Digital Media

The heads of the UK's largest ISPs have co-signed a letter of protest against the proposal to disconnect suspected illegal file-sharers from their broadband service.

The open letter was sent to The Times on Thursday by the chiefs of TalkTalk, BT, and Orange, as well as representatives of the Open Rights Group and the consumer choice organizations Which and Consumer Focus.

It coincided with a detailed argument against the government's proposals, issued as a statement by the Featured Artists Coalition (FAC), the British Academy of Songwriters, Composers and Authors (Basca) and the Music Producers Guild (MPG).

The signatories of the letter to The Times acknowledged the creative industry's concerns about illegal sharing of copyrighted material. Nevertheless, they said the government's latest proposals on how to reduce this are "misconceived, and threaten broadband consumers' rights and the development of new, attractive services."

"Consumers must be presumed to be innocent unless proven guilty," the letter read. "We must avoid an extrajudicial 'kangaroo court' process where evidence is not tested properly and accused broadband users are denied the right to defend themselves against false accusations.

"Without these protections, innocent customers will suffer. Any penalty must be proportionate. Disconnecting users from the internet would place serious limits on their freedom of expression."

The letter's signatories--TalkTalk's Charles Dunstone, BT's Ian Livingston, Orange's Tom Alexander, the Open Rights Group's Jim Killock, Consumer Focus' Ed Mayo, and Which's Deborah Prince--were responding to proposals made by the Department for Business, Innovation, and Skills (BIS) in late August.

In those proposals, Lord Mandelson's department called for disconnection to be an option in the case of persistent illegal file-sharers.

The proposal came before the deadline on a consultation--launched in June by BIS--into the issue of copyrighted material being shared online. That consultation was kicked off by Lord Carter's Digital Britain report, which discounted the option of disconnection as being unnecessarily harsh.

BIS's proposal suggested ISPs should pay a large portion of the cost of the monitoring and legal mechanisms needed to establish which file-sharers should be disconnected.

The signatories of the letter to The Times pointed out that these costs would filter down to broadband customers. They described the plan as "grossly unfair, since the vast majority of consumers do not file-share illegally."

Also on Thursday, the FAC, Basca, and MPG issued a joint statement arguing that a system where suspected illegal file-sharers are monitored, sent warning letters, and punished would not lead to a "vibrant, functional, fair, and competitive" market for music.

"As a result, we believe that the specific questions asked by the consultation are not only unanswerable, but indicate a mindset so far removed from that of the general public and music consumer that it seems an extraordinarily negative document," the organizations wrote.

The organizations argued that the consultation's estimate for the damage done to the content industries by file-sharing--about $328 million per year--was based upon the premise that a P2P-downloaded track equals a lost sale. Therefore, the estimate is no more than "'lobbyists' speak' (as) it has little support from logic, and no economist would seek to weave such a number into a metric aimed at quantifying a 'value gap' for the industries challenged by P2P," they said.

The organizations also noted the costs of monitoring for illegal file-sharing, and said the consultation's estimate of $92 million to $139 million was likely to be a gross underestimate due to the complicated nature of the proposed system.

"Looking backward for insight into how we adapt mass-production product models to the digital age of access and services has been a major obstacle to progress over the past decade," they wrote. "We must begin to look forward to business models that we cannot even imagine yet.

"As creators' representatives, we are willing to be partners with government in exploring and navigating the opportunities and challenges brought by digital technologies. What we will not be a party to is any system that alienates our members' existing audience and potential new audiences."

David Meyer of ZDNet UK reported from London.

8-25-09, 8:07 a.m. To include that The Pirate Bay is back online. To see a detail story on the site go here.

A Swedish district court has ordered an Internet service provider there to stop servicing The Pirate Bay.

The most popular BitTorrent tracker in the world appeared to be inaccessible to many in the U.S. on Monday morning but the blog TorrentFreak reported that the site had found a new connection to the Web and there were reports from readers that they were able to log on to the site. Citing a source close to The Pirate Bay, TorrentFreak said that the tracker was still down but would be back up on Tuesday.

