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!

Swedish Pirate Party Launches ISP

kdawson posted more than 4 years ago | from the nothing-to-declare dept.

Piracy 356

WillDraven writes "Torrentfreak is reporting that the Swedish Pirate Party has launched an ISP. Starting with 100 residents in a housing organization in the city of Lund, Pirate ISP hopes to gain 5% of the market in Lund before spreading to other markets. Headed by longtime Pirate Party member Gustav Nipe (video interview in English), the company aims to provide Internet service with the sort of guarantees one would expect from the Pirate Party. Most notable are the promises to keep no logs of subscriber activity and thus to provide no data to law enforcement or private corporations."

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

Please spread to other countries... (5, Interesting)

Shikaku (1129753) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970184)

Please spread to other countries...

Re:Please spread to other countries... (1)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970296)

There was an article a while back... They applied to be a party in Canada, and they have been approved (don't know if they've actually formed a party yet or not).

I imagine if its a big hit there, and it spreads over here... Well I mean we manage to slip past some of the more Draconian IP laws of the States by putting taxes on blank media and such - I wonder if offering this service to Canada would cause a stir...

Re:Please spread to other countries... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32970582)

The party in canada is a fucking joke the guy that's running it is a self important prick with no moral or brains.

They make the pot party look legit, and it is harming all of us to have people like this trying to 'run' the show.

Re:Please spread to other countries... (4, Interesting)

Yvanhoe (564877) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970472)

Well it depends on you for a big part : http://www.pp-international.net/ [pp-international.net]
Sweden has exceptional political conditions. Germany is coming up to speed. But tentative national pirate parties exist in many countries.

Re:Please spread to other countries... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32970674)

Yes, we could use some non-monitored freedom in the US.

Re:Please spread to other countries... (1)

rainmouse (1784278) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970708)

Sounds awesome, can't wait to sign up.

what ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32970186)

It's legal for a ISP to just don't log activities instead of refusing to handle the data ? ...

Re:what ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32970452)

Not all countries are under american corporate martial law.

I predict... (2, Interesting)

f3rret (1776822) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970188)

That The **AA's are just going to love this idea.

I suspect that they'll just set up bulk mailers to send DMCA notices to this ISP's abuse@ address, every time a new movie, album or anything is released a mail gets sent to abuse@pirateisp.com because no doubt a copy of said work is bound to exist somewhere on their network.

Re:I predict... (5, Interesting)

bsDaemon (87307) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970258)

and I bet the Pirate Party and the network engineers and system administrators that they hire will be at least smart enough to straight filter, either at the packet level at the border, or application level on the mail servers, any traffic coming from IP ranges known to belong to the RIAA, MPAA, or constituent organizations. That's what I'd do. Or segment abuse@ off on its own area, let it take the hammering, and spit all the addresses back via feedback loops and get their email black listed. Or... run the mail server on OpenBSD, where spamd is linked to pf, and accept the incoming connections from their mass-mailer at 1bps, thus backlogging the sender and screwing them over (disk i/o issues, etc). Fun stuff like that.

Re:I predict... (0, Offtopic)

f3rret (1776822) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970278)

Whoa...

You really thought that through, didn't you?

Re:I predict... (2, Interesting)

bsDaemon (87307) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970298)

as a system administrator at a web hosting company who had to monitor abuse@ and all the crap that was associated with that... yes. yes i have.

Re:I predict... (2, Flamebait)

MobyDisk (75490) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970416)

any traffic coming from IP ranges known to belong to the RIAA, MPAA, or constituent organizations.

IMHO, that would be doing exactly what their enemies are doing. Their purpose is to let users access the internet without restrictions. Not to wall-off those things they find evil.

Re:I predict... (3, Informative)

Andorin (1624303) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970562)

You left out the "on the mail servers" part of his post. Meaning that the filtering is done for incoming email to the ISP itself, not traffic in general.

Re:I predict... (1)

bsDaemon (87307) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970770)

Blocking incoming traffic that isn't in a TCP session already associated with an egress port is not the same thing as filtering internet access for their customers. It's responsible security administration. Besides, how many of their customers do you think even want to have any communication with the RIAA anyway? I'd wager not a lot.

