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!

Russia Wanted To Shut YouTube Down For Piracy

Unknown Lamer posted about 3 years ago | from the sharing-is-bad-for-you dept.

Piracy 122

ge7 writes "A recently leaked confidential diplomatic cable reveals Russia's growing interest in shutting down copyright infringing websites. 'Russia's Deputy Minister of Economic Development said that not only do U.S. sites continue to offer pirated Russian movies, but that YouTube and Google should be shut down for not respecting local laws'. The U.S. government has previously attacked torrent and link sites hosted elsewhere in the world, extradited foreign nationals for piracy and provided training on how to shut down piracy websites. 'Voskresenskiy went on to state that, in his opinion, no country in the world is prepared to fight Internet piracy. He argued that all existing laws, including laws in the U.S., are antiquated and do not address new technological trends. As an example, [Voskresenskiy] stated that YouTube and Google (as YouTube's owner) should be shut down because they do not conform to current Russian IPR laws. He admitted that this was not feasible, but continued to emphasize that these entities need to follow local laws, even if the laws are outdated,' the cable adds."

cancel ×


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

Modern tech. (1)

suso (153703) | about 3 years ago | (#37320834)

. Yep, Google Translate just proved that irony exists in Russian too.

Re:Modern tech. (1)

suso (153703) | about 3 years ago | (#37320850)

I guess Cyrillic doesn't work on Slashdot though. *sighs*

Re:Modern tech. (5, Funny)

ArsonSmith (13997) | about 3 years ago | (#37321118)

In Soviet Russia the US violates your copyrights.

I guess.

Re:Modern tech. (2)

interkin3tic (1469267) | about 3 years ago | (#37321316)

In soviet Russia, you don't watch tube...

Re:Modern tech. (2)

SlashV (1069110) | about 3 years ago | (#37321366)

In Soviet Russia copyright violates you!!! tube...

Re:Modern tech. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37322460)

In Soviet Russia copyright violates you!!!.

I thought that was in the USA? MPAA et al?

Re:Modern tech. (1)

Lexx Greatrex (1160847) | about 3 years ago | (#37321544)

"hypocrisy" would be even more fitting. Why not coin a new word even, "Hypiracy"...

Re:Modern tech. (1)

sixsixtysix (1110135) | about 3 years ago | (#37323054)

portmanteau ftw!

Re:Modern tech. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37323854)

I'm not sure what is wrong with slashdotters as you really can't read what he is actually saying. He doesn't want to shut down YouTube, nor does he want to go after american pirates. He's pointing out the huge hypocrisy coming from U.S. and that U.S. laws about copyright are outdated. If it's hard to read that between the lines, it's even stated: "Voskresenskiy went on to state that, in his opinion, no country in the world is prepared to fight Internet piracy. He argued that all existing laws, including laws in the U.S., are antiquated and do not address new technological trends."

God, do you people also think that a woman inviting you to a cup of coffee late at night after a date really means she wants to drink coffee with you?

Questions (1)

sycodon (149926) | about 3 years ago | (#37323012)

1. Russia makes movies?
2. Someone in America wants to watch them?

Re:Questions (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37323140)

yes, and yes.

Guys I spent about 10 years learning Russian - so I was a language fan, for a while.

It's true - what they are saying, Russian TV and Movies are blatantly distributed on YouTube.

I can't believe you all are using the word hypocrisy. Don't you get it? You are the hypocrites.

You are in Russia's business all the time about supposed IP violations, while not caring, knowing about, or doing anything to stop piracy of Russian movies.

You are surprised they noticed?

Meanwhile in Russia... (3, Insightful)

DurendalMac (736637) | about 3 years ago | (#37320884)

...there are an unholy amount of crooks cranking out malware, extortionware, and everything else under the sun for profit, not to mention PLENTY of people hosting and even selling pirated goods.

Clean up yer own shit before crying about the US, Vosk. You have one hell of a dirty house.

Re:Meanwhile in Russia... (1)

Dan667 (564390) | about 3 years ago | (#37320910)

I better answer would be that governments should not be involved in these entertainment businesses at all.

Re:Meanwhile in Russia... (5, Informative)

ge7 (2194648) | about 3 years ago | (#37320942)

I think the main point here is that U.S. should clean up their own shit first. Like he said "that this was not feasible". U.S. has a long history of attacking Russia and other countries for copyright theft while ignoring that U.S. itself has the same problems. Russia here seems to understand that, U.S. doesn't.

Re:Meanwhile in Russia... (4, Insightful)

Kenja (541830) | about 3 years ago | (#37321166)

Try going to said other countries and you'll see the problem. You cant even find legitimate copies of software or movies, and while movies may be one thing, software is another. For some reason I dont trust the $1 copy of Photo Shop to be free of malicious additions.

Re:Meanwhile in Russia... (1)

ge7 (2194648) | about 3 years ago | (#37321278)

.. which makes it even more ironic that U.S. is demanding those countries to fix the problem while they themselves have it too.

Re:Meanwhile in Russia... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37321658)

Try going to said other countries and you'll see the problem. You cant even find legitimate copies of software or movies, and while movies may be one thing, software is another.

Try opening your eyes.

For some reason I dont trust the $1 copy of Photo Shop to be free of malicious additions.

Of course it isn't. It's no safer than the $0 copy you've bittorrented.

The US needs to put up or shut up. If we insist on whining about copyright infringement to others, we have zero cause to complain when they in turn stick their dicks in our mashed potatoes.

Re:Meanwhile in Russia... (1)

kdemetter (965669) | about 3 years ago | (#37323660)

Trust me , i'm sure that $0 copy is much much safer.
All you have to do is read the comments section. If it says 'VIRUS' , 'confirmed VIRUS' , then you pretty much know not to download it.
In other words, you have a complete community out there who is filtering the bad the stuff , and thus improving the quality enormous.
And the way bittorent works , that which is really good will be shared the most.

Try getting that for your $1 copy.

