BPI Threatens To Sue the UK Pirate Party Over Proxy

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

BPI Threatens To Sue the UK Pirate Party Over Proxy

Posted by samzenpus on Monday December 10, 2012 @07:43AM from the take-them-to-court dept.

Techmeology writes "The BPI has threatened to sue the Pirate Party for allowing people access to The Pirate Bay through its proxy service. The leader of the Pirate Party UK, Loz Kaye said his party would go to court over the issue. Kaye said that he was determined to defend his party's principles even in the face of an expensive legal battle."

41 of 60 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Non news by Anonymous Coward · 2012-12-10 07:49 · Score: 4, Insightful

BPI being douchebags again. (or is it still)
I wonder what it's like going thru life knowing a majority of the population who know you exist... hate your guts and would like to see you on fire.
If i were a religious sort.. that might bother me. Karma will eventually demand payment.
1. Re:Non news by Anonymous Coward · 2012-12-10 07:54 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  I know the answer.
  They don't have souls, so they are not bothered by it at all.
2. Re:Non news by Anonymous Coward · 2012-12-10 08:06 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  I'm on your side, but please realize that the views of the /. community do not necessarily reflect that of the entire population, who may or may not "hate their guts" or even care much about them, provided they're even aware of BPI or the MAFIAA cartels.
  I come across this all the time here, where a large but closed community of like minded people assume that just because common themes and trends are repeated by a number of vocal ( possibly a minority) of the community that that reflects the view of the population at large. It's easy to fall into that fallacy. Peace.
3. Re:Non news by CanHasDIY · 2012-12-10 08:09 · Score: 1, Offtopic
  
  I wonder what it's like going thru life knowing a majority of the population who know you exist... hate your guts and would like to see you on fire.
  If i were a religious sort..
  If you were a religious sort, specifically of the fundi persuasion, you would probably take it as a sign from God that you're doing things right.
  
  The Westboro Baptist Church, for example, maintains that because most Americans think the WBC is nothing but useless scum, they are therefore the "only true Christians," due to a passage in Luke (21:17) that reads, "You will be hated by all men for my name's sake."
  
  I shit you not.
  
  --
  An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
4. Re:Non news by poetmatt · 2012-12-10 08:11 · Score: 1
  
  I don't know what you're thinking, but easily more than 50% of the global population cannot stand the MAFIAA or the BPI. SOPA/PIPA really woke people up on the matter. All you have to do is explain that BPI supports SOPA as an arm of the RIAA, and the connection is made. So no, you are mistaken.
5. Re:Non news by lightknight · 2012-12-10 08:12 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  Ah, but with NuSoul, they won't be bothered by that.
  
  --
  I am John Hurt.
6. Re:Non news by Anonymous Coward · 2012-12-10 08:23 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  I don't know what you're thinking, but easily more than 50% of the global population cannot stand the MAFIAA or the BPI. SOPA/PIPA really woke people up on the matter. All you have to do is explain that BPI supports SOPA as an arm of the RIAA, and the connection is made. So no, you are mistaken.
  Please, today, go out and ask that 50% of the global population what SOPA/PIPA were all about.
  Apart from technology enthusiasts (a very, VERY small amount of the population), chances are the BEST answer you'll get is "that bill where Congress wanted to shut down Wikipedia!", assuming they even remember the whole ordeal at all (which is a pretty huge assumption), INCLUDING those who contacted their Congresspeople. You won't get "that bill sponsored by the record labels and movie studios where they wanted to introduce truly Draconian regulations to restrict the internet and...". In fact, most of those answers won't go anywhere NEAR the RIAA/MPAA.
7. Re:Non news by chrismcb · 2012-12-10 09:12 · Score: 1
  
  If you said "50% of the global population has never heard of the MAFIAA or the BPI" I'd be more willing to accept your made up statistic. Shoot, if you had said 50% of the American population has never heard of the MAFIAA or the BPI, I'd consider you right. But to even ATTEMPT to claim that 50% of the global population cannot stand the MAFIAA is, utterly wrong. I don't even know if 50% of slashdot can make that claim.
8. Re:Non news by Anonymous Coward · 2012-12-10 09:46 · Score: 1
  
