The internet providers would says that its not their job to monitor what traffic passes through their doorway to the world and into people homes but they will happily take that monthly subscription and keep theirs eyes shut.
The customer also is happy to pay that monthly fee and some of them use that doorway to steal things others have created and then share those things to other thieves who want to steal using the Internet
Between them they both think this is how the world should be?
The internet providers say no to filters and anything that might stop illegal activity using their doorway because they say it would be too expensive to monitor and track and as they are not doing the stealing its not their problems.
The customer say no to anything that might get them found out as to what illegal things they are doing and scream civil liberties and right to privacy as a way to scare off any rules on how the internet should be used.
It’s a happy life for both, as one wants the access to steal and the other want the money fee for the access to steal.
Anyway the customer will say it’s the job of the copyright holder to put protection on their work to stop it being stolen
(No matter what copyright you put on your work someone will take it off)
They will both argue that everything must be free and open and no restrictions should be put on this cozy set up they both have.
But hold on a min.
One is stealing and the other is providing the tools. In the real world both would be behind bars but because its all done in people houses and in a closed environment they can steal steal steal.
The internet provider is really just like the supplier of the stolen goods as they allow it to be transfer via their systems (like a courier) they know what is illegal an what is not but they don’t want to lose that monthly wage from the customer who won’t like being told not to steal.
If this were in a uk court then normally the supplier (in this case the supplier of the doorway to steal as in the internet provider) would get a longer term behind bars than the thief as without the supplier the thief has no outlet for his stolen trade and with not means to get stolen goods it becomes harder for him to steal and so is less lightly to steal
Internet providers need to run a business that involves not turning blind eye but they know that any form of monitoring for copyrighted material will eat into their nice profits so they complain its not workable
But think about it we are talking about a ring of thieves here crying civil rights and all the good things we want but actually the cause of all the bad things in society.
The Internet providers have to shoulder some of the responsibility for providing paid access to world and they should not allow their service to be used illegally
Because if they allow illegal material to be transmitted without running any form of checks then they are the supplier of the stolen goods and turning a blind eye does not make them innocent of the crime.
Its the nature of the service they provide that makes them different to other real life examples as they are getting paid to provide the transfer of media so they should hold some responsibility that it is not illegal media being transferred.
They are currently the supplier/ courier of the stolen good and the thieves will keep using them because they provide the means to do what they are doing Stealing!
The only solution to curb the abuses taking place online by thieves is to have those supplying the thieves (ISP’s) with laws and rules that make them show they are active responsibly in checking and filtering known copyrighted material and this is not about openness and civil liabilities because we live by laws all the time its what defines us as law abiding
If you’re honest and innocent then what’s the problem
We need laws in society and this utopian view on the Internet is rubbish. Just like we want to pedophiles scum off the Internet touting their horrible wares so the thieving community are just a different sort of scum that needs to be caught and stopped and the only person responsible to do this is those supplying the means in the first place (the sip’s).