Re:I predict... (3, Insightful)

Zedrick (764028) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970304)

Then this ISP can set up an autoreply that gets triggered by "DMCA" in the body, informing the sender that the DMCA is an american law and totally irrelevant in most other countries. (though writing such replies manually can be a lot of fun, I did plenty of that when I worked as abuse-handler at a large webhost in Denmark. A lot of American lawyer-types really can't get it into their thick skulls that american laws are not universal, and if they have a valid complaint they need to say so (and be specific!) instead of just waving around a wand, trying to invoke the magical DMCA.)

Re:I predict... (4, Informative)

AndrewNeo (979708) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970338)

Yes, because the ** Association of America will send DMCA (an American law) notices to a Swedish ISP. You know what the Pirate Bay does with those letters now? They post them up on a page and laugh at them.

Re:I predict... (2, Insightful)

f3rret (1776822) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970498)

Yeah but that does not really stop the **AA's does it?

Re:I predict... (0, Redundant)

GofG (1288820) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970590)

Because **AA is hard to parse and it's rather difficult to immediately know what it means, I might recommend the term MAFIAA in the future. Sure, it might not stand for anything in specific, but it's easy to parse and everyone knows exactly what it means.

Fuck yeah (0, Offtopic)

lobf (1790198) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970192)

Fuck yeah.

It's too bad that it takes "criminals" to create a network as it should exist.

Which is awesome until... (2, Insightful)

easterberry (1826250) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970194)

... people start using it for child pornography transfer and other things that SHOULD be illegal.

Re:Which is awesome until... (5, Insightful)

MrEricSir (398214) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970222)

But isn't it better to trust people with freedom than to treat everyone like criminals?

Re:Which is awesome until... (2, Insightful)

endymion.nz (1093595) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970260)

I dunno.. they might do something I have a moral objection too, not necessarily a criminal act. :(

Re:Which is awesome until... (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32970328)

I'm not sure if you're trolling or trying to be funny but that's just fucking scary.

Re:Which is awesome until... (-1, Troll)

easterberry (1826250) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970262)

um... no. Not in cases of major crimes it isn't. It would be better if we lived in a world where these things weren't needed. But we don't. Innocent people need to be watched by the police so that guilty people can't go free.

Re:Which is awesome until... (1)

kg8484 (1755554) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970308)

Holy shit, you're being serious. How about we install a camera in your bedroom? After all, I hear a lot of pedophiles do their raping in bedrooms. Think of the children! You've got nothing to hide, right? All the video will be monitored securely and we will make sure to keep the videotapes safe.

Re:Which is awesome until... (0, Troll)

easterberry (1826250) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970350)

Straw man. The relevant analogy would be police being able to enter my house with a warrant.

Re:Which is awesome until... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32970422)

By your own analogy, the police should need actual evidence of your illegal act before they intrude on your privacy. IRL or online.

Re:Which is awesome until... (1)

easterberry (1826250) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970558)

No. They need reasonable suspicion.

Re:Which is awesome until... (1)

HungryHobo (1314109) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970656)

ah so logs should only start being kept after a warrant has been issued then?

Re:Which is awesome until... (1)

Tubal-Cain (1289912) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970716)

Theoretically.

Re:Which is awesome until... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32970466)

That doesn't hold when there is article after article about ignoring the use of warrants and proceeding anyways, even when they are available after the fact.

Re:Which is awesome until... (0, Troll)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970484)

You are pathetic.

I was going to make a real reply, but you are such a sniveling coward of a person that I really can't be bothered.

Re:Which is awesome until... (1)

easterberry (1826250) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970592)

I was going to make a real reply, but I can't think of one so I made an unfounded ad hominem attack instead and hoped nobody would notice the difference.

fixed that for you.

Re:Which is awesome until... (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970748)

Go fuck yourself you little coward. Is that a clear enough reply for you?

Re:Which is awesome until... (1)

kg8484 (1755554) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970586)

Well, good job with catching the straw man. But shouldn't police require a warrant to monitor my traffic? Seems like you don't agree:

Innocent people need to be watched by the police so that guilty people can't go free.

Now, it would be one thing if I was a suspect but was innocent, but you are implying that we should all be monitored, and I simply extended the slippery slope.

Re:Which is awesome until... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32970606)

No, it's not a straw man. You specifically said:

Innocent people need to be watched by the police

Not "Police need to be able to enter the houses of innocent people", "innocent people need to be watched." Watching implies an active watcher.