Copy of Photoshop (1)

tepples (727027) | about 3 years ago | (#37321680)

For some reason I dont trust the $1 copy of Photo Shop to be free of malicious additions.

If a $1 "copy of Photoshop"* bears the digital signature of the GIMP team, then I'll probably trust it.

* In the SCO sense that Linux is a copy of UNIX.

Re:Meanwhile in Russia... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37323384)

The failure of the industry to produce a business model that people will pay for or they can otherwise produce revenue from is just that. The failure of the industry. It is not a failure of government. The government should have limited copyright enforcement. There isn't much anybody can do to really stop infringement. The industry needs to take these things into consideration and come up with a business model that actually works. But first... let me step back. I don't think the industry is failing to succeed. The industries business model is adapting and they are complaining that they are losing money when in reality they are. It has nothing to do with copyright though. Consumers never paid for the copyright. They paid for the physical media which contained the music, video, etc. It is a matter of convenience. While the value of the media might be what consumers want... the value is not in the copyright itself. The industry needs to get into the distribution business. Stop letting Apple, Amazon, Wallmart, etc. take the money. Cut out the middle man. Start a company like Hulu to distribute the content. Make it easier to use (multi-platform, multi-device, without DRM, etc). If consumers need not spend much (think newspaper rates of 75 cents) and advertisers make up the difference you are off to a good start. You could also harass users a little by charging 75 cents for a particular amount of bandwidth. Maybe two movies worth. The more they watch the cheaper that bandwidth gets. So 4 movies worth might only be $1.25 instead of $1.50.

Re:Meanwhile in Russia... (1)

Reservoir Penguin (611789) | about 3 years ago | (#37323670)

It used to be like in Russia, but the situation generally changed about 4-5 years ago. The shops selling pirated software compilations at every corner disappeared (they might still exist somewhere). I used to pirate games, now I just do not bother, I just pick up the localized Russian version for half the US price at the local mall, it's usually already available at game's launch.

Re:Meanwhile in Russia... (1)

AmiMoJo (196126) | about 3 years ago | (#37324160)

It's okay, the same guy can sell you Norton Anti-Virus for another $1.

Re:Meanwhile in Russia... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37321450)

I think the main point here is that U.S. should clean up their own shit first.

And Russia will just continue ignoring the problem under the pretext that because the US hasn't completely eliminated the problem Russia doesn't need to bother doing anything.

U.S. has a long history of attacking Russia and other countries for copyright theft while ignoring that U.S. itself has the same problems.

Russia has a long history of attacking other countries for doing the same shit Russia is doing while ignoring that Russia itself is doing the same shit they are attacking other countries for doing.

Re:Meanwhile in Russia... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37321820)

Look, the USA have an outdated view of copyrights. In most of the world, people find that view ridiculous and laughable, especially seeing as the Internet allows easy distribution of digital products. The US keep clinging to the old "Companies should make profit by directly selling music and software rather than find a business model that earns them money but while still allowing easy and cheap access to their products".

I could offer dozens of new business models. Some examples:
- Give it for free, but with advertisement. Imagine you could go to a website, watch any episode of any show or any movie, or download any song, provided you watch a few minutes of advertisement - like on TV. That could also work with software.

- Make customers pay you to support you, not to reward you - currently, somebody makes a movie/album/game then sells it and hopes to earn money for their work. The thing is, once the product is on the shelves, they forget all about it and don't work on it anymore.
This might sound crazy, but why not take care of your product after it is made and sold? I'm thinking about games here: why make 10 separate games instead of one big game. There are thousands of games and they look a lot alike. Why don't companies develop one game, then improve it constantly for many years, by creating expansions. Imagine a game that had a decent expansion coming out each month for ten years. Expansions would have to be bought, but customers would be more likely to buy them since they would know the game and thus would trust the expansions to add something good. Piracy would also diminish because pirates would get tired of constantly waiting one month longer than paying customers to get pirated versions of the new expansions - there would be a huge incentive to buy legit copies. And more importantly, customers would feel like their money does not just reward the publisher but also helps the publisher improve the game. Minecraft did not just sell because it was good, it sold mostly because people liked the concept and wanted to support it, so that one day they would have a great game.
The same could work for music and movies: you can't update a song or a movie, but you can tell your customers "if our first album/movie sells Y copies, we'll make another album/a sequel. But if we don't sell that much money, we won't do it. Your choice." Customers would have a greater incentive to pay, they'd even do it gladly if they like the first album/movie and want another, and the artists would still make the money they want since they could set the bar (i.e. how much cash they want in order to make a sequel) as high as they want. Think your album should earn you 2 million dollars? Tell your fans there won't be another one unless you sell 100.000 copies of the first album in a year!

- Sell derived products, like T-shirts, figures and other things. Works for movies, music and games.

Now those are some business models that are modern, compatible with today's technology (i.e. the Internet) but unfortunately, they're very different from what we have now and big publishers are too lazy to change their models it seems.
Anyway, it shows the US conception of copyrights it not necessarily the right one, or at least not the only valid one, and other countries are not crazy for assuming publishers should learn to work with the Internet.

So your point is bogus. Russia does not want to eliminate the problem, the US does. And Russia is not wrong for not wanting to eliminate the problem. Russia thinks the Internet is part of the game and if you can't make money selling music or movies or software despite the Internet, then it's your own fault. The US however keep pushing for things to change, and Russia is now telling them "That's impossible, plus you would need to clean your own backyard first. We're fine with the way things are now and we certainly would not do things your way if you won't return the favor".

End of story. They're not asking any help from the USA, they're telling the USA to get off their backs and go fuck a VHS recording machine.

Re:Meanwhile in Russia... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37322424) business models...

Re:Meanwhile in Russia... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37323636)

Game expansions? Great idea, too bad nobody but Microsoft, Sony, and every other game company around thought of it.

Adware, what a brilliant modern idea. Maybe somebody should make a version that is fully functional, but missing some advanced features. You could even SHARE this ware with other people.

