C-61: Copyright legislation **UPDATE**

[Azure]

Have they said anything about how they'll find out who is downloading illegal movies?

[photon]

They already do that now, they get your IP through bittorrent or whatever client you are using for p2p sharing, then get the ISP to send you a letter or get them to divulge your info so they can sue you or get it during the process of suing you.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by photon

They already do that now, they get your IP through bittorrent or whatever client you are using for p2p sharing, then get the ISP to send you a letter or get them to divulge your info so they can sue you or get it during the process of suing you.

Oh darn. I guess we're all screwed now.

How on earth do you they know you're downloading 'movies?'

Just because your Bittorrent traffic is high, doesn't mean you're illegally downloading anything.

[BlackEleven]

Originally Posted by Barnes

The second logical step after this would be the government forcing ISPs to not allow certain things across their network. This would essentially make them content publishers and allow them to not only block types of traffic but traffic to specific locations. Bye Bye net neutrality.

This is territory I hope the government never decides to venture into. Once you start trolling the seas with big nets you're going to catch a lot of fish that you weren't after. I can understanding wanting to filter out material that's illegal (say kiddie porn and even illegal downloading), but what else is going to get filtered out along with that?

If this does become the norm then we end up with two Internets. One controlled by the corporations and governments, like the Great FireWall of China (or the Golden Shield as I like to refer to it), and one unregulated run mostly by servers in less developed nations that have more pressing problems to deal with than what its citizens do on the net (as an aside, this all seems like a plot for a sci-fi flick where the Internet is policed and anyone connecting to the illegal internet is tracked down and punished).

By no means am I saying C61 is going to lead to that, but I agree with your point that once governments and corporations started seeing the internet as a threat, we start heading into dangerous territory. If the industry was more focused on the massive distribution potential of the Internet rather than a gateway to piracy we could avoid all this mess and end up with a better end product for consumers. Piracy will always be there, as it was before the net ever existed, but if the record industry viewed it as competiton and applied all their marketing efforts down than avenue as they would to any legitmate threat, this probably all could have been avoided in the first place.

[BlackEleven]

Originally Posted by Azure

Oh darn. I guess we're all screwed now.

How on earth do you they know you're downloading 'movies?'

Just because your Bittorrent traffic is high, doesn't mean you're illegally downloading anything.

They track certain files. They manually download the suspected files, and check the content. Once its been flagged as a copyrighted material a unique hash code is generated for that file. They can then determine who else has the exact copy of that file by checking the hash codes of the files you're sharing. If you have a matching file, you get flagged as a copyright violator.

Generally speaking, they only go after the most shared files (ie blockbuster movies and Top 40 songs) since they can flag a lot of offenders in one shot, but that doesn't mean you're safe if you only download unpopular stuff....

[Azure]

What if I download stuff but don't share it with anyone?

[Circa89]

Originally Posted by BlackEleven

They track certain files. They manually download the suspected files, and check the content. Once its been flagged as a copyrighted material a unique hash code is generated for that file. They can then determine who else has the exact copy of that file by checking the hash codes of the files you're sharing. If you have a matching file, you get flagged as a copyright violator.

Generally speaking, they only go after the most shared files (ie blockbuster movies and Top 40 songs) since they can flag a lot of offenders in one shot, but that doesn't mean you're safe if you only download unpopular stuff....

It happened to me a few months back and Telus said hey we know you downloaded Movie "X", please do not do that, however we will not release your IP address UNLESS ordered to do so by a court.

So now I guess the courts may in fact order IP addresses be provided by ISP's.

Bye bye bit Torrent from me until I hear how this is shaking down.

[BlackEleven]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Is that really what they are going to do? Those are American entities. They can't just give our stuff to some Yank shysters. Can they?

They'll give the information over to whomever the copyright holder is. From the CBC article linked earlier in this thread:

Canadian internet service providers, meanwhile, would continue to be immune to lawsuits from copyright holders for infringements over their networks. The bill recognizes ISPs as intermediaries and would only require them to pass on violation notices from copyright holders to their customers.

How it works is the RIAA (or whomever) files a lawsuit against John Doe, and then passes your IP onto the ISP. Then once the ISP informs you of your offence, they give your info back to the copyright holder who replaces John Doe with your name.

[BlackEleven]

Originally Posted by Azure

What if I download stuff but don't share it with anyone?

It doesn't matter, its still considered copyright infringement. If you are going to continue to download in Canada, I would suggest you install an app like Peer Guardian which will block known RIAA and MPAA IPs from connecting to you. This will make you safer from getting flagged, but by no means will make you immune from it.

[BlackEleven]

Also, for anyone intested in how all this works, here's a great article that explains in laymen's terms how the RIAA goes after people:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/st...0515239&pnum=0

[photon]

Originally Posted by Azure

What if I download stuff but don't share it with anyone?

