One of the major pieces of "evidence" the RIAA was using for subpoenas was to see if you were using "excessive" bandwidth, regardless of wether or not this bandwidth was being used by p2p apps.
I own my own design business, and work primarily from my home. When sending files for customer billboards, I obviously chow up bandwidth. The problem is people like me can be scrutinized without there being any evidence to justify doing so.
One of the major pieces of "evidence" the RIAA was using for subpoenas was to see if you were using "excessive" bandwidth, regardless of wether or not this bandwidth was being used by p2p apps.
I own my own design business, and work primarily from my home. When sending files for customer billboards, I obviously chow up bandwidth. The problem is people like me can be scrutinized without there being any evidence to justify doing so.
I agree with you that the excessive bandwidth test is not the best one. However, if you were using excessive bandwidth for file transfers in the 2-4MB range, then you are beginning to look suspicious. Either way, RIAA is fishing and it shows. However, this method is not without precedent. One of the best ways to catch people who grow lots of maraijuana hydroponically in their home is through their heavy power consumption. Such households will consume something like ten times the normal power use because they are running 1000W lamps 24/7.
I think that RIAA's real goal is to harrass the ISPs with lawsuits so that they crack down on P2P themselves (ala college campuses). I can't say that this would be too bad of a thing although I don't like how it is coming about (lawsuits). I don't have much pity for P2P users.
Comments
One of the major pieces of "evidence" the RIAA was using for subpoenas was to see if you were using "excessive" bandwidth, regardless of wether or not this bandwidth was being used by p2p apps.
I own my own design business, and work primarily from my home. When sending files for customer billboards, I obviously chow up bandwidth. The problem is people like me can be scrutinized without there being any evidence to justify doing so.
Originally posted by rageous
ah, reality finally sets is.
One of the major pieces of "evidence" the RIAA was using for subpoenas was to see if you were using "excessive" bandwidth, regardless of wether or not this bandwidth was being used by p2p apps.
I own my own design business, and work primarily from my home. When sending files for customer billboards, I obviously chow up bandwidth. The problem is people like me can be scrutinized without there being any evidence to justify doing so.
I agree with you that the excessive bandwidth test is not the best one. However, if you were using excessive bandwidth for file transfers in the 2-4MB range, then you are beginning to look suspicious. Either way, RIAA is fishing and it shows. However, this method is not without precedent. One of the best ways to catch people who grow lots of maraijuana hydroponically in their home is through their heavy power consumption. Such households will consume something like ten times the normal power use because they are running 1000W lamps 24/7.
I think that RIAA's real goal is to harrass the ISPs with lawsuits so that they crack down on P2P themselves (ala college campuses). I can't say that this would be too bad of a thing although I don't like how it is coming about (lawsuits). I don't have much pity for P2P users.