Music Industry Sues Charter For Failing to Disconnect Pirates' Internet Service

[Lurick]

You read the title correctly, the RIAA and their ilk are suing Charter Communications claiming, and I quote:

Quote

Despite these alleged policies, and despite receiving hundreds of thousands of infringement notices from Plaintiffs, as well as thousands of similar notices from other copyright owners, Charter knowingly permitted specifically identified repeat infringers to continue to use its network to infringe. Rather than disconnect the Internet access of blatant repeat infringers to curtail their infringement, Charter knowingly continued to provide these subscribers with the Internet access that enabled them to continue to illegally download or distribute Plaintiffs' copyrighted works unabated. Charter's provision of high-speed Internet service to known infringers materially contributed to these direct infringements.

 

They are trying to argue that providing high speed internet means Charter, and other ISPs, are profiting off piracy and enabling it. It's almost like they don't even know what an ISP is or does and how their business model works, they provide internet. Most places literally have one or two (if they are lucky) choice(s) of ISPs who offer maybe 3 or 4 plans. I guess because Charter recently upped their minimum in a lot of areas to 200Mbps that means they want more people to download pirated material and consume more bandwidth? LOL.

I do wonder, does this mean, if successful, I can sue the RIAA for making it easy to pirate their work, thus enabling piracy in the first place? Perhaps I can sue bottled water companies for keeping criminals hydrated or oil companies for powering the cars that let criminals get away?

 

Quote

Many of Charter's customers are motivated to subscribe to Charter's service because it allows them to download music and other copyrighted content—including unauthorized content—as efficiently as possible. Accordingly, in its consumer marketing material, including material directed to Colorado customers, Charter has touted how its service enables subscribers to download and upload large amounts of content at "blazing-fast Internet speeds." Charter has told existing and prospective customers that its high-speed service enables subscribers to "download just about anything instantly," and subscribers have the ability to "download 8 songs in 3 seconds." Charter has further told subscribers that its Internet service "has the speed you need for everything you do online." In exchange for this service, Charter has charged its customers monthly fees ranging in price based on the speed of service.

 

Link: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2019/03/music-labels-sue-charter-complain-that-high-internet-speeds-fuel-piracy/

[Radium_Angel]

I was hanging on the (original) Napster during the DSL days....

So I'm calling BS on this.

 

 

As an aside, I have an original Napster server, I won it at eBay auction, complete with logo stickers, and lots and lots of .mp3s still on the drives.

[PlayStation 2]

Guess it's time to go back to DSL because big brother RIAA can't believe that no one wants to pay for their shitty music.

[Jito463]

Ah, RIAA.  Still trying to pretend you're relevant.

[martward]

Yeah that is just not what the lawsuit is about. I get how that might look if you only take a couple of the sentences from the article and post it, but if you actually read the article the lawsuit is about the fact that Charter doesn't block users even though they are aware that these users are pirating stuff. 

 

"While the act of providing higher Internet speeds clearly isn't a violation of any law, ISPs can be held liable for their users' copyright infringement if the ISPs repeatedly fail to disconnect repeat infringers." This is exactly what is happening, they are being held liable for not doing what, apparently, they are supposed to do by law.

 

Now I don't care about the RIAA and I have no opinion on the matter whatsoever, but this post is basically how misinformation is being spread across the internet so please think before you post.

[Catsrules]

Quote

Despite these alleged policies, and despite receiving hundreds of thousands of infringement notices from Plaintiffs, as well as thousands of similar notices from other copyright owners, Charter knowingly permitted specifically identified repeat infringers to continue to use its network to infringe.

To be fair It sounds like the main reason they are mad is because Charter isn't disconnecting users that they say have been infringing. The internet speed is just BS to try and make their case sound like a bigger issue. (Every second we wast 8 more songs are getting stolen oh no!!)

 

 

[Jito463]

4 minutes ago, martward said:

the lawsuit is about the fact that Charter doesn't block users even though they are aware that these users are pirating stuff.

Which is still ridiculous.  The RIAA is asking the ISP's to behave as moderators for the internet, which none of us want.  Their job is to provide access, nothing more.  This is why I never thought it was a good idea for some ISP's to cooperate with the RIAA and MPAA back in the day.  It will never be enough.  Once the ISP caves in to one demand, the media groups will just make more demands of them.

