I assume that this will be targeted at whoever pays the bill.
The problem is that a lot of people especially families etc have more than one person using the internet even if you ignore issues such as other people breaking into your network without permission.
Another problem is that bit torrent traffic is very difficult to block without effectively crippling the internet connection since modern clients seem to be clever about using encryption and trying different ports etc. I've tried blocking bittorrents on my router using it's feature for doing so, didn't work at all.
This means that you might have a family with a shared internet connection where all of the kids are given internet access because they need it for schoolwork & keeping in touch with friends etc but maybe one of them simply keeps downloading copyrighted material despite being told not to. Identifying and preventing this behaviour might prove impossible and it's likely that the entire household suffers as a result.
(Went through all this stuff 5 years ago when it was passed in France, so I already went through most of the arguments/counter arguments)
The argument is that they don't care, it is the fault of the account owner if they are not able to prevent "illegal" usage. Account owner should be able to install "something" (they were always vague) that would help him prevent people doing illegal stuff.
By something we always thought it would be allowing ISPs to do DPI or something (and you would off course have to pay for it, because it's a service they offer).
I'm not sure if DPI would help much if the torrent connections are all encrypted.
Perhaps you could do something by profiling connections, for example if a particular computer has a large amount of connections open to a large number of IP addresses.
But then again in theory you don't have to download very much to trip over this, downloading 6 separate 4MB MP3 files could do it if you are very unlucky.
The only thing I can think of would be to run everything through an HTTP proxy and then explicitly whitelist IP addresses of individual websites as and when you need them.
Of course this would break stuff like XboX games and any legitimate use of P2P networking.
So then, is imagined property set to be the basis of this century's systematic child abuse, much like religion was the last's? I suppose it's not the only similarity between the two.
The problem is that a lot of people especially families etc have more than one person using the internet even if you ignore issues such as other people breaking into your network without permission.
Another problem is that bit torrent traffic is very difficult to block without effectively crippling the internet connection since modern clients seem to be clever about using encryption and trying different ports etc. I've tried blocking bittorrents on my router using it's feature for doing so, didn't work at all.
This means that you might have a family with a shared internet connection where all of the kids are given internet access because they need it for schoolwork & keeping in touch with friends etc but maybe one of them simply keeps downloading copyrighted material despite being told not to. Identifying and preventing this behaviour might prove impossible and it's likely that the entire household suffers as a result.