  but easily more than 50% of the global population cannot stand the MAFIAA
  [citation needed]
  You are falling into the trap the gp was talking about. Show your work here, or else you are making up numbers to back up your self referencing ideals. And no I am not going to 'google it'. You are the one making the assertions. Sorry to be so crude here with what I am saying but you are doing exactly what he was saying then saying you are not. That does not make you friends and convince people you are right. It just makes people mad. Especially when they find out you are making things up and coming off as a liar. Which is precisely the wrong way to fix this issue.
  Whenever I talk to people about this they have 0 clue what is going on. When they find out they are usually pissed, then resigned. As they can do jack and squat about it, other than bitch about it. If it were not for wikipedia saying anything about it most people would have not even known or bothered with talking about it. Wikipedia gave people a list of people to call and vent on...
9. Re:Non news by Anonymous Coward · 2012-12-10 10:24 · Score: 1
  
  Don't worry about that. You see, the British pirate party is a political party - "somewhat" part of the infrastructure of the legislature. Therefore if they can make the argument that this proxy is something they use to attempt to change the law - the court cannot touch it.
  While people don't want copyright abolished or even changed (and courts certainly won't entertain that notion), very many courts believe in separation of powers. Suing a political party, a union or lobby groups is an extremely difficult proposition, as the court must avoid at all costs to put pressure on the elected representatives. Barring exceptional circumstances (and explicit agreement from other elected representatives), they cannot be convicted for this.
  Also, I think it is more likely that the average population doesn't want to change things believed to be too important parts of the economy. Also hollywood/big cable has more support than techies, especially in democrat circles. And yeah, it's big business, so it probably has support on the republican side as well.
10. Re:Non news by interval1066 · 2012-12-10 10:40 · Score: 1, Flamebait
  
  They do what they do in with the purpose of discrediting Christianity.
  Unnecessary, since Xtianity discredits itself quite well on its own.
  
  --
  Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
11. Re:Non news by MightyMartian · 2012-12-10 11:34 · Score: 2
  
  I think you may be referring to Parliamentary privilege, as per the Bill of Rights, 1689. I know of no interpretation of the notion of Parliamentary privilege that would extend beyond the bounds of Parliament itself, and remember that even if it did, Parliament itself has the power to override privilege of its members, and does not protect a member from prosecution for criminal action.
  Even if the party were successful in arguing that it is immune from lawsuits, the party would still be bound by Parliamentary rules, and I'm sure the Speaker would have little issue with ordering the proxy shut down or the members in question facing contempt of Parliament.
  
  --
  The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
12. Re:Non news by Anonymous Coward · 2012-12-10 14:34 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Absolutely correct. It is also entirely predictable human behavior too. This is because laws are tools for control which are accessible only through a high individual barrier to entry. A person must dedicate a significant part of their life to affect change and be part of the process. It is a specialization. Furthermore, as with all public choice equilibrium equations, the cost of the law is wide, but shallow; it often targets all people but it only affects them slightly(or with low probability as with legal action for piracy). On the other side, the benefits are extremely concentrated; the beneficiaries are both a minority and the privilege they receive are significant.
  So the incentives for human action are minimal for those being targeted while the incentives for those who perpetuate these laws are high. In other words, for you or I to stand against a single group of people whose entire income depends on some set of laws, we would have to have motivation equal to that. However, we do not. Those of us that get involved in politics (or more loosely the philosophy of politics) in order to oppose people who would use state violence to profit have a sort of masochistic bent that is outside of strictly material economic incentives. We have some sort of itch we cannot ignore(call it dedication to morality, truth or whatever). However, most people aren't and cannot be like that. The vast majority of people cannot spend so much time on each little thing that threatens to take another drop of blood. There is no way one would expect that a majority of people would even know about SOPA and all the recent variants(some of which have passed in european nations by the way).
  If you doubt this, if you don't think the game is stacked against us, just consider how many laws are active in the US. The federal register is over 100,000 pages. How many of you who care so much about SOPA, how many of you know the number of people the FDA kills each day by threatening innocent people into withholding treatments from willing patients in the US while the very same treatments are saving lives in Europe and other nations? How many of you know what laws enacted in the 1980s began to force money from workers into the stock market, changing it from an institution of knowledgeable investment into casino that has distorted the fundamental incentives for all businessmen to the point where stocks themselves drive corporations rather than productivity? How many of you know of the violent government monopoly and subsidization of sugar production has lead to the collapse of the industry and the installment of fructose corn syrup as a replacement which is a significant source of the obesity and health problems this country is so famous for? I could fill pages full of just references to the near countless number of laws that all have disastrous consequences to us but my point is not to show how well read I am on such matters. I want to show you that it is not sensible to expect most people to be aware of and combat the things that harm them when the costs to do so greatly exceed the benefits. The incentives for those who lose in these laws is to simply take it. The incentive for the beneficiaries is their entire means of living. Public choice demonstrates that things like SOPA will continue to creep into the law books, bit by bit.
13. Re:Non news by tehcyder · 2012-12-10 23:46 · Score: 1
  
