Virgin Media trials file-sharing monitoring tech

Phorm anyone?

I thought Virgin had dropped Phorm. Just re-badged it I think.

By Steve_Adey on 26 Nov 2009

Mixed feelings

While I'm against web monitoring and deep packet inspection in general as a broadband customer I support this. I pay for CDs and I pay for a fast internet connection, so I am against people jamming up bandwidth downloading illegal music and illegal software.

People don't seem to realize that the internet would be a whole lot faster if it wasn't for illegal P2P downloads. All of that data moving up and down the internet has a knock on effect for other users. Especially if you are on a shared or contention based service.

A single heavy P2P user in a dorm can slow down the internet connections of an entire building. Especially if they run one of those clients that opens multiple connections until it's used up all available resources, and doubly so if it's uploading as well as downloading.

By Perfectblue97 on 26 Nov 2009

Isn't "jamming up the internet" what people have PAID for?

If I buy an "unlimited" broadband package, that's what I should get. How is an illegal wire-tap justified?

Torrent downloaders encrypt their packets, so only casual downloaders could be "caught" anyway. What is the point, apart from being able to "morally" justify reducing the connection speed someone has paid for?

@Perfectblue97 - If your ISP has oversubscribed their bandwidth is that the fault of the P2P downloader or your ISP? Would you blame the person at the table, or resturant if your table was double booked? It is exactly the same thing. People selling more capacity than they have, gambling it won't be used, then bitching when people take the service they paid for.

No suprise that the "new internet laws" proposed by Labour did nothing to address this.

It's just a Phorm by any other name smells as foul.

By cheysuli on 26 Nov 2009

Biased Results

If they're purely going to define legal traffic as those defined by the record companies, then surely the eventual results from this study will show a massive proportion of 'illegal' file-sharing traffic.

By Laurent on 26 Nov 2009

Controlled by a Monopoly

The entire film and music industry is controlled as a Monopoly. Why are DVDs and CDs so expensive? Try to buy DVDs from a cheaper country, USA or Asia and they don't work because the monopoly has location locking set up. Imagine that with cars... your Toyota wont work because it's from Japan?

In the dying days of tapes, they got very cheap and were sold for less then the CD/DVD equivalent. CD/DVDs cost less to produce then tapes but are still sold for more even after paying off any investment costs!

The rise of illegal file sharing is either a crime wave or a sign that CD/DVDs are to expensive for a large part of society. The monopolies thinks it is a crime wave and wants the law to waste public money so they can make more. I thinks CD/DVDs are artificially kept expensive by the music and film industries. Lower the price and less people will rip you off.

This is just an extension of there monopoly control curtsey of Virgin.

By M_Hamer on 26 Nov 2009

The bright sparks at ISPs know that without illegal content being freely available, broadband subscribers eventually won't know what to do with their bandwidth every month, except to eventually cancel it. Most people get bored of FaceBook, Twitter after a month or two, and apart from accessing their emails, gambling and watching the odd bit of fluff on the iplayer, what are they going to do?

By popeye91 on 26 Nov 2009

Shameful

You know when you hear about so many 3rd parties 'tapping' into your private life you wonder why? What the hell has it to do with Virgin what the content of customer download/uploads. I bet Richard Branson won't be having his connection monitored.
Regarding Uni dorms I'd suggest that educational establishments are exactly that! You should get your laptop/mobile working instead of free internet access.

Michael

By photomanlondon on 26 Nov 2009

Jammy Dodgers?

Perfectblue97
'People don't seem to realize that the internet would be a whole lot faster if it wasn't for illegal P2P downloads'

Peer to Peer Bit torrent protocol has developed a bad name through greedy Media moguls and technology ignorant complicit politicians. It is ever associated with illegal downloading, but standard hosting also has is fair share of illegal downloading.

In comparison with standard hosting, bit torrent provides a significant reduction in distributors hardware and bandwidth resources and providers redundancy against system problems.. ie it doesn't clog up the internet.

By blackcat on 26 Nov 2009

@Laurent

"If they're purely going to define legal traffic as those defined by the record companies..."

Well done, Laurent - you've managed to completely take something out of context seeing as it said "legal and illegal sources". I think it's a fair assumption that the vast amount of traffic not defined as being of either source will not be counted. Virgin is hardly going to want to come up with a picture of vast amounts of illegal downloading by their customers are they?

By halsteadk on 26 Nov 2009

Who put the record companies in control?

Surely what is "legal or illegal" is a matter for the courts NOT the record companies, but then what can we expect when it blatantly obvious that the record companies have Mandy on their payroll!

By mauriceheath on 26 Nov 2009

Who put the record companies in control?

Surely what is "legal or illegal" is a matter for the courts NOT the record companies, but then what can we expect when it blatantly obvious that the record companies have Mandy on their payroll!

By mauriceheath on 26 Nov 2009

Who put the record companies in control?

Surely what is "legal or illegal" is a matter for the courts NOT the record companies, but then what can we expect when it blatantly obvious that the record companies have Mandy on their payroll!

By mauriceheath on 26 Nov 2009

Sorry for the triple post

My browser seems to have developed a stammer.

By mauriceheath on 26 Nov 2009

All a bit late in the day Virgin

Thanks to all original ISP the hoo-hah about P2P and torrents, I was motivated to find far better and quicker sources of films, TV and music, so I'm downloading more than ever.

I'd like to thank the music industry, Virgin, the government etc. for inspiring me to do this. I consider every downloaded kilobyte a blow against the forces of monolithic oppression.

