Slashdot Mirror


Danish ISP Tele2 Challenges Pirate Bay Blockade

krasmussen writes "After Monday's injunction on Danish ISP Tele2 to block access to The Pirate Bay, the company has now decided to take the case further in court. 'We do not like being put in a role where we as ISP have to regulate people's freedom of speech' says Nicholai Pfeiffer, regulatory manager i Telenor, which owns Tele2. However, because the current ruling against Tele2 still stands, the customers are not going to regain access to The Pirate Bay at the moment."

129 comments

  1. Possible interim solution: by Penguinisto · · Score: 3, Funny
    Tele2 can post a list of legal open proxies on their website, and instructions on how to set one up? They can still comply with the court order, but meanwhile stick by their principles.

    /P

    --
    Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    1. Re:Possible interim solution: by BSAtHome · · Score: 5, Informative

      The Pirate Bay already beat them to it: http://thejesperbay.org/
      The name is a parody on the chairman of the IFPI...

    2. Re:Possible interim solution: by KublaiKhan · · Score: 1

      Nice idea, but I can see a couple problems with it--namely that they could then be considered to be 'aiding and abetting' as it were (and thus potentially held liable) and also the number of tech support calls such a project would generate might be inconveniencing to the way they run their business.

      Nice thought, though.

      --
      In Xanadu did Kubla Khan
      A stately pleasure dome decree
    3. Re:Possible interim solution: by thegux · · Score: 1

      Would anyone be able to post an English translation of that page?

    4. Re:Possible interim solution: by jim.hansson · · Score: 2, Insightful

      wonder what will thepiratebay will do when the ISP is ordered to block the IP:s, insteed of only fu*king up the DNS?

      --
      preview button, my computer does't have any preview button
    5. Re:Possible interim solution: by Penguinisto · · Score: 1
      The tech support load I didn't think of... and you're right ab't that.

      OTOH, they can deflect the 'aiding and abetting' charge by saying it has nothing to do with TPB. Simply post a news/press release about how it's part of a super-secret networking efficiency R&D project that Tele2 has going (or somesuch)... as long as the proxies are legit and legally open (e.g. no compromised machines), IMHO it would be fairly litigation-proof.

      Now if anyone were to build a toolbar(?) that any ol' user could install and automatically seek and use legit open proxies upon hitting a single on-off button, then stupid rulings like this would be impossible.

      /P

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    6. Re:Possible interim solution: by compro01 · · Score: 1

      xBbrowser (formerly torpark) has such functionality to switch between regular access and tor routing.

      --
      upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
    7. Re:Possible interim solution: by meringuoid · · Score: 4, Insightful
      wonder what will thepiratebay will do when the ISP is ordered to block the IP:s, insteed of only fu*king up the DNS?

      Get another IP? It's not as if it's hard to do; spammers seem to manage. Let the Danish courts play the same game of whack-a-mole that mail admins do.

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
    8. Re:Possible interim solution: by jim.hansson · · Score: 1

      do you mean that the pirate bay should start using a botnet? that could be so funny and troublesome at the same time :-)

      --
      preview button, my computer does't have any preview button
    9. Re:Possible interim solution: by jopsen · · Score: 1

      They aren't as far as I remember from earlier the discussions the Danish childpornography filter is also implemented as a DNS only filter...

      But if they do block the IPs it's just a matter of getting a dynmic IP (Joke)... But multiple IPs would do, they just change every day... no problem, just make sure the old IPs still redirect, so users of cached DNS resolution isn't left out...

    10. Re:Possible interim solution: by emj · · Score: 1

      Actually I would think that this is the next step for P2P using a botnet to spread their index.

    11. Re:Possible interim solution: by Penguinisto · · Score: 1
      Well, FWIW, it wasn't me who modded ye.

      It isn't that TPB is some great big illegal operation (it is perfectly legal within the framework of their jurisdiction), nor that they act as a torrent tracker (they are, for torrents regardless of content*).

      The big deal is that there is a great big precedent where information is blocked due to content.

      We often praise people who find ways to break past China and Saudi Arabia's forms of Internet censorship... why all the sudden do you cheer the same censorship in an EU member state?

      Do you realize that all I would need to do to shut down a torrent tracker in Denmark now is to post a link or four leading to some IFPI-owned content, then pack off a C&D notice? I have no kick against someone wanting to control stuff that they have rights to, but the route they took to do so is appalling, to say the least. I don't poison a noisy neighborhood dog to get him quiet, I go to the dog's owner and see about getting him to keep his animal quiet. The IFPI did the equivalent of setting out buckets of antifreeze in this analogy... and it is IMHO wrong.

      /P

      * this does include a rather large amount of links leading to legal/legit content, such as: WoW patches, Linux distros/updates, FOSS binaries, artist-permitted multimedia distribution, and various other items of a perfectly IP-respecting nature).

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    12. Re:Possible interim solution: by Penguinisto · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Perhaps you could tell us which exact laws TPB has broken? In their jurisdiction, they have broken none.

      Sorta blasts your argument apart right there, doesn't it?

      /P

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    13. Re:Possible interim solution: by Yvanhoe · · Score: 1

      Or open a .onion server. This is a server only accessible through the EFF-sponsored network Tor.

      --
      The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
    14. Re:Possible interim solution: by uniquename72 · · Score: 1

      TPB is not being blocked because it has the writings of Karl Marx, Osama Bin Laden or Adolf Hitler. No one is saying that TPB doesn't make stealing music easier. But at what point does that make all internet searching illegal?
      Fact is, I can use Google to find any info available on TPB. You must also support the closing of Google then, no?
    15. Re:Possible interim solution: by brit74 · · Score: 1

      Well, FWIW, it wasn't me who modded ye.

      (nod) Yes, I understand that you can't mod and post within the same article.

      The big deal is that there is a great big precedent where information is blocked due to content.

      Isn't that what a C&D letter does? When you shut down child-porn sites, aren't you doing it on the basis of content?

      We often praise people who find ways to break past China and Saudi Arabia's forms of Internet censorship... why all the sudden do you cheer the same censorship in an EU member state?

      That's because we have ideas about what should and shouldn't be allowed in society. When people break past China's or Saudi Arabia's ridiculous, oppressive laws, I cheer them because they are fighting against a corrupt system. Stealing digital content from their creators is not "fighting a corrupt system"; it's just "getting stuff without paying for it". You label it all under one term: "censorship", and I simply don't think all these different situations can be subsumed under one word and treated uniformly.

      Let me put it this way: Western governments will put you in jail for theft. Saudi Arabia will put you in jail for preaching any religion other than Islam. Do you argue: "you support the people who Saudi Arabia puts in jail, but you condemn the people the United States puts in jail" - as if I'm guilty of some double-standard? Do you conclude that "putting people in jail is wrong"? No.

      "Net censorship" which prevents theft of digital content (music, movies, software, etc, etc) is different than net censorship that is used to hide government crimes from their people. Just as putting someone in jail for believing the wrong religion is different than putting someone in jail for theft.

      I don't poison a noisy neighborhood dog to get him quiet

      Nobody's dead.

      I go to the dog's owner and see about getting him to keep his animal quiet

      And you think piratebay is just going to say, "Oh, I'm sorry. I won't let that happen again." Of course not. I recently read an interview with the creator of piratebay. What's his view on copyright? He said that people claim piratebay hates copyright, but that wasn't true at all - he says that piratebay simply doesn't care about copyright. He flat-out saying he doesn't care if copyrighted material is on there against the author's wishes. You know what else piratebay is working on? An anonymous system. Where's your cease and desist letter going now? Piratebay is aiding and abetting criminals - and they are doing whatever they can to aid them even more in the future.

    16. Re:Possible interim solution: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd mod you insightful, but I don't have that much karma to blow.

    17. Re:Possible interim solution: by cliffski · · Score: 1

      a long discredited and silly argument. Google indexes everything without prejudice, and does not give out instructions deliberately on where to host copyrighted material. TPB does, and its a question of intent, in legal terms.
      To compare TPB with google is frankly stupid.

      --
      DRM-free indie games for the PC and Mac: Positech Games
    18. Re:Possible interim solution: by mmcuh · · Score: 1

      Where does TPB instruct you to host copyrighted material? Also, one would think that the fact that Google indexes everything while TPB only indexes what their users put their would make Google more vulnerable to lawsuits of this type, not less.

