UK “Three-Strikes” Could Prove IneffectiveAdded: Friday, June 14th, 2013
Category: Recent Headlines Involving File Sharing > Current Events
Tags:ET, p2p, Torrent, Piracy, Peer To Peer, Network, Hackers, Internet, BitTorrent, Google, utorrent, bitcomet, extratorrent, www.extrattorrent.com, 2013
After successfully managing to ban such file-sharing services as The Pirate Bay and Newzbin2, the British government is now going to introduce a “three-strikes” system. However, Ofcom’s quarterly report reveals that the system may appear ineffective against digital piracy.
The report covers November 2012 – January 2013 and reveals that warning letters, which are sent by Internet service providers to their subscribers alleged of sharing copyrighted material and threaten to suspend their access to the web, would only have the desired effect on 16% of the users. In the meanwhile, the outfit’s previous report showed that 18% of subscribers shared illegal content at least once.
The report also reveals some facts that the content industry should consider before blocking websites at DNS level. Internet users agreed upon 3 vital changes which would make them stop violating copyright: 28% said that affordable legitimate services would make them stop from downloading unauthorized material, 24% said they needed a system which clearly determined which material is legitimate and which is not, while 22% agreed that availability is an important issue that urges people to pirate.
In addition, over 40% of all Internet consumers admitted that they weren’t particularly confident about what was legitimate online and what wasn’t. The research found out that for music, movies and TV programs, users who chose both legitimate and unauthorized content spent more on that particular content type than people who consumed the content 100% either way. There are many reasons why this happens. The statistics shows that almost 50% choose illegal content because it is free, 40% appreciated convenience, and 36% also mentioned that it is fast. There are also many ways to access the illegal content. The most popular source of pirated content is peer-to-peer, with 35% Internet users preferring the decentralized method. In the meanwhile, cyberlockers account only for 12%.
The experts believe that the results of the research should bring further changes to the Obligations Code. The industry and the government have to understand that the new legislation should be mutually beneficial, but for some reason they don’t.
June 14th,2013Posted by:
Friday, June 14th, 2013
|posted by (2013-06-14 20:14:19)|
|"The industry and the government have to understand that the new legislation should be mutually beneficial, but for some reason they dont"|
Because they are greedy barstewards who's only consideration of us is that we spend all our money on their products. They are greedy kunts who only care about the bottom line - Profit.
|posted by (2013-06-14 20:21:06)|
|fiRst the DHSS,,, NOW THE NET,,,,,,|
|posted by (2013-06-14 21:08:57)|
|The movie industry makes more than enough money off advertising and the cinemas. End of story.|
|posted by (2013-06-14 23:53:52)|
|Where does the DHSS come into it?|
|Where the hell do you get successfully banned pirate bay im in the uk and still get access to it on a daily basis if i wish.|
|People start using TOR browser and hide my ass search engine you ARE being spied on.Ask Edward Snowdon|
|The "industry" is loosing money compared to a decade ago but first of all they just assume that's because of piracy|
although that will account for SOME of their lost revenue where do they even consider how many more people are living on, just above or below the poverty line EVEN if theyre working full time nowadays?
Where do they factor in the HUGE ammounts of people who after only paying rent or mortgage, gas, electric, water, rates, commuting and food have little to no money left as well as some having to hit credit cards just to meet their basic living costs
The "industry" seems to labour under the delusion that profits should magically increase year on year even during a recession
Maybe, if they want to see more profits they should impose a 2 million dollar maximum payment for any actor in any film right across the board, all studios, all film companies this would not only create instant profits but would also mean cinema prices could be reduced which in turn might tempt more people back to see films there as it costing around £40 for a family of 4 before you even start buying the overpriced food and drinks is why so many people cant justify going anymore
The "industry" needs to realise that even they need to change their business model in line with the social and economic climate or just go broke due to their own greed and inflexibility because new and more rational thinking companies will always be there to fill the void the dinosaurs leave with most probably more affordable and appealing marketing ideas
|its always been proven ineffective.|
and why are they using an american baseball term?
maybe better is... an empty pint and your nackered
|thats right #1, they claim to be losing money, but they are losing money the same way the oil companies are... not|
if they made quality products and had reasonable prices, they would make more.
on the other hand, why is gasoline so expensive? there is no shortage of anything, and just 1 company makes 140 billion dollars profit in a year. why not reduce the price to a normal amount and make just 50 billion, isn't that enough?
|VPN.. Problem solved!|
|@9 If you looke at their earnings over the last 10 years and then factor in inflation theyre about $5 billion short of making "just as much" as they were a decade ago|
When the huge increases in the cost of actors pay, special effects and all the other involved ancilliary costs as well as the rises in the cost of living get factored in theyre not only turning over less as an industry but the profit margin from that turnover is also much lower. Still making A profit yes, but you don't have to be operating in negative turnover to be losing money based on an earlier years turnover its very basic economics easily highlighted by comparing the price of a gallon of gas, a car, a house (maybe a bad example in the US lol) or a loaf of bread today compared to 10 years ago and then see if the movie industries turnover has increased by the same percentage
Oil companies also aren't such a good example either.
