Slashdot Mirror


Copyright Demands Push Largest European Usenet Provider Permanently Offline

First time accepted submitter jonathan1979 writes "Dutch anti-piracy authority BREIN has caused the largest European usenet provider, News-Service.com, to immediately terminate its services as they felt they could not live up to the court order served earlier."

47 of 199 comments (clear)

  1. power by Nembi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It always surprises me how much power Brein has. Brein isn't mandated by anyone. It's not "the" authority, it's a self proclaimed authority. They don't work for the government, it's a foundation.

    1. Re:power by Stellian · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They are founded by right-holders and have an arsenal of favorable laws. No surprise they can get results.

    2. Re:power by nepka · · Score: 3

      BREIN didn't have any power, courts did. And they went there and got results, just like you do in a civilized country.

    3. Re:power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      And then they will be China's lapdogs...

      Oh shit, does this mean that they're going to eat us then?

    4. Re:power by rtfa-troll · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This power is not coming from Brein themselves. This is based on a court decision. Simply put they have managed to persuade the court that the law is on their side and the law and copyright legislation is providing the power needed.

      This is obviously an extreme restraint on freedom of speech. The Usenet data is widely and simply available. There is no way to provide an open communication service whilst guaranteeing that nobody using it puts up copyrighted material. On the other hand there are simple technical measures that BREIN could take, such as providing cancels for all of the posts that they claim copyright over and there are simple legal measures they could take to make using those measures reasonable such as guaranteeing to take over the legal liability of the Usenet providers for any mistakes BREIN make (including libel compensation for anyone who's post they incorrectly cancel). The only reason BREIN doesn't want to do this is that they do not want to take on the costs which their demands would cause. The law should tell the court to tell them to stuff off.

      The only solution to this is political. Even if the appeal succeeds the very fact that this judgement could happen at all is going to chill free speech. I hope nobody from the Netherlands will be posting here complaining if they haven't already at least sent a message to their Members of Parliament.

      --
      =~ s,(.*),<sarcasm>$1</sarcasm>,g if any_point_you_wish();
    5. Re:power by nepka · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's not a free speech matter. Just take a look at Binverse and Usenext sites. All they do is advertise download speeds, binaries, "user uploaded content" and blazing fast downloads. It's clear to everyone what files those are and what users will be looking for. Sadly, that is the state of Usenet now. It's just warez. You would had have a good point in the 90's, but now it's just a scheme from Usenet companies to profit from such material. They know that without warez they would not have subscribers.

    6. Re:power by nepka · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Oh and just as a note, they could still just carry all the other groups. In fact they could carry all groups, but just block binaries. They already have that system in place as they save text posts longer than binaries. This would satisfy BREIN's wishes. Of course, Usenet providers know that they will lose all their pirating customers if they did that, so they decided to just wrap it up and go home (after a good long profitable run).

    7. Re:power by CAPSLOCK2000 · · Score: 2

      I hope nobody from the Netherlands will be posting here complaining if they haven't already at least sent a message to their Members of Parliament.

      The Pirate Party is not in the Dutch Parliament yet, so that may be harder.

    8. Re:power by Hentes · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If they prosecuted the ones uploading the content, thus committing the crime, you would be right. But holding storage/service providers liable is an attack against free communication.

    9. Re:power by SuricouRaven · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There is no difference between text and binaries to usenet - binaries are just yencoded as text. It's only a convention that binaries be posted in the alt.binaries groups. If those groups were closed down, you'd see binaries appear in the discussion groups.

    10. Re:power by Arlet · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It's relatively easy to block binaries in the discussion groups, though.

    11. Re:power by houghi · · Score: 3, Interesting

      There is no difference between text and binaries to usenet - binaries are just yencoded as text.

      So there IS a difference.
      So it would be easy to detect and thus blocked. Also many groups do not want binaries in their groups and users have been known to get removed.

      Does this mean there will never ever be somone posting illegal material? No, it would not.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    12. Re:power by nepka · · Score: 2

      And another why: why aren't I, as a software engineer, entitled to getting royalties every time someone uses something with my code in it? It's creative work, it's copyrighted work, so why don't I get paid every time like musicians?

      What? It's entirely possible. Just license your code that way.

    13. Re:power by Arlet · · Score: 2

      Are you suggesting 99% of all liquor is consumed by drunk drivers ? If so, I'd like to see your references. If not, your analogy doesn't make sense.

    14. Re:power by Just+Brew+It! · · Score: 2

      Also many groups do not want binaries in their groups and users have been known to get removed.