An executive with Black Internet told Swedish newspaper SvD that the court informed the company that it would either shut off The Pirate Bay or face penalties. The founders of The Pirate Bay were found guilty of copyright violations last April.

The executive told the newspaper that Black Internet is not the only ISP servicing The Pirate Bay but is probably the largest. He said none of the other ISPs were affected by the decision. He added that the company is considering options.

It's unclear how long Black Internet will be forced to stop service for The Pirate Bay. The company may not be able to resume service until the appeal filed by The Pirate Bay founders is settled, SvD reported.

The news comes on the heels of a victory for the founders of The Pirate Bay.

Sweden's government run debt-collection agency, commonly referred to as the bailiff, said it could find no attachable assets belonging to three of the four founders of the site. A group of media companies had asked the bailiff to collect the $4 million a court had awarded them after finding the four Pirate Bay founders guilty of copyright violations.

At this point, the future of the site, at least in name, appears to rest with the software maker Global Gaming Factory X, the software maker and operator of Internet cafes. The company said in June it would pay $8 million to acquire The Pirate Bay and the deal is supposed to close on Thursday. But Swedish regulators halted trading in Global Gaming on Friday over questions about the company's financial readiness to complete the transaction.

At the very least, the launch of a new Pirate Bay, one with authorized film and music copies, is unlikely to happen anytime soon.

The International Federation of the Phonographic Industry issued a statement applauding the decision by the court and Black Internet.

"The Court's ruling yet again confirms the illegality of The Pirate Bay's operation and demonstrates the liability of ISPs that provide internet services to The Pirate Bay," the IFPI wrote. "The Pirate Bay seeks to continue to infringe our members' rights on a commercial scale and further actions against ISPs who enable access to The Pirate Bay are planned."

Last December, the music industry's message to song writers, publishers, and musicians was that antipiracy help was on the way. Hopes soared after the major labels announced that they had convinced a group of telecoms to work with them.

Filing lawsuits against individuals accused of illegal file sharing was, for the most part, a thing of the past, said the Recording Industry Association of America, the trade group representing the top music companies. The new strategy was to enlist Internet service providers, the gatekeepers of the Web, to issue a series of warnings meant to increase pressure on alleged pirates in what the RIAA called a "graduated response." Under the plan, those subscribers who refused to heed warnings could eventually see their Web connection suspended.

Six months later, the music industry is still waiting to hear from the RIAA which ISPs have explicitly agreed to work with the association. When the RIAA first announced its new antipiracy project, it didn't name partners. Behind the scenes, industry insiders assured the media that the group would disclose the names of partner ISPs "within weeks." Six months later, however, not one ISP has publicly acknowledged working with the RIAA on a "graduated response."

RIAA CEO Mitch Bainwol

(Credit: Declan McCullagh)

That there are still no announced deals--and there's no guarantee the RIAA can sign any of the major broadband companies--indicates that at best the big recording companies may have spoken too soon when they said broadband providers would help, says one ISP executive. Ironically, at a time when many figured the RIAA had finally hit upon a compelling way to go after music piracy, the association's copyright protection efforts may be more toothless than ever.

"(The RIAA) has tried various ways to turn ISPs and other intermediaries into their own Internet cops," said Cindy Cohn, legal director for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, an advocacy group for Internet users. "What the ISPs appear to be saying is that this isn't our job."

To be sure, the RIAA continues to pitch its plan to ISPs, numerous sources have told CNET News. AT&T has launched tests of a graduated response--everything, that is, but service interruption. The telecom said it would never shut off a customer's service without a court order. The recording companies may soon announce some kind of agreement with one of the ISP trade groups. But this won't bind the group's members and the RIAA will still need to strike deals with individual companies.

"We have been working slowly but surely, directly and through the offices of (New York Attorney General Andrew) Cuomo, with virtually every major ISP on common approaches," said Jonathan Lamy, an RIAA spokesman in an e-mail. "During the past six months, a number of different ISPs have forwarded nearly half a million RIAA notices to P2P infringers. They had not done that before last winter. A number of individual ISPs now argue that notices alone are proving to have a sufficient deterrent impact."