YES they make a lot of money, but most of the cost of a gallon of fuel at the pump goes to the government in most western countries, as high as 75% in some. Then you have the cost of actually get it out of the ground (VERY expensive), transportation costs including the road and sea tankers, refining, storage, safety precautions etc etc
And then whats left as "profit" from that 25-40% is then divided up between the petrol station, refiniries, various transportation companies and the actual company that got it out of the ground to begin with
And of course theres the greenies and environMENTAList lobbyists to thank for giving huge tax hikes a façade of being reasonable by claiming the planet will catch fire in 10 years whilst they all jet around the world to conferences instead of teleconferencing about it lol
|posted by (2013-06-17 01:12:51)|
|If an actor can get a studio to pay $2M for a movie why shouldn't he? They only pay them that much because they believe they will make that much more money than they would have without him. Isn't it bad enough we have a commie in the Whitehouse?|
Hmm, the spell checker didn't like how I spelt "Whitehouse", it suggested "whore house"!
|Virgin Media here have blocked access to certain torrent sites and even blocking most of the mirrors. I dont think they are going to bother with this 3 strike system. I really hope they dont start blocking access to this site|
|tpb will never go away! either will kat! NEVER!|
|Those 10 minutes when i couldn't access the pirate bay because my isp blocked it were the longest 10 minutes of my life. To me it seemed like almost 15 minutes.|
|Btw TOR browser doesnt work for me to get on virgin media blocked sites here in the UK|
|it all sucks this blocking rubbish we should be allowed to download what we like!|
|What nobody ever seems to mention is the complete lack of logic in all this bullshit|
Lets say we have a student who works part time for some pocket money. So he/she earns lets say 50 dollars/quid a week
That will be for going on the piss with their mates and other things their parents wont fund
Going to the cinema would be a huge chunk of that money so chances are they wouldn't be going to the cinema even if they couldn't download films or buy pirate copies of them
But as they can they download them with me so far?
So then along comes the movie industry and finds out they have downloaded lets say 20 films a week with a retail DVD value of 10 quid/dollars over a year which adds upto 200 per week and £/$ 10,400 WOW
And yet his entire income for the entire year was only £/$ 2,600
The ACTUAL loss to the industry whether music or movie is the amount of money somebody WOULD otherwise have spend on the film or music in one format or another but didn't as a direct result of downloading it.
If someone not only wouldn't have paid to begin with and as is the case very often didn't even have the funds or means to have paid for it in the first place then its actually impossible for the industry to have "lost" money that it would never have gotten at all, ever in the first place
Before they can prosecute they should have to first establish how much per week somebody USED to spend on films and music prior to getting pirated alternatives then compare that to afterwards and that's what the industry lost
Unless of course the persons income or outgoings altered which would have meant a reduction in spare case to spend on luxury good and entertainment
As an example I know someone who has been unemployed for over 10 years due to illness. He cant physically go to a cinema and after paying for care workers barely has enough money for food each week with the current prices of gas, electric, rent and water charges so however its dressed up his actual budget that COULD be spent on music or films is less than zero
So to claim (if he got targeted) that he is doing the industry out of thousands of pounds is to say the least quite comical and isn't something they could prove to any valid extent and that is the problem. There doesn't seem to be ANY requirement for these firms to prove they have actually lost anything at all which they might not have done
After all a recession means less money to spend, less people in work and also films come on other mediums far more quickly now and some prefer to wait with the current cost of going to the cinema
All of which could more than likely explain ALL of the reductions the music and movie industry is claiming, its also not unreasonable to expect them to not rip their patrons off by over inflating the prices at each stage too as that's hardly a purchasing incentive
|keith23uk I did not say TOR browser gets you on blocked sites,i said it HIDES what sites your browsing so you cant be tracked.|
|I was going by what they say on the makers website quote... Prevents the sites you visit from learning your physical location, and it lets you access sites which are blocked..... end quote Real shame it doesnt work||
Most Popular Stories