[Radium_Angel]

8 minutes ago, martward said:

"While the act of providing higher Internet speeds clearly isn't a violation of any law, ISPs can be held liable for their users' copyright infringement if the ISPs repeatedly fail to disconnect repeat infringers." This is exactly what is happening, they are being held liable for not doing what, apparently, they are supposed to do by law.

Gotta prove they are doing what they are being accused of...

A random "notice of infringement" is not proof.

 

This is what happens when insatiable greed meets immovable stupidity (RIAA vs ISP) 

[Windows7ge]

Taking all of this in all I can say for us is the necessity of a VPN is an ever accelerating requirement. What you use it for is your own business but if ISPs start cracking down on our online activity...

[martward]

7 minutes ago, Jito463 said:

Which is still ridiculous.  The RIAA is asking the ISP's to behave as moderators for the internet, which none of us want.  Their job is to provide access, nothing more.  This is why I never thought it was a good idea for some ISP's to cooperate with the RIAA and MPAA back in the day.  It will never be enough.  Once the ISP caves in to one demand, the media groups will just make more demands of them.

 

4 minutes ago, Radium_Angel said:

Gotta prove they are doing what they are being accused of...

A random "notice of infringement" is not proof.

 

This is what happens when insatiable greed meets immovable stupidity (RIAA vs ISP) 

 

I see where you are both coming from and perhaps you are right, I honestly have no knowledge about this. However right now this is the law and if someone doesn't abide to the law they can get sued. If the law is stupid it should be changed, but saying that RIAA is suing ISPs for providing too fast internet is just not true.

[Jito463]

2 minutes ago, Windows7ge said:

Taking all of this in all I can say for us is the necessity of a VPN is an ever accelerating requirement.

This year, after 20+ years of using exclusively DSL, I finally switched to Cable (mainly because my DSL provider ticked me off for the last time).  One of the first things I did once I decided to switch, was finally get a VPN.  The best thing I can say about DSL, is that most of the providers don't care one whit what you're using it for, unless it's blatantly illegal.

[paddy-stone]

If they have a case, and they can identify the perpetrators then they should take them to court, not sue the ISPs... my bet is they can't identify them as they're just using IP addresses. So trying to pass the burden onto the ISP.

[Jito463]

1 minute ago, martward said:

However right now this is the law and if someone doesn't abide to the law they can get sued.

Nope, it's not law.  This is a civil suit, not a criminal one.  The RIAA is trying to claim that Charter should be doing this, but there's no law requiring them to do so.

[Ithanul]

1 hour ago, Jito463 said:

Nope, it's not law.  This is a civil suit, not a criminal one.  The RIAA is trying to claim that Charter should be doing this, but there's no law requiring them to do so.

Actually, the ISPs have to comply with the DMCA notices if they want to keep certain protections from infringement lawsuits.

 

Quote

 As long as these ISPs comply with DMCA notices and make reasonable efforts to stop copyright infringement, they are protected from infringement lawsuits. This protection is valid if ISPs didn't have knowing participation in the infringement and they didn't gain financial benefits from it. - https://www.upcounsel.com/dmca-notice

Probably why the RIAA is bringing up money into the whole deal.  They want to make it seem the ISP is gaining some short of financial benefit which in turn the ISP loses protection from the DMCA.

[LostElric]

From reading the quote, it's not about fast internet speeds but rather that they aren't disconnecting infringers. Though my general understanding is that the Six Strikes agreement isn't in place any more.

[Jito463]

7 minutes ago, Ithanul said:

Actually, the ISPs have to compy with the DMCA notices if they want to keep certain protections from infringement lawsuits.

 

Probably why the RIAA is bringing up money into the whole deal.  They want to make it seem the ISP is gaining some short of financial benefit which in turn the ISP loses protection from the DMCA.

Touché.

[RejZoR]

Music industry, just like movie industry is SO OUT OF TOUCH with reality it's not even funny anymore.

 

You know what made me stop pirating games? Good service and availability. Steam and GOG made me buy everything I've pirated in the past and I haven't pirated a single game for like 15 years now. I can buy nearly ANY game at ANY time for relatively reasonable prices from a comfort of my home in one or two places.