Re:Which is awesome until... (1)

ElectricTurtle (1171201) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970754)

Absolutely correct, no doubt the GP will ignore you. His 'relevant' analogy is the real strawman, as a person's house does not contain timestamped records of a person's every activity therein. A search warrant can only reveal the house as it is at the time of search, with a few possible educated extrapolations back in time for rough estimates of previous activity, but nothing like a timestamped log.

Re:Which is awesome until... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32970310)

I bet you love Apple products.

Re:Which is awesome until... (5, Insightful)

Andorin (1624303) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970320)

um... no. Not in cases of major crimes it isn't.

Downloading child pornography is a major crime?

Innocent people need to be watched by the police so that guilty people can't go free.

It's better to let a guilty man go free than convict an innocent.

Re:Which is awesome until... (-1, Troll)

easterberry (1826250) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970364)

It's better to have police patrol the street looking for crime than to not have them doing that.

Re:Which is awesome until... (1)

Andorin (1624303) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970458)

Patrolling a public street != monitoring or controlling a given person's communication with another given person. Again, freedom of speech is a bitch.

Re:Which is awesome until... (-1, Troll)

easterberry (1826250) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970540)

Watching a site for illegal content then going to the ISP and asking who is accessing it is EXACTLY like patrolling the streets.

Re:Which is awesome until... (1)

Andorin (1624303) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970598)

No, it's not. It's like watching a store for illegal activity, then going in and asking the guy behind the counter who has been inside. Of course, stores don't keep logs of who walks in... *hint*

Re:Which is awesome until... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32970680)

Not sure how, since that's after the fact. Patrolling the streets involves seeing crime as it happens!

Re:Which is awesome until... (0, Flamebait)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970732)

Not at all you sniveling coward-shit. It would be like recording where everyone goes at all times then checking the tapes later.

Re:Which is awesome until... (1)

HungryHobo (1314109) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970564)

papers please.

Re:Which is awesome until... (1)

countertrolling (1585477) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970352)

You must be from one of those fascist commie countries. We have a saying that you should take to heart. Goes something like, Better to let a thousand guilty go free than to imprison even one innocent...

Re:Which is awesome until... (1)

Mongoose Disciple (722373) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970438)

Better to let a thousand guilty go free than to imprison even one innocent...

Of course none of us want to be the innocent guy in jail for a murder he didn't commit, but also of course, none of us want to be the victim of the thousand serial murderers you let free.

There's a reason for a standard of "reasonable doubt".

Re:Which is awesome until... (1)

countertrolling (1585477) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970686)

Ah, so some collateral damage is "reasonable"?

Re:Which is awesome until... (1)

HungryHobo (1314109) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970354)

And as such the police cameras in your living-room and bedroom are a necessary evil to ensure that you aren't keeping any kidnapping victims in your home.

After all in the case of major crimes privacy isn't an issue.
Sure we could assume that you're not a kidnapped until you prove otherwise and it would be better if we lived in a world where these things weren't needed. But we don't. Innocent people need to be watched by the police so that guilty people can't go free.

Re:Which is awesome until... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32970372)

Major crimes like planning to overthrow your government in 2015...I mean 1775?

Re:Which is awesome until... (1)

Zerth (26112) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970640)

So you want to be like England, where they can search your car without cause and take you in for weapons possession for having a multitool in your briefcase [telegraph.co.uk] .

Re:Which is awesome until... (3, Insightful)

RLiegh (247921) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970356)

That's a false dichotomy. You can be allowed freedom to speak while still being able to be found when you use that freedom to engage in criminal activities or to organize acts of terrorist destruction.

Re:Which is awesome until... (4, Insightful)

HungryHobo (1314109) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970428)

If you can be found and punished for that then you can be found and punished when you want to speak out against your government, when you want to say unpopular things, support unpopular positions or organize acts of civil protest.

Re:Which is awesome until... (0, Flamebait)

RLiegh (247921) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970552)

So, you're against law enforcement then? after all -the lawman who can stop a rape in progress could also stop a peaceful protest?

Isn't that right?

Re:Which is awesome until... (1)

HungryHobo (1314109) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970618)

lovely strawman there.
freedom to speak anonymously != freedom to rape people.

Re:Which is awesome until... (1)

RLiegh (247921) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970764)

Now you're being deliberately obtuse, but that's ok -I don't need to waste any further time on you.

Re:Which is awesome until... (0, Troll)

ae1294 (1547521) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970448)

But isn't it better to trust people with freedom than to treat everyone like criminals?