What the RIAA seems to be suggesting here is that it doesn't need a threat of service termination for a graduated response to be effective. This, however, conflicts with what music executives say in private. They want a carrot and stick approach. They know they have to offer the public inexpensive and easy-to-use alternatives to illegal peer-to-peer sites. They also believe chronic abusers won't stop without the threat of a serious punitive consequence.

So, why did the RIAA announce the ISP-based program without any ISPs on board so many months ago?

Some RIAA critics have speculated that the December announcement was a smokescreen to cover the music industry's retreat from the 5-year-old and highly controversial strategy of filing copyright lawsuits against individuals accused of copyright violations. The theory goes something like this: the RIAA needed a face-saving way to walk away from the litigation, which resulted in more than 30,000 people being sued, a fortune in legal fees, a huge public relations black eye, and didn't do all that much to stop piracy.

Ernesto, founder of the blog TorrentFreak, which focuses on file sharing, was always skeptical of the RIAA's announcement. He noted that some telecoms have voluntarily sent warning notices to subscribers accused of illegally downloading songs for years, while other companies refused. He says he sees nothing new.

"Yes, the RIAA, MPAA and other outfits do plan to send copyright infringement warnings to ISPs," Ernesto wrote in March, "but they've been doing so for at least half a decade. Every other month these Hollywood lobbyists pitch their antipiracy efforts to the public...this doesn't mean, however, that something is about to change."

According to the ISP executive who asked for anonymity because he's involved in negotiations with the music sector, the RIAA's tactics in dealing with the ISPs have been too heavy handed.

The executive complained that the RIAA has tried to use Andrew Cuomo to push the ISPs into helping. But Cuomo doesn't have the kind of political muscle to sway the major ISPs when they are acting well within the law, the executive said. There's nothing in the Digital Millennium Copyright Act that requires ISPs to send their own warning letters to subscribers.

And some ISPs say the DMCA is unclear about when they must terminate service of repeat offenders. AT&T executives say they won't cut off someone's Web access based solely on evidence supplied by the recording industry and will only do so after receiving a court order.

"We keeping hearing about how (Cuomo) is supposed to make this happen," said the executive. "You don't see much changing, do you?

So if Cuomo isn't enough, why don't the music labels appeal to Congress to legislate the ISPs into submission? That's easy. The ISPs have much more influence in Washington than the music sector. There's also little public sympathy for recording stars, who are often perceived to be rolling in money--even if this is a reality for a tiny fraction of working musicians.

In an interview with CNET last week, Paul McGuinness, manager of the rock band U2, says that ISPs have for a long time profited from selling broadband to file sharers and have little interest in taking action without seeing financial reward. But he sees some progress around the globe.

"Perhaps broadband subscription sales are saturated in many territories and the ISPs are belatedly but realistically now turning to building revenue collection businesses with the content owners," McGuinness said. "I just hope it's not too late."

Cohn, from EFF, sees it differently. To her, cutting off someone's Internet connection for file sharing is like refusing to sell shoes to someone accused of jaywalking.

"Every day that passes we realize how important Internet connectivity is to people's lives," Cohn said. "The RIAA looks so out of step with what most people think is a reasonable response to (copyright) infringing behavior. Even to the people that believe we're locked into this 19th century view of copyright law, the RIAA looks hysterical."

Having apparently been scared off illegal file sharing in large numbers by a new Swedish law that went into effect April 1, pirates in that country now have a new safe harbor to escape law enforcement.

Three Swedish Internet service providers, among them Tele2, one of the country's three major broadband operators, have stated that they will erase traffic data to protect their customers' privacy.

"It's a strong wish from our customers, so we decided not to store information on customers' IP numbers anymore," Niclas Palmstierna, CEO of Tele2, told Swedish national news agency TT Tuesday morning.

The information is crucial in investigating piracy. When surveying the Internet to spot computers involved in uploading or downloading copyright-protected material, it's easy to capture these computers' IP data. But to identify the person using the computer, it's necessary to ask for the ISP, as IP numbers normally are assigned dynamically by the provider.

