Belgium Anti-Piracy Group Expands Attack On Access To the Pirate Bay

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Belgium Anti-Piracy Group Expands Attack On Access To the Pirate Bay

Posted by timothy on Friday December 16, 2011 @08:54PM from the new-links-will-sprout-in-brussels dept.

bs0d3 writes "The Belgian Anti-Piracy Federation (BAF), has been threatening ISPs into expanding their blockade of thepiratebay. Recently they have been sending threatening letters to various other ISPs which were not involved with the original judgment to block thepiratebay. The letter 'kindly requests' that all ISPs voluntarily block thepiratebay, or BAF will bring legal action against them. The ISP BASE has succumbed to these legal threats. Also, many of the same Belgian ISPs have taken it one step further and also blocked the DNS for depiraatbaai.be. depiraatbaai.be was setup by thepiratebay as an alternative domain which directs users to the piratebay's servers to circumvent DNS censorship. For those who can't wait for The Pirate Bay to set up new alternative domains, a full working mirror of the site still exists at malaysiabay.org, which was originally set up to circumvent the piratebay block in Malaysia."

159 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Constant Pirate Bay news by bonch · 2011-12-16 20:54 · Score: 1, Funny

Why does Slashdot report on Pirate Bay so much? Almost like it's pro-piracy or something. The summary even helpfully provides links to Pirate Bay mirrors.
Don't hurt me; just asking.
1. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by luther349 · 2011-12-16 21:04 · Score: 0
  
  piratbay is the number 1 site for media to attack and governments to attempt to censure. yes its all just a witch hunt by the media company's and there dieing business models because when something does come alone with a hey this works and people will pay netflicks anyone they kill them off with shit deals and insane fees.
2. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by GoodNewsJimDotCom · 2011-12-16 21:09 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  Slashdot links to Pirate Bay? That is illegal in ProtectIP. But so is linking to Google, Facebook or Twitter which in turn links to PirateBay. And many congressmen link to these sites too! ProtectIp is a case of a law where everyone is a criminal, so let us pick and choose who we want to censor. This puts power into special interest groups, takes free speech away from anyone the special interest group wants. Someone should compile a list of every single Congressman who was in favor of ProtectIp and post them here on Slashdot. It will make it easy to know who to vote out next election. No Congressman should ever get reelection who is against free speech especially while being hypocrite about it.
  
  --
  God spoke to me
3. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-16 21:13 · Score: 0
  
  It's a form a censorship and they are giving a way around it. It's like if your favorite news site is blocked you want to know a way to read the news, right?
4. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-16 21:15 · Score: 0
  
  Information wants to be free
5. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by fsckmnky · 2011-12-16 21:36 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  If there is no financial reward or incentive, no one will invest the time or money to create content.
  A society that fails to protect its means of production, stops being productive.
6. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-16 21:48 · Score: 1
  
  I thought it wa: 'A society that protects it's means of production, stops being productive.'
  See Britain vs the US circa the industrial revolution.
  See: The US vs China now.
7. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-16 21:53 · Score: 0
  
  Because a great many of Slashdot's readers are a bunch of whiny, spoiled children.
  And the rest are trolls and/or astroturfers, like you.
  Piss off.
8. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by fsckmnky · 2011-12-16 21:54 · Score: 1
  
  See: The US vs China now.
  A classic example of failing to protect ones means of production.
9. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-16 22:01 · Score: 1
  
  Probably to make the point that banning sites this way is rediculous: It is simular to creating a road access system that blocks a single car from using the roads in your country. The problem with this method is that when the owner decides to modify the car just a little bit or places the contents in another one, the access system fails to detect it.
  When you want to ban a site because it contains illegal contents, you need to go after the owners/publishers instead of modifying the access rights for every single user. The only effect it has is that the internet will eventually become useless because of all the blocking and exception rules imposed by a bunch of idiots who don't realise the impact of what they are demanding.
  In a state under the rule of law you need to punish the notorious offenders and never consider to punish the entire society by blocking their access to (parts of) the internet. Blocking access by governments is something I expect from countries like China, Iran and other dictatorships.
  However when you take a look at developments in 'free' countries like the US where the FBI and private enterprises like CBS can ban legal content from the internet without any implications, you can't get too much notifications about events that may effect your right to access a truly free internet.
10. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by fsckmnky · 2011-12-16 22:07 · Score: 0
  
  a bunch of idiots who don't realise the impact of what they are demanding
  Are you referring to the people who think they should be allowed to copy and distribute content even if it is unlawful ?
11. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by SuricouRaven · 2011-12-16 22:19 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Because Pirate Bay has become more than just a torrent site. It has become a symbol of defiance. Flying the pirate flag proudly and giving lawyers the finger.
12. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by SuricouRaven · 2011-12-16 22:20 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Those great many readers aren't so much against copyright as they are against copyright in its current form - together with a very strong anti-corporate sentiment.
13. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-16 22:28 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Slashdot tries to report on Stuff That Matters to its audience.
  The Internet matters to its audience.
  Tremendous efforts (legal, extralegal and illegal) to impede free use of the Internet are currently being made by Corporations and the governments they own.
  The efforts are currently frequently directed at The Pirate Bay.
  Slashdot reports on those efforts. Therefore, the name "The Pirate Bay" frequently comes up.
  I hope that I've connected enough dots for you.
14. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-16 22:40 · Score: 0
  
  a bunch of idiots who don't realise the impact of what they are demanding
  Are you referring to the people who think they should be allowed to copy and distribute content even if it is unlawful ?
  No,
  I refer to people demanding to block the entire community from accessing parts of the internet because they believe that some illegal content is stored there. No one considers to block traffic lanes on a highway just to prevent people from exceeding the speed limit.
  When you have people offending the law you should arrest them and/or give them a fine.
  .
15. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-16 22:41 · Score: 0
  
  Information wants to be free
  Memes want to be repeated.
16. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by Elaugaufein · 2011-12-16 22:43 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  He might be referring to people who confuse the word unlawful with the word immoral and then demand that all unlawful things be considered immoral without considering the impact (no more revolutions for oppressed people, no more ability to question whether or not the law is correct).
17. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-16 22:51 · Score: 0
  
  this is not a question of supporting the pirate bay.
  the issue with the BAF is not that it protects the copyright, but in the way it does it - by threatening and bullying ISPs
  there is no legal ban of the TPB site, but BAF is trying to enforce it by going around the legal procedures.
  *that* is the news here. and that is why BAF must be opposed.
18. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-16 23:14 · Score: 0
  
  Oh? And I suppose all copyright supporters are corporate shills?
  Hey, I'm just using your own tactic (generalizing) against you. Different people have different motivations. Do you think straw men or generalizations are going to make them 'see the light'?
  
  They don't understand that musicians and other performing artists have a right to be paid for their work.
  I'm sure they've heard that argument time and time again but simply disagree with it. You know, like how you disagree with their arguments.
  Where has pretending to be 100% correct and being closed-minded to the idea that you could be wrong gotten you? Where has it gotten them? Nowhere.
19. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-16 23:47 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Blah blah.
  Your music/movie/game/book can be copied an unlimited number of times for free. Following the law of supply and demand, your media is worth $0 since supply is infinite.
  So if you still want to make money from it, change your business model. Sell something that actually has value. Make the music available for free, build a fan base and cash in on that fan base by selling t-shirts, concert tickets and other derived products. I'd pay a hundred bucks for a replica of Dr Who's Sonic Screwdriver. So far I can't find a proper replica. Only cheap plastic stuff. I found one that makes light but no sound. I found another one that makes light and sound but it's also a pen, so not a real replica. I found a perfect replica of the newest screwdriver they use in the show, but I like the previous model better. I never paid to watch a single episode of the show, yet if the people in charge could just make that replica of that screwdriver I'd pay as much money as a few DVD seasons are worth.
  Again, music/movies/software by itself is worth $0 today.
  Also, I'm an artist myself. I make my art available for free. I still manage to make a good amount of money. People donate money or buy my derived products. "Collector editions" of my products, which feature a nice box and a few items, can not be downloaded and sell pretty well. Last year I made almost a million dollars in profits. Sure, I could fantasize all night about the extra cash I would make if I could force 'pirates' to pay me, but the reality is that my art is worth what people think it's worth. I'm also very happy to make nearly a million a year and so I do not care much about making more money by forcing pirates to pay me. As long as I think I earn as much money as my work is worth I don't see why I should demand that more people pay me. And if one day too few people pay me, well I will stop making art and I'll find a job. Most of my fans know this, so that's why they donate money even though they can access my art for free.
  I am also very happy for the Internet and file sharing, it has helped me spread my art to more people. Recently I received a letter from a fan in CAMEROUN. He's from a village where they get water from a well and doesn't have access to electricity except for battery-operated devices. They access the Internet by going to the nearest city. He wrote a letter to thank me for my work and tell me his friends and neighbors all enjoy it a lot. I doubt they all paid me for my work but you know what? I don't care. I'm just glad I could entertain them. That's my first goal. I'm glad that I make money in the process of creating my art but that's far from my main goal.
  So as you can see, you are not speaking for myself. You claim to be defending artists but you are not. You are either very ignorant of this issue, or you are a shill working for big publishers. Publishers are leeches, they are not needed anymore, they never were really important, but they still take over 90% of the profits. When you hear a publisher claim piracy hurts artists, you can be sure they are hypocrites. And if you really liked art you would know this, so I think you're working for a label and just shilling on the Internet. Or maybe you are one of those fake artists who don't even write their songs and who only care about money. These fake 'artists', I can see why they don't like piracy even if they make millions anyway. But these 'artists' are the people who turned art into a business. Art wasn't a business, if you create for money more than for the sake of it then it's not even real art.
  Piracy removes the incentive to create art, you say? If money is your incentive, then you are not creating art anyway and thus society loses nothing of cultural value if you stop creating! You don't believe me that commercial 'art' is not real art? Well just look at what has happened to culture today.
  Many people think reading books is not important and is boring, or that playing farmville is a comparable hobby. There used to be a time when even the guy who loved soccer/foo
20. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-17 00:13 · Score: 0
  
  No.. I guess he's referring to the people who request copyright bills.
21. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by Opportunist · 2011-12-17 01:08 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  Explain to me why a bricklayer shouldn't be allowed to charge for 70+ years after his life ends for every house he ever built and we'll talk.
  The problem people have isn't with copyright per se. It's with the insanity copyright has turned into.
  
