Slashdot Mirror
Film Studios Seeking Complete Block of Newzbin2 in the UK
superglaze writes "Having got BT, one of the biggest ISPs in the UK, to block the Newzbin2 Usenet site, the Motion Picture Association is now trying to get the same result from all the other major service providers in the country. As this is likely to go through, it won't be long before most people in the UK will be unable to visit file-sharing sites at all, without using a proxy, VPN, or special client."
At the end of the day, they won't be surprised when the ticket sales for the utter crap that they call movies doesn't go up one bit. People who download movies usually cannot afford to go and see them, or refuse to pay the ridiculous prices to see them. Cinemas in the UK are a joke. 7 quid for a coke and popcorn. 8 quid to get in. Take a family of 4 to a cinema and you are out 60 quid ($90 ish). It's a joke. Just to sit there for 90 minutes and watch utter crap. Make cinema affordable for families again and piracy will go down very quickly.
having just read that, it seems, there is no need for smaller ISPs that resell the connection of BT to be blocked (which they wont be it seems).
now, if there is one idea we can steal from patent trolls (if they didn't patent it yet) its making shell companies with no real atributes.
how about making smaller ISPs that do nothing but resell the connection of BT, if they get sued, you drop them and offer the clients to swap to another shell company with no added costs, under the same terms.
Then child porn. Then hate speech. Then speech to create political unrest. Then pro-abortion speech. Then pro-Republican speech.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
it won't be long before most people in the UK will be unable to visit file-sharing sites at all, without using a proxy, VPN, or special client.
That's like saying you soon won't be able to leave your own house - unless you use a door or window. If the Chinese government cannot filter the internet effectively the UK government will have no hope.
And yet the population at large will continue to blissfully re-elect that same old clowns that are helping to slowly tighten the noose/boil us frogs... nothing to see here.
Stop watching TV and cancel all magazine subscriptions. When you block these big-money ad channels, you'll find you want less things than you used to.
Ads are all about making you want stuff you didn't want before. Or even knew about before.
Piracy doesn't matter anymore; it's about useless stuff we can live without. Try it yourself if you don't believe me. Toss that TV and cancel all newspaper and mag subs.
And doubtless it'll be just as effective as BT's blocking has been...
Though I suspect that it's less the awesome skill of the people circumventing it and more that BT have almost certainly found the cheapest way to minimally comply with the court order making it trivial to bypass and the other ISPs will probably do the same.
Yes, this isn't all bad. What this means is that the Average Joe will become somewhat more clueful about how to route around the "damage", and the use of these tools will become more ubiquitous (thereby helping to shield the privacy of those who use them).
The funny thing is that the people that download movies are actually the ones that are going to cinema. And if you anger them enough, instead of going to the cinema for the rare cases there is some relatively good movies, they will actually download them all, and f... them all. And it is easy, there are tons of torrent sites, thousands, and most of them are in countries where you cannot close them (not legally). And finally, lets not forget why P2P, Torrent, etc were invented.. remember remember the 5th of November ........
By forcing the 'net underground they ultimately encourage truly free speech.
If video games influenced behavior the Pac Man generation would be eating pills and running away from their problems.
I'm curious - why did they go after Newsbin2? Why not one of the main sites, like Piratebay (I know they're next, but you'd have thought they'd have gone after the big fish first). Unless Newsbin2 is a bigger site than I gave it credit for. I've never really heard of it, even from chatter amongst heavy filesharers and newsgroup users - nzbmatrix, binsearch, etc. all seem a lot more popular.
What did Newsbin2 do to specifically piss off this label?
+1 IDisagreeSoHeMustBeATrollOrAnAstroturferOrAShill
I never heard of Newzbin2 before. Now I'll give it a look.
The court statement blocks a specific set of sites. If newzbin2 changed their DNS name to www.somestupidothername.com, changed their IP addresses and their hosting information, the firms would have to start again and it does take time.
newzbin2 will move far quicker than the UK legal process.
There are so many ways to circumvent this now that its pointless.
Anyway, good luck to the film companies, it's always fun watching stupid people wasting time and money.