      How do you remove a user from a distributed system with no central point of control? You might be able to get their upstream provider to cut them off, but they can just find another one pretty easily.

    15. Re:power by houghi · · Score: 2

      Or perhaps there is an issue with it being illegal in the first place.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    16. Re:power by blackest_k · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The Netherlands seems to have changed from peaceful easy going to extremely right ring.
      From banning products to banning religious practices.

      Hal-ah and Kosher meat is soon to be banned from production in the Netherlands, which seems very much an attack on the Muslim and Jewish communities. Strangely importing of frozen Hal-ah meat is not an issue. Hal-ah meat is of extremely high quality due to the stringent rules of what is fit to be eaten and you don't need to be Jewish or Muslim to appreciate that.

      It's such a far cry from the freedom loving Dutch people who were the most welcoming and friendly that you would find in Europe. Sad to see the about turn

    17. Re:power by Arlet · · Score: 2

      No. What's your point ?

    18. Re:power by Luckyo · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Halal meat isn't higher quality - it's usually lower quality in the West. The myth of it being "higher quality" comes from dark ages, when slaughtering animal without letting the blood drain out of it would cause blood remaining in the body to spoil extremely quickly (as blood is a very fertile soil for bacteria growth). Halal meat, while considered religious was actually started as a tradition for more healthy way of draining blood from the animal to get meat that was healthier to eat due to lower bacterial content.

      Thing is, modern slaughtering techniques extract blood much more efficiently then slitting animal's throat and letting it drain while its heart still beats. As a result, just like halal meat being better quality then dark ages western meat, it's worse quality then modern industrially slaughtered meat. If you hear otherwise, know that you're talking to uninformed person or a liar with a (religious) axe to grind.

    19. Re:power by Luckyo · · Score: 2

      +2 is what you get to all your posts by default when you're have excellent carma and not posting as AC. Like me for example.

    20. Re:power by Arlet · · Score: 2

      Not splitting hairs at all. Despite what you may think, it's pretty easy to make a filter that detects binary content, and it doesn't involve checking all the world's dictionaries.

      Some simple rules and patterns will do fine.

    21. Re:power by kesuki · · Score: 2

      google groups shows you as being wrong http://groups.google.com/groups/dir?hl=en?hl=en& if i recall correctly google groups doesn't allow you to download binaries.
      sure your newsfeed might be relegated to binaries, but the google one is quite diverse and has many languages, and plenty of content.

    22. Re:power by CRCulver · · Score: 2

      I don't know about Muslims, but observant Jews have made it clear that they don't accept historical conjectures like "pork was banned because trichinosis was a danger" as a reason to give up the kosher rules. Dietary prescriptions are a spiritual matter, not just the possible result of ancient hygienic norms.

    23. Re:power by vadim_t · · Score: 2

      The religions practice part of it should be entirely ignored.

      The question should be settled entirely on empirical grounds: Does Halal meat production pass the standards of quality, hygiene, and reduction of suffering? All meat production must be held according to the same standards.

      If Halal meat complies with the minimum requirements, then it should be allowed. If not, it should be banned. Religion should at no point come into it.

    24. Re:power by nepka · · Score: 2

      And what would that reason be? Is there some reason why you cannot upload it elsewhere or host it?

      You would have a good argument if there actually would be large amount of legit binaries on Usenet. Frankly, 99.99% of it is pirated material and sadly that changes things. Especially when everyone knows you pay those Usenet binary companies for the sole reason of getting warez.

    25. Re:power by Kjella · · Score: 2

      By all means, have your religious diets. I'm also not going to complain about you being a vegetarian, vegan, nondrinker, diabetic, having food allergies or whatever else diet you're on. If you'll do the same as I eat my pork and drink my beer. Now of course I'd be interested if there was a medical reason I shouldn't eat something or it should be prepared a special way, so it's worth exploring if there's a purpose behind it. But apart from that, I'm not going to limit what I will eat to please some religious sensibilities.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    26. Re:power by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

      no one gives a shit about your spirituality. This is about public health.

    27. Re:power by cOldhandle · · Score: 2

      pfff banning killing animals in prolonged, painful ways for magic rituals - those right wing fascists!

    28. Re:power by darthdavid · · Score: 2

      Actually neither uses an alphabet per-se. The Chinese use ideograms, with the Japanese using the same set of ideograms (usually with the same or at-least a similar) meaning attached but (obviously) to represent a Japanese word instead of a Chinese one. The Japanese also use two syllabaries (that are basically the equivalent of cursive and printing except that one is generally used for normal writing and the other is used to write out SFX and foreign words (usually badly mangling them in the process because as a syllabary there's no way to express consonant sounds without an attached vowel).