  --
  We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
22. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by Kjella · 2011-12-17 01:28 · Score: 2
  
  Because even though a book is obviously "IP", it's sold. The publisher keeps the rights he got under copyright, the rest belongs to me. In this new economy, nothing is sold anymore. Oh, they can still use words like "buy" or "own" but they don't really mean it, because by their monopoly rights they also take every other right to dictate when, where, how and who can use it. The only limitations are what technology makes possible and how willing the customers are to get screwed over. Not only is it a breach of license, in most of the western world they've even made you a criminal for trying through the DMCA, EUCD and similar laws. And anything that needs permission from the mothership to run isn't even that, it's more like leased until they decide to end service.
  As far as I'm concerned, any social contract between me and copyright holders has been broken and pissed on by the copyright holders long time ago. For them it's just about getting monopoly rents like any old oligarch that doesn't want the system to change. Any sort of progress is no longer brought forth by competition, only by mass civil disobedience that forces them to be dragged kicking and screaming into the future. Without TPB and friends you could forget iTunes, forget Spotify, forget Amazon and all the rest. We'd still be buying CDs in stores because that's the way they like it. For TV and movies they still have a long way to go. Kill TPB and everything else will start going backwards, less service, less selection, less quality, more restrictions, more region codes, more "you're going to take this crap because you can't get it anywhere else" attitude.
  Sure, it helps to reward the services that are at least moving in the right direction, killing off the most user-hostile versions. But whenever the market colludes and says you're all going to use CSS and AACS and HDCP and whatever and all the restrictions that come with it, when your choice to vote with the wallet is reduced to either accept it or forego pretty much all of modern media, then TPB is the third option. Fair? Not individually, which is why a lot of my downloaded media is also on the shelf behind me as unused discs. But collectively it's pretty much the only curb we have on their power grab because the law is in their pocket. And it doesn't seem they care how many other rights they trample in their quest to stomp out piracy.
  
  --
  Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
23. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by PopeRatzo · 2011-12-17 01:43 · Score: 0
  
  Memes want to be repeated.
  And haters gonna hate.
  
  --
  You are welcome on my lawn.
24. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-17 01:48 · Score: 0
  
  Why does Slashdot report on Pirate Bay so much? Almost like it's pro-piracy or something. The summary even helpfully provides links to Pirate Bay mirrors.
  The ISP's that listen to the BAF are a bunch of pussy's that have no right being an ISP
25. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by GNious · 2011-12-17 01:49 · Score: 1
  
  Can you help me understand this ProtecTip thing?
  If you post something of mine (picture?) on facebook, does that make you or Facebok guilty?
26. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-17 01:58 · Score: 0
  
  Wouldn't know where to look for a full list of supporters, but a list of Senate sponsors is a start:
  http://thomas.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d112:SN00968:@@@P
27. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by migla · 2011-12-17 02:37 · Score: 0
  
  Memes want to be repeated.
  And haters gonna hate.
  But ideas will evolve.
  
  --
  Some of my favourite people are from th US; Vonnegut, Chomsky, Bill Hicks.
28. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-17 03:01 · Score: 0
  
  No one considers to block traffic lanes on a highway just to prevent people from exceeding the speed limit.
  The police block the highway, lawfully, for whatever, whenever. It is the kings highway.
29. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by tqk · 2011-12-17 04:16 · Score: 1
  
  the issue with the BAF is not that it protects the copyright, but in the way it does it - by threatening and bullying ISPs
  there is no legal ban of the TPB site, but BAF is trying to enforce it by going around the legal procedures.
  There is a legal ban of the TPB site (see below), but it only affects two ISPs atm. BAF is not "going around the legal procedures". They're using tort law to enforce their business model. What I'd like to know is, why are the ISPs not banding together to fight this? Pretty much every other industry has an umbrella organization. Don't ISPs?
  As for why TPB stories so often show up on /., it's because orgs like BAF in their "Bull in a China Shop" ways threaten to destroy the net in their myopic attempts to enforce their business model. Whether you're a pirate or a boycotter, destruction of the net is a huge over-reaction on the part of BAF and the legal system.
  As for why nitwits have to ask /. why TPB stories end up on /., it's because even now some people can't think clearly enough to plug "baf tpb" into a search engine. A court has forced two ISPs to break DNS, and BAF is attempting to extort other ISPs into doing the same.
  Funny thing is, DNS isn't necessary:
  (0) infidel /home/blah_ nslookup depiraatbaai.be Server: 10.0.1.1 Address: 10.0.1.1#53
  Non-authoritative answer: Name: depiraatbaai.be Address: 194.71.107.15
  (0) infidel /home/blah_ nslookup malaysiabay.org Server: 10.0.1.1 Address: 10.0.1.1#53
  Non-authoritative answer: Name: malaysiabay.org Address: 184.173.151.99
  
  --
  "Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit ..." -- Pink Floyd.
30. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by bs0d3 · 2011-12-17 04:39 · Score: 2
  
  it's just because i report stuff like that, then i submit it here, then people vote it up, then it ends up here. its not like slashdot is hunting pirate news stories
31. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-17 04:50 · Score: 0
  
  Hear Hear!!!
  Or Brick Brick!!!!
  The Mortar Man! Who lives for 70+ years!
32. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by h00manist · 2011-12-17 04:54 · Score: 2
  
  musicians and other performing artists have a right to be paid for their work.
  Yes. Someone has to tell the corporations who are selling the work - the artists have to be paid. FAIRLY. Met someone who wrote a book for a huge publishing house, which sold millions of copies. She received $300. This "the artists have to be paid" is a nice lame excuse from the corporations. They tell the artists themselves "the company has bills, tax, etc to pay". They tell the government "we paid the nonprofits and the employees and the people and the economy", and don't pay taxes, either.
  
  --
  Build your own energy sources from scratch. http://otherpower.com/
33. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by h00manist · 2011-12-17 05:02 · Score: 2
  
  If there is no financial reward or incentive, no one will invest the time or money to create content.
  A society that fails to protect its means of production, stops being productive.
  Somehow I think the human species, motivation, inspiration, ideas, food, work, art, professions, and society must have existed and advanced quite a lot, before capital, corporations, and currency even existed. It seems that human work is not a derivative of capital, but rather, the other way around - capital is merely a representation of work. Movies "The Corporation", and "Steal this film" come to mind.
  
  --
  Build your own energy sources from scratch. http://otherpower.com/
34. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by h00manist · 2011-12-17 05:08 · Score: 1
  
  Because a great many of Slashdot's readers are a bunch of whiny, spoiled children.
  And the rest are trolls and/or astroturfers, like you.
  Piss off.
  Indeed the days when the Internet was a source of people's opinion is dying because of all the paid "opinion-makers".
  
  --
  Build your own energy sources from scratch. http://otherpower.com/
35. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-17 05:53 · Score: 0
  
  If this drivel is an example of your debating skills, I strongly doubt you have the mental capacity to reply to it logically at al.
36. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by h00manist · 2011-12-17 06:01 · Score: 1
  
  If this drivel is an example of your "art" I strongly doubt you pulled in a million bucks in profit.
  It doesn't say whether his art is written, drawn, painted, played, acted, built, or any format whatsoever.
  It does say profit and popularity is not a very good measure for the quality of art.
  Perhaps you were trying to say you politely disagree, but prefer to express disagreement and debate ideas by resorting to personal debasement and offense?
  
  --
  Build your own energy sources from scratch. http://otherpower.com/
37. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by h00manist · 2011-12-17 06:06 · Score: 1
  
  Explain to me why a bricklayer shouldn't be allowed to charge for 70+ years after his life ends for every house he ever built and we'll talk.
  The problem people have isn't with copyright per se. It's with the insanity copyright has turned into.
  You mean you disagree with the notion of paying royalities, rent, and licensing for the use of the air you breathe? Ok, we will charge you to pollute the rest of it for a few years, and come back later with a bottle of clean air to and a contract lawyer when you are feeling out of breath.
  We want to help you support clean air for yourself and for everyone. Of course, we have some costs to be reviewed.
  
  --
  Build your own energy sources from scratch. http://otherpower.com/
38. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by h00manist · 2011-12-17 06:12 · Score: 1
  
  Why does Slashdot report on Pirate Bay so much? Almost like it's pro-piracy or something. The summary even helpfully provides links to Pirate Bay mirrors.
  Damn you're smart! You should run for office. And here I thought Slashdot, computer users, geeks, and open-source fans were all in support of Intellectual Property law, infinite patents and copyright, the RIAA, MPAA, intensely complex licensing agreements, etc.
  
  --
  Build your own energy sources from scratch. http://otherpower.com/
39. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by devent · 2011-12-17 06:14 · Score: 1
  
  It would be nice for your readers if you put a link to your site. You got me real interested.
  
