Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Pirate Bay To Offer VPN For $7 a Month

kdawson posted more than 5 years ago | from the p-for-private dept.

Privacy 461

Death Metal sends along an Ars Technica piece about The Pirate Bay's plans for a virtual private network service to help ensure its users' privacy. "The Pirate Bay is planning to launch a paid VPN service for users looking to cover their tracks when torrenting. The new service will be called IPREDator, named after the Swedish Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement Directive (IPRED) that will go into effect in April. IPREDator is currently in private beta and is expected to go public next week for €5 per month. ... IPREDator's website says that it won't store any traffic data, as its entire goal is to help people stay anonymous on the web. Without any data to hand over, copyright owners won't be able to find individuals to target. ... The question remains, however, if any significant portion of The Pirate Bay's users will decide to fork over 5 Euro per month solely to remain anonymous. It seems more likely that the majority either won't care, or will simply start looking for lesser-known torrent trackers to use."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Please slashdot you must help me!!! (-1, Offtopic)

Yamamato (1513927) | more than 5 years ago | (#27357937)

Did I first post?!?!?!? I'm not sure!!!

Re:Please slashdot you must help me!!! (4, Funny)

ilovegeorgebush (923173) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358031)

You're supposed to do it anonymously, noob.

Oh, wait...

Re:Please slashdot you must help me!!! (2, Funny)

Drakkenmensch (1255800) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358167)

I can't believe someone beat the Tsarkon Report guy to the first post!

pirate bay (1)

t3chn0n3rd (1490333) | more than 5 years ago | (#27357955)

7 dollars a month for VPN. Can you get it cheaper somewhere else?

Re:pirate bay (5, Funny)

Qzukk (229616) | more than 5 years ago | (#27357967)

I'm sure there's a torrent somewhere...

Re:pirate bay (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27358281)

Didn't they already start a VPN service called Relakks?

Re:pirate bay (1)

bluesatin (1350681) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358513)

For people too lazy to google: https://www.relakks.com/ [relakks.com]

I remember some news story saying the Piratebay guys started this up, but as per usual it was probably complete rubish.

Re:pirate bay (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27358627)

I've been using Relakks & SwissVPN for a while now.

The Relakks service isnt too bad. I've had a few days when its been unavailable & a while when it would disconnect very frequently but speeds aren't too bad (upto 600k/sec to a 24Mb DSL & 30Mb Cable service).

SwissVPN is faster (upto 1.2Mb/sec) with fewer disconnects.

Lesser Known Torrent Trackers (3, Interesting)

manekineko2 (1052430) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358545)

The question remains, however, if any significant portion of The Pirate Bay's users will decide to fork over 5 per month solely to remain anonymous. It seems more likely that the majority either won't care, or will simply start looking for lesser-known torrent trackers to use.

I don't get this blurb from the headline. Seems to me like this service wouldn't be mainly targeted at users accessing torrent trackers. This is anonymity for the Internet in general, and torrent trackers are only one small part of that.

Furthermore, I'm not familiar with any case so far that is based on turning over the logs from a website to get the users. I don't think that would present a strong enough case that someone is sharing, which is what they've been getting people on. Instead, they've been snooping the actual upload traffic from people by requesting downloads based on everything I've been seeing.

Re:pirate bay (4, Informative)

leamanc (961376) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358575)

Hotspot Shield [hotspotshield.com] is free with ads.

Hmmmmm. (1, Insightful)

SatanicPuppy (611928) | more than 5 years ago | (#27357959)

How do you maintain that you're not expressly in the business of circumventing copyright law (as they did in the recent trial) when you offer a paid service that really has no other function?

Seems like a risky strategy.

Re:Hmmmmm. (2, Funny)

tritonman (998572) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358001)

those wacky europeans do not yet understand how capitalism works.

Re:Hmmmmm. (5, Insightful)

Reason58 (775044) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358111)

How do you maintain that you're not expressly in the business of circumventing copyright law (as they did in the recent trial) when you offer a paid service that really has no other function?