 

What do I have for music? Like 300 billion services crumbled all over the internet of which some small % allows downloading of songs as MP3, the rest are some locked down proprietary services which are of no use to me if I want to simply copy MP3's to USB drive and listen it in my car.

 

Movies? Hahahaha, good one. If you want to watch a blockbuster movie without having to go to a damn cinema, well, tough luck, you can't. At all, even though I'd be willing to pay the price of the ticket in cinema to watch it one time at home. Streaming services? Sure, we have Netflix. Just sucks I live in Europe and I get like 1/4 of content Americans get, yet I pay MORE (coz $9,99 = 9,99€ for them). The music and movie market is absolute garbage and I'm not really surprised people prefer to pirate things instead of opt for these archaic outdated business models that only cater to their rich owners and not to customers.

 

Give me a Steam equivalent for music and movies and I'll spend hundreds on it. But so far, I can only do that for games. Hell, I bought many games that I've not even played yet and god knows if I ever will. I don't buy nearly any music I listen apart from few tracks from Beatport and for some good indie artists for which I make an exception and go out of my comfort zone to support them. I sure as hell won't do that for some faceless mega corporation.

 

Bottom line, this is the problem they created and now they are blaming everyone else but themselves. Heh.

[Catsrules]

6 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

Music industry, just like movie industry is SO OUT OF TOUCH with reality it's not even funny anymore.

 

You know what made me stop pirating games? Good service and availability. Steam and GOG made me buy everything I've pirated in the past and I haven't pirated a single game for like 15 years now. I can buy nearly ANY game at ANY time for relatively reasonable prices from a comfort of my home in one or two places.

....

 

...Give me a Steam equivalent for music and movies and I'll spend hundreds on it. But so far, I can only do that for games. Hell, I bought many games that I've not even played yet and god knows if I ever will. I don't buy nearly any music I listen apart from few tracks from Beatport and for some good indie artists for which I make an exception and go out of my comfort zone to support them. I sure as hell won't do that for some faceless mega corporation.

 

Bottom line, this is the problem they created and now they are blaming everyone else but themselves. Heh.

I don't know what services exist in Europe but don't things like Google Play and iTunes exists? They are basically the Steam equivalent for Music / Movies / TV.  

[Brooksie359]

27 minutes ago, Catsrules said:

I don't know what services exist in Europe but don't things like Google Play and iTunes exists? They are basically the Steam equivalent for Music / Movies / TV.  

I was literally thinking the same thing. I have rented movies from a ton of different platforms like that. I used to use iTunes and you can easily pay for the music you want just like you can with steam. Honestly for the longest time if I wanted to listen to music at home I would simply play music on YouTube while I do stuff. Now i have spotify premium for the sole purpose of being able to play a large playlist at work to drown out my coworkers. I would say there are plenty of ways to get music and movies legally. 

[GilmourD]

1 hour ago, Jito463 said:

Ah, RIAA.  Still trying to pretend you're relevant.

I'm a musician. The RIAA can DIAF.

[Fasterthannothing]

All I'll say is one no matter what you use it for you should have a VPN it's just another good level of protection security wise. Also all these media companies brought it on themselves making like a hundred streaming services for media and having companies that have exclusives making it so you have to buy a ton of different subscriptions to get everything you want. Screw the fractured online streaming services and all this ala carte crap is only making it worse. All they need to do is make one giant service where every company has their media on it and boom piracy is almost instantly gone.

 

 

[maartendc]

Can anyone please tell these people it is not 1999 anymore? Who even downloads music anymore? Everyone just uses Spotify or Youtube.

[Trik'Stari]

The music industry seriously needs to go eat a dick.

 

Piracy will always happen, get over it and be happy you are as successful as you are.

[S w a t s o n]

As much as these guys can go suck a dick, I do not think the argument is that the speed itself is the problem. If you read the whole paragraph it's clear they mean that charter just never took actions against people that were pirating. Obviously having higher speed internet makes it more viable to pirate large amounts of content but that does apply to every ISP

[dfsdfgfkjsefoiqzemnd]

12 minutes ago, maartendc said:

Who even downloads music anymore? Everyone just uses Spotify or Youtube.

Downloading some music as I write this ... because the original CD is too scratched up to do a proper rip.