    19. Re:Possible interim solution: by cliffski · · Score: 1

      google do not have specifics categories for torrents like TPB does. look for fucks sake its called THE PIRATE BAY, do your eally think they are 'unaware' that 99.9% of their content is illegal? if not, why the 'hidden' servers?
      Its amazing the bullshit argument people will trot out to defend criminals if they think it means they can get free stuff...

      Go on, keep modding me troll because you don't like hearing the truth...

      --
      DRM-free indie games for the PC and Mac: Positech Games
  2. Less Than Honorable by milsoRgen · · Score: 1

    Although I'm sure the ISP is more about protecting their bottom line as opposed to protecting freedom of speech. I'm still often left in awe at some of the actions European citizens and governments take to protect users rights as opposed to rolling over at the beck and call of the entertainment history or government here in the US. Kudos to them!

    --
    I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask where they're goin' and hook up with 'em later.
    1. Re:Less Than Honorable by milsoRgen · · Score: 1

      the one time i don't use preview... history=industry

      --
      I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask where they're goin' and hook up with 'em later.
    2. Re:Less Than Honorable by Lithdren · · Score: 4, Funny

      ERROR: Unable to load page. www.ThePirateBay.com (Arrr) has been blocked by court injunction for your own protection. We are unable to provide you access to this wonderfull service at criminally low prices!

      If you object to this injunction, please write your state representative to have the law changed at:

      Jack "The price is right!" Representation
      12345 Pork Barrel Depot
      Washington, DC 20004


      If only they'd handle it this way, in the US of A.

  3. start the arms race to defeat the firewalls by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    this should spur development of new tools to evade firewalls and stop
    the advance of filtering of our packets. going to court to stop these
    types of problems will only end in the users circumventing the fix time
    and time again.

    1. Re:start the arms race to defeat the firewalls by jim.hansson · · Score: 1

      maybe we should really thank IFPI for pushing the development of application that hides what the user is doing.

      here's idea: mask the traffic as VOIP, that way it will get high priority also :-o

      --
      preview button, my computer does't have any preview button
  4. ah the wonders of proxies by Coraon · · Score: 4, Funny

    ah http://www.prospector.cz/Free-Internet-services/Web-proxy/ , without you I would be torrent-less...that is of course if I lived there. Fortunately I live in Canada the Tortuga of the internet, where the torrents flow like water and our government is still afraid of its people.

    --
    -Ours is the wisdom of Solomon, the magic of Merlyn, the fall of Icaris.
    1. Re:ah the wonders of proxies by compro01 · · Score: 1

      Fortunately I live in Canada the Tortuga of the internet, where the torrents flow like water and our government is still afraid of its people. unless you use Rogers or Bell C, who both seem to be taking a dislike to torrents, and encrypted traffic too.

      though fortunately, Bell is required by CRTC regs to lease out their lines to other providers for a fixed fee, so it's a near-certainty that anyone wanting to get away from them can find an alternate ISP that doesn't do such things.

      --
      upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
    2. Re:ah the wonders of proxies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fortunately I live in Canada the Tortuga of the internet, where the torrents flow like water and our government is still afraid of its people. Really?
    3. Re:ah the wonders of proxies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Says the person from the country that shut down demonoid...

      All things must end riaa and the rest just haven't learned that yet...

    4. Re:ah the wonders of proxies by plpl · · Score: 0

      I think you are wrong. Brazil is the Tortuga of the internet. Our government is still afraid of the big tubes.

  5. Whoa by rakuen · · Score: 1

    An ISP that isn't Anti-P2P? Does anyone have a contact in hell to see what's going on down there? I guess that leaves a bit of hope for the future...

    1. Re:Whoa by veganboyjosh · · Score: 4, Funny

      They did say duke nuke'em's coming...

    2. Re:Whoa by Markspark · · Score: 1

      P2P is definately what drove the broadband into every Swedes home (almost every swede then, but still)
      and without P2P, what would your average joe do on the internet? (except view webpages, but that he could do of a modem)

      --
      i find your lack of faith in science disturbing!
    3. Re:Whoa by alx5000 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Fairly common in Europe (or at least Spain), where there's a lot of competition among ISP's (some places are still subject to some monopoly, but they're an over(under?)whelming minority). Not being able to use P2P reduces users' satisfaction, and leads to saying "byebye" and choosing another carrier.

      --
      My 0.02 cents
    4. Re:Whoa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      haven't you heard
      porn, the broadband is for porn

    5. Re:Whoa by Smordnys+s'regrepsA · · Score: 1

      An ISP that isn't Anti-P2P? Does anyone have a contact in hell to see what's going on down there? I guess that leaves a bit of hope for the future...
      Maybe they had too many call center reps quit after the shit storm of callers complaining about their breaking the internet?
      --
      Just -1, Troll talking to another.
    6. Re:Whoa by robertjw · · Score: 1

      Haven't you heard?
      P2P is for porn.

  6. At least they put up a fight by guruevi · · Score: 1

    Unlike AT&T or some other American counterparts which apparently give the government access to listen and block with a smile.

    I hope this ban gets lifted. The RIAA and their cronies have done too much damage to the economy already. Personally, I haven't bought any RIAA-affiliated music since 2002 and I have a lot of songs, go to Indiefeed or something similar for real 'free' music and then sponsor those artists.

    --
    Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
  7. Dykes by mbarron · · Score: 2, Funny

    Too bad the network admin, just can't pull his finger out of the firewall.

    1. Re:Dykes by digithed · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's Denmark not Holland.

    2. Re:Dykes by R2.0 · · Score: 2, Funny

      I think he was referring to the sexual orientation of the admins.

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
  8. Challenges? by krilid · · Score: 1

    The article mentions that a meeting has been held but no decision on whether to appeal the court order.

  9. Pirates Bay is finished by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Until the whack a mole pops up elsewhere. What an exercise in futility. "Introducing the new Cisco Pandoras Box Lock Router."

  10. This is not packet filtering, only a DNS block by Gnavpot · · Score: 5, Informative

    Just to clear up the confusion in some of the comments:
    The court did not order Tele2 to do any packet filtering. Tele2 will only have to remove piratebay.org from their DNS servers.

    So no need for proxies or firewall circumvention tools this time.

    1. Re:This is not packet filtering, only a DNS block by Bryansix · · Score: 1

      Really?! So now all the users have to do is use one of the billions of tools on the net to find the IP address of a domain and their in? Well if they use IIS and host headers then it's a little more complicated. Gotta edit that hosts file. Other then that though, they are in. Courts are so stupid!

    2. Re:This is not packet filtering, only a DNS block by karmatic · · Score: 1, Redundant

      Actually, they just recommend using OpenDNS (see The Jesperbay, a Pirate Bay website).

    3. Re:This is not packet filtering, only a DNS block by CodeBuster · · Score: 1

      Which their clients could easily dodge by using an alternative DNS server OR they could simply type in the IP address for the pirate bay instead of "thepiratebay.org".

    4. Re:This is not packet filtering, only a DNS block by Jugalator · · Score: 1

      That would be so hilarious if it just wasn't such a pathetic "solution" by them.

      What are they going to do next? Keep asking ISP's to adjust their DNS records? Where to draw the line? The Pirate Bay has, after all, still not been ruled down by Swedish court, and Denmark AFAIK uses the same kind of copyright laws due to also being members of the EU. So correct me if I'm wrong, but these should be pretty harmonized as for those laws.

      --
      Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
  11. Bold move by eebra82 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Fighting this new law is not only important to the people of Denmark, but also to the rest of the European Union. European politicians tend to agree on many issues and it takes only one country to influence the rest.

    1. Re:Bold move by Valdrax · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, that very fact means that it's going to be one hell of a fight for Tele2 and the Pirate Bay considering that most EU countries are heading towards stronger copyright restrictions against P2P sharing.

      --
      If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
    2. Re:Bold move by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are only vollowing orders!