But think of the children! All those young, innocent and mostly helpless fragile little children. Then, good sir, then you look me in the eye and YOU tell me that you didn't rape and murder that 16 year old girl we all know you where molesting about five years back.... Come on, the nation, no... the whole world is waiting.... SaY it DAmN YoU! CONFESS! I SAID CONFESS SINNER, CONFESS or embrace the fires of HELL instead of those of stake!

Re:Which is awesome until... (4, Insightful)

stagg (1606187) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970238)

And? People use highways for illegal things. They use their homes for illegal things. Hell, they probably use government buildings for illegal things. Cracking down on freedoms in the name of a minority of miscreants is never a good thing.

Re:Which is awesome until... (2, Interesting)

easterberry (1826250) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970290)

I'm pretty sure the cops patrol and watch the highways and, with a warrant, can go into your home if there are reports of crimes there.

Are you implying it would be better if they couldn't/didn't?

Re:Which is awesome until... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32970488)

If you want to make analogies, do it right. There is no "just in case" recording of everything I do in my home so that cops can get a warrant and watch what I did. Even for "live" investigations, there's a high legal barrier before a cop can enter my home. If someone just accuses me of stealing something, it is not sufficient for a warrant. On the internet, with most ISPs, not only is there a record which ties my online activities to my identity, there's also almost no barrier if someone wants to access that information.

Re:Which is awesome until... (4, Insightful)

HungryHobo (1314109) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970500)

logging every site that every user visits through an ISP just in case law enforcement want to check up on it later to see if they're viewing illegal material is like putting a camera in every bedroom just in case law enforcement want to check up on it later to see if you've been raping victims in the room.

an equivalent to a warrant to search your house would be a warrant to search your computer not having your ISP recording everything you view for future inspection.

Re:Which is awesome until... (4, Insightful)

BitterOak (537666) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970270)

... people start using it for child pornography transfer and other things that SHOULD be illegal.

This is precisely why these things shouldn't be illegal. At least, possession and transfer of information (including child pornography) shouldn't be illegal. (Of course, abusing children to make child pornography should be illegal, and child pornography itself could very well be evidence of a crime.) The problem is, as soon as you make certain kinds of information illegal, then it would be impossible for ISPs to provide the kind of anonymity many of us would desire. Child pornography makes a wonderful excuse to impose strict data retention laws that affect a wide variety of users.

Re:Which is awesome until... (0, Troll)

easterberry (1826250) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970312)

How about when someone posts online that they plan to go shoot up their school the next day?

Re:Which is awesome until... (1)

Andorin (1624303) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970358)

How does that have anything whatsoever to do with the topic at hand? It's not illegal to blog about how you're going to shoot up the school; you're only committing a crime if you actually do it. Freedom of speech is a bitch.

Re:Which is awesome until... (1)

easterberry (1826250) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970426)

protip: If you publicly announce your intention to commit a violent crime the police have probable cause to go to your house and detain or arrest you.

Re:Which is awesome until... (1)

Andorin (1624303) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970492)

protip: If you publicly announce your intention to commit a violent crime the police have probable cause to go to your house and detain or arrest you.

[citation needed]

Re:Which is awesome until... (1)

easterberry (1826250) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970632)

Citation provided [associatedcontent.com] Conspiracy law is pretty standard fare.

Re:Which is awesome until... (1)

Andorin (1624303) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970726)

Bad citation.

When two people get together, discuss a crime, and plan its commission, those two people have committed the crime of conspiracy. Even if they never get around to actually doing what they have planned, or if they are caught before they are able, they can still be prosecuted under conspiracy law.

In most states, an individual cannot be prosecuted for conspiracy unless at least one of the people involves as taken an overt action toward carrying the plan out. For example, if two people talk about robbing a bank, but never do anything to move the plan forward, neither can be charged with conspiracy. If, however, one of the partners obtains a bank floor plan for the institution they plan to rob, both can be charged for conspiracy to commit robbery.

By definition of this citation, blogging about committing a crime is not conspiracy to commit a crime.

Re:Which is awesome until... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32970672)

A wonderful excuse to do everything not to actually go after the real criminals.

Re:Which is awesome until... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32970302)

The police will then be able to wiretap the perps, just like they would otherwise.

ISP logs have never been used in Swedish court as evidence of child porn transfer. The possession of the images themselves are the most serious crime, and the intent or actual transferring to others.

