Slashdot Mirror
Dutch Court Forces ISPs To Block the Pirate Bay
New submitter swinferno writes "After recent successes in Finland, Italy and Belgium, the Dutch Copyright protection organization BREIN has obtained a verdict that forces two major ISPs to block access to The Pirate Bay domains and gives them the right to submit future domains/IP addresses to be blocked in the future without court order."
And from a country where a man once gave his life for freedom of speech, no less.
They once fought the Nazi's, but now they drop to their knees before the entertainment industry.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
The verdict also said that if they submit non-TPB domains or ip's and violate that court decision, they will be legally liable.
The Dutch ISP XS4ALL just decided to appeal again. They might win since BREIN based their offence on some very (VERY) poorly done statistics.
Is it just me, or is the crusade to monitor everything accelerating? Now I know why the world ends in Dec 2012! All of these Big Brother movements will collide into a giant explosion!
You know - what if every page anyone has ever looked at leaked and became public domain?
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
So get everyone to use http://dot-bit.org/Main_Page
Ofc being a wiki page someone has just ruined it but anyone who should know enough about torrents should also have it in their locker to get dot bit running and then by using piratebay.bit they'll never have to worry about this sort of rubbish again. (check our previous revisions for all the information)
The alternatives are either remembering a static IP address (which could change at a moments notice) or use an alternative DNS root which has its own worse problems.
This has the potential for some serious griefing. Since they'll keep blocking IPs and such, obviously TPB needs new IPs constantly. Cloud time! How many of Amazon's IPs do you think they'll have to block before realizing that they're blocking legit sites, too?
"If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
Try to take over the world again
This is a 'rechtbank' (lowest court) judgement. There was just the announcement that there will be an appeal. So this is not the last we will hear of this. Let's hope our internet freedom does mean something to higher judges.
You can't block websites, they'll just pop up under different names and addresses easily discovered with a google search. You should define which websites are allowed like North Korea does with their own internet (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_in_North_Korea).
These aren't so hard - SOCKS proxy works, for instance.
That said, I would suspect that shadow DNS projects would get a kick in the pants by this type of activity as well as SOPA.
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
Equating the enforcement of copyright to censorship of free speech is perhaps the most intellectually dishonest thing the piracy crowd have tried to do.
http://alternatives.rzero.com/
They'll have to shutdown the whole Internet to stop Pirating!
-- By all means let's be open-minded, but not so open-minded that our brains drop out.
So we should remove laws about killing and murdering because the laws do not stop people murdering and killing others?
The law should be a guideline.... something what people respect and honors.
The situation has gone bad because people have been brainwashed that competition and international corporations are good thing.
As competition and international corporations are those what drivens greed and weak minded people to do anything to be on winning side, were it to rise copyright time from 20 years to 150 years or lobbying politicions to support their cause and their needs instead civilians....
Money talks and bullshit walks.... That is what is left from competition and international corporations.
There is way to fix things, it is not to fight or compete. It is about fixing the problems what were created in the first place.
We need to talk people, we need to write to media, we need to demand rights. We can not allow big corporations to compete and ruin whole world because they beliefe they need to do so.
If someone brakes the law, you dont brake to law to catch him.
It is hard to show a good example to your kid when your neighbord or someone else shows bad example. So you dont show a bad example as well, but you explain it to your kid and then you discuss about problem with those who are giving a bad example. And if they dont agree, then you need to talk to people around you and get them to understand that giving a bad example is not allowed by anyone.
And Swiss banks had secrecy laws to protect people from their own tyrannical regimes, such as Jews trying to escape the Nazis.
Now that the US regime has morphed, the IRA finds it necessary to pursue US citizens and crack the Swiss open.
Did you know, the USA was once a tax haven, with matching economic performance.
Prove anything by multiplying Huge Number times Tiny Number
And the most interesting fact is that downloading is legal in the Netherlands under the condition that it is stricktly for private use. And that includes material that violates copyrights. Uploading of illegal materials (that you do not own the rights to) is illegal. Torrent clients that also share/upload are illegal when use to download illegal materials.
Believe me, I know.
And Stichting Brein (=Braindead), under director Tim 'brown arm' Kuik
is a limp dick sissy.
Guess where his nick comes from -- he likes to have it up American asses.
--
bjd
Small correction: Downloading games and software can be illegal if you do not own the rights and/or have a licence.
I know that they have plenty of lawyers, but that can't be the full story. I just have to stop and wonder what makes them think that their right to entertain should outweigh other people's civil rights.
So we should remove laws about killing and murdering because the laws do not stop people murdering and killing others?
If the laws had no effect, we should, or if the effect was moremordering and killing. It's not right to make a law against something without regard to consequences (of course, we do this all the time). Will the actual consequence of the law, after people chnage their behavior and try to game the new system, be better or worse for society? Will banning X mean fewer people use X, or just that we lode visibility into how many people are using X and any possiblity to help those harmed?