      The Koreans us a Featural Alphabet where consonants and vowels are put together in blocks to form syllables and those syllable blocks are put together into words but they have just as much trouble with R & L as the Chinese and Japanese because all three languages treat R&L as the same phoneme so the first time native speakers of any of those languages have to differentiate between the sounds is when they pick up a language that does.

  2. Re:Well done by rudy_wayne · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Let's admit it, nowadays Usenet is just another warez distribution network.

    Except for a few diehard nerds everyone switched to online forums long ago.

    Usenet has always been a Warez distribution network. Now however, it's 99% viruses disguised as warez.

  3. It's sad how USENET has changed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If USENET were what it used to be, I would be sad about this. But it's just a scheme for companies like this to charge access to pirated goods while claiming that the responsibility lies elsewhere. If people still had useful discussions, I would feel differently but all that's left is the pirated materials.

    1. Re:It's sad how USENET has changed by houghi · · Score: 2

      There are plenty of free non-binaries servers out there where you can still do discussions. Unfortunately many people prefer discussing things one many different sites instead of having the discussions grouped and easy to follow.

      So forums have taken over.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    2. Re:It's sad how USENET has changed by misexistentialist · · Score: 3, Funny

      Why aren't you blaming the hard drive companies? Everything was better when people only had 1.44 MB of storage!

    3. Re:It's sad how USENET has changed by dkf · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If people still had useful discussions, I would feel differently but all that's left is the pirated materials.

      You were subscribed to the wrong groups. There are still useful ones out there, with ordinary discussions happening just as they used to a decade or more ago.

      --
      "Little does he know, but there is no 'I' in 'Idiot'!"
  4. Re:I'll defer to the bard on this one by Dunbal · · Score: 2

    Fast forward a little more, and the Death Star is destroyed, and a few sequels later, the Empire loses the war. Your point was?

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  5. Sort of like the BSA by tgd · · Score: 3, Insightful

    In the US, the BSA is the same way ... its a pseudo-legal extortion outfit.

    Of course, that's the norm in the US for a lot of organizations. The "Better Business Bureau" is another classic example. Commercial extortion was an area Yelp was trying to get into for a long time, too.

    1. Re:Sort of like the BSA by mcgrew · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Despite their best efforts, the BSA promotes open-source software.

      In 2000, the Business Software Alliance conducted a raid and subsequent audit at the San Luis Obispo, Calif.-based company that turned up a few dozen unlicensed copies of programs. Ball settled for $65,000, plus $35,000 in legal fees. But by then, the BSA, a trade group that helps enforce copyrights and licensing provisions for major business software makers, had put the company on the evening news and featured it in regional ads warning other businesses to monitor their software licenses.

      Humiliated by the experience, Ball told his IT department he wanted Microsoft products out of his business within six months. "I said, 'I don't care if we have to buy 10,000 abacuses,'" recalled Ball, who recently addressed the LinuxWorld trade show. "We won't do business with someone who treats us poorly."

      Ball's IT crew settled on a potpourri of open-source software--Red Hat's version of Linux, the OpenOffice office suite, Mozilla's Web browser--plus a few proprietary applications that couldn't be duplicated by open source. Ball, whose father, Ernie, founded the company, says the transition was a breeze, and since then he's been happy to extol the virtues of open-source software to anyone who asks. He spoke with CNET News.com about his experience.

  6. Re:The only way to win. by SuricouRaven · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They work only if you can get enough customers to join in to have a serious impact. Despite the constant claims of hollywood that internet piracy is killing their industry, they are still churning out a series of blockbusters every year that rake in the cash with ease.

  7. Re:The only way to win. by hairyfeet · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No they don't and here is why: You manage to get enough people to boycott (not easy since their goals are now the complete control of the channels so you can't hear or see anything but pre-packaged crap) to seriously hurt their bottom line and what will happen?

    They will blame their losses on piracy, walk into the halls of power with a nice PPT that shows conclusively that "If we made X that year than logically we should have made X+Y by now so it HAS to be the pirates!" and then after handing out the customary bribes they WILL get ever more draconian laws and copyright extensions!

    You see this is like "too big to fail' which is "heads I win, tails you lose" as they have long since figured out how to game the system so ANY action results in increased power and profits for them! Hell if you were to cause enough damage they'd just have a "piracy tax" added to every single HDD, flash drive, anything that can hold a scrap of data, and pick the money straight out of your pockets!