Blackmailing your fans to buying your records is the best idea I've heard in years! You don't even have to make a good album, in fact it's better if you don't. Tell them you won't make a good one unless you sell 1 million copies.

I think the USA should take the stance that modern advanced countries like China have on copyright. Let people in other countries make movies, music, software, then steal it and copy it and sell it!

Re:Meanwhile in Russia... (1)

harrytuttle777 (1720146) | about 3 years ago | (#37321654)

Gee, I understand that you are a faggot.

Go back to Russia you commie pinko retard. The USA and Al Gore invented the Internets. Russia should get off (the Internet).

Fuck Russia, Fuck Putin, and Fuck you.

Re:Meanwhile in Russia... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37321928)

AND the stink the US makes at the behest of its large corporations not only makes the US look stupid, it creates enemies of allies. I'd say our troubled IP law system is costing the US more in innovation than it is losing in revenue.

Re:Meanwhile in Russia... (1)

geekmux (1040042) | about 3 years ago | (#37322024)

I think the main point here is that U.S. should clean up their own shit first. Like he said "that this was not feasible". U.S. has a long history of attacking Russia and other countries for copyright theft while ignoring that U.S. itself has the same problems. Russia here seems to understand that, U.S. doesn't.

I'm sorry, it's become rather impossible to see your point here. The thick fog of irony over .ru standing up and bitching about piracy and copyright still has most of us reeling here, postulating between utter disbelief and uncontrollable laughter.

In the battle to prove who needs to clean up who's shit first or more...sorry .ru, but you lost long ago with that one.

Re:Meanwhile in Russia... (1)

the_enigma_1983 (742079) | about 3 years ago | (#37322626)

I'd say the point holds on both sides. Whatever country your from, you should sort out your own issues before telling other countries, otherwise we enter a situation where it's countries telling each other "Do as I say, not as I do.

Re:Meanwhile in Russia... (1)

geekmux (1040042) | about 3 years ago | (#37323928)

I'd say the point holds on both sides. Whatever country your from, you should sort out your own issues before telling other countries, otherwise we enter a situation where it's countries telling each other "Do as I say, not as I do.

You mean like when politicians consume thousands of gallons of jet fuel and generate tons of CO2 to fly their entire "ensemble" all around the world to talk to other countries about how we should all be more "green"?

You bring a very good point, but I'd say the problem tends to start and end with the overinflated egos of our elected officials, especially as their efforts tend to shift from public representation to personal gain. Happens all the damn time.

Re:Meanwhile in Russia... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37322482)

You have no idea what you are talking about.

Re:Meanwhile in Russia... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37320962)

...there are an unholy amount of crooks cranking out malware, extortionware, and everything else under the sun for profit, not to mention PLENTY of people hosting and even selling pirated goods.

Clean up yer own shit before crying about the US, Vosk. You have one hell of a dirty house.

Ah but those people are paying them to be ignored, these dirty American corporations haven't given their "donations" yet.

Re:Meanwhile in Russia... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37321022)

The US should clean up their own shit before they complain about IPR infringement too, but it hasn't stopped them yet.

Re:Meanwhile in Russia... (1)

strength_of_10_men (967050) | about 3 years ago | (#37321030)

...not only do U.S. sites continue to offer pirated Russian movies, but that YouTube and Google should be shut down for not respecting local laws'

Well, how do you like THEM apples. Speaking of apples, or at least Apple Corps Ltd. [] it doesn't feel so good to be on the other side, no? If they want to criticize US-based companies for not respecting local laws, maybe they should look at sites like this [] , which I believe is the former AllofMP3.

I'm not saying that two wrongs make a right, but man, this is the pot calling the kettle black. I guess in Soviet Russia, YouTube pirates you!

Re:Meanwhile in Russia... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37321276)

He actually makes a good point. It's not about really shutting down US companies it's about pointing out the absurd nature of trying to police new technology with antiquated laws. It's about us telling them not to pirate and trying to apply laws from the early 1900s to 2011 digital technology. Regardless of what you think of Russia as a whole I would think his basic "what's good for the goose is good for the gander" argument would at least make you want to look at the stupid view we have on the world.

Re:Meanwhile in Russia... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37322026)

The whole point is, why should one country go first, when many other countries are comparably dirty?

The huge majority of spam, for instance, still originates in the USA. So do a lot of cracks and malware. So where exactly does the US get off lecturing other countries about their lax enforcement regimes?

This is the culprit (1)

ArsonSmith (13997) | about 3 years ago | (#37320898)

This seems to be the main violation they refer to: []

Re:This is the culprit (1)

cashman73 (855518) | about 3 years ago | (#37320936)

Actually, I thought that they would be more interested in going after this one [] .


Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37320926)

Now isn't that moronic ??

In Soviet Russia... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37320952)

Youtube shuts down you!

Cables = Commentary on Society, not Leaders (3, Interesting)

JordanL (886154) | about 3 years ago | (#37320960)

It isn't malice that ruins the world, it is malfeasance. The leaders of the world are completely and utterly stuck in the paradigm that only the people they control are people, and then only so long as they control them. It has nothing to do with conspiracy or evil... these people honestly do not know how to govern correctly, because those who learn how to do that understand how our social systems would never let them do so, and thus never attempt to control government.

Humanity if very quickly approaching the point at which we will have to restructure not just our political systems, but our society and our economy as a species. I doubt we make it out of this century as anything other than a sad afterimage if we don't.

The fact that people do not believe such a thing is "realistic" only further highlights how bent on self-destruction humans are. We have collectively decided to let our non-cognitive processes guide our decision making, and then we created social structures to reinforce that process. Are people honestly surprised that we are burning out our energy reserves, that we have huge gaps in wealth, that we have enough food to feed everyone but don't do it, or that we constantly make decisions which provide no way to plan for the consequences of our choices?

That is the expected outcome of our society as it is right now, and it is not our leaders that are responsible, it is you and it is me and it is them. Species scale problems cannot be solved by or blamed on one group, one person, or one class. If they make the wrong decisions it is because you and me let them. If they try to make the right decisions but are stopped, that is also our fault.