Depends on the technology being used.

For something like bittorrent, every computer in the "swarm", the group of computers all downloading and sharing the same file, knows about each other, or at the very least knows about the other peers they are connected to in the swarm. When using bt, it shows how many seeders and leechers you are connected to, so each one of those computers knows your IP address and knows what you are downloading (because they have to know where to send and what to send to you).

So all a company has to do is enter into the swarm and record all the IP's they connect to, and they have a nice list of people to hunt down.

Other p2p networks are going to be pretty much the same.

Like BlackEleven said you can install an app which will block known IPs of companies that do this sort of hunting, but of course they're always going to be trying to get new blocks of IPs.

So even if you accept only encrypted connections in bittorrent it doesn't help much. While it does prevent your ISP from knowing what information is being transmitted, it doesn't stop the bittorrent swarm from knowing.

If you use something like usenet, that's different since that's a single point to point transfer from the usenet server to you. You can encrypt that so your ISP can't eavesdrop, and if you trust the usenet provider enough to not divulge your downloading history tracking you would involve a lot more invasive means.

For p2p stuff one could also employ something like TOR, which will do a fairly good job of hiding your IP, or go through proxy services that guarentee your anonynanimity (or so they say).

Without Canada becoming a police state it's pretty easy to stay ahead of things technologically if you really want to, if they created the department for Canadian homeland security and started detaining people for having 80% of their internet usage encrypted that's a different problem.

[metal_geek]

For people concearned about the Time shifting, and whatnot on your PVR.

Once all the signal goes digital a byte will be assigned to all the data that comes to your TV/PVR that esentially describes how that piece of data can be displayed by that device.

So, for Example, You PVR a rerun of Beachcombers, and the byte is set to "0" you can play that recording, whenever you wish.

If you want to PVR, the latest Lost Episode, the byte is set to "1" you can PVR it, but won't be able to skip the commercials.

If you want to PVR the News, and the byte is set to "2" you can PVR it and skip the commercials.

If you want to PVR the superbowl, and the byte is set to "3" you will only be able to record it from your local station, and must watch the commercials.

Basically any combination of ways they want you to watch thier content, they can make happen. Any circumvention of that setup makes it illigal. This law is just another step in controling how, if, where, when and with what device you can watch or listen to something.

It's not the first step, alot of other things like changing format requirements by the CRTC, all had this stuff in mind before any of it was implementd. Some of these things are harder for the public to accept but in the end they don't really care if you accept it or not, the one who stays in government are the ones that can do it with the least ammount of public response..

Oh... and what does that mean for your PVR?... Depends, if you have say a shaw or bell one now. Depending on how old it is, it already has it built in, they'll just execute a clause in their terms of service which you may or may not have already read. If it's old, or "unsupported", then you'll just have to buy one from a "supported" provider.
________
Pornstars Movie

[Barnes]

I've avoided getting a shaw PVR until this was sorted out. Now I know that if I want a PVR, I'll have to build one myself and use the analog hole from my cable box.

[metal_geek]

Originally Posted by Barnes

I've avoided getting a shaw PVR until this was sorted out. Now I know that if I want a PVR, I'll have to build one myself and use the analog hole from my cable box.

That will be against the law..
________
Lovely Wendie

[troutman]

Is any of this retroactive? My friend still wants to know.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by BlackEleven

It doesn't matter, its still considered copyright infringement. If you are going to continue to download in Canada, I would suggest you install an app like Peer Guardian which will block known RIAA and MPAA IPs from connecting to you. This will make you safer from getting flagged, but by no means will make you immune from it.

Not what I meant.

Could they still 'trace' me if I download something, and not share it afterwards? They know I downloaded something via bittorrent...but how would they know its a movie as opposed to legal software....or even CBC TV shows?

[Azure]

Originally Posted by photon

Depends on the technology being used.

For something like bittorrent, every computer in the "swarm", the group of computers all downloading and sharing the same file, knows about each other, or at the very least knows about the other peers they are connected to in the swarm. When using bt, it shows how many seeders and leechers you are connected to, so each one of those computers knows your IP address and knows what you are downloading (because they have to know where to send and what to send to you).

So all a company has to do is enter into the swarm and record all the IP's they connect to, and they have a nice list of people to hunt down.

Other p2p networks are going to be pretty much the same.

Like BlackEleven said you can install an app which will block known IPs of companies that do this sort of hunting, but of course they're always going to be trying to get new blocks of IPs.

So even if you accept only encrypted connections in bittorrent it doesn't help much. While it does prevent your ISP from knowing what information is being transmitted, it doesn't stop the bittorrent swarm from knowing.

If you use something like usenet, that's different since that's a single point to point transfer from the usenet server to you. You can encrypt that so your ISP can't eavesdrop, and if you trust the usenet provider enough to not divulge your downloading history tracking you would involve a lot more invasive means.

