June 20, 2007 1:14 PM PDT
GE's top exec urges piracy fight
- Related Stories
-
Big talk about broadband
June 21, 2007 -
Hollywood's YouTube frustration grows
June 11, 2007 -
Schmidt says YouTube 'very close' to filtering system
April 16, 2007
During a keynote speech at the NXTcomm trade show here Wednesday, Wright, whose company also owns NBC Universal, said media companies and Internet service providers need to join forces to fight the illegal distribution of pirated content.
In the past, Internet service providers, such as cable operators and phone companies, have not had a vested interest in doing anything to stop the proliferation of pirated content, Wright said. But now, as these companies invest money in rolling out new services and start providing some of their own content on their networks, they are more interested in stopping piracy. As a result, the companies can work together.
"Now that ISPs are moving to offer video-on-demand and some of their own content, facilitating the theft of content doesn't make sense," he said.
Wright said some progress is already being made. Six of the eight largest ISPs in the country plan to adopt notification policies and enforce them if people violate usage agreements that prohibit the downloading of pirated content. If the illegal behavior persists after notifications are sent, these ISPs have agreed to take further action, such as shutting off service.
Wright also said that NBC Universal is working with ISPs to develop better technologies, such as filtering, that can prevent piracy. AT&T has already said it will work with the Motion Picture Association of America and the Recording Industry Association of America to keep pirated content off its Internet network.
"Technology must be a part of the long-term solution of fighting piracy," he said. "I applaud AT&T for their plans to work on technology. This type of relationship will contribute to a positive evolution of the Internet. It's in no one's interest for the Internet to turn into the Wild West."
Verizon's CEO Ivan Seidenberg said he agrees that service providers need to be more involved in stopping the distribution of illegally downloaded content. But he did not say what, if any, antipiracy technology the company is considering.
"We agree with what Bob is saying," he said. "And we're looking into it."
Beyond educating the public about piracy and developing new technologies to fight the proliferation of illegal downloads, Wright said that stronger legislation is needed to fight piracy. He also called for companies in other industries to band together to stop the distribution of pirated entertainment as well as other counterfeit goods, such as drugs and consumer electronics.
"This is a global crisis," he said. "It's not just about bootlegged movies. It's about counterfeit pharmaceuticals and cell phone batteries. It's a drain on the economy and a public safety issue. Business leaders from all industries need to join forces."
See more CNET content tagged:
General Electric Co.,
piracy,
Internet Service Provider,
media company,
vice chairman
You can only monitor what the end users let you (through commission or omission). If someone is downloading pirated content from a web server using SSL how will the ISP know? What can the ISP do about it?
How could ISPs control ALL computer-use..?
Two words... "Trusted Computing".
If youve been following "..the news", you may have noticed that, currently, the Government, and various "commercial-interests", are heavily-pressuring various "network access providers" (such as "web-sites", "private ISPs" and "universities") to control the capabilities (and track the actions) of, their network-users. In fact, hardly a month goes by without some new proposed "legislation" or, much-publicized, civil-courtroom "victory", for those that wish to be able to forcibly-control (and track) virtually ALL Internet-access (and, more generally, computer-use). This is primarily being accomplished by, trying to hold "technology providers" (software, and Internet-access, providers) responsible for the actions of their "customers". This is allegedly also being done for all manner of "security" reasons ("terrorism", "identity-theft", "hacking", "spam", etc.), and, also, numerous alleged "legal", reasons (such as enforcing "copyright" interests, and catching "sex offenders").
In fact, both the Government, and the largest Internet-access providers (such as "...The New AT&T"), HAVE been calling for, and working towards, the capability to "track", "control", and "block"... "...unacceptable uses"... and any form of "Internet anonymity"... for some time.
One might think that this would merely entail, wholesale, preemptive-monitoring, and blocking, of ALL "internet traffic" (which is, in and of, itself is a frightening prospect to any rational-American).
However, in my opinion, the ONLY real way to insure such levels of "control" (and, alleged, safety) would clearly, eventually, be the wholesale technological-implementation, and imposition, of technological-elements such as:
1. Fully identifying every single computer (and, potentially, each individual "user") during all computer, and network, transactions.
2. Being able to identify "trustworthy" systems (I.E. verifying systems which fully comply with ALL "copyright", "security", and "legal" requirements, and by requiring systems to prove, that they are not running any "non-trusted" elements, processes, hardware, or applications).
And, finally...
3. Denying ALL network-access to any computer which doesnt meet EVERY-ELEMENT of this arbitrary set of requirements.
This level of "control" is, in fact, exactly what "Trusted Computing" is actually, precisely, designed to accomplish. Specifically, "Trusted Computing" (in its various public incarnations, and components... "Palladium", "TC", "NGSCB", "TPMs", and "software-signing") consists of exactly these three elements:
-"Identification".
-"Verification" of all system-elements (from the motherboard-BIOS, to the OS, to the Drivers, up to the actual Applications themselves).
These elements are part of... "remote attestation" and, so-called, "end-point security".
And, finally...
-"Exclusion" of ALL "non-compliant" systems.
If you think that this must be a long-way from any practical-implementation... especially the most-extreme, ...the requirement for "individual-user identification"... The reality is that many of these "trusted" elements, in fact, already ARE, or are currently being put, in place.
..."MS-Vista", for example, already has the "APIs" (Application Program Interfaces) needed to require, such things as, "machine-readable, user identity-cards" ("REAL ID"??? ...which the government is starting to, once again, ...push heavily), and "biometric identification" of each "individual computer-user" (through such Biometric-devices as "fingerprint scanners"). It [MS-Vista] also has the built-in capability to require "software, and driver, signing and authentication" (which is actually-designed, primarily, to enforce "DRM" compliance from all "media", "devices", and any "..low-level OS operation calls"). And, the Government has indicated that they are preparing to DEMAND, exactly this level of "security" (external-control of, and the ability to track, ALL "Internet use"). Furthermore, most of the "routers", currently used by ISPs, ARE ALREADY designed to be able to demand such "trust authentication" from every "end-point device" (Thats YOUR computer, or network, when you try to connect to the Internet through your ISP, by the way). If your computers cannot "attest" to such "security criteria"... they WILL, simply, NOT be granted Internet-access, at all.
So... there wouldnt have to be an actual, sweeping, official, "requirement". But rather, so-called "voluntary compliance", with a broad set of "general security policies", and "legal requirements"... would be the rule (allegedly designed to enhance "security", "reduce abuses", "protect copyright interests", and thereby, "...limit liability")... all under THREAT of serious "legal repercussions"... if ISPs dont "voluntarily comply"). This could very quickly mean that only -approved- Operating-Systems, applications, and uses, would be "allowed" Internet-access, by any "ISP".
Frankly, in my opinion... based upon the entire "Trusted Computing architecture", this could easily, actually-mean, -ONLY- fully-registered, -APPROVED- "software", running ALL REQUIRED "updates", patches", "software", and "DRM" components.
In the end... such alleged "copyright" concerns could, mean that if you run anything other than -APPROVED- software, or attempt any "unapproved use"... you will be BANNED from ANY Internet-use, PERIOD...
Just some things to be aware of, and think about...
>"This is a global crisis," he said. "It's not >just about bootlegged movies. It's about >counterfeit pharmaceuticals and cell phone >batteries."
Well, when a store wants to charge you $30 for a cell phone battery made in China like its pirate counterpart which I can get for $3 , what do you expect?
Here is a hint, eliminate all those money hungry executives at your companies (CEO's, Presidents, Vice, etc) and that way you can lower the prices to something most people will agree to pay.
Robert