    You have to give them credit, its a great scam. there is literally not a single answer you can give that won't give them more money and power! You copy their content you're a pirate, you don't copy but don't buy you're a pirate, you don't copy and DO buy you're not giving them the year over year gains their PPT says they should be so you must be a pirate! It is like xkcd only every road leads to " we get more money and/or power" for the megacorps. like I said, pretty slick scam.

    --
    ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  8. Usenet is a dinosaur by Just+Brew+It! · · Score: 2

    Sad as it may be, this was probably inevitable. I was pretty active on Usenet back in the day (1990s), and look back on that time with a fair bit of nostalgia; but I don't use it any more. Technology has moved on, and Usenet is an anachronism. The last couple of times I poked my nose into the groups I used to frequent, they were full of spam with very little (if any) worthwhile discussion taking place. The poor S/N ratio makes it pretty much unusable.

    Usenet's primary purpose these days seems to be the distribution of spam and illicit copyrighted content. I've wondered how long it would be able to continue flying "under the radar" when many of the other popular file sharing services were getting hammered by the **AA and their henchmen.

    While Usenet is essentially a distributed system, users still require an upstream provider, and these providers are quite vulnerable to legal pressure. It looks like Usenet's day of reckoning may be at hand; the incoming asteroid is on a collision course.

    RIP Usenet.

    1. Re:Usenet is a dinosaur by turbidostato · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "Technology has moved on, and Usenet is an anachronism."

      So, please, can you explain to me what's the better technology that arose that made NNTP an anachronism? Because I honestly say I don't know the current technology that is better than NNTP doing its stuff on technical grounds.

    2. Re:Usenet is a dinosaur by marcello_dl · · Score: 3, Insightful

      > Technology has moved on, and Usenet is an anachronism.

      As a distributed content provider subdivided by categories, usenet was better than most centralized systems we have today. It doesn't matter if they are implemented in the cloud: if fb throws you out, who cares how many redundant servers they have.

      Usenet did leave people with too much freedom, so alternatives who removed such control creeped in. Now we are at the stage of megaupload and company that is replacing bittorrent that is replacing p2p. See an involution? You become the dumb terminal again.

      --
      ---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
    3. Re:Usenet is a dinosaur by turbidostato · · Score: 2

      "USNET's other advantages are a single UI "

      Not only a single UI but the specific UI that suits my needs/preferences, which doesn't need to be the same that fits others.

      "and a single searchable archive of all your posts."

      And local retention if I want to and exactly the way I want to, and the ability to score messages by the criteria better fits me, and a logical and common hierarchy to find/subscribe to info...

      I honestly believe that the only way to say that web-based service is a better tool for on-line discussion is not knowing about the alternatives.

  9. Re:I'll defer to the bard on this one by Cylix · · Score: 2

    I'll fetch him. BREIN? Huh. I can get RIAA! We'll have a nightmare with MPAA, have a surprise party for SCO, Monsanto can do the catering, and then we'll have christening for Lodsys! All I have to do is snap my fingers and they'll be here. They're lining up to get here, and do you know why Jack? Should I tell you why? Hmm? Because here, in this world, the bad guys can win!

    --
    "You should always go to other people's funerals; otherwise, they won't come to yours." -- Yogi Berra
  10. eMule by tepples · · Score: 2

    where ya gonna find out about a torrent in the first place

    Trackers are decentralized in BitTorrent with DHT. Both trackers and search are decentralized in eMule's protocol.

  11. Re:Reduction of suffering by vadim_t · · Score: 2

    "Reduction of suffering" can be twisted into an excuse to ban anything. How about requiring vegetarianism by requiring a reduction of suffering to zero?

    That, however, should not be twisted into an excuse to keep the same bad practices. If it's clear that we can do better, then we should.

    If not, is there an objective measure of how much suffering is OK?

    I would say that as little as possible, and bleeding to death by having the neck slashed sounds very painful.

    Long term I hope for it to be eliminated entirely, by switching by growing the meat itself. Some progress already has been made in that direction.

  12. Hunting by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 2

    Funny how hunting is not banned:

    http://southholland.angloinfo.com/countries/holland/hunting.asp

    Have you ever shot a living thing? It is not exactly a pain-free way to kill an animal, and I can assure you that hunted meat is not up to the hygiene standards of halal, kosher, or industrial slaughter. I seriously doubt that bans on kosher or halal meat are about health more than about making life hard for Jews and especially Muslims (given what I know of the politics of Holland and that fact that observant Muslims will eat kosher meat if halal meat is unavailable). I would accept the health argument if rather than ban the meat, they government simply refused to certify its safety (but still left open the option of buying it).

    --
    Palm trees and 8