Plusnet monitoring for infringement?

[#1]

BT having a userbase of over 400,000 clients will soon be monitoring customers for copyright infringement as part of the Digital Economy Act. Does Plusnet fall under the BT banner here and will you be doing so as well?
Sadly its completely fine for political parties to breach copyright but for us mere mortals the slightest look at an infringing picture or video on the web is soon likely to result in a demand for money.
Original article via ars technica

[#2]

A slight clarification the ISP's aren't monitoring for copyright infringements they need to log all complaints of infringement by third parties

Quote

The UK has just released a draft set of rules for its new "three strikes and you're... on a list" approach to online copyright enforcement. The quick and dirty details: ISPs must log copyright infringement warnings, rightsholders can sue when anyone picks up three warnings within a year, rightsholders must prove they use a solid process to uncover violations, ISPs must prove they can properly match IP addresses to names, and there's an appeals process. At first glance, it doesn't seem too bad.

 

[#3]

I'm guessing PN itself now have around 350,000+ users. Brightview Group (Madasafish) had around 62,000 broadband users at the time they were acquired by BT. I think it's quite probable the Plusnet's total user base is in excess of 400,000 so I think being part of the larger BT group is probably irrelevant.

[#4]

It's probably relevant jelv when considering that Ofcom claim that the 'seven largest ISPs' will be included, and then go on to cite them as BT, Talk Talk, Virgin Media, Sky, Orange, O2 and the Post Office.
Having read most of the articles about the proposed COP, I did notice that ISPr have specifically paid mention to us. Not sure where that information came from though as I'm certainly am not aware of what the official line is (will try and find out though).
For anybody interested there's the responses of a few ISPs (including BT) here.

[#5]

Quote from: jelv

I think it's quite probable the Plusnet's total user base is in excess of 400,000 so I think being part of the larger BT group is probably irrelevant.

Well depending on how up to date the graph is then at any one time there is 290,000 users routers synced plus however many customers routers are turned off at same time which is any one's guess but i would put my money on 350,000
edit.
might help if i put the link in, site still running slow http://www.plus.net/support/network_performance/broadband_bandwidth_usage.shtml#numbers

[#6]

There's a difference of 40,000 between the peak and the minimum (250,000 permanently connected).
So what's the percentage of users who connect as and when needed who will on at the same time? Assuming 50% gives you 80,000 which would give the total user base as 330,000. I'd have thought 50% was on the high side so I don't think you are far off Asbo Dog

[#7]

Hi guys,
Just to update the thread, we do fall under the BT banner in this case, but bear in mind this is a draft code of practice, and will probably change considerably before the launch proper (there's also 2 other parts to follow).

[#8]

as it's still at the draft stage, there's still wiggle room and even getting it through their thick heads that it's unworkable in all manner of ways.  whatever they implement, i do hope that the first casualties are little old ladies who know how to press start, but are a little bemused thereafter, little children and people with no connection whatever.  eggs on faces is just so effective.

[#9]

Hmm I don't like this new law but anythings better than the current system that allows people to be bullied into paying early settlement fees.

[#10]

Thanks for the replies and clarification. Hopefully the whole lot will get ditched in the 'great repeal' though I highly doubt it.

[#11]

I expect there will be a roaring trade in sending spam (electronic and printed) notifications to random uk addresses.
Also, I'd like to know how I am able to appeal against any threatening letters.
Since my identity is supposed to be protected, without at the same time revealing my identity?
Rubbish idea.
When the first letter arrives, any serious downloader would just get themselves a VPN.

[#12]

The fundemental part of this we all need to realise is ......only an IP address is not proof of any wrong doing...
This applies to both the SCAM Mass mailings sent out by ACS LAW and the Digital Economy bill. Both will involve Plusnet giving up personal details with the barest of proof. The Bill in its current form still does not mean that the rights holder must provide absolute proof (like a UK criminal court) but only the probabilty of more than 50% that any wrong doing has taken place. there still is no free way to counter these claims, and in the future (though apparently not at the moment...)the traffic shaping that plus net carries out on every single subscriber (See my usage on the portal) means that this could be used as more evidence  of wrongdoing.
We must stand up to the bullying of big business, The Digital Economy bill came about after Mandelson met David Geffen on holiday in corfu and promised him the bill. All this is not about protecting copyright but protecting BIG BUSINESS.

[#13]

Quote from: davethir

and in the future (though apparently not at the moment...)the traffic shaping that plus net carries out on every single subscriber (See my usage on the portal) means that this could be used as more evidence  of wrongdoing.

That won't work as evidence of P2P isn't evidence of illegal downloads. The Sky Player uses Kontiki P2P

[#14]

For some reason, my downloads via Sky Player are appearing as streaming rather then P2P?

[#15]

shhhh.