×

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!

Victory For Irish File Sharers Dashed By Government Report

Unknown Lamer posted more than 2 years ago | from the protect-revenue-at-any-cost dept.

Censorship 77

2phar writes "The Irish Government is 'to publish an order early in the new year to allow music publishers, film producers and other parties to go to court to prevent ISPs from allowing their customers access to "pirate" websites.' The government has 'written to music publisher EMI Ireland confirming the order will be published and incorporated into existing legislation in January ... EMI Ireland recently warned the Government that it would take legal action against the State if the Government did not address the problem.'" This is a response to a ruling that Eircom's current "three strikes" rules were illegal due to privacy issues.

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

77 comments

Go green. (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38431882)

Ireland. You're now our bitch. Bend over and take it like the sissy you are.

-RiAA

Re:Go green. (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38432262)

Ireland. You're now our bitch. Bend over and take it like the sissy you are.

-RiAA

Ireland. You're now our bitch. Bend over and take it like the sissy you are.

-RiAA

Yep.

In particular this gobsheen: http://twitter.com/seansherlocktd

The "technology fella in de government who looks after the mp trees and de music pods" who made the decision, pushed it through, and is defending it so as to "fix" the ruling in the previous court case.

He was spokesman for agriculture prior to getting into government and being given this new role.

Re:Go green. (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38432858)

Dear RiAA,
                  We recognize that you prevent a world full of honest musicians from making a living by monopoly of industry. You give intangible songs value and charge for them while those not chosen as slaves by you languish, barely able to scrape a living in pubs if at all. In a working world, there is no "music industry" and all musicians promote themselves by giving away music to increase their publicity and charge for performances. By charging for what God gave us for free, you have gagged the worlds musicians ability to promote themselves on a level playing field, thus reserving profits for yourselves while not actually adding any value to the world. The RiAA can expect a visit from the IRA soon.
            Don't eat any ticking potatoes.

                                            Love Ireland

Re:Go green. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38433546)

> The RiAA can expect a visit from the IRA soon.

I have a much better idea.

These things do a localized harm and, at least to me, my morals keep from supporting it.

But there's something able to do widespread harm: we do like it was done with the Free Software Movement (with Copyleft) and create our very own RIAA and MPAA -- let's call it, for instance, Freedom Media Artists Association (FMAA). We make sure artists get a better deal without fscking the buyers. Heck, why not do a WWAO (Worldwide Authors' Organization) specifically to help these jerks go out of business?

I, for one, would like to spend some little money (the way Canadians do) paying such pro-Freedom organization, if nothing more just for knowing it's money that helps derail RIAA and MPAA. What about the idea of giving Japan an annual fee to have access granted to any anime series? What about some lil' spare change going directly to filmmakers in India? What about indie musicians that post music online for free actually getting some compensation based on their works downloads (I'm not talking about any popular music site owned by an affiliate of said evil "AA"s)? What about making sure this never passes thru the hands of greedy sobs like those monopolists?

My wallet is open and waiting for some with the clout to make it happen. Actually, the way I see it, it would be just another donation to promote what's right in this world full of wrongs... so, no big deal for me.

Therefore, my wallet is here waiting and my fingers are eager to open it. Isn't it exciting? ;-)

Re:Go green. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38436352)

Can I just AOL this one with a resounding "ME TOO!"

An Open Media group demonstrably not owned or controlled by any of the *AAs (that's just my spite talking) and providing the actual content-producers with a fair deal for hours worked and not royalties in perpetua would be the best thing to happen to intellectual freedom in the arts in a long time.

I would happily pay more for works the author places in the public domain or that enter the public domain in a reasonable amount of time and doesn't try to fsck me over by "leasing" me the media or such trickery. That was the whole reason why I left a significant amount of money with people like GoG before they became asshats and CD Project started randomly suing German grannies and dead people for allegedly torrenting their game.