But fault and blame solve no problems, provide no solutions, and give us no answers. So if you really, truly, desire to see change within our society, the most productive thing you can do to bring that about it so end your own hypocrisy and embody the wisdom that you feel you can explain to others. Once you understand what the solution is, you either start working on bringing it about, or you are part of the problem.

Sometimes I wish I'd been born in a different time... it seems that my generation, and those before me, have decided to subsist through our existence like a blind drunkard wandering through a dream. One day maybe. I hope. But right now, the things revealed by the cables on Wikileaks do not surprise me. If they surprise you, ask yourself if there was really any other possibility within our society for the things we now learn of. This is the society we all asked for, don't act surprised when you find out we got it.

Re:Cables = Commentary on Society, not Leaders (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37321240)

So what do you do? How do you do it? Please let me know as I'm still searching and hear ya, but haven't quite found a solution that I consider feasible yet.

I'm working towards/toying with the idea for an elected benevalent dictatorship with 5 years complete power and then put to death; and, upon the end of your term if you made any promises before being elected and failed to keep them then all your family (all members to within 1st cousins) are put to death as well.

I think it would keep the election BS to a minimum and ensure they do as they said.... Death sucks but it's the only way to make sure only people who want to change the country in a good way (good enough to give their life for) will run.

A balance may be required so a second group (maybe one per state/prov/etc) would also be voted yearly and they would control the military and can use that to protect the country from external threats and to dispose the dictator when required (after 5 years) or if they vote at anytime with a 75% agreement. However, upon death of the dictator (if by their vote) they must cut off one limb to demonstrate they believed the sacrifice was truly required.

During votes (from death of Dictator to next election) the country falls under marshal law comprised of the Police, Medical, and Military units so therefore a FAST election is required/wanted. Even if just one person runs it is worth it!

Anyways, just an idea....


Re:Cables = Commentary on Society, not Leaders (2)

JordanL (886154) | about 3 years ago | (#37321408)

I personally have my own ideas, but my ideas aren't really the point. I will explain them to you, so long as you understand there is virtually no chance that I am espousing truth... I may be closer to it than someone else, or than what we have now, but it is still only truth within the context of myself.

What you can do is embody the wisdom that you have. You go through life, and you learn what consequences choices have, and whether or not those choices are inherent or derived. That is, whether or not the consequences are because of the paradigm society is in, or because that consequence always arises from a particular choice.

Adultery has consequences that rely on both. There are inherent consequences: it is likely because of the structure of the human psyche that it will cause emotional harm to your partner. But it also has derived consequences: legal situations or cultural situations that arise because others within society find a behavior so abhorant that they want to provide additional consequence as punishment or deterrent.

As you learn these things going through life, many people make decisions in the moment. That is, decisions are made as part of a short term plan, and actions are taken as part of a long term plan. (A generalization, certainly.)

In that sense, what is easiest (and hardest) for most people to do is to embody their wisdom. When you were young, did you learn through consequence what it felt like to be shunned? Did you learn through consequence what it meant to be hated? Did you learn through consequence what it meant to love? For these things, once you understand through the experience of them what these consequences mean, it is your responsibility to decide in the future, ever time the choice is presented, if you want to encourage these consequences upon others.

The problems are much deeper within society than our political systems. Fixing our political systems directly will probably never work. Not until we fix our social systems to represent the sum of our wisdom instead of the sum of our desires. I personally do not believe that our social structures, political systems, economies, or even our friendships will be productive and directed toward an actual goal until people come to feel that it is truly in their best interest to help other people become better people.

It is not a moral deficiency necessarily. We as a society interact with each other as if we still need to dominate in order to subsist. This is no longer true. Our technology has saved us from that, we just haven't realized it yet. It's not about holding hands and singing Kum-by-yah, it's much simpler. It benefits you the most to be positive and productive in society, because it allows others to also be positive and productive, and when we all can be positive and productive, we will almost surely discover not through song or religion that "love" is the answer, but rather being selfless is the most selfish action you can take. That when you go far enough in either direction, they become the same, and achieve the same things.

We have not given our political leaders a system that they could do good with even if they wanted to. If we want to design a system that allows them to do good, it's my opinion that we first have to learn how to "be good" ourselves, and really learn how to practice it with each other.

It all sounds lofty, and crazy, and idealist. The fact that it sounds that way is... sad. But I don't think it will always be that way, and one day I believe that our choices will be to adopt these lofty, crazy, idealist concepts, or to self-destruct by our own hands.

I've already made my choice between the two, and as much as I can, I try to embody it. It's what I can do that has the most positive impact on the most people, and when society is ready, they won't need to be convinced. We'll simply be able to decide how to make things better.

Re:Cables = Commentary on Society, not Leaders (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37322056)

The world is not Age of Empires you know?

You have a major flaw in your proposal of putting leaders to death: not only is it immoral, but it's mostly a bad idea.
See, with that system, only people who are willing to make strong personal sacrifices will get to lead. Those people will have some opinions that only they have, and that other people won't share. As a result, they might miss out on some good ideas. That's one purpose of democracy: that anyone can get their own perspective included in the system. A butcher might not be the most educated person, but he'll have a perspective only butchers can have and that a lawyer won't know about. You can't represent people by casting them out of the system.

Here is an example:
If leaders were only made of people who would give their life for their society, then these people would be biased and would not be able to understand that others are not willing to make the same personal sacrifices. They would set high expectations for everyone because "if I can give my life for my country, so can others! And if they can't, they deserve no respect!".
"Retirement? No way, good citizens are willing to work all their lives! Let's also make them work harder, this way they die younger - old people do not work as efficiently, better our workers work twice as hard but live shorter."
"Privacy? Good citizens have no problems opening their homes at all times to police officers. As soon as a child goes missing, each home will be searched by a cop"
"Better a free criminal than an innocent in prison? Good citizens don't mind being accidentally convicted for the safety of others! While we're at it, when we narrow the list of crime suspects to just two, let's jail them both and save time and money. Good citizens worthy of respect will have no issues with this".

