Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft, Google, Apple Could Be Requested To Actively Block Pirated Downloads, Says Report (torrentfreak.com)
Popular operating systems by Microsoft, Apple, and Google could possibly soon nuke torrents downloaded (PDF, non-English language) from The Pirate Bay and other websites that offer copyright infringing content, warns a report published by Black Market Watch and the Global Initiative against Transnational Organized Crime. The report adds that the aforementioned companies are in an ideal position to deter piracy, and could be requested by the authority to put a system in place to block pirated content on the operating system level. Via a TorrentFreak report: "Other players that possess the potential ability to limit piracy are the companies that own the major operating systems which control computers and mobile devices such as Apple, Google and Microsoft," one of the main conclusions reads. "The producers of operating systems should be encouraged, or regulated, for example, to block downloads of copyright infringing material," the report adds. The report references last year's Windows 10 controversy, noting that these concerns were great enough for some torrent sites to block users with the new operating system. While Sweden doesn't have enough influence to make an impact on these global software manufacturers, applying pressure through the international community and trade groups may have some effect.
This will produce a giant boost of Linux usage on the desktop.
And pirated versions of Windows, custom Android roms.
Until the day a legislation gets passed where only hardware may be sold where UEFI secure boot can't be disabled, and
where UEFI signatures will only be allowed for kernels that have such an "anti pirate" spyware module inside.
Also works great for political ideas. Just put anything you don't like your people to read onto the blacklist. Iran, China and friends will love this.
Nothing makes me feel safer than knowing some invisible party on the other side of the Atlantic has access to nuking any and all files on my computer whenever he wants.
I'm sure companies will love to know that their trade secrets can be deleted without notice by a low-level grunt taking a bribe from a competitor.
When the fucking hell did my computer stop being MY computer?
-=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
No, the OS makers should not be regulated to keep your struggling business model alive.
You fought to make copyright insanely long. Now its getting harder to put out new things no one has seen before and will pay money to see.
You fight to keep your creations artificially restricted by region in our connected world. So people share it to get around that.
You fight to keep people from sharing culture. That's the very essence of culture, a shared social existence.
You fight to make money off those who create, and screw them over. They are leaving you in droves.
You lie, cheat and steal and when someone does it to you, you whine and beg and bribe to get them back. You act as if you are the only ones with rights here. Well you are not. We have rights as well and we're sick of your corrupting our governments to steal them from us.
We're going to share content. you cannot stop it. Add more DRM and we'll simply break it. Pass laws to regulate makers of operating systems and they'll move while we choose another one or make it ourselves. Take down a website, another will always spring up to replace it. Give us shit options that cost more than physical ones and we'll continue to ignore them in favor of sharing. We are not pirates. We are humans. We are not wallets. We are humans. Humanity survived because of sharing. You deny humanity itself when you try to stop sharing. You declare yourselves to be monsters that must be fed, creatures who think they are better than we and should be obeyed.
We do not like those would call themselves our masters. Especially not when they prove to have such a weak grasp of reality. You keep spending your money and efforts trying to stop sharing. We'll keep finding new ways to share until you run out of money, out of influence, out of ears to listen to you and corrupt our laws. And then, when you have passed from existence, we'll figure out better ways to share more freely, to build upon each others creativity, and make truly great things again.
captcha: overtake
You mean decade-old titles and ancient marketing.
Don't forget multiple FBI notices to accuse you of being a bad person for buying the DVD.
If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
In the 90s if I told you, your monitor cable would enforce DRM, you would have thought me mad.
This frog is being boiled slowly, but boiled nonetheless.
This is troublesome because if it actually came to pass in that way, then legitimate use of Linux could itself basically be pushed to fringe usage of the OS. This could in turn spur the impression that that the only, or at least primary reason to use Linux, or any open source OS for that matter, is for piracy, much as the impression has already been created that the primary use for bittorrent is for piracy. Commercial entities may then possibly be inclined to steer clear of such open source platforms for fear of being perceived by the general public as somehow affiliated with the piracy culture on those platforms.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
It's kinda hard to determine what exactly MS is siphoning from our computers, for it is encrypted. For our security, of course. Yeah.
A honest company would be up front with it. Telling you in no uncertain terms what information is being transmitted and allowing you control over said information, allowing you to determine what information to transmit and what information not to. Since this is not the case, the only logical conclusion is that whatever is being transmitted is not in my interest that it is transmitted. Else it would be no problem to inform me what information is being relayed.
I have written software before that requests information from the user, but I go out of my way to inform the user what information is being transferred and also why I request this information. That information can even include intimate details about the computer setup if it is requested e.g. during debugging so I can find out whether the error could be due to a hardware issue or a driver issue. But in every case the user is able to review the data transmitted and even delete information he does not wish to release.
It is interesting to see that people are quite willing to accept a lot of information being handed over if you explain to them why you want it. People were even ok with handing us their "movement pattern" in the software when we explained to them that we want to know this to improve the UI so they can do what they do often with fewer clicks.
Without this information, I am fairly sure they would have done whatever they could to limit our information level to the minimum achievable by whatever means available to them. Which is basically exactly what people are doing right now with Windows. I do not know of a single person, computer savvy or not, that isn't trying to find any and all programs that limit, cut or disable telemetry in Windows 10. Why? Because we don't know what it transmits. So the logical conclusion is that whatever it does transmit is not in our interest.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.