The new so-called IPRED law in Sweden, based on an EU directive, gives copyright owners the right to ask for customers' identity from ISPs, if a court agrees.

Strong indications showed that total Internet traffic in Sweden decreased by 30 percent to 50 percent the day the law took effect, and traffic still remains low, as indicated by traffic exchanged between ISPs in major Swedish network exchange Netnod.

Tele2's decision to erase traffic data follows a similar decision by ISPs All Tele and Bahnhof.

The move in itself is not against the law. On the contrary, European law on electronic communication (PDF) demands that ISPs only store traffic data for a limited time period to handle billing, inter-operator traffic, and security issues. The law then requires them to erase that data as soon as possible.

Copyright owners are upset nonetheless. "It's astonishing that someone who claims to be a serious communication operator wants to assist in crime, which is implied by what (ISPs) are doing" when they erase data, lawyer Peter Danowsky told the Swedish daily newspaper SvD.

Danowsky represented the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry in the high-profile Pirate Bay case. Four men were sentenced to prison for assisting in making 33 copyright-protected files available over the Internet. (The IFPI represented a number of record labels in the litigation.)

Overall Swedish Internet traffic apparently dropped drastically on April 1 when a new antipiracy law went into effect. The graph represents traffic in gigabits per second through Netnod, the major Swedish node for exchange of traffic between operators.

(Credit: Netnod)

"Major portions of the Internet traffic derive from illegal file sharing, which makes it an important revenue source for the ISPs," Danowsky added.

The downturn in Swedish Internet traffic results in lowered costs for ISPs, while revenues remain the same as prescription fees are flat rate. But long-term revenues are at stake, as demand for high bandwidth could decrease.

Other major ISPs in Sweden declare they will not follow Tele2's decision. They say they need traffic data to handle security issues. But data will be stored only for a few weeks.

Telia Sonera, the country's largest ISP, tells SvD that it stores data for "a short period," whereas another major ISP, Norwegian Telenor, says it stores data for a maximum of three weeks. So copyright owners that want traffic data must turn to a court very quickly after securing evidence on illegal file sharing if they want a chance to get at the identity behind an IP number.

According to Swedish police, the operators' move to erase traffic data will also make other cybercrime investigations more difficult, Swedish national news agency TT reports.

Meanwhile, the first case under the new IPRED law drags on. Five audio book publishers have turned to the law to get at the identity behind an IP number allegedly used for illegal file sharing, but the ISP Ephone refuses to hand over the information, declaring that the evidence is too weak.

The court now says the material from the parties is extensive and that it largely will be up to the parties to decide how long the court's decision will take, according to the daily SvD.

Mitch Bainwol, CEO of the RIAA.

(Credit: Declan McCullagh)

France has passed a law that requires Internet service providers to cut off Web access of customers accused of illegally downloading copyright material multiple times.

Last Thursday, the French National Assembly passed the "Creation and Internet" law, which implements a graduated response program similar to one the recording industry is asking ISPs in the United States to adopt.

According to a story in BusinessWeek, the accused are first e-mailed a warning that they have been flagged as a copyright violator. If the person is accused a second time, the pressure is increased. Another warning is sent but this time in the form of a letter mailed to the person's house. A third accusation will trigger the "three-strikes" part of the plan, and the person's Internet access can then be suspended for up to a year.

Two weeks ago, CNET reported that AT&T has begun assisting the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) by sending out warning letters for people accused of copyright violations. The company also acknowledged experimenting with sending warnings by way of certified letters to customers' homes. The ISP, however, said it would never shut off anyone's service without a court order.

Mitch Bainwol, the RIAA's chairman and CEO, has never called for government regulation in this country, but said that France's decision to implement a three-strikes law is a sign the relationship between ISPs and copyright owners across the globe is only getting stronger.

"Each country will forge its own solutions to this challenge," Bainwol said in an e-mail to CNET, "but the general pattern is clear. ISPs and the content community are working together in a constructive way to find common solutions that work for all sides."

The move by France's lawmakers comes as creators of content ranging from music to movies to book publishers appear to be taking the offensive against illegal file sharing or Web services they accuse of using their copyright work without permission.