Re:Go green. (1)

doccus (2020662) | more than 2 years ago | (#38444166)

I might just pick up a guitar again.. if that ever materializes.. but at the moment the very thought of it makes me almost puke.. fact is i know lots odf more succesfuyl folks than me.. and not a one is anything but a hack compared to me.. but they know how to bend over.. Cheers and Merry Christmas y'all

Re:Go green. (1)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 2 years ago | (#38436518)

The RiAA can expect a visit from the IRA soon.

You mean the guys who couldn't even beat a bunch of effete Englishmen?

Re:Go green. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38436566)

Well they, unlike you, didn't have the help of the French to fight off the English.

They did, in fact, have help FROM you which should be somewhat depressing.

Re:Go green. (1)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 2 years ago | (#38436490)

Reminds me of what my grandpa always used to say: "Kid...a bird belongs in the sky, a fish belongs in the water, and an Irishman belongs on his knees."

Re:Go green. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38442198)

All your bass are belong to us.

It wasn't a victory for "File Sharers" (2)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38431892)

"File Sharers" has a bad connotative definition, justly or not, because of the marketing against 'file sharing' being bad.
Email, IMs, text messages, VOIP, regular phone calls, are all forms of "file sharing", depending on how you look at it. ...but back on point....
The previous court finding was a victory common sense, good judgement, and for those in power having a basic understanding of how technology works.

Re:It wasn't a victory for "File Sharers" (2)

neokushan (932374) | more than 2 years ago | (#38431948)

"hacker" has the same connotations these days - often it comes from someone either missing the point, or attributing the negative actions from a few people to the entire demographic.

Re:It wasn't a victory for "File Sharers" (1)

ewanm89 (1052822) | more than 2 years ago | (#38432084)

As is plain HTTP... I mean google would not work if they didn't share a HTTP file with me when I visited google.com

Re:It wasn't a victory for "File Sharers" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38439664)

Quit the disengenuous semantics and hair-splitting. We all know that "file sharing" is in most cases a euphamism for "passing around ripped off artistic works," and "file sharers" are, mostly, people who find ways to do that because they want those works without paying for them. There are exceptions, but that's true enough for enough people to make it especially obnoxious to pretend it means anything else in practical terms. A "victory for file sharers" is a "victory for people who like to rip off the entertainment they want someone to make for them."

There's always proxies... (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38431898)

Looks like TOR and other proxy/tunneling services and procedures are about to get a lot more popular in the Republic of Ireland...

Re:There's always proxies... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38431932)

Yeah, I gotta get my free shit somehow and I'll do what it takes to really show the man by not paying for stuff.

It's a revolution.

Re:There's always proxies... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38431974)

Are you some kind of shill? Anyone who really cares enough will pay. If not, it should not be up to the state to enforce the business models of entertainment companies. When you're throwing out thousand dollar fines to kid for pressing a few buttons on a computer for some music, it's time to hang up the skates, it's over, no more laws keeping your revenue stream up.

When we create replicators for material objects like computers can copy information, I'd hope patent laws would be removed altogether as well.

Music and movies will be made, the show will go on. It went on long before publishers like EMI, and it will be around long after they're gone.

Re:There's always proxies... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38431942)

At which time those little experiments in circumvention become acts of economic terrorism too. And so goes our absurd game of cat and mouse, while refusing to address the core concern... that the interests of an industry are commonly more important than rational rule of law.

Re:There's always proxies... (4, Informative)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | more than 2 years ago | (#38432990)

Don't use TOR for torrents, it bogs the network down while some guy is trying to leak info from China before the government goons bust the door down. Use I2P if you want to run torrents over a darknet.

New corporate overlords (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38431908)

> EMI Ireland recently warned the Government
Ok, so now corporations not only sue people, they openly threaten governments of legal action, and governments chicken out and pass laws that restrict people's freedom. Can we yet declare a new feudal regime?

Re:New corporate overlords (1)

gl4ss (559668) | more than 2 years ago | (#38431976)

irish gov. should have warned EMI Ireland that they might them illegal - and that the fall of cd sales is simply because irish economy went to the gutter after 2006. blocking websites chosen by emi will not affect that at all. suppose emi ireland decides that it's illegal for the irish to buy music from google music and itunes..

the EU law doesn't need what they're claiming anyways.