In other words, the lack of ISP logs will not make it significantly harder to bring REAL criminals to justice.

However, It will make it more difficult for movie companies to perform large-scale 20,000 people civil lawsuits.

Re:Which is awesome until... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32970376)

Hey, guess what, downloading that file was illegal too, maybe not in your eyes, but certainly in theirs and content producers.
You can either have it all out or none at all, there is no acceptable middle ground.

If you want to create a no-law system, then damn it you better expect anarchy.
This is simple logic here.
You, the police, governments, ISPs, none of them will prevent child porn production. You might make some dents in it, but you will never stop it.
Just like you will never stop terrorism, people attacking other people for opinions, murders, molestation, etc.
If you want a world free of that, you better be prepared to have no privacy.
And really, when you think about it, if you and everyone else knew everything about everybody, would it really matter much?
Of course it would, to you, but in a few generations, those brought up in a society where all information is freely available to everyone would be normal, thinking about a world without such a society would be sickening to the mind.
Just some food for thought...

Re:Which is awesome until... (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32970604)

>child pornography transfer
>things that SHOULD be illegal

You mean, things other than child pornography transfer? Because child pornography transfer definitely shouldn't be illegal.

I am skeptical of the claim that voluntarily pedophilia harms children. The arguments that it causes harm seem to be based on cases which aren't voluntary, which are then stretched by parents who are horrified by the idea that their little baby is maturing.

IBTL (-1, Troll)

RLiegh (247921) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970286)

This will last all of four seconds, until the government shuts them down for failure to provide access to logs and user information to law enforcement agencies.

And really, in this age of terrorism and child pornography is it even a good idea to have an anonymous isp? I think it's highly irresponsible. People need to be held accountable for their actions -online as well as offline.

Re:IBTL (2, Insightful)

Amouth (879122) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970396)

how would you feel if i was able to call up and get your IP from this post - then call your ISP and get your address, along with usage logs so i can approximate when you will be home.

then i'll just go sit on your door step and say hi and talk to your neighbors that i'm just watching you for suspicious activity because you where online talking about keywords "child pornography & terrorism"

now - does it make a difference if i'm wearing a uniform or not?

what if i was a politician and you happened to say something negative about my campaign?

the point is - that we need an avenue for free speech - we need an avenue to be able to anonymous. do people abuse that? yes they do - should we penalize all of society to a nanny/police state for the few? NO..

Re:IBTL (0, Troll)

RLiegh (247921) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970516)

Conversely, how will you feel if someone says that they intend to walk into the school your child attends and shoot it up -but they can't be traced because there are no logs?

Would you be happy if people are able to coordinate planting bombs in a subway and can't be stopped because they cannot be connected to a real-world identity?

the point is - that we need an avenue for free speech - we need an avenue to be able to anonymous. do people abuse that? yes they do - should we penalize all of society to a nanny/police state for the few? NO..

With freedom comes accountability, otherwise freedom falls to the thug with the largest gun and the most righteous jihad.

Anonymity needs to have limits -when your right to be anonymous infringes on people's right to peace and well-being, then you lose the right to hide behind your keyboard.

Re:IBTL (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970646)

Considering those are highly unlikely outcomes, well below the odds of say dieing from the result of a farm animal attack, we can safely ignore it. Terrorism is a very rare way to die.

In those cases they can get warrants and do some wiretapping, this is about wiretapping and logging for later. See the difference?

Re:IBTL (1)

RLiegh (247921) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970724)

And without records you're going to know who to wire-tap how? exactly?

That's right, you're not.

Also, what good is wiretapping going to do when they're not talking over the phone since they don't have to because they can communicate anonymously over the ISP that can't be arsed to save vital documentation?

Re:IBTL (1)

Amouth (879122) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970688)

If someone said they where going to X school to shoot it up - i would go to the school to stop them

if people where coordinating bombing a subway i would go to the subway to stop them

if i want to speak out about censor ship or have a different view than the current government i don't want them tracking a posting down and throwing me in a dark hole

Re:IBTL (1)

Andorin (1624303) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970402)

Surrender your rights to us! We'll protect you from the child rapists and the pirates and the terrorists! Did I say that clearly enough? There are terrorists! TERRORISTS! Are you frightened enough yet to let us watch and control everything you do?

Re:IBTL (1)

jack2000 (1178961) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970410)

No they don't. People need to have full anonymity online.
Keep your grubby ass backwards notions in real life where they belong. We don't need that kind of bullshit on the internet!

