Slashdot Mirror


Torrentspy Disables Searching For US IPs

dr_strang writes "Torrent indexing site Torrentspy.com appears to have disabled torrent searches for IPs that originate in the United States. Instead of a results page, users are directed to this page, which states: 'Torrentspy Acts to Protect Privacy. Sorry, but because you are located in the USA you cannot use the search features of the Torrentspy.com website. Torrentspy's decision to stop accepting US visitors was NOT compelled by any Court but rather an uncertain legal climate in the US regarding user privacy and an apparent tension between US and European Union privacy laws."

277 comments

  1. tor by wpegden · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Did someone say tor?

    1. Re:tor by rrkap · · Score: 1

      Tor looks cool, but how much additional network traffic to you get from using it and how much of a speed hit do you take?

      --
      I like my beverages with warning labels!
    2. Re:tor by The13thSin · · Score: 2, Informative

      That, or use one of the (crappy) free proxies around... or go to a torrent site that's not based in the US... or... dare I say: Usenet?

      --
      "This should be fun, and by fun, I mean a wholly depressing insight into the cognitive ability of some grown adults."
    3. Re:tor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Tor might let you get to the .torrent, but you really shouldn't use it for the actual download... that's just not what the program is for. If you can download without torr, great. If you can't, it's time to get a demonoid account or use TPB.

    4. Re:tor by FlyByPC · · Score: 4, Informative

      Searching shouldn't take too long. Basically you're submitting a small string and asking for a fairly simple HTML page as a response. You can live with even moderate to bad inefficiency if the request is small enough.

      I wouldn't want to try to download the latest Ubuntu DVD via TOR, though; that might be more of a problem. But that's what BitTorrent is for, anyway.

      --
      Paleotechnologist and connoisseur of pretty shiny things.
    5. Re:tor by Larus · · Score: 1

      As with most internet regulations, geeks will find five more channels to get their necessities. Torrentspy traffic will be down for a while (or maybe for good), and politicians will take credit and claim that they have succeeded in some small way to fight piracy. They don't lose face before their campaign fund donors, and they care less what geeks do. Torrentspy will either go away or pay lobbyists to remove the regulations. It's a win-win situation.

      Geeks and jocks don't coexist. Maybe because geeks don't learn jocks' bag of tricks.

    6. Re:tor by xtracto · · Score: 5, Funny

      or... dare I say: Usenet?

      So, why would you like to to run upon usenet? Do you plan to start a big flamewar about the Torrentspy blocking or anything?

      something tells me you wont be desired there!.

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
    7. Re:tor by kebes · · Score: 5, Informative

      Keep in mind that in this case you don't even have to use TOR for the actual torrent. You only need to use a proxy for the short time necessary to do a search on torrentspy and download the .torrent. After that, you can join the torrent in the usual way. After all, torrentspy only tracks torrents: it has no control over the swarm or what connections the swarm allows/blocks.

      So, instead of a search taking 1 second it would take 3 seconds. The actual download would be just as fast. (That is, assuming you were willing to download a torrent without TOR before this block, then this block doesn't change your actual download speed.)

      Also note that an easier solution is to switch to using a torrent tracker which does not block US users. For instance trackers not in the US (e.g. Pirate Bay) will probably not have any reason to block US users. In fact a tracker like Pirate Bay could mirror all of TorrentSpy's contents. Although this recent development is interesting, it will have little to no impact on the amount of downloading (or the ease of downloading) that goes on.

    8. Re:tor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Usenet?

      We do not speak of such things here. For It is heresy, and your irreverance will be dealt with swift and mercilessly.

      You shall be stripped of your geek status, forced into the Windows ME support team in a non-english speaking country, and banned from /. for eternity.

      Let your brethren never forgive you, and may GOD have mercy on your UserID.

    9. Re:tor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      The first rule of Usenet: Don't talk about Usenet. The second rule of Usenet: Don't talk about Usenet. Understand?

    10. Re:tor by AndersOSU · · Score: 2, Interesting

      So if MediaSentry circumvented this protection method using the technique you describe, in order to "monitor" copyright infringement, we could sue them under the DMCA?

    11. Re:tor by djdbass · · Score: 2

      Brilliant!

      I wonder how long it will take the **IAA to realize all they have to do is say they've blocked something, and then over @ slashdot is some genious showing the latest get-a-round...

      Some of you know-it-alls couldn't keep a secret in a secret-tight box.
      Security Experts??!?

    12. Re:tor by blahlemon · · Score: 5, Funny

      Most people don't participate in tasteless and foolish events like flamewars unless they need the approval of others. Yes, it happens at times but I'm sure it's never planned that way by Slashdot posters!

      --
      It take more faith to believe in evolution than it takes to believe in God
    13. Re:tor by blahlemon · · Score: 0

      Flamer.

      --
      It take more faith to believe in evolution than it takes to believe in God
    14. Re:tor by scythe000 · · Score: 0, Interesting

      Awesome. For those who didn't see it, his hidden message is "Shut up seriously sheesh!

    15. Re:tor by Assoupis · · Score: 1

      Hmmm... that's time for the worldwide campaign proxy an american !

    16. Re:tor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oops you just said usenet, oops so did i, i said usenet where I can download games and stuff................oops

    17. Re:tor by pete-classic · · Score: 0, Troll

      Regarding your sig*, many are under the false impression that Michael Moore is a documentarian. I assure you he is not. He makes a sort of intellectual pornography for the shrill faction of the American political left.

      Learning about America from his films would be very much like learning about sex from pornography. Everything is basically correct, but you're left with entirely the wrong impression.

      Don't be embarrassed about your misunderstanding. It's quite common here in the States as well.

      -Peter

      * For the record, at the time of this post his sig is, "After watching Sycko[sic] now I am very afraid to live in the USA. How can you live there?"

    18. Re:tor by kc2keo · · Score: 1

      Hmmm i'm in the US and the search seems to work for me. I do not see that page.

    19. Re:tor by Spudtrooper · · Score: 0, Troll

      And the right has an entire channel of the same thing. What's your point?

    20. Re:tor by luther349 · · Score: 0

      unless you have comcast.

    21. Re:tor by The+Living+Fractal · · Score: 0, Redundant

      I am trying to figure out if the parent makes any sense. The guy clearly was groping for words that fit his quaint little dual message. Is bolding letters within words to form a sentence that you could've just, well, typed out, supposed to be clever? Why was it modded interesting? WTF is going on here!?

      --
      I do not respond to cowards. Especially anonymous ones.
    22. Re:tor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about that we shouldn't watch either of them?

    23. Re:tor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And so does the left, more than one in fact, along with newspapers and national radio networks. As for Fox, how do you measure left-right bias, and where do they fall on a scale that includes a large sampling of news outlets?

    24. Re:tor by torrentami · · Score: 1

      All very valid points. Tor works great for torrent spy. The thing to remember is not so long ago suprnova was the best torrent site out there and then it took itself down and the bit torrent world recovered quite resiliently. torrentspy is a great site but it's increasingly become an also-ran. also, every time something like this happens it just energizes the community who then takes it upon themselves to innovate and offer better solutions.

    25. Re:tor by computational+super · · Score: 1

      Actually, from what I've seen in the past few years (with few exceptions), the first rule of Usenet is "don't post anything on Usenet any more."

      --
      Proud neuron in the Slashdot hivemind since 2002.
    26. Re:tor by PopeRatzo · · Score: 0

      Sounds great. Is tor difficult to configure on a Windows machine (not Vista)? If it's something that's fairly easy to "turn on and off", then I'm definitely interesting.

      I know I could just hop over to the Tor site and see for myself, but sometimes it makes more sense to ask someone who knows than to do the work someone else has probably done. Plus, since I don't tend to be exceptional, if I have a question, chances are others have it too, so a question asked and answered here might help more people than just me.

      It's a damn shame that Torrent Spy feels the need to take this step, but you can't fault someone for trying to protect them self.

      As my old Sicilian grandfather used to say, "Liberté, égalité, fraternité!" At least that's what I think he used to say. Maybe it was "Don't bet the under when it's two AFC teams on grass". Anyway, he was a smart old dude.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    27. Re:tor by torrentami · · Score: 2, Insightful

      yeah, I'm not entirely sure what the proprietors of torrent spy are actually stealing since they merely provide links to torrent files. and by innovate I mean create better and more efficiently designed web sites that allow you to search for torrents that span multiple sites, add easy to use ratings and comments systems, and integrate social networking features.

    28. Re:tor by shmlco · · Score: 1

      "... some genious [sic] showing the latest get-a-round."

      That is so funny on so many levels.

      --
      Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
    29. Re:tor by huckamania · · Score: 1

      The Tor Client gives you a fair amount of control over which nodes you use. Without even playing with the source code, you can select the fastest servers and only allow them into your chain. That would theoretically increase the odds that an attacker could some how track your web usage (fewer nodes == less anonymity), but if they can do that, they probably already have other methods available.

      When your chain of nodes includes two multi-megabit nodes and a 15k node, the two multi-megabit nodes don't do you a bit of good.

      Of course, the source is also there if you don't like fiddling with configuration files.

    30. Re:tor by pete-classic · · Score: 1

      I think you've mistaken me for a Republican. Silly Spudtrooper!

      I think it is interesting that I ascribed Moore to a wacko minority of the left, but you make no such concession to the right regarding Fox. A better analogy would have been to compare to Limbaugh. I wouldn't want my country judged by what either one of those blowhards has to say.

      To explicitly answer your question, my point is that a person does himself a disservice to judge the US by what some axe-grinding jerk says about it. Sorry that wasn't clear enough for you.

      -Peter

    31. Re:tor by ijakings · · Score: 0

      Dis someone say Relakks? Works as a VPN. The speed hit is there, but not huge, not as much as Tor.

    32. Re:tor by WhatAmIDoingHere · · Score: 2, Informative

      www.google.com

      en.wikipedia.org

      Learn things.

      --
      Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
    33. Re:tor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow...
      somebody buy this guy a sense of humor...

      please?

    34. Re:tor by cbreaker · · Score: 1

      "except binaries."

      --
      - It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
    35. Re:tor by jollyreaper · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      It take more faith to believe in evolution than it takes to believe in God No. It takes less mental effort to believe in God than it does to understand evolution and natural selection.
      --
      Kwisatz Haderach
      Sell the spice to CHOAM
      This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
    36. Re:tor by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      There are no documented cases of Fox news forging documents in an attempt to characterize a sitting republican president as a draft dodger. "Fake, but Accurate" also is not a phrase common in the Fox news room. Therefore, they are extreme right wing radicals bent on establishing a new Reich and ignoring the fact that the last group famous for that were vegetarian, anti-smoking Nazis.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    37. Re:tor by MS-06FZ · · Score: 1

      Did someone say tor? Did someone say, "TIME FOR GO TO BED!"?
      --
      ---GEC
      I'm but the humble pupil, seeking to snatch the scratchbuilt pebble from the master's fully articulated hand
    38. Re:tor by dmatos · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Pray tell, then, what does one have to do to qualify as a documentarian? Tell the truth? Can you point out the parts in his movie where he doesn't tell the truth? Be unbiased? Can you point me to a single documentary that does not contain any editorial bias? Can you point me to anything published ever that does not contain any bias?

      Michael Moore is a documentarian. He creates documentaries. His documentaries have a very strong left wing bias. The trick is in recognizing this factor, and judging his films accordingly.