In other words, you will have leaders who care about society. Unfortunately, they'll also act like elitist assholes because there will be nobody to tell them when they're wrong - citizens who won't give their life for their country surely can't have anything useful to say.

Personally, I think there are a few much simpler solutions:
1) Referendum. A few countries have it. Basically, the population can propose to add, change or remove a law at any time. This way, when the politicians are bought off by corporations and they just ignore the people, the people can pass laws to get the situation back in control again. A Democracy is only a true Democracy if it's citizens can start referendums.
2) Education. Working in the interest of others is good for yourself in the long run. The problem is not Good people vs. Evil people, it's short-run vs. long-run. In the short run, you're better off being selfish. In the long run, you earn a lot more by taking others into consideration. Educating people about the merits of thinking about others can do a great deal.
You can be a dick and insult that woman who provided poor service at the store. She'll go home upset and won't be in the mood to have sex. Her husband will be upset the next day because he did not get laid. At work, he'll do a shitty job making burgers and won't cook the meat long enough. Your colleague will buy a burger from him, realize it's not cooked well, and get upset that he's having a bad day and now even his lunch is going wrong. Back at work, your colleague will be distracted by his bad mood and forget to do something important for a project you're both working on. By the time you realize it, it's too late and you need to stay at work 4 extra hours to finish the project by the deadline. It's a made-up example, but it shows how others problems can spread an become your problem. The morality: don't create problems to others, it's not good for you. It's possible to teach that to people. We'll never have a society full of saints but we can improve from where we are now.
Education also prevents people from becoming sheep who follow the leader blindly. Education teaches critical thinking skills and to think on your own.

Re:Cables = Commentary on Society, not Leaders (1)

MarkvW (1037596) | about 3 years ago | (#37321300)

"Species level problems" really don't have much to do with the possible shutdown of Youtube.

You should voice your concerns on a Youtube video!

Re:Cables = Commentary on Society, not Leaders (2)

JordanL (886154) | about 3 years ago | (#37321436)

This article was about two things, IMO:

1. The possible shutdown of YouTube because of IP laws.
2. The greater topic of the WikiLeaks cables that have been released.

I chose to talk about the second. I guess most of Slashdot agrees with you though, since my post was modded Offtopic.

Re:Cables = Commentary on Society, not Leaders (1)

ewibble (1655195) | about 3 years ago | (#37322564)

I have a couple Ideas: Just Ideas I maybe wrong

I think transparency is the key every thing should be revealed eventually including reasoning. Everybody is corruptible and fallible so politicians need to be aware that they will be judged eventually (some things need to be secret for now but not for ever). But along with transparency we need the public to be more accepting of failure and mistakes from our politicians they are just human no better or worse than we are.

I believe sharing is the key here from ideas to physical things. New Ideas are based on old ones keeping them to yourself and assuming the rest of the world cannot make a valuable contribution. Same with things does every body really need there own drill, barbecue, lawn mowers, cake tins .... how may things do you own they you use infrequently. The internet now provides us with the ability to share both all we need is to utilize it.

Also reward it seems to me that currently it is our measure of success, and how much status symbols you can buy with it. But it does not have to be recognise people for achievements more do they help other etc. There is an honours system it seems to unattainable. Money is a means of attaining a goal not the goal itself.

Re:Cables = Commentary on Society, not Leaders (1)

Xest (935314) | about 3 years ago | (#37324386)

You're right about the problem and right that something needs to change.

The problem is how you go about organising and managing that sort of change and the fact is, current governing structures are the best we've managed to implement so far.

Your solution is fantasy, you suggest that if as an individual you figure out "the solution", then you should work to implement that. You seem to miss the point that there's another 6.5bn people out there also trying to implement their ownh, often different and opposing solution, and that when said opposing solutions clash, as they inevitably will, you get stalemate and are back to square one- a point of inaction.

Re:Cables = Commentary on Society, not Leaders (1)

JordanL (886154) | about 3 years ago | (#37324416)

Only if we hold to society's currently held view that it is not in your best interest to help others. The paradigm shift that has to happen is not "we need to take action". People must eventually realize that it is in their best interest to help other people become better people however they feel they should.

I stated several times that the human race doesn't appear ready for this. But it will become a necessity. I do not see it as fantasy, it is an eventuality. It may not happen in my lifetime, but it will happen, or we will die.

No. (1)

RyanFenton (230700) | about 3 years ago | (#37320978)

Laws are like contracts (both are subsets of rules) - with very little effort (easier with less effort, actually), you can very simply create laws that are nearly impossible to follow or obey... except for a few people who the law was written to support.

Obeying all laws, in all countries is like obeying any contract anyone in the world would have you sign. It's going to end up excluding everyone from everything once you mix them all together.

Laws are important - they are what define what is important for a community, create the basis for many cultures. But they exist within a context - spreading local laws across the world as if they could apply anywhere... it's just a very dumb idea.

Ryan Fenton

Re:No. (0)

Kjella (173770) | about 3 years ago | (#37321384)

Politicians have been struggling with this since the dawn of the Internet, it's like extending the "If I stand on Canada's side of the border and fire a gun into the US, whose laws apply?" except with the Internet sends bits and bytes into the homes of millions of Russians. Essentially they have three options:

1. Ignore it, which is de facto accepting that they've lost all ability to enforce the law and that anything that's legal outside the country is as good as legal inside the country. This is practically anarchy where you can't forbid anything unless you get all the other ~200 countries to agree.

2. Block it at the border, which brings most slashdotters to talk about slippery slopes, the foundations of censorship and the Great Firewall of China. Yet it's the only one that actually tries to enforce the idea that our laws are our laws and the rest of the world's laws are theirs.

3. By all sorts of technical, legal, economic, political or other means try to shut down the foreign sites, typically causing a big fuzz about interfering with the sovereignty and democratic process of other nations, accusations of making a coup of the DNS system and so on.