Re:IBTL (1)

gbll (1846580) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970430)

yeah, so what you're saying is that carnivore is really good idea? bc you use this kind of information to spy people on the fly. if someone is using this network for terrorism or child pornography they can start to log this person AFTER the suspicion, not BEFORE, like this 1984 Minority Report way the internet is heading.

Re:IBTL (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32970440)

A strong fuck you sir. My rights are more important than your desire to feel safe.

Re:IBTL (1)

RLiegh (247921) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970594)

And a hearty fuck you, sir -the health and physical well-being of my family and neighborhood are far more important than your so-called 'right' to download content of questionable legality

Re:IBTL (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970666)

Coward. There is no threat but the imagined one, yet you wish to give up all your rights for a little bit of safety theater.

Re:IBTL (5, Insightful)

Spectre (1685) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970468)

"... this age of terrorism and child pornography ..."

What the hell? You think this age is "different" some how?

Terrorism is certainly not rampant. Look back a few decades, to say, the fifties or the sixties when there were riots all over the USA.

Child Pornography, hell. Look back a century, "children" were getting married to middle-aged men and having their babies. The only difference is, back then nobody arrested you for it, or even thought twice about it.

"This age" is noted only for everybody being declared a criminal and living in fear that their government is going to lock them up if they happen to say something ... like, say, this post on SlashDot RIGHT HERE.

Kind of Sad... (5, Insightful)

ceraphis (1611217) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970292)

...that a special ISP has to be launched to get the type of protections every ISP should have.

This is great news for Comcast (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32970344)

Now that political parties can own ISPs this paves the way for ISPs to cut out the middle man and start political parties.

***BZZZZZZZT*** wrong (1)

RLiegh (247921) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970412)

This paves the way for government (through the dominant political parties) to own the ISPs.

This is a BAD THING, do you really want your login and user data being held on neo-conservative servers?

Re:***BZZZZZZZT*** wrong (1)

Shikaku (1129753) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970584)

Yes. I'll watch 1 man 1 jar and post daily in the efukt forums and they'll abandon the policy immediately.

Is it free? (1)

Itninja (937614) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970362)

Assuming it's not, why would any license holder need logs to prosecute? All they would need are billing records. I doubt anyone could successfully make an argument they are not pirating software/videos/etc while paying to use 'Pirate ISP'.

Re:Is it free? (1)

JustinOpinion (1246824) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970476)

If the ISP doesn't maintain records of the dynamic IPs they give out to customers, then there is no way to associate a supposedly-violating IP to a customer billing address. The ISP won't have the data to help out the authorities and their investigations will thus be fruitless. This of course assumes that the ISP has enough customers that it isn't trivially easy to identify which one was using that IP address. Even having a few dozen customers should be enough to make it impossible to associate some web traffic with a particular customer.

I doubt anyone could successfully make an argument they are not pirating software/videos/etc while paying to use 'Pirate ISP'.

I don't think courts would be able to make that glib assumption. As long as the ISP has legitimate uses (like, say, protecting one's privacy while surfing the net) then the burden will be on the accusers to show that a particular user is guilty of a particular crime.

Re:Is it free? (1)

ceraphis (1611217) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970496)

Believe it or not, you can buy something and not even use it. I'm sure many a guy is confused when he sees a woman's closet that has a bunch of clothes with the tags still on because they were never worn.

Limits? (2)

Rik Sweeney (471717) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970420)

How much will it be per month? How much can I transfer per month? Is there a time when downloading is unlimited (such as weekends or between 10pm and 8am). Will they throttle the line during peak hours? What speed can I expect?

Logging my BT transfers is the least of my concerns when choosing an ISP.

Re:Limits? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32970610)

You do not live in a Scandinavian country do you?
I don't know of any ISP with caps on downloads or download speed in Norway or Sweden.

Re:Limits? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32970694)

It's in Sweden dude, bandwidth caps and throttling are almost unheard of in these parts of the world. And price is probably very reasonable compared to the US, maybe $50 for a 10-100Mb/s?

how do I get there from here? (3, Funny)

slick7 (1703596) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970700)

Would that be Pirate_Party.arg?

Reason for server logs (3, Funny)

Nethead (1563) | more than 4 years ago | (#32970712)

That's going to be fun for the admins when the server falls over and they need to figure out why. /var/log is there for a reason.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?