). The only people who should be really worried are P2P/Torrent users. |
trinsic (6945) | ||
| 746689 | 2009-02-16 21:57:00 | The only people who should be really worried are P2P/Torrent users. And anyone who provides any form of internet access to customers like hotels, motels, airports, cafes etc. |
CYaBro (73) | ||
| 746690 | 2009-02-17 01:29:00 | Where in the amendment act does it say that ISPs are allowed to terminate the Internet connection of a customer without a trial? www.legislation.govt.nz 92A:Internet service provider must have policy for terminating accounts of repeat infringers “(1) An Internet service provider must adopt and reasonably implement a policy that provides for termination, in appropriate circumstances, of the account with that Internet service provider of a repeat infringer. “(2) In subsection (1), repeat infringer means a person who repeatedly infringes the copyright in a work by using 1 or more of the Internet services of the Internet service provider to do a restricted act without the consent of the copyright owner. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 92C: Internet service provider liability for storing infringing material “(1) This section applies if— “(a) an Internet service provider stores material provided by a user of the service; and “(b) the material infringes copyright in a work (other than as a result of any modification by the Internet service provider). “(2) The Internet service provider does not infringe copyright in the work by storing the material unless— “(a) the Internet service provider— “(i) knows or has reason to believe that the material infringes copyright in the work; and “(ii) does not, as soon as possible after becoming aware of the infringing material, delete the material or prevent access to it; or “(b) the user of the service who provided the material is acting on behalf of, or at the direction of, the Internet service provider. “(3) A court, in determining whether, for the purposes of subsection (2), an Internet service provider knows or has reason to believe that material infringes copyright in a work, must take account of all relevant matters, including whether the Internet service provider has received a notice of infringement in relation to the infringement. “(4) An Internet service provider who deletes a user’s material or prevents access to it because the Internet service provider knows or has reason to believe that it infringes copyright in a work must, as soon as possible, give notice to the user that the material has been deleted or access to it prevented. “(5) Nothing in this section limits the right of the copyright owner to injunctive relief in relation to a user’s infringement or any infringement by the Internet service provider. :confused: |
Renmoo (66) | ||
| 746691 | 2009-02-17 01:35:00 | ISP's will never snoop on their customers. It's not their job to, the only reason this law is implemented is because ISP's are currently flogging off all the copyright notices sent to them (except Xnet). Anyway a majority of the bigger ISP's are going to be charging for these notices so if the holders don't pay up the user wont get a warning (a lot of notices are automated anyway). The only people who should be really worried are P2P/Torrent users. ISP's HAVE snooped in the past in NZ(for heavy data use by home a/c's) & given the 3rd degree to those users. Its happened before in NZ, no reason to assume it will NEVER happen again. I agree, its going to be the P2P/torrent users who get caught first(as is starting to happen now) My point was that ISP's arnt idiots, they have a pretty good idea of whats going on with home users gobbling up 10-20G per month. I wouldnt be suprised if they make a few examples of these users just so they can claim they are being pro-active with the anti-piracy thing. |
sroby (11519) | ||
| 746692 | 2009-02-17 03:33:00 | My point was that ISP's arnt idiots, they have a pretty good idea of whats going on with home users gobbling up 10-20G per month. They would have to look at exactly what is being downloaded and from where - My account with Telstra is under a Home user account, yet I work from home, and I have asked several times and Telstra are quite happy to leave it as is. The point ??? I download approx 25 - 60Gb / Month - all in updates for customers, Big Downloads from MS and other legal software etc --and the movies or songs have been purchased Via Itunes / Digirama. So they cant simply look at quantity. Some people on the Xnets Torrent plan :rolleyes: - Go figure. Speaking of torrents - The outcome of this (crave.cnet.co.uk) will be "interesting" |
wainuitech (129) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 5 | |||||