  --
  http://www.mueller-public.de - My site http://www.anr-institute.com/ - Advanced Natural Research Institute
40. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by stanlyb · 2011-12-17 06:29 · Score: 1
  
  Nope, because you agreed to FaCEBOOK'S TOS, which in a few words say that you gave up your soul, and you still own them.
41. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by stanlyb · 2011-12-17 06:30 · Score: 1
  
  Quite the opposite, we do want all the musician to be paid for their art, but somehow this is not the case, as not the inventors, but some funny bunch of bastards are actually sucking both the musicians and the public.
42. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-17 07:15 · Score: 0
  
  You do realise that this being a tech orientated site that probably some of the creative types that work at these companys read this site?
  But don't let the truth obscure your need to feel repressed and down trodden.
43. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-17 08:10 · Score: 0
  
  You forgot one little thing: ever since Douglas Adams wrote The Hitchhickers' Guide to the Galaxy everything 'Belgium' takes a very special place in our hearts!
44. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by GNious · 2011-12-17 08:28 · Score: 1
  
  Not sure I understand...
  If person A posts something belonging to person B on Facebook, person B still maintains the rights and is not subject to Facebook's TOS.
  What I'm curious about, is whether Person A, Facebook or both are guilty of infringement (I'd venture, both), and what ProtectIP and SOPA would require be done...
45. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-17 09:26 · Score: 0
  
  I'm entirely against "copyright." And patents. I do believe in attribution. But not any sort of privelege of preventing people from copying anything. The results are more criminal than the problem intended to be addressed.
46. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-17 09:39 · Score: 0
  
  I love you.
47. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-17 10:05 · Score: 0
  
  At the same time that piracy is supposedly doing harm to businesses by taking their profits, my personal research into the RIAA's earnings actually showed that they weren't suffering visible losses until many years after piracy through P2P and torrents actually began. Actually, I found a dip in their earnings around the time DRM started being used (with not always wonderful results if you remember the settlements over the installation of software secretly when trying to use music CDs on computers). It's also worth mentioning that some artists like Avril Lavigne had opposed actions against file sharing because she (and other recording artists) believed that it increased sales by exposing more people to their music and then if they liked it, they'd buy an official CD or merchandise.
  Now, at first that seems like a more of a grand loss, right? Well, at the same time that piracy is supposedly hurting industries, it's helping the DRM industry. What would all these (probably) closest-P2P-users working in DRM companies do if people just stopped file sharing tomorrow? Music, movie, and software piracy created an entirely new industry! There are many people who have jobs because of this Darwinian fight of Piracy vs. DRM. This is relevant to those of us working in the fields of technology -- whether it be a white hat job, or as you had implied, a not-so-white-hat pirate...
  How this relates to Slashdot? Well, for the same reason that writing about cases of Islamic Extremism doesn't mean the NY Times or other newspaper is pro-extremism, Slashdot having posts about piracy doesn't mean it's pro-piracy. Simply informing people isn't the same thing as choosing a side. Not at all! Every single bit of news I've ever seen on Slashdot has been written in an objective way like such: userBlah said "stuff happened that's relevant to tech/science/math fields and here's some link" without any pushing of the readers to support/rail against it.
  It's important to remember that REAL news (not necessarily what's seen on TV or read in the newspaper, but the REAL stuff) is meant to be an objective bit of information that informs the reader/viewer and doesn't impose a viewpoint upon them or trick them into choosing one side or another. As far as I've seen on Slashdot, this seems to be their way of doing things -- direct quotes with links, no push in either direction. Remember to read critically when reading news, look at where the writer is coming from, are they telling you to believe something? --are they not? --then always decide for yourself what you want to believe. Also remember, informing isn't the same thing as supporting an idea.
  P.S. - The "Don't hurt me; just asking." line you wrote is absolutely priceless -- and completely understandable since questions like these can result in things being thrown...
48. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by fsckmnky · 2011-12-17 10:38 · Score: 1
  
  before capital, corporations, and currency even existed.
  These things have always existed, they just take on different forms.
  
  Movies "The Corporation", and "Steal this film" come to mind.
  Um ... those are movies. Movies != reality.
49. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by Opportunist · 2011-12-17 12:33 · Score: 1
  
  Bad example. If you refuse me the air to breathe and I cannot afford to pay, I will do what is necessary, including but not limited to killing you, to get it. Because without I'd die.
  I mean, what's the worst you could do to me if I fail or get caught? Kill me?
  
  --
  We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
50. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by drsmithy · 2011-12-17 18:25 · Score: 2
  
  Um ... those are movies. Movies != reality.
  Right. Because there's never, ever been a movie, song, poem, book, story, or anything else created to demonstrate and explain "reality".
51. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by fsckmnky · 2011-12-17 19:44 · Score: 1
  
  If you want to *experience* the reality of business, start a company.
  
  If you want to *fantasize* about the evil greedy drama of business, watch a movie.
52. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by metacell · 2011-12-17 21:57 · Score: 1
  
  Why does Slashdot report on Pirate Bay so much? Almost like it's pro-piracy or something.
  I bet that many of its readers are pro-piracy.
  Not that there's anything wrong with that :-p
53. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by metacell · 2011-12-17 21:59 · Score: 1
  
  Can you help me understand this ProtecTip thing?
  If you post something of mine (picture?) on facebook, does that make you or Facebok guilty?
  Both of you will be guilty under ProtectIP. You will be sued for copyright infringement, and Facebook will be shut down, if the copyright owner so wishes.
54. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by metacell · 2011-12-17 22:19 · Score: 1
  
  a bunch of idiots who don't realise the impact of what they are demanding
  Are you referring to the people who think they should be allowed to copy and distribute content even if it is unlawful ?
  And what impact would that have?
  Piracy has been rampant for ten years, and the film and computer game industries just keep increasing their revenues, year by year, while the sharp decline among record companies has been made up for by increased online sales.
55. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by metacell · 2011-12-17 22:58 · Score: 2
  
  If there is no financial reward or incentive, no one will invest the time or money to create content.
  This is getting really old...
  1. There have been numerous studies showing that the people who pirate the most, are also the ones who buy the most culture.
  2. There have been several studies showing that the loss in potential music sales is roughly made up for by the free advertising provided by music piracy.
  3. Despite rampant piracy since around the year 2000, the revenues of the film and computer game industries have continued to increase, year after year, and the decline among the record companies are made up for by the increase in online sales of music. The only two events which seem to have caused a measurable loss to the industry, are the economic recess around 2007 and the failed attempt at DRM.
  4. There are several studies which show that music artists earn considerably *more* today than ten years ago, partly because they have decided to bypass the record companies and sell their music online directly to the consumers, or give their music away for free and earn money from concerts and merchandise. This includes a study which shows that Norwegian artists' revenues have increased by over 60% per artist during the first decade of the new millenium, and one which shows that Swedish artists' revenues have increased by over 30% per artist, despite the number of artists increasing in both countries.
56. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by metacell · 2011-12-17 23:01 · Score: 1
  
  Really? The USA protects its failing industries with subsidies and regulations, and yet they keep failing... e.g, the automobile industry and the banking system.
57. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by xenobyte · 2011-12-18 00:09 · Score: 1
  
  Actually, linking to just about anything is illegal if it the number of clicks between it and pirate services doesn't matter. Almost anything links to a search engine and they all link to all the pirate services. So there.
  It makes sense to say: "You can't directly to illegal stuff"
  It also makes sense to say: "You can't link to pages that link directly to illegal stuff"
  It makes NO sense to say: "You can't link to pages that link to something which through further links eventually links to illegal stuff"
  - Because everything to the Internet eventually leads to illegal stuff - illegal somewhere in any case. There has to be an exact limit on the click distance for it to make sense. The other thing can't be verified and will get you into trouble if someone is out to get you, because you can't avoid doing the wrong thing.
  Oh, and all search engines fail on every count. You can search directly for torrents - or recent movies available on rapidshare, hotfile etc. - why is this not the primary target? - Because of Microsoft and Google both having whole buildings full of attack-trained lawyers? ;)
  PS: I find just about everything I need in the scull and crossbones section using Google and download it directly from rapidshare, fileserve, hotfile, megaupload etc. - no need for Pirate Bay I'm afraid.
  
  --
  "For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong." -- H.L. Mencken (1880-1956) --
58. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by fsckmnky · 2011-12-18 04:02 · Score: 1
  
  thanks for the propaganda update
59. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by Richard+Dick+Head · 2011-12-18 04:12 · Score: 1
  
  I hope I don't offend anybody! But I wish to drive an idea home...something to consider.
  
  A smart and talented audio engineer is working for a small audio shop. The manager looks at his shrinking portfolio, and decides to close his doors.
  
  We now have a smart and talented, and desperate audio engineer. He decides to switch careers. He talks with your employer, and even though he doesn't have the experience you do, he demonstrates his potential and offers to do your job at half the price.
  
  Now, you get a short phone call, and you're stuck at home, thankful that you don't have to pay for your audio since you don't have an income. And meanwhile the demand and market rate in your profession has gone down a bit, for reasons that you nor anyone else can figure out.
  
  I hope no one is offended, truly, I just hope to demonstrate how silly and self-destructive it is to sing the praise of the downfall of productive industries that would pay good money to smart people like you and I. This all has now been further tarnished by desperate measures demanded of lawyers, but remember this is a VERY separate issue from a talented person losing his job and going after yours. You have nothing to gain and everything to lose by one of your peers being cast into the abyss.
  
  While I am certainly guilty of patronizing Pirate Bay, it does not bother me if law will eliminate the possibility of me going out and getting things for free. You know why? Because out there, the market will grow, and for reasons no economics person will be able to quantify, at least one less desperate person out there looking to take MY prosperity away from ME.
  
  --
  The real path to male liberation
60. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by Richard+Dick+Head · 2011-12-18 04:21 · Score: 1
  
  And before anyone accuses me a being a fantastical blow-hard making silly stories, the aforementioned audio engineer is a true story, a person who now makes more salary working in IT than the person he replaced. :)
  
  --
  The real path to male liberation
61. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by ultranova · 2011-12-18 05:00 · Score: 2
  
  It makes sense to say: "You can't directly to illegal stuff"
  
  No, it doesn't. If a page links to illegal stuff, then that page is also illegal under this rule. That makes all pages linking to it also illegal, making all pages linking to them illegal, and so forth.
  Furthermore, torrent files don't themselves contain any copyrighted stuff. They contain hashes of data blocks, filenames these blocks are associated with, a hash for the whole thing, and optionally one or more "tracker" (directory server) address. They don't contain anything illegal, they don't necessary even contain any links to anywhere with anything illegal. They simply contain identification/verification codes for data. So, under this rule, Pirate Bay itself isn't illegal, and since pretty much all web-based copyright ignoring nowadays happens through torrents, almost no site is.
  