Near as I can tell, they have a lose-lose-lose situation. No matter what they do, they're going to catch flak for either doing something or not doing something. Then there's the US that wants everyone else to follow their laws, but can't see any reason they should follow everyone else's laws. And they can't seemingly phantom why other countries are giving them the finger...

Re:No. (1)

poetmatt (793785) | about 3 years ago | (#37321522)

The long story short of it is you can't bend society to follow a law that they themselves do not care for. You could make circumventing censorship illegal but if people want to avoid censorship they will do so regardless of the penalty.

There is no solution that will stop this copyright thing because the RIAA/MPAA/international equivalents (which seem to be completely controlled by RIAA/MPAA) are the only folks bothered by this stuff, mostly because of their legacy businesses. Meanwhile, nobody else even gives a shit. Thus, see above.

Re:No. (1)

JWW (79176) | about 3 years ago | (#37322774)

I'll take option one, thanks. It's only been the defacto standard for the internet for a couple of decades.

The Internet isn't broken, copyright law is!

I view the internet as one of the top five creations of mankind. While recorded music and movies are nice, they are not that important.

The people's content. (1)

jedidiah (1196) | about 3 years ago | (#37320994)

There is a strong likelihood that anything that Russia would be complaining about is the intellectual property of a country that no longer exists.

They are probably trying to exert ownership and control of the works of the people created under during the Soviet regime.

Re:The people's content. (2)

shutdown -p now (807394) | about 3 years ago | (#37321168)

There is a strong likelihood that anything that Russia would be complaining about is the intellectual property of a country that no longer exists.

They are probably trying to exert ownership and control of the works of the people created under during the Soviet regime.

Given that Russian Federation is officially a successor state of the USSR, recognized as such by UN, and taking over all rights and obligations (including e.g. external debt), why shouldn't it exert ownership and control of the works copyrighted under Soviet regime?

Re:The people's content. (1)

LifesABeach (234436) | about 3 years ago | (#37321938)

Any Treaties signed by Ivan evaporated when the U.S.S.R. collapsed. What the empire of the tired bear did was unilaterally abide by those vary treaties. And by current market activity these days, maybe the bear wasn't so tired or so old after all.

Re:The people's content. (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | about 3 years ago | (#37322004)

Any Treaties signed by Ivan evaporated when the U.S.S.R. collapsed. What the empire of the tired bear did was unilaterally abide by those vary treaties.

Nope. According to Vienna Convention on Succession of States in respect of Treaties [] , a successor state inherits all treaty obligations of its predecessor, unless it was a colony.

Re:The people's content. (1)

517714 (762276) | about 3 years ago | (#37323968)

Did you bother to read your link? Only twenty-two countries have ratified the treaty and neither the USSR or Russia were among them.

Re:The people's content. (1)

Xest (935314) | about 3 years ago | (#37324476)

Yeah, because all Russians have been sat sleeping for the last 20 years and haven't actually produced anything since the fall of the USSR.

Yes. 20 years.

It seems a little odd to assume they've not produced any IP or content worth protecting in 20 years, but somehow had some worth protecting before that. Not to mention that Russia took on all the obligations of the former USSR so is actually just a continuation of that entity albeit with some big changes. The USSR didn't simply vanish out of existence and cease to exist, it morphed rapidly into what we now know as Russia.

And In Other News... (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | about 3 years ago | (#37321036)

And in other news, Satan demands the residents of Hades put out their camp fires.

Torrents ?= Google (3, Insightful)

bmacs27 (1314285) | about 3 years ago | (#37321044)

It's a good question. Is a torrent tracker any more liable for copyright infringement than Google?

Re:Torrents ?= Google (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37321350)

I guess that depends on how much involuntary gratuitous winking is required when claiming each wasn't designed specifically to facilitate the trade of illegally-copied products.

Re:Torrents ?= Google (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37321362)

The legal difference is that Google themselves is copying the video and sending it to you (although they are just providing hosting for someone else's video sharing) while the torrent tracker is just saying "Uh, ask him over there.", which is somewhat similar to Google linking to infringing material from their search results.

He should clean up his own country first (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37321062)

Says the guy from the country where every weekend you can go to a market in nw Moscow and buy all the latest music and software on pirated CDs, and buy videos for movies still playing in theatres at kiosks all around the city.

Re:He should clean up his own country first (1)

blackest_k (761565) | about 3 years ago | (#37321466)

I'm probably halfway between Washington and Moscow and there are pirated goods in every country in between. There is no utopia where piracy doesn't occur.

I sincerely doubt there is a city on earth where you cannot obtain your drug of choice , tax free alcohol pirated games and movies and a woman willing to fuck you for an appropriate sum.

The risks and penalties may vary but everything is available if you look for it and it is going to get easier as more and more people are looking for ways to make a buck and save a buck.

Our world economies are a house of cards and they are starting to fall.

Said it before, I'll say it again... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37321064)

The best way to prevent your stuff being pirated is to make it EASY and CHEAP for people to get it from you directly!

Does anybody actually care about Russian movies? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37321074)

Who wants to see Boris drink vodka for 2 hours?

thats funny (1)

FudRucker (866063) | about 3 years ago | (#37321132)

I want to shut Russia down for piracy too [] []

thats just two, i am sure i can dig up more

Re:thats funny (2)

h4rr4r (612664) | about 3 years ago | (#37321178)

The Tupolev was a copy, the Buran was not a total copy. It involved some industrial espionage, but we do that to. Buran was mostly a Russian design, they were also smart enough to cancel it after only one flight, unlike our shuttle program.

Re:thats funny (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | about 3 years ago | (#37321258)

Soviet Union only joined the Universal Copyright Convention in 1973, and did not have any (with a few minor exceptions) international agreements regarding copyright before that. Accordingly, it (and Russia, being its successor state) does not recognize copyright on earlier foreign works.

As for Buran, its semblance to the Shuttle is mostly superficial based on appearance - much like people often think that AK derives from StG44, or consider Vz 58 a variation of AK, just because they look somewhat similar.