      That said, I have to agree with the grandparent poster. The US medical system is scary. The fact that it is possible to have to go into Bankruptcy because of a medical condition scares the fuck out of me. I'm with Moore's relatives. I would not set foot into the US without additional medical insurance. In fact, for the most part, I've been steering clear of the US as much as possible. Ever since that whole right of Habeas Corpus was suspended.

      --

      It may look like I'm doing nothing, but I'm actively waiting for my problems to go away.
      --Scott Adams
    39. Re:tor by The+One+and+Only · · Score: 1

      I've been steering clear of the US as much as possible. Ever since that whole right of Habeas Corpus was suspended.

      Silly rabbit. The US government will take you prisoner even if you are in Macedonia and hold you for months without any civil rights!

      --
      In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
    40. Re:tor by The+Living+Fractal · · Score: 0

      It wasn't funny. And that guy's signature is fscking stupid.

      Go away AC.

      --
      I do not respond to cowards. Especially anonymous ones.
    41. Re:tor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Pray tell, then, what does one have to do to qualify as a documentarian?

      You need to be accurate and at least do your best at not guiding viewers to a specific conclusion. Documentaries attempt to document facts, they do not attempt to reach conclusions. Humans are fallible, of course, and no one achieves perfect neutrality but obvious effort is appreciated and noted. Unfortunately true documentaries are boring, about as interesting as reading a random court reporter's (a true documentarian, btw) work for the day.

      Michael Moore is a documentarian. He creates documentaries. His documentaries have a very strong left wing bias.

      Your final statement contradicts your previous two. Michael Moore is an editorializer. He has a specific conclusion he would like you to reach and he presents his facts in such a way that will lead you to that conclusion. This eliminates him from being a documentarian as he would choose to forgo mention of facts that might be relevant if they would hinder you reaching the conclusion he would like.

    42. Re:tor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
      For those who didn't see it, his hidden message is "Shut up seriously sheesh!

      Oh fearless leader of We Who Are Completely and Utterly Oblivious, we praise thee! You are a beacon of light.

    43. Re:tor by molarmass192 · · Score: 1

      As my old Sicilian grandfather used to say, "Liberté, égalité, fraternité!" At least that's what I think he used to say.

      Are you sure your old Sicilian grandfather wasn't French?

      --

      Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws-Plato
    44. Re:tor by EugeneK · · Score: 1

      Oh yeah, the good old "left" Washington Post? Is that the same Washington Post that backed the Iraq War and hosts der Kabbagemallet?

    45. Re:tor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OK, so life/the universe/everything is too complex to have spontaneously existed and/or simply always existed.

      Would you say that God himself is more complex than the Universe? If so, how do you explain God's [alleged] existence?

    46. Re:tor by pete-classic · · Score: 0, Troll

      Active misrepresentation in order to support your conclusions makes you a propagandist, not a documentarian.

      One concrete example. A friend of mine told me that when a person opens a bank account in Texas the government gives that person a gun. Beyond the fact that this obviously fails the sniff test, I had lived in Texas fairly recently, had opened several bank accounts, and had to buy all my guns.

      So I saw Fahrenheit 9/11. Okay, so she misunderstood the facts, even as Moore represented them. In fact I recognized the program, which isn't limited to Texas, immediately. He did make it seem like something insidious.

      Then I saw a film called Fahrenhype 9/11, which purports to debunk Fahrenheit 9/11. Say what you will about the makers of that film, it contained a bunch of footage of the people at the bank in Fahrenheit 9/11 complaining that Moore misrepresented what happened.

      Here's the key bit. He asked them to bring the gun in from there warehouse and put it in the vault. They cooperated in good faith. He coached them to sort of play along with his questions. Again, they cooperated. He then asked leading questions on tape, creating the impression that the guns are stored on the premises.

      Do you contend that that sort of practice is normal and/or acceptable in documentary film making?

      Another good example from those two films. In the bit where Bush quips about the "Haves and the Have Mores" Moore paints him as an elitist. Turns out that Al Gore was a few chairs away, and Moore cropped him out. Is one of us confused about what "document" means?

      -Peter

    47. Re:tor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hardly. Evolution is simple - mixing gametes, DNA splicing within chromosome pairs, a mutation here and there. Religion, if you actually wish to think about it, inevitably leads to questions about reality, knowledge itself, etc. I think those are much more interesting topics than how a protein machine changes over time.

      I find it ironic though that people who call out others for taking things on faith often do not bother to do experiments to verify any science for themselves. Are they not themselves taking things on faith? Just a thought.

    48. Re:tor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, if only someone had spotted this gaping hole in everyone's logic. You sir, are a true genius. No educated mathematician has ever considered such a flaw! Bravo, sir! Bravo! http://www.amazon.com/Mathematics-Evolution-Phylog eny-Olivier-Gascuel/dp/0199231346

    49. Re:tor by Mateo_LeFou · · Score: 1

      huh? Natural selection seems pretty straightforward to me.

      --
      My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
    50. Re:tor by ThePengwin · · Score: 1

      Since when did wikipedia come up in the "go here before asking stupid questions" category?

      not to say that the GP post was stupid :)

    51. Re:tor by Deliveranc3 · · Score: 1

      Did I read this wrong, or is Torrentspy saying they are blocking U.S. users so those users can't incriminate themselves?

      Why are they doing this?

      TOR may or may not be secure but it's worrying for a website to say that it's not sure it's not compromised/subject to persecution.

    52. Re:tor by kaens · · Score: 1

      About a year ago, for anything computer-related.

    53. Re:tor by kaffiene · · Score: 1

      Rubbish. There are features of the building blocks for life which are self attracting and self organising. Life is inevitable.

    54. Re:tor by gomoX · · Score: 3, Funny

      For those who didn't see it, the parent comment contains sarcasm.

      --
      My english is sow-sow. Sowhat?
    55. Re:tor by fractoid · · Score: 1

      No. It takes less mental effort to believe in God than it does to understand evolution and natural selection. "A wizard did it!"
      --
      Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
    56. Re:tor by mqduck · · Score: 1

      Documentaries attempt to document facts, they do not attempt to reach conclusions. Says who? Lots of people, I suppose, but that doesn't make it true.
      --
      Property is theft.
    57. Re:tor by kayditty · · Score: 1

      ThePirateBay and TorrentSpy are not trackers. They are torrent search sites.

    58. Re:tor by kayditty · · Score: 1

      Well, slight correction: ThePirateBay appears as though it may be a tracker. The point is that it's mostly known for being an index site (so far as I know), and the two are not necessarily related.

    59. Re:tor by adona1 · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      Personally, I would view him more as a modern day pamphleteer, who makes visual essays, rather than a documentary maker. He has his argument and seeks to make a film to support it. Whether you view it as gospel or not would depend entirely upon your own personal viewpoint, but he's not remotely a documentary maker the way David Attenborough is.

      --
      Between the falling angel and the rising ape
    60. Re:tor by tiedemann · · Score: 3, Funny

      thanks blahlemon, you made my day :)

    61. Re:tor by bentcd · · Score: 1

      Michael Moore is a documentarian. He creates documentaries. His documentaries have a very strong left wing bias. The trick is in recognizing this factor, and judging his films accordingly. Moore strikes me first and foremost as a propagandist who uses the form of documentaries to deliver his propaganda. My impression from watching the Columbine movie was that while it was certainly entertaining in a ye olde stupid Americans kind of way (we Europeans often like to laugh at how silly we think Americans are/can be/might have been) it largely came across as on over-hyped under-critical opinion-fest with a bias so heavy it could probably stop a depleted uranium shell fired point blank.

      I also don't much care for his over-provocative methods and the bit of underhanded privacy intrusion we see at the end of the movie (I think) was just plain old obnoxious. Perhaps there is some backstory to that particular incident that I'm just not familiar with, or perhaps the Jackass culture has extended further than I had thought over the pond, but from my my point of view it was so far across the line it alone put the entire movie in a suspicious light.

      While I tend to agree with many of Moore's basic sentiments, I don't think he's doing his camp a lot of good with his works. Perhaps if he'd more clearly labeled it as satire or humour it would be a more credible weapon.
      --
      sigs are hazardous to your health
    62. Re:tor by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Are you sure your old Sicilian grandfather wasn't French?
      No, he was Sicilian, but he must not have been all that smart because he died owing 25 large to a guy named Frankie Bats. He was a good grandfather, but could not pick a winner to save his soul.

      Thank you for asking.
      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    63. Re:tor by dmatos · · Score: 1

      Moore strikes me first and foremost as a propagandist who uses the form of documentaries to deliver his propaganda.


      Exactly. Thank you. Being a propagandist makes him no less of a documentarian.
      --

      It may look like I'm doing nothing, but I'm actively waiting for my problems to go away.
      --Scott Adams
    64. Re:tor by Eivind+Eklund · · Score: 1
      It take more faith to believe in evolution than it takes to believe in God

      Either faith or investment. It's quite a lot of work to investigate evolution; and if you don't put that work in, it's faith, and as you obviously understand, evolution makes more concrete claims than belief in God does. As a such, you must accept these concrete claims, and as a larger set of claims they require more faith. Of course, when you start to look, you'll find that they're all connected and have a ton of evidence, so it doesn't require much faith at all (sort of like it's fairly easy to believe in chairs), but before you've investigated carefully and understood evolution and what claims it makes and what evidence it has, it's a whopper.

      Oh, and if you haven't yet gotten to believe in chairs - I'm sorry, evolution - I can recommend Richard Dawkins' "Climbing Mount Improbable". It's a wonderful introduction, showing a mountain of evidence.

      Eivind.

      --
      Doubting the existence of evolution is like doubting the existence of China: It just shows that you're uninformed.
    65. Re:tor by ibbey · · Score: 1

      I may be misunderstanding you, but I think you're confusing two separate programs with similar names. TorrentSpy provides links to torrent files. The GP poster refered to using TOR, an online anonymity tool provided by the EFF. Despite the similar names, the two have no direct relation. You can use TOR to bypass this sort of block and search for torrents, though. Does that make any more sense?

    66. Re:tor by WhatAmIDoingHere · · Score: 1

      You're a liar and not funny. End your life.

      --
      Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
    67. Re:tor by Deliveranc3 · · Score: 1

      I see you have a low UID (so I'm gonna let you troll as you like). I'm aware of the distinction, and the purpose of both sites.

      I won't be using torrentspy any longer, I suspect most people may join me.

      I just think it's interesting that the M/RIAA scared them so badly (And they're so decent) that they would block the U.S. to keep it's citizens from incriminating themselves.

    68. Re:tor by ibbey · · Score: 1

      No troll intended... As I said, perhaps I just misunderstood you. That said, I'm sure they are very saddened by your decision to not use Torrentspy any longer. I suspect that they are losing sleep over it every night.

      Seriously, what would you have them do? It seems like they have three options: 1) They can just roll over and hand the MPAA/RIAA their user logs. 2) They can fight any subpeonas using their own funds-- likely an expensive proposal that they probably can't afford. Or 3) do what they did. While you may disagree with their decision, unless you are willing to personally fund their legal defense I'd say that you have no right to criticize them for their decision.

  2. They aren't the only ones by bconway · · Score: 2, Funny

    Nothing for you to see here. Please move along.

    Seems I just can't win with searches anywhere today.