    3. Re:Bold move by Mathness · · Score: 1

      Fighting this new law is not only important to the people of Denmark, but also to the rest of the European Union. What new law is that? The ruling is based on well know Danish (copyright) law, and Danish law hardly extend to other countries. Unless it is advanced into an EU court it will probably not have any significant effect in other countries.
      --
      Carbon based humanoid in training.
    4. Re:Bold move by xenobyte · · Score: 1

      It's a very nessesary fight! - It is about the right of one industry to restrict the freedom of expression in general just because it's possible, convinient and of great symbolic value. The core issue is that IFPI should spend their money on making people choose to pay for their music and movies instead of downloading them for free. Procecuting your potential customers is beyond stupidity and only works due to monopolitic laws surrounding intellectual property.

      Why does people break the law and download mosic and movies? - Well, that question isn't hard to answer and IFPI is sure to know the answer: Price and availability. People mostly download new movies because it isn't available in other forms locally or in a convinient form (for home use). People discuss new movies globally but the release of them are hardly ever global; rather it's usually region by region, format by format - a very outdated method. Changing this would eliminate many more downloads than a thousand lawsuits. Lowering the prices to the bargain bin level from the start would also make more willing and able to afford DVDs. The production cost of a DVD is still so low that there's a profit even at bargain bin level. Sure it might also mean that the stars need to stop getting obscene paychecks but that's a detail. If you're truly interested in the acting art, the pay shouldn't need to be more than what you need to live on (including savings for out-of-work periods).

      --
      "For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong." -- H.L. Mencken (1880-1956) --
    5. Re:Bold move by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's in German, not Danish that "v" is pronounced as "f" :)

  12. Just to clarify by Tukz · · Score: 0

    This isnt't the first time Tele2 does this.
    Doing the entire allofmp3.com episode, Tele2 was the first to filter out allofmp3.com, and the rest soon followed.

    Tele2 was picked for that reason, some speculate. Tele2 does it, everyone else follows out of fear.
    Now Tele2 just won't stand for it, since Pirate Bay never got convicted like allofmp3.com did.

    I think it's a good move on Tele2 to reject this first hand. There is no conviction against Pirate Bay. Pirate Bay has not been convicted of breaking the law, so Tele2 should NOT be forced to deny access to it.

    On that note, it's only a DNS block, not any kind of content filtering.
    Use a different DNS server or static route and it will circumvent it.

    (opendns.org ftw)

    --
    - Don't do what I do, it's probably not healthy nor safe. -
  13. Better solution by 77Punker · · Score: 4, Informative

    Just use a different DNS server. I started using OpenDNS a while ago because the DNS servers at my school were quite unreliable.

    1. Re:Better solution by houghi · · Score: 1

      That is not a better solution. A better solution is that the DNS is NOT blocked. What you propose is a workaround, nit a solution.

      In fact it is WORSE as it agrees with the fact that the ISP must be filtering.

      Also as a workaround, you can add "83.140.176.146 thepriratebay.org" to your hosts file.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    2. Re:Better solution by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      Somebody needs to make a simple DNS server that just resolves requests. No need for BIND/etc - just something that is one-click on install and then you point your resolv.conf or windows networking setup to localhost for DNS. A standard DNS query that doesn't use the ISP would bypass all of this nonsense.

  14. If it were me... by TheSpengo · · Score: 1

    I would put a link on my website titled "want to know why you can't connect to thepiratebay.org?" that links to a brief explanation of the situation as well as a link to a proxy and a description of how to use it. :)

    --
    Weaksauce as they say...
  15. Ohmygod by tehniobium · · Score: 1

    For the first time ever I'm actually proud of being from denmark...way to go tele2!

    --
    No kitty, this is my pot pie!
    1. Re:Ohmygod by KlaymenDK · · Score: 1

      For the first time ever I'm actually proud of being from Denmark. For the first time ever? Wow, man. There is tons of other stuff to be proud of. The vikings, if you consider them Danish, were quite apt shipbuilders, sailors and traders. Then there's the Rosetta stone. In more modern times, Danish companies make world-leading noise measurement apparatus and hearing aids; the Danish institute of technology (DTU) provides unique magnetism detectors for the Ørsted satellite, as well as (the only?) star-positioning camera technology.

      Oh, and Carlsberg!
    2. Re:Ohmygod by DanJ_UK · · Score: 1

      Carlsberg do indeed make the best adverts in the world, Heineken all the way though.

      --
      - Dan
    3. Re:Ohmygod by EvilIdler · · Score: 1

      Oh, and Carlsberg! I think you would have people's attention with just that.
    4. Re:Ohmygod by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      KlaymenDK (er du rigtig dansk?) writes:

      Then there's the Rosetta stone.


      What does that have to do with Denmark?

      It's inscribed two ancient Egyptian written languages and classical Greek. The inscribers were in Egypt. The audience was in Egypt.

      In modern times it was rediscovered by French troops, fell into British hands, and was decoded by a Briton named Thomas Young and a Frenchman named J.-F. Champollion. The Stone itself now rests in the British Museum, in central London. Apart from tourists who visit the Museum, I can't think of how Danes would ever have encountered the Stone, much less laid claim to it in any fashion. Rosetta/Rashid doesn't even really sound like Roskilde!

      While you're thinking up things to be proud of, you might try looking into the biographies of H. C. Ørsted (after whom the sattelite is named), Hans-Christian Andersen (another H. C.), Tycho Brahe, or Niels Bohr. You can leave out Bjarne Stoustrup though. Sorry!

      Carlsberg? Eugh. How about Thy Økologisk Humle?

      How about something to really be proud of? Like the continual electoral successes of Dansk Folkeparti?

  16. This thing ain't over yet by JosefAssad · · Score: 1
    The IFPI's gameplan seems to be to establish precedent with a smaller ISP, in this case Tele2.

    The other ISPs in the Danish market though do not seem to be willing to play along (yes, I just linked to a Danish article. No, I'm not translating the WHOLE THING!):

    The top part goes something like:

    ISPs Ignore Bailiff's Ban on thepiratebay.org - Frustrated ISPs are continuing to hold the door to thepiratebay.org open, even if the bailiffs court has asked Tele2 to close down access.

    So, what with most of the ISPs digging their heels in it doesn't look quite so cut and dried yet.

  17. English Translation by andersh · · Score: 5, Informative

    The Fogderetten (court) of Fredriksberg decided on Tuesday the 29/1 that Danish Internet provider Tele 2 must block their customers from accessing The Pirate Bay.

    While the reasoning and contents of the verdict has not reached the public yet, the consequences are already clear: Danish Internet users have been censored and cannot visit the world's largest bittorrent tracker - The Pirate Bay. With this Denmark joins the company of Turkey and China, the two and only other countries in the world that blocks their citizens from accessing the site.

    The case was brought to the court by the IFPI who had previously successfully used the same strategy with regards to the Russian music site AllofMP3. The IFPI is fighting a desperate struggle to keep control over how music is distributed, and The Pirate Bay has been a thorn in their eye for a long time.

    On this page you can learn how to circumvent the block. We do not want to let the recording industry decide what information we as Internet users have access to.

    P.S. I did not use a lot of time on this translation, it might have some typos and errors. Also I'm Norwegian and not Danish so please excuse any mistakes.

    1. Re:English Translation by Husgaard · · Score: 1

      "Fogedretten" is the correct danish name for this special kind of court. It is a special kind of court used to get preliminary injunctions fast, and is considered a level lower than the court of first instance (called Byretten in danish).

      And the court decision is basically a preliminary injunction. When Fogedretten considers the arguments of plaintiffs in such a case, they need no proof, only that the arguments are shown to be probable. Such a decision is almost always followed later by a real court case.

      TFA states that Tele2 is a major ISP in Denmark. But Tele2 only has a 4 percent market share, so it is quite small.

      This is not the first case of this type raised by IFPI against danish ISPs. It is the third case, and all have been raised against Tele2. None of these cases have been followed by a real court case. Instead all the ISPs have started doing the filtering too, although no court has told them to do so. Nobody really knows why. But a few days ago I was told by a reliable source that in the first of these cases (about blocking allofmp3.com) IFPI paid Tele2 to accept to continue blocking and not to go further with the case. I guess the reason Tele2 is willing to fight now is that they have realized that this will never end unless they start fighting back.

      So why is such a decision possible at all? The copyright fundamentalists have over the years developed some very twisted case law here in Denmark, mostly in cases where their opposition lacked expertise in copyright law.