That should be the basis upon which laws are evaluated - but of course it never is. Mostly, when poeple pass a law against X, they just don't want to see X around any more, and don't care at all who the law helps or hurts as long as they don't have to see it.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
Agreed Troll. Not so much that we should fight over copyright itself but the corruption the media companies have clearly demonstrated is a very good reason for rebellion.
After all much of the USA watches a TV "news" network (aka FAUX NEWS) owned and controlled by a foreign (UK) criminal!
Could've been a lot worse. The current sentence specifically states TPB because they were already found guilty in another Dutch copyright-infringement case against Brein last year. This is merely a decision to enforce blocking of the 'illegal' site. Also, as it's in a low court with a single judge, and appeal has already been filed, this'll probably go on for years. The good thing to that, is that it'll eventually end up in the European Court of Justice, which earlier already decided (in a case against the Belgian equivalent of Brein, SABAM) that the intrusion of privacy required to block a domain is not outweighed by copyright infringement.
And even if that doesn't happen, Brein still has to get EVERY SINGLE OTHER torrent site convicted, each in their separate trials, and prove every time that the specific site is used for illegal activities, something that in this case cost them a year and a half.
Third and finally: The fine the ISP's are risking is set to 10.000 euros per day, and then limited to a maximum of 250.000. If all else fails, I'm pretty sure the Dutch'll just pay that.
All in all, I'm not that worried, and this is clearly not as big a threat to freedom on the internet as some of the decisions brewing over the Atlantic...
If you enter into google "site:thepiratebay.org" followed by whatever you were looking for, it will bring up cached copies of TPB pages. The magnet links are just text. So does the court order block Google's cached pages also, or is this a trivial workaround?
Lets watch the wack-a-mole game continue to intensify and get ugly.
Sort of like what happened when the RIAA attacked Napster, the resulting press opened up the entire p2p concept to the unwashed masses and 'piracy' blossomed. I have a feeling this game will end up driving people ( and tech ) more underground with more secure tactics to not be caught, AND generate lots of press to bring even more 'violators' to the scene.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
well... time to start using namecoins http://dot-bit.org/Main_Page
http://www.bluishcoder.co.nz/2011/05/12/namecoin-a-dns-alternative-based-on-bitcoin.html
#
#\ @ ? Colonize Mars
#
>They are just doing what the United States is telling them to do.
>Honestly, Why are the Citizens of the Netherlands allowing the USA To dictate their own laws? Why are you people not protesting in the streets over this stuff?
>>>You honestly think there would be no copyright laws abroad without American pressure? Really?
No, no, no, that's not the argument about US influence on copyright laws and other IP laws of other countries. They had their own laws before -- and even before the US joined the Berne Copyright Convention. Mostly they were better balanced too.
What the lobbying influence has done is to insinuate changes that skew the balance that used to be set, between the authors'/publishers' interests and the public interest.
Copyright terms have been drastically lengthened. New infringement offences have been created in the law. New procedural powers have been introduced that can lead to new claims, often enabling control of materials and works that are not even in copyright and would not be eligible for copyright at all (like the 'TPM's that can be used to padlock anything, copyright or not).
On the other hand, look what has become of the parts of the law that were intended to ensure public rights broadly equivalent to 'fair use': in some places they used to go farther, in others not so far, as in the US. They have been narrowed, whittled down, even taken away from some classes of user entirely, under the influence of this lobbying pressure.
And why or how has it been happening? It often isn't the 'citizens' or even their legislatures primarily doing this. These insidious cripplings of public rights often come in through the relatively new channel of international treaties or EU directives carved out in private conferences, not in legislative assemblies. 'Poison pills' of rights removal have been insinuated as part of larger packages: their design has been fixed so that for some larger and usually economic reason, the 'victim country' won't refuse the 'poison pill', so as not to lose whatever the unrelated material was.
Then, what happens in the local legislative assembly is that the mass of lawmakers are held by their bought-and-sold government executives as if at pistol-point, with a dilemma: they can either rubberstamp the whole thing or reject the whole thing. But the design has fixed it so that the latter will be practically infeasible.
The democratic legislative process is not primarily to blame here, it is the sharks who have bypassed it and subverted it that are to blame.
-wb-
BREIN have a history of playing fast and loose with the law, and the artists they claim to represent. Dutch performer Melchior Rietveldt wrote music for a BREIN anti-piracy video, on the condition that it was only used at a local film festival. BREIN then apparently re-purposed the music for a number of retail DVDs, without bothering to pay Rietveldt, or even ask him.
... in return for a 33% cut.
Worse, Rietveldt claims that when he discovered BREIN's omission and contacted a local recording rights group seeking restitution, nothing happened - until a BREIN board member Jochem Gerrits (who also owned a music label) contacted him to offer a deal. Gerrits would get BREIN to pay up
Everything is done in order to maximise the earnings of the administrators, leaving nothing to the real workers. Check: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_accounting
Last time I checked Australia was not part of the US!
We ALL know that CEOs NEVER break the law too - can you say ENRON, et al???
Harmonize this!
Privacy is terrorism.