Slashdot Mirror
The Pirate Bay Launches Free VPN
bs0d3 writes "The Pirate Bay team is going to be making the RIAA angry, with the launch of a new ad-supported VPN service. PrivitizeVPN is available for free from The Pirate Bay. Instead of earning revenue through subscription as ipredator does, PrivitizeVPN comes packaged to install the Babylon search bar (adware). PrivitizeVPN appears to be available for Windows users only at the moment. The Pirate Bay staff has a long history of promoting services that have no logs; e.g. , you can't get in trouble if your anonymized IP is subpoenaed by government officials. Although PrivitizeVPN is being released silently, with no press coverage, no official statement, and no comments from The Pirate Bay of any kind, people are assuming that PrivitizeVPN will have the same familiar data protection policies. A backup download location has been setup here for people who have limited access to the Pirate Bay domain."
honeypot!
This would be the worlds greatest honeypot if it was setup by the **AA themselves.
It seems I cannot opt out of installing the search bar during installation. Too bad, I will never get to try it out.
Call me paranoid, like the voices in my head do, but why should I trust the Pirate Bay with access to my network? A VPN goes both ways and most people are not going to be up to the task of fire-walling off the VPN host from connecting back to their local system.
"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
Hmm. Must have said something politically controversial recently to be picking up all these 'troll' flags. Oh wait, found it: I said something bad about Apple. That tends to get people's panties all up in a knot. Well... here's a little something then to help them burn through those extra -1, disagree points; links backing up my previous post....
The war on piracy uses pretty much the same tactics as the war on drugs.
You can't have downloaded content. Any downloaded content you do have must be in clear digital containers with the administering agency. Even if you have prescr--er, license, for the downloaded content you have in your possession, you can still be charged with a crime if it does not come in a pre-approved container. Taking other people's downloaded content, even if they have the same content as well, is also forbidden. You cannot move your downloaded content from one container to another container, this is also illegal. Admission that you have downloaded content, or a suspicion that you may be in possession of downloaded content, legally or not, is grounds to search your person for it. Possession of a sufficient quantity would normally get you intent to distribute as well, but we have declared a quantity of zero to be intent to distribute: Every downloader is also an uploader, as a matter of law.
If charged, you are guilty until proven innocent. The best lawyers in the geographical area you are being prosecuted in will be used against you, while you will be given a crappy public defender, or none at all, since we've found that we can throw you in jail for civil violations as well, and only criminal court has to provide one. Possession in and of itself, regardless of whether or not you have a valid license to possess it, is sufficient for a conviction. There is no appeals process, or any appeals process present is designed only to look at things that are a "matter of law". You'll note the law has been so narrowly written as to make everyone guilty, merely by possession.
Fines and punishments will be far worse for this than any other crime. In fact, if you murder the artist who's song you downloaded, you'll face less time in jail and less fines. Actually, you could murder the whole band, and their agent, and still get off comparatively light.
Oh, lastly, trying to hide your content trafficing using encryption, vpns, or any other obfusciation technology will result in additional punishments, as it is obstruction of justice now to do so. Thank you for you cooperation, corporate citizen.
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
I'm an advocate of piracy myself - I believe that enforceable copyright law is incompatible with fundamental freedoms of the internet - but I still have to point out that 'potential sales' are a widely-accepted concept in economics. A dollar not earned is in many ways equivilent to a dollar lost: The effect on a company bottom line is the same.
A dollar not earned is in many ways equivilent to a dollar lost: The effect on a company bottom line is the same.
In many ways it is equivalent. In many ways it is not. I am completely that punish people who steal, for example, a macbook instead of buying one. I'm not for punishing people who choose to not buy a macbook. The effect on Apple is mostly the same (mostly because in the second case, they can sell the macbook you chose not to buy to somebody else, but let's assume we're talking about them having a surplus of macbooks and having to get rid of them Atari E.T. style, which would make the effect on their bottom line the same).
Things get a little more iffy with data. You can download a song / movie / game / whatever without paying for it. So you choose not to buy it without actually having to do without. But the point is that you're still not stealing something from the company. The company can still sell the music / movie / game you didn't buy to somebody else. Assuming that the piracy actually cost them a sale (which is a big, provably incorrect assumption. From another widely-accepted concept in economics, demand is going to be higher when the price is zero than when it is higher), it might affect the company bottom line the same way as stealing, but it also affects the company's bottom line in the exact same way as someone who simply chose not to buy it and go without, which we all agree is behavior that should not be punishable. That makes the argument of "how does this affect the company's profits" irrelevant. We either decide the behavior is acceptable or it is not. The company doesn't have a right to make money.
My personal opinion is that copyright law is important, but it is currently ridiculous. How many people are still using Windows 2000 today? It's obsolete, and it should have already reverted to the public domain. If you can't profit in 10-15 years, it's not our responsibility to help you out any more. The whole intellectual property movement is about conflating something that is not property with property. The creators don't have any intrinsic rights to their creations precisely because they can't be deprived of anything that is not physical. It's simply that society agrees to give up our rights to those creations for a limited time in exchange for encouraging further contributions to society. So if we don't get it back in a reasonable time, we're not getting what we bargained for.
Tortius Interference
Tortious interference with business relationships occurs where the tortfeasor acts to prevent the plaintiff from successfully establishing or maintaining business relationships. This tort may occur when a first party's conduct intentionally causes a second party not to enter into a business relationship with a third party that otherwise would probably have occurred. Such conduct is termed tortious interference with prospective business relations, expectations, or advantage or with prospective economic advantage.
Basically, interfere with the business of someone richer than you and there will be heck to pay Just Because You Got in the Way.
Yes, this includes bad online reviews if they can find you. Yes, it's an oppressive idea right up there with "All game animals in the wilds belong to the King."
He put his boots up on the table and made a face. "The sig," he smirked. "You can waste your life in search of the sig."
So what you are saying is a musician should only be able to sell their music once?
I am a musician/artist/songwriter/composer.
I sell my music every time I'm paid to perform.
I give away recordings. They promote my performances.
The CDs all have "Please feel free to copy and share this music with anyone you'd like if you enjoyed it." printed on them and the jewel cases. I also provide free high quality downloads.
Trying to make income selling recordings is a dead business model from the last century. Recordings are a promotional tool, nothing more.
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
That's pretty awesome. I'm suddenly very interested in hearing your music. What kind of music is it? Could you link me to your website, or a source for your tracks?
Thanks k3vlar.
I play high-energy electric blues along the lines sound-wise of Joe Bonamasa, Smokin' Joe Kubek, Bernard Allison, etc. I also design/build/repair/restore vacuum tube guitar amps. I do the amp thing strictly locally. Generally play bluesfests, clubs, openers for major blues acts, etc mostly in the lower-MI/IN/OH/IL area.
I swore when I finally created an account here back in '02(?) I think, that I would never spam or pimp my personal music or business on this or any other non-music-related forums, etc even if asked.
This isn't the place for that, this is "News for Nerds, Stuff That Matters". I hate it when discussions all over the 'net are full of "buy my dope beat-tracks"-"buy my CD/Ringtone"-"visit my website" crap, and I refuse to add to it in any manner whatsoever even with good intentions, as that's what the road to hell is paved with.
However, you can hear me on the regular playlists, and other indie artists like me as well, on streaming stations like Kansas City Online Radio (KCOR) and KOQX/San Jose.
http://www.kconlineradio.com/
http://www.koqx.com/
There are tons of artist links. If my music is worthy, as long as you hear it on stations like the ones above it should speak for itself. Blues artists, blues music, and the blues community needs all the support they can get.
Thanks again for your interest.
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.