Slashdot Mirror
Belgium Anti-Piracy Group Expands Attack On Access To the Pirate Bay
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."
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
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
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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).
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.
Please. This did more bad than good.
Instead use the force, read it at the source, Luke!
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.
Use 8.8.8.8 as your DNS server - works nicely with thepiratebay.org (I just tested)
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
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.
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.
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
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
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/
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/
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/
Right. Because there's never, ever been a movie, song, poem, book, story, or anything else created to demonstrate and explain "reality".
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.
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.
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?
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.