      One twisted thing established in case law is that a link on the web is considered a public performance of what is linked to, done by the person doing the link. So if I link to a newspaper article on the web, I do a public performance of the article I link to, which is illegal without permission. (So now you know why Google news doesn't exist in Denmark.) This is a bit simplified, as case law has evolved to the point where legally there are about a dozen different kinds of links, depending on how an where you link, even though they all are simple hypertext references.

      Another twisted thing established in case law is that all content traveling through the net of an ISP is considered copied by the ISP. The rationale is that when IP packets are forwarded by a router they are copied from the incoming interface to the outgoing interface. And here in Denmark it is illegal to copy any part of a copyright work, no matter how small.

      Local legal experts say that if this decision holds up, IFPI could easily get Google blocked in Denmark if they wanted.

    2. Re:English Translation by Auldclootie · · Score: 0

      Pirate Bay is not blocked in China.

  18. Tele2 by eitreach · · Score: 1

    Glad to see they didn't try to bribe anyone. Two kroner just doesn't buy as much for them as it does for the average danish consumer.

  19. Top Ten by SeaFox · · Score: 1

    'We do not like being put in a role where we as ISP have to regulate people's freedom of speech'

    Oh, I saw this episode of Lettermen! I believe the list was titled "Things AT&T will never say".
  20. American ISP by Nonillion · · Score: 1

    You certainly wouldn't see this in an American ISP. They're too busy bending over to the government yelling, Thank You Sir May I Have Another!

    --
    "I bow to no man" - Riddick
  21. Priceless! by SplatMan_DK · · Score: 1

    I am no pirate myself ... but ...

    Buying a .ORG domain in Denmark: 20 USD

    Buying a .ORG domain name resembling BOTH "The Pirate Bay" and the Marketing Manager of IFPI in Denmark, "Jesper Bay": PRICELESS!

    (see http://thejesperbay.org/)

    :-D

    - Jesper

    --
    My security clearance is so high I have to kill myself if I remember I have it...
  22. Danish Hypocrisy by Orion+Blastar · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    They won't censor the Mohamed Cartoons that Muslims find offensive, but they'll go out of their way to censor a BitTorrent web site?

    They support free speech when it mocks religion, but they don't support free speech when it comes to BitTorrent. Hypocrisy at its finest.

    Don't give me that "they only block it because it violates copyright laws" because on The Pirate Bay there is open source materials and files in the public domain and shareware as well that are 100% legal. They are called legal torrents. Legal torrents are much more than just Linux ISOs, many music artists release open source OGG and MP3 files for free as well under an open source license. Michael David Crawford is one such musical artist that has had his works silenced by fascist laws and actions against BitTorrent sites. In fact he even lists many other music artists just like him who also share their music for free on BitTorrent and that is the real reason that recording companies are shutting down BitTorrent web sites, to silence the competition and sabotage their efforts to release free and alternative music by independent open source musical artists and force everyone to buy commercial CDs instead.

    --
    Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
    1. Re:Danish Hypocrisy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They only block it because
      1. politicians don't know their technology, and
      2. the media isn't there to pressure/help them, like they were with the cartoons.

  23. What Government Intervention? by andersh · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They won't censor the Mohamed Cartoons that Muslims find offensive, but they'll go out of their way to censor a BitTorrent web site?

    What rubbish! The Danish government has no responsibility for what the press does in a free country. As long as the press is not in violation of Danish law they're free to publish what they want.

    And if you didn't read the facts it was the IFPI that brought the [Pirate Bay] case to court. That's not the Danish government either - so you are way out of line.

    1. Re:What Government Intervention? by Hatta · · Score: 3, Interesting

      What rubbish! The Danish government has no responsibility for what the press does in a free country. As long as the press is not in violation of Danish law they're free to publish what they want.

      Replace "press" with "search engine" in that and it applies quite well the Pirate Bay.

      And if you didn't read the facts it was the IFPI that brought the [Pirate Bay] case to court. That's not the Danish government either

      The court isn't the Danish government?

      - so you are way out of line.

      No, your government is being hypocritical. But really, all governments are hypocritical. This is a relatively small inconsistancy on the scale of government hypocrisy.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    2. Re:What Government Intervention? by Nodamnnicknamesavial · · Score: 1

      "The court isn't the Danish government?"

      Actually that's exactly right, the courts are not the government in Denmark. They are apolitical and completely independant, the government has zero influence on their policies, who gets appointed or anything else - apart from approving the general budget.

      Just because your own courts are corrupt and political, doesn't mean ours are.

      That said, the "fogedret" is not really a court as such, it's a means of getting temporary injunctions quickly (among other things irrelevant to this discussion) - that's why Tele2 intended to take it up at the proper courts, to get a proper ruling on the matter to see if the injuction will hold up at all.

      If you want to argue, at least check the facts.

      --
      I have spoken'eth.
    3. Re:What Government Intervention? by Hatta · · Score: 1

      Actually that's exactly right, the courts are not the government in Denmark. They are apolitical and completely independant, the government has zero influence on their policies,

      Really? The courts don't make their decisions based on Danish law? If not, what do they base their decisions on? And if so, doesn't the government pass laws, thereby influencing the courts?

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    4. Re:What Government Intervention? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In any democratic country (!) the power is divided in three.

      The government isn't part of the courts, the government isn't part of the police, they are part of the legislative chamber.

      This is founded in the danish constitution. Where it is ALSO founded that no censorship is allowed in 77, with very few exceptions.

      Remember that even after WWII with holocaust, it still isn't illegal to publish nazi literature in Denmark! And there are good reason for this. If you don't suppress, much more will be done in the open, and thus people get to be more informed, and can decide how STUPID nazi's are!

      As the danish government explained in the Mohammed drawing incident, the government can NOT set up a suite in a danish court, it's illegal. But as they ALSO incurraged, any private organization could file a suite (they would probably even be granted 'free process', due to the very principal problem), BUT as the drawings are only illegal according to a religous beleif and not danish law (which isn't sharia law, praise Allah), it's not possible to set an injunction against the drawings.

      There is a long tradition of making funny drawings on very serious matters in Denmark, and what is more grotesque than misusing a profets name to perform terror??? A profet for a religion that's one of the most peacefull compared to everything else? That was the point in the drawings, that maniacs hide behind bad and il-founded retoric based very liberally on the Koran (which in NO way encourages terror).

      It's not illegal to make a drawing of Mohammed, it might be bad taste according to the religion, but that's something else, and people of another persuasion can't be asked to respect the rules of another religion.

      Jews has rules for their religion, Christians have rules for their religion, Muslims have rules for their, but the rules are not law, it's only to stress that this is what you must adhere to, to be a good XXX.

    5. Re:What Government Intervention? by Hatta · · Score: 1

      The government isn't part of the courts, the government isn't part of the police, they are part of the legislative chamber.

      You have some strange definition of "government" if neither the courts or police are considered part of the government. I understand that the legislative, executive, and judiciary are independent branches, but they're independent branches of the government.

      This is founded in the danish constitution. Where it is ALSO founded that no censorship is allowed in 77, with very few exceptions.

      Then why is Denmark censoring the Pirate Bay?

      BUT as the drawings are only illegal according to a religous beleif and not danish law (which isn't sharia law, praise Allah), it's not possible to set an injunction against the drawings.

      That would imply that because an injunction was set against the Pirate Bay, that the Pirate Bay is illegal according to Danish law. That's the hypocrisy that started the thread. They respect free speech only when it's convenient, when people with money complain they fall over themselves to abrogate free speech.

      Again, this is a rather small hypocrisy in the final analysis so I don't see why you Scandinavians are so defensive. All governments commit this kind of injustice.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    6. Re:What Government Intervention? by Orion+Blastar · · Score: 1

      The one that bribes the court officials the most gets the decision in their favor.

      --
      Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
    7. Re:What Government Intervention? by Talrinys · · Score: 0

      No the government is not the courts. I'm not sure what it's called in english but most western countries have the power split between the courts, the senate/parlament/whatever-it-is-called and the government which carries out the decisions made by the senate. The courts are not to be affected by government decisions, and this is a very very important part of American politics, that everything is kept seperate. Even though the government usually has their members in the senate as well here in Denmark, it would be unthinkable for the courts to be affected by a ruling government.