Re:New corporate overlords (3, Interesting)

myowntrueself (607117) | more than 2 years ago | (#38432118)

I wonder how Irish election campaigns are funded?

Re:New corporate overlords (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38432236)

The same way as in the US, but on a smaller scale.

Re:New corporate overlords (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38432422)

Do you still wonder about these facts of life?

Re:New corporate overlords (1)

hitmark (640295) | more than 2 years ago | (#38432806)

Cyberpunk in the making.

Re:New corporate overlords (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | more than 2 years ago | (#38433028)

We are well into a cyberpunk dystopia, it just doesn't look that way because the fashion never caught on (and to add insult to injury, we got fucking tight jeans for men instead!)

Re:New corporate overlords (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38434392)

I don't know, the hipster style and current nerd-chic looks alot like cyberpunk style.
and if you go to the shitholes of the world, it has all the dirt, debauchery, and destruction that was foretold in cyberpunk literature.

Bonus points if you visit detroit and have your hacker crew setup shop in an abandoned highrise.

Re:New corporate overlords (2)

hitmark (640295) | more than 2 years ago | (#38435104)

Meh, i don't think the punk part of cyberpunk was ever about the music and fashion.

I think we find a clearer meaning of it in "the street finds its one use for things". This in that kids with a lot of smarts, and not much fear of the authorities beaten into them, will take technology and use it in ways never intended by the powers that be.

Re:New corporate overlords (1)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 2 years ago | (#38435198)

There's no law that says you have to dress like everybody else. Tight jeans? Screw that!

Re:New corporate overlords (1)

Pecisk (688001) | more than 2 years ago | (#38432860)

Corporations sue governments for some 80 years, welcome to the club. They usually choose not to because it's bad for their business in that country. However, if they are arrogant enough and have "special relationship" with politicians, then this threat is not only legal step, but also psychological one - do not dare to cross us, you are in our pocket.

Re:New corporate overlords (1)

JasterBobaMereel (1102861) | more than 2 years ago | (#38433246)

The sensible government can simply pass laws that:

    Make suing the government/country illegal

    Counter sue the company (under it's own laws)

    Make the company illegal....

   

Re:New corporate overlords (2)

Pecisk (688001) | more than 2 years ago | (#38433406)

"Make suing the government/country illegal"

Not sensible, but suicidal. Also so far I have seen no country (except North Korea and Stalin time USSR) who would not allow it's peers rise issue in highest constitutional court. Sorry, but you can't have it both ways. You can't cherry pick restrictions in normal working democracy. Sooner or later they are thrown out.

Also you couldn't be part of any normal treaty, as they require issues to solve in different international courts. No treaty, no exports, no money from taxes. And quite possibly no credits too.

"Counter sue the company (under it's own laws)" - again, maybe not so smart idea. What you will counter-sue for? Because they "blackmailed to sue"? Law doesn't work that way. Of course, if company have done bad things according to law - no problem, sue it out of existence.

"Make the company illegal" - I won't even mention about international fallout and isolation what will follow.

I would suggest better such things as (for this specific scenario):
a) making copyright law sane again. Make it balanced (like 20 years), make it less restrictive and leave criminal charges only for very serious mass copyright infringements. EMI and friends of course will shout to the sky, as it would remove their privilege to talk about copyright law as something belonging to them (not to mention suddenly term 'IP' will sound silly). People would cheer for you. And maybe saner countries would follow and finally bring some sanity for copyright world;
b) better inform people about copyright infringements and what that means. Not in "you are a pirate", but "artist is given 20 year privilege to this work, please, respect that. But 20 years". Problem with people ignoring copyright is these insane terms. Remove them and people will see reason why work is protected for some time;

Re:New corporate overlords (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38436286)

Not sensible, but suicidal. Also so far I have seen no country (except North Korea and Stalin time USSR) who would not allow it's peers rise issue in highest constitutional court.

