Slashdot Mirror
Russia Wanted To Shut YouTube Down For Piracy
ge7 writes "A recently leaked confidential diplomatic cable reveals Russia's growing interest in shutting down copyright infringing websites. 'Russia's Deputy Minister of Economic Development said that not only do U.S. sites continue to offer pirated Russian movies, but that YouTube and Google should be shut down for not respecting local laws'. The U.S. government has previously attacked torrent and link sites hosted elsewhere in the world, extradited foreign nationals for piracy and provided training on how to shut down piracy websites. 'Voskresenskiy went on to state that, in his opinion, no country in the world is prepared to fight Internet piracy. He argued that all existing laws, including laws in the U.S., are antiquated and do not address new technological trends. As an example, [Voskresenskiy] stated that YouTube and Google (as YouTube's owner) should be shut down because they do not conform to current Russian IPR laws. He admitted that this was not feasible, but continued to emphasize that these entities need to follow local laws, even if the laws are outdated,' the cable adds."
. Yep, Google Translate just proved that irony exists in Russian too.
...there are an unholy amount of crooks cranking out malware, extortionware, and everything else under the sun for profit, not to mention PLENTY of people hosting and even selling pirated goods.
Clean up yer own shit before crying about the US, Vosk. You have one hell of a dirty house.
This seems to be the main violation they refer to:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v1PBptSDIh8
Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
It isn't malice that ruins the world, it is malfeasance. The leaders of the world are completely and utterly stuck in the paradigm that only the people they control are people, and then only so long as they control them. It has nothing to do with conspiracy or evil... these people honestly do not know how to govern correctly, because those who learn how to do that understand how our social systems would never let them do so, and thus never attempt to control government.
Humanity if very quickly approaching the point at which we will have to restructure not just our political systems, but our society and our economy as a species. I doubt we make it out of this century as anything other than a sad afterimage if we don't.
The fact that people do not believe such a thing is "realistic" only further highlights how bent on self-destruction humans are. We have collectively decided to let our non-cognitive processes guide our decision making, and then we created social structures to reinforce that process. Are people honestly surprised that we are burning out our energy reserves, that we have huge gaps in wealth, that we have enough food to feed everyone but don't do it, or that we constantly make decisions which provide no way to plan for the consequences of our choices?
That is the expected outcome of our society as it is right now, and it is not our leaders that are responsible, it is you and it is me and it is them. Species scale problems cannot be solved by or blamed on one group, one person, or one class. If they make the wrong decisions it is because you and me let them. If they try to make the right decisions but are stopped, that is also our fault.
But fault and blame solve no problems, provide no solutions, and give us no answers. So if you really, truly, desire to see change within our society, the most productive thing you can do to bring that about it so end your own hypocrisy and embody the wisdom that you feel you can explain to others. Once you understand what the solution is, you either start working on bringing it about, or you are part of the problem.
Sometimes I wish I'd been born in a different time... it seems that my generation, and those before me, have decided to subsist through our existence like a blind drunkard wandering through a dream. One day maybe. I hope. But right now, the things revealed by the cables on Wikileaks do not surprise me. If they surprise you, ask yourself if there was really any other possibility within our society for the things we now learn of. This is the society we all asked for, don't act surprised when you find out we got it.
FanFictionRecs.net
Laws are like contracts (both are subsets of rules) - with very little effort (easier with less effort, actually), you can very simply create laws that are nearly impossible to follow or obey... except for a few people who the law was written to support.
Obeying all laws, in all countries is like obeying any contract anyone in the world would have you sign. It's going to end up excluding everyone from everything once you mix them all together.
Laws are important - they are what define what is important for a community, create the basis for many cultures. But they exist within a context - spreading local laws across the world as if they could apply anywhere... it's just a very dumb idea.
Ryan Fenton
There is a strong likelihood that anything that Russia would be complaining about is the intellectual property of a country that no longer exists.