  It also makes sense to say: "You can't link to pages that link directly to illegal stuff"
  
  Assuming the above-mentioned daisy-chaining of illegality is specifically ruled out by the law (otherwise all your examples are identical): no, it doesn't make sense. It makes me responsible for other people's actions, and in particular makes it very difficult to link to pages in foreign countries which, after all, are operating under different set of laws.
  Also, I can't help be suspicious of the purpose of such a law. After all, it is common practice to mention - or link on the Internet - to one's sources to back one's arguments. Suppose the subject under discussion is whether or not something - such as using cannabis - should be illegal. We can reasonable assume that someone who is in favour of legalizing might link to a cannabis-user forum on Tor to back his arguments of cannabis-users being generally sane; and one might also assume that such a forum might have posts linking to Silk Road, the infamous Tor drug marketplace. Is either Slashdot or the poster now a criminal? And if they are, was that the very intent of the law - to produce a chilling effect against discussing any existing laws?
  
  It makes NO sense to say: "You can't link to pages that link to something which through further links eventually links to illegal stuff"
  
  While I agree, I must ask: why does the degree of separation make a difference? Once you make it illegal to associate with criminals, and people who associate with criminals, why stop there?
  
  --
  Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.
62. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by metacell · 2011-12-18 05:23 · Score: 1
  
  Just giving the facts. Regardless of whether you think piracy is good or bad, it's a fact that the media industry keep increasing their revenues despite piracy.
63. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by fsckmnky · 2011-12-18 05:27 · Score: 1
  
  Which is alot like saying, even tho theft of corn from farmers fields has gone up, farmers are growing more corn than ever.
64. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by SuricouRaven · 2011-12-18 05:40 · Score: 1
  
  The old broken window fallacy? Consider that all those pirates are not buying audio, and thus the audio engineer does lose his job. I'll accept that, but you overlook something. Those pirates find they have more money now - and having money, will spend it somehow. Maybe they'll buy more computer equipment to pirate on, or just frivilous things like more clothes to show off, or perhaps new appliances - but however they spend it, they'll be stimulating economic activity elsewhere, and thus creating jobs. The overall effect may be to reduce the total number of employment positions, or it may be to increase it - but determining which is the case would require much more complex economic analysis than I can perform, and I imagine more than you can. Given that every study I've seen on the issue is hopelessly biased beyond any shread of credibility, it's just unknown.
  
  Personally I am singing the praises of the downfall of the entertainment industry because they are currently attacking things that I value ideologically: Openness, reuse of ideas, technology as a hobby, freedom of speech and so forth. Or rather, I would be singing those praises if they were actually falling. For all the end-of-the-world hysteria, I find it hard to believe that piracy is having much of an impact when Transformers 3 is able to gross over one BILLION dollars before even being released on blu-ray. Those are not the numbers of an industry in crisis.
65. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by metacell · 2011-12-18 06:17 · Score: 1
  
  If tens of millions of people stole corn from the farms every week, and the corn production just kept increasing, even though the farmers did nothing special to grow more corn, then we'd have to conclude that stealing corn somehow didn't affect the amount of corn on the fields.
  If it were true of corn fields, it'd seem like magic. In the case of filesharing, we can explain it by 1) making a digital copy doesn't affect the original, and 2) people who pirate go ahead and spend their money on another entertainment product instead, so the sales stay roughly the same.
66. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by Richard+Dick+Head · 2011-12-18 11:18 · Score: 1
  
  I'm talking about you and the other guy next to you. Idealism is fine, and so are studies, but these aren't going to put bread on your table.
  
  Despite the threat of outsourcing, the computing industry survives. How? Well, it hasn't entirely. People have left. Some are still going hungry.
  
  The arguments you make are no different than the PHB stating that offshoring is always a good idea, the money saved will be spent elsewhere, and they'll find jobs elsewhere, because there are plenty enough, and if they were really willing to compete they'd charge the same price.
  
  If everybody had your ideology, with no compassion for the individuals involved and their unique professional success, and indeed systematically poaching them for the tidbits... there would be very little bread left between us, friend.
  
  --
  The real path to male liberation
67. Re:Constant Pirate Bay news by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-18 19:53 · Score: 0
  
  If you want to experience the evil greedy drama of businesses, watch reality.
  If you want to fantasize about a company, experience a movie.
FUCK OFF BAF! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-16 20:56 · Score: 0

And die in a fire please.
so sick of these media monopoly whiners...
depiraatbaai.be by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-16 20:58 · Score: 0

de piraatbaai.be blocked? Simply not true.
1. Re:depiraatbaai.be by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-16 21:05 · Score: 1
  
  >de piraatbaai.be blocked? Simply not true.
  From the summary:
  "[M]any of the same Belgian ISPs have taken it one step further and also blocked the DNS for depiraatbaai.be."
  That means that you may have one of the providers that hasn't blocked it. Get some reading skillz.
2. Re:depiraatbaai.be by houghi · 2011-12-16 21:11 · Score: 2
  
  There are not that many providers in Belgium.
  Skynet, Telenet, VOO and Scarlet are the biggest ones.
  I am at Dommel and they do not block. Evonet is a smaller one.
  Curious which ones are blocking piraatbaai.be
  I also run my own DNS, so enough ways around it for me. If nothing else out of principle.
  
  --
  Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
3. Re:depiraatbaai.be by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-16 21:45 · Score: 1
  
  depiraatbaai is currently not blocked by telenet.
  Not that it matters, because it's only the dns which is blocked. It's easy enough to circumvent by using another dns server.
  If they block the ip adres, that would be a problem , though i already have some ideas to work around that.
4. Re:depiraatbaai.be by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-16 21:46 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  on a "Scarlet" (= Belgacom) ADSL connection:
  depiraatbaai.be has address 194.71.107.15
  (truthful)
  thepiratebay.org has address 193.74.22.191
  thepiratebay.net has address 193.74.22.191
  thepiratebay.com has address 193.74.22.191
  thepiratebay.se has address 193.74.22.191
  piratebay.org has address 193.74.22.191
  piratebay.net has address 193.74.22.191
  piratebay.se has address 193.74.22.191
  piratebay.no has address 193.74.22.191
  (falsified)
  Flemish speakers can have a good laugh here: http://nurpa.be/files/20111117_BAF-letter-to-ISP_NL.pdf
5. Re:depiraatbaai.be by ocean_soul · 2011-12-16 22:59 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  For those who don't speak Dutch: the link goes to a letter send to ISPs that is horrendously translated to Dutch from another language (I guess French). And by 'horrendously' I mean it's worse than a Google-translate translation. On another note: even if depiraatbaai.be gets blocked, why does anyone think there won't be a new URL within hours, at the most? On still another, somewhat related, note: a letter from McCain as a response to concerns regarding SOPA can be found here.
6. Re:depiraatbaai.be by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-16 23:35 · Score: 1
  
  That's some really funny shit. If I were an ISP I would simply ignore it and if BAF took further action claim that the letter simply was unintelligible.
  Anyway, let them put their effort in this nonsense. It will just get more people to use alternative DNS providers.
7. Re:depiraatbaai.be by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-16 23:59 · Score: 0
  
  On my VOO account, depiraatbaai.be can't be found. This is different from the piratebay block itself which shows a nice warning page. So I dunno about that...
Why arent these people beaten in back alleys ? by unity100 · 2011-12-16 21:07 · Score: 4, Insightful

See ? Sounds brutal ? But that was how it was back in peasant revolts in middle ages - when a small minority enforced their rules and interests on overwhelming majority through organized repression through the system they established (political, economical) and usage of arms, there was no way out but that. And most of those uprisings are now considered revolutions that made our modern societal principles.

See, something similar is happening, yet noone is doing anything, but talk. the only difference in between middle ages and now is, back then people were not allowed to talk. Now, you can talk, but talk changes nothing.

does that mean, society is ok with getting repressed as long as they can talk against it, even if it doesnt provide any fruits ?

It seems modern man is much more obedient than medieval peasant. the irony ....

--
Read radical news here
1. Re:Why arent these people beaten in back alleys ? by deburg · 2011-12-16 21:49 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  does that mean, society is ok with getting repressed as long as they can talk against it, even if it doesnt provide any fruits ?
  It seems modern man is much more obedient than medieval peasant.
  Yes, considering that quite recently (relatively) "complaining" about repression was considered sedition and will get ya jailled for it. In fact, Malaysia has a ton of anti-sedition laws that is still being used to slap down on opposition.
  It's not that moderm man is more obedient, it just that we're less anonymous. A medieval man can run to the next country and start a new life, but not a modern man
2. Re:Why arent these people beaten in back alleys ? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-16 22:09 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  I've wondered why there aren't more folks with high powered rifles taking out bankers and the like. Or some Dexter-esque like character stalking congress.
  It seems that if so many are near the breaking point, the chance a three hots and a cot in prison might be a step up. Might as well get some street justice along the way.
  Either that, or things aren't nearly as bad as reported.
3. Re:Why arent these people beaten in back alleys ? by fsckmnky · 2011-12-16 22:15 · Score: 1
  
  Might as well get some street justice along the way.
  So if a person is uneducated and frustrated and is failing to adapt to their environment, or find their place in society, then it's a good thing if they freak out and kill innocent people as they self destruct ?
  