    --
    Interested in open source engine management for your Subaru?
  3. The Obvious Reason by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Torrentspy's decision to stop accepting US visitors was NOT compelled by any Court but rather an uncertain legal climate in the US regarding user privacy and an apparent tension between US and European Union privacy laws. From the Wikipedia page (and as linked on the related Slashdot articles):

    On May 29, 2007, A federal judge ordered TorrentSpy to begin monitoring its users' activities and to submit these logs to the Motion Picture Association of America. TorrentSpy's attorney, Ira Rothken, has stated that TorrentSpy would likely turn off access to U.S. users before it started monitoring anyone, since such monitoring is in violation of TorrentSpy's own privacy policy.[1] As of August 24, 2007, TorrentSpy has been closed to United States users. Looks like they finally got around to it ... although it wasn't ordered by a judge, a US judge certainly left them no choice.

    I wonder if this can be accessed from the United States through Tor.

    I also wonder if I have to start worrying about other sites blocking American users simply out of fear & safety from the United States MPAA/RIAA run court system? I used to feel sorry for Chinese people who had to suffer from their government's censorship and now I have to wonder if I'm going to start suffering from other servers censoring me based on my government's actions.
    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:The Obvious Reason by snowraver1 · · Score: 1

      I also wonder if I have to start worrying about other sites blocking American users simply out of fear & safety from the United States MPAA/RIAA run court system? I used to feel sorry for Chinese people who had to suffer from their government's censorship and now I have to wonder if I'm going to start suffering from other servers censoring me based on my government's actions
      You bring up a very valid point, what we have here is reverse censorship. Because of the freedoms (freedom to sue for losses) offered in the US, these restrictions are imposed.
      --
      Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. This comment may not be copied in any way including, but not limited to caching.
    2. Re:The Obvious Reason by DoofusOfDeath · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I also wonder if I have to start worrying about other sites blocking American users simply out of fear & safety from the United States MPAA/RIAA run court system?

      That would potentially be fantastic. If we can make Congress understand that excessive copyright and patent regimes put the U.S. at a technological / competitive disadvantage, that's part of the war in getting change.

      Of course, Congress might be just as likely to respond in some insane, drunken, counter-productive way as well, which is why I used the word "problematic" above.

    3. Re:The Obvious Reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well - it sounds like te isolation of the USA has begun...

      Within a decade or so Americans are not allowed to connect to the rest of the world and vice-versa, except for heavily monitored connections. You can only speculate what this will do to technical development outside and inside the USA. Most likely you will get two "brain centers"..

      One in the USA... and one in the rest of the world...

    4. Re:The Obvious Reason by kebes · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You bring up a very valid point, what we have here is reverse censorship. Because of the freedoms (freedom to sue for losses) offered in the US, these restrictions are imposed.
      What? "Freedom to sue for losses" ? And does equal rights decrease freeom because landowners no longer have "the Freedom to own slaves" ? How do you reconcile "freedom of speech" against the "freedom to censor" ?

      Get real. Just because you add the word "freedom" to the start of a sentence doesn't mean you are describing a real freedom. US users are not being blocked because the US is "too free." They are being blocked because US laws meant to protect copyright holders may require logging and disclosure of logs. This is in conflict with privacy policies.

      There is a disagreement here about what "rights" are more important (ease of tracking legal violators vs. privacy). To characterize US laws in this instance as being about "freedom" is disingenuous.
    5. Re:The Obvious Reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wonder if this can be accessed from the United States through Tor If all they're doing is blocking US IPs, then yeah, it will usually work. There are Tor exit nodes in the States, but a good deal of them seem to be in Europe.
    6. Re:The Obvious Reason by ExE122 · · Score: 1

      I don't think "censorship" is the right term here. The site was brought down to protect the end user's information from being given to the MPAA, not to block information that the user can reach. While you might say, "same difference", it probably changes the strategy of the legal recoil that is about to take place. This actually becomes a battle of privacy protection vs. copyright enforcement. This means TorrentSpy could potentially get a lot of support from privacy advocates.

      But yes, the way the ruling played out worries me too... especially that this shows how the justice system blatently favors MPAA.

      --
      Capitalism: When it uses the carrot, it's called democracy. When it uses the stick, it's called fascism.
    7. Re:The Obvious Reason by heinousjay · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      It's only disingenuous if you're on the side of the pirates. Naturally, I'd expect such a stance here.

      After all, who cares about the Constitutionally protected rights to control distribution? What use is that in the face of overwhelming demand for free shit?

      --
      Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
    8. Re:The Obvious Reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which constitutionally protected rights to control distribution?
       
      The distibution model is broken. Thats the whole attraction of torrents. Its not just the free shit.
       
      Its free delivery. On demand.
       
      Me, Thats why I use it.

    9. Re:The Obvious Reason by Applekid · · Score: 2, Insightful

      After all, who cares about the Constitutionally protected rights to control distribution? Obviously we here do, and the ability to ammend the constitution to correct problems was built in for a reason.

      The real problem is that Congress (and States' Congresses, most members with aspirations for greater office) are in the pockets of industry and would dare not impose changes to the patents or copyrights that may make their purse-holders angry.

      Perhaps if they weren't shills for MAFIAA we'd have a freedom more free. Perhaps we'll never know for sure.
      --
      More Twoson than Cupertino
    10. Re:The Obvious Reason by capnchicken · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The Congress shall have Power . . . To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Author and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries; The pretense of this right is to promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts not to protect a failed and obsolete business model.

      --
      A libertarian shat on my carpet once. Claimed the free market would sort it out. -Ford Prefect(8777)
    11. Re:The Obvious Reason by kebes · · Score: 1

      As I said, there is a valid argument about what should be maximized (either the ease of tracking down law breakers or the privacy of citizens). You can even frame this as an argument about "rights" (the right of a copyright holder to control distribution vs. the right of a citizen to privacy).

      However, my point, to emphasize again, was that a statement along the lines of "freedom to sue for losses" (that is a direct quote) is disingenuous. Everyone agrees that freedom is important, but if you ask people to list "important freedoms" I somehow doubt that "freedom to sue for losses" would show up on that list. Invoking "freedom" in this case is disingenuous: this is not a debate about freedoms.

      There is a crucial debate here, and we do nothing to forward useful discussion by allowing silly statements like the one I was attacking.

    12. Re:The Obvious Reason by snowraver1 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Get real. Just because you add the word "freedom" to the start of a sentence doesn't mean you are describing a real freedom. US users are not being blocked because the US is "too free." They are being blocked because US laws meant to protect copyright holders may require logging and disclosure of logs. This is in conflict with privacy policies.
      My point was that in the US, individuals are "free" to sue someone if they believe that they were wronged by the defendant. Because the RIAA is free to sue people for downloading they have had some judges compell some orginizations to basically incriminate themselves and thier users. So basically, what started as a freedom to sue for losses, turned into a clusterf*ck requiring websites to either: a) Incriminate themselves and thier users b) Cut the US out of the picture and carry on business as usual.
      --
      Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. This comment may not be copied in any way including, but not limited to caching.
    13. Re:The Obvious Reason by adrianbaugh · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So if you feel strongly enough about it, kick out the government and elect one better suited to your wishes. Oh, I forgot, although you get the choice between 2 parties both of them are almost exactly the same...

      --
      "'I pass the test,' she said. 'I will diminish, and go into the West, and remain Galadriel.'"
      - JRR Tolkien.
    14. Re:The Obvious Reason by kebes · · Score: 1

      Fair enough. I don't want to get into a purely semantic argument here, but my objection was to using the term "freedom" to describe these abilities. The "ability to sue for losses" is artificial, and a system put in place as part of a larger, complex incentive system (specifically, a copyright system that is supposed to be an incentive for art creation/distribution). I guess I view "freedoms" as being more fundamental ("inalienable rights") rather than legal constructs that serve pragmatic goals.

      I think suggesting that "freedom to sue" is somehow a fundamental right (on par with "freedom of thought," "freedom of speech," "freedom of assembly," "freedom of travel," "freedom of religion," etc.) is not the right way to look at it. (I now realize that this was probably not what you were getting at.)

      One of the primary differences, in my mind, is that eliminating one of those "fundamental freedoms" (to speech, thought, etc.) would be a hugely immoral act on the part of the government and/or citizenry. However, the elimination of certain pragmatic laws (and loss of the associated "freedom to sue") is rather less significant.

      I may have over-reacted to your wording and taken your quote out of its intended implied context. If so, I apologize.

    15. Re:The Obvious Reason by aevan · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.

    16. Re:The Obvious Reason by ggy · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Well, aren't they in a way censoring MPAA from reading these "studies" on what people want to see?

    17. Re:The Obvious Reason by mpe · · Score: 1

      Just because you add the word "freedom" to the start of a sentence doesn't mean you are describing a real freedom. US users are not being blocked because the US is "too free." They are being blocked because US laws meant to protect copyright holders may require logging and disclosure of logs. This is in conflict with privacy policies.

      Court orders (assuming they have jurisdiction) override any corporate policies.
      The really strange thing is the "Torrentspy's decision to stop accepting US visitors was NOT compelled by any Court but rather an uncertain legal climate in the US regarding user privacy and an apparent tension between US and European Union privacy laws." claim. The design of the site including "Privacy Policy" and "DMCA Information" links together with a US postal address make this out to be an organisation in the US
      If their servers are in the Netherlands there is no obvious reference to this. N.B. allowing access to personal information stored on a server in the Netherlands from the US (or anywhere else without an appropriate treaty with the Netherlands) is likely to violate Dutch law.

    18. Re:The Obvious Reason by radarjd · · Score: 1

      The pretense of this right is to promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts not to protect a failed and obsolete business model.

      What is your suggestion for promoting science and the useful arts? How do we encourage authors, painters, musicians, etc if they have no protection for their works? You can go on about how most of the money never reaches artists (and you'd be right in many cases), but some money definitely does. Our current copyright law protects works for too long, but other than that what changes would you make?

    19. Re:The Obvious Reason by letxa2000 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Its not just the free shit. Its free delivery. On demand. Me, Thats why I use it.

      How much have you paid for content you got from Bittorent? Come on, be honest. It's the "free shit" and the "free delivery." That IS why you use it.

    20. Re:The Obvious Reason by Skreems · · Score: 2, Informative

      After all, who cares about the Constitutionally protected rights to control distribution? What use is that in the face of overwhelming demand for free shit?
      That's a bit of a mischaracterization. The constitution grants congress the right to pass laws granting control of distribution. This doesn't mean that the right to control distribution is itself constitutionally derived. And the implication that everyone who's against indefinite copyright is equally wrong. The entire point of copyright was to encourage creation of works which would eventually (sooner than later) enter the public domain. The entire point of copyright, as originally written, was to create "free shit".
      --
      Slashdot needs a "-1, Wrong" moderation option.
      The Urban Hippie
    21. Re:The Obvious Reason by letxa2000 · · Score: 1

      So basically, what started as a freedom to sue for losses, turned into a clusterf*ck requiring websites to either: a) Incriminate themselves and thier users b) Cut the US out of the picture and carry on business as usual.

      So basically Torrentspy is cutting off the U.S. because it might actually attempt to compel them to not permit illegal activity?

      Hey, I'm as opposed to the RIAA/MPAA as much as the next guy. But let's call a spade a spade--Torrentspy continues to serve the rest of the world because the rest of the world lets them get away with looking the other way, and they're not servicing the U.S. because there's the possibility that justice will be demanded by the U.S. And Torrentspy is the good guys here and the U.S. is the bad guy?

      I agree that the RIAA's (and to a lesser extent the MPAA's) business model is broken but they have the right to distribute their content and charge what they want for it. No-one has the right to violate their copyrights. Are RIAA lawsuits against individuals excessive and abusive? Yep, I think so. Do I feel the need to buy their junk? Nope! But do they have the right to go after those that they can prove are distributing their copyrighted content? Damn right! If someone was wholesale distributing my commercial software, I'd go after that person too.