By Lacrobat on 27 Nov 2009

All a bit late in the day Virgin

Thanks to all original ISP the hoo-hah about P2P and torrents, I was motivated to find far better and quicker sources of films, TV and music, so I'm downloading more than ever.

I'd like to thank the music industry, Virgin, the government etc. for inspiring me to do this. I consider every downloaded kilobyte a blow against the forces of monolithic oppression.

By Lacrobat on 27 Nov 2009

Listeners are abandoning illegal downloads

Punters are turning to authentic digital music files, and ignoring file sharing sites. According to the Sydney Morning Herald the reason for the trend is not because of the heavy handed actions of the music companies in locking up file sharers.

Instead it is because of an explosion of new companies offering tracks free, legally, without consumers having to go to peer-to-peer sites. In other worlds people are flocking to them simply because it is a much easier way of listening to music. What is amusing is the music industry appears to have missed the boat. None of the sites was started by the music industry.

Itunes, Comes with Music, Spotify.com and We7.com, have gained at least 5 million new users in their first year, mainly people who previously downloaded illegally. The chief executive of We7, Steve Purdham, is quoted as saying that the different music services are popping up are better than free because it is easier than downloading illegally. There are other services planned too. Rdio.com from the founders of Skype, Virgin Media, Sky Songs and mog.com, which will offer a $5-a-month inclusive service.

What this appears to be saying is that p2p piracy only thrived because the music industry did not support legal download systems. They should have twigged earlier. While the the music industry was complaining that users wouldn't pay for tracks, the same people were paying up to $5 a pop for ringtones on their phones.

It is also fairly clear that it has not learnt its lession. The music industry is still leaning on ISPs, and governments to come up with draconian penalties for file sharers, when it would be a lot more effective to support music and film sites at a reasonable price.

All this is going on when this year was the most successful in British history for singles sales. More than 117 million have been sold — comfortably beating the previous record of 115.1 million, set last year.

http://www.fudzilla.com/content/view/16589/1/

By sayl1000 on 27 Nov 2009

Listeners are abandoning illegal downloads

Punters are turning to authentic digital music files, and ignoring file sharing sites. According to the Sydney Morning Herald the reason for the trend is not because of the heavy handed actions of the music companies in locking up file sharers.

Instead it is because of an explosion of new companies offering tracks free, legally, without consumers having to go to peer-to-peer sites. In other worlds people are flocking to them simply because it is a much easier way of listening to music. What is amusing is the music industry appears to have missed the boat. None of the sites was started by the music industry.

Itunes, Comes with Music, Spotify.com and We7.com, have gained at least 5 million new users in their first year, mainly people who previously downloaded illegally. The chief executive of We7, Steve Purdham, is quoted as saying that the different music services are popping up are better than free because it is easier than downloading illegally. There are other services planned too. Rdio.com from the founders of Skype, Virgin Media, Sky Songs and mog.com, which will offer a $5-a-month inclusive service.

What this appears to be saying is that p2p piracy only thrived because the music industry did not support legal download systems. They should have twigged earlier. While the the music industry was complaining that users wouldn't pay for tracks, the same people were paying up to $5 a pop for ringtones on their phones.

It is also fairly clear that it has not learnt its lession. The music industry is still leaning on ISPs, and governments to come up with draconian penalties for file sharers, when it would be a lot more effective to support music and film sites at a reasonable price.

All this is going on when this year was the most successful in British history for singles sales. More than 117 million have been sold — comfortably beating the previous record of 115.1 million, set last year.

http://www.fudzilla.com/content/view/16589/1/

By sayl1000 on 27 Nov 2009

Is it OK to steal??

@M_Hamer
It sounds like you're saying it's OK to steal copyright material because it’s expensive. This is an utterly ridiculous point or view. The people who put the time and effort into making music and movies have a right to sell that work and make a living from it. You might consider the product to be expensive, and to be honest I’d agree with you. However, if you can’t afford to buy CDs and DVDs then the answer is simple – don’t.
I can’t afford to buy a Range Rover Sport, but that doesn’t mean I’m going to go out and steal one.
At the end of the day, the music and movies we’re talking about are hardly essential items but more of a luxury. You can live without them. If we were talking about someone stealing a loaf of bread to feed their family then I might take a different point of view, but this is not the case. Comic Relief don’t run charity campaigns for deprived people who can’t afford the latest Westlife CD!

By danielohare1 on 27 Nov 2009

In Regard to "Is it OK to steal"

Of course it is not ok to steal, I use legal services such as napster to get my music, and playstation network offer a wide selection a movies to purcahse for reasonable prices. However the music and movie companys plus isp's are completley out of order whilst the music and movie industry deserve to earn a living some of their life styles are crazy luxury and whilst they work hard for it im sure they could afford to knock £3 - 5 pounds of a dvd or cd.
Personally myself I h and still have a luxurious lifestyle.I personally have no problem paying for the content I want, although I want everything stored digitally and not on a cd/dvd because they can get scratched or lost. The music and movie companys dont even like you backing them up for your personal use.
Getting back to the point at hand, DPI wont solve anything, if any of the customers had common sense they would use VPN's 128 - 256 bit ssh tunnel which would render the data impossible to determine for now. When they isps and music companys catch on to this the dpi software will edit to solve this problem or try and fail.
DPI breaks laws of privacy the isps actually need to get the customers consent to use DPI.

By KevinandToby on 19 Jan 2010