      It's a very important distinction to make, and you shouldn't forget Montesque's ideas that have helped so incredibly much in the making of the western world. I'm not saying that the muhammed cartoons should have been created, as much as i like public debate and radical moves, they were stupid, over the line and just a way to get some attention. However comparing them to a case against a well known torrent website(search engine, i know that it is that technically, but no court will care about that) is absurd, no laws were broken by JyllandsPosten, The Pirate Bay does however help break laws.

      Now i'm off to go grab some TPB torrents, thankfully not blocked by other Danish ISP's yet.

  24. Legal Concepts and Legality by andersh · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Don't give me that "they only block it because it violates copyright laws" because on The Pirate Bay there is open source materials and files in the public domain

    You are totally and utterly wrong. If the majority of files on the Pirate Bay were legal it would perhaps be a different matter. But the vast majority of files on The Pirate Bay are illegal and violate copyright laws in many or most countries. So the few legal torrents available don't change things at all.

    If you sell pirated and legal CDs out of the trunk of your car - you are still guilty of selling illegal copies.

    1. Re:Legal Concepts and Legality by Penguinisto · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you sell pirated and legal CDs out of the trunk of your car - you are still guilty of selling illegal copies.

      ...would I be equally guilty if I merely posted a user-modifiable map of where these trunk-selling bootleggers are located?

      /P

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    2. Re:Legal Concepts and Legality by trewornan · · Score: 1

      the vast majority of files on The Pirate Bay are illegal and violate copyright laws in many or most countries

      Bittorrent files contain only information about other files available from other sources. A bittorrent file contains NO copyrighted data and the copyright laws of "many or most countries" do not apply to them.

      If you sell pirated and legal CDs out of the trunk of your car - you are still guilty of selling illegal copies.

      And if I tell you where a local garage sale is being held is that illegal too?

    3. Re:Legal Concepts and Legality by Orion+Blastar · · Score: 1

      In Denmark, why not, not like their government runs their courts. If they rule that garage sales are against the law, then it is banned in Denmark. Only governments make laws and rule on legal matters, but not in the Kangaroo Courts of Denmark where money is power and gets a ruling decided in your favor.

      All the Pirate Bay does is provide maps to garage sales, the actually files aka garage sales are stored on private computers with Internet IPs. Since garage sales are illegal in Denmark, they must rule against the Pirate Bay as organizations that hold copyright to the merchandise that is sold at garage sales paid the courts a lot of money to rule on it. Common sense says go after the computers that have the merchandise on them, but in Denmark Common Sense doesn't rule the courts, so don't charge the actual pirates, but charge Pirate Bay for hosting maps to buried treasure.

      --
      Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
  25. As a Dane, let me say... by KlaymenDK · · Score: 2, Interesting

    As a Dane, let me say that this is stupid (the ruling, not your generalization). "We" won't go out of our way to censor BitTorrent; in fact many of us will go out of our way to *not* censor it. I bet that Jesper has no deeper understanding of what BitTorrent is than "it's that thing the pirates use".

    I also believed that the papers (and, more recently, Wikipedia) should be able to show pictures of religious symbols. If the "infidels" (their words) can't take it and start burning embassies, who's being narrowminded then?

  26. No Get Out Of Jail Free Card by andersh · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Let the Danish courts play the same game of whack-a-mole that mail admins do

    I'm sorry but you do realize the courts never bother with actual IP adresses? They just issue a general directive that requires the ISP to block access regardless of what it takes or if it's even possible.

    The courts don't have to bother with such mundane issues as the time and money it will take to block a moving target. They will just fine the ISP if they don't take enough action in the eyes of the court. The target can move, the ISP will suffer increased costs - but the users will still find their site.

  27. Good Neighbors by andersh · · Score: 1

    For the first time ever I'm actually proud of being from denmark...way to go tele2!

    Kjære nabo, is this when I tell you that Tele2 in Denmark is a division of Norwegian Telenor? ;)

    1. Re:Good Neighbors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Kjære nabo, is this when I tell you that Tele2 in Denmark is a division of Norwegian Telenor? ;)

      kära granne, is this when I tell you norway is only a part of the swedish/norway union, ohh wait did they disolve the union in 1905, f**k
  28. Parallel Universe? by andersh · · Score: 3, Informative

    European politicians tend to agree on many issues and it takes only one country to influence the rest.

    Excuse me, but what Parallel Universe do you live in? Is it nice there? Because one thing is for sure here: European politicians do not agree on many things at all. I wonder what made you write that? There's not a single issue that doesn't come across differently in every European country. Take the War in Iraq, the EU CAP, the EU itself, religion and religious issues such as abortion, ethnic discrimination, immigration, European integration, NATO organisation and so on.

    Fighting this new law is not only important to the people of Denmark, but also to the rest of the European Union

    No, it's not important to the people of Europe. Any verdicts in Denmark will have practically zero value outside. If it was decided upon in the Court of First Instance perhaps. This case will not change anything in Europe in general.

    1. Re:Parallel Universe? by eebra82 · · Score: 1

      European politicians do not agree on many things at all. I wonder what made you write that? There's not a single issue that doesn't come across differently in every European country. Take the War in Iraq, the EU CAP, the EU itself, religion and religious issues such as abortion, ethnic discrimination, immigration, European integration, NATO organisation and so on. You are not looking at it from the right angle. I am obviously not saying that the entire EU ministry is agreeing on everything. My point is that some countries in Europe are looking at internet regulations (Germany, Spain, etc) and Denmark will surely not be of great help from this point of view since they've clearly taken the first step of controlling the internet. So if Denmark does this, Germany watches that, it will have a good reason to follow because it certainly looks better to imitate Denmark rather than China and Turkey alone.

      Last but not least, just because there are indifferences, you must also admit that the reason the EU exists is because there are in fact a lot of agreements within the EU. Otherwise, it wouldn't exist at all. And the whole point of the union is to agree more. No, it's not important to the people of Europe. Any verdicts in Denmark will have practically zero value outside. If it was decided upon in the Court of First Instance perhaps. This case will not change anything in Europe in general It is ignorant of you to believe that a country cannot have an effect on the rest of the EU. Prior to this case, Europe had no cases of internet censorship (except for child pornography, etc). Not only will it cause debates, but also concerns over privacy in other countries if governments with similar thoughts reflect on the ideas of a pioneering Denmark.

      Also, I am fluent in French, German and Spanish. Please tell me how I just spotted articles on this topic in major news papers from all three countries?
    2. Re:Parallel Universe? by Njovich · · Score: 1

      Excuse me, but what Parallel Universe do you live in? Is it nice there? Because one thing is for sure here: European politicians do not agree on many things at all. I wonder what made you write that? There's not a single issue that doesn't come across differently in every European country. Take the War in Iraq, the EU CAP, the EU itself, religion and religious issues such as abortion, ethnic discrimination, immigration, European integration, NATO organisation and so on.

      Well, I think the GP is right. You'll find that both in the European Commission, and the Parliament, a single country can push an issue very far. On many issues, other countries will see advantages in helping the directive (or objection to it) forward. Also, don't forget there are worlds of difference between being roughly neutral and actively working against a directive. Of course, there is generally no consensus, and there will be disagreement about the colour of the shed and all. The issues you mention are more difficult than that, but for other things this often goes.

      If a country like Denmark is strongly for or against killing copyright violations, this could strongly affect the outcome of directives. Right now the Danish government seems opposed to it to the extend of blocking the Pirate Bay from DNS. Just getting them to rethink the validity of that reasoning within the frames of their own laws can mean a lot. A more neutral stance could potentially give a lot more protection for pirates EU-wide.
  29. Guilty As Charged by andersh · · Score: 1

    ...would I be equally guilty if I merely posted a user-modifiable map of where these trunk-selling bootleggers are located?

    Well, since you asked, yes, you would probably be guilty here in my country, Norway.

    Danish and Norwegian law is quite similar, and we also happen to be subjects of the same EU laws.

    A few years ago we had a case against a simple linking site called napster.no. No files were ever stored on the server. Just simple links to other sites where the material was. Not only did they find the person behind it guilty - it went all the way to the Supreme Court.