      Personally, I think everyone is responsible for their actions. If you are trading copyrighted material, you should not expect your ISP to protect your identity. People here often complain about the "corporate shield" protecting corporate bad guys from their illegal acts, but yet turn around and expect ISPs or their IP address to somehow protect them from their illegal actions. I call B.S. and hypocrisy.

      I understand the relatively rare need for privacy on the Internet: Whistleblowers and oppressed political discussion. But anonymity should not be abused to conduct illegal acts. To use that anonymity for illegal acts and then complain when governments/businesses make moves to make the infrastructure less anonymous is absurd. Own up to your actions and stop abusing anonymity for a free ride.

    22. Re:The Obvious Reason by dwye · · Score: 1

      > Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.

      Which one?

    23. Re:The Obvious Reason by TClevenger · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Simple: automatically release works to the public domain after a limited time of protection. That's the way it originally was supposed to be: an artist is encouraged to create a work because they have a time-limited protected period to make money from it, and the expiration of that protection encourages the artist to continue creating. Now, an artist can sit on one successful work and make a lifetime of money from it.

    24. Re:The Obvious Reason by miyako · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I would say that wide distribution is far more important than money for true art. People don't create true works of art to lock up and only be viewed/listened to/etc. by those with money. True art is a message, and the more easly a message can be distribtued the more it encourages the production of art.
      Someone who makes music or paintings or whatever else just for the money is a craftsman, not an artist.

      --
      Famous Last Words: "hmm...wikipedia says it's edible"
    25. Re:The Obvious Reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the last i checked your so-called obsolete business model wasn't the only option. you failed it. your post isn't insightful and the theft of music and movies has nothing to do with distribution models. you failed it yet again.

    26. Re:The Obvious Reason by Fritz+T.+Coyote · · Score: 1

      The constitution grants congress the right to pass laws granting control of distribution. This doesn't mean that the right to control distribution is itself constitutionally derived.
      Actually, in the US all law must ultimately descend from the Constitution. It, like Judge Dread, IS the law.
      The problem is that what the Constitution means on any given day depends on the opinions of 9 senile old coots in funny black dresses.
    27. Re:The Obvious Reason by MoogMan · · Score: 1

      In Soviet Russia, sites censor you!!

      Wait, what?

    28. Re:The Obvious Reason by capnchicken · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Promoting Science and the useful arts =/= Payday for Hollywood!!

      One method is to secure the rights of the content produced to the producer for a limited time (as it is described).

      The original intent is lost because the method used to rectify the intent is what is being focused on.

      Authors, painters, musicians will always create. This protection is something new in the whole scope of creativity and art, but instead of being fairly compensated for their contributions to society, it has become another way to exploit a buck.

      The original clause has mutated into the entertainment industry screaming "WHERES MAH CHECK?!".

      If a media corporation could make a nickel everytime you uttered a movie quote they would do it, as a corporation is defined as entity that lives only to make profit for the shareholders. It's just unenforceable and a poor business model. So when an innovation in copying and distribution makes old business models based around copying and distribution obsolete why should they not be abandoned?

      There was no sudden influx in the poor houses for starving artists or lack of content when the printing press, analog copying, VHS, digital copying, the Internet, or distributed distribution was born. There is more noise to signal, I'll concede that. But I refuse to recognize arguments involving poor or inadequate compensation.

      --
      A libertarian shat on my carpet once. Claimed the free market would sort it out. -Ford Prefect(8777)
    29. Re:The Obvious Reason by nurb432 · · Score: 1

      At some point every public site will be blocking most countries that are a member of the WTO. I can even see blocking of 'legit' things like your average linux distro due to fears of IP litigation by someone like microsoft. Then it all goes underground, again.

      --
      ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    30. Re:The Obvious Reason by LordSnooty · · Score: 1

      On May 29, 2007, A federal judge ordered TorrentSpy to begin monitoring its users' activities
      On that basis, I wonder who in their right minds has been using the site in the last three months, and therefore why this current change would be of any concern whatsoever.
    31. Re:The Obvious Reason by Skreems · · Score: 1

      The power of the Congress to pass laws and have them enforced does derive from the constitution. That doesn't mean that every law is a "constitutional right".

      --
      Slashdot needs a "-1, Wrong" moderation option.
      The Urban Hippie
    32. Re:The Obvious Reason by heinousjay · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Copyright is defined in the Constitution, brainiac. Don't let learning something impede your continuing infringement of that right in the name of flexibility though, I'm sure you'd actually pay if only you weren't ethically bankrupt and willing to justify with lies about delivery options.

      --
      Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
    33. Re:The Obvious Reason by Fritz+T.+Coyote · · Score: 1

      The power of the Congress to pass laws and have them enforced does derive from the constitution. That doesn't mean that every law is a "constitutional right".

      Yes, the authority to pass laws is created by the Constitution.

      But Constitutional Rights are superior to laws. Thus when the 9 geezers in gowns rule a law is Unconstitutional, it is Game Over.

      Until Congress comes up with a new way to weasel around the Constitution.

    34. Re:The Obvious Reason by radarjd · · Score: 1

      I would say that wide distribution is far more important than money for true art. People don't create true works of art to lock up and only be viewed/listened to/etc. by those with money. True art is a message, and the more easly a message can be distribtued the more it encourages the production of art

      Okay, I can understand that hypothesis -- but there's nothing preventing anyone from doing that now. That is to say, there's nothing preventing an artist from distributing his or her work to the entire world for free. Some artists do that. Others do not, and presumably those have some motivation besides distribution. I would not go so far as to say they're not artists simply because they wish to make a living at what they do.

      Further, as P2P traffic goes, the only art that anyone is objecting to the copying of is the commercial art which you imply is, at best, a craft. It has value to people nonetheless. Why are those who choose to distribute expecting some sort of monetary return undeserving of said return?

    35. Re:The Obvious Reason by Torvaun · · Score: 1

      I have the freedom to censor myself, just as TorrentSpy does. I can choose not to say certain things to certain people. TorrentSpy has decided not to tell U.S. IP addresses about the results of their search query. They have not deleted torrents, or blocked torrents from being downloaded by the U.S., they have only stopped helping us find them. I seem to remember a bunch of /.ers saying that TorrentSpy and TPB were not liable for the things they link to in the same way Google isn't liable for the things it links to. I find this attitude irreconcilable with the attitude espoused here.

      --
      I see your informative link, and raise you a pithy comment.
    36. Re:The Obvious Reason by heinousjay · · Score: 1

      This isn't crucial at all. On one side you have a group of people who invest time, money, sweat, and tears to create a product for consumption by the masses, and on the other side you have a group of people who want that product for free and will plumb any depths of rhetorical retardavism to justify it. Basically, it's greed vs. greed. I settled on supporting the guys who actually did something as being more deserving of the rewards.

      --
      Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
    37. Re:The Obvious Reason by mqduck · · Score: 1

      What? "Freedom to sue for losses" ? And does equal rights decrease freeom because landowners no longer have "the Freedom to own slaves" ? How do you reconcile "freedom of speech" against the "freedom to censor" ? Freedom and rights are complex things. One (wo)man's freedom to post ads all over town is another (wo)mans lack of freedom to avoid brainwashing. My right to blast loud music conflicts with my neighbors' right to hear themselves think. The media's right to say and show what they want to goes against my right to have my voice heard. Capitalism is at once the businessman's freedom and the worker's slavery. And, yes, the slavemaster's right to own slaves is the slave's slavery.
      --
      Property is theft.
    38. Re:The Obvious Reason by mqduck · · Score: 1

      Oh, and while I'm at it:

      America may indeed be "The Land of the Free", and socialist Cuba may indeed deny freedoms, but it's important to ask who's freedoms we're talking about. Hint: even within either country the answer isn't consistent.

      --
      Property is theft.
    39. Re:The Obvious Reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Of course, Congress might be just as likely to respond in some insane, drunken, counter-productive way as well, which is why I used the word "problematic" above..."

      Like nuking the country involved, then invading it and raping and shooting every surviving inhabitant. And then wondering why they don't all appreciate 'Truth, Freedom and the American Way'?

      Seriously, why are Americans still allowed to exist? All of the world should stop any kind of interaction with them whatsoever.

    40. Re:The Obvious Reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Newsflash - in most (all ?) of the EU countries (like the Netherlands, where TorrentSpy is located), you are also "free" to sue whomever you like. However, if you loose, you (usually) have to pay your opponents legal costs. This discourages frivolous law suits. As a side effect, legal insurance is actually affordable.

      But guess what - this case has nothing to do with the freedom to sue. It has to do with the fact that in the U.S., litigants are "free" to subpoena just about anything they want to in civil cases, while in the EU, no such "freedom" exists.

    41. Re:The Obvious Reason by bentcd · · Score: 1

      After all, who cares about the Constitutionally protected rights to control distribution? It's not Constitutionally protected - it's Constitutionally permitted to give exclusive distribution rights. That is, the writers of the Consitution apparantly concluded that copyright as they understood it would in itself be in violation of the 9th amendment. They therefore found it necessary to add a note effectively saying that notwithstanding the rest of the Constitution, Congress should still have the power to legislate copyright should they feel so inclined.

      The Constitution does not, however, require that copyright must exist, it only says that it can even if its existence does violate people's basic rights (e.g. the 9th amendment again).

      Or, in other words, for so long as copyright remains a necessary evil, we'll bow to the inevitable.
      --
      sigs are hazardous to your health
    42. Re:The Obvious Reason by bentcd · · Score: 1

      What is your suggestion for promoting science Science is generally pursued either by public institutions (who generally get their funds from tuition, or else the government) and by profit-seeking inventors (who are probably better served pursuing patents, but who will be able to profit from their inventions anyway if they are useful ones).

      and the useful arts? That is too big a field for one single answer to address.

      How do we encourage authors, Authors will tend to write because they feel the urge to write. And if what they write is good enough that people start taking notice of them, they may even be able to earn money from it by - would you believe it - selling them books, selling them other merchandise, making public appearances and whatever else clever they can think of.

      painters, You don't /seriously/ think that a full-size photocopy of the Mona Lisa is going to be as sought after as the original, do you? Art is all about originals for those who are into it and so this really is a total no-brainer.

      musicians, etc Again, musicians will play music because they feel the urge to do so. And the decent ones will make money the same way they always have: live performances.
      --
      sigs are hazardous to your health
    43. Re:The Obvious Reason by Pope · · Score: 1

      Again, musicians will play music because they feel the urge to do so. And the decent ones will make money the same way they always have: live performances.

      Great, so now I'm limited to the bands that tour and play venues I actually want to visit. Thanks, but I'll take a great $20 CD over a shitty $80 concert any day.
      --
      It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
    44. Re:The Obvious Reason by bentcd · · Score: 1

      Great, so now I'm limited to the bands that tour and play venues I actually want to visit. Thanks, but I'll take a great $20 CD over a shitty $80 concert any day. There is something intriguingly masochistic about refusing to accept the $0 download and instead insisting on paying $20 for a CD. If your demographic is sufficiently large (and somehow I believe that it is) then - shock horror - the band will be able to make money from selling recordings of its performances and even from selling recordings of studio performances. Which would in fact be an improvement from the current situation since it would actually be the bands collecting that money rather than the middle men.
      --
      sigs are hazardous to your health
  4. Time for wiki-torrent by superpulpsicle · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Someone create a privatized wiki-torrent where people can put up their own torrents. That way you can never be sued cause you're not responsible for the contents.