  Really ? If the drug addict, or the alcoholic, or the guy with a failed marriage and ruined finances down the street, gives up on life, and kills you or one of your family members, then this is a good thing in your opinion ? Really ?
4. Re:Why arent these people beaten in back alleys ? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-16 22:17 · Score: 0
  
  does that mean, society is ok with getting repressed as long as they can talk against it, even if it doesnt provide any fruits ?
  Society is ok with whatever causes the least short term distress to the majority of the individuals. Doing something about major issues usually involves a great deal of discomfort. Easier to delude ourselves that it doesn't concern us. If that fails, complain we are powerless or invent another social issue to battle. I hear there is a witch in the vilage across the mountain, grab the pitchforks and worry about unfair taxes later.
5. Re:Why arent these people beaten in back alleys ? by unity100 · 2011-12-16 22:21 · Score: 1
  
  A medieval man can run to the next country and start a new life
  no. medieval manors (smallest feudal unit) were conservative societies which were closed to outside. everyone knew each other, everyone's families' histories were known, and even the person living in next village was an outsider. you couldnt just move into some place and settle. leave aside the legalese of getting a permission from the lord owning that land.
  
  --
  Read radical news here
6. Re:Why arent these people beaten in back alleys ? by unity100 · 2011-12-16 22:22 · Score: 1
  
  So if a person is uneducated and frustrated and is failing to adapt to their environment, or find their place in society, then it's a good thing if they freak out and kill innocent people as they self destruct ?
  the above arguments could be very well used to reject any kind of revolution against repression - problems ? then it means you are not able to adapt. problem solved.
  
  --
  Read radical news here
7. Re:Why arent these people beaten in back alleys ? by SuricouRaven · 2011-12-16 22:23 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  He didn't say it's a good thing, just expressed surprise that it hasn't happened more often. People stressed to breaking point will sometimes turn to violence regardless of the personal consequences because all other means have failed them and revenge is all they have left. With so many people facing ruin, why does this still happen so rarely?
8. Re:Why arent these people beaten in back alleys ? by houghi · 2011-12-16 22:43 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Revolutions changed the names of those in power. The common man is only interested in feeding and housing his family. Only when that is a threat to that are they willing to risk anything as they will not have anything to loose.
  For now the risks are too high. In general we still have a reasonable comfortable lifestyle.
  These revolutions also did not happen over night. There are many years of abuse of the people before anything really happens. So give it another 25-50 years or so and then we might see a serious revolution of the people. Now? Not so much.
  
  --
  Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
9. Re:Why arent these people beaten in back alleys ? by mapkinase · 2011-12-16 22:55 · Score: 1
  
  "the only difference in between middle ages and now is, "
  That in middle ages oppression meant serfdom (without quotes) and no oppression means "i can't get stuff free".
  
  --
  I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
10. Re:Why arent these people beaten in back alleys ? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-17 00:14 · Score: 0
  
  Yes, you could. By making friends!
  And it's sad that you, like probably most people nowadays, didn't even think about that option.
  Those small groups were groups of trust. Which is a good thing.
  So when you show that you are useful to them, and can be trusted, e.g. by offering valuable services, knowledge, work, protection, or other help, there always is a way in.
  And this is true for all life in all of the universe. Because all life wants to get more resources, grow, and be protected from dangers.
11. Re:Why arent these people beaten in back alleys ? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-17 02:34 · Score: 0
  
  Because a third of the US people are on some form of medication to keep them "normal".
  Its as though being depressed and sad while those with power destroy everything isn't normal.
12. Re:Why arent these people beaten in back alleys ? by fsckmnky · 2011-12-17 03:06 · Score: 1
  
  revolution against repression
  In matters concerning revolution and repression, might makes right.
13. Re:Why arent these people beaten in back alleys ? by Anthony+Mouse · 2011-12-17 04:36 · Score: 1
  
  I've wondered why there aren't more folks with high powered rifles taking out bankers and the like. Or some Dexter-esque like character stalking congress.
  Dexter is fiction. The chances of one guy being able to kill multiple members of Congress on multiple occasions without being caught is extremely low, because as soon as it happens once, it becomes the number one priority for law enforcement. What actually happens is Gabrielle Giffords. And that sort of thing does happen. (Of course, the problem is that the people crazy enough to do something like that are so crazy that you can't count on them to only go after the evil and corrupt. No one is safe from crazy.)
14. Re:Why arent these people beaten in back alleys ? by tqk · 2011-12-17 04:52 · Score: 1
  
  When's the last time you tossed a molotov cocktail? Are you volunteering? If not, then this:
  
  It seems modern man is much more obedient than medieval peasant.
  is just you blowing smoke, and accurately describing yourself.
  Note, I'm not advocating anything here. I'm just pointing out that you're just a cheerleader on the sidelines, and not really in the game as you think you are.
  
  --
  "Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit ..." -- Pink Floyd.
15. Re:Why arent these people beaten in back alleys ? by unity100 · 2011-12-17 19:32 · Score: 1
  
  no you couldnt. it is very ignorant of you to think that you could just move to another manor/domain by 'making friends'. this is not teletubbies. there was medieval law. and a lord to rule over that law, who can decide things on his whim.
  
  --
  Read radical news here
Dance on Piratebay! by Ezel · 2011-12-16 21:43 · Score: 3, Informative

This is exactly why Mediaafires Firefox-plugin "Piratebay Dancing!" was created:
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/mafiaafire-piratebay-dancing/
Or is there some circumstance here that cripples the plugin?
(And still there is no notes about how to 'properly' link a word with an URL in slashdots help below writing comments)

--
Prosp long and liver.
1. Re:Dance on Piratebay! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-16 22:03 · Score: 0
  
  (And still there is no notes about how to 'properly' link a word with an URL in slashdots help below writing comments)
  This is 2011, almost 2012. You are on a website for nerds. You (somehow) don't know the rudiments of html.
  And that's slashdot's problem?!
  What the hell, it's the weekend and I feel unreasonably generous. Here ya go, wanker!
2. Re:Dance on Piratebay! by Ezel · 2011-12-16 23:27 · Score: 1
  
  It might be simple but I still don't understand why the don't just add it in the help-part of the "Edit Comment" page. Just about the only time I ever need to dig up the knowledge of how to manually code links in HTML is when writing slashdot-comments.
  I just do it so seldom that I end up having to search for some tutorial. And since I get bored of having to do that every time (while there is a full URLs-section in the help that doesn't address the issue at hand) I just keep posting the links like this instead:
  http://slashdot.org/
  Amazing, simple, even non standard HTML, that works and is mentioned in the help-section but makes my posts look a bit crap.
  
  --
  Prosp long and liver.
Alternative DNS by sociocapitalist · 2011-12-16 21:54 · Score: 1

This may already exist but if not, how possible would it be to add an additional DNS that has rapidly updated IPs for politically (or otherwise) blocked servers? So long as the user could add this DNS to the ISP provided DNS server list it would be able to more rapidly react to such blocking based on DNS names.
The ISPs would of course block the alternate DNS unless it provided primarily non-pirate related alternative DNS services.

--
blindly antisocialist = antisocial
1. Re:Alternative DNS by znerk · 2011-12-16 22:23 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  This may already exist but if not, how possible would it be to add an additional DNS that has rapidly updated IPs for politically (or otherwise) blocked servers? So long as the user could add this DNS to the ISP provided DNS server list it would be able to more rapidly react to such blocking based on DNS names.
  The ISPs would of course block the alternate DNS unless it provided primarily non-pirate related alternative DNS services.
  For instance, google's dns servers, at 8.8.8.8 and 8.8.4.4?
  Google told China to back down, and got away with it. I doubt they're afraid of Belgium.
  
  --
  This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
2. Re:Alternative DNS by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-16 23:18 · Score: 1
  
  In China DNS poisoning prevents you from using Google DNS. Well, not prevent it, but make it utterly useless.
  DNSCrypt from OpenDNS is helping though. Websites like facebook.com now open fine for me here in China. (Not all websites obviously as some are IP blocked in addition to being poisoned).
3. Re:Alternative DNS by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-16 23:44 · Score: 0
  
  everyone's afraid of Belgium now! We have a gay Italian socialist immigrant for a prime minister!
4. Re:Alternative DNS by Opportunist · 2011-12-17 01:17 · Score: 1
  
  Wait, wait... you have a government again?
  See what it got you?
  
  --
  We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
5. Re:Alternative DNS by sociocapitalist · 2011-12-17 03:26 · Score: 1
  
  Not fast enough. My point is to have something that could be updated in, say, five minutes if the previous result IP had been blocked by the ISP or government.
  
  --
  blindly antisocialist = antisocial
6. Re:Alternative DNS by znerk · 2011-12-18 00:16 · Score: 1
  
  Not fast enough. My point is to have something that could be updated in, say, five minutes if the previous result IP had been blocked by the ISP or government.
  The DNS spec isn't fast enough, then. When I used to update my DNS entries via a third-party DNS server, instead of running my own, I would be told that global propagation could take up to 72 hours. Admittedly, this was years ago, but I wouldn't imagine it to have changed all that much in the intervening time - updates only happen so fast, and that's just the way it is. If you want a more speedy DNS propagation, then I guess you'll need to either run a DNS server yourself, or find some darknet DNS server somewhere that already has this functionality.
  The downside of this would be that if the "evil authority" in your story discovers the IP of the "rogue" DNS server, then you're hosed - and tracking the destinations of a specific IP's packets directed at a specific port isn't rocket surgery - this is one of the reasons why TOR is less bullet-proof than it could be (by default).
  
  --
  This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
7. Re:Alternative DNS by znerk · 2011-12-18 00:19 · Score: 1
  
  When I said "Google told China to back down", I wasn't actually referring to DNS stuff, I was referring to this event.
  