  It is self evident that the majority of people do not hate record companies and the BPI or else they wouldn't fucking sign up with them.
  No one's forcing them.
  What no one on slashdot appears able to believe is that it is in the artist's own interest to get on the record company/BPI gravy train, as obviously the benefits of marketing, distribution or whatever outweigh the disadvantages.
  The majority of the population who are simply consumers of the industry's products also have the simple option of refusing to buy/support them if they find their stuff so hateful.
  
  --
  To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
14. Re:Non news by MysteriousPreacher · 2012-12-11 00:16 · Score: 1
  
  What's it like to live with being hated? You should know - there are people who hate you. Why doesn't it bother you too much? Probably because you don't see yourself as being an evil piece of shit.
  While there are people aware that they're doing wrong, id suspect that most of them justify it to themselves. A religious fanatic who kills someone of an opposing view is doing it because they think its justified. What about a boss who sacks someone who by impartial measures is doing a good job? The boss probably isn't seated there on a throne in Castle Skull, giggling and imagining the ruination he visited upon the guy.
  BPI and their like are no different. We all do things others would consider evil. Some are just more evil than others. It doesn't excuse their actions. What it does is to help us form a realistic way of tackling them.
  
  --
  -- Using the preview button since 2005
15. Re:Non news by coofercat · 2012-12-11 02:19 · Score: 2
  
  It's non-news, unless you're the one getting sued. I appreciate there's a certain amount of outrage-fatigue, but this is the first time the BPI has gone after someone credible (as far as I know, at least). I for one hope they go all the way to court and then lose - PPUK will make some political/publicity capital out of it, and we can all go home happy. For that to happen, the UK Pirate Party is asking for help (http://www.pirateparty.org.uk/help), it would be remiss of me not to suggest you head over there and help out if you can.
16. Re:Non news by ArsenneLupin · 2012-12-11 02:48 · Score: 1
  
  I'm on your side, but please realize that the views of the /. community do not necessarily reflect that of the entire population, who may or may not "hate their guts" or even care much about them, provided they're even aware of BPI or the MAFIAA cartels.
  That's why he said "... knowing a majority of the population who know you exist... hate your guts..."
17. Re:Non news by mcgrew · 2012-12-11 04:33 · Score: 1
  
  It is self evident that the majority of people do not hate record companies and the BPI or else they wouldn't fucking sign up with them.
  The majority of people don't sign up with them. In fact, the majority of people are not musicians. And even among musicians, the vast VAST majority don't. I know quite a few musicians who've been offered major label contracts and refused them, but most aren't even offered them.
  Only one in twenty five albums makes a profit. The lablels seem pretty damned bad at marketing and distribution, or most label artists would be a lot better off financially.
  
  --
  Free Martian Whores!
Even if the proxy goes down.. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-12-10 07:52 · Score: 1

There are are hundreds of other TPB proxies out there. Taking one down will cause issues for 1 or 2 days until people find another proxy site.
There's a big list of TPB proxy sites here: http://proxybay.info
1. Re:Even if the proxy goes down.. by Art+Challenor · 2012-12-10 08:03 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  There are are hundreds of other TPB proxies out there. Taking one down will cause issues for 1 or 2 days until people find another proxy site.
  There's a big list of TPB proxy sites here: http://proxybay.info/
  Yes, but it's important that BPI sue people on a regular basis so that this information stays in the news.
2. Re:Even if the proxy goes down.. by K.+S.+Kyosuke · 2012-12-10 08:08 · Score: 1
  
  There are are hundreds of other TPB proxies out there.
  Exactly. One would expect that actual mirrors would be more useful.
  