    1. Re:Time for wiki-torrent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Someone create a privatized wiki-torrent where people can put up their own torrents."

      Like Konspire2B?

    2. Re:Time for wiki-torrent by theantipop · · Score: 2, Funny

      That way you can never be sued Need I remind you how, *ahem*, flexible the US legal system is?
    3. Re:Time for wiki-torrent by veganboyjosh · · Score: 4, Funny

      That way you can never be sued

      Need I remind you how, *ahem*, flexible the US legal system is?


      Flexible like a rubber hose, you mean?

    4. Re:Time for wiki-torrent by dslauson · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Someone create a privatized wiki-torrent where people can put up their own torrents. That way you can never be sued cause you're not responsible for the contents.
      Ummm, there's really no such thing as "can never be sued because of". In the U.S., anybody can sue anybody for anything. Sure, maybe a case will hold no water and will get thrown right out of court, but you'd still probably have a pretty damn good lawyer on retainer before you try something like this in the States, because somehow I don't see the **AA saying, "Oh, well. The guy's got a Wiki. There's nothing we can do."
    5. Re:Time for wiki-torrent by brunascle · · Score: 2, Insightful

      how would that be any different than sites like torrentspy? they're basically just search engines. they dont host the content, and some dont even host the .torrent files.

    6. Re:Time for wiki-torrent by MikeBabcock · · Score: 1

      Several people have lost lawsuits for posting links to sites that had links to software that was deemed illegal. Yeah, double indirection and the court still ruled against them. I wouldn't be surprised if an american court was willing to find you guilty for thinking about linking to a torrent linking to pieces of a file.

      --
      - Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
    7. Re:Time for wiki-torrent by Borealis · · Score: 1

      IANAL but as I understand it, the Napster decision pretty much boinked them because the primary purpose of Napster was to facilitate infringement. Given the precedent, I don't think it would be a stretch to assume that a site dedicated to putting up torrents even as a wiki would be immune from litigation. It's important to remember also that even if the case is eventually won by a private wiki, the legal costs of defending yourself is not inconsequential and is beyond the reach of most citizens.

      That's really just treating the symptoms in any case, and there's a variety of perfectly good alternatives to torrentspy.

      --
      Unbreakable toys can be used to break other toys.
    8. Re:Time for wiki-torrent by turnipsatemybaby · · Score: 1

      More like, flexible like a rubber glove. Now where's the lube....

    9. Re:Time for wiki-torrent by Minwee · · Score: 1

      Flexible like a rubber hose, you mean?

      Flexible like the bones in your fingers, too.

    10. Re:Time for wiki-torrent by db32 · · Score: 1

      They only need the hose long enough to fill the bucket they are going to use to waterboard our terrorist intellectual property stealing ass! Rememeber kids, illegal downloading of movies, music, and software supports terrorism.

      --
      The only change I can believe in is what I find in my couch cushions.
    11. Re:Time for wiki-torrent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Need I remind you how, *ahem*, flexible the US legal system is? Flexible like a rubber hose, you mean? Flexible like a condom; it stretches to accommodate the biggest pricks.
    12. Re:Time for wiki-torrent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IANAL always makes me think: iAnal

    13. Re:Time for wiki-torrent by fm6 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that worked out great for YouTube.

    14. Re:Time for wiki-torrent by splutty · · Score: 1

      Flexible like a contortionist being paid by lobbyists to 'bend over'. (And then we can have fun with that hose)

      --
      Coz eternity my friend, is a long *ing time.
  5. In other news.. by micksam7 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Non-US proxy usage skyrockets globally.

    1. Re:In other news.. by yorugua · · Score: 5, Funny

      Are US-based users going to start using china-based proxies??!?!? Did hell just freeze?

    2. Re:In other news.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      I'm offering europe based proxy access to torrentspy for US citizens for 50 cents per search. 5 cents of every search goes towards helping starving artists in the states.

    3. Re:In other news.. by warmgun · · Score: 1

      More likely that an alternative gains the top spot. It happened with Suprnova and now it's Torrentspy's turn. I recommend http://mininova.org/.

    4. Re:In other news.. by Jugalator · · Score: 1

      Or... People just keep using TPB, Mininova, Demonoid, IsoHunt, or the newly reborn SuprNova.

      There's not exactly a shortage. :-p

      --
      Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
    5. Re:In other news.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      or just thepiratebay.org. They try and try but RIAA/MPAA just can't shut them down.

    6. Re:In other news.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You forgot to end it with 'Film at eleven.'

  6. The real victims... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    How am I supposed to support artists if I can't steal their work? Buy CDs and movies?

    1. Re:The real victims... by SCHecklerX · · Score: 1

      Go see them at the bar, buy them a drink if you like what they are playing. Buy a CD at a release party. Give copies to your friends, who if they like them will also then go to their shows and buy their promotional CDs.

    2. Re:The real victims... by gosand · · Score: 1
      Go see them at the bar, buy them a drink if you like what they are playing. Buy a CD at a release party. Give copies to your friends, who if they like them will also then go to their shows and buy their promotional CDs.


      Assuming of course that those artists you like are playing near you (unlikely) at a bar (more unlikely) and have CD release parties (huh?). Stop trying to fit every artist into your business model!!!!

      --

      My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

    3. Re:The real victims... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, but the point is if everyone does that the system will self-correct into a business model that works for everyone (except the middlemen, of course). Some big-time bands are good, but the reality is mainstream music is mostly Ushers and Rihannas and Avril Lavignes.

    4. Re:The real victims... by gosand · · Score: 1
      ...but the reality is mainstream music is mostly Ushers and Rihannas and Avril Lavignes.


      Eh, say what you will - but I like Avril Lavigne sometimes. Some days it's that, others it's Queen, or Motorhead, or Clutch, or old Red Hot Chili Peppers, or old NIN, or Jane's Addiction, or any other various groups that might be considered "mainstream". Metallica is probably considered mainstream now, but their early stuff (pre-Black) still kicks ass. Not everyone fits that business model. Some groups aren't together anymore or aren't even alive. My point is that the "support them at a bar" is a piss-poor business model. Artists should also be able to make and sell their works without having to tour.

      --

      My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

    5. Re:The real victims... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, have I got good news for you - Avril Lavigne's a dime a dozen. If there were no Arista to sign her, you'd still have found plenty of singers like her singing in bars and local music shows.

    6. Re:The real victims... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not everyone fits that business model. Some groups aren't together anymore or aren't even alive. My point is that the "support them at a bar" is a piss-poor business model. Artists should also be able to make and sell their works without having to tour. Well, artists that are dead are dead. They don't really need you to support their business model.
  7. This is a good thing. by Deagol · · Score: 4, Informative

    The more popular tor gets, and the more traffic in the network, the better it'll be for the entire 'net. One click of the my "tor" option under "FoxyProxy", and I was able to submit searches no problem.

    1. Re:This is a good thing. by phoenix.bam! · · Score: 1

      Do you get several failed requests before a successful one? The tor exit node would have to be outside the US, so I imagine there must be many failed queries for every success.

    2. Re:This is a good thing. by pla · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Do you get several failed requests before a successful one? The tor exit node would have to be outside the US, so I imagine there must be many failed queries for every success.

      Thanks to a cultural obsession with (fighting) child porn in the US, I would expect just the opposite - No sane American would allow exit connections unless they had high enough 3rd party traffic to claim basically no control over or knowledge of the vast majority of the content (ie, an ISP, and they rarely give anything away).

      And if the real feds don't ruin you, Dateline will, regardless of the actual facts. I can just about hear the announcement: "Up next, the newest threat to your children: We put 250 megs of fake child porn on a website, and found we could retrieve it anonymously with a new program for terrorists called Tor. We've hunted down, had fired, and forwarded evidence to the DA about the beast running this smut ring, known perversely as 'Exit Node'.

    3. Re:This is a good thing. by DAharon · · Score: 1
      Thank you! I frequently visit torrentspy and I've now installed foxyproxy. What would have taken me 15 minutes (finding an appropriate way to get around this) has instead taken me 5 minutes. And now I never even have to see that warning screen.

      Again, thanks for saving me 10 minutes.

    4. Re:This is a good thing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [...] a new program for terrorists called Tor.[...]
      Shouldn't we call them "torrorists"?

      Thank you, thank you. I'll be here the whole week.
    5. Re:This is a good thing. by pla · · Score: 1

      Shouldn't we call them "torrorists"?
      Thank you, thank you. I'll be here the whole week.


      Good one!

      Actually I had come up with "You can't spell Terror without Tor, but couldn't work it in smoothly so skipped it. But I do like yours. :)

  8. But how will Americans hook up...sexually? by Valacosa · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I was afraid that the lockout would affect Canada too, but it works just fine for me. So yeah, they have the whole localizing IP addresses thing down pat.

    In related news, I get a banner add offering to help me "Find my real sex partner in WATERLOO". But how will Americans find their "real sex partners" without this valuable service?

    --
    "Live as if you'll die tomorrow." Ridiculous. You could die later today.
    1. Re:But how will Americans hook up...sexually? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Depends -

      Is that Waterloo, Ontario or Waterloo, Iowa ? :-)

    2. Re:But how will Americans hook up...sexually? by matts-reign · · Score: 1

      They could always have a selective filter so ads are requested through their normal, geolocatable IP. Then they won't have to come and take over Waterloo.

      --
      Waffles rock.
    3. Re:But how will Americans hook up...sexually? by Debian+Cabbit · · Score: 1

      Think of the embarrassment this would have saved Napoleon!

    4. Re:But how will Americans hook up...sexually? by Soruk · · Score: 1

      > "Find my real sex partner in WATERLOO"

      Real? Maybe if you're quick enough before Clapham Junction...

      --
      -- Soruk
    5. Re:But how will Americans hook up...sexually? by RealGrouchy · · Score: 1

      But how will Americans find their "real sex partners" without this valuable service? They'll have to get away from their computers and go for a drive downtown like everyone els--

      I mean, a relationship is about loving someone unconditionally, not sex.

      - RG>
      --
      Hey pal, this isn't a pleasantforest, so don't waste my time with pleasantries!
    6. Re:But how will Americans hook up...sexually? by Viceroy+Potatohead · · Score: 1

      But how will Americans find their "real sex partners" without this valuable service? [frightened style="extratentative"]goatse???[/frightened]
  9. The Obvious Reason-Set my P2P free! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "I also wonder if I have to start worrying about other sites blocking American users simply out of fear & safety from the United States MPAA/RIAA run court system? I used to feel sorry for Chinese people who had to suffer from their government's censorship and now I have to wonder if I'm going to start suffering from other servers censoring me based on my government's actions."

    Ah yes. The right to be entertained being denied to Americans. Next up, the government stops you from getting fat.

    1. Re:The Obvious Reason-Set my P2P free! by jshriverWVU · · Score: 1
      Ah yes. The right to be entertained being denied to Americans. Next up, the government stops you from getting fat.

      Know you were joking, but that is the case. In NY and a lot of other places, the government is banning trans fats.

    2. Re:The Obvious Reason-Set my P2P free! by Sunburnt · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Ah yes. The right to be entertained being denied to Americans. Next up, the government stops you from getting fat.

      Know you were joking, but that is the case. In NY and a lot of other places, the government is banning trans fats.

      Huh? You can still get as fat as you like on all the starches, sugars, and saturated fat you like. Trans fats are a manufacturing convenience that is strongly and indisputedly linked to heart disease at a far greater rate than conventional "bad fats." This has been known since the early '90s, and many manufacturers have voluntarily shifted away before the series of bans, likely to prevent lawsuits.