Your statement is akin to saying that you must be guilty of something, since you refuse to let law enforcement search through your house whenever they feel like it.

Re:Hmmmmm. (4, Insightful)

SatanicPuppy (611928) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358203)

Actually, no, it's nothing like that.

It's like being accused of being a drug dealer because people buy drugs off your site, and, in response, you offer a method for people to make private transactions.

If you say, "hey, look, I just provide a service, I'm not telling people how to use it" then you might be able to get away with being effectively a middleman in an illegal transaction.

But if your response is to provide a way of hiding those illegal transactions from law enforcement, you're much more likely to be nailed as an accomplice, especially when you're making money specifically off those hidden transactions.

Re:Hmmmmm. (4, Informative)

Sloppy (14984) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358341)

It's like being accused of being a drug dealer because people buy drugs off your site, and, in response, you offer a method for people to make private transactions.

While it's a sure thing that such a thing would be used for people buying drugs, seriously, I would expect this to also widen that drugdealer's market to include more than just drug buyers. A useful tool is a useful tool.

Re:Hmmmmm. (1)

SatanicPuppy (611928) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358481)

What's the use of it? Slow down your downloads for an extra 7 bucks a month? Sounds like a waste to me, unless you're downloading something that could get you in trouble.

Re:Hmmmmm. (4, Insightful)

bluesatin (1350681) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358551)

Bear in mind the "You shouldn't be hiding anything if you're innocent" mindset leads to a lot of privacy invasions.

Re:Hmmmmm. (5, Insightful)

merchant_x (165931) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358369)

You seem to be operating under the assumption that the only purpose for offering/using a VPN is to engage in copyright infringement.

Re:Hmmmmm. (5, Funny)

Propaganda13 (312548) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358511)

Dammit, I knew my company was up to something. Always making me use vpn to log into work. I'm reporting them for copyright infringement.

Re:Hmmmmm. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27358659)

I am looking for a similar service just so my own government doesn't see what I am browsing. Why should they have a right to know?

A guy http://extradition.org.uk/ is being extradited from the UK to the US for selling chemicals that are perfectly legal to sell in the UK, allegedly as part of a Meth ring in the states.

Re:Hmmmmm. (2, Interesting)

Bjrn (4836) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358577)

Rather interestingly one the founders of the Pirate Bay, Gottfrid Svartholm Warg, registered a site for selling the drug GBL [wikipedia.org] . GBL is converted by the body into GHB [wikipedia.org] , sometimes referred to as "the date rape drug". Svartholm also registered a site for selling the drug Fenazepam. When asked about this he replied (roughly translated): "We register domains for customers who don't wish to be visible and we protect their anonymity".

Re:Hmmmmm. (1)

mdm-adph (1030332) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358489)

Doesn't seem too unusual in a post 9/11 world -- what's your point?

Re:Hmmmmm. (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27358119)

Also $5/user goes an awful long way for a service which claims to only make just enough money to cover costs.

Re:Hmmmmm. (1)

MadnessASAP (1052274) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358287)

I would suspect it's because the service is put their with the intention that you will use torrent through it and thus their bandwith costs are going to be significantly higher.

Re:Hmmmmm. (2, Insightful)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358125)

I'd expect it's like how bongs and other drug paraphernalia is legal in most areas while any logical use for the items is not. Running a business centered around providing your customers with all the tools necessary to break the law (even when it's obvious that this is your intention) isn't illegal so long as you yourself are not breaking any law.

Re:Hmmmmm. (4, Insightful)

DaveV1.0 (203135) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358269)

I'd expect it's like how bongs and other drug paraphernalia is legal in most areas while any logical use for the items is not.

First, define drug paraphernalia.
Second, rolling paper, water bongs, etc. can be used with tobacco. By selling such items for use with tobacco, said items are not considered "drug paraphernalia" until they are used with marijuana. Thus, there is, in fact, a legal, logical use for such items.

A chef's knife is not a deadly weapon until it is used as such. Until it is used as such it is a kitchen tool.
A screwdriver or pry bar are not burglary tools until they are used to commit a burglary. Until they are, they are just tools.
 

Re:Hmmmmm. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27358597)

Seriously, who the fuck actually uses water bongs with tobacco?

Re:Hmmmmm. (1)

fredklein (532096) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358657)

Thus, there is, in fact, a legal, logical use for such items.

And there are no legal, logical uses for a VPN??

Re:Hmmmmm. (1)

wastedlife (1319259) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358295)

Tell that to the old Napster.

Re:Hmmmmm. (4, Insightful)

Gonarat (177568) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358491)

I'd expect it's like how bongs and other drug paraphernalia is legal in most areas while any logical use for the items is not. Running a business centered around providing your customers with all the tools necessary to break the law (even when it's obvious that this is your intention) isn't illegal so long as you yourself are not breaking any law.

Tell that to Tommy Chong. He may disagree with you on that one...

Not that I agree with what happened to him (I think it is despicable), but that's the U.S. Government for you.

Hopefully TPB will be okay because the VPN can be used to bypass censorship on the net (or least can be advertised as being as such) -- if you happen to have your Torrents running through it, oh well, shit happens...also they are not in the USA...

Re:Hmmmmm. (1)

Yamamato (1513927) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358127)

Yep, and Tor is only for child pornographers trying to circumvent being caught.

Re:Hmmmmm. (1)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358133)

There are many other functions of encryption besides copyright violation and child porn. Some may wish to encrypt just on general principle, many advocating encrypting all your emails, including "meet me at the local bar after work and I'll buy you a beer and we'll discuss the topic."

Re:Hmmmmm. (0)

SatanicPuppy (611928) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358315)

Encryption is fine. Encryption + TPB is shady, since the vast majority of traffic from the site is illegal in most countries.

Re:Hmmmmm. (2, Informative)

PIBM (588930) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358495)

Actually, the traffic from TPB site is not illegal in most country I would say. There is no parts of the transfer of any copyrighted material going through TPB so far ..

Re:Hmmmmm. (1)

SatanicPuppy (611928) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358567)

That's the whole point! They maintain that they're doing nothing wrong and have nothing illegal on their site...But they're offering a VPN connection so that the people who use it to download Linux distros can do it without evil gov't spying? Come on.

Re:Hmmmmm. (4, Insightful)

Laglorden (87845) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358159)

It has the function of maintaining your privacy. This is valuble for some people, not because they are breaking the law but because other people, corporations and governments have no business knowing who you are talking/mailing/communicating with in 99,99% of all cases.

Re:Hmmmmm. (1, Insightful)

CannonballHead (842625) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358377)

Let's assume, for the purpose of this post, that something someone is torrenting is illegal.

TPB is coming out with a paid service to keep you from being caught.

Let's assume you are, I don't know... doing illegal drugs. It doesn't matter if you think it should or shouldn't be illegal to do them, it's illegal in your hypothetical situation that I put you in ;) I come out with a paid "service" (say, a very dark alley that is guarded) to help keep you from being caught in your illegal [drug using] activities.

I'm pretty sure that's, at the very last, something to do with aiding/abetting and is usually considered illegal. Just because all you did was "drive the getaway car" doesn't mean you're not an accomplice.

Re:Hmmmmm. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27358465)

Just because all you did was "drive the getaway car" doesn't mean you're not an accomplice.

Yes, but if you're just the person who sold the car, you can hardly be help responsible.

no other function? (0, Flamebait)

Sloppy (14984) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358301)

No other function than circumventing copyright? Hey, I want to use it to send spam. Er, I mean, trade kiddie porn. Er, I mean, send death threats to politicians. Er, I mean, get around my employer's websense(tm).

Oops, ignore all the above. I meant to say I want to use it to post political samizdat to wikileaks.

Re:no other function? (0, Flamebait)

Yamamato (1513927) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358331)

Yeah, no one every uses VPN connections for anything other than spam, kiddie porn trading and sending death threats. Fuck off you stupid troll.

Re:no other function? (1)

Sloppy (14984) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358527)

Fuck off you stupid troll.

Sorry, I meant to say I want to use the VPN for trolling Slashdot.

Re:Hmmmmm. (3, Insightful)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358417)

How do you maintain that you're not expressly in the business of circumventing copyright law (as they did in the recent trial) when you offer a paid service that really has no other function?

Other function: Downloading materials which are necessary to promote freedom but which could be considered seditious or even treasonous. Understanding the substantial non-infringing use for encryption? YOU FAIL IT! Next you must advocate the banning of halloween masks, since no one would ever want to mask their identity except for nefarious purposes, or you only prove that you don't understand the issue - since they are both the same thing. There is no freedom without anonymity.

Re:Hmmmmm. (1)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358435)

So the use of a VPN has no other function than IP infringement?

Please have them sue IBM,Comcast,AT&T,AIG,and every other large company fort then please.

They are advertising it as a way to be online anonymously NOT for IP infringement. you know like if you are writing about how wacked out the Talaban leaders are and dont want to be beheaded, or surfing fish porn that is illegal in Scandinavia, etc....

 

Re:Hmmmmm. (1)

bernywork (57298) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358487)

Umm, Australia is looking at web filters, people under oppressive governments, ability to use it to remotely test hosted services.

Freedom of speach and other technical reasons are pretty good reasons to invest in a VPN.

Question (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27357973)

So I understand this VPN service will "help ensure its users' privacy". But will it also ensure copyright protections or protect IP holders' rights?

After all, they wouldn't want to be aiding and abeting a criminal operation, would they? Copyright infringement is still a crime in the western world.

Just asking.

Re:Question (4, Insightful)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358307)

But will it also ensure copyright protections or protect IP holders' rights?

No, but why should it? many of us think that the current US copyright laws are unconstitutional, despite what SCOTUS says; Stanford Professor Lawrence Lessig, for one, who argued that current copyright is unconstitutionally long in front of the Supremes. He details the reasons he lost, and what he did wrong that caused him (and us) to lose in his (copyrighted) book Free Culture, available for sale at your local bookstore, free at your local public library, or free on his web site.

After all, they wouldn't want to be aiding and abeting a criminal operation, would they?

I have no problem with aiding and abetting a criminal operation when I buy pot. Drug laws should also be judged unconstitutional; they needed a constitutional amendment to outlaw the dangerous drug alcohol, why would they not need the same to outlaw the relatively benign marijuana? Where in the Constitution (besides the much abused "interstate commerce clause", which could have theoretically been used for alcohol) does Congress have the right to stop me from screwing up my life any way I wish?

Copyright infringement is still a crime in the western world.

Copyright infringement is largely a civil matter. And Pirate Bay doesn't limit itself to the western world; the internet is world wide.

Re:Question (1)

Cajun Hell (725246) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358671)

But will it also ensure copyright protections or protect IP holders' rights?

No, but it doesn't hurt those things either. I wouldn't worry about a tool that only serves one purpose and doesn't address others. For example, my car helps ensure I can travel, but it doesn't help me shave my beard. And yet, people who shave don't avoid using cars. IP holders who want privacy aren't going to be unusually (moreso than not-IP-holders) biased against using this VPN service.

Not needed yet (1)

Krneki (1192201) | more than 5 years ago | (#27357977)

VPN networks may become useful if anti-sharing laws are passed or if sites starts to block foreign connection.

Still it is good to know people are preparing if things doesn't go as we hoped.

Re:Not needed yet (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27358209)

Also, automated ATM machines use virtual VPN networks to keep your personal PIN number safe.

Re:Not needed yet (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27358573)

i see what you did there and i'm LOLling out loud here! :)

Erm (5, Insightful)

ilovegeorgebush (923173) | more than 5 years ago | (#27357993)

You're as anonymous as your credit card details allow you to be. How are you supposed to pay for something web-based without handing over your details?

Furthermore, couldn't the courts just request THB hand over a list of paying customers if it were pertinent to a case?

Re:Erm (5, Informative)

SatanicPuppy (611928) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358053)

Yea, so? If there are no traffic records, all they would know is that those people pay for a service, not that they actually used it to download anything.

It's not illegal to pay someone for a secure connection, and since damages in most cases are attached to download records, they would have nothing to stand on really.

Re:Erm (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27358353)

I swear officer, I only paid that prostitute for her to spend time with me in a hotel room. You cant prove we actually had sex.

Re:Erm (5, Insightful)

arndawg (1468629) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358571)

I swear officer, I only paid that prostitute for her to spend time with me in a hotel room. You cant prove we actually had sex.

More like: I only paid for that hotel room. What prostitute are you talking about?

Re:Erm (1)

rattaroaz (1491445) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358585)

I swear officer, I only paid that prostitute for her to spend time with me in a hotel room. You cant prove we actually had sex.

No, but the gonorrhea had to come from somewhere.

Re:Erm (1)

batquux (323697) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358089)

This is like buying a 'gold delivery service' from Blackbeard.

Re:Erm (1)

simonbas (1319225) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358095)

Is there any service to pay anonymously over the net? comparable to cash?

Re:Erm (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27358097)

Wow, young crowd here today: maybe a pre-paid Visa card from Wal*Mart? Like, duh?

-jcr

Re:Erm (1)

wastedlife (1319259) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358175)

And how do you explain to the authorities why you are paying for an overseas VPN account with a fake name and a pre-paid Visa? Granted, none of those things are technically illegal in the US AFAIK(the fake account details might be a problem with the Patriot Act though), but it might be suspicious enough to have a search warrant issued and your computer taken for analysis. This is the same problem with encrypting your hard drive and border searches, they are going to assume the worst even if you only do it because you expect reasonable privacy.

Re:Erm (2, Informative)

Loadmaster (720754) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358121)

You're right that the user will not be totally anonymous, but TPB said they will not store traffic logs. Basically, even if they get your name as a user they cannot tie any illegal action to you. Just ask the RIAA how well lawsuits work with dynamic IP addresses. They paid out over $100,000 to Tonya Anderson of Beaverton, OR because of this.

Re:Erm (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27358129)

Sure, but using your credit card does not make you a criminal, does it?

Compared to your friendly local ISP, at least THB would have to go to court to give a list of customers.

Re:Erm (1)

pilgrim23 (716938) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358147)

You are purchasing a VPN Service. nothing illegal about that. Now, track who paid for it, their downloads, the torrents they nabbed, the IP from which it was nabbed, match to known copyrighted materials.... Sounds an expensive and a possibly futile search given who is running this party. It would also require they hire geeks very good at this sort of thing and fluent in Swedish. If nothing else it will result in new and interesting letters in the PB legals...

Re:Erm (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27358161)

I guess you've never heard of pre-paid credit cards? I guess you've never heard of webmail accounts outside a given country? I think you should cancel your /. account and sod off over to digg.

Account details (1)

wastedlife (1319259) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358055)

Considering you have to pay them somehow, won't the authorities be able to extradite the client information that way? Granted, The Pirate Bay claims they won't log your activity, but having an account with them might put you under scrutiny.

Re:Account details (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27358115)

You pay them by sending me $5, and I pay them for you... yeah!

Re:Account details (3, Informative)

joelmax (1445613) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358375)

Yes, but really, if they only have your name and address, they can't search your home/sieze your system simply for having a vpn account with TPB. You are not violating any laws to have that account, therefore probable cause *shouldn't* work on the simple grounds that millions of people around the world use/connect to vpns all the time. Now IANAL by any means, and who knows what sort of strong-arm/sneaky tactics could be used... but simply having a vpn with TPB shouldn't be enough cause to gain a warrant.

Re:Account details (1)

wastedlife (1319259) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358619)

Well, they were able to torture and imprison you without trial for "terrorist activities". They are able to take your laptop away for having encryption at a border search. I'd say that, realistically, they could probably have a warrant issued(or would just illegally search and seize) against you for having a VPN account with a web site filled with "illegal" material. Just because they shouldn't doesn't mean they won't.

Why is it needed? (1)

DaveV1.0 (203135) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358061)

Why would anyone need to "cover their tracks when torrenting" unless he was doing something illegal?

Re:Why is it needed? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27358151)

more importantly, why would anyone resist personal searches and eavesdropping if they've got nothing to hide?

Re:Why is it needed? (3, Insightful)

Per Wigren (5315) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358173)

Illegal is not necessarily the same thing as immoral, wrong, evil, bad.

Maybe the laws are wrong and should be changed? Before that can happen though, this will help people in need of privacy. You can look at it as a kind of civil disobedience.

Re:Why is it needed? (0)

DaveV1.0 (203135) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358363)

Maybe the laws are wrong and should be changed?

Then you change the laws, not break them. It is not civil disobedience. It is simple criminality.

Re:Why is it needed? (3, Interesting)

Hatta (162192) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358647)

Then you change the laws, not break them. It is not civil disobedience. It is simple criminality.

Henry David Thoreau would disagree:

As for adopting the ways which the State has provided for remedying the evil, I know not of such ways. They take too much time, and a man's life will be gone. I have other affairs to attend to. I came into this world, not chiefly to make this a good place to live in, but to live in it, be it good or bad. A man has not everything to do, but something; and because he cannot do everything, it is not necessary that he should do something wrong. It is not my business to be petitioning the Governor or the Legislature any more than it is theirs to petition me; and if they should not hear my petition, what should I do then? But in this case the State has provided no way; its very Constitution is the evil. This may seem to be harsh and stubborn and unconciliatory; but it is to treat with the utmost kindness and consideration the only spirit that can appreciate or deserves it.

Civil Disobedience, 1849

Re:Why is it needed? (1)

itschy (992394) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358205)

Your position seems to be the widely spreading "guilty until otherwise proven" one.
By that logic, why would anyone use sun glasses in winter?
Or even: Why would anyone wear cloth, unless they are unbelievable ugly?

Sadly, a lot of very attractive women seem to wear cloth these days.

Where was I?
Ah, yes: Forbid beautiful people to waer clothes. That was my point!

Re:Why is it needed? (1)

DaveV1.0 (203135) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358327)

By that logic, why would anyone use sun glasses in winter?

Because the sun still shines in winter.

Or even: Why would anyone wear cloth, unless they are unbelievable ugly?

Because it is cold, or they burn easily, or they need protection from the elements, or simply because of social mores and laws.

Would you care to use an analogy which is not completely false and has a modicum of reality and relevance?

Re:Why is it needed? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27358225)

Why don't you have a webcam in your toilet?

Are you doing something illegal in there?

Re:Why is it needed? (1)

Loadmaster (720754) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358323)

Privacy. It's your right whether you need/want it or not. Don't give yours away, and I'd appreciate you not giving mine away either.

http://www.computerweekly.com/blogs/the-data-trust-blog/2009/02/debunking-a-myth-if-you-have-n.html [computerweekly.com]

And here's Professor Solove's essay on "I've got nothing to hide" and privacy.

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=998565 [ssrn.com]

Re:Why is it needed? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27358329)

Just another rehash of the "if you've got nothing to hide..." trope which has been refuted on /. ad nauseam. Please go back to trolling Digg.

Re:Why is it needed? (1)

PhrostyMcByte (589271) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358367)

Why would you shut your blinds unless you were doing something illegal? Why would you password protect your computer unless you have child porn on it? Some people just like their privacy. You don't have to be doing illegal things to want to keep your habits private.

To be clear, I'm not arguing the likelihood of the service being used for anonymization of illegal activity.

Users Rights. (5, Insightful)

geekmux (1040042) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358477)

Why would anyone need to "cover their tracks when torrenting" unless he was doing something illegal?

Ah, careful there. You're coming dangerously close to arguing the old "mind of I search your car/house, what do you have to hide?"...

Remove the torrent-laced, copyright-riddled emotion from this for a moment. It's about offering users a service to stay anonymous while using the web. The concept is certainly not new (care for a fresh onion on your browser burger?), this one just happens to be offered by a fairly popular website. Something tells me if Google were to offer the same thing, we wouldn't be talking about people hiding Gmail content.

Arr (1, Informative)

Inda (580031) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358091)

If you are willing to pay something, why not use something else like the old University Networks. No uploads. Maximum download speeds your pipe can handle.

It's like coppery but made of iron (1)

Drakkenmensch (1255800) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358101)

I hope that the RIAA and all the other IP zealots realize the delicious irony that if they hadn't come down so hard on the pirate bay to begin with, they might never have even though of offering such a strong way for its users to cover their own asses. Looks like the Copyright Overlords may have unintentionally done something right by trying to do something wrong!

Re:It's like coppery but made of iron (1)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358245)

It's the simple natural progression of things. When it comes to the Internet, people have shown time and time again that they can and will find a technical solution to route around any law that they see as unjust or unfair.

Re:It's like coppery but made of iron (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27358273)

No, the irony is the Pirate Bay are getting â5 that the music companies could have had.

Anonymity at this level is dangerous (1, Interesting)

richardellisjr (584919) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358143)

I'm all for an anonymous web, however this is really quickly going to be the way thieves, crackers and all the other low lifes on the net do their work. I can tell you that if I were to try and break into something like the pentagon or some large financial institution I'd use this service. How long will it be before see a major break in originate from this service?

Re:Anonymity at this level is dangerous (4, Informative)

gentry (17384) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358389)

You're not all for an anonymous web really are you?

There are many ways to hide tracks already that are more effective than this offering (Tor, Open wireless access points, anonymous proxies and so on).

Organisations that have significant risk from being hacked either improve their security or get the hell of the Internet.

Re:Anonymity at this level is dangerous (5, Insightful)

wastedlife (1319259) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358433)

Yes, because overseas, anonymous VPN accounts are totally new and have never been used before for nefarious purposes...

Re:Anonymity at this level is dangerous (1)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358497)

Of course it is all thieves and criminals. Laws have been passed to make all of us criminals.

Please turn yourself in to the nearest enforcement bot.. You violated law 45634.21-5 Instigating thought for enabling anonymous webs.

you will be rehabilitated shortly.

VPNOUT baby (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27358195)

https://vpnout.com/ does similar things, and some of us use it because we don't like being watched, for any suspected reason.

Subscription to legal music store is 15$ (2, Interesting)

rexping (1505799) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358197)

Rhapsody [real.com] is a subscription based music service with monthly fee of 15$. Someone will make it with 7$/month soon I am sure of it. Why be pirate if you have to pay for it?

Rex Ping [cybertechnews.org]

Leaving dock... (1)

avenema (1201077) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358233)

Free to board, $7 for us to clean up behind you.

Sensationalism? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27358261)

VPN services are just anonymous surfing... You don't have to use them solely for downloading by bittorrent, though many people do.

All TPB has to say is they're offering a privacy service. I think the Swedes would be cool with that, especially considering the only evidence there could be is that you bought the service. There's no way to tell what you did with it.

Also, it appears to be optional, so the last few sentences don't make sense except as sensationalism to sell ads on a website.

False sense of security (2, Interesting)

ACMENEWSLLC (940904) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358325)

Years ago, the US Government opened up one of these Anonymous web surfing sites. There was no indication that it was the US Government. The let this run for considerable time. After a while, the truth came out in a proceeding. The US Government was using this Anonymous site to find people violating US law. Many people ended up in the tank.

If you send ALL your traffic to this VPN service, what makes you think you are safe? While PB may not log, what is to stop a government from forcing PB to place their own logging device inline?

After being a very quick and nice dialup service, Earthlink suffered a year of horrible response times, poor performance, and high drops. Then it quit, but not until after they lost a lot of subscribers. In a case it turned up that the US Government put these tracking devices inline between Earthlink and their backbone connections which was the cause of the slowdowns. The current crop, though, don't have this issue.

People need to think about these things.

Re:False sense of security (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27358467)

Years ago, the US Government opened up one of these Anonymous web surfing sites. There was no indication that it was the US Government. The let this run for considerable time. After a while, the truth came out in a proceeding. The US Government was using this Anonymous site to find people violating US law. Many people ended up in the tank.

If you send ALL your traffic to this VPN service, what makes you think you are safe? While PB may not log, what is to stop a government from forcing PB to place their own logging device inline?

After being a very quick and nice dialup service, Earthlink suffered a year of horrible response times, poor performance, and high drops. Then it quit, but not until after they lost a lot of subscribers. In a case it turned up that the US Government put these tracking devices inline between Earthlink and their backbone connections which was the cause of the slowdowns. The current crop, though, don't have this issue.

People need to think about these things.

Do you have some proof for these claims?

Re:False sense of security (1)

Dan667 (564390) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358569)

It is a VPN, not a regular connection and outside snooping would be pretty hard. To be honest there are probably only a hand full of gov agencies in the world that could do it and they don't care about copyright law. If you look at the competency of the prosecution in the TPB trial it is clear the RIAA don't have any access to them. Occam's razor.

divide and conquer (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27358339)

I hope they are just making it a publicity stunt.
Since this will divide the "pirates" and make it easier to (conquer) win over them.

The power in Pirate Bay is the numbers of users.
Noone thinks that they can sue 1million users, but if they can split them up in smaller parts they will sue.
Because they just need enough "good" convictions and they scare the masses of piracy.

Migrating users (1)

quercus.aeternam (1174283) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358343)

The question remains, however, if any significant portion of The Pirate Bay's users will decide to fork over 5 per month solely to remain anonymous. It seems more likely that the majority either won't care, or will simply start looking for lesser-known torrent trackers to use."

Why would anyone move trackers just for this reason?

This shouldn't affect their normal services in any way, so the only reason someone might shift would be because of a moral problem with the service, correct?

And honestly, how many tpb users would switch in the context of a moral dilemma like this?

Might Actually be GOOD for the Movie Industry (5, Interesting)

A. B3ttik (1344591) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358347)

Suppose this takes off and TPB starts raking in cash.

This shows that even Pirates are willing to fork over money and pay for the products if the service is good enough and the price is low enough.

Netflix already has similar Pay-for-Unlimited-Access plans between $8 and $20... and if TPB is successful, I predict that more distributors will move to this service model.

Imagine Blockbuster or Amazon or iTunes saying: "Take whatever you want. Movies, music, ANYTHING. $20/month." They'd make a fortune. Hell, if you threw games in there, I'd personally pay like $100/month.

Re:Might Actually be GOOD for the Movie Industry (3, Insightful)

Dan667 (564390) | more than 5 years ago | (#27358653)

they are to greedy to understand that they would make a lot more delivering something that people want that they could own than trying to squeeze a nickel out of everything even if it costs most of it to try make it work and have a draconian DRM system. I think a lot of this is driven by egos, control, and middle manager charts that are out of touch with the real world.

April 1? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27358509)

Has anyone actually read the article?

Still, The Pirate Bay is sensitive to the concerns of its users, especially with IPRED going into effect on April 1. The question remains, however, if any significant portion of The Pirate Bay's users will decide to fork over â5 per month solely to remain anonymous. It seems more likely that the majority either won't care, or will simply start looking for lesser-known torrent trackers to use.

Cheaper (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#27358609)

... here [witopia.net]

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?