    The point however was that regardless of what your views are on The Pirate Bay if the Danish courts rule that they are violating copyright laws (or other laws) they have the right to take away access to the site. Also did I mention that both in Denmark and Norway we have a government prescribed child pornography censorship and filtering system? All the major ISPs volunteered to join it.

    1. Re:Guilty As Charged by Penguinisto · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well, since you asked, yes, you would probably be guilty here in my country, Norway.

      In that case, when do we see Google banned (specifically, Google cache)? And the Wayback Machine while we're at it?

      I'm not saying it to pick a fight, but it stands to reason that Google's cache and archive.org can be modified easily enough by anyone with the right know-how (basically, you just modify the site that either one is caching). Will the IFPI demand their removal next?

      The whole Child Porn thing is IMHO a red herring. Child Pornography is direct evidence of a criminal act (namely, the sexual abuse of a minor), and blocking such things is done in deference to the victims, not because it's liable to bring civil charges. TPB, even if all it ever did was IP violation, contains zero evidence of any crime (IP and copyright violations are civil acts, not criminal ones - it only becomes criminal when you try to sell the copies).

      In this case, we're talking about a court bending over backwards to satisfy the civil demands of a cartel, and in the process do two things:

      1) create bad precedents, and

      2) perform collateral blockage (I think the legal term is "estoppel"?) against legitimate distributors who use/rely on that particular torrent tracker.

      /P

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    2. Re:Guilty As Charged by andersh · · Score: 3, Interesting

      In that case, when do we see Google banned (specifically, Google cache)?

      I did say probably because it would have to proved in a court of law. Not everything is as clear cut as you or I would like it. Even if I am a lawyer.

      blocking such things is done in deference to the victims

      I only mentioned it to give you some insight into the way our countries work. It's certainly not done out of deference - it's simply censorship regardless. No court ever ruled the sites on the list are illegal. "First they came for..."

      IP and copyright violations are civil acts, not criminal ones

      Sorry, that's only in the US. European law can be very different to what you are accustomed to.

      TPB, even if all it ever did was IP violation, contains zero evidence of any crime

      Again that's not really true according to the example I just told you about (napster.no). Even linking is considering illegal here now. Not that I personally agree with it. They have yet to challenge access to The Pirate Bay here in Norway, but they have a law firm working on it.

      create bad precedents

      Nope, that's not the way the Scandinavian Civil Law system works. The way precedents work in the Anglo-American Common Law system is not applicable here. It's not really a significant ruling, it's not even a High Court ruling. It can easily be overruled and interpreted away by the higher courts.

    3. Re:Guilty As Charged by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hi buddy!

      Just to clarify. The Danish government has nothing to do with the Danish childporn filter. That is an initiative by the Danish ISPs and Red Barnet.

      I'm confident that Tele 2 will win this one in court. One would only have to read 11a in the law about copyright, which clearly states that ISPs are neutral even if the content is "illegal".

    4. Re:Guilty As Charged by shark72 · · Score: 1

      "I'm not saying it to pick a fight, but it stands to reason that Google's cache and archive.org can be modified easily enough by anyone with the right know-how (basically, you just modify the site that either one is caching). Will the IFPI demand their removal next?"

      Probably not. Despite the braying of the "it's just lke Goooooooooogle!" idiots, intent and scope are likely big factors European-style law, just as they are in the US. This goes for crimes as well as torts -- in Europe, juast as in the US, your fate might be quite different if you accidentally run down a pedestrian in your car, vs. plotting to kill them with a handgun. The law tends to have these sorts of tests to avoid the slippery-sloping of the examples you've given.

      "TPB, even if all it ever did was IP violation, contains zero evidence of any crime (IP and copyright violations are civil acts, not criminal ones - it only becomes criminal when you try to sell the copies)."

      That's not the case in the USA, for what it's worth. All you have to do in the US is distribute more than $1,000 worth of work in three months -- no sales required. If TPB were being tried in the US, it would be for facilitating copyright infringement, or contributory infringement, or something similar. I don't know if the same test applies for civil vs. criminal in these cases. I believe it's moot, as it would be in the best interests of the rightsholders to keep filing lawsuits a la MGM v. Grokster.

      And, of course, in Sweden it might be completely different.

      "create bad precedents"

      Huh? What precedent? Do you mean the Google slippery slope? Don't worry about this: the courts understand the difference between Google and a site set up to facilitate, promote and encourage piracy.

      "perform collateral blockage (I think the legal term is "estoppel"?) against legitimate distributors who use/rely on that particular torrent tracker."

      That's not what estoppel is generally understood as meaning. I think the closest concept that applies to the situation you're describing is "tortuous interference," but you wouldn't have a case. The ten-second solution is "just use another tracker" and if you can come up with that instantly, then so would the defendant.

      --
      Sitting in my day care, the art is decopainted.
  30. Re: !Guilty As Charged by moxley · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Google does the same thing. Would they be guilty?

    Maybe the Pirate Bay needs to find a way to include a whole bunch of other stuff in their indexes (witha checkbox to remove those results on queried results if the user would like) - then any similar laws wouldn't be able to affect them without affecting Google and every other search engine - and who's going to put an onerous burden on them?

  31. Crossborder Politics by andersh · · Score: 1

    Denmark... since they've clearly taken the first step of controlling the internet

    You think this is the first such action? What do you call taking down Oink? Or Tv-links.co.uk? That happened in the UK a few months ago by the way. Or Sweden attacking ThePirateBay? This is not a new or innovative form of policy.

    You are not looking at it from the right angle. I am obviously not saying that the entire EU ministry is agreeing on everything.

    I think it's you who's not looking at it from the right angle. Europe and the EU is like the Eurovision Song Contest - everyone agrees within the regional subgroups, but are at odds with the rest of Europe.

    Europe had no cases of internet censorship (except for child pornography, etc)

    Sorry, but that's not true. In all the different countries in Europe there have been any number of cases. I especially find a ruling from my own country very interesting. Napster.no was convicted of simply linking to external sites where illegal MP3 files were stored. Or how about the French ruling on Nazi memorabilia on Ebay? There are loads of other cases.

    It is ignorant of you to believe that a country cannot have an effect on the rest of the EU

    No, I am not saying that people cannot be affected by reading about it. But it has no effect on the legal systems of the different countries. The EU has not harmonized all the different legal systems and courts of Europe. We are still too far away from each other for it to easily cross borders. It's split along historical lines from the Northern European states, Roman Law to Common Law in the UK. There's a huge variety that does not accept foreign verdicts easily. Politicians on the other hand are receptive.

    the reason the EU exists is because there are in fact a lot of agreements within the EU.

    The reason the EU exists is a well known historical fact. A forced marriage. Now, you might agree on a few things - yet it has proven increasingly difficult to agree on new and important issues such as the Constitution. A few trade laws are not as hard to pass. How about the proposed North African-Mediterranean area Sarkozy wants? Or allowing Turkey into the fold? A European President?

    I am actually quite in favor of a federal European Union - but at the moment it's just a dream. You/we are really not that united yet.

    1. Re:Crossborder Politics by jhol13 · · Score: 1

      Napster.no was convicted [...] What on Earth has that anything to do with EU?
  32. Come on! It was a joke! by andersh · · Score: 1

    kära granne, is this when I tell you norway is only a part of the swedish/norway union, ohh wait did they disolve the union in 1905, f**k

    Come on, it was just a joke! :)

    Of course, the fact that the company is Norwegian owned doesn't change much, but the management does what it's owners want. So I suppose Telenor might want Tele2 Denmark to appeal the verdict to sell more. Or it could be the management decided on their own they had to fight it so they don't loose customers. All the same, I was just joking.

    And before that short period of the Swedish-Norwegian Union we spent 400-500 years with Denmark :D

  33. Still Not The Government by andersh · · Score: 1

    Replace "press" with "search engine" in that and it applies quite well the Pirate Bay.

    Yes, it does, doesn't it? And the government didn't act in either case.

    And there have been cases in Scandinavia where even just linking has been enough to close you down. I would not rule it out even if you claim to be "just" a search engine.

    The court isn't the Danish government?

