Swedish ISP Told Not Just To Stop Hosting The Pirate Bay But To Block Others From Reaching It As Well [Updated]

from the overkill? dept

Tue, Jun 29th 2010 7:37pm — Mike Masnick

A former ISP for The Pirate Bay, Black Internet, was told by a Swedish court that it had to stop hosting the site a while back. The Pirate Bay quickly switched to a different provider, but Black Internet went to court to challenge the legality of being told whom it can and cannot host. It appears that the Swedish appeals court ruling on the matter went beyond just telling Black Internet that it can't host The Pirate Bay, it also told the ISP that it must block all of its customers from reaching the site, even though the site is no longer hosted by Black Internet. It seems like yet another attempt by courts trying to play whac-a-mole in an incredibly ineffective manner that is likely to do more damage than good. Completely blocking people from reaching a site, even if they have legitimate reasons for reaching it, doesn't help anyone. Those who are interested in infringing on copyrights will still figure out plenty of ways to do so. They'll route around the blocks or go to other sites. So what does this do other than create an inconvenience and set a bad precedent for any ISP? Update: Thanks to folks in the comments for pointing out the update, where the court is claiming that Black Internet misinterpreted the decision, which says that Black is prohibited from providing "internet access" and there's a bit of a debate over what "internet access" means. It appears that Black interpreted that to mean "access" while the judge meant just hosting.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: blocking, hosting, sweden
Companies: black internet, the pirate bay

16 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

David, 29 Jun 2010 @ 7:50pm

Not quite right?
The post you link to was updated to note that the injunction apparently does not involve blocking customers from reaching the site, it just prevents hosting - there may be some confusion over the meaning of the words 'internet access' in the text of the decision.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 29 Jun 2010 @ 8:13pm

LONG LIVE PIRATE BAY LOL
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 29 Jun 2010 @ 8:35pm

The update, making this post irrelevant:

"Update: Court of appeals judge Ulrika Gustavsson Stenbäck has been speaking with Swedish media and has stated that Black Internet’s interpretation of the injunction has gone too far.

“The decision meant no general duty to supervise over what people do online, or a general duty to stop someone from getting into the Pirate Bay. It is clear in our decision. Our decision relates only to Black Internet not providing internet access [hosting] to The Pirate Bay.”

It seems at this stage that Black Internet is blocking The Pirate Bay but doesn’t have to."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Perchange, 29 Jun 2010 @ 8:52pm
  
  Re:
  Agh. That wording reminds me of when I bought a video game labelled 'CD/DVD' and it was in DVD format. I thought the label meant it would work in a CD or DVD drive.
  
  "...not providing internet access...to the Pirate Bay." I'd take that to mean they have to block the site from their customers. [hosting] is different than accessing.
  
  Who put the bracketed stuff in?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 29 Jun 2010 @ 9:06pm

oh look, another story punted by mike. its getting to be more and more common as he rushes to slam things he doesnt like without bothering to get more of the facts first.

you get any better at punting, the nfl may come calling.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 29 Jun 2010 @ 9:35pm
  
  Re:
  The irony. It is too thick. I'm going to have to bring the chisel.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- PaulT (profile), 29 Jun 2010 @ 10:12pm
  
  Re:
  Just a quick question: when are you going to start getting facts and posting them here? If you ever wish to be taken seriously, you might consider at least doing that yourself.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 30 Jun 2010 @ 6:26am
    
    Re: Re:
    i dont run the blog. i make comments. i dont attempt to place myself as a guru or leader of the flock. i dont try to save* anything. i dont sell lotttts of tshirts. i just laugh my ass off when i see mike once again in such a rush to condemn things without taking even a few minutes to find out what is really going on.
    
    i dont have to do much to be taken seriously when the guy running the place makes less effort than i do.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 30 Jun 2010 @ 8:34am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      So basically you are admitting that your sole purpose in life is make fun of other people? Laugh at their misery and mistakes? Make absolutely no effort to educate them or teach them something new?
      
      You are a sad, sad person.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
fairuse (profile), 29 Jun 2010 @ 9:11pm

Clarify the update - The judge says (from Swedish site)
Google Translate of page - http://is.gd/d9vcg

"Ulrika Gustavsson Stenbeck was one of the three judges who took the Court of Appeal decision. She would not comment on Black Internet action is right or wrong, but saying that there was no requirement that Black would prohibit Internet customers access to Pirate Bay."

Hosting is inferred from?
"- There they are prohibited to do is to provide internet access for file sharing service The Pirate Bay, "she says."

2-cents
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 29 Jun 2010 @ 11:36pm

gotta saay..i saw both the original story AND the update hours before this was posted.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Mike Masnick (profile), 29 Jun 2010 @ 11:39pm
  
  Re:
  gotta saay..i saw both the original story AND the update hours before this was posted.
  
  Yup. I had opened the original a while back, and hadn't reloaded it before writing and posting this story, so I didn't see the update. Such is life.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mike Masnick (profile), 29 Jun 2010 @ 11:38pm

Updated
Updated the post. I had the original TorrentFreak article opened in a tab and wrote it up earlier, but hadn't reloaded it before posting to see that the story had updated.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
BruceLD, 29 Jun 2010 @ 11:39pm

yep
The ruling really stopped piracy dead in its tracks.

All piracy ended that day.

*shrug*
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Jun 2010 @ 5:00am

I want to see what they will blame next, when people stop pirating and start using free legal alternatives and they still loose money.

I'm sure some people will run to enact laws outlawing the practice with some convoluted reasoning.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Jun 2010 @ 6:09am

Pure speculation
AFAIK Black Internet did not have any direct customer relationship with The Pirate Bay. This is why they take the broadest possible interpretation of the courts decision. From Black Internet's point of view they where only providing access not hosting the site in the first place.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]