  --
  This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
8. Re:Alternative DNS by sociocapitalist · 2011-12-18 01:15 · Score: 1
  
  In addition to propagation delays the normal DNS infrastructure can't work as the ISP themselves can block lookups to a given domain name by putting entries in their own servers, which is why I was thinking alternate DNS with only a relatively short list of 'sensitive' name resolution entries allowing very few servers to serve the entire net, eliminating the propagation delay.
  I agree with you about the potential blocking of the alternate servers so perhaps a new mechanism is needed where the alternative DNS is tunneled in http(s) and thus can use any proxy to avoid being blocked. Should work anywhere a local proxy isn't forced I would think, and even then it would be easy enough to set up many mirrors to avoid local proxy blocking.
  
  --
  blindly antisocialist = antisocial
9. Re:Alternative DNS by znerk · 2011-12-20 08:37 · Score: 1
  
  In addition to propagation delays the normal DNS infrastructure can't work as the ISP themselves can block lookups to a given domain name by putting entries in their own servers...
  No, they can't. Or rather, that only works if you're using their servers. If you send a dns query packet to a specific IP address, you should only receive a response from the IP address you requested one from. Any firewall worth calling a firewall will block most spoofing attacks by default.
  
  ...which is why I was thinking alternate DNS with only a relatively short list of 'sensitive' name resolution entries allowing very few servers to serve the entire net, eliminating the propagation delay.
  If you are sending DNS queries to a specific server, then your propagation delay is only as long as it takes for that server to update. In other words, if you're using a "darknet" DNS server, then as soon as the admin (or whatever automated process exists) updates the DNS records, that server begins sharing the new DNS records; without propagation, there can be no propagation delay.
  
  I agree with you about the potential blocking of the alternate servers so perhaps a new mechanism is needed where the alternative DNS is tunneled in http(s) and thus can use any proxy to avoid being blocked. Should work anywhere a local proxy isn't forced I would think, and even then it would be easy enough to set up many mirrors to avoid local proxy blocking.
  For a secure(ish) proxy, look into TOR (The Onion Router) - it can be configured to send DNS queries through the secure tunnel, although it does not do it by default (if I recall correctly - always double-check information you receive from random strangers on the internet). Of course, you may want to be aware that by running TOR, you are also volunteering to be an endpoint for lots of other people's traffic, so the cost may outweight the benefit in the final analysis.
  Alternatively, there are literally thousands of websites out there that will perform a DNS lookup for you in your web browser - try "DNS lookup" as your search terms in your search engine of choice. That query on google gave me back "About 5,030,000 results (0.14 seconds)" - all of the ones on the first page of results looked relevant, at a glance.
  To be completely honest, I think you're making this process out to be much more complicated than it actually is.
  
  --
  This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
dns poisoning by arbiter1 · 2011-12-16 22:06 · Score: 1

When will these copyright groups learn that DNS Poisoning as this pretty much is don't stop anything. They may claim it will stop most people, But are most people really that dumb to not know how to use google or bing to search out easy way around the blocks.
1. Re:dns poisoning by znerk · 2011-12-16 22:26 · Score: 2
  
  When will these copyright groups learn that DNS Poisoning as this pretty much is don't stop anything. They may claim it will stop most people, But are most people really that dumb to not know how to use google or bing to search out easy way around the blocks.
  I have known 11-year-olds who knew how to get at the anime they wanted to watch, in sequential order, with or without subtitles and/or overdubbed language (as desired). I have known 30-somethings who got confused if the text they searched for didn't bring up "that thing I saw yesterday" as the first result.
  So, I guess the answer to your query is "...Maybe?"
  
  --
  This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
2. Re:dns poisoning by Gaygirlie · 2011-12-16 23:17 · Score: 1
  
  But are most people really that dumb to not know how to use google or bing to search out easy way around the blocks.
  Short answer: yes.
3. Re:dns poisoning by h00manist · 2011-12-17 06:20 · Score: 1
  
  Well they have stated on the record that they don't really hope to block all file sharing - they just want to make it as hard, impractical, frustrating, and inefficient as possible.
  So poisoning downloads, breaking dns, domains, uploading fakes, scaring, suing, intimidating, etc, is their chosen strategy. War of attrition?
  
  --
  Build your own energy sources from scratch. http://otherpower.com/
4. Re:dns poisoning by znerk · 2011-12-18 01:54 · Score: 1
  
  Well they have stated on the record that they don't really hope to block all file sharing - they just want to make it as hard, impractical, frustrating, and inefficient as possible.
  So poisoning downloads, breaking dns, domains, uploading fakes, scaring, suing, intimidating, etc, is their chosen strategy. War of attrition?
  To be honest, I absolutely love what the media industry has done in their "war of attrition". The mass media's exposure of all the underhanded tactics they have employed has turned what might have been a quiet war of attrition into a public spectacle. The rootkits on audio CDs; the suing of dead grandmothers, children with single-digit-ages, and single moms for millions of dollars in "damages"; the "MAFIAA" tactics of knocking on people's doors and threatening them; all of this has contributed to the more rapid demise of the outdated, outmoded, and frankly outclassed business practices employed by the media control industry for decades. "DRM" has come to mean "Digital Restrictions Management", rather than "Digital Rights Management" in the public eye, and has mostly been destroyed as an effective means of restricting the distribution of licensed content.
  The Streisand effect has made the ability to "steal" media ubiquitous, and there is practically no way to pull the plug on it, without destroying or crippling the greatest communications tool ever invented (the internet).
  The general public is becoming more aware that the "pirates" are able to access the restricted content freely, in ways that are not possible for mere "paying consumers", and the backlash has been a sight to behold. The new "downloadable digital copy" is a good example of the media industry's lackluster response, as it only works if you have a Windows-based PC to download and view it on. Sorry, Linux and Mac, you guys need to pay the Microsoft tax or you don't get to (legally) transfer your (legally-purchased) digital media to your digital playback device.
  My response to the previous paragraph's tactic is to simply rip the movie anyway - Fair Use laws guarantee me the right to make a backup copy, and I see no issue with having my original disc be my backup, with the digital version being the "in-use" copy on my media server. Theoretically, a pressed disc will last for decades, if not centuries, assuming you keep it in a vibration-less, cool, and dark place - the shelves and cabinets in my half-finished (and furnished) "shed" mostly qualify as exactly that. The peace of mind I enjoy because I don't have to worry about one of my friends' kids smashing, scratching, or otherwise injuring a plastic disc is well worth the effort of spending an hour with my newly purchased (from the $5 bin at the bigbox store, or even cheaper from the local pawn shop) media in a linux machine's optical drive.
  Intellectual Property law is on the verge of being reformed in one way or another, and as far as practical implications, those laws may as well not even be on the books. I don't personally "steal" music and movies (unless you consider my "format shifted backup" of my legally-purchased media to be "theft"), but I know many people who do, and they do it with practical impunity. There is such a huge non-profit black market for movies now that (I am told) there is typically a BluRay rip available the same day the movie releases in the theaters (I'm assuming it's generated from a screener, or somehow lifted from the production-room floor, so to speak).
  I understand the frustration and panic displayed by the media industry - they didn't pay enough attention to the rapid rise of technology, and their business model is now obsolete. They're still arranging the deck chairs and bailing with cocktail glasses, but the ship is most assuredly sinking. Unlike many proponents of "piracy", I don't think this is a completely good thing... Once "Big Money" loses interest in the media industry because it's not profitable enough to deal with anymore, I am concerned about what level of entertainment qualit
  
  --
  This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
Totally agree by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-16 22:09 · Score: 0

In addition to this impressive group think my other favourite is the double standard about jobs moving overseas.
Yeah information wants to be Free!
But not our jobs - that information needs to held tightly!
My personal favourite pirate argument - nothing is lost when I pirate something so therefore it's morally ok.
No it isn't morally ok, you are depriving the creator their choice in where and how their creation is distributed. Using P2P on files you don't have copyright on you are actively distributing someone else's creation without their permission.
It's basically some hand waving that allows people to feel morally innocent. I've no issue with pirates who admit what they are doing is morally unjustifiable - it's the freetards who think it's OK and they're STICKING IT TO THE MAN that get my goat.
Sadly both you and I will get modded down as people "need their free shit".
1. Re:Totally agree by migla · 2011-12-16 22:45 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  No it isn't morally ok, you are depriving the creator their choice in where and how their creation is distributed. Using P2P on files you don't have copyright on you are actively distributing someone else's creation without their permission.
  It's basically some hand waving that allows people to feel morally innocent. I've no issue with pirates who admit what they are doing is morally unjustifiable - it's the freetards who think it's OK and they're STICKING IT TO THE MAN that get my goat.
  Sadly both you and I will get modded down as people "need their free shit".
  Since we have the means of copying something that has value, we should do that. For free, we can spread joy, information, knowledge and culture to people. Obviously, we should do that.
  We should also find a way for talented people creating the content to be able to keep doing what they do and not having to get a job at McD which would cut into their time of producing their art. A little bit of socialism could help.
  A good starting point to build a more sane society, where passionate people could pursue their passion while the rest of us could get jobs to afford luxury items to fill the void of lacking a passion, might be a basic income guarantee.
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income_guarantee
  
  --
  Some of my favourite people are from th US; Vonnegut, Chomsky, Bill Hicks.
2. Re:Totally agree by alexgieg · 2011-12-17 01:08 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  No it isn't morally ok, you are depriving the creator their choice in where and how their creation is distributed. Using P2P on files you don't have copyright on you are actively distributing someone else's creation without their permission.
  Yes and no. This isn't usually brought into the discussion, but it's a basic moral and ethical principle that for every right there must be a corresponding duty. Hence, when those that detain a "right to copy" fail in fulfilling the corresponding "duty to copy" by, say, refusing to employ all the copy channels available and/or by discriminating against recipients on grounds of age, race, sex, religion, geography etc., it's a moral duty of all concerned to fulfill their copyduty role for them.
  For instance, I love to watch anime, and use streaming services for this. But now and then I found an anime whose copyrighter, filled with geographist bigotry, refuses his copyduty to stream to my country. Now, since they dismissed their copyduty, I don't feel a duty myself to respect their copyright, and thus I pirate. Were they to correctly follow their copyduties, and I would never pirate. And, I bet, that's also true for most pirates out there.
  Sites like the Pirate Bay exist and thrive only in those instances in which copyrighters willingly decouple themselves from their copyduties, hoping we wouldn't notice such a distortion in the social contract. These sites are, quite literally, copyduty enforces. As for those copyrighters who do fulfill their copyduties, they have nothing to worry. In their case, the societal balance is already established, and working as intended.
  PS.: "Intended by whom", you ask? Why, by society itself, of course, in its intuitive understanding of what "is" (clearly feels) right and what "is" (clearly feels) wrong. The above, much like sane laws, is but an explicit exposition, in logical clothing, of the inner logic behind such intuitions of right and wrong. No one is against content makers earning a living from their work, but there's a baseline human understanding on how it should happen. And "copydutyless copyright" is something that clearly doesn't fit it.
  