    Did you intentionally read that the wrong way? Because the sentence clearly says the IFPI is not a part of the Danish government. The courts are part of the Danish state, but they don't act on their own. The party that brought the case to the court is who's responsible for the issue.

    No, your government is being hypocritical

    Sorry, I am Norwegian, it's not my government.

    1. Re:Still Not The Government by Hatta · · Score: 1

      Did you intentionally read that the wrong way? Because the sentence clearly says the IFPI is not a part of the Danish government. The courts are part of the Danish state, but they don't act on their own. The party that brought the case to the court is who's responsible for the issue

      Hardly! The court is the party that made the decision based on the law, they're the party that enforces it. They're responsible.

      Come on, you can't really be so disingenuous as to expect me to believe that an action of the court is not an action of the government. I can't even believe you'd make such an argument.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  34. Official /. stance by billcopc · · Score: 1

    I'm new here (riiiiiiight!). What's the official /. stance on TPB ? Pro or Con ?

    On one hand, what they're doing is technically illegal, and they're fully aware of it. On the other hand, they're doing it for a very good reason: to test, provoke and popularize the concept of free speech and of course, to bring grand attention to the evils of modern copyright law (Thank^H^H^H^H^HFUCK YOU Sonny Bono!)

    Personally, I like The Piraty Bay's attitude and I support their cause. The fact that they have a real life political party that's got quite a bit of traction (for a niche party), that just makes it even more respectable to my eyes. In today's reality of court abuses and rampant corruption, an outfit like Piratbyran is a much needed counterbalance to corporate terrorism.

    --
    -Billco, Fnarg.com
    1. Re:Official /. stance by HybridJeff · · Score: 1

      "On one hand, what they're doing is technically llegal." I corrected your typo for you.

  35. Re: !Guilty As Charged by shark72 · · Score: 1

    "Maybe the Pirate Bay needs to find a way to include a whole bunch of other stuff in their indexes (witha checkbox to remove those results on queried results if the user would like) - then any similar laws wouldn't be able to affect them without affecting Google and every other search engine - and who's going to put an onerous burden on them?"

    Such a tactic would depend on finding a court that didn't understand the difference between Google and a site set up for the purpose of promoting, facilitating and encouraging piracy. I know that we all like to joke about stupid judges and stupid prosecutors, but you need to take a pragmatic view here: if you can easily understand the difference, expect the court to understand, as well.

    The original Napster tried the "we're just a search engine" defense. Grokster went the safe-harbor route as well. The courts didn't buy it in either case, yet this bit of history is apparently unknown to many Slashdotters. If TPB were operating in the US, it would be a legal slam dunk. It's safe to be cynical here and expect the laws of the EU nations to follow.

    --
    Sitting in my day care, the art is decopainted.
  36. Re: !Guilty As Charged by jhol13 · · Score: 1

    Google does the same thing. Actually, no, they do not do the same thing. They do not directly and on purpose have links to infringing material. Whether this is legally big enough difference is another matter ...

    Oh, btw, Fredrik Neij, Gottfrid Svartholm, Peter Sunde and Carl Lundstrom has gotten charge of about $200'000 in fines and of two years jail. The prosecutor is asking for extremely harsh punishment, the reasoning is that TPB has big advertisement income.

    The charge is "conspiracy and help for copyright infringement" (i know, my legalese-english is not very good).
  37. You guys just dont get it.... by FlyingGuy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This is only the opening Salvo... This thing is far from over.

    Even Sweden will eventually fold to the political pressure, just like "secret" Swiss bank accounts eventually became not so secret. There is such a huge amount of money riding on this that eventually its going to happen, it just is, it is inevitable.

    I mean enjoy the ride as long as you can, but like any other carnival ride, it eventually ends. Thats just the way it is. You or I might not like it, but thats long and short of it.

    --
    Hey KID! Yeah you, get the fuck off my lawn!
  38. Re: !Guilty As Charged by Pofy · · Score: 1

    >They do not directly and on purpose have links to infringing material.

    Ehh, what do you mean by "directly"? Why do you claim it is directly in one case but not the other? How do you get to the "on purpose"? In one case the site is automatically going arround looking for files and index them if they find them (one have to actually take specific actions to op-out). In the other case, the ones with the files has to tell the site to index it. (Yes I know one can go to google and tell them as well.) The only thing ending up there is what others put there. That is the main difference.

    >Oh, btw, Fredrik Neij, Gottfrid Svartholm, Peter Sunde and Carl Lundstrom has
    >gotten charge of about $200'000 in fines and of two years jail.

    No, you can't get both a fine and jail in Sweden, you get one or the other. The $200,000 is a pacyback of what the prosecutor claim is the sum they gained on the crime. The "two year in jail" is also just the maximum possible listed sentence for the crime. It is not what they have been "charged" with. Since the trial has not started, the prosecutor has actually not said anything about what sentence he will ask from the court. It can be jail (of varying time) but it can also be a fine. We don't know yet.

    >The prosecutor is asking for extremely harsh punishment, the reasoning is that
    >TPB has big advertisement income.

    So no, he is not asking for anything extreme at all. He hasn't even asked anything at all. The sum of money is what he claims is their gain (I know it is not the proper word but can't figure out a better one) which he claim he can prove. it is not a punishment or sentence though.

    > The prosecutor is asking for extremely harsh punishment, the reasoning is that TPB has big advertisement income.

  39. ^_^ by Skal+Tura · · Score: 1

    Hurray for Tele2 to standup!

    Now, i wonder do they sell anything i could as a foreigner buy so they get my support ^^

    No censorship ty! :) It takes a lot of guts for a business to fight for this, every spend on the courts is away from their profitability directly, while the benefits in profitability are indirect and cannot be calculated, meanwhile, a good-faith-do-no-evil CEO recognizes something like this has priceless value, and it's a must to fight against censorship.

    Hurray for Tele2! :)

  40. You misunderstand net resilience by Xest · · Score: 1

    When enough standard torrents like this are shut down and enough people are affected people will instead start using encrypted, anonymous services which aren't so hard to shut down.

    Yes P2P as we know it now will likely end up being dealt a heavy blow, but then people will move on to something else. This simply isn't a war that can be won without cutting access to entire types of data stream at the ISP simultaneously destroying lots of valid business applications at the same time.

    It's futile to try and fight this without also damaging citizens rights, legitimate business applications and combined hence the entire economy of that particular country.

    There is indeed a lot of money being poured into fighting piracy, and enough for governments to accept the bribes and so forth right now however there is a tipping point at which the damage to citizens rights and the economy will make a particular goverment so unpopular they wont be able to take bribes from anyone. The cost of fighting the war on piracy will be so much higher than actually winning it would ever be so no, you're wrong, it's simply not a fight that can ever be win. It's very similar to Vietnam and Iraq - winning battles is easy with their resources, but winning the war is impossible without somehow winning over the hearts and minds of the people, that's something you can't ever achieve whilst simultaneously suing them and eroding their rights.

    The recording/movie industries have shown they're incapable of changing their ways, as such they can never win this war.

    1. Re:You misunderstand net resilience by Xest · · Score: 1

      Perhaps I should start using the preview button! That was one of the most horribly nonsensical posts I've ever written.

      The first paragraph should've said:

      When enough standard torrent sites like this are shut down and enough people are affected people will instead start using encrypted, anonymous services which aren't so easy to shut down.

      I'm sure there is plenty of mistakes in the rest of it but that initial sentence just outright didn't even make sense so I will now go and hang my head in shame.

    2. Re:You misunderstand net resilience by FlyingGuy · · Score: 1

      No worries, we all let our fingers get ahead of our brains now and again.

      --
      Hey KID! Yeah you, get the fuck off my lawn!
  41. Telenor doesn't own Tele2 by pyzondar · · Score: 1

    Telenor doesn't own Tele2, they are Tele2's main competitor... Unless you mean that they 'pwn' Tele2, in which case it is arguably true.

  42. free speech is NOT the issue here by Grampaw+Willie · · Score: 0

    the complaint against p2p operators generally and Pirate Bay in particular is that the main use of these systems is to defeat copyright protections,-- an illegal activity.

    anyone should know better than to participate in an illegal activity in any way. it doesn't matter if you are directly benefiting or not, if you are involved in one way or another you are likely to be prosecuted.

