Copyright Alert System

“Internet Service Providers Close to Implementing System to Punish Piracy
Internet providers, along with content creators, will roll out a system that guards against illegal BitTorrent downloads as early as July 1”

"By Jason Koebler
April 4, 2012 RSS Feed Print

"Content creators and Internet service providers took another step towards preventing online piracy Monday by naming the head of an agency that will help develop a “graduated” set of punitive measures for suspected online pirates.

"The move to tap Jill Lesser as head of the Center for Copyright Information (CCI), which will develop the guidelines, suggests that ISPs are quickly advancing towards launching a system that guards against illegal downloads. The system is slated to start in early July.

“The challenge is to strike a balance between the two core notions of copyright protection and the First Amendment,” Lesser wrote. It’s already clear which side she’s on: “While laws that protect intellectual property remain strong and enforcement efforts continue, technology has tipped the balance away from the interests of most creators and artists.”

“The ease of distribution of copyrighted content has helped create a generation of people who believe that all content should be free. The notion that artists and creators, and even the big companies that finance, produce and deliver their creations, don’t have the right to own and control their distribution, simply cannot be.”

So, if I create something, I should own it and decide how I will be compensated and how it will be distributed. People should not be able to take it for nothing.


Right. And once you are wealthy enough from selling it, you can contribute to a political party that has established a reputation for taking other people’s money and spending it on your favorite causes. :wink:

Wha… What? I have no political party affiliations. None. Do you not vote for your favorite causes? :slight_smile:


People should get paid for their property.

The one that gets me though is a copyright is assumed for a photograph shot 75 years ago of your relative. You would like to have a copy of great granddad to share with the rest of the family but do not take it to Wal-Mart without a release. How do you get a release from a company that has been out of business for fifty years by and unknown photographer?

They must have gotten sued for copying a photo taken by a professional. As a result, the word came down: “No copying any photos without a release. Period.”

Just speaking hypothetically.

I see nothing wrong with contributing to political campaigns, but not for preventing others from succeeding, especially when their success costs me nothing.

Thanks for the thread & links Ed!:slight_smile:


Ed, you posted the wrong link! :blush:

To keep us on the right side of the copyright issue, here is a link to the news article quoted in the first post:

The Center for Copyright Information is comprised chiefly of the the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) and five major US internet service providers: AT&T, Cablevision, Comcast, Time Warner Cable and Verizon.

The organization seeks to implement a “six strikes” program. This would involve notifying a customer if his account is being used for online piracy, educating about alternatives, slowing the speed of a user’s internet account and ultimately suspension of internet service. Arbitration of penalties via the American Arbitration Association would be available.

Reportedly, the ISPs are worried about alienating their customers so an advisory board comprised of known consumer advocates has been created. However, the advisory board holds no power in the organization.

The article which Ed quoted is from April. Last month there was word that implementation of the “six strikes” policy may not take place in July.

“The dates mentioned in the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) are not hard deadlines but were intended to keep us on track to have the Copyright Alert System up and running as quickly as possible and in the most consumer friendly manner possible,” a CCI spokesperson told TorrentFreak. “We do not intend to launch until we are confident that the program is consumer friendly and able to be implemented in a manner consistent with all of the goals of the MOU. We expect our implementation to begin later this year.”

The group also clarified that while repeated offenses may result in bandwidth throttling and service suspensions for those caught downloading pirated material, no permanent service disconnections will result from this new policy.

Your right. They will copy it if the photo is 100 yrs:rolleyes:

It will be interesting to see what they come up with this time around. If it’s same old stuff, I don’t anything changing.

Thanks for your help, Dale.

The bottom line: infringing sites will be shut down. Individual users will get a warning.


Copyright laws exist and thus they should be respected; however, I do not see anyone up in arms in relation to the methods that are used to enforce such laws. It is quite obvious that RIAA has the approach that the ends justify the means, and the methods that they use often are at least immoral if not illegal (e.g. the investigations done by MediaSentry without a license).

Doesn’t copyright protection extend to 75 years beyond the life of the author? Perhaps someone can shed some light?

From the U.S. Copyright Office.


For those of us who are unfamiliar, could you provide a link or some background info?


This are the first two I could get to. A detailed search will give you more information.

Yes, because copyright is meant to be a cash cow for people to be able to make money off some old thing for at least 100 years.

Oh wait, silly me. Copyright (and patents for that matter) was a system invented to encourage creativity by giving people a monopoly on their product for a short time. How far we’ve drifted from that.

I see that the M.A.F.I.A. is involved in this too. I wonder when they’ll finally move into the 21st century? Or maybe they can just reinvent themselves as “artistic traditionalists” to try and gain some sympathy?

Then go and create your own Star Wars. Why hope that it’ll enter the public domain in the next 5 years so you can milk that cash cow? Yeah, and they’re still making money off of old films - so what?

I’ve helped create worlds for a number of years. Get an idea, present it well and people will buy it. I’m sick and tired of the whining. The date on the calendar has nothing to do with it. You know, and I know, that you can create what you want, put it online and, heck, charge nothing for it. Let everybody use it however they want. No copyright - nothing. Then when some big movie studio makes a half billion dollars off it - no worries.

Creativity is a learned skill, but all I’m hearing is - it’s too hard. Just let me milk the other guy’s cow who did all the hard work. Yep, Bob’s Star Wars action figures, that were not even designed by Bob but by some artist fresh out of school.

Creativity is a lot like bodybuilding - as your creative muscles develop, you get more and more ideas. I know that creativity is not helped by you taking the other guy’s complete works and writing your own version or tacking on some idea you had. There’s a learning curve involved and the 21st Century has nothing to do with it.


But where is the incentive to create anymore? Nobody in their right mind would call Call of Duty 9 (or whatever they’re on) a creative work because it’s just taking the same thing as the last 8 and altering it slightly. All they’re doing is pulling a Disney really.

There’s also no incentive to do anything if you get 1 big thing. You are allowed to sit on that for potentially 100 plus years. Not only that, the new age of copyright (the grail, if you will, for the RIAA and MPAA) is the complete destruction of the First Sale Doctrine. If I buy a CD, then I have bought the songs and should be able to do whatever I please with then, including putting them on my computer, iPhone, ect because it is my property (Sony tried to get around this. It did not turn out well). If my friend is going on a road trip, I can lend him my CD so that he can listen to it.

The video game industry is especially working hard at eliminating first sale because they hate (and I mean hate) the used games market.

Obviously game makers deserve to get paid for their work (and pirating is wrong), but it’s completely unfair to customers to go all the way to the other side and make it so that they’re buying something without having any rights to it. We have a right to personal private property.

Or you get the really, really stupid examples. SOCAN (basically the RIAA in Canada) wants to charge huge fees for people to have music at a wedding say. I can’t really say I understand why you would need to pay to play music that you have already purchased and are playing at a private event (a wedding reception is private). Even more infuriating, they want to double the fees if there’s dancing. Seriously, that makes no sense at all. Why should you have to pay more for dancing?! I think that is actually the new definition for “a policy that is completely retarded”.

It’s hard to understand when they don’t make any sense sometimes.

Another draconian measure on the part of the government. We can only hope it is murdered in Congress like SOPA and those other anti internet bills.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit