Attempts To Censor File Sharing Sites In The UK Demonstrate The Pointlessness Of SOPA's Blocks
from the won't-stop-infringement dept
As the UK has ramped up its own "Great Firewall" by requiring ISPs to block access to sites deemed infringing, we get a bit of a preview of what life in the US would be like under SOPA, which has provisions for similar censorship. And, thanks to submissions from Butcherer79, we quickly learn two things. First, for those who want to infringe, easy paths will be found to get around the blocks. In this case, new software is apparently out that routes around the block easily. Thus, there's no stopping of infringement, but this will stifle plenty of legitimate users.Second, as soon as any blacklist is in place, the copyright holders will push for more. Witness the record labels immediately pushing for BT to block access to other sites, including the Pirate Bay, on their say so alone, rather than any court order. And here, again, we see the natural state of things for copyright maximalists. They'll never stop trying to expand what they control. If the law gives them an inch, they'll try to claim a mile.
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: blocks, censorship, copyright, sopa, uk
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
example of how record lables could fall
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Suck My Dog's ass Wshington Creeps !
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Fun!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
torrentfreak.com/shoot-the-pirate-copyright-campaign-descends-into-real-violence-111112/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Or cross the street while the light is red?
Maybe Bubba should remind you why YOU should follow traffic law.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Something that is legal is not necessarily ethical. Something that is illegal is not necessarily unethical.
Laws that are not written on behalf of the masses are not valid laws and do not have to be followed by the masses.
If you violate democratic processes, corrupt or use the corruption of government officials to your own advantage, ignore due process, and censor free speech for your own profit, you don't deserve due process, free speech, or profit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
For every little bit further they push these laws, they claim even more losses in response. One could make the argument that new laws are not the answer to the problem, and using public resources to protect the business model failings is a bad use of those resources.
If you make a law to make the roads safer, and instead the people injured jumps in response to each law and clarification of the law, it would show a failure of the law to look at the real issues at play.
Unless the Governments of the world are ready to ban the internet as a whole and force us back to the telegraph, no law they pass will deal with these "problems".
It becomes clear with the actions of the Copyright holders, pay raises - paying billions for inventory in a shrinking market - ignoring evidence of anything reducing piracy, and trying to force it out of business - that they have no interest in looking at any real solutions beyond make a law so its the 1950's again and we can make more money.
Time moves forward, and every technological innovation has been declared the death of an industry, until the industry adapts to it and then leverages it to make even more money than before. It is time we stop letting them buy the law they want, and force them to compete in the market like everyone else.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
What the witch wanted was plenty clear.
But I am confused what the wardrobe wanted.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Think Roman Colosseum.
You entertain the masses to distract.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Dwolla
http://articles.businessinsider.com/2011-11-11/t ech/30381380_1_credit-card-interchange-fees-paypal
I see all those laws as a wish for people to not do business with American companies ever.
Obama was just babling about how Asia today is responsible for more than half the total GDP of the world and how he wants those markets to buy "made in USA", problem is, Americans are so anal that no one wants to do business with them if they can avoid it, also why buy second class products when they can produce that same crap for less with better quality on their own?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The idiots in the government and on the industry just can't see it, but others understand it perfectly. You can't fight something that can spawn a new layer instantaneously.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OSI_model
After layer 7 you can try to count how many layers people can put on top of that.
Ad infinitum.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Now if we consider the internet a series of tubes......
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Not this has anything whatsoever with anything being said here is just that plumbers do plumbplasty on the house and doctors do angioplasty on people, and I just marveled at how the same tools plumbers use to declog plumbing are so close to what doctors use except for the big honking ass CT Scan swirling around you all the time.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
follow the real story
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: follow the real story
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: follow the real story
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: follow the real story
...or not.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: follow the real story
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: follow the real story
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: follow the real story
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not because I hate BT or anything. I'm just trying to prove a point.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Suppose they make some configuration mistake in their network that would allow people to still see censored content, would they then be liable for the massive penalties big copyright likes to extract?
They did agree to censor in the first place, so not doing so might be breach of contract or something.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
I also think they've said (initially) that they won't block anything without one (not that I think for one moment that that's an iron clad, set in stone, 'til death do us part promise).
They've also probably got one of those 'take reasonable measures' chucked in before 'to stop your paying customers seeing the ----- site/domain'
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
How is the UK meant to achieve this for non-UK sites, often operating within the local law in their location?
"Would you still oppose PROTECT IP if DNS blocking was from the bill?"
Yes. I oppose any measures that involve restrictions or punishment without due process, based on mere accusations from a biased private party known to rely on inaccurate data.
"you guys is that you oppose everything and never offer alternatives beyond CwF + RtB, which ain't happening"
So, instead of offering suggestions that really just amount to saying "there's only a problem because the industry makes it a problem, and here's how to fix it", we should just roll over and give up rights and freedom of communication so that an outdated business model cam remain profitable?
No, sorry.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Problem is, there will not be any "here" to come and bitch upon. Eventually, criticism will be declared illegal ala l�se majest�, and self censorship will rue the day. It would be a good idea for the "law makers" to solicit advice from knowledgeable resources other than those with financial interests, but (sadly) that is unlikely.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Care to place a wager on that?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Why not? I mean we can all see that so far it isn't happening, but why do you reject it so forcefully?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Nobody here is an "apologist." Perhaps you should ask this on the Pirate Bay's forum, or something?
But since I'm also opposed to SOPA ant PROTECT IP, I'll give you my opinion.
I agree that blocking by itself won't work. What's lacking in the UK is cutting off their cash flow.
What's lacking in the UK (or anywhere else) is any evidence that rights holders will make more money, even if they get every legal change on their wishlist.
What's lacking is due process. None of these measures should be allowed prior to trial. In fact, measures like these traditionally have not been allowed even after a guilty verdict. Yet they will be granted on mere accusations.
What's lacking is any benefit to the general public. Copyright's purpose is to serve the public, not copyright holders or publishers. Yet they're trying to pass these laws despite the fact that the general public is overwhelmingly against them.
What's lacking is any concern about how this will affect industries that rely on the internet. Which, frankly, is nearly all of them. For example, under PROTECT IP and SOPA, Viacom would have blacklisted YouTube. Can you imagine how many billions of dollars that would have cost the economy? How many jobs would have been lost? Can you imagine how much money content creators themselves would have lost?
Can you imagine the damage Righthaven would have done if these bills were law? How about the Church of Scientology?
So if not PROTECT IP measures, what?
If not PROTECT IP measures, then nothing.
At least not legally speaking. Because widespread piracy is not a problem with the legal system. It is a business model problem, and can only be countered by better business models.
As an example, take digital music. Digital music sales account for more income now than physical sales. What would happen if iTunes, Amazon, etc. did not exist? What would piracy look like then?
Obviously, piracy would be astronomically higher than what it is now. It would have to be; because everyone who is a paying customer to iTunes, eMusic, Amazon, etc. would have no other place to turn to get music in a digital format.
But would CD sales increase? Not really. Certainly not as much as digital sales have brought in. That's because the problem wasn't - and isn't - piracy per se; it was the fact that people want music in a digital format, and don't want CD's.
So, what we need are more companies like iTunes. More like YouTube, Netflix, Spotify, eMusic, or Hulu. What we need are better business models.
I don't care what those business models are. It could be CwF + RtB (which works, by the way), or it could be something else. But what we do not need are laws that negatively affect everyone in society, merely so you can "solve" a problem that is brought on solely by your own failure as a business.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Nobody here is an "apologist." Perhaps you should ask this on the Pirate Bay's forum, or something?
Please. I've never seen such a bunch of nauseating, self-serving excuse making freeloaders in my life.
But since I'm also opposed to SOPA ant PROTECT IP, I'll give you my opinion.
I agree that blocking by itself won't work. What's lacking in the UK is cutting off their cash flow.
What's lacking in the UK (or anywhere else) is any evidence that rights holders will make more money, even if they get every legal change on their wish list.
So what. Right now there are people without the rights who are making money on property that doesn't belong to them. That's reason enough. You can speculate all you like about increased legitimate sales increases. There's no way to prove what the increase might be. In the meantime criminals are profiting by selling copyrighted material that doesn't belong to them.
What's lacking is due process. None of these measures should be allowed prior to trial. In fact, measures like these traditionally have not been allowed even after a guilty verdict. Yet they will be granted on mere accusations.
What's lacking is any benefit to the general public. Copyright's purpose is to serve the public, not copyright holders or publishers. Yet they're trying to pass these laws despite the fact that the general public is overwhelmingly against them.
Overwhelmingly? Funny, Congress doesn't seem aware of that. You have about 5 people total between the House and Senate who are prepared to vote against this. The overwhelming number of Americans could give a shit.
What's lacking is any concern about how this will affect industries that rely on the internet. Which, frankly, is nearly all of them. For example, under PROTECT IP and SOPA, Viacom would have blacklisted YouTube. Can you imagine how many billions of dollars that would have cost the economy? How many jobs would have been lost? Can you imagine how much money content creators themselves would have lost?
Can you imagine the damage Righthaven would have done if these bills were law? How about the Church of Scientology?
So if not PROTECT IP measures, what?
If not PROTECT IP measures, then nothing.
At least not legally speaking. Because widespread piracy is not a problem with the legal system. It is a business model problem, and can only be countered by better business models.
As an example, take digital music. Digital music sales account for more income now than physical sales. What would happen if iTunes, Amazon, etc. did not exist? What would piracy look like then?
Obviously, piracy would be astronomically higher than what it is now. It would have to be; because everyone who is a paying customer to iTunes, eMusic, Amazon, etc. would have no other place to turn to get music in a digital format.
But would CD sales increase? Not really. Certainly not as much as digital sales have brought in. That's because the problem wasn't - and isn't - piracy per se; it was the fact that people want music in a digital format, and don't want CD's.
So, what we need are more companies like iTunes. More like YouTube, Netflix, Spotify, eMusic, or Hulu. What we need are better business models.
I don't care what those business models are. It could be CwF + RtB (which works, by the way), or it could be something else. But what we do not need are laws that negatively affect everyone in society, merely so you can "solve" a problem that is brought on solely by your own failure as a business.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dear Copyright Maximalists
I don't want to feel this way. You have done this to me. These feelings are the fruits of your multi-billion dollar sowing. And I am not alone. There are others like me out here. Every suicide, every madman, every man or woman who gets a gun and just starts shooting - these are your illegitimate children. They don't all know what they are doing. All they know is hate for the invisible walls which you have raised around them, hate for the narrow path you have tried to make them walk. And the innocent pay in blood for you negligence.
Remember this: My mind is big. The more you try to push me down and make me small, the greater the pressure inside me becomes. The greater the pressure, the greater the chance of an explosion. There was once a time when I felt love, but now I feel only hate and anger, and fear at what I might do. And you can tell me to "BE HAPPY," but I know that you really mean "BE QUIET".
Believe me, I want to be happy. You stand in my way.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Dear Copyright Maximalists
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Dear Copyright Maximalists
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Dear Copyright Maximalists
1) Person(s) who wrote this feels invincible
2) Person(s) who wrote this wants to be caught to stop them carrying out what they know is wrong.
A nice example of method writing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Dear Copyright Maximalists
http://www.westal.net/hp/mint/poems/unknown.htm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Dear Copyright Maximalists
jfavettasocialpsychology.blogspot.com/2007/10/hate.html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Dear Copyright Maximalists
http://www.abrupt.org/abruptlog/culture-jamming/your-pictures-make-me-want-to-kill-2198/
I' ll stop now
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Dear Copyright Maximalists
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Im waiting
Soon there won't BE an internet in the UK, because somewhere someone is offended at my little pony.....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Im waiting
Bloody right too, those My Little Pony doll's are obviously the work of devil worshiping, voodoo types who regularly sacrifice real ponies to their gods in an evil attempt to take over the world!
They must be stopped!! Where's the petition for me to sign to get the sites (poorly) blocked so that, although nearly everyone can see it, we can say we've successfully banned the little critters!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]