There needs to be a mass migration to this. It will be difficult, similar to the IPv4 to IPv6 transition, but it will be completely invulnerable to interference. TPB should take the lead by setting up a parallel darknet tracker & torrent site that runs on I2P, that would make it easy for users to start running multiple clients and ease the transition to I2P torrents. Once complete anonymity is possible, uploading will become much more popular, maybe there could be a quick interface for re-seeding old torrents on I2P.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Amateurism is way better than the utter shit that Hollywood shits out 98% of the time. Your industry needs to be purged, I welcome its death and rebirth.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Refuse to buy any content or product from any member of the mafiaa. Continue to download copyrighted material even if it is just to seed. Support open media and content providers that give away their content through donations. If you want these guys to loose their grip on your society you have to remove their power. Money. There are people that actively pull games and cd's off the shelf to rip them out of hatred for the publisher/distributer. Don't give in to the desire to buy something as soon as it comes out.
Or, more precisely for us un the U.S., banning guns because they kill people.
I'm going way out on a limb here, but in the U.S., I suspect there are many more incidents of crimes committed with the aid of a handgun than there are incidents of self-defense usign a handgun. Banning guns isn't the solution for several reasons, the most salient being that criminals will still have guns from any source willing to sell them, while their victims will not.
Forcing British ISPs to block Newzbin2 is the equivalent of banning the service (Usenet) because it is almost entirely used for what are apparently illegal activities. Apparently being significant also. So rather than tackle each incident, or even ask for blocking of specific content, why, go ahead and kill off the entire service. Kinda sad.
But the British aren't unused to this. After all, in the U.K., owning a handgun isn't a right. Neither is being left alone by your government. And the U.S. is following right behind, sadly.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
Yes, god forbid actors make less than the absurd millions they currently earn for less, easier work than some people do every day. If Hollywood salaries were on par with the rest of the country, that would trickle down through the cost of the movies, and people could more easily afford to go out to the theatre, buy DVD's, etc.
Michael J.
Root, God, what is difference?
That's just it. Everyone cries for it to be reborn - but the outcome of that scenario could result in something worse, not something better. I'm not saying changes don't need to be made, but the whole industry dying off will probably not happen.
Karnal
is that they're using the same technology for this as they do for childporn, essentially inviting thousands to discus how to circumvent it instead of just a few shady groups here and there. this'll just lead to tighter security for child porn, which the movie industry will then wish to adopt for films and so on and so forth.
The once united global net will be fractured into small national networks if these legislations spread.
It'll be hard for the majority of those working in the creative industries, but we braindead code monkeys, consultants, administrators and documentators create as much content as you do (and coding, conceptual work and finding nasty bugs is creative work), but we write a single bill for it, and are done with it. We don't expect to be paid for the rest of our lives and our heirs for an additional 70 years for it.
First they blocked the file sharing sites, but I did not speak out because I was not a file-sharer...
Sorry, my points have all been spent.
You might want to pick up a newspaper sometime (if they still in print) because the world has changed a little bit in the last several decades.
There have been some recent developments that you might find interesting, such as the rise of "the internet", "smart phones", "i-things", "unemployment", and "economic uncertainty".
In reading, you might also learn that most of us don't have infinite incomes. Additionally, at the risk of offending some camps, all businesses can't continue to always increase profits for an infinite amount of time.
So the average person has less money to spend on entertainment and more places to spend it, then it seems pretty likely that certain "creative industries" can feel the pinch.
You are in the "creative industry", can't you be more creative than using piracy as a scapegoat?
"Afro-american"!?? You raving racist! It is "melanin-endowed", GOD! This isn't 2003 anymore!
So you think that the creative industries don't create any jobs for "code monkeys, consultants, administrators and documentators"?
And yes, it's simply true that genuine creative work is worth more than what most people do for a living.
For example, when the Beatles wrote and recorded the White Album, should they have been paid simply by the hour for the composing and time in the studio -- and received no further payment? Of course not. If that were the case, there would be no Beatles, because it would be impossible to make a living as a professional musician.
Your argument is invalid.
What, like crappy homemade vanity movies on YouTube, made on iPhones and edited in cracked video software?
Oh, wait -- you're prepared to pay for a computer, an iPhone, an internet connection and the download allowance needed to steal software...
The industry can't see an arms-race when it's staring them in the face.
This will escalate until file-sharing is done over invite-only darknets. Best
of luck filtering fully encrypted data streams that make a jump or two
across national borders. A DNS blacklist is one thing, but forcing ISPs to
engage in highly costly traffic analysis is something they will fight tooth and nail.
