Hadopi hasnt done much (if anything) to stem the flow of downloads in France, and with the ACS:Law decision in England, their Digital Economy Act may be an impotent law, given much of the comments made by the judge in that – namely similar things to what I said about access v authorisation.

Things might change, and I expect laws to crop up more and more over the next few years changing things. But even then I think its just going to create a divide around the globe.

I work with legislation daily in my job, and 10 years ago I asked a question about the tax status of subscriptions for online games, and was basically told it was too hard.

For me, thats one of the key problems around the world. There is no clear and common answer. For every iiNet decision, you have a Tenenbaum penalty to point to. For each safe harbour ruling, theres a Hadopi law lurking somewhere.

And yeah, lets not get into the technical limitations of the whole process…

I hope AFACT gets a huge spiky defeat up their arrogant arses.

Someone in a university research lab told me that it is just a matter of time before the entire internet becomes decentralized. I am not en engineer but it has to do with wireless technology where internet access is achieved through some kind of peer 2 peer systems. Currently, the technology in his lab allows for 1 Gbit/sec over 3 Km.

Apparently the US Army connects it’s tanks that way. Since the battlefield does not always allow for line of sight or even satellite communication, each tank relays data from peers all the way back to the HQ.

Using a similar technology, internet users could technically have their signal relaid through other users all the way to a communication hub where it would achieve connectivity with the commercial internet.

The only limitation would be to be within 25 Km of another user. So 10 users could in theory cover a distance of 250 Km wirelessly, making it possible to bring broadband to isolated villages. In larger cities, your signal could be relaid through many users allowing for the fastest route to be used at all times.

In theory again, this kind of network could eventually do without data centers and even without the entire commercial internet. This might result in numerous independent “internet like networks” that might or might not be bridged together. No throttling, no HADOPI since this system needs to be 100% neutral to work.

Nobody can stop progress, the dinosaurs will get extinct!

A dozen bots posting human like views to many forums and backing each other up would be a nightmare.

And if the customer isn’t using encryption the ISP would still have to intercept the traffic and analyze it in order to see what was being transferred. Which would net them highly personal info such as bank transfer statements and torrent files alike.

I.e. No, the ISP can, in practice, no more have a say in what is being transferred than what the regular post office could.

We NEED the most senior courts in each and every Country Worldwide to closely inspect the evil scam that’s going on with these stupid copywrong laws and decided in FAVOUR of common sense, fairness and a freedom to share for no cash, no profit and no gain without risk of threats or punitive action.

This decision in Oz is EXTREMELY important and sends a warning shot into the face and wallets of the copywrong lobby to calm down, stop being so fecken hysterical and listen to what their customers and the original artistes want.

The revolution meanwhile continues with casualties on both sides of this stupid fecken war :( And I’m afraid to say my prediction is there wont be a ceasefire for some years yet.

http://torrentfreak.com/iinet-fights-off-hollywood-isp-not-responsible-for-online-piracy-110224/