Broadband: I Found Big Brother and His Name Is COMCAST
I Found Big Brother and His Name Is COMCAST
by benoddo - 4/26/05 11:20 PMHas anyone read this April 14th article in Reuters?
The link is split into two lines. Copy and paste each line in your browser so that they form one long URL with no spaces.
http://news.com.com/2100-1030_3-5671438.html
It is a story of a Seattle woman filing suite against Comcast for disclosing her contact information to the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA). The RIAA then contacted a collection agency to go after this woman and collect $4,500 for downloading copyrighted music. This disclosure was VOLUNTARY on Comcast's part. No court issued an order to Comcast for the contact information on suspected copyright violators.
Granted, copyright infringement is illegal and until the RIAA, MPAA, and the courts wake up in the 21st century, file sharing of copyrighted material will remain illegal. But that does not address the flagrant disrespect Comcast has for its customers' privacy. It makes you wonder to whom, besides the RIAA, has Comcast forwarded your private information and/or surfing habits.
It's nice to know that after expending considerable effort to free my PCs from spyware that my ISP, Comcast, is behaving in a manner worse than any tracking cookie or data miner that was involuntarily loaded on my machines. I'll have to do the same thing to Comcast as I have with any other spyware on my systems.
[Edited by: admin]Edited link so reader wouldn't have to cut and paste URL. -Lee Koo CNET community
hmm
by Mark5019 - 4/25/05 4:10 PM In reply to: I Found Big Brother and His Name Is COMCAST by benoddolets see she dowmloads music unlawfully, and there isp can be sued and your upset that they turned info over.
i hope all who do that pay fines and thats why laws are made
please clarify
by mechanismatic - 4/27/05 7:45 AM In reply to: hmm by Mark5019Are you saying you think all people who download music unlawfully should pay fines or all ISP's who turn over customer info without a court order should pay fines?
if you break the law you need pay fines
by Mark5019 - 4/27/05 5:53 PM In reply to: please clarify by mechanismaticand as im to understand if the isps dont turn over the names they get fined.
and if thats the case then there rates go up, then my rates go up.
seems to me theres an honest way and the crocked way.
of course thats just my views
Protecting privacy
by jimlowry98 - 4/29/05 4:08 AM In reply to: if you break the law you need pay fines by Mark5019I've always hated the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) because they seem to be on the 'wrong' side of so many issues. However, I do reap the benefits of living in a 'free' society where I'm protected from a totalitarian 'big brother' regime, because of the heroic efforts of the ACLU and many like-minded individuals.
Comcast has created a problem for themselves and I think they and any other ISP who gives up private information freely, should be punished severely.
well if they get court order to release
by Mark5019 - 4/29/05 4:30 AM In reply to: Protecting privacy by jimlowry98and my feelings are this not directed at you if you steal stuff which d/l songs with out buying where its not legal you deserve to pay any and all penaltys
I'm not sure of the differences...
by nastymind567 - 4/29/05 5:03 AM In reply to: well if they get court order to release by Mark5019...but in the UK where I am, its in many, if not all of the ISP's disclaimers and license agreements that they reserve the right to stop the service of anyone they feel to be abusing or using the service for illegal purposes.
In one hand they have the right to stop someone from using a service and even blacklist them, however I dont think they have the right to give out personal information (protected in this country by the DPA data protection act of 1998) about any of their customers to any third party. Unless it is directly linked to the government, in particular national security and the MOD ministry of defence (on grounds of national security).
Unless the country is at risk directly privacy of citizens should be protected always.
Have to agree
by BobLap - 4/29/05 5:25 AM In reply to: Protecting privacy by jimlowry98If they were handed a court order for the info I wouldn't have a problem with them handing it over, but to willing hand over personal info is dead wrong. There should be some very strick penalties for anybody that willing hands over private info.
Hope the user sues their butts off and wins big. Maybe she can pay off her downloading fines with a settlement from Comcast?
This is not copyright vs. privacy
by mpmacal - 4/29/05 6:30 PM In reply to: Have to agree by BobLapIt sounds like the discussion is addressing the pros and cons of file swapping.
I too agree with those who claim that if the woman committed the crime, that she'll have to pay the fine. Whether you agree or not, it is NOT the issue. The issue here is privacy.
The local high school principal goes to your ISP and says, "I think little Johnny is planning write graffiti on the bathroom wall. I want to tap his Instant Message and get a copy of every e-mail that goes to the Smith family."
To put this into perspective... Little Johnny just shot his mother. The police need a SEARCH WARRANT to get into his computer and check for evidence. They even need a SEARCH WARRANT if the ONLY thing they wanted to check was his garbage pail in his bedroom. By going through the ISP, they can bypass all of that and gather evidence? The police may not reach into your mailbox and take your mail, but they can pull your electronic mail from your ISP?
This is insane. Stop looking at whether you like this woman or what she does. We are loosing freedoms in this country because we are not being thoughtful about the consequences of the policies this government is undertaking, and the corporations that go along.
The current administration promised, "LESS GOVERNMENT", yet we continue to have more restricted speech, less privacy, and more... I will not distract you with, here.
I am not defending this woman... I am trying to defend my basic constitutional rights as a citizen of the United States.