They are probably trying to exert ownership and control of the works of the people created under during the Soviet regime.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
And in other news, Satan demands the residents of Hades put out their camp fires.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
The best way to prevent your stuff being pirated is to make it EASY and CHEAP for people to get it from you directly!
I want to shut Russia down for piracy too
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupolev_Tu-4
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buran_program
thats just two, i am sure i can dig up more
Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
One is over copyright infringement, and I think many people here are against the enforcement that Voskresenskiy desires.
The other, however, is whether giant multi-national corporations should have to bend to the law of individual nations outside their central base -- and this is a much more interesting issue, one that may bring dire consequences if we continually tell Google, et al. that they do not need to concern themselves with anything but US law.
If an internet site has to comply with the local laws in every jurisdiction from which it is accessible, you would have an utterly farcical situation...
Plenty of countries have laws which make it illegal to display content which is contrary to their regime, and some countries even require all content to be censored.
Imagine trying to comply with the laws of Myanmar or North Korea...
A website should only be beholden to the laws in the country from which it is hosted and/or operated.... And speaking of Russia, isn't that how allofmp3 worked? Blatantly ignoring US laws, but complying with Russian laws.
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
I'm probably halfway between Washington and Moscow and there are pirated goods in every country in between. There is no utopia where piracy doesn't occur.
I sincerely doubt there is a city on earth where you cannot obtain your drug of choice , tax free alcohol pirated games and movies and a woman willing to fuck you for an appropriate sum.
The risks and penalties may vary but everything is available if you look for it and it is going to get easier as more and more people are looking for ways to make a buck and save a buck.
Our world economies are a house of cards and they are starting to fall.
Blarney Quality Restaurant, Plants
For some reason I dont trust the $1 copy of Photo Shop to be free of malicious additions.
If a $1 "copy of Photoshop"* bears the digital signature of the GIMP team, then I'll probably trust it.
* In the SCO sense that Linux is a copy of UNIX.
My question is, "Russia makes movies?" Who knew?
Soviet Union only joined the Universal Copyright Convention in 1973
Doesn't matter. The Uruguay Round Agreements Act of 1994 restored U.S. copyright in all post-1922 works first published in any Berne Convention member state. (All WTO members are Berne Convention members.) This is being challenged (Golan v. Holder).
Russia has clueless Republican politicians, too, I see.
Can't say I have ever personally seen, legally or other wise, heard of, heard people discussing, seen advertised, seen awarded or anything else to any Russian films, the closest is pirated American films with Russian subs. I'm not saying there aren't any Russian films or indeed any good ones, but I wouldn't say it's a massive part of piracy outside of Russia or Russians. And if they don't like these sites because they don't respect local laws why not just block them in Russia, China did it.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
Does Russia even have any video that isn't pr0n or pirated from the US or pr0n?
1. Offer pirated Russian movies.
2. ???
3. Profits!
One jurisdiction cannot dictate the terms to another independent jurisdiction. Russia, for example, sells CDs that contain whole sets of albums in MP3 format at a cheap price that while legal in Russia (the contracts were set per disk, before people thought about higher compression allowing multiple albums on one CD). The import of those albums into the US is restricted (on a commercial not personal basis, so go to Russia and buy one, fine, buy one and have it shipped, not so good).
So, in the Internet age, we have to look at a different range of solutions. We cannot continue to have the hodge-podge application of some laws that really have no standing where they are applied. You Tube should not be held responsible for filtering pro-Nazi video for Germany. What could be done is that every jurisdiction that cares could enter into a treaty that allows conforming content suppliers to accept a tag from a legal jurisdiction of the treaty conforming parties, and when such content is supplied the legal jurisdiction / country can then take responsibility and filter the content request. Yes, this means wire speed content filtering at the level of whole countries. It also means the treaty must prohibit filtering of any content not destined for an end point in their jurisdiction. Else content merely routed through becomes subject to filtering. The content providers can voluntarily meet these requirements to add to their own infrastructure, and the consequence of not adding the ability to tag content would be they may not be able to deliver any content to the jurisdiction that chooses to filter all their content.