  --
  Conservatism: (n.) love of the existing evils. Liberalism: (n.) desire to substitute new evils for the existing ones.
3. Re:Totally agree by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-17 01:11 · Score: 0
  
  ...you are depriving the creator their choice in where and how their creation is distributed
  Oh, really?
  and there was me, thinking that this was all to do with the organised crime syndicates which run the music business, and their cohorts in Hollywood getting pissy about the fact that they're losing tons of revenoo that they can plough into 'legitimate business interests', now I know the artist has full control over the distribution of his works...
  Google Robert Fripp's thoughts on the 'legitimate' music industry sometime and what they've done with his works, and he's not the only one..
4. Re:Totally agree by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-17 03:42 · Score: 0
  
  No it isn't morally ok, you are depriving the creator their choice in where and how their creation is distributed. Using P2P on files you don't have copyright on you are actively distributing someone else's creation without their permission.
  You are entitled to your opinion. I've got a different one. There is no natural law that says that someone owns their creative works. If an artist wants to be stingy, they can keep it to themselves and completely control where and how it is distributed by not distributing it. On the other hand, if they release it, then they have given up that right of exclusive control for a spin on the wheel of fortune. But, once again, they have no moral right to control what happens to it after their choice has been made. You are welcome to present your case; but most of what I hear from your side of the debate is as equally indefensible as that of many infringers and merely boils down to selfishness. Your brand happens to be currently enshrined by law. Times change.
5. Re:Totally agree by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-17 04:38 · Score: 0
  
  What if my passion is making gobs and gobs of money? Why do you assume that people who like to work for a living aren't passionate about what they're doing?
  There is so much wrong with the fundamental assumptions that you're making about people.
6. Re:Totally agree by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-17 04:56 · Score: 0
  
  How exactly does basic income guarantee hurt your passion of making "gobs and gobs" of money?
  There is so much wrong with your silly strawman.
7. Re:Totally agree by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-17 05:46 · Score: 1
  
  No it isn't morally ok, you are depriving the creator their choice in where and how their creation is distributed. Using P2P on files you don't have copyright on you are actively distributing someone else's creation without their permission.
  Conversely, that creator is depriving me my choice in how I arrange my ink on my paper, or bistable voltage levels in my computer's memory. The adage that my right to stretch my arm ends where my neighbor's nose begins springs to mind -- even granting some notion of intellectual property and authorial control, there's the issue of who's the fist and who's the nose here?
  However, I (and a very few others) see through the copyright lobby's bullshit. This "right" of authors to control their creation was fabricated from thin air a scant 300 years ago by publishers (who opposed author's rights in general up till then) when they were unable to get the same right (also invented), but applying to the first publisher to print a work, not the actual author who wrote it, recognized in law. They compromised, settling for the less transparent authors' "right", only because they thought they could still control the work -- after all, what could an artist do with a work but sell the rights to a publisher on the publisher's terms? This stands in stark contrast to personal property rights, which have been more-or-less recognized over thousands of years. One of these sounds like a profit-increasing fraud, the sort of thing one might expect some big corporation to pull today with the help of some bought congressmen, while the other sounds like a real, natural, moral right -- I leave you to guess which is which.
8. Re:Totally agree by h00manist · 2011-12-17 05:51 · Score: 2
  
  A good starting point to build a more sane society, where passionate people could pursue their passion while the rest of us could get jobs to afford luxury items to fill the void of lacking a passion, might be a basic income guarantee.
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income_guarantee
  If the music industry is so interested in creating music and supporting musicians, I think all their effort and expense towards lawyers would somehow be more effiient if they created music schools, promoted musicians, shows. They want us to believe in the the insane story that humans will not make music anymore, music and culture will die and disappear from history... why? because it can be easily distributed? quickly and without cost? That's going to kill music?
  Perhaps we should say that taking the corporations out of music is actually going to save it.
  
  --
  Build your own energy sources from scratch. http://otherpower.com/
9. Re:Totally agree by cheekyjohnson · 2011-12-17 07:21 · Score: 1
  
  No it isn't morally ok
  Subjective.
  
  you are depriving the creator their choice in where and how their creation is distributed
  You drilled into their skull and took away their ability to believe that they can do something? Wow, people sure do 'deprive' me of a lot of things, then!
  Also, they still very much have that ability. They haven't lost their ability to choose where and how their creation is distributed. It's just that the pirates are doing it, too.
  
  morally unjustifiable
  Subjective.
  In any case, your assumptions and generalizations completely obliterated the opposition. That was truly the end of the pirates. You're completely right and they're completely wrong.
  
  --
  Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
10. Re:Totally agree by migla · 2011-12-17 07:27 · Score: 1
  
  If your passion is making gobs and gobs of money, then go make gobs and gobs of money.
  
  --
  Some of my favourite people are from th US; Vonnegut, Chomsky, Bill Hicks.
11. Re:Totally agree by newcastlejon · 2011-12-17 07:57 · Score: 1
  
  We should also find a way for talented people creating the content to be able to keep doing what they do and not having to get a job at McD which would cut into their time of producing their art. A little bit of socialism could help.
  Sounds a lot like Communism to me, not that that's a bad thing in itself. From each... to each..., and all that.
  
  --
  If God forks the Universe every time you roll a die, he'd better have a damned good memory.
12. Re:Totally agree by drsmithy · 2011-12-17 18:32 · Score: 1
  
  No it isn't morally ok, you are depriving the creator their choice in where and how their creation is distributed.
  *Reality* "deprives" the creator of that "choice". P2P is merely a manifestation of the simple fact that information is trivial to create and duplicate, and nearly impossible to destroy. Go back millennia or so and "P2P" was someone wandering around the countryside singing songs beside the campfire every night.
13. Re:Totally agree by metacell · 2011-12-17 22:04 · Score: 1
  
  I've seen people on Slashdot WORRY over jobs moving overseas, but I haven't yet seen anyone here who wants to OUTLAW it.
did they ? by unity100 · 2011-12-16 22:20 · Score: 4, Insightful

you are grossly ignorant of this.

a medieval peasant would lose A LOT more than you, from his/her perspective. foremost being the piety, the standing in front of god's eyes. because the church have been conditioning people from birth to believing that lords held power in god's name, rebelling against the nobles had basically been made into a sin.

for a medieval peasant even to muster the will to break that conditioning was something major.

and, you dont know what came after repressed revolts - medieval torture. yes, not metaphorically, real medieval torture.

if you are fooled into believing that you have more belongings and comfort of life in contemporary world, hence more to lose - think again - you are getting LESS than available amount and level of technology and wealth available to your civilization at your time, than a medieval peasant got as share from his society at his time - his share was 33%, and your share is just 15%.

http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html

--
Read radical news here
1. Re:did they ? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-16 22:53 · Score: 0
  
  I prefer my 15% thank you very much.
2. Re:did they ? by causality · 2011-12-16 23:20 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  for a medieval peasant even to muster the will to break that conditioning was something major.
  
  The only difference between then and now is that back then there were a few agreed-upon forms of conditioning that few individuals were able to question. We're much more sophisticated now. We've developed a wide variety of forms of conditioning that few individuals are able to question. Fewer would listen anyway -- they're too busy defending their particular form and explaining why other forms are absurd.
  
  These days, the conditioned can feel like they had a choice in the matter. It's like choosing your master in order to celebrate your great freedom of choice.
  
  If you had the kind of freedom that celebrates itself, you wouldn't choose any master.
  
  --
  It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
3. Re:did they ? by dkleinsc · 2011-12-17 03:16 · Score: 1
  
  The only difference between then and now is that back then there were a few agreed-upon forms of conditioning that few individuals were able to question.
  There still are a few:
  * How many ran out and bought at least 1 tchotchke for each of your family members and a few of your friends over the last month? Something that would probably not be used too much, but felt necessary to give?
  * How many sat down and watched a TV show they didn't really like so they'd be in on the conversations about it at work?
  * How many believe that food comes from fast food restaurants, and have no idea how it's made?
  * How many get their musical tastes from a ClearChannel radio station?
  Most of this conditioning is related to convincing you to buy stuff you don't need.
  