Yeah, you can raise constitutional issues to have bad laws scrapped through the courts, but governments are sovereign and generally don't consent to legal action against them. It's only with "free trade" that corporations are becoming as powerful as governments (because the WTO/IMF/USA will step in to force governments to comply with agreements they probably never thought about much when they signed).

The lesser of two evils (3, Interesting)

Thnurg (457568) | more than 2 years ago | (#38431918)

So you're not going to be hauled over the coals through a three strikes system - WIN!
Certain sites may be blocked - Meh.

If you really want to get to a site you'll get to it either via tor, running your own DNS, or via a VPN. I'd take this system over a three strikes any day.

Re:The lesser of two evils (4, Insightful)

Ihmhi (1206036) | more than 2 years ago | (#38432292)

I'd take this system over a three strikes any day.

Why take any system at all?

Re:The lesser of two evils (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38432822)

Indeed. Its a sign of how bad things have become when 'he only beats me when hes drunk' is as much as people hope for.

Re:The lesser of two evils (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38439884)

Why take any system at all?

Because a system of copyrights is demonstrably a good thing. The particulars are open for debate. But that system is important.

Re:The lesser of two evils (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38432908)

www.freesslvpn.net

Sovereign immunity? (2)

Fjandr (66656) | more than 2 years ago | (#38432004)

I guess Ireland has no concept of sovereign immunity, or is this a result of how the EU is structured?

Re:Sovereign immunity? (2)

Xest (935314) | more than 2 years ago | (#38432014)

Blame the US' puppet organisation the WTO for this sort of thing, not the EU.

Re:Sovereign immunity? (4, Insightful)

Targen (844972) | more than 2 years ago | (#38432242)

Blame the WTO's puppet organisation the US for this sort of thing, not the EU.

Fixed that for you.

Re:Sovereign immunity? (4, Informative)

Xest (935314) | more than 2 years ago | (#38432432)

The US created the WTO to enforce US style IP laws across the globe because WIPO wasn't playing ball due to the fact it was democratic and the small African nations wanting cheap drugs to keep their people alive outvoted the US and it's strong IP law lobby.

WTO is very much the US' puppet organisation and not vice versa. This is also why the US pushes countries to sign up to it and adhere to it's rulings, whilst simultaneously ignoring rulings against it by the WTO itself.

I'm not sure how one could claim the WTO is in charge of the US when the whole US the WTO exists is to push US trade policy and the subvert the previously more rational, fair, and democratic nature of WIPO. They're both shit now though, in order to avoid becoming obsolete, WIPO is now adhering to the US line, which is just what the US wanted.

Re:Sovereign immunity? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38433958)

The WTO was created to be "Them".

In the US the government claims that it must do certain things because it's WTO obligations require them to.

Re:Sovereign immunity? (1)

Xest (935314) | more than 2 years ago | (#38434238)

Yes, no doubt it acts as a convenient scapegoat for implementing unpopular laws that favour corporate lobbyists and so forth also.

freedom of speech... (0)

zugedneb (601299) | more than 2 years ago | (#38432138)

...is not an infinitely heavy black monolith that can not be budged...It is just a law, like any other and can be changed or revoked. Generally, using it as a shield to protect your semicriminal interests does not bode well, no matter how I try to look at it.

Do not use the work of others without paying the requested price. If it does no suite you, do like Stallman, start out on your own.

Re:freedom of speech... (3, Insightful)

hawkinspeter (831501) | more than 2 years ago | (#38432408)

I'm glad I don't live where you live where fundamental freedoms can just be revoked on the whim of a law-maker. If someone tries to legislate my freedom away, they'd better be ready for a fight.

Just imagine if the progress of science was bound by "intellectual property" - we'd still be in the dark ages. Human culture has always revolved around the sharing of culture, whether that means singing songs around a campfire or viral youtube videos, sharing is in our nature.

Re:freedom of speech... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38432606)

So.... where do you live? If you answer United States i'm going to piss myself laughing so hard.