Why would this be good? Mainly because sovereign jurisdictions have the right to impose their own restrictions, restrict freedoms, and in general trample on what Americans take as basic rights. Well, legally but perhaps not morally. And the Big Win? The treaty would provide that transient traffic not destined for a venue in their jurisdiction would be unencumbered by their policy, and would freely traverse their jurisdiction.
When we get around to rewriting some of the basic Internet protocols to have security in mind at the start, as well as non-repudiation and verification checks, then we just add a message portion to the initial setup for content flags. This means we can easily block based on acceptable age, overall content, ratings, etc. As well as assure easy access that is unrestricted when legal. Make the creation of the flags / registration of them, based on the individual jurisdictions preferences and then they can filter based on their own custom criteria. Have a set of general purpose flags and combine with the ISO code for the jurisdiction and its all good for most cases, but add the ability to register custom codes too. Then their censors can tag away and isolate their populations to their hearts content. The current DNS bases schemes are bound to failure. And if for example a Russian Film is still under copyright that is valid in the US, then they really do have the right to send a DMCA takedown for that item. But they seem a bit overly aggressive in the articles case. My solution is workable, and will help put a bunch of compsci people to work initially and a whole lot of censors at work around the world.
- Tjp
I am in wallow with my inner money grubbing capitalistic pig. ... Oink!
You really don't understand what the phrase "Information wants to be free," means, do you? The problem with piracy has never been the distribution of content, though I understand if you got that impression from the RIAA/MPAA circus. You can take your jurisdictions, treaties, content flags, and filters to armor up and close every gap in the distribution chain, except one: the gap between the screen and the eye. The analog hole is uncloseable, and it is why efforts that function only in distribution space will fail. The real problem is the fact that digital content can be so easily replicated, even if it is content that had to be ripped through the uncloseable analog hole.
Two points:
First, I doubt "Russia" gives a frozen rat's ass about what YouTube does. I'm sure the MPAA or a foreign equivalent is 99% responsible for this.
Second, statements like "entities need to follow local laws" are just plain stupid and wrong. Only LOCAL entities need to follow local laws.
If some kid in Russia downloads an illegal movie, throw him in your gulag. Reductio ad absurdum: If it's against the law in Russia to use car headlights after 11pm, and someone in Finland drives along the border, their headlights spilling onto Russian soil, should they be arrested?
There are reasons we have borders, and a big one is so that "we" don't have to follow "your" stupid laws. No one at Google is forcing anyone in Russia to watch YouTube.
1. Russia makes movies?
2. Someone in America wants to watch them?
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
Summary is all wrong, for once government official said something, that made sence: "It is stupid and impossible to try and get the internet in compliance with outdated laws, that were creating when the tech available to us was barely imaginable." Oh, and it totally made sence pointing out that US is attempting to bring internet to compliance with US laws is retarded, as every country has it's laws, and, for example google and youtube are in violation of Russia's laws.
I like that when some guy in the US makes a statement, slashdot titles "some guy say..." or maybe "the republicans/democrats say.." etc. But when it happens in some heathen foreign country, the country is personified under the assumption that the reader would not know or care who the speaker is.
Reminds me of a board game called diplomacy I used to play in high school, where during the diplomacy phase you would get up from the table saying something like "can I talk to france"? and then once you were in a quiet corner with France you would try to convince him or her (usually him) that surely an agreement to demilitarize the english channel was in everyone's best interest...
No doubt the oligarchs have seen what an effective tool false copyright infringement claims have been in the civilised world - a no-trial, no-evidence way of cutting off websites that displease the authorities - and are keen to use them to give their future repressive moves a veneer of legality.
....they have their own criminals for that
Of a lawless third-world nation like Russia wanting to clamp down on piracy would be hysterical in almost any other situation. I mean -- this is the nation that apparently protects spammers as if they're heads of state.
One day I feel I'm ahead of the wheel / the next it's rolling over me / I can get back on / I can get back on
-- Why? When you're bigger than Pirate Bay or other search engines, it's ok after all?