Pirate Bay To Offer VPN For $7 a Month

Death Metal sends along an Ars Technica piece about The Pirate Bay's plans for a virtual private network service to help ensure its users' privacy. "The Pirate Bay is planning to launch a paid VPN service for users looking to cover their tracks when torrenting. The new service will be called IPREDator, named after the Swedish Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement Directive (IPRED) that will go into effect in April. IPREDator is currently in private beta and is expected to go public next week for €5 per month. ... IPREDator's website says that it won't store any traffic data, as its entire goal is to help people stay anonymous on the web. Without any data to hand over, copyright owners won't be able to find individuals to target. ... The question remains, however, if any significant portion of The Pirate Bay's users will decide to fork over 5 Euro per month solely to remain anonymous. It seems more likely that the majority either won't care, or will simply start looking for lesser-known torrent trackers to use."

Comments

Hmmmmm.

[SatanicPuppy]

How do you maintain that you're not expressly in the business of circumventing copyright law (as they did in the recent trial) when you offer a paid service that really has no other function?

Seems like a risky strategy.

Re:Hmmmmm.

[Reason58]

How do you maintain that you're not expressly in the business of circumventing copyright law (as they did in the recent trial) when you offer a paid service that really has no other function?

Your statement is akin to saying that you must be guilty of something, since you refuse to let law enforcement search through your house whenever they feel like it.

Re:Hmmmmm.

[MBGMorden]

I'd expect it's like how bongs and other drug paraphernalia is legal in most areas while any logical use for the items is not. Running a business centered around providing your customers with all the tools necessary to break the law (even when it's obvious that this is your intention) isn't illegal so long as you yourself are not breaking any law.

Re:Hmmmmm.

[Laglorden]

It has the function of maintaining your privacy. This is valuble for some people, not because they are breaking the law but because other people, corporations and governments have no business knowing who you are talking/mailing/communicating with in 99,99% of all cases.

Re:Hmmmmm.

[SatanicPuppy]

Actually, no, it's nothing like that.

It's like being accused of being a drug dealer because people buy drugs off your site, and, in response, you offer a method for people to make private transactions.

If you say, "hey, look, I just provide a service, I'm not telling people how to use it" then you might be able to get away with being effectively a middleman in an illegal transaction.

But if your response is to provide a way of hiding those illegal transactions from law enforcement, you're much more likely to be nailed as an accomplice, especially when you're making money specifically off those hidden transactions.

Re:Hmmmmm.

[DaveV1.0]

I'd expect it's like how bongs and other drug paraphernalia is legal in most areas while any logical use for the items is not.

First, define drug paraphernalia.
Second, rolling paper, water bongs, etc. can be used with tobacco. By selling such items for use with tobacco, said items are not considered "drug paraphernalia" until they are used with marijuana. Thus, there is, in fact, a legal, logical use for such items.

A chef's knife is not a deadly weapon until it is used as such. Until it is used as such it is a kitchen tool.
A screwdriver or pry bar are not burglary tools until they are used to commit a burglary. Until they are, they are just tools.
 

Re:Hmmmmm.

[merchant_x]

You seem to be operating under the assumption that the only purpose for offering/using a VPN is to engage in copyright infringement.

Re:Hmmmmm.

[CannonballHead]

Let's assume, for the purpose of this post, that something someone is torrenting is illegal.

TPB is coming out with a paid service to keep you from being caught.

Let's assume you are, I don't know... doing illegal drugs. It doesn't matter if you think it should or shouldn't be illegal to do them, it's illegal in your hypothetical situation that I put you in ;) I come out with a paid "service" (say, a very dark alley that is guarded) to help keep you from being caught in your illegal [drug using] activities.

I'm pretty sure that's, at the very last, something to do with aiding/abetting and is usually considered illegal. Just because all you did was "drive the getaway car" doesn't mean you're not an accomplice.

Re:Hmmmmm.

[drinkypoo]

How do you maintain that you're not expressly in the business of circumventing copyright law (as they did in the recent trial) when you offer a paid service that really has no other function?

Other function: Downloading materials which are necessary to promote freedom but which could be considered seditious or even treasonous. Understanding the substantial non-infringing use for encryption? YOU FAIL IT! Next you must advocate the banning of halloween masks, since no one would ever want to mask their identity except for nefarious purposes, or you only prove that you don't understand the issue - since they are both the same thing. There is no freedom without anonymity.

Re:Hmmmmm.

[Gonarat]

I'd expect it's like how bongs and other drug paraphernalia is legal in most areas while any logical use for the items is not. Running a business centered around providing your customers with all the tools necessary to break the law (even when it's obvious that this is your intention) isn't illegal so long as you yourself are not breaking any law.