      Trans fats are like lead paint: sure, there are some neat things you can do with it, but you can do the same things at a negligibly higher cost without needlessly harming people, so it's hard to justify having it out there.

      --
      Tags != Comments, and -1 (Troll) != -1 (I Would Respond Angrily To This Poster So They Must Be Trolling)
  10. So? by Tweekster · · Score: 1

    I never understood why people get all excited about the piratebay and torrentspy. They are shitty trackers filled with horribly named, low quality garbage.

    --
    The phrase "more better" is acceptable English. suck it grammar Nazis
    1. Re:So? by JamesRose · · Score: 1

      Because the people who actually know where to get fast high quality downloads know when to STFU.

    2. Re:So? by Bucc5062 · · Score: 1

      Would you be so kind as to point out high quality, well named, and sweet trackers? It is not helpful to knock a product without naming an alternative. Just think of the karma you'll get

      --
      Life is a great ride, the vehicle doesn't matter
    3. Re:So? by pla · · Score: 1

      I never understood why people get all excited about the piratebay and torrentspy. They are shitty trackers filled with horribly named, low quality garbage.

      For the same reason the US fought in Vietnam and Korea, and imposed sanctions on Cuba in the first place (though we seem to have forgotten the "why" of that one, considering that the former Soviet Union collapsed quite a few years ago now).

      If you can trick your enemy into attacking a strawman rather than your real vulnerabilities, you pretend to defend that strawman as long as you can (or until your enemy gets a clue, which seems safely outside the realm of possibility with the MPAA).

      Hell, I personally consider the entirety of P2P as one nice strawman for the RIAA and MPAA to waste resources on. The real pirates simply trade exteral HDDs these days, and I'd like to see the **AA try to stop that. But by all means, we should encourage them to keep flailing at grannies and foreign torrent trackers as long as they seem willing.

    4. Re:So? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just google errrr do some research into private and semi-private trackers. You'll find out what's legit and high quality, as well as what it takes to join the club(s).

    5. Re:So? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because some people have lives AND want to download music/movies etc.

    6. Re:So? by julesh · · Score: 1

      Because they're public trackers. Because public trackers are just so much easier to use than private ones.

      OK, I'm a member of a special-interest private tracker, but when I can download a file from a public one instead, I use it. Why? Because I don't have to worry about my upload ratios. In fact, downloading from a public tracker, I usually have ratios of 1.1 or so by the time I finish downloading. But with private trackers that have penalties for not uploading enough, I find I normally have to share a torrent for a month or more (where I'm one of 300 people seeding, with about 10 downloaders) after I've finished downloading otherwise I end up with a shitty ratio. Some of us don't have hundreds of gigabytes of disk space available for storing torrents that we're finished with, thanks. I like to archive off to DVDROM after a few days.

    7. Re:So? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Get a few friends together and group buy a seedbox.

  11. suprnova.org by PlusFiveInsightful · · Score: 1

    When one site goes down, another appears. There is balance in the Universe.

  12. Tor:Shell Games. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Did someone say tor?"

    And why would legitimate downloads need Tor?

    1. Re:Tor:Shell Games. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The same reason browsing legitimate web sites might. Privacy.

  13. Canada also blocked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

    Canadian users are also blocked

    1. Re:Canada also blocked by Kristoph · · Score: 4, Informative

      I am in Canada at the moment and it is working fine for me. I suspect it much depends on who your ISP is.

      ]{

    2. Re:Canada also blocked by Krakhan · · Score: 1

      No they aren't. I just tried searching from here and it works fine.

    3. Re:Canada also blocked by FarHat · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It seems only searching is affected. You can browse the directories and go from there. Thankfully and strangely, searching adult torrents is not affected.

      --
      At the intersection of computation and biology.
    4. Re:Canada also blocked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've been using it in Canada all weekend - found plenty of results for every search as well. ISP is Bell Sympatico DSL.

  14. No surprise by MortenMW · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    European laws are not as strict as the the US one's, and they are not really enforced a lot either. I think this will be seen more often in the future.

    1. Re:No surprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      European laws are not as strict as the the US one's, and they are not really enforced a lot either. I think this will be seen more often in the future.

      Actually quite the inverse. The European privacy laws are rather strict regarding who you're allowed to share the information with, and considering MPAA and RIAA are American monopolies... I'm sure you can see the clash of privacy laws. Privacy regarding information transfer is quite regulated in the EU. (Companies aren't allowed to give away your information in the EU, without your concent).

      I can't imagine what law isn't as strict in Europe as US regarding privacy, but IANAIL (International Lawyer)

    2. Re:No surprise by RexRhino · · Score: 1

      While Europe has strict privacy laws against private institutions, but there are very few privacy protections from the government itself.

      I don't think you can say privacy laws are more or less strict in Europe... rather, the privacy laws in Europe tend to reflect European cultural biases (i.e. innate trust in the government, and innate hostility towards non government institutions).

    3. Re:No surprise by Anspen · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well, many European nations have an explicit right to privacy. Which is different from the US (yes there is a constitutional right to privacy but it is implicit, which means it tends to be unenforced in rulings). While the government has more leeway than private companies they are mostly subject to similar rules (i.e. they can't simply share information between, say the IRS and welfare, you need an explicit law to allow it.)

  15. Also blocks AOL in the UK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    I know it's lame to be using AOL in the first place, but it would be nice if they were using a decent geo-ip list.

    1. Re:Also blocks AOL in the UK by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Why bother? It's easier to just block *.aol.com.

      After all, the name is AOL: AMERICA On-Line. What the hell are you using that for in the UK?

      If you're dumb enough to use AOL in another country, you deserve all the restrictions and other downsides that the rest of us Americans have to deal with. You're right across a small pond from Holland, the land of freedom. Why the hell would you want to ally yourself with restrictive American corporate interests?

    2. Re:Also blocks AOL in the UK by gowen · · Score: 1

      Ahh, but what about aol.co.uk? And yes, I know that makes no sense, but it is what it is.

      --
      Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
    3. Re:Also blocks AOL in the UK by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      I think that anyone who signs up for AOL in the UK should be forced to pay taxes to the USA (in addition to their UK taxes).

    4. Re:Also blocks AOL in the UK by porneL · · Score: 1

      AOL makes it difficult to distinguish between their US and non-US network blocks. Workarounds for AOL's lameness aren't free:
      http://www.maxmind.com/app/geoip_country

  16. Move along by scruff323 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Isohunt, Demonoid, The Pirate Bay, Mininova, (reincarnated) Suprnova. Shall I go on?

    1. Re:Move along by hansamurai · · Score: 1

      I'm actually a big fan of btjunkie, not a tracker itself, but the best torrent search engine I've ever used. Searches everything you listed off.

    2. Re:Move along by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you forgot to add:

      and monitored the hell out of them by your loved MAFIAA friends.

      cheers!

    3. Re:Move along by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Meh, Google search with a inurl:.torrent in the search replaces the need for any of those sites individually. Google, My OmniTracker!

    4. Re:Move along by jcenters · · Score: 1

      What the hell do you mean I can't smoke in here? Fuck you, I'm going back to USENET.

      --

      vi ~/.emacs

    5. Re:Move along by Type-E · · Score: 1
    6. Re:Move along by MrPeach · · Score: 1

      BTMON FTW!!!

  17. The Obvious BS. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "That would potentially be fantastic. If we can make Congress understand that excessive copyright and patent regimes put the U.S. at a technological / competitive disadvantage, that's part of the war in getting change."

    Oh right! Not having unlimited access to this is really setting the US back technologically/competitively in the world market. Who do you think your fooling with that argument?

    "Of course, Congress might be just as likely to respond in some insane, drunken, counter-productive way as well, which is why I used the word "problematic" above."

    Or maybe they'll see through the smokescreen and realize that the majority of torrents fall within the Queen Anne limits. And there's even some that haven't been released

  18. Blame CANADA! by Mr.Fork · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Alright, but maybe not. I'm a Canuck and I enjoy the fact that my country has a different view on this issue. I don't understand why the MPAA spends so much money and efforts against downloaders where they loose a majority of their money due to pirate bootleg copies being sold inside the USA and around the world? I wonder if the MPAA polled movie goers and found out how many that do download movies still go to movies in the Theatre? Has it increased their interest since movies became easy to download? Do they watch more movies they normally would of skipped otherwise because they're watching so much more on the Internet via their computer?

    Also, isn't this kind of action biting the hand that feeds them? Didn't Napster actually increase sales because it stimulated interested in music? Could MPAA be suffering the same short-sighted vision because their top executives are disenfranchised from the general public?

    --
    Management is doing things right; leadership is doing the right things. - Peter F. Drucker
    1. Re:Blame CANADA! by griffjon · · Score: 1

      See, this is why Canada will always be second fiddle. I mean, here you go applying "logic" and "business sense" -- not to mention, strategy -- to matters OBVIOUSLY better dealt with using chutzpah, truthiness, gut feelings, and stubborn, malicious incompetence. For the Mafiaa, it's obviously not about the money, the customers, the artists, or even being "right," it's about winning the global war on commies. I mean drugs. Wait, terrorists. no, like terrorists, but less 'splodey and more cutlasses. Pirates! Right. fighting the evil pirates. Yarr.

      --
      Returned Peace Corps IT Volunteer
    2. Re:Blame CANADA! by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      I'm a Canuck and I enjoy the fact that my country has a different view on this issue.

      I'm glad for that too, even though I'm an American. But I'm curious: what do you think of the current plans by the Bush Administration and your own administration to join Canada, Mexico, and the USA into one big state with a single government? Pretty soon, unless things change drastically, your "country" won't be able to have a different view, because we'll all be in the same country, and you'll be stuck with the MPAA just like the rest of us.

      I don't understand why the MPAA spends so much money and efforts against downloaders where they loose a majority of their money due to pirate bootleg copies being sold inside the USA and around the world? I wonder if the MPAA polled movie goers and found out how many that do download movies still go to movies in the Theatre? Has it increased their interest since movies became easy to download? Do they watch more movies they normally would of skipped otherwise because they're watching so much more on the Internet via their computer?

      It's all about money. They don't care if they're watching more movies than before (which is hard to prove); they want them to buy and watch even more movies, both in theaters and on DVD. It's really hard for you to comprehend, I think, because like most other normal people, you don't have the insane level of greed that these people do. It's sort of like trying to understand the motivations and thinking of a serial killer; that kind of thinking is so alien to normal people that they simply can't comprehend why serial killers do what they do. It's the same with corporate executives. They don't use the same kind of reasoning that the rest of us do.

      Also, isn't this kind of action biting the hand that feeds them? Didn't Napster actually increase sales because it stimulated interested in music? Could MPAA be suffering the same short-sighted vision because their top executives are disenfranchised from the general public?

      Again, see above. Of course Napster increased music sales; that's well documented. Of course, there's no real proof that the increased sales during that time period were specifically caused by Napster (how would you prove such a thing?), but the correlation is pretty obvious to most of us. But if you're some RIAA executive driving a Rolls, all you see is dollar-signs, and Napster seemed like it was decreasing the number of incoming dollars.

      It's not just the MPAA and RIAA that are guilty of faulty reasoning and just plain incompetence. Most American companies are guilty of this. Just look at how poorly run our corporations are. Worse yet, the very worst executives are the most rewarded. Bob Nardelli just got done driving Home Depot into the ground, took a $200 Million golden parachute (on top of everything else he got before this), and the company that just bought out Chrysler now thinks he's the man to turn that company around and appointed him CEO!

