US ISP Disconnects Alleged Pirates for 6 Months - Polidicks

[img]http://thepiratesdilemma.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/torrentfreak.JPG[/img] [url=http://torrentfreak.com/us-isp-disconnects-alleged-pirates-for-6-months-100924/]Source[/url] [release] The United States Internet Service provider Suddenlink has effectively implemented a three-strikes policy for repeated copyright infringers. After three DMCA notices, alleged copyright infringers are disconnected from the Internet for six months, without a refund. According to a company representative, the DMCA requires them to take such drastic measures. suddenlinkJust a few days ago France started warning thousands of file-sharers as part of the controversial Hadopi anti-piracy law that was introduced there earlier this year. Upon receiving their third warning, alleged copyright infringers will lose their internet connection for several weeks. Across the pond in the United States, there is an Internet provider that has single-handedly implemented a similar scheme. Suddenlink, one of the top 10 cable companies in the country, disconnects subscribers for six months after they have received three DMCA notices. According to a company representative, Suddenlink is required to take this action under the DMCA. TorrentFreak has been in contact with one of the customers who had his Internet connection disconnected for three alleged copyright violations. The affected subscriber provided detailed chatlogs with Suddenlink where the following explanation for the drastic measure is given. [quote] Customer: I want to reconnect my internet service. They said I got 3 DMCA letters and they said that by law I had to be disconnected. Is that true? Suddenlink rep: Yes, your internet was disconnected due to DMCA. When the internet is disconnected due to DMCA, it can not be reconnected for a minimum of 6 months. Customer: The DMCA makes that requirement? Suddenlink rep: Yes. Customer: So you’re stating, for the record, that by law, the DMCA law, that you have to disconnect users for receiving 3 DMCA letters? Suddenlink rep: You have no choice in the matter. Suddenlink rep: It is the DMCA policy that it can not be reconnected for 6 months. Suddenlink rep: It may be the DMCA policy or it may be the way we go about following the DMCA guidelines. Customer: The law states that? Suddenlink rep: Once the 3rd offense occurs, it can not be reconnected for 6 months. Suddenlink Rep: The information I have on the DMCA states: This law was enacted in 1998 to protect against illegal downloading of copyrighted material like movies, music, etc. As an Internet Service Provider (ISP), Suddenlink , and other ISPs, must implement a policy of terminating internet service of customers who repeatedly share copyrighted files. [/quote] The explanation given above is pure nonsense of course. The DMCA does not and never has required ISPs to disconnect users. For some reason Suddenlink customer support was told to communicate this lie to its users. What is true, however, is that Suddenlink will disconnect subscribers after three alleged warnings. TorrentFreak contacted the company and we were told that this measure is hidden in their Terms of Service. Although there is no word about a three-strikes policy, we did find the following sentence that could be used to justify the disconnections. “If you continue to transfer Copyrighted Material illegally, you are violating Suddenlink’s policies and Suddenlink may take further action, including limiting your Internet download capacity, suspending or terminating your account, or a range of other measures.” In reality, this means that subscribers will be disconnected from the Internet for 6 months without a refund. The subscriber we talked to was informed about the penalty over the phone and never received any documents to back it up. Although Suddenlink’s three-strikes policy is the most extreme, the company is not the only US Internet provider that has implemented it. Cox is using a similar scheme, but with the major difference that the disconnection is limited to a few hours, not six months. Disconnecting users based on claims of copyright holders and without any form of trial seems to be an extreme measure for a company that provides such an essential service as Internet access. Suddenlink told TorrentFreak that they are within their rights, just like Comcast said two years ago when they started blocking BitTorrent traffic.[/release]

what the fuck is this

That's just retarded on the ISP's part. Business is business.

oh fuck dammit shit dick Suddenlink (they are my ISP)

What the fuck? The DCMA makes ISPs excempt from liablity of what their users do. Why would an ISP disconnect users when they have no liability. There's no requirement in the 1998 DCMA for "three-strikes".

Looks like they need to rebrand to "suddenunlink". Also; do they disconnect at the allegation of pirating, or after the proof of pirating?

[QUOTE=Sumtoxx;25029239]Looks like they need to rebrand to "suddenunlink". Also; do they disconnect at the allegation of pirating, or after the proof of pirating?[/QUOTE] Allegation, it looks like. The title says "Alleged" so I'd assume...

brb getting a job at suddenlink and accusing everyone I don't like of piracy.

How are they supposed to get their Linux Distros now?!

[QUOTE=Qombat;25029423]Allegation, it looks like. The title says "Alleged" so I'd assume...[/QUOTE] I forsee a court case if this keeps on. Its almost as legal as going to prison for just possibly owning illegal drugs. The police wouldn't have to find them, just if they /thought/ you had some, you're going to prison. Seriously. Has everyone forgot the meaning of the internet in the first place? It's meant to be free, and despite what ISPs want, its going to stay that way lol. It really would come to war if they tried to censor it. [editline]01:37AM[/editline] [QUOTE=Encryption;25029442]How are they supposed to get their Linux Distros now?![/QUOTE] very fucking carefully ._.

[QUOTE=Sumtoxx;25029519] Seriously. Has everyone forgot the meaning of the internet in the first place? It's meant to be free, and despite what ISPs want, its going to stay that way lol. It really would come to war if they tried to censor it. [/QUOTE] Yeah right. Internet is not free. Just because it's virtual doesn't mean you should be able to distribute paid content without permission. Look at china, most of their internet is censored. Do you see a war? No. No one will bother starting a war just because they crack down on pirates. So yeah, stop stealing and this won't affect you. (In before piracy is not stealing, yes it is.)