    I have yet to see a complaint anyplace about anyone publishing their own Op Ed ( except in totalitarian states ) so let's quit trying to confuse criminal activities with freedom of speech.

  43. The most important issues are these: by SplatMan_DK · · Score: 1

    The saddest thing, and the biggest problem in this case is the fact that only The Pirate Bays voice is used as the opposition. And the real important issues have absolutely nothing to do with P2P filesharing, software piracy, or copyright.

    The most important issues are these:

    1.) Should private organizations (such as IFPI) be in a position where they can censor the webpages of another party (such as a private citizen) simply because they dislike the information distributed there?

    No court has made any ruling concerning the actual legality of the content hosted on The Pirate Bay. So how could the site be censored, when nobody has evaluated the legal status of the content?

    2.) Enforcing the law is typically something we let the authorities do. In this particular case, the enforcement has been bestowed upon the ISP (who is very unhappy with that role).

    Is it acceptable to society as a whole, that a private organization (such as IFPI) can demand that other private organizations (such as an ISP) enforce a specific law or ruling? And what are the long-term consequences of allowing (or forcing) private companies to enforce laws when this task is normally something only the authorities should do?

    3.) Can this practice be used in other media or means of communication that the internet?

    If The Pirate Bay opens a massive "customer call-center" with 300 phoners worldwide, so P2P end users could just make a phone call and get information on a desired torrent, could the telecommunication companies then be forced to "censor" their phone lines?

    If The Pirate Bay started to print lists of torrents on paper and publish them as books, could the printing companies be forced to stop printing the books?

    Think it over. Because normally practices such as these are only common in China (and similar dictatorships).

    - Jesper

    --
    My security clearance is so high I have to kill myself if I remember I have it...
  44. principle != workaround if it suits by CarpetShark · · Score: 1

    They can still comply with the court order, but meanwhile stick by their principles.


    You seem to misunderstand the meaning of principles. They're called that because they're considered to be of the utmost importance -- i.e., when you would rather go to jail than violate your principles. Tele2 are not "sticking to their principles"; they're going along with what the law tells them to do, even if they think it's wrong.
  45. Google et.al. compared with Pirates, et. al. by Grampaw+Willie · · Score: 0

    what copyright law protects is the right of the copyright owner to control the manufacture and distribution of copies of the copyrighted material.

    Case: if I write an essay and post it to the Web I have published it by that means and anyone who wants to read it is welcome to do so.

    In fact anyone who likes the essay and wants to provide a hyper-link to my essay is welcome to do that,-- same as providing an ISBN reference number to a book.

    what you are NOT welcome to do is to down-load my essay and republish it on your own web site: that is a copyright violation -- the reason being that when you put my essay on your site I can no longer control the manufacture and distribution of copies of that essay. In other words I can't delete the essay from my web site thus making it un-available to the audience.

    Case: when you load copyright music onto a P2P share directory you have trespassed the copyright owner's copyright: you have taken from the copyright owner his ability to regulate the production and distribution of copies of his copyright material. and that is a violation of copyright law.

    Case: where Pirate Bay et.al. is off base is that they are deliberately indexing material they know to be copyright protected and illegally distributed and in doing this they are facilitating an illegal activity*. Google et.al. does no such thing: they index material that copyright owners have intentionally published to the web.

    if you can't or won't understand the difference you best get a lawyer cuz ya gonna need one.

    *Case: if you allowed car thieves to use your property to chop up and sell parts from stolen cars you are involved in the crime -- even though you didn't steal a care or sell stolen parts.

    get your hats on straight kids, and pull up your pants before you get into real trouble.

    1. Re:Google et.al. compared with Pirates, et. al. by Pofy · · Score: 1

      Exactly WHAT in my post are you commenting on? Were do you think I am wrong?

      >what copyright law protects is the right of the copyright
      >owner to control the manufacture and distribution of copies
      >of the copyrighted material.

      Exactly what copyright protects vary som between countries. The above is not a complete description of everything that is protected. It excludes for example various forms of public performance and transfering a work to the public. I don't think we disagree what copyright protects and does or doesn't allow though.

      >Case: where Pirate Bay et.al. is off base is that they are deliberately
      >indexing material they know to be copyright protected and illegally distributed
      >and in doing this they are facilitating an illegal activity*. Google et.al.
      >does no such thing: they index material that copyright owners have intentionally
      >published to the web.

      Indexing is not a copyright violation (at least not in most countries of the world, and especially not in Denmark). They index anything that people send in information about (regardless of their illegalness or not), it is an automatic process. They also don't even link to the actual material but rather to a tracker were one in turn can find others that has the material. It is as inderect it can be.

      Google similary index anything it finds on the net, regardless of if it is has been put there by the copyright holder or not. Everything on the net is NOT put there by the copyright holder, yet google will index it. Google directly link to the material. In many cases google even download it and make it in turn available from their own servers as a cache. So not only do google link more directly, they even copy and allow people to get it directly from the.

      I don't see any difference in the directness nor in the "on purpose". You also seem to believe that google in some magical way only index sites were all material is put out by the copyright holder while ignoring the others. You also seems to think that google somehow doesn't link directly to any site (lets disregard their own cache here) while the pirate bay never actually link to any material at all. They do link to a tracker were people exists that might have the work. So yes, there is a difference but it is google that is linking more directly. Neother is more "on purpose" than the other.

  46. where do your cross the line by Grampaw+Willie · · Score: 0

    Where do you cross the line and become involved in an illegal activity?

    -- if you post copyright material that you do not own to a public share such as a web site or p2p share folder you are definitely across the line: you have illegally copied someone else' material and then published it.

    -- too, if you involve yourself in someone else' illegal activities you are across the line. Pirate Bay et. al. deliberately assist in copyright violations and even sought advertising revenue for those efforts.

    not good, kids, you need to straighten up or you will end up in front of a judge

    1. Re:where do your cross the line by SplatMan_DK · · Score: 1

      I am not defending The Pirate Bay. And I don't use their services either.

      But the fact is, that they have *NOT* been convicted of anything. Hell, there hasn't even been a trial yet which determines the legality (or illegality) of their content.

      For that reason alone, their site should not be closed or censored.

      - Jesper

      --
      My security clearance is so high I have to kill myself if I remember I have it...
  47. You have to be the most stupid person on earth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What rubbish! The Danish government has no responsibility for what the press does in a free country. As long as the press is not in violation of Danish law they're free to publish what they want.

    Replace "press" with "search engine" in that and it applies quite well the Pirate Bay. Yes it does. It applies better than you understand. The government has nothing to do with neither the press nor the court.

    And if you didn't read the facts it was the IFPI that brought the [Pirate Bay] case to court. That's not the Danish government either

    The court isn't the Danish government? Let me surprise you, Mr Idiot. The answer is: No.
    The court is the court, and completely separated from the government, which has no right to control what the courts do or don't do.

    - so you are way out of line.

    No, your government is being hypocritical. But really, all governments are hypocritical. This is a relatively small inconsistancy on the scale of government hypocrisy. First of all, "your government" means the Norweigan government, since the user 'andersh' said he was Norweigan.
    Secondly, the government is not hypocritical in this case, since it has nothing to do with either case.

    You really seem to have no idea how a free country works. It's just extremely sad a comment like yours can get +4 Interesting.
    1. Re:You have to be the most stupid person on earth by Hatta · · Score: 1

      Let me surprise you, Mr Idiot. The answer is: No.
      The court is the court, and completely separated from the government, which has no right to control what the courts do or don't do.


      Ok, explain to me how the system works in Denmark. Does the court not decide cases based on the law? If not, on what basis do they decide cases? Do they just pull decisions out of their ass?

      If the court does decide cases based on the law, who writes the law? The legislature, I'd assume. Is the legislature part of the government? If so, doesn't that imply that the government can control what the courts do by writing laws?

      Courts are obviously part of the government. If courts were not part of the government, they would have no authority. Duh.


      You really seem to have no idea how a free country works. It's just extremely sad a comment like yours can get +4 Interesting.


      Then explain it to me. 4 posters have said exactly the same thing you said to me. I have asked all of them the same question I have asked you. None have replied. If the courts really aren't part of the government, my questions should be pretty easy to answer. So put up or shut up, idiot.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!