Have a BBQ instead, invite all your neighbors, because it seems like no one knows their neighbors any more.
That sounds horrible.
I dream of the day people stop telling me that I would be happier doing what they enjoy. I don't want to know my neighbors. I hate large gatherings. If there's going to be more than 6 people at a place at any given time, I don't go. My idea of getting everybody together is getting everybody together to watch a movie in my home theater.
Fuck you and your arrogance. You don't see me telling you to stop socializing and go watch TV. Why do you feel the need to tell me what to do?
So you think that the creative industries don't create any jobs for "code monkeys, consultants, administrators and documentators"?
We don't think it, it's unarguable fact. Your job wouldn't exist without the rest.
Software runs not only the entire creative industry, but most all other industries. We will be perfectly fine without you.
For example, when the Beatles wrote and recorded the White Album, should they have been paid simply by the hour for the composing and time in the studio -- and received no further payment? Of course not.
Of course so. All real artists would do it even without pay, let alone repeating life-time pay for doing literally nothing at all but sucking up air (and 70 years after you stop doing that)
Maybe parasites like you won't exist, but no one else in the world cares about you and your type.
Artists would and always have created while being paid just like everyone else for over 6000 years. This failed copyright thing you are so on about hasn't even existed for a tenth of that time, and many many thousands of times LESS art gets created now.
Your argument is invalid for claiming the argument is invalid.
Get a real job you parasite, and get back to work!
"So the average person has less money to spend on entertainment and more places to spend it, then it seems pretty likely that certain "creative industries" can feel the pinch."
Actually, the "average person" has plenty to spend on a computer, smartphone, iPod, iPod dock, digital camera, preposterous "Beats" headphones, internet connection and download allowance (for all those cracks), etc etc.
The only reason why ISPs have resisted censorship so far is that it would impact on their profits, because download usage would decrease.
What you don't realise is that ISPs are big businesses too, and they're sucking dry you and other morally bankrupt thieves, with every illegal download you make.
...using a proxy, VPN, or special client.
So there are your first 3 workarounds already. Tells you how effective this is all going to be. Nothing more than harder to detect when it's actually happening now.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
I never listened to the White Album, how should I know? Any famous songs on it?
Awesome black-and-white thinking, you aspergic asshole.
So a "real artist" is by definition not a professional one - just some amateur jerk who turns out half-baked vanity projects in his spare time and posts them on YouTube for free, getting his friends and family to "like" them?
If you knew anything about cultural history, you'd know that most great creative works were, on the contrary, produced because people were willing to reward artists for making them. How else do you think symphonies got written, great buildings designed, beautiful artworks created?
But then, understanding that would mean looking up from your computer monitor at the big, wide world, and realising that people are different from one another, and some things have value beyond trite hourly payments.
Now go back to your basement and wank over some code.
As highlighted by RevK from AAISP in a recent blog post on the stupidity of the blocking
This post will enter the public domain 70 years after my death, unless Disney buys another extension.
There's a pill for that.
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
Actually, the "average person" has plenty to spend on a computer, smartphone, iPod, iPod dock, digital camera, preposterous "Beats" headphones, internet connection and download allowance (for all those cracks), etc etc.
Which doesn't mean that they have money to spend on every single movie or game that they want. Their money is limited (especially after buying all of that, some of which they may need for work).
Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
Of the cinemas i've been to over the years, most are smelly, dirty, poor climate control (either too hot or too cold), uncomfortable seats, seats too close together so you knock elbows etc etc...
So it's the equivalent of a British-made car or British cuisine. Sounds more like you may have a cultural problem.
The average creative isn't working as a busker - where the audience gets the entertainment and then chooses whether or not to compensate. Also buskers end up getting paid because of proximity guilt. As any creative whose provided their stuff for free on the 'net and thrown up a "tip jar" can tell you - people on the Internet don't feel proximity guilt. Long run? Creatives are working out that people expect to be entertained for free. If that's the case, they might as well be consumers as well rather than producers.
Every time I go to the cinema I swear it will be my last visit. Then over a period of a few months, I figure maybe I was just being a little too picky and arsey, so I try again. And swear that it's the last time.
Between people talking (they don't even bother whispering anymore), stinking foods, the glow of large cellphone screens throughout and damaged speakers that rattle and distort, I can never quite remember why I'm paying to see the film. So I started renting.