      I'm sure I could do a fine job of running some company into the ground; why can't I get paid $200 million for that?

    3. Re:Blame CANADA! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But I'm curious: what do you think of the current plans by the Bush Administration and your own administration to join Canada, Mexico, and the USA into one big state with a single government?


      "Current plans" == "paranoid ramblings of a couple side-show delusional Bush-hating freaks"

      Seriously- get a fucking grip, loser.
    4. Re:Blame CANADA! by RealGrouchy · · Score: 1

      Don't lose despair yet--Industry lobbyists are working very closely to get Parliament to pass U.S.-style copyright restrictions.

      When Reagan visited Canada while President, he said it was like being in the U.S. of two or three decades earlier. I can only hope he's right, because it means we still have time to avoid making the same mistakes.

      - RG>

      --
      Hey pal, this isn't a pleasantforest, so don't waste my time with pleasantries!
  19. Re:Obligatory by LordEd · · Score: 2, Funny

    Searching for U.S. IPs disables Torrentspy.
    It could be worse. In Soviet Russia, IPs disable you!
  20. It's easier than proxies by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 1

    Just use a web anonymizer for the search.

  21. Okay.. by WhatAmIDoingHere · · Score: 1

    So why not use Torrentz.com? It searches all the big sites including Mininova and TPB.

    --
    Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
  22. JAP is good too by bombastinator · · Score: 1

    JAP is imho easier to use than TOR, and since it is based in germany you know that it will get by every time.

    1. Re:JAP is good too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      JAPs and Germans? What could go wrong?

  23. Violated Rights by blahlemon · · Score: 1

    As a Canadian working in the US I feel that my socialist, lax copyright rights are being violated by this blanket ban. This is a travesty, how will I download my shareware torrents now?

    --
    It take more faith to believe in evolution than it takes to believe in God
  24. Tor:Popularity Games. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why yes, I can see why someone would want to hide the fact that [IP address], downloaded Ubuntu (grab some attention).iso.torrent from the rest of the world.

    1. Re:Tor:Popularity Games. by UncleTogie · · Score: 1

      Yes, 'cause it's not their knowledge to begin with. Why would someone else NEED to know that I'm downloading Ubuntu?

      I'm not saying I don't masturbate. I am saying that it's none of anyone else's business if/when I do.

      --
      Don't tell me to get a life. I'm a gamer; I have LOTS of lives!
    2. Re:Tor:Popularity Games. by shmlco · · Score: 1

      "Why would someone else NEED to know that I'm downloading Ubuntu?"

      'Cause you don't? Downloading Ubuntu is just a rationalization.

      --
      Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
    3. Re:Tor:Popularity Games. by computational+super · · Score: 4, Insightful
      If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear

      Buildings with security guards are rarely robbed or broken into. A naive building owner may say, "you know, there haven't been any break-ins in years - I'm wasting my money paying the security guards to guard this place!" when in fact it was the deterrent of the security guard that prevented the break-in in the first place. Civil liberties (such as privacy safeguards) are a bit like security guards - the fact that you have them means you probably don't need them, but if you get rid of them, you'll want them back in a big hurry.

      --
      Proud neuron in the Slashdot hivemind since 2002.
    4. Re:Tor:Popularity Games. by jollyreaper · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      I'm not saying I don't masturbate. I am saying that it's none of anyone else's business if/when I do. I only care if I have to use your computer next.
      --
      Kwisatz Haderach
      Sell the spice to CHOAM
      This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
    5. Re:Tor:Popularity Games. by UncleTogie · · Score: 1

      'Cause you don't? Downloading Ubuntu is just a rationalization. I do and did. What rationalization are ya speakin' of?
      --
      Don't tell me to get a life. I'm a gamer; I have LOTS of lives!
    6. Re:Tor:Popularity Games. by cooley · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yes, 'cause it's not their knowledge to begin with. Why would someone else NEED to know that I'm downloading Ubuntu?

      I'm not saying I don't masturbate. I am saying that it's none of anyone else's business if/when I do. Hey buddy, I love Ubuntu as much as the next guy (maybe more) but seriously you probably shouldn't tell people that you masturbate to it downloading.
      --
      Just then the floating disembodied head of Colonel Sanders started yelling Everything You Know Is Wrong!-Weird Al
    7. Re:Tor:Popularity Games. by SoulDrift · · Score: 1

      Besides, the thrill is gone now, there hasn't been any porn in Ubuntu since version 4.10.

  25. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  26. How many people still use torrentspy? by nnull · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I stopped using torrentspy.com when they put up all those annoying ads on it. Their search has been pretty lame lately. Mininova, piratebay and a host of others offer a lot more. So good riddance, good bye Torrentspy.com. I hope you lose a lot of money from the lost ad revenue from US internet users.

    Buhh bye!

    1. Re:How many people still use torrentspy? by evaprototype00 · · Score: 0
      ad revenue?
      I never knew they had ads on the page.

      /adblock

    2. Re:How many people still use torrentspy? by ImaLamer · · Score: 1

      Go ahead and demean them, they did this for your protection. By not letting Americans search they are keeping logs from being generated for the FBI et. al.

      Sadly, they are looking out for you, unlike anyone else. It does ease my fears actually. I looked there for a movie I own and lost to letting someone borrow it; while doing this I had slashdot headlines dancing in my head saying that they were once asked for IP addresses of Americans who use the service. I did go ahead and grab the movie (soylent green), but then found it at the supermarket for $10 the next day.

      Maybe you should go click on a few of their ads since they made a move to keep you out of trouble - when you might have deserved it.

  27. ok now how do I block my tor node for US? by Werrismys · · Score: 1
    Bad attempt at humor.

    I just wish the tor network remained for normal surfing anonymously and not warez.

    --
    'Once scientists, even the dim-witted social scientists, get muzzled, the Western Civilization is finished.' - oldhack
  28. torrents suck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Torrents suck, anyway...you have to upload to random people you don't know, get spied on by various other people about what you're doing, deal with low-quality crap and fake files all the time, etc.

    Usenet alt.binaries.whatever is much better, higher quality, no fake files, you might have to buy a subscription to a Usenet host though (Usenetserver is $1/day pay as you go or $19/month to max out cable.)

  29. That's OK... by The+Mu · · Score: 1

    because TorrentSpy was never any good in the first place. Good riddance.

  30. it works for me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the Torrentspy search is working for me like it always has, and i live in the US. i'm also very sure i'm not using a proxy. is this just me?

  31. btjunkie is good by Von+Rex · · Score: 1

    That's funny, I just deleted my torrentspy search box in Firefox yesterday because I got tired of waiting for them to reinstate comments. Torrent sites without comments are useless to me because there's so much shit floating around.

    I've been using Btjunkie.org lately. They have comments and lots of files. Often I would find things there I couldn't find on Torrentspy anyway.

  32. well, duh! by jaimz22 · · Score: 0

    thats why al gore invented proxies. but over all it's ok because we can atleast still see the ads with the boobies!

  33. Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe this will wake US citizens up to eroding personal liberties.

  34. Fuck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fuck you torrentspy, now I'm going to have to use a foreign proxy just to get there?

  35. Missing the point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A lot of you seem to be missing the point here..

    Instead of letting you all search their site and comply with US law to report you all, they made it so you couldn't increminate yourself.

    So good riddence you say?

    How about, "God Speed you crazy Pirates, God Speed"

  36. The what?? by Gonoff · · Score: 1

    shrill faction of the American political left

    That means nobody then. The USA does not have a political left...

    Here at /. I have seen evidence of middle of the range viewpoints, right wing and extreme right wing.

    As far as can be seen then, you are saying that Michael Moore belongs to something that does not exist. Is this to say that he is independent and following no guidance beyond his own opinions?

    --
    I'll see your Constitution and raise you a Queen.
    1. Re:The what?? by The+One+and+Only · · Score: 2, Funny

      That's like saying your boat doesn't have a port side, only a starboard side and an "extreme starboard" side. "Left" and "right" are relative terms. That's the reason we use terms normally associated with direction to denote them.

      --
      In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
    2. Re:The what?? by Gonoff · · Score: 1

      And that may be why your don't have some of the basics of a civilised society including things like...

      Universal Health Care
      No Judicial Death Sentences
      Government plans to end social injustice
      Financial aid to those who need it.

      If you take off some parts of your boat, you will not get anywhere and may eventually sink. Balanced politics may never cure all the problems of society. It will mean that some get smaller and some won't. It is a mark of decency that we try!

      --
      I'll see your Constitution and raise you a Queen.
    3. Re:The what?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's like saying your boat doesn't have a port side, only a starboard side and an "extreme starboard" side. "Left" and "right" are relative terms. Depends on what he's comparing to. If he's using the rest of the world as a comparison, then the US probably doesn't have any real "left" to speak of, as the "left" relative to only the U.S. is closer to the "right" of many other countries, and our right is definitely on the extreme side compared to others.
    4. Re:The what?? by The+One+and+Only · · Score: 1

      Or maybe your society has overloaded one side of the boat, causing it to list helplessly until finally capsizing. Social welfare is nice, but may not be socially tenable. As to the death penalty--well, much of the US was still a frontier until just over a century ago. Death penalties are unavoidable in frontiers, but preferable to avoid once you can afford neat things like prisons. And, as always, cultural practice lags behind economic and technological progress for centuries.

      --
      In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
    5. Re:The what?? by The+One+and+Only · · Score: 1

      That's like saying western Poland is in eastern Europe--true, but that doesn't mean that we should call it "eastern Poland" and call eastern Poland "extreme eastern Poland".

      --
      In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
  37. I don't see what the big deal is... by mark-t · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Virtually everything that is legally copyable for distribution and is available via bittorrent can be found without the need for a dedicated torrent search engine anyways because a link to a torrent is often available right on the creator's website. At least, that's my experience. I use bittorrent fairly regularly but I've never once needed to resort to using a torrent search engine to find what I wanted.

    1. Re:I don't see what the big deal is... by jb.hl.com · · Score: 1

      Virtually everything that is legally copyable for distribution and is available via bittorrent can be found without the need for a dedicated torrent search engine anyways because a link to a torrent is often available right on the creator's website.

      The problem is that most people go to Torrentspy etc for stuff that's not legally copyable for distribution.

      --
      By summer it was all gone...now shesmovedon. --
    2. Re:I don't see what the big deal is... by LunarCrisis · · Score: 1

      I use bittorrent fairly regularly but I've never once needed to resort to using a torrent search engine to find what I wanted.
      You've evidently never played World of Warcraft.
      --
      Mr. Period: Nine is the one that's right by ten!
      Nine: One day I will kill him. Then, I will be Ten.
  38. FWIW by cromar · · Score: 1

    I live in the USA and think that all drugs should be legalized, prostitution and unlicensed gambling too, no age limit for drinking, free condoms/needles, no "voluntary" labeling of music/movies for profanity, nudity, violence... real, free, socialized public communication media (airwaves, phones, etc), socialized medicine and home/health insurance... radically more democracy (a little bit of republicanism is a good thing though), ugly public spaces as media for visual art, and definitely no banning of transfats/cigarettes/fun poisons du jour.

    Anyway, I can't tell what the left is anymore... I get the feeling I can only be called a radical.

    1. Re:FWIW by Gonoff · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Some of that is not political, left or right, some is.

      I recognise the socialised medicine etc but legalising prostitution and removing drug & drink laws don't sound like anything trying to make a fairer society. Can I guess that you see restrictions on gun ownership and use as a bad thing too? Just sounds like you don't like other peoples needs to infringe upon your play.