Thanks so much
by katyclo5405 - 5/4/05 10:42 PM In reply to: This is not copyright vs. privacy by mpmacalI'm getting in on this discussion very late, but in the event you're still reading any of this-thank you for an intelligent answer! I don't even care if I agree with you-although I do.
It seems to me that 1/2 the problem in this country is that too much television, sugar, fat and easy living have made America stupid! No one seems to think about anything any more; they just hop on the week's most popular bandwagon and go back to watching "24." (Good show, but isn't Kiefer Sutherland just a bit too much like Jack Lord on the old "Hawaii Five-O" series? Maybe it's just me..Plus, I am probably dating myself badly!) No offense, guys, but many of YOU are too lazy to even check your spelling or punctuate sentences anymore!
Anyway, of course this has nothing to do with what the woman did-she did nothing to Comcast! The violation of people's privacy rights is escalating daily-and it's not just fly-by-night identity thieves doing it--it's also huge institutions like BofA and that other company (I cannot remember the name right now) that just sold the personal information, INCLUDING SS#'s, of millions of people to scam artists pretending to be legitimate business people (again-no one seems to be asking WHY they were selling social security numbers to ANYONE!). What's worse-"stealing" some songs off the Internet or betraying the trust of millions of your customers? You better believe if Comcast betrayed this woman so willingly they are selling YOUR information, too, to anyone who will pay their price.
Big Brother is here-but it's not just Comcast. It's every big company in America-from the US Government on down. If you don't believe me, subscribe to the free "Direct Marketing News" for a few months; it will FLOOR you what information these folks have to sell-and do sell-every day.
Kathie C.
Don't you mean to protect your "right" to break a contract?
by zoraster05 - 4/30/05 7:05 AM In reply to: Protecting privacy by jimlowry98Don't people read the contracts they sign?
Buried in those kind of contracts is the warning for the consumer not to do anything illegal. If you do, they have the "right" to turn you in.
If you sign away a "right" (to the "privacy" of receiving stolen goods?), just like when you sign the form 1040 and sign away your 5th Amendment Right, one should expect the other party to oversee the protections which where written into the contract.
Unethical contracts
by jdbwar07 - 12/27/06 1:20 PM In reply to: Don't you mean to protect your "right" to break a contract? by zoraster05Maybe you have a point, however I personally think broadband internet is so helpful, even necessary for life and work in the 21st century that it needs more protections such as net neutrality, privacy laws, etc.If ISPs only give you service if you sign a contract waiving your right to privacy, then in practice it's not worse than not having the privacy anyway. There usually are only 2-3 broadband providers in an area, and since they pretty much all have the same disclaimers you're out of luck.
Telecom companies would never get away with making you sign a phone contract saying, by the way if we suspect you're doing any suspicious, we reserve the right to listen to your phone conversations at any time. Well, your emails, messages, and other internet activity shouldn't be any different.
who's the criminal?
by starsultan - 4/29/05 10:47 AM In reply to: hmm by Mark5019Doesn't it make sense that if Comcast knowingly knows
she is downloading illegal software than it is comcast that is also complicist in the criminal activity?
Since comcast is bigger and more informed it is Comcast that should be liable for fines or penalties.
They 'control" the bandwidth and can easily determine
what is being downloaded.
BTW I don't download music or videos either way but it really po's me to see BIG BROTHER in action when they are betraying a trust.
The Real Criminals
by bobinbush - 4/29/05 12:22 PM In reply to: who's the criminal? by starsultanThe real criminals are the lawyers.
Do you think a dime of that settlement money is
seen by the artists??? I don't think so. It's just
fueling the lawyers war chest.
This isn't Comcast's first abuse of consumers rights
by deceptive business practices.
They did bandwidth monitoring last year and sent notices
to users they felt were using too much bandwidth, but
they refuse to say what the limit is.
I hope the person who got burned by Comcast canceled
all of their services.
BTW: Some universities were asked to divulge some student
names for the same thing and they told the lawyers that
would violate the privacy of their students.
Don't blame the lawyers....
by stevemilleresq - 4/30/05 6:39 AM In reply to: The Real Criminals by bobinbush...when they are doing a client's bidding. And of you are so sure that it's the lawyers getting "all" the money from lawsuits (to fund some spurious war chest), think again because if the lawyers were getting all the money, we would have no clients.
Lawyers can't institute lawsuits without representing a person or entity who has "standing" to sue, that being having provable damages and a right of recovery. No client, no lawsuit. It's as simple as that. And client's pay the costs of litigation.
In terms of artists not receiving money, isn't that an issue between artists and management? Isn't it the evil corporations who are not properly paying talent? If anything that's where your complaints properly lie.
Take a look at who is writing the laws these days, corporate lobbyists. Case in point: the new bankruptcy law (that is destructive to ordinary consumers and small businesses while being favorable to the rich and large corporations)was written by the banking lobby who was doing the bidding of the credit industry.
In addition to consumer protection, laws and regulations are being eviscerated in the areas of environmental protection, energy, workplace safety, taxation, healthcare, (not to mention personal injury claims), etc., in favor of corporate profit to the detriment of regular citizens.
Your anger is misplaced.
| Forum legend: | |
 |
Locked thread |
 |
Moderator |
 |
CNET staff |
 |
Samsung staff |
 |
Norton Authorized Support team |
 |
AVG staff |
 |
Windows Outreach team |
 |
Dell staff |
 |
Intel staff |