High-ranking newspaper executives this week were critical of Google and Web sites that aggregate news for profiting from news stories without compensating the publications that produced them.

Across the Atlantic, the European Union passed the Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement Directive, a law that enables copyright holders to obtain a court order that requires ISPs to hand over IP addresses of people accused of infringing on intellectual property.

Police in Sweden last week began making arrests of those accused of breaking the new law.

Updated at 5:05 p.m. PDT to include explanation of RIAA's graduated response, quotes from RIAA, as well as information about how some ISPs had already implemented their own type of graduated response.

Jim Cicconi, a senior executive vice president at AT&T, says much has been written about his company's relationship with the music industry and some of it is flatly untrue.

This much at least Cicconi wants customers to understand: "AT&T is not going to suspend or terminate anyone's policy without a court order."

On Tuesday, Cicconi told attendees of the Leadership Music Digital Summit that the ISP has begun issuing warning notices to people accused of pirating music by the Recording Industry Association of America. The RIAA, the trade group representing the four largest music labels, said in December that it had received cooperation from some large Internet service providers. CNET reported Wednesday that besides AT&T, Comcast and Cox Communications were also working with the music industry.

There has been some confusion about what the RIAA's graduated response program involves. The program could include suspension or termination of service for repeat offenders. It's up to the ISP to decide. But there are also other forms of escalating responses, such as the sending of multiple letters. Some of the notices could take a stronger tone or perhaps the ISP might follow up with a phone call.

Ideally for the the RIAA, the graduated response would culminate in a temporary suspension of the account for chronic offenders. Some ISPs have balked at that step, but the RIAA is still encouraged by discussions it's had with the ISPs so far.

"We're pleased to be in constructive discussions with several ISPs," said an RIAA spokesman. "We're making important progress, and doing so in a manner consistent with everyone's respective priorities. We're grateful that some of the industry's leading executives came to Nashville and talked through these important issues."

CNET News reported Tuesday evening that Cicconi said AT&T had begun issuing warning notices to people accused of pirating music by the RIAA. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 has mandated that ISPs forward those letters to people accused of violating copyright. But AT&T has begun sending its own "cover letter" along with the RIAA's cease and desist notice, according to a company representative. Cicconi confirmed on Wednesday that those letters began going out last week. CNET also reported that in the notices sent to customers was language informing them that the company had the right to terminate service. Cicconi again confirmed that, but said the clause wasn't much more than legal boilerplate.

"It's a standard part of everybody's terms of service," Cicconi said. "If somebody is engaging in illegal activity, it basically gives us the right to do it...We're not a finder of fact and under no circumstances would we ever suspend or terminate service based on an allegation from a third party. We're just simply reminding people that they can't engage in illegal activity."

Cicconi said the company began testing this kind of "forward noticing" late last year and even experimented with sending certified letters. Cicconi said the notices worked. The company saw very few repeat offenders.

The RIAA is encouraging ISPs to strengthen their responses to piracy. Some ISPs, such as Cox, says it had already implemented a policy very similar to what the RIAA is asking for.

Comcast said Wednesday afternoon that it hasn't changed its policy. An executive who spoke at the same conference as Cicconi told the audience that the company has sent 2 million notices on behalf of content owners. A company representative said the company has no plans to test "a so-called 'three-strikes-and-you're-out' policy."

But music industry sources told CNET that Comcast has agreed to cooperate with the RIAA in other ways.

But what happens to chronic offenders? Cicconi said that his company will only send notices and that if a content owner wants more done, they need to see a judge.

"What we do is send notices and keep track of violations and IP addresses," Cicconi said. "It's our view that any stronger action has got to rest with the copyright owner...That's what the courts are there for."

Cicconi raises some important questions. How many ISPs are willing to cut off a customer's Internet connection without a court order, and how effective is the RIAA's graduated response program without one?

Note to readers: Have you received a warning letter from AT&T or another ISP? If so, e-mail me by clicking on the link in my bio below. Please include your contact information. I won't reveal your name in any story if that's what you prefer.

Update: 11:37 a.m. PDT To include quotes from a Cox spokesman.