  --
  I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
NOT w3schools! It's the worst site on the net! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-16 22:54 · Score: 2, Informative

Please. This did more bad than good.
Instead use the force, read it at the source, Luke!
1. Re:NOT w3schools! It's the worst site on the net! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-17 00:12 · Score: 0
  
  It's the only site people of his calibre seem to understand, judging from my cow-orkers.
Use different DNS: Google by GNious · 2011-12-16 23:16 · Score: 4, Informative

Use 8.8.8.8 as your DNS server - works nicely with thepiratebay.org (I just tested)
1. Re:Use different DNS: Google by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-16 23:47 · Score: 0
  
  Use 8.8.8.8 as your DNS server - works nicely with thepiratebay.org (I just tested)
  It'll just be a matter of time before ISP's start blocking access to external DNS servers, just like they started doing with SMTP many years back.
2. Re:Use different DNS: Google by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-17 00:03 · Score: 1
  
  and then people will start sharing hosts files with IPs of blocked domains.
3. Re:Use different DNS: Google by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-17 00:10 · Score: 0
  
  and then people will start sharing hosts files with IPs of blocked domains.
  Yeah, sharing them on TPB. Oh, wait...
4. Re:Use different DNS: Google by Opportunist · 2011-12-17 01:20 · Score: 1
  
  No, on the various boards around the planet.
  Block them? ALL of them? Enjoy playing whack-a-mole much?
  Ok. start a facebook page dedicated to it, or a twitter entry.
  Block facebook and twitter?
  Uh... ya know, while the average surfer probably won't notice that TBP is missing, I have a hunch that a few people MIGHT notice if FB and twitter are gone...
  
  --
  We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
5. Re:Use different DNS: Google by Halo1 · 2011-12-17 01:37 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Use 8.8.8.8 as your DNS server - works nicely with thepiratebay.org (I just tested)
  At least until Google gives UMG access to its DNS server
  
  --
  Donate free food here
6. Re:Use different DNS: Google by GNious · 2011-12-17 01:46 · Score: 2
  
  True, that would cause some hiccups in this plan.
  More likely, (short-term), is that Belgacom et al will block access to 3rd party DNS services.
very well put : by unity100 · 2011-12-16 23:27 · Score: 1

These days, the conditioned can feel like they had a choice in the matter. It's like choosing your master in order to celebrate your great freedom of choice.

quite accurate.

--
Read radical news here
Logical conclusion by eddy · 2011-12-17 00:06 · Score: 1

So where does this 'DNS blocking' nonsense end? Well, since it's trivial to set up, all that will happen is that we will have a "Freedom DNS" layer out there. How do you stop that? I guess you could try and block those IPs. Okay, so you layer it on top of a DHT say. Now what? Either you continue to 'whack a mole', or you make it illegal to look up some numbers on the internet.
That's the end point of this, another crazy 'these bits are special and you're not allowed to see/copy/think about them' law. This can only end with more freedom thrown handcuffed into the cellar while corporate interests are getting blowjobs from eager politicians mubling incoherently about 'the children and the jobs'.
At some point there's going to be a physical reaction to this insanity. Just keep pumping up the pressure.

--
Belief is the currency of delusion.
bad idea? by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-17 00:31 · Score: 0

maybe just twitter the ip-address on #piratebay?
i'm sure we can all type-in a number?
-OR-
RSS-feed?
Email?
auto-update IRC-chat bot?
shoutcast with SIRI like voice saying the ip-address? ...
Trademark is a Lottery by retroworks · 2011-12-17 01:01 · Score: 1

This is like a quarrel at a casino. If you take all the singers, banjo players, actors, actresses, etc. and add up all their income, and compare that to the ratio that goes to the few who make it big in Hollywood, the whole entertainment industry resembles a lottery. It's funded by charging for overpriced tickets. Whenever you overcharge for something (margins over value of cost of production) you create huge incentives for piracy. The music industry should have revamped the "Columbia Record Club" of the 1970s Parade Magazine, given away enough songs/albums up front for customers to feel like they were getting a deal.

--
Gently reply
Anti-copyright, or pro-piracy? by h00manist · 2011-12-17 02:43 · Score: 1

I guess "anti-copyright" is being opposed to copyright/patent laws. "Pro-piracy" is disbeying the law. Although politically the two opinions are likely closely aligned in politically opposing copyright. I suspect agreement becomes harder when discussing an alternative law - discussion which just doesn't exist yet, as it's not yet politically viable.
But I'd propose that the new law simply say - Intellectual concepts, information, and ideas, when unlocked and detached from any hard property, is simply human knowledge. And human knowledge cannot be owned by anyone, it can always be circulated and communicated freely. When attached to a certain hard media, such as paper, computers, data-recording media, or any equivalent, anyone may sell that media for whatever amount one decides to ask.
In other words, if you have access to any information you think you should make public and distribute, you may do so, and noboy may stop you or punish you for it.
That includes industrial information, technical information, personal information, product information, military information, espionage information, and any other information.
If anyone decides to inflict violence upon others based on some information, they will respond for and be responsible for their violence. Information, technology, and machines do not create violence - violent people create violence.
The priority issue in human society is violence - not property. Economic violence, psychological violence (lies), discrimination violence, physical violence, and several other forms. Information is just not a priority issue, and in fact, it's just knowledge, and everyone is entitled to have access to it.
I believe any other interpretation, such as "the artists must get paid", simply eventually leads to ownership, and blocking access, restrictions, and so on.

--
Build your own energy sources from scratch. http://otherpower.com/
Written law vs practiced law by h00manist · 2011-12-17 05:23 · Score: 1

people "need their free shit".
Uhm yea started a while back, British East India Company, colonies, gold, Roman Empire taxes, etc. It's what money-society teaches, by example. You can't steal. Actually... you can't get *caught* stealing. But if you have the power to, or the need to, and you're either the Authority, The Rebel, or the Poor Man... your job, obligation, or right, is to steal.
There is the written law, the praticed law, the culture, society, tradition, the moral law, social context, political reality... you have to take all of these into account. Not just the paper law. If you look at just the paper law it's either in your interest, or you are being naive.
Look at military, police, legal, and tax practices, and you will get a crash course in paper law vs practiced law real fast.

--
Build your own energy sources from scratch. http://otherpower.com/
Robert Fripp lays in to music rip-off merchants by h00manist · 2011-12-17 05:32 · Score: 1

Here you are. It's always nice to see rapist corporations put under the proper light.
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1029514/fripp-lays-music-industry-rip
Robert Fripp lays in to music industry rip-off merchants
Vista composer exposes EMI's lucrative shenanigans
Source: The Inquirer (http://s.tt/14sUS)

--
Build your own energy sources from scratch. http://otherpower.com/
Oblig Adams... by SmurfButcher+Bob · 2011-12-17 11:22 · Score: 1

...only on Earth would someone actually name a country "Belgium".

--

help me i've cloned myself and can't remember which one I am
This Christmas time, just imagine... by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-17 11:39 · Score: 0

Just imagine the good that you could all accomplish if you put to constructive use the same time and effort that you put into stealing from artists, musicians, filmmakers, developers, and all those who they employ.
Just imagine.
1. Re:This Christmas time, just imagine... by metacell · 2011-12-17 22:44 · Score: 1
  
  Piracy IS a constructive activity. Every time you download something over BitTorrent, you help others download it. Piracy helps spread culture to the wider masses, without having a measurable impact on the income of artists (study after study shows that the people who pirate the most are also the ones who spend the most money on culture, and the loss in potential sales is roughly made up for by the free advertising provided by piracy).
Re:BAF by TaoPhoenix · 2011-12-17 13:05 · Score: 1

Et tu, Belgium?

--
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
Namecoin by Anonymous Coward · 2011-12-17 16:17 · Score: 0

Namecoin anyone? Just google it...
Staley hopes to return from concussion; Willis que by xingnuo01 · 2011-12-17 17:18 · Score: 1

Boleynfl jerseys, who signed a $25 million contract with the Giants in 2009, has dealt with alleged domestic violence in the past. He was arrested in May 2008 in Gwinnett County, Ga., and charged with three counts ofnfl jerseys wholesale domestic battery for allegedly beating his wife, according to The Star-Ledger. The prosecutor eventually decided not to pursue the case. However, Boley received a one-game suspension cheap nfl jerseys from the NFL -- the first of his career -- for violating the league's personal conduct policy. Forte wants to play and is well aware of the Bears' struggles, as they've lost three in a row custom nfl jerseysand are in a fight for a wild card spot at 7-6. But he also knows he's not close to feeling comfortable with returning. Staley, who took part in Saturday's walk-through with his nfl jerseys wholesalehelmet on, told the Sacramento Bee that he hopes to be cleared for full contact Sunday."You've got to go through the steps," Staley said. "I've been passing nfl jerseysall the steps, doing well. It's still in the doctor's hands. I have no real say in this. It's all protocol." Wide receiver Braylon Edwards (knee) and fullback Bruce Miller (knee) also are listed as cheap nfl jerseysquestionable for the 49ers but are expected to play.
mafiaafire.com by KingBenny · 2011-12-18 21:08 · Score: 1

also, they got no case at all, EU supreme court already ruled in favor of scarlet after it got threatened, ruling said no isp can be forced into filtering content, im pretty sure the moral there is they can't be forced to block either. I don't get why base would succumb to this extortion tactic when there is already a legal precedent. Shows agani how much balls these people have, i think you need to be castrated from birth to run a business in belgium. In the end no one wins and the blocks are useless anyway there's like a thousand ways to circumvent and even the layman can get around it easily. It's all typical belgian bs

--
Free speech was meant to be free for all... how can anyone grow up in a nanny state ?
Anonymous to the rescue???? by hesaigo999ca · 2011-12-19 04:57 · Score: 1

This is a job for Anonymous.....
whats that up in the sky, its a bird, its a plane, no its......a binary stream ready to take out all R U BELONG To US servers....
I cant wait till they decide to go after the anti piracy people...
Beats By Dr Dre Tour by ningmeng12 · 2011-12-20 18:45 · Score: 1

Alexander Mcqueen shoes have hundreds of styles that will make a woman shop till she drops, Lady Gaga Heartbeats from leather ankle boots to stiletto high heels, there are plenty to choose from you won't Monster Beats Solo know where to start. A tip on how to shop before you Monster Beats NFL Teams buy your perfect pair of shoes is to stop Monster Beats Studio and think what you need most, and what you will use most often.