Re:freedom of speech... (1)

zugedneb (601299) | more than 2 years ago | (#38432628)

Everything that is missused can be revoked or modified to suit twe needs of those holding the _lawful_ rights to the ownership, and that was my only point. I am simply making the point that the way this "law" is being bent by the internet crowd is not fruitful. It will not be accepted that you can link or post pirated goods, and get away by citing freedom of speech. There is no reason to fool onself by expecting positive results.

Also remember, the people who fought for these freedoms Ãived in other times and had other things on their minds...

Re:freedom of speech... (3, Funny)

JasterBobaMereel (1102861) | more than 2 years ago | (#38433290)

So you don't live in the USA - Where laws allowing companies to do this were created?

Or Europe - where they apply

Or any other 1st world nation - who have signed up ...

Or Any 3rd world nation who owe enough to bow to the corporations

which leaves repressive dictatorships...

So you don't live on Earth ? - Life does exist on other planets ...!

Re:freedom of speech... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38440196)

Human culture has always revolved around the sharing of culture

And the break-neck speed of techincal innovation over the last century or two has been as fast as it has been because the people risking the time and money have a vested interest in the outcome of their R&D. Many of them would never be able to hire people and build the facilities in which they do their work without IP protections to make it possible in the first place. Designing microchips is not the same as singning around the campfire (did you really just use that as an analogy?).

Unethical to buy music (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38432182)

I think the music-industry is hostile to free speech. It is not ethical to buy their music. Use creative-commons or small, independent labels instead.

Wait, what? (4, Interesting)

Robert Zenz (1680268) | more than 2 years ago | (#38432328)

EMI Ireland recently warned the Government that it would take legal action against the State if the Government did not address the problem.

"We'll sue you if you don't change your laws"?! On what basis? Did I just misunderstand that sentence?

Re:Wait, what? (2)

Pecisk (688001) | more than 2 years ago | (#38432760)

International agreements, like "protection of investment", also you can base your claim on constitution.

They can sue government (aka Ireland) for this. No one says they would win. But as it seems these threats are quite enough for government.

Re:Wait, what? (1)

Alex Belits (437) | more than 2 years ago | (#38441714)

And the winner gets... a new form of progressive tax! A tax that increases 10% per year!

Seriously, if a government can't squash any corporation like a bug, it's not a government worth having.

Re:Wait, what? (1)

hitmark (640295) | more than 2 years ago | (#38432882)

On the basis of lost (potential) profits, perhaps?

Note the potential there, as while i think that is their logic i do not consider it a valid one. Never mind the old economic axiom of government having no business keeping a old business case afloat, tho it often seems to imply "unless the business tells them to do so". The last bit based on the axiom being called upon by business only when it favors them, either as now or as a reason for letting a company shut down its operations and move abroad.

Re:Wait, what? (1)

Jazari (2006634) | more than 2 years ago | (#38432902)

If a government is in breach of a treaty obligation, it can be sued if the treaty provides for this. One example: countries are sometimes sued for imposing unfair tariffs of US goods.

A great people firewall. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38432396)

I would like a firewall which adds asshats to it one by one. Each time an EMI pulls this shit, plonk, no more access on-line to any of the product or messages. They essentially disappear from my life. I feel the rate of opt-in would increase asymptotically after the sixth addition. Maybe a three strikes policy could be introduced, redemption could be achieved with the individual responsible instantly lost their job, maybe the rest would get a clue.

No surprise (1)

Wowsers (1151731) | more than 2 years ago | (#38432662)

Don't be surprised by this, the Irish government has history on bowing to lobby groups. The government got billions from the European Union (Brussels) to vote FOR a treaty that was AGAINST the people's interests in having it signed. However with a totally one sided BS campaign of lies by the Irish government, the people voted to sign away Ireland to Brussels control, and the government got it's blood money in return.

As a side comment, will the Irish be blocked from accessing Canadian websites due to the Canadian record companies pirating of their own artists?