      --
      I'll see your Constitution and raise you a Queen.
    2. Re:FWIW by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just sounds like you don't like other peoples wants to infringe upon your rights.

      There, fixed that for you.

    3. Re:FWIW by cromar · · Score: 1

      For my own benefit, I looked up the left in the OED and it says that the left may refer to a person or political group who is liberal, socialist, or radical, where liberal is said to mean open to new behavior ... willing to discard traditional values.

      I suppose I'll go with that definition (should have done that in the first place). It's funny, the words really aren't used that way. Kinda reminds me of the old hacker/cracker debate.

      You have guessed incorrectly about me, at any rate. I am for limited gun control, like people not carrying around concealed AKs or shotguns. That's a good thing. No, I don't have a particular problem with conceal-and-carry laws. Mistrust of the government is the smart road, trust me. Hell if I'd get a gun though. My knife's good enough for me till the revolution :D

      I must agree with AC, your quip about needs and play is short sited.

  39. http://torrents.to will list sites to meta-search by KWTm · · Score: 1

    Isohunt, Demonoid, The Pirate Bay, Mininova, (reincarnated) Suprnova. Shall I go on?

    Why not? Torrentreactor, btjunkie, fenopy, bushtorrents, meganova ...

    If you go to torrents.to, it will search various sites for you. Even if you just visit, you can read their list of sites that they search. So, if you only know of a few sites, and your sites get shut down, now you'll know what other sites to go to.

    This is, of course, for the express purpose of identifying torrents that are legal/ethical to download.
    --
    404555974007725459910684486621289147856453481154 in hex is "You sank my Battleship?"
    [GPG key in journal]
  40. well done by tHeSiD · · Score: 1

    well done tspy. prolly they don wanna get screwed or they are pisses at the US

    1. Re:well done by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      well done tspy. prolly they don wanna get screwed or they are pisses at the US I think you may have meant to say: "Well done Torrentspy. They probably don't want to get screwed or they are pissed at the US.".

      Glad to help.
  41. Usenet as an alternative requires improved search by BenEnglishAtHome · · Score: 1

    ...the first rule of Usenet is "don't post anything on Usenet any more."

    OK, but how do you know? How can anybody know?

    Theoretically, Newzbin can help me find binaries, but the search function is pretty basic. If you're looking for something without a known, reasonably rare text string in the file name in a known format, then you'll inevitably wind up with nothing or thousands of hits. Newzbin also refuses to index binaries posted to non-binary groups; I realize that's something that shouldn't happen, but it does and those files need to be searchable.

    As for text entries to Usenet, I can't find a good search solution. Google Groups has, far more times than I can count, failed in my testing. More times than not, I can be looking at a post in my newsreader, copy some unique text from it, enter that text to Google's search, and get back zero results.

    I have a premium provider. I have an account with Newzbin. I've been downloading binaries since back when I had to paste together multipart binary files in a text editor to get them to work on my 286, in between autoposting multiple messages to Compuserve. I am no dummy when it comes to all this. I sincerely hope I've overlooked some wonderful resource, but my current take on the situation is that the lack of good search makes usenet a really lousy alternative these days.

  42. Re:My first accepted submission in 8 years by Lithdren · · Score: 4, Funny

    Way to post off topic, on your own topic.

    That...that really takes something special.

  43. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  44. Faith has no place in science by Smeagel · · Score: 1

    Your signature is such an overused stupid argument. Science isn't faith. They key component about science is you can always learn more and attempt to prove your hypothesis. It only takes faith to believe in science if you're too stupid or lazy to verify what you're being told is true. The key component to faith is that you ACCEPT your hypothesis without any proof. Your post is just a lack of understanding in both the scientific method (evolution) and faith.

  45. You're quite the security expert yourself. by Von+Rex · · Score: 1

    Because we all know that there's no way the RIAA could discover the existence of a public network used by millions of people since before the web even existed. After all, how could the hired guns at the RIAA discover anything except through reading Slashdot?

  46. Tor:Evil succeeds when good falls for it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Yes, 'cause it's not their knowledge to begin with. Why would someone else NEED to know that I'm downloading Ubuntu? "

    It makes it easier to legitimize P2P and increase Linux awareness when you all aren't ping ponging bits all over the world, and encrypting the fact that it's even a legitimate download.

    "I'm not saying I don't masturbate. I am saying that it's none of anyone else's business if/when I do."

    It's our business when your actions affect us in a negative way. Hiding illegal acts behind the privacy veil means that when there's a REAL need for privacy, it will not be there to enjoy.

    1. Re:Tor:Evil succeeds when good falls for it. by UncleTogie · · Score: 1

      Hiding illegal acts behind the privacy veil means that when there's a REAL need for privacy, it will not be there to enjoy.

      ...which leads to the question, how will someone tell if it's illegal or not? Here, let's use the Slashdot-Approved Car Analogy:

      How would you like the government to install speed-regulators on cars keeping them from travelling over 70MPH? It's good for public safety, will cut down on high-speed chases and crashes, and will keep people from dying...

      What we need isn't law, what we need is a return to personal accountability.
      --
      Don't tell me to get a life. I'm a gamer; I have LOTS of lives!
  47. Re:tor - Proxy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You just have to use a Proxy browser like myproxybrowser.com and get the torrent.. then its a free for all

  48. .Sig by Morosoph · · Score: 1

    It take more faith to believe in evolution than it takes to believe in God
    Offtopic, I know, but it seems to me that you've accepted Dawkins' agenda. Yes, maybe it take more faith to believe that yellowfin tuna are four metres long than that Michealangelo is a great artist, but they're simply not related facts.

    If you haven't accepted Dawkins' dichotomy, then maybe you've accepted Biblical literalists. If you support freedom, these people are not your allies. Please make your faith an informed one; truth should not be a political matter.

  49. This is a good excuse. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Thanks to a cultural obsession with (fighting) child porn in the US, I would expect just the opposite - No sane American would allow exit connections unless they had high enough 3rd party traffic to claim basically no control over or knowledge of the vast majority of the content (ie, an ISP, and they rarely give anything away)."

    You don't need any "porn" justification to deny Tor. Human nature tells you that any resource made available to the public is going to be abused. Be it increasing bandwidth usage, fall guy for the cowardly, or middle man to something you'd never agree to if you knew.

    If those who think that "information wants to be free" is a god given right? Then do what civil rights leaders did and stand up and be counted. Instead of slinking in the encrypted shadows like a common thief.

    1. Re:This is a good excuse. by theNeophile · · Score: 1

      If those who think that "information wants to be free" is a god given right? Then do what civil rights leaders did and stand up and be counted. Instead of slinking in the encrypted shadows like a common thief. For those of us who believe in privacy, encrypting our communications and encouraging others to do likewise is standing up to be counted.
    2. Re:This is a good excuse. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "For those of us who believe in privacy, encrypting our communications and encouraging others to do likewise is standing up to be counted."

      Kind of hard to be counted when you can't even be found, let alone caught red-handed?

  50. Re:Workaround in T-Minus.... by Barnoid · · Score: 1

    Of course, this would be a bit annoying if you find you have to switch it on for torrentspy and then switch it off when you want to surf in general (without the inherant lag).

    Apparently, you have never heard of FoxyProxy (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/24 64/). It automatically connects directly/via proxies depending on the URL.

  51. Offtopic. by StikyPad · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Pray tell, then, what does one have to do to qualify as a documentarian? Tell the truth?

    I'd say "Make a genuine attempt at creating an accurate portrait of reality." "Absolute truth" is probably unknowable through our limited faculties, but it's still a worthy goal.

    Can you point out the parts in his movie where he doesn't tell the truth?

    It's not what he says, it's what he doesn't say. "Dihydrogen monoxide can be deadly if inhaled!" That's a true statement, but is the listener any better informed than he was before hearing it? I would argue that he is not. The best case scenario is that he will investigate my statement and discover its relevance and context, but the most likely scenario is that he will simply parrot it to others.

    My co-workers, for example, were outraged that Cuba has better healthcare than the US. Is that really true? Well, if "universal no-fee coverage" is your metric, then yes. But if you include average quality of care -- bankruptcy or not -- most people are better off in the US. (Personally I'd much rather be alive and bankrupt than dead and financially secure, but I agree that ideally, citizens of a civilized society should not be faced with such a dichotomy.)

    Can you point me to a single documentary that does not contain any editorial bias? Can you point me to anything published ever that does not contain any bias?

    That's a red herring. If everybody takes a test, and you get most of the questions wrong, pointing out that nobody got a perfect score (or even that everyone else failed), would not be justification to give you a passing grade. More importantly, eliminating bias isn't a prerequisite for accuracy. I'm biased to believe that 1+1=2.

    At any rate, I believe the GP's point was not that Michael Moore produces films that are inconsistent with the content and format of a typical documentary, but rather that his films fall so short of the mark of a good documentary that they are hardly worthy of the title. And he explained that quite clearly with the pr0nography comparison. (Sorry, work filters.. not trying to be 1337).

    I do agree that the US has gone downhill in many areas in recent years, and lack of universal healthcare is a glaring shortcoming. And some of us are doing what we can to fix things.. I just hate having someone like Moore on my side. There are plenty of legitimate reasons to be dissatisfied with the state of affairs; there's no need to invent falsehoods, and in fact, it only makes things worse because it makes everyone on one side of an issue look like an idiot. Like some dolt who says "antivirus is important to protect you from hackers!" Bush did the same thing with Iraq, and now look where we are. I'm not saying we should be there, but it's an excellent example of how public support turns against you and credibility suffers when you tell half-truths and/or outright lies, no matter how well intentioned. Shortcomings and risks of a plan should be met head on, along with legitimate complaints, not gingerly avoided with cherry picked "facts" and stories about rainbows and lollipops.

  52. Re:Workaround in T-Minus.... by MarsMartian · · Score: 1

    30 minutes until an American teenager makes one?

  53. haha by pppppppman · · Score: 1

    hahahahahahahahahahahahaha that's pretty funny.

    ah crap, I'm in Australia, it's just a matter of time... maybe they wont notice us

  54. Now truly we can say by fan+of+lem · · Score: 1

    Then the terrorists have already won!

  55. Did anyone else... by Mike73 · · Score: 1

    ...read that as "Torrentspy Acts to Protect Piracy"? :)

  56. also keep in mind that by talledega500 · · Score: 1

    if your using a torrent in the US that we need to be educating others in torrents suchas southafrica ansd others that dont have torrents and its not our fault that others who dont have bytes and computers cant access torrents and how thats not fair and stuff so pls if you know someone who doesnt have torrentspy like um help them out suchas telling them how to use it

    1. Re:also keep in mind that by wideglide · · Score: 1

      You're not blond ?

      --
      The sum of intelligence on a planet is constant. Nowadays we have more people. When classic goes away, so do I. Copy
  57. probably doesn't block chinese users by tfiedler · · Score: 1

    Unless they're blocking users from China and other totalitarian countries, this is just a politically motivated move by the administrators of TorrentSpy.

    --
    Democrats and Republicans are like AIDS and Cancer, I want neither!
  58. This might be a good thing........ by siasl · · Score: 1

    Having web sites and services in the rest of the world cut off U.S. IP addresses might be a way to get U.S. users to get the attention of their congress critters. Especially if the sites put the messages like "Contact your government representatives about your screwed up laws." I would not blame the rest of the world to just cut us loose.

  59. Liftoff! by kurious0 · · Score: 1

    http://unblocktorrentspy.com/ well that was quick.