Tell that to Tommy Chong. He may disagree with you on that one...

Not that I agree with what happened to him (I think it is despicable), but that's the U.S. Government for you.

Hopefully TPB will be okay because the VPN can be used to bypass censorship on the net (or least can be advertised as being as such) -- if you happen to have your Torrents running through it, oh well, shit happens...also they are not in the USA...

Re:Hmmmmm.

[bluesatin]

Bear in mind the "You shouldn't be hiding anything if you're innocent" mindset leads to a lot of privacy invasions.

Re:Hmmmmm.

[Sloppy]

What's the use of it?

Anything for which you want to frustrate 3rd party traffic analysis. For example, you can send me an encrypted email whose contents other people can't read, but your ISP (or someone pressuring them) can see that you connected to my SMTP server.

Encryption obscures the "what" from 3rd parties, but sometimes you want to obscure the "who". A VPN service is one way to make things more complicated. Now the person spying on you just knows you conversed with TPB. If they weren't already watching me, then they don't know who TPB relayed to.

Re:Hmmmmm.

[billcopc]

The difference is TPB is not an American company. They're not bound by American laws and money. What has permitted TPB to exist in the first place is their country's relaxed copyright laws (vs the U.S.).

They've also been operating the world's largest public tracker for YEARS, longer than anyone else. They are largely responsible for the success of BitTorrent as a protocol, by making it freely accessible to anyone and everyone without discrimination. It doesn't matter whether you're a kid in a basement, or a big business or artist joining the movement, TPB is there and you can make use of its service.

Say what you will about the copyright issue, there's no hiding the fact that a large portion of their site is used for software piracy, but it is leading people to ponder and discuss these issues, which is more than any MAFIAA drone has ever accomplished with greedy lawsuits and gag orders.

There is no question at all that copyright infringement is a crime, and TPB's founders don't argue that point at all. What they're fighting is the current implementation of copyright law, which they consider over-reaching and extortive. It is their highly-effective form of civil disobedience, and they've extended an invitation to the entire BitTorrent community to join the cause.

The fact that they can stand trial and actually put up a good fight, should be at least partial proof that what they are doing has some legitimacy. If you really want to fight piracy, go beat up the guy selling DVDRs on the street corner... that guy's just in it for himself.

Re:Hmmmmm.

[MBGMorden]

Exactly - and so a VPN connection to Pirate Bay is just an encrypted network connection until someone transfers something copyrighted.

You can't have it both ways. The simple truth is that the vast majority of the uses you quoted for the drug-related items aren't the norm. I don't say that to say that they should be illegal - quite the contrary. I say that they should be (and currently are) legal and nobody much cares because they, like the VPN's here, are simply the result of a populace getting as close to breaking the law as they legally can because they don't see the purpose of the actual law (ie, marajuana, or filesharing of copyrighted content being illegal) as being just.

Or more simply, tools generally aren't illegal - doing something illegal with those tools is. A VPN is a tool, and so until they can prove that I'm using it to do something illegal then I'm innocent on paper, which is all that most people care about.

Re:Hmmmmm.

[Anonymous Coward]

No, actually it is exactly like that... Here's why:

You can do legal things in public, or in private. Just like you can do illegal things in public, or in private. The problem is governments are exceeding their boundaries, and forcing away your anonymity under the guise of providing public benefit. The government, nor anyone else imho, has the right to remove your privacy. If you choose to do illegal things in private, oh well! That's the price of true freedom in the USA. Governments should keep busting criminals that commit crimes utilizing public methods. Governments should not strip away our privacy as a step in determining whom to bust.

I'm sorry but I'll never register here and I'll always remain Anonymous Coward to people unable to access /. server logs. I'm sorry that if you invade my home I will end your life as a defense mechanism to such invasion. I'm sorry you seem to have a fascist agenda to know every detail about me (others) and mine (theirs).

The most disturbing part of your posts however, is that you have taken the stance of, "attempting to protect your true identity and maintain personal privacy for any reason; makes you guilty of committing a crime." You do so in a non-shallant way that really implies anyone that disagrees with you MUST be a criminal. If I was a mod I would have definitely gone with -1 flamebait.

PS) If you really stand by the ideals you seem to be presenting here, I dare you to go ahead and post your full real name, address, telephone number, and social security numbers, so I and others here can put your life under our microscopes. Otherwise, by your logic, you're a criminal hiding behind an email@ and an IP.

Re:Hmmmmm.

[commodore64_love]

>>>It's like being accused of being a drug dealer because people buy drugs off your site, and, in response, you offer a method for people to make private transactions.