Uruguay Round Agreements Act of 1994 (1)

tepples (727027) | about 3 years ago | (#37321704)

Soviet Union only joined the Universal Copyright Convention in 1973

Doesn't matter. The Uruguay Round Agreements Act of 1994 restored U.S. copyright in all post-1922 works first published in any Berne Convention member state. (All WTO members are Berne Convention members.) This is being challenged (Golan v. Holder).

Re:Uruguay Round Agreements Act of 1994 (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | about 3 years ago | (#37321842)

I wasn't saying that US does not respect pre-1973 Soviet/Russian works - it does. However, Russia does not respect [] pre-1973 foreign works (with some exceptions pertaining to CIS states and a few other countries which had bilateral agreements with the USSR predating UCC and Berne). This is because of an explicit reservation Russia made when joining the Berne convention, denying retroactivity - similar to what US did before Uruguay, but as yet unchanged.

Re:thats funny (1)

modecx (130548) | about 3 years ago | (#37322668)

The Vz 58 is a lot closer to a cross between the StG44 and SKS, in that it has a striker based action, with the a piston action similar to the SKS's short stroke piston and also the open top breach design.

But, yeah, it'd be foolish to think there weren't a few StG44s running around Kalashnikov's shop when he set about making the AK.

Re:thats funny (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37321546)

Stalin ordered Tupolev to make an exact copy of B-29 down to some ridiculous details. Tupolev wanted to build a different plane but it is not like he could say no to Stalin.

Despite appearances, Buran is pretty different from Shuttle. The laws of physics are the same for everyone. :)

Two important issues here (1)

Ranguvar (1924024) | about 3 years ago | (#37321134)

One is over copyright infringement, and I think many people here are against the enforcement that Voskresenskiy desires.

The other, however, is whether giant multi-national corporations should have to bend to the law of individual nations outside their central base -- and this is a much more interesting issue, one that may bring dire consequences if we continually tell Google, et al. that they do not need to concern themselves with anything but US law.

R5 Rips (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37321198)

somehow every first release of new movies on torrent sites seem to have in russian subtitles... I wonder....

Re:R5 Rips (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37321270)

not to mention you can get 60$ game's cd-key for 15$ from Russian sites, all legit..

Russia should clear homeground before going outside borders pointing fingers.
no they don't have massive servers hosting illegal data online but they have most likely the biggest export of physical piracy copies of games/movies/music/clothing.
all sale right on the streeside, as long as you pay "fines" to local law enforcers...

Need to follow local laws? (2)

Bert64 (520050) | about 3 years ago | (#37321266)

If an internet site has to comply with the local laws in every jurisdiction from which it is accessible, you would have an utterly farcical situation...
Plenty of countries have laws which make it illegal to display content which is contrary to their regime, and some countries even require all content to be censored.

Imagine trying to comply with the laws of Myanmar or North Korea...

A website should only be beholden to the laws in the country from which it is hosted and/or operated.... And speaking of Russia, isn't that how allofmp3 worked? Blatantly ignoring US laws, but complying with Russian laws.

Re:Need to follow local laws? (1)

AmiMoJo (196126) | about 3 years ago | (#37324170)

Blatantly ignoring US laws, but complying with Russian laws.

And that is exactly why Russia has come out with this. If the US expects Russia to comply with its requests for shutting down web-sites then the US had better be prepared to comply with Russian requests too. Obviously the US isn't going to shut down YouTube and Google, so now any requests they send to Russia can be simply ignored.

It's local law... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37321480)

Iran called. They want Miss October at to put on a berka.

My Question. (1)

Souliris01 (1984212) | about 3 years ago | (#37321682)

My question is, "Russia makes movies?" Who knew?

Re:My Question. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37321836)

Who knew?? The Russians, of course. It is true, there are tons of great Russian(Soviet era) movies and cartoons on Youtube.
Quite frankly, those movies were made during the Soviet Union so they belong to The People, not to scumbags who stole everything in the country after the "Perestroyka".

This is about stopping competition, not piracy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37321706)

Surprise, surprise, a Russian firm with political connections wanting to kneecap its foreign competitors.

Putinistas don't care about copyright, only that pesky level playing field which keeps getting in the way.

So... (1)

rocket rancher (447670) | about 3 years ago | (#37321754)

Russia has clueless Republican politicians, too, I see.

Re:So... (1)

travbrad (622986) | about 3 years ago | (#37324104)

The Democrats push heavily for "anti-piracy" too, probably more than the Republicans actually.

Russian films (1)

stealth_finger (1809752) | about 3 years ago | (#37321986)

Can't say I have ever personally seen, legally or other wise, heard of, heard people discussing, seen advertised, seen awarded or anything else to any Russian films, the closest is pirated American films with Russian subs. I'm not saying there aren't any Russian films or indeed any good ones, but I wouldn't say it's a massive part of piracy outside of Russia or Russians. And if they don't like these sites because they don't respect local laws why not just block them in Russia, China did it.

Re:Russian films (1)

Tjp($)pjT (266360) | about 3 years ago | (#37322374)

At one point in Ukraine I bought what I thought was a DVD of Zorro (The Mask of Zorro, 1998) with a Russian language track. What it turned out to be was a copy of the Legend of Zorro, with a Russian language track. This was a used DVD for sale before the theatrical release of the movie. Professionally created, not a DVD-R but a real DVD, and printed insert, jacket, etc. And a nice Russian tax authority holographic stamp, and a Ukrainian one applied overlapping the Russian one where it was taxed coming into Ukraine. So Russian sanctioned piracy. Appropriately taxed.

Pirated ru Video, say what? (1)

walkerp1 (523460) | about 3 years ago | (#37322190)

Does Russia even have any video that isn't pr0n or pirated from the US or pr0n?

