Well now the BPI is about to start sueing filesharers in the UK because the RIAA are doing it in the US so it must be
, I'm forced to ask if there isn't a simple way to avoid it.
They target file sharers, right?
And, erm, correct me if I'm wrong, but you can happilly download on P2P apps like kazaa without sharing any files.
And with programs like BitTorrent its nearly impossible to tell what you're uploading (for those who don't know bittorrent, it forces you to upload in order to download, but only little chunks of what you've already downloaded of that file, which get sent to other people after the file in no particular order or sequence). And most sensible people using bittorrent have moved off the default ports because ISPs tend to throttle those now anyway (BT works on any port at all) making it even harder to monitor.
So the people who are at risk are basicly massive filesharers on Kazaa who pop up regularly in audits, the people running BT torrent hosting websites (ie. not the users, the seeders), and people who do things that are just plain stupid - like persisting in using Direct Connect on the public internet, an activity similar in the stupidity stakes to sending the BPI the contents of your MP3 folder with a return address to your house and a note attached saying "So sue me".
So, short of every one of these major filesharing types being arrested, how exactly is this supposed to disuade your average users from downloading (note DOWNLOADING not SHARING) files, or using anonymous systems like BT?
Threaded Mode