For p2p stuff one could also employ something like TOR, which will do a fairly good job of hiding your IP, or go through proxy services that guarentee your anonynanimity (or so they say).

Without Canada becoming a police state it's pretty easy to stay ahead of things technologically if you really want to, if they created the department for Canadian homeland security and started detaining people for having 80% of their internet usage encrypted that's a different problem.

Ah okay.

That explains it much better.

[FFR]

With all this talk of PVR's and legal and illegal stuff...Does anyone know what the stance will be regarding using Windows Media Center as a PVR? Already we've been experiencing some issues with Shaw (as a cable provider) adding codes on to certain programs that will not allow us to record them as we are not using a Shaw PVR, but I'm wondering if this new Bill will affect us even more.

[ericschand]

Originally Posted by metal_geek

For people concearned about the Time shifting, and whatnot on your PVR.

Once all the signal goes digital a byte will be assigned to all the data that comes to your TV/PVR that esentially describes how that piece of data can be displayed by that device.

So, for Example, You PVR a rerun of Beachcombers, and the byte is set to "0" you can play that recording, whenever you wish.

If you want to PVR, the latest Lost Episode, the byte is set to "1" you can PVR it, but won't be able to skip the commercials.

If you want to PVR the News, and the byte is set to "2" you can PVR it and skip the commercials.

If you want to PVR the superbowl, and the byte is set to "3" you will only be able to record it from your local station, and must watch the commercials.

Basically any combination of ways they want you to watch thier content, they can make happen. Any circumvention of that setup makes it illigal. This law is just another step in controling how, if, where, when and with what device you can watch or listen to something.

It's not the first step, alot of other things like changing format requirements by the CRTC, all had this stuff in mind before any of it was implementd. Some of these things are harder for the public to accept but in the end they don't really care if you accept it or not, the one who stays in government are the ones that can do it with the least ammount of public response..

Oh... and what does that mean for your PVR?... Depends, if you have say a shaw or bell one now. Depending on how old it is, it already has it built in, they'll just execute a clause in their terms of service which you may or may not have already read. If it's old, or "unsupported", then you'll just have to buy one from a "supported" provider.

Good post.

It even gets better. They demoed a few years back a way by which they
could not only force you to watch the recorded commercials, but if the
channel that you had recorded had commercials in real-time, you are
forced to watch them too. So you get 2x the commercials in order to
watch your recorded content. Can you imagine how broken TV shows
would be at that point?

Tivo UK screwed up also, they made everyone's Tivo go on in the
middle of the night and record some TV show. Even if you were going
to record something else at that time, you got the TV show they wanted
you to have, your show didn't record. Tivo claimed it was an accident.

Also, with the Canadian DMCA, metal_geek is right. Bypassing the digital
aspect [DRM], and using the analog signal will be illegal. As would bypassing any of the above. And besides, why would you want analog if
weren't doing anything illegal?

How do they know if you are downloading illegal stuff? Use the RIAA
method, toss out a lawsuit and make you prove you are innocent.
Even if you are innocent, you'll probably just pay to get rid of them.

I received a phone call from my provider once, saying that I downloaded
movies. What I had actually done was download 4 or 5 different versions
of Linux ISO's. Being new to the whole bittorrent thing, and my internet
connection being screwy (all fixed now though), these ISO's were over
4GB each. But it would get to 3.5GB and then the torrent would stop.
So I would delete it, and start over....and over...and over...imagine how
many times to break their "25GB limit" that they didn't specify anywhere.
(I didn't realize that you could keep what you downloaded, and just
continue )

The person said, "We understand you want to watch movies, but you
have to keep it under your limit." I told them it was linux ISO's...and
they didn't believe me.

Obviously they do get it wrong.

ers

[metal_geek]

Originally Posted by FFR

With all this talk of PVR's and legal and illegal stuff...Does anyone know what the stance will be regarding using Windows Media Center as a PVR? Already we've been experiencing some issues with Shaw (as a cable provider) adding codes on to certain programs that will not allow us to record them as we are not using a Shaw PVR, but I'm wondering if this new Bill will affect us even more.

That's excatly the technology they are.. and will be using, but before this bill it wasn't illegal to come up with a way around it. Things like Windows Media Center currently respects the content byte, and as such you can't recording programs you are "not allowed" to . That will continue down the road, and every show will have the byte set in some form or other, regardless of this bill. This bill is aimed at stoping people from downloading the same show, and playing it from thier Windows Media Center to get around that.

Basically.. Someone paid the network alot of money to show a local commerical during LOST. The advertisers want to be guranteed that they get what they paid for. They want to be sure you don't SKIP, DELAY, or see the commercial ment for Dallas, on your Calgary TV ...
________
BeautifullNightmare