But the studios wised up to people like me renting and a number of films I've wanted to watch have been 'Unavailable for rental' from lovefilm. And we don't have any blockbusters near where I live. So I just skip those movies. But I bet loads of people who do want to see them DON'T skip them.
The studios have to understand that the business model has changed. They can't charge what they did in the past because the product isn't the same. The experience is broken, and it's the experience we were paying for.
I didn't say anything about that. All I said was that just because someone has a computer and internet, that does not mean that they have money to spend on every little thing.
Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
Amateurism is way better than the utter shit that Hollywood shits out 98% of the time. Your industry needs to be purged, I welcome its death and rebirth.
Ignore Hollywood and there are plenty of low budget high quality films around. But low budget does not mean "totally free" or "completely amateur". Films cost money to make, they need to get something back somewhere.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
Yes, god forbid actors make less than the absurd millions they currently earn for less, easier work than some people do every day. If Hollywood salaries were on par with the rest of the country, that would trickle down through the cost of the movies, and people could more easily afford to go out to the theatre, buy DVD's, etc.
Oh, just fuck off, apart from a few Hollywood stars in crappy blockbusters, actors don't make that much money. But they do need to make something to live on.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
coding, conceptual work and finding nasty bugs is creative work
Only in the trivial sense that making a fucking Big Mac is creative work for the person constructing it.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
All real artists would do it even without pay
And all real coders would do their work without pay, so let's just pay all of them minimum wage.. After all, if they were real coders they wouldn't care about the money, so really why pay them any more than legally necessary?
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
Actually, the "average person" has plenty to spend on a computer, smartphone, iPod, iPod dock, digital camera, preposterous "Beats" headphones, internet connection and download allowance (for all those cracks), etc etc.
Which doesn't mean that they have money to spend on every single movie or game that they want. Their money is limited (especially after buying all of that, some of which they may need for work).
The fact that you can't afford something doesn't give you the right to help yourself to it for free, just because you can. Unless you live in a society where everything is freely available, which sadly we don't.
There is no good reason why a product that requires money to put it together shouldn't be able to make a return on that money. A film is no different in that respect from a car. No one expects car manufacturers to design cars then just sell them at the marginal cost of production and make no profit.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
Have a BBQ instead, invite all your neighbors, because it seems like no one knows their neighbors any more.
That sounds horrible.
I dream of the day people stop telling me that I would be happier doing what they enjoy. I don't want to know my neighbors. I hate large gatherings. If there's going to be more than 6 people at a place at any given time, I don't go. My idea of getting everybody together is getting everybody together to watch a movie in my home theater.
Fuck you and your arrogance. You don't see me telling you to stop socializing and go watch TV. Why do you feel the need to tell me what to do?
I think GP's point wasn't so much that everyone should be forced to socialise in large groups, as that there are plenty of ways of spending your time that don't involve being a passive consumer of junk media. These would include solitary activities like reading real literature, playing a musical instrument, painting wildlife, coding FPS games for the currently under-represented FreeBSD and so on.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
The fact that you can't afford something doesn't give you the right to help yourself to it for free, just because you can.
I agree that it doesn't magically change the law, but as I told the other guy, I wasn't even talking about that. I just meant that the fact that someone has a computer and internet does not mean that they have money to spend.
A film is no different in that respect from a car.
Or pretty much any job in existence (when talking about working for free). The only difference is that you can copy data more easily than you can make a car (and, of course, that pirates are paying absolutely nothing for the product).
Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
Only on Slashdot would an artist be called a "parasite" by a pirate.
In the machine city of which you dream, there will be no artists, no musicians, no writers, no actors, no filmmakers. There will be no paintings, no symphonies or songs, no novels or poetry, no theatre, opera or movies.
There will be no culture.
There will also be no work for technical professionals who support the culture industry. That means no jobs for you at Adobe, at Avid, at Valve, at Apple, at Sony, at Steinberg - to name just a few.
There will be only "user generated content", churned out without regard for aesthetic quality, or moral insight, or craftsmanship.
And the authors and audiences for "user generated content" will be sold to advertisers by the companies that host the content.
And the same big businesses which you think piracy can topple will simply reappear as hosts of user generated content, funded by advertising. Look at Google and YouTube. That is just the start.
This is the future that piracy will create.
An inhuman future.