New business plan (1)

porky_pig_jr (129948) | about 3 years ago | (#37322244)

1. Offer pirated Russian movies.
2. ???
3. Profits!

Diplomatic means plus technology (1)

Tjp($)pjT (266360) | about 3 years ago | (#37322324)

One jurisdiction cannot dictate the terms to another independent jurisdiction. Russia, for example, sells CDs that contain whole sets of albums in MP3 format at a cheap price that while legal in Russia (the contracts were set per disk, before people thought about higher compression allowing multiple albums on one CD). The import of those albums into the US is restricted (on a commercial not personal basis, so go to Russia and buy one, fine, buy one and have it shipped, not so good).

So, in the Internet age, we have to look at a different range of solutions. We cannot continue to have the hodge-podge application of some laws that really have no standing where they are applied. You Tube should not be held responsible for filtering pro-Nazi video for Germany. What could be done is that every jurisdiction that cares could enter into a treaty that allows conforming content suppliers to accept a tag from a legal jurisdiction of the treaty conforming parties, and when such content is supplied the legal jurisdiction / country can then take responsibility and filter the content request. Yes, this means wire speed content filtering at the level of whole countries. It also means the treaty must prohibit filtering of any content not destined for an end point in their jurisdiction. Else content merely routed through becomes subject to filtering. The content providers can voluntarily meet these requirements to add to their own infrastructure, and the consequence of not adding the ability to tag content would be they may not be able to deliver any content to the jurisdiction that chooses to filter all their content.

Why would this be good? Mainly because sovereign jurisdictions have the right to impose their own restrictions, restrict freedoms, and in general trample on what Americans take as basic rights. Well, legally but perhaps not morally. And the Big Win? The treaty would provide that transient traffic not destined for a venue in their jurisdiction would be unencumbered by their policy, and would freely traverse their jurisdiction.

When we get around to rewriting some of the basic Internet protocols to have security in mind at the start, as well as non-repudiation and verification checks, then we just add a message portion to the initial setup for content flags. This means we can easily block based on acceptable age, overall content, ratings, etc. As well as assure easy access that is unrestricted when legal. Make the creation of the flags / registration of them, based on the individual jurisdictions preferences and then they can filter based on their own custom criteria. Have a set of general purpose flags and combine with the ISO code for the jurisdiction and its all good for most cases, but add the ability to register custom codes too. Then their censors can tag away and isolate their populations to their hearts content. The current DNS bases schemes are bound to failure. And if for example a Russian Film is still under copyright that is valid in the US, then they really do have the right to send a DMCA takedown for that item. But they seem a bit overly aggressive in the articles case. My solution is workable, and will help put a bunch of compsci people to work initially and a whole lot of censors at work around the world.

Distribution isn't the issue, replication is. (1)

rocket rancher (447670) | about 3 years ago | (#37322588)

You really don't understand what the phrase "Information wants to be free," means, do you? The problem with piracy has never been the distribution of content, though I understand if you got that impression from the RIAA/MPAA circus. You can take your jurisdictions, treaties, content flags, and filters to armor up and close every gap in the distribution chain, except one: the gap between the screen and the eye. The analog hole is uncloseable, and it is why efforts that function only in distribution space will fail. The real problem is the fact that digital content can be so easily replicated, even if it is content that had to be ripped through the uncloseable analog hole.

I can't wait! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37322614)

Russia cracking down should give Linux on the desktop a nice boost.
Imagine how many unauthorized copies of Windows would need replacement.

This is stupid (1, Informative)

flibbidyfloo (451053) | about 3 years ago | (#37322696)

Two points:

First, I doubt "Russia" gives a frozen rat's ass about what YouTube does. I'm sure the MPAA or a foreign equivalent is 99% responsible for this.

Second, statements like "entities need to follow local laws" are just plain stupid and wrong. Only LOCAL entities need to follow local laws.
If some kid in Russia downloads an illegal movie, throw him in your gulag. Reductio ad absurdum: If it's against the law in Russia to use car headlights after 11pm, and someone in Finland drives along the border, their headlights spilling onto Russian soil, should they be arrested?

There are reasons we have borders, and a big one is so that "we" don't have to follow "your" stupid laws. No one at Google is forcing anyone in Russia to watch YouTube.

Re:This is stupid (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37323640)

It agree that V's comments are silly. I think piracy, though is not the main issue. Piracy for some time has been used as a justification to shut down and put pressure on local NGOs in Russia. Many NGOs' offices have been searched and material/equipment confiscated on the grounds that they use pirated software. It seems to me that V's comments are merely a justification to limit access to media and alternative sources of information. Seen in this way, V's statements follow Russia's trends in limiting and controlling media sources which might shed light on the high level of corruption and motivate Russia's large population to question the government's policies which have led to a increasingly stagnant and non-diversified economy that is crumbling and increasingly despotic measures to limit democratic processes.

Blocking trash at the BGP (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37322848)

Anyone who is not already blocking the major malware hosts/spammers by country is wasting bandwidth at the router level.

Inexplicably Inexplicable (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37323624)

YouTube wants to shut down Russian Pirate movies?

I've never seen a russian movie (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#37323844)

and with this attitude I probably never will :(

To summary's author: "Whooooosh!". (2)

Pi1grim (1956208) | about 3 years ago | (#37324010)

Summary is all wrong, for once government official said something, that made sence: "It is stupid and impossible to try and get the internet in compliance with outdated laws, that were creating when the tech available to us was barely imaginable." Oh, and it totally made sence pointing out that US is attempting to bring internet to compliance with US laws is retarded, as every country has it's laws, and, for example google and youtube are in violation of Russia's laws.

Provincial point of view... (1)

js_sebastian (946118) | about 3 years ago | (#37324532)

I like that when some guy in the US makes a statement, slashdot titles "some guy say..." or maybe "the republicans/democrats say.." etc. But when it happens in some heathen foreign country, the country is personified under the assumption that the reader would not know or care who the speaker is.

Reminds me of a board game called diplomacy I used to play in high school, where during the diplomacy phase you would get up from the table saying something like "can I talk to france"? and then once you were in a quiet corner with France you would try to convince him or her (usually him) that surely an agreement to demilitarize the english channel was in everyone's best interest...
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>