Well to stretch an analogy to near breaking point..... Piratebay doesn't sell drugs. They just provide the address(es) for the corner where you can obtain them, which is not illegal. Neither is it illegal to sell users a trenchcoat and hat to help hide their identity.

Re:Hmmmmm.

[wastedlife]

Excellent point, thanks. The scary thing is that Sweden seems to be looking to make copyright enforcement more strict as a result of all of this.

Re:Hmmmmm.

[dubbreak]

..as if "Pirate Bay" wasn't enough of an outright confession.

So if I name my blog "I like to steal things" I'm obviously a thief? A name is not a confession.

If sharing files, even ones "protected" under copyright is considered legal in their country (some countries have pretty liberal interpretations of "fair use" and "fair dealing"), then the name is tongue and cheek not a confession of guilt.

Re:Hmmmmm.

[Ihmhi]

The problem is that, again, as far as Sweden's laws are concerned The Pirate Bay isn't doing anything illegal.

Is it illegal in America? Yes. Does setting up a VPN service make them look worse? Yes. Will it actually affect TPB in any significant way? Probably not. Trying to shut down TPB is like trying to shut down Wikileaks.

If the day ever comes that their service is illegal in Sweden, I'm sure that they'll just move it to somewhere that doesn't give a fuck and would appreciate making tens of thousands of dollars a year off of them.

Besides, if The Pirate Bay were sued, all they'd have to do is set up a legal defense fund. They'd get the money they need in a very short time, I imagine.

Erm

[ilovegeorgebush]

You're as anonymous as your credit card details allow you to be. How are you supposed to pay for something web-based without handing over your details?

Furthermore, couldn't the courts just request THB hand over a list of paying customers if it were pertinent to a case?

Re:Erm

[arndawg]

I swear officer, I only paid that prostitute for her to spend time with me in a hotel room. You cant prove we actually had sex.

More like: I only paid for that hotel room. What prostitute are you talking about?

Re:Erm

[jhol13]

The fact that you have paid for TPB might be enough for a search warrant.

And we all know how that is going to end (you'll never get your computer back).

And that is all RIAA/... wants.

Re:Erm

[FrankieBaby1986]

And how do you explain to the authorities why you are paying for an overseas VPN account with a fake name and a pre-paid Visa?

You don't have to.

Or, if that doesn't suit you, "To be anonymous, thus the purchase of an anonymity service using anonymous methods...duh"

Re:Erm

[intx13]

And how do you explain to the authorities why you are paying for an overseas VPN account with a fake name and a pre-paid Visa? Granted, none of those things are technically illegal in the US [...]

What, is the US government my mom? I don't have to explain myself. It's none of the US government's business if I want to have candy after dinner and stay up late on a school night.

I think part of The Problem is that people are beginning to think how you are thinking: "But how will you justify your legal actions to the government?" The proper sentiment is "Why on earth does the government care why I'm doing perfectly legal things?"

I pay my taxes. I am not a felon. I've paid my "rent" so to speak and in return I get a handful of rights, a secure nation to live in, and (theoretically) a solid economy to base my finances on. And that is where my relationship with the government ends.

(Though as a side-note: no affordable health care, no decent public transportation, poor economy, limited social rights, and a questionable education system... I'm not sure I'm getting my money's worth anymore!)

Re:Erm

[FictionPimp]

Buy a visa gift card with cash?

Re:Why is it needed?

[Anonymous Coward]

more importantly, why would anyone resist personal searches and eavesdropping if they've got nothing to hide?

Re:Why is it needed?

[Per Wigren]

Illegal is not necessarily the same thing as immoral, wrong, evil, bad.

Maybe the laws are wrong and should be changed? Before that can happen though, this will help people in need of privacy. You can look at it as a kind of civil disobedience.

Sensationalism?

[Anonymous Coward]

VPN services are just anonymous surfing... You don't have to use them solely for downloading by bittorrent, though many people do.

All TPB has to say is they're offering a privacy service. I think the Swedes would be cool with that, especially considering the only evidence there could be is that you bought the service. There's no way to tell what you did with it.

Also, it appears to be optional, so the last few sentences don't make sense except as sensationalism to sell ads on a website.

Re:Question

[mcgrew]

But will it also ensure copyright protections or protect IP holders' rights?

No, but why should it? many of us think that the current US copyright laws are unconstitutional, despite what SCOTUS says; Stanford Professor Lawrence Lessig, for one, who argued that current copyright is unconstitutionally long in front of the Supremes. He details the reasons he lost, and what he did wrong that caused him (and us) to lose in his (copyrighted) book Free Culture, available for sale at your local bookstore, free at your local public library, or free on his web site.

