Slashdot Mirror
USTR Publishes Rogue Sites List
bs0d3 writes "The U.S. Government has classified some of the largest websites on the Internet as examples of sites which sustain global piracy. The list released by the United States Trade Representative draws exclusively on input from rightsholders. It includes popular torrent sites such as The Pirate Bay, file-hosting service Megaupload, and Russia's leading social network VKontakte. VKontakte says that company's copyright problems are in the past after a deal was made with the USTR. Also, for the first time in many years, China's leading search engine Baidu has been removed from the list. However, China's widely used online consumer and business-oriented online shopping service Taobao remains listed. The full report can be viewed here. It has no legal implications whatsoever, but may be referred to by policy makers regarding future legislation (e.g. SOPA)."
I'm a rightsholder too. For example, I hold the rights to this post. But I wasn't included.
I think it's more correct to say that they drew input exclusively from large media cartel members, not from rightsholders in general.
If they had asked me, for example, I would have listed riaa.org and mpaa.org as rogue sites that sustain global piracy. I don't need evidence. I'm a rightsholder!
And not Google? or Bing?
filetype:torrent $SEARCH_TERM
Another biased & agenda laden publication from The United Corporations of America.
Thanks for naming all the popular sites I never knew about, keep up the good work, I tip my hat to the USTR :D
By the way, if you close these sites, any chance you could do another report so I don't have to go to the fuss of looking for infringing content?
In case you're wondering, the current person filling the post is Ron Kirk, appointed by Obama in 2009. Though it doesn't seem that USTR policy differs much under Republican versus Democratic administrations; sadly this one isn't a partisan issue because both parties are generally on the wrong side.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
I love how these two sites made it into the list. They are claimed to be selling "circumvention devices and components used to circumvent technological protection measures on consoles". If they are openly selling these things, I am assuming it is legal in Canada to do so - showing a lovely attitude of "If we call it illegal, it is illegal everywhere in the entire world!" from American "rightholders".
Also, that must have been from the Rightholder Group Dept of Redundancy Right Holder Group.
Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
Isn't anyone wondering why we get to see lists like that, but no "shame" lists of various internet sellers of brand knockoffs? Ya know, the kind of asshats that keeps spamming /., amongst other sites, with their claims for cheap, cheap prices?
One really has to wonder why this list and not one of the real problem for economy, the commercial infringers. The damage is by some margin higher, and unlike that one, such a shame list, along with action against the operators of such sites, would not only make the economy proponents happy, I bet quite a few internet users would love to see less "cheap outlet" spam littering in their inbox and message boards.
Government really needs a few marketing goons...
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
"The U.S. Government has classified some of the largest websites on the Internet as examples of sites which sustain global piracy."
Disney has pirated a lot from the brothers Grimm, Mark Twain, Hans Christian Anderson, etc. And, they continue to pirate our culture.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
If you're trying to find pirated movies or software, it's got a nice list of sites you can go to.
"They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
I'm convinced that anything which legislates against common human behavior will never have the desired effect. This generalization is, of course, with exceptions and limitations (consider laws against theft and murder and the like) but largely holds true of many things. Laws against prostitution, for example has never stopped it and does little to even inhibit it. A law against smoking wouldn't help. There are countless other examples where civil behavior will simply always be a fact of human society. I hold that file and information sharing is one of these things and what's more, I hold we can't really be human without it. I know it sounds absurd, but what we are talking about is sharing human culture, heritage, art, expression... these are the things that make us human. Trying to package it and make it a "product" is okay within limits, but at some point, it becomes anti-human and I hold we have passed beyond that point quite some time ago.
Does anyone in the real world care about this list? Unless you're after government contracts I can't really see how business is likely to be affected by your inclusion on it.
Damned right they do! As TFA predicts, clueless policy makers will soon be citing it as "the official list of pirate sites...", if they are not already. "After all, teh list is on teh interwebs, so it must be true. Think of the children..." The same braid dead rationale behind SOPA is already in play here. Just because it does not (yet) carry the force of law, it's effect is very real.
the internet killed it
it is unenforceable law
millions of global media hungry technology savvy and most importantly POOR teenagers has made this so, and there is absolutely nothing anyone can do this short of destroying the internet
not that they won't try, and not that they understand or accept this, but maybe someone should scream into these ignorant fucking media dinosaur's ears until they understand that no amount of purchased congresscritter whores, hired tech hacks, or lawyer goons can stop this
game over morons. please don't destroy the most imporatnt media invention since the written word and the printing press in your disability to comprehend fucking reality
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it