kc3.net isp query

[moaningoldgit]

hi all
first post
not yet on idnet but looks to be sooner rather than later
ok my query is i joined kc3.net (entanet reseller ) on 2/04/2009
a movie was downloaded from torrent site on 3/04/2009
with my ip address,
now this could have been myself or another person that uses
my home network.
the email i recieved from kc3.net stated,
initial infringement 3/04/2009
recent infringement timestamp 3/04/2009
protocol bitTorrent
could you please check your system and remove any such material
does this meen that every time i or anyone using my pc or network downloads
i will recieve a infringement notice.
i wonder is this because i am on a business connection
or is this the future of the internet for us all

i forgot to say i am on business 45 connection

sorry for the long post
hope someone can shed some light on this
does this happen on idnet or any other isp
thanks to all
by the way this looks like a great forum

[Dopamine]

It looks to me as if they are assuming your download is of copyrighted material that you shouldn't download.

Their email may be scare tactics, or it may be to cover themselves in the event of a complaint by the copyright holder, or it could be something else. Do they give any greater detail about what they allege the "infringement" is?

KC3's website says that they do not restrict any Bit torrents or news sites, so my guess would be that you've received the email because they're covering their backs or are holding hands with the music/film industry.

I'm not a downloader so don't know IDNet's policy when they see/assume illegal activity, but I've not heard of anything similar here. There are other ISPs who operate similar tactics or restrictions for supposed illegal downloads, so it does look like it will be the future for a certain section of the ISP business.

IDNet's Acceptable Use Policy contains the following:
The IDNet network may be used only for lawful purposes. Transmission, distribution or storage of any material in violation of any applicable law or regulation is prohibited. This includes, without limitation, material protected by copyright, trademark, patent, trade secret or other intellectual property rights used without proper authorisation, and material that is obscene, defamatory, constitutes an illegal threat, or violates export control laws.

Your best bet is to talk to KC3 and find out exactly what it is they are accusing you of, and ask them to point out where in their terms and conditions it explains any penalties and actions they reserve the right to impose. If those terms aren't clear, and if you have the stomach for a fight, ask them to provide proof that it was you.

Personally, I'd move to an ISP that was a bit more open about its policies regarding copyright infringement........

..... or stop illegally downloading. That would reduce the number of pirates to something close to 29,999,999, and would no doubt solve the problem overnight

[moaningoldgit]

hi
thanks for the reply
i am not sure what to do
but i am not going to stay with an isp that sends emails everytime i download from torrents
it could be as you say scare tactics
it says at the bottom of the email
if you have any questions regarding this let me know
so it looks like a mac for me and off elswhere
pity realy because my speeds have not been this good for about six months
oh well try again

[drummer]

I'm confused because here they suggest:

One month short term contract contract so that you won't be forced to stay with us for 12-18 months.

But on their broadband T&C page here they state:

...e. Contract length:
12 months from the effective date.

f. Cancellation period:
Contracts are for 12 months and then after that first 12 months 1 months notice in writing must be given to cancel the contract. (Example: KC3.net receive a request to cancel the contract at end of month 12 then contract would terminate 1 month later at the end of month 13.)

Clear as mud.

[Rik]

Hi and welcome to the forum Mog.

I have never heard of IDNet sending out an email of this sort, and Simon Davies, the MD, is on record as saying he has no intention of becoming the BPI's policeman unless he's legally forced to. They do make it clear that downloading illegal material is unacceptable for obvious reasons, but afaik, they don't go looking for it.

[JB]

On some torrent clients such as uTorrent there is a facility to enable protocol encryption on outgoing packets. I don't know if this would stop your ISP from seeing that you are downloading a torrent or not, but might be worth a try.

Disclaimer
---------
I offer this information so that your downloading of legal material is not impeded. I do not condone the theft of copyright material.

[Sebby]

Protocol encryption does not stop your ISP see what you are downloading; it merely encrypts the protocol so if an ISP blocks/throttles BitTorrent traffic, you can get around it.

What you need is a blocklist. I'm not condoning the downloading of illegal material, but if you do so without a blocklist in place, you are going to get in trouble on any ISP. Check out bluetack.co.uk where you can download an ipfilter.dat.

[Bill]

There's a thread about this in the Entanet forum on thinkbroadband:

http://forums.thinkbroadband.com/entanet/t/3611196-copyright-infringement.html

Looks like it's Entanet rather than kc3.net.

[Rik]

Thanks, Bill. 

[Simon]

It might also be worth mentioning that µTorrent keeps a record of all of your downloaded torrents in (in XP) C:\Documents and Settings\[user]\Application Data\uTorrent.  These files can be safely deleted, but take care not to also delete the .dat files, as these are your set up and preferences.  It's not the end of the world if you wipe them, but you would have to set up µTorrent again from scratch if you did.  I don't know if the same applies to other torrent clients, as I only use the one.

[Sebby]

Another way to do it is when the torrent finishes downloading it, right-click on it and select Remove > And delete .torrent.

[Simon]

I usually do that, Seb, but I still found a load of torrent files in that folder the other day.

[Sebby]

Ah, I'm surprised, I'll have to check mine (although I'm not sure if it works on the same way on a Mac).