After all, they wouldn't want to be aiding and abeting a criminal operation, would they?

I have no problem with aiding and abetting a criminal operation when I buy pot. Drug laws should also be judged unconstitutional; they needed a constitutional amendment to outlaw the dangerous drug alcohol, why would they not need the same to outlaw the relatively benign marijuana? Where in the Constitution (besides the much abused "interstate commerce clause", which could have theoretically been used for alcohol) does Congress have the right to stop me from screwing up my life any way I wish?

Copyright infringement is still a crime in the western world.

Copyright infringement is largely a civil matter. And Pirate Bay doesn't limit itself to the western world; the internet is world wide.

Re:Anonymity at this level is dangerous

[wastedlife]

Yes, because overseas, anonymous VPN accounts are totally new and have never been used before for nefarious purposes...

Re:False sense of security

[Anonymous Coward]

Years ago, the US Government opened up one of these Anonymous web surfing sites. There was no indication that it was the US Government. The let this run for considerable time. After a while, the truth came out in a proceeding. The US Government was using this Anonymous site to find people violating US law. Many people ended up in the tank.

If you send ALL your traffic to this VPN service, what makes you think you are safe? While PB may not log, what is to stop a government from forcing PB to place their own logging device inline?

After being a very quick and nice dialup service, Earthlink suffered a year of horrible response times, poor performance, and high drops. Then it quit, but not until after they lost a lot of subscribers. In a case it turned up that the US Government put these tracking devices inline between Earthlink and their backbone connections which was the cause of the slowdowns. The current crop, though, don't have this issue.

People need to think about these things.

Do you have some proof for these claims?

Users Rights.

[geekmux]

Why would anyone need to "cover their tracks when torrenting" unless he was doing something illegal?

Ah, careful there. You're coming dangerously close to arguing the old "mind of I search your car/house, what do you have to hide?"...

Remove the torrent-laced, copyright-riddled emotion from this for a moment. It's about offering users a service to stay anonymous while using the web. The concept is certainly not new (care for a fresh onion on your browser burger?), this one just happens to be offered by a fairly popular website. Something tells me if Google were to offer the same thing, we wouldn't be talking about people hiding Gmail content.

Re:Might Actually be GOOD for the Movie Industry

[Dan667]

they are to greedy to understand that they would make a lot more delivering something that people want that they could own than trying to squeeze a nickel out of everything even if it costs most of it to try make it work and have a draconian DRM system. I think a lot of this is driven by egos, control, and middle manager charts that are out of touch with the real world.

Re:Might Actually be GOOD for the Movie Industry

[Microlith]

This shows that even Pirates are willing to fork over money and pay for the products if the service is good enough and the price is low enough.

Sure, they're willing to pay $7/month for VPN, they aren't willing to pay for what they download. Take away the VPN and they'll keep pirating. Charge a fair price and they'll keep pirating.

"Take whatever you want. Movies, music, ANYTHING. $20/month." They'd make a fortune.

Sure, they'd make a fortune. But would the fortune they make cover the production costs of everything they were selling?

I mean, sure, Slashdot says you can take a PC, a shitty mic, and whip out a better album than anything produced by a major label (and since it isn't label backed, it's Definitely Better(tm)) and go back and make your money touring your ass off (at least, so sayeth Slashdot.)

But that's just one medium. Not everything works like that. Remember, there's costs beyond what the retailers are charging.

Re:Why is it needed?

[Vertana]

EVERYONE has something to hide. Not to say it would be illegal, but how about credit cards? Or something even a little more trivial, how about the way you like to have sex? Let's say you were talking to your wife over the internet about the way you like to have sex. Is it illegal? No. "Not tasteful?" According to who? And is it potentially embarrassing? Depending on what specifically you're talking about, maybe. Especially if it were revealed to your work or maybe your insurance company. Here you thought you were just talking about the great night you were gonna have with your wife and someone has 'eavesdropped' on that conversation and has twisted it to be a weapon against you. Yeah, that's extreme, but just one of those things that 'could happen' if we (the people) don't try to fight the little things.

easy to block

[dickens]

The idea is vulnerable to traffic analysis. Once the IPs of the PB VPN endpoints are known, last mile providers could just drop traffic from them.

Re:Why is it needed?

[DaveV1.0]

But, no one is showing the law is unjust. They are just breaking the law and claiming the law is unjust because they don't like the law, and they don't like the law because the law says they can't make copies of copyrighted works even if it is cheap and easy to do so. They trample on the rights of the copyright holders and then claim it should be their right to do so.