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.

The main investigative committee in the U.S. House of Representatives has reopened a probe of Lime Wire and other peer-to-peer file-sharing companies over the issue of "inadvertent sharing." The move comes nearly two months after it was alleged that Iran took advantage of a computer security breach to obtain information about President Barack Obama's helicopter.

After sensitive information regarding the president's helicopter was leaked, Congress wants to know whether P2P company Lime Wire has made good on helping stop inadvertent sharing.

(Credit: The White House)

CNET News has obtained copies of the letters written by the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform to the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission asking them for help investigating the recent rash of security breaches caused when people who use P2P software accidentally share information on networks like Lime Wire or BearShare.

"These reports indicate that very significant risks continue to plague P2P file sharing networks," lawmakers wrote in an April 20 letter to FTC Chairman John Leibowitz. "Therefore, under Rules X and XI of the Rules of the U.S. House of Representatives, we are reopening our investigation of inadvertent file sharing on peer-to-peer networks, including LimeWire."

Some security experts believe the files probably were transferred through a peer-to-peer network.

The Oversight Committee also wrote a letter to Mark Gorton, chairman of the Lime Group, Lime Wire's parent company.

"On July 24, 2007, you testified before the Committee on Oversight ... in a hearing on 'Inadvertent File Sharing on Peer-to-Peer Networks,'" the committee wrote Gorton. "It appears that nearly two years after your commitment to make significant changes in the software, LimeWire and other P2P providers have not taken adequate steps to address this critical problem."

A spokeswoman for the Committee on Oversight confirmed the letters had gone out. Representatives from the Lime Group were unavailable for comment.

The committee cited some recent high-profile security breaches.

On February 28, 2009, a television station in Pittsburgh reported that the blueprints and avionics package for "Marine One," the President's helicopter, was made available on a P2P network by a defense contractor in Maryland.

On February 26, 2009, the "Today" show broadcast a segment on inadvertent P2P file sharing, reporting that Social Security numbers, more than 150,000 tax returns, 25,800 student loan applications, and nearly 626,000 credit reports were easily accessible on a P2P network.

On February 23, 2009, a Dartmouth College professor published a paper reporting that over a two-week period he was able to search a P2P network and uncover tens of thousands of medical files containing names, addresses, and Social Security numbers for patients seeking treatment for conditions such as AIDS, cancer, and mental health problems

On July 9, 2008, The Washington Post reported that an employee of an investment firm who allegedly used LimeWire to trade music or movies inadvertently exposed the names, dates of birth, and Social Security numbers of about 2,000 of the firm's clients, including Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer. There have been reports alleging file-sharing programs have been used for illegal purposes, such as to steal others' identities.

A copy of the letter from U.S. Congressional committee on oversight to Attorney General.

The Business Software Alliance continues to battle distribution of pirated software on peer-to-peer and auction sites.

The trade group served more than 48,000 "takedown" notices related to BitTorrent files in the first half of this year and says BSA members lost an estimated $525 million in sales as a result of peer-to-peer piracy, according to a new BSA report called "Online Software Scams: A Threat to Your Security."

During the first half of this year BSA asked auction site providers to shut down more than 18,000 auctions in which 45,000 products, worth $22 million, were being sold, the report says.

The piracy problem on auction sites is so bad that the Software and Information Industry Association has said it was considering suing eBay.

The BSA warns consumers that buying pirated software can lead to software incompatibility and viruses, increased maintenance costs with no technical support, as well as identity fraud and privacy breaches.

One in five U.S. consumers who bought software online in 2006 reported problems, in a survey conducted by Forrester Research on behalf of the BSA. More than half received software that was not what they ordered; 36 percent said the software didn't work; 14 percent realized immediately that the product was pirated; and 12 percent never received what they ordered, according to the survey.

"Although consumers may think they are getting a great deal when they buy software from unfamiliar sources online, it is more likely they will receive a substandard product with hidden cybersecurity threats that may expose them to identity theft and the loss of thousands of dollars," the report says.

(Credit: BSA)