Update: 4:05 p.m. PDT To include Comcast's statement that the 2 million notices sent out was not part of any new policy.

The Internet service providers that have agreed to work with the recording industry to battle illegal file sharing are starting to come forward.

Joe Waz, a senior vice president at Comcast, the nation's second largest ISP, told a gathering of music industry executives that the company has issued 2 million notices on behalf of copyright owners, according to multiple people who were in attendance.

Comcast said Wednesday afternoon that the 2 million notices Waz referred to were part of the company's standard practice and not a new policy.

"Comcast, like other major ISPs, forwards notices of alleged infringement that we receive from music, movie, videogame, and other content owners to our customers," Comcast said in a statement. "This is the same process we've had in place for years--nothing has changed. While we have always supported copyright holders in their efforts to reduce piracy under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), and continue to do so, we have no plans to test a so-called 'three-strikes-and-you're-out' policy."

Comcast's Joe Waz, in a photo from March 2008.

(Credit: Declan McCullagh/CNET)

Waz made the comments Tuesday while part of a panel at the Leadership Music Digital Summit in Nashville. This was the same event where an AT&T executive told the gathering that the nation's largest ISP was cooperating with the Recording Industry Association of America by sending notices to customers accused of illegal filing sharing. The letters are part of a trial program, the executive told the audience.

In addition, sources confirmed that Cox Communications is also assisting the RIAA in the group's new campaign to use ISPs to help discourage consumers from pirating songs.

In December, the RIAA shocked music fans by announcing the termination of a years-long strategy of filing copyright lawsuits against individuals. Instead, the lobbying group for the major recording companies would seek the help of Internet providers. The RIAA said it had lined up a group of large ISPs to help, but declined to disclose which ones or how many.

To copyright owners, the shift in strategy is a victory. For a long time, people in the music and film industries have complained that broadband providers were profiting from piracy. Many in the entertainment industry have called on ISPs to lend a hand in plugging up the flow of illegal content.

To those who advocate for Internet users, however, any plan that threatens to shut off someone's Internet access without hard evidence is unfair. RIAA leaders have said that the group's graduated response program would include punitive action for repeat offenders, which could include suspension or even termination of service. RIAA managers say they support due process to protect people from being falsely accused. But what the due process looks like has yet to be determined.

Comcast was careful to state that it isn't considering terminating customers' service.

An AT&T spokeswoman said that the ISP has not threatened anyone with the disabling of service but acknowledged that warning letters sent to customers, the company says it reserves the right to terminate service.

She said the company sends a letter from the RIAA and adds its own cover letter. The company informs the customer that the problem could be that a teenager in the home has downloaded unauthorized material or that someone else is doing so via an unsecured Wi-Fi connection.

As far as Cox is concerned, the practices that the RIAA is asking ISPs to adopt have been standard since the Digital Millennium Copyright Act was passed in 1998. The company acknowledges that it will, in the case of chronic offenders, shut off service. A Cox spokesman said this about the company's policy:

When we receive notifications from RIAA or other copyright holders stating that their copyrighted material is being infringed by a customer, we pass that information along to the customer so they can correct the problem, or dispute the notice directly with the copyright holder if they feel the notice was sent in error. This notification is the most helpful thing we can do for the customer and is expected of us, as an ISP, under the DMCA. We attach a copy of the notice from the copyright holder with our message to the customer.

The spokesman said that the company has issued "hundreds of thousands" of warnings to customers but has terminated service on less than one tenth of 1 percent.

There's data to support the claim that warning notices work. In the United Kingdom, research done by Wiggin and Entertainment Media Research found that seven out of 10 people surveyed said they would stop downloading unauthorized content if they received a notice from their ISP.

Note to readers: Have you received a warning letter from AT&T or another ISP? If so, e-mail me by clicking on the link in my bio below. Please include your contact information. I won't reveal your name in any story if that's what you prefer.

Research in the United Kingdom shows that 70 percent of those surveyed would stop pirating music if they received a notice from their ISP.

(Credit: Wiggin)

AT&T, one of the nation's largest Internet service providers, confirmed on Tuesday the company is working with the recording industry to combat illegal file sharing.