Re:No surprise (1)

JasterBobaMereel (1102861) | more than 2 years ago | (#38433322)

I am not surprised by the Irish government, the last time Scotland got into serious debt (Darien Crisis) it signed away it's sovereignty completely ...

Brilliant News - We need this. (2)

bedwards (1937210) | more than 2 years ago | (#38432910)

File sharing technologies have been evolved to provide the maximum amount of convenience to as many users as possible. An inconvenient system results in too few users for a file share network to be sustainable. The goal of organisations is to reduce the number of users. The goal of sharers is to increase it.

The "Three Strikes Law" enabled organisations to state that they will catch people file-sharing and cut off their connection. We have to persuade users (most being non-technical) that the technology we produce to evade detection (encryption etc) keeps them safe. This is difficult when they are also being told it does not work by our opponent organisations.

This regulation against ISPs creates a technical problem without recrimination for solving it. It essentially results in an inability to trust the security and reliability of the network technologies at the lower end of the OSI model (controlled by the ISPs). This results in more inconvenience for the end user but no fear.

This plays straight to our hands. Not only are the developers of communication systems used to dealing with unreliable networks, we can now go to people with our tools (Tor,Free DNS etc), but instead of having to persuade them that it protects them from punishment, we just have to show them the tools remove their inconvenience - resulting in more users using encrypted file sharing technologies and tor.

As a bonus, we can help users hide and encrypt everything by default, creating a culture of protected information amongst ordinary people. This not only satisfies the goal by the file sharers, but also reduces the effectiveness of every other regime and organisation from governments down who want to censor the information people share.

If we play this right we will be telling our children we were there when we took away control of the internet.

moving out (1)

harvey the nerd (582806) | more than 2 years ago | (#38433186)

Website blocking is pernicious, whether by country or -IAA. Somehow, 3rd world countries just keep looking better and better.

EMI aint broke? (3, Insightful)

sgt scrub (869860) | more than 2 years ago | (#38433542)

If you have enough money to go round suing governments, piracy must not be cutting very deep into the bottom line.

Its not published yet (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38434082)

The legislation isn't published yet I have talked to the TD in question and he said he took both sides of the argument although he refuses to comment on who both sides of the argument are.(EMI and EMI maybe) I have written to both of my TD's in government and I expect to be notified when the legislation is available and be given sufficient time to read it to decide its merit before it is voted on

What the hell is going on? (1)

Adrian Lopez (2615) | more than 2 years ago | (#38436504)

The US Federal Government seizes websites on claims of copyright and trademark infringement, congress proposes bills (SOPA and PROTECT-IP) that force American ISPs to block websites accused of such infringement, and now we hear that Ireland wants to force ISPs to block alleged "pirate" websites? Is this all just coincidence, or is there a coordinated effort afoot to impose these kinds of restrictions on as many sovereign nations as possible?

What should happen (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38437304)

Please tell me that "the State" is going to tell "the Corporation" to kiss its rosy white ass.

Of course, the absolute opposite will probably happen...And the state will force the ISP's to spend money enforcing the desires of the corporation...because that's somehow fair.

So cute (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38438024)

The American Executive is 'to publish an order early in the new year to allow music publishers, film producers and other parties to go to court to prevent ISPs from allowing their customers access to "pirate" websites.' The President has 'written to music publisher EMI America confirming the order will be published and incorporated into existing legislation in January ... EMI America recently warned the President that it would take legal action against the State if the President did not address the problem.'"

You know America is an Imperialist Dictatorship when, well, when it looks like Europe.

LOL silly Europeans, think they know what freedom is or what democracy looks like. So *cute*...

~There was a post on irishbitz.net .. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38458498)

the post on irishbitz.net said that the best isp to not get kicked off was NTL ..

with a VPN ....
with a seedbox if possible.

as far as i understand Ireland is behind on most open source websites, but this comes half-way to addressing the sharing problem in that country.
although they do have hackspace and ubuntu local group.
PS I believe you have to play with the cookies and you only get 3 attempts to access the site until you get barred for 48 hours.

Good-luck peeps !!

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

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>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...