Letters to the Editor
-
ATT
Aren't they already monitoring our traffic for the White House?
-
proofreader alert
Has AT&T "simply lots its mind?"
Yes, lots and lots.
-
They're not mad, just sinister
AT&T is going to sensor and track the information that is shared and dispersed via the internet because darker forces than itself (of which it is only a slightly less dark part) are Hell bent on having complete control over information. People "stealing" is only the excuse to exert more control, just as "Terror" has been used to strip the citizens of the U.S. of their rights. The powers that be can only think in terms of total domination at this point.
The Chinese model of censorship and pervasive oppression is the dream of our dark overlords. You see, our twisted masters cannot stand to see we peasants happy, it breaks their black hearts.
-
It's a ruse
What's the problem with the internet, from AT&T's perspective? Anyone can upload any content they want, and potentially make money on it. That's a lot of revenue that big corporation lose to smaller producers of content. AT&T wants to make the internet just as easily controlled--and therefore easy to make money on--as other media. The first step is to be able to tell who is sending what information, then they can go on to make the internet less chaotic and democratic, and more corporate. This whole illegal file sharing thing is just a ruse.
-
Move along, no legal problems to see here....
AT&T will simply instruct Bush to get legislation passed that will make them immune to any legal consequences of their behavior.
-
If AT&T can turn me over to the police after they deliver illegal content to me
And they can get away with quasi-police powers then, yeah, filter all you want. Or, simply sign up to be indicted alongside me when the RIAA comes after BOTH of us.
Me? I'm kind of opposed to ISP's being crack dealers who get to rat you out to the cops and have no responsibility whatsoever for the crack they gave you.
-
Legal Consequences
It's obvious that ATT's Mr. Stephenson hasn't talked to the kids in Legal yet, or he wouldn't be spouting nonsense like this.
I may be out of date, but my understanding of what would happen to AT&T if they were to open this Pandora's box is that it would be disastrous.
Under their current status as nothing more than a "Common Carrier," AT&T has absolutely no legal liability for the contents of the data sent over its lines. This is a concept that dates back to the days of the first telegraph.
You and I could use the internet to plot the death of Aunt Martha, and there's nothing Uncle George could do to AT&T for carrying our discussion. Or, more to the point, you and I could share all our music and movie files with each other, clearly a violation of the law, with absolutely no liability for AT&T at all.
On the other hand, as I understand it, the moment they tamper with content, exercising their judgment as to what is and isn't legal, moral, or what-have-you, AT&T and their cohorts abandon that common carrier protection from liability and become legally liable for the content of every single bit of data sent over their lines.
No lawyer, in or out of their right mind, would allow a client to do such a foolish thing. If there were profit in it, I could see them doing it, but surely this is just an intoxicated Republican CEO making stupid political noises without having given it much practical thought.
- SL
-
Follow the money.
Most likely they figure it will open the door to charging for different levels of service on what has heretofore been an open pipe.
In any event, somehow they plan to make/save money off of this or they wouldn't even be considering it.
It's that simple.
-
AT&T's "mind"
Has AT&T lost its mind? I think it'd be safer to say it had a brain transplant. The AT&T we all grew up with is no more. They essentially went out of business recently and were purchased by SBC. SBC is, of course, an entity merged out of several of the "Baby Bells" created when it was decided AT&T was a monopoly and had to be broken up. SBC is well on its way to re-establishing that monopoly. Of the pieces of that breakup only Verizon is still really independant from them. As an added "benefit": Bell Labs, one of the nation's premier research facilities, is no more and will never be coming back.
So thank the "power of the market" for this wonder.
-
it's the responsible thing to do.
It's like you're walking down the street and you see somebody carrying a DVD. Did they steal it? Maybe, so better report them to the police, just to be safe.
-
Legal eagles
Surprising that now AT&T gets all uncomfortable about supporting illegal activity, after having helped the Bush administration conduct illegal searches. I don't know whether to laugh at the irony or cry about the unmitigated gall.
-
So crazy it just might work
See fredblotnik's post "Follow the Money." AT&T has made it clear for years that it wants to institute a multi-tiered internet so that it can charge both uploaders and downloaders: it wants its customers to pay for their internet service, of course, but it also wants Google and Amazon to pay to have their traffic be delivered in the fast lane. This is what the net neutrality debate is all about. As another poster pointed out, "piracy" is just the rhetoric that they will use to get large content providers on board.
My immediate concern, though, is Manjoo's Pollyanna-ish belief that this is akin to AT&T's suicide. If we take refuge in the belief that customers would never stand for this, and that there would be a major uprising to prevent it, that is a dangerously naive complacency. Most citizens have few choices for their high-speed internet provider (we don't all live in SF, Salon!), and between AT&T's campaign contributions and anti-piracy rhetoric, the company can expect little opposition in Congress or the FCC. Just look at how easily they are getting retroactive immunity, a blatantly corrupt provision that has only failed to pass so far because of one brave senator.
For all of you counting on "the boys in Legal" to prevent this, a more likely scenario is that AT&T gets an immunity provision through Congress allowing it to filter content without liability--the worst of all possible worlds.
Do NOT assume that just because AT&T's plan is insane means they won't pull it off.