At a digital music conference in Nashville, Tenn., Jim Cicconi, a senior executive for AT&T, told the audience that the ISP has begun issuing warning notices to people accused of pirating music by the Recording Industry Association of America, according to one music industry insider who was present.

Early Wednesday morning, an AT&T spokeswoman confirmed that Cicconi made the statements.

In December, the RIAA, the lobbying group of the four largest recording companies, announced the group would no longer pursue an antipiracy strategy that focused on suing individuals, but rather would seek the help of broadband providers to stem the flow of pirated content. The RIAA said an undisclosed number of ISPs had agreed to cooperate but declined to name them. In January, CNET News reported that AT&T and Comcast were among the group.

Sources told CNET on Wednesday that a Comcast executive confirmed that the nation's second largest ISP is working with the RIAA. At the same Nashville conference where Cicconi spoke, the Comcast exec said the ISP has sent 2 million warning notices to customers accused of infringement by entertainment companies. The sources have also confirmed that Cox is a member. (You can read more about that here: "Comcast, Cox join RIAA antipiracy campaign.")

Representatives of the RIAA could not be reached for comment.

Cicconi told attendees of the Leadership Music Digital Summit that the notices, which are sent via e-mail, are part of a "trial." AT&T wants to test customer reaction, he said. It was unclear Tuesday evening if AT&T had included any threats to suspend or shut off service.

The RIAA had said that under its "graduated response" plan, repeat offenders faced the possibility of their ISP suspending or terminating service--at least temporarily. There are also other forms of escalating responses, such as the sending of multiple letters. Some of the notices could take a stronger tone or perhaps the ISP might follow-up with a phone call. Managers at the organization have also said they support due process to protect people from being falsely accused. What the due process includes has yet to be determined.

Reached Wednesday morning, Claudia Jones, an AT&T spokeswoman, said the company's letters do include a mention that company retains the right to terminate service. She wanted to make it clear that AT&T has no intention of doing so, however. Jones also said the ISP never shares customers' names or any other personal information. What the company does do is send a "cover letter" to the accused customer along with the letter the ISP received from the RIAA stating that the person's IP address was flagged.

AT&T goes on to tell the accused customer that the problem may be caused by a teenager in the house who may be illegally downloading or that the customer might have an insecure Internet connection and that someone could be using it to steal content.

The ISP also informs the customer that downloading unauthorized copies is illegal and should be prevented. As for chronic offenders, Jones was less specific but said: "We can't assume that people are stealing. All we know is that they are using a lot of bandwidth. We can't be the police or the copyright enforcer...that's up to the content owner."

All the activity going on with AT&T, Comcast, and Cox is likely the first stage in what promises to be a long and drawn out process of using ISPs to help protect copyright material.

ISPs have traditionally tried to stay out of the fray between the big entertainment companies and those who download music illegally. They remain squeamish about the possibility of alienating customers, according to music industry sources. The ISPs also don't like plans that call for them to cut off access and chase away a source of income.

Note to readers: Have you received a warning letter from AT&T or another ISP? If so, e-mail me by clicking on the link in my bio below. Please include your contact information. I won't reveal your name in any story if that's what you prefer.

AT&T and Comcast, two of the nation's largest Internet service providers, are expected to be among a group of ISPs that will cooperate with the music industry in battling illegal file sharing, three sources close to the companies told CNET News.

The Recording Industry Association of America, the lobbying group representing the four largest recording companies, said last month that it had enlisted the help of ISPs as part of a new antipiracy campaign. The RIAA has declined to identify which ISPs or how many.

It's important to note that none of the half dozen or so ISPs involved has signed agreements. The companies are "skittish" about negative press and could still back out, said the sources. But as it stands, AT&T and Comcast are among the companies that have indicated they wish to participate in what the RIAA calls a "graduated response program."

Typically, ISPs have stayed away from getting involved in copyright enforcement. The ISPs working with the RIAA will forward take-down notices to network users accused of illegal file sharing and in an unprecedented move, will establish a series of responses for chronic copyright violators.These responses will gradually grow in severity as the number of violations go up and may include suspension of service or even service termination. Each ISP will decide its own response.