It should made that if the company has proof that you have illegally downloaded then they should be able to. How ever it is quite stupid that they will go an disconnect your Internet for alleged copyright infringement. It possible that we could go and sue for alleged bullshit if it is untrue. Sad that you probably be not be able to go to another ISP due to bullshit monopoly regulations for towns and such. Can someone please elaborate on this for me.

[QUOTE=johan_sm;25029693]Yeah right. Internet is not free. Just because it's virtual doesn't mean you should be able to distribute paid content without permission. Look at china, most of their internet is censored. Do you see a war? No. No one will bother starting a war just because they crack down on pirates. So yeah, stop stealing and this won't affect you. (In before piracy is not stealing, yes it is.)[/QUOTE] No, this would still affect those that aren't stealing. Just being an "alleged" thief is enough to get you disconnected. I don't pirate software or digital goods, nor do I condone it. But when an ISP decides to punish those people by blinding stabing their hand in the server rack and unplugging people, shits going to go down. In the US, you're innocent until proven guilty. Not innocent until you're thought to be guilty. It's their service and they can do what they like though. But if this catches on and all ISPs start doing it, theres going to be some serious internet rage.

[QUOTE=johan_sm;25029693] (In before piracy is not stealing, yes it is.)[/QUOTE] it's more comparable to copying important government documents than say, walking out of a store with something expensive and not paying

[QUOTE=Red Toaster;25029784]it's more comparable to copying important government documents than say, walking out of a store with something expensive and not paying[/QUOTE] No it's not. It's like taking something for free that you're supposed to pay for. Even if the original is still there, you copied it without permission. If it was possible in real life, we would all be living happy dreams, but since digital is not real, a bit different rules apply. Someone still spent time and most likely money to create this or that and you just copy it without paying. That demotivates people from creating new stuff. Important government documents are not for sale, not to the public atleast. Virtual goods are. Using something without paying is stealing in my book.

It's still not stealing.

Suddenlink, customers! None of them!

[QUOTE=imadaman;25030116]It's still not stealing.[/QUOTE] the grand debate huh

[QUOTE=johan_sm;25029911] Using something without paying is stealing in my book.[/QUOTE] I agreed you up till here. If I download Ubuntu.. its free. I'm not stealing anything from anybody. Not everything that is free (of monetary value) doesn't mean its stealing.

[QUOTE=Richard Simmons;25030188]I agreed you up till here. If I download Ubuntu.. its free. I'm not stealing anything from anybody. Not everything that is free (of monetary value) doesn't mean its stealing.[/QUOTE] I thought common sense would tell people that I meant paid content. Free stuff is free. No stealing there obviously.

[QUOTE=johan_sm;25030210]I thought common sense would tell people that I meant paid content. Free stuff is free. No stealing there obviously.[/QUOTE] Stealing has to deprive the original owner of the item.

[QUOTE=ZekeTwo;25030251]Stealing has to deprive the original owner of the item.[/QUOTE] Then I guess it isn't "stealing" by definition, but it shouldn't be legal either

[QUOTE=johan_sm;25030210]I thought common sense would tell people that I meant paid content. Free stuff is free. No stealing there obviously.[/QUOTE] You can't grab common sense out of a broad view, like your sentence. I like to think thats common sense there. But with that to narrow it down; we all know downloading something illegally (pirating) is stealing. And downloading something legally (Open source or other lax legal binding) is well.. free content.

[QUOTE=ZekeTwo;25030251]Stealing has to deprive the original owner of the item.[/QUOTE] In real life maybe. In virtual one it doesn't. It's like patents. You can copy it, but that would be stealing.

[QUOTE=johan_sm;25030284]In real life maybe. In virtual one it doesn't. It's like patents. You can copy it, but that would be stealing.[/QUOTE] True.. but some of these patents are stealing on their own. [editline]0000[/editline] [QUOTE=ZekeTwo;25030448]I think the patent system is just as retarded as the copyright system.[/QUOTE] [img_thumb]http://www.facepunch.com/fp/rating/tick.png[/img_thumb]

[QUOTE=johan_sm;25030284]In real life maybe. In virtual one it doesn't. It's like patents. You can copy it, but that would be stealing.[/QUOTE] I think the patent system is just as retarded as the copyright system. Besides, a patent owner is only going to sue you if you steal his ideas for profit. If you copy his widget and build it yourself for personal use nobody will give a shit and you won't be breaking the law. Copyright should be the same.

[QUOTE=ZekeTwo;25030448]I think the patent system is just as retarded as the copyright system. Besides, a patent owner is only going to sue you if you steal his ideas for profit. If you copy his widget and build it yourself for personal use nobody will give a shit and you won't be breaking the law. Copyright should be the same.[/QUOTE] So it should be ok to acquire virtual items that someone spent time making for free? Then why am I still buying games? I should just go and pirate them, I mean, it's not stealing after all.

[QUOTE=johan_sm;25030665]So it should be ok to acquire virtual items that someone spent time making for free? Then why am I still buying games? I should just go and pirate them, I mean, it's not stealing after all.[/QUOTE] If you're not burning copies of your pirated shit to sell on the street corner you're not costing the developers anything.

Oh god, I have Suddenlink. :ninja:

[QUOTE=ZekeTwo;25030698]If you're not burning copies of your pirated shit to sell on the street corner you're not costing the developers anything.[/QUOTE] Except you give people a free source of getting something, and most people would rather get something for free than have to pay full price So yeah, you're filtering out the buyers, less loyal people will torrent it to the point where the only people that will buy the games are loyal consumers