[moaningoldgit]

hi all
update on original post
i was told today by my isp that all isp are monitoring p2p trafic
it would appear this is from entanet.
its strange i never had this on sky or aol
probably because the connection was s**te
and it took forever to download anything
it seams if you pay for a fast connection
you still cant download i know copyright material downloads are ilegal
but i would like the freedom of choice

[Rik]

IDNet do not monitor, block or throttle P2P traffic.

[quandam]

hi all
first post
not yet on idnet but looks to be sooner rather than later
ok my query is i joined kc3.net (entanet reseller ) on 2/04/2009
a movie was downloaded from torrent site on 3/04/2009
with my ip address,
now this could have been myself or another person that uses
my home network.
the email i recieved from kc3.net stated,
initial infringement 3/04/2009
recent infringement timestamp 3/04/2009
protocol bitTorrent
could you please check your system and remove any such material
does this meen that every time i or anyone using my pc or network downloads
i will recieve a infringement notice.
i wonder is this because i am on a business connection
or is this the future of the internet for us all

i forgot to say i am on business 45 connection

sorry for the long post
hope someone can shed some light on this
does this happen on idnet or any other isp
thanks to all
by the way this looks like a great forum

Hi! I am also confused. You state that it might be you or someone else that downloaded the 'offending' material. Was it you or was it someone else? Surely you must know if it was yourself.

I would say that if (if) you are downloading illegal material then IDNet would probably adopt the same stance as your current ISP.

[Sebby]

I agree. If IDNet receive a complaint, they have to pass it on, and that's all Entanet are doing. Anyway, get a blocklist in place and you won't have a problem (again, not condoning piracy).

[drummer]

It might also be worth mentioning that µTorrent keeps a record of all of your downloaded torrents in (in XP) C:\Documents and Settings\[user]\Application Data\uTorrent.  These files can be safely deleted, but take care not to also delete the .dat files, as these are your set up and preferences.  It's not the end of the world if you wipe them, but you would have to set up µTorrent again from scratch if you did.  I don't know if the same applies to other torrent clients, as I only use the one.

Been happily using µTorrent for some years now but I've never understood the settings.dat.old files.  No matter though, it's a great little app which works for me.

For everyone else though, there's a massive difference between illegal content and that which infringes copyright.  The former is subject to the full weight of the law, whereas the latter is dealt with under civil law.

I applaud IDNet's stance because they've never, ever indicated they would refuse to co-operate where criminality is the issue.  What they've said though, is that it's not within their remit to assist copyright holders taking civil action against individuals, based on scant or negligible evidence.

[Sebby]

The .old files are simply backups of .dat files.

Thanks for clarifying the difference between illegal content and that which infringes copyright - I wasn't aware of the difference.

[drummer]

The .old files are simply backups of .dat files.

Thanks for that which confirms what I suspected.  It just always made me laugh that an "old" dat file is created at the same time as a new one is created.

Thanks for clarifying the difference between illegal content and that which infringes copyright - I wasn't aware of the difference.

It's still a legal minefield though but the guardians of copyrights are very happy to muddy the waters by suggesting that copyright infringement is illegal.

It flipping well isn't illegal but it may deprive your favourite band/songwriter/movie director/actor etc of royalties.

Think I've covered both schools of thought...

[Dopamine]

It flipping well isn't illegal........

I understand the difference between criminal law and civil law, but I don't understand your post.

There are various definitions of "illegal" or "illegally"; here are a few:

• Prohibited by law or by official or accepted rules

• In a manner contrary to law

• Against the law

Copyright law originated in the United Kingdom from a concept of common law; the Statute of Anne 1709. It became statutory with the passing of the Copyright Act 1911. The current act is the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.

It is an offence to perform any of the following acts without the consent of the owner:

• Copy the work.

• Rent, lend or issue copies of the work to the public.

• Perform, broadcast or show the work in public.

• Adapt the work.

Care to elaborate on what makes copyright breaches not illegal?

Surely the only difference is in which court a case would be tried: civil or criminal.

[Tacitus]

At what point does the idea of 'fair use' come into it?  Or is it one of those things that became generally accepted but has no legal standing except in certain closely defined circumstances?

For example, with my academic hat on I am allowed to make copies of material (within limits) for review or other educational purposes.  Some of this stems from a general licence that all educational establishments have, but I believe the licence itself stems from the idea of 'fair use' which was at one time I believe, defined in law. 

If in my daily life, I buy a CD and rip it onto my iPod, I regard that as fair use despite the record companies (possibly correctly) regarding it as a breach of the law.  I paid for the CD, have it on my shelf and rip it for convenience.  However if I put a copy on the internet I would regard that as 'unfair' use despite the fact that both acts may technically be illegal.

If the record companies feel I should buy a fresh copy for every device in my home they're smoking some serious stuff. 

[Rik]

AFAIK, it's widely accepted by the record industry that making a copy for personal use, eg to put on an iPod is acceptable and they don't pursue this 'technical' breach of copyright. OTOH, if you give that copy to someone else, they'd look on it differently.

[Simon]

AFAIK, when you buy a CD, you're buying the rights to listen to the content of that CD, so I can't see how it can be 'wrong' to transfer the content to different, more convenient formats.  I always copy CDs for car use, to save the originals getting bashed about in the glove box, or stolen.

[Rik]

I do too. The next car has to have an MP3 function!!