An RIAA spokesman declined to comment, and a Comcast representative said he wouldn't confirm the company's participation. An AT&T spokesman said this: "While I'm not in a position to comment on the RIAA announcement, we believe that consumer education is a key component to enabling customers to find and use legal methods to access the content they want...we have also consistently said that automatic cutoff of our customers is not something we would do."

There are still plenty of details left to work out, the sources said. The RIAA has yet to address how it would help ISPs make up for the revenue they would lose by kicking people off their networks or who would pay the costs of sending take-down notices. The RIAA may disclose participating ISPs as soon as next month, according to a music industry source, adding that AT&T and Comcast are expected to be part of the group.

If AT&T and Comcast do join, the RIAA will have plenty of muscle to wage a new assault on piracy. The music industry said last month that it would no longer battle piracy by filing lawsuits against individuals. Instead, the big recording companies seek to create a new line of defense at the network level. And at least on paper, the plan is a potent one.

Broadband providers are the gatekeepers of Internet access and have their hands on all the controls.

News that Comcast and AT&T would likely join the fight against illegal file sharing was greeted warmly by Rick Carnes, president of the Songwriters Guild of America.

"Perhaps we have a chance to rebuild the music business after a period of tremendous looting," Carnes said. "You can't have a marketplace without property rights. Certainly (the ISPs) rolled out broadband based on movie and music downloads, legal and illegal and claimed (exemption from any legal responsibility), but at this point I think they realize being good partners with the content industry is a better idea. I really want to salute them for doing that."

The move is part of the music industry's global campaign to sway broadband providers to join in protecting copyright material.

The entertainment industry has been trying to get laws passed throughout the world that would force ISPs to implement a "three strikes" policy. Under such a policy, repeat offenders would be given three notices to stop infringing on copyright before a service provider cuts off Internet access.

Such a "three strikes" policy was implemented in France in 2007. The way it works is that ISPs issue warning messages to customers downloading files illegally. And if users ignore those messages, their accounts could be suspended or closed altogether.

Italy is considering a similar policy, according to the blog TorrentFreak. But in the U.K. a "three strikes" law appears to be losing support. The The Times of London reported Monday that passage of such a law is unlikely given that ISPs there don't want the added regulation.

The newspaper reported that David Lammy, the intellectual property minister, said a law that requires ISPs to disconnect users had too many legal issues surrounding it. That said, ISPs in the U.K. have agreed to work with the movie and music industries to help stop piracy. In July last year, ISPs agreed to a memorandum of understanding with the music and film industries in which ISPs agreed to send 1,000 letters a week for three months to combat users caught sharing files illegally, The Times reported.

Here in the U.S. ISPs have been reluctant to send letters or cut off service. And so far only in a couple of isolated agreements has an ISP agreed to help content owners police and enforce copyright infringement. In 2005, Verizon struck the stealth deal to win favor with Disney management. Verizon is building out a TV network and is striking content deals with movie studios and TV networks. In exchange for forwarding notices to suspected illegal file sharers, Disney gave Verizon the rights to transmit 12 of Disney's TV channels over its broadband network.

The problem with these agreements is how to enforce them. If notices are sent automatically, there's no way to tell if a user has received it. Representative of the Electronic Frontier Foundation have reserved judgment until they hear the RIAA's plan detailed. They want to know how ISPs will protect users from being wrongly accused and whether ISPs will blackball users who have been kicked off other networks.

Another big question that EFF asks is how far will the policing efforts eventually go? Will network operators be responsible for identifying illegal content on their networks and then be asked to stop it from traversing its broadband pipes?

AT&T has previously stated that it's been testing technology that does just that. The company hasn't announced plans to use the filter technology. But the company has been working with members of the Motion Picture Association of America and the RIAA over the past year to figure out ways in which it can curb the flow of illegal content on its network.

Sources told CNET News that the RIAA hasn't asked any ISP to peer into packets or be responsible for monitoring their networks for piracy. The RIAA will continue to identify alleged copyright violators and report them to their ISPs.