  --
  Ezekiel 23:20
3. Re:Even if the proxy goes down.. by nogginthenog · 2012-12-10 08:48 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  Or just download the Tor Browser Bundle. Takes 2 minutes. Opens TPB from anywhere.
4. Re:Even if the proxy goes down.. by rioki · 2012-12-11 01:40 · Score: 1
  
  What the UK Pirate Party is trying to do is a form of protest. So it is not intended to be practical or fully legal; they are using legal gray area to make a point. If they lose the will probably resort to putting up information about generic HTTP proxing and that will change exactly nothing. Then (hopefully) the BPI will sue them again and that will result in a precedent that will be so absurd that sows how stupid that law is.
Re:corporation sues political party by jythie · 2012-12-10 08:17 · Score: 2

Well, if they don't accept 'contributions' then they need SOME way to remind the politicians who is boss.....
so um by arbiter1 · 2012-12-10 08:29 · Score: 1

Does this mean they will sue every proxy and vpn host in the world next?
1. Re:so um by Charliemopps · 2012-12-10 08:39 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  actually, that probably on the horizon.
Re:Surprise surprise by CanEHdian · 2012-12-10 08:44 · Score: 2

"*snip* in the face of an expensive legal battle" Well, at least they're subtly acknowledging that, as per the status quo, the ruling will be decided by who has the most money to throw at a lawsuit.
There's already a Call For Help out by the PPUK itself. And they will need it; the music industry is a mega-billion-pound industry, the poor artists are starving-near-death, so you figure out where the money went...

--
When the copyright term is "forever minus a day", live every day like it's the last.
Re:Online Banking | Internet Banking by Anonymous Coward · 2012-12-10 08:52 · Score: 1

Hassan, is that you? How's the weather in Nigeria?
Re:Cunts! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-12-10 08:58 · Score: 1

This proxy wasn't your average neutral web proxy, it actively tunneled your traffic straight to 'the pirate bay' without user input.
Re:what is BPI short for by c0lo · 2012-12-10 09:06 · Score: 1

Big pricks incorporated
Prick... wasn't this suppose to already have a touch to the connotation of "derisively small"?

--
Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
What do they have to do with anything? by dohzer · 2012-12-10 10:00 · Score: 1

Why does the Bank of the Philippine Islands care?
*Takes Notes* by Richy_T · 2012-12-10 10:05 · Score: 1

I'll be on top of things for next talk-like-a-pirate day.
1. Re:*Takes Notes* by Errol+backfiring · 2012-12-10 22:54 · Score: 2
  
  In the Netherlands, the Pirate Party is sued into bankruptcy by Brein (the local mafiaa). So the next talk-like-a-pirate day could feature a lot more silence.
  
  --
  Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!
2. Re:*Takes Notes* by rioki · 2012-12-11 01:43 · Score: 1
  
  Nice in Germany the pirate party gets elected into legislative bodies... So Harrr Harrr Harrr!
Re:Online Banking | Internet Banking by Anonymous Coward · 2012-12-10 11:27 · Score: 1

Nothing ever gets done, that flag is just there for decoration!
Noone has defined the acronym "BPI" by cshay · 2012-12-10 14:51 · Score: 2

... not the slashdot summary and not the article linked. C'mon people, unless an acronym is widely known, you should define it.
1. Re:Noone has defined the acronym "BPI" by Xest · 2012-12-10 22:27 · Score: 1
  
  One would think most people on Slashdot are technically competent enough to Google for this sort of thing.
  Apparently not.
2. Re:Noone has defined the acronym "BPI" by tehcyder · 2012-12-11 00:01 · Score: 1
  
  It's a story to do with someone suing the UK Pirate Party, that someone will obviously be some copyright holder or umbrella organisation. How hard can it be to work out it's the British Phonographic Industry when that's probably the first result you get on a google search?
  
  --
  To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
3. Re:Noone has defined the acronym "BPI" by viralburn · 2012-12-11 04:24 · Score: 2
  
  oops ... read that as the 'British Pornographic Industry'
4. Re:Noone has defined the acronym "BPI" by mcgrew · 2012-12-11 07:24 · Score: 1
  
  One would think that the submitter (let alone editors) would be technically competent enough that we don't have to google the acronym for the foreign telephone company they're writing about.
  One would be wrong, however.
  
  --
  Free Martian Whores!
Re:Did I sleep through the UK censorship reform? by RaceProUK · 2012-12-11 00:37 · Score: 1

Which law makes it illegal to access TBP in the UK?
There isn't one. Some large ISPs were issued a court order to block the site.

Which other sites are censored?
As far as I'm aware, none. However, there is the IWF blacklist that several ISPs use by choice.

--
No colour or religion ever stopped the bullet from a gun