Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

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!

cancel ×

304 comments

Et tu, Netherlands? (5, Interesting)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664404)

And from a country where a man once gave his life [wikipedia.org] for freedom of speech, no less.

They once fought the Nazi's, but now they drop to their knees before the entertainment industry.

Re:Et tu, Netherlands? (5, Funny)

Rogerborg (306625) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664442)

Invoking Godwin's Law in the first post is worse than anything that Hitler ever did.

Re:Et tu, Netherlands? (2)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664462)

I would use Genghis Khan, but it turns out that the Dutch never fought him.

Re:Et tu, Netherlands? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38664474)

You can go to jail for that in some countries now.

Re:Et tu, Netherlands? (1)

CubicleView (910143) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664512)

Which Hitler?

Re:Et tu, Netherlands? (4, Funny)

ThatsMyNick (2004126) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664568)

I am pretty sure he refers to this guy [wikipedia.org]

Re:Et tu, Netherlands? (1)

CubicleView (910143) | more than 2 years ago | (#38665286)

Cheers, it was just the "that Hitler" bit that threw me. Pity about the overrated mods, I thought the parent was witty enough.

Re:Et tu, Netherlands? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38664552)

It's worse than starting a world war and being responsible for the deaths of millions of people? really?

Re:Et tu, Netherlands? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38664694)

Very poor attempt at trolling, it's the mod I feel sorry for though.

Re:Et tu, Netherlands? (1, Informative)

rubycodez (864176) | more than 2 years ago | (#38665248)

that's pretty much what we did at the end of WW I, the unfair treatment of Germany at that time caused WW II.

Re:Et tu, Netherlands? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38664590)

>Invoking Godwin's Law in the first post is worse than anything that Hitler ever did.

But it is a fact that they fought the Nazi's, not an "argument".

Godwin's Law applies to Nazi analogies used by people who argue about something unrelated like the weather.

"I think we will have a rainshower."

See?

Re:Et tu, Netherlands? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38664752)

watering down an important first post containing important concepts and principles with some fad shit like 'godwin's law' is even worse.

next time, please dont be so stupid.

Re:Et tu, Netherlands? (4, Funny)

ichthus (72442) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664852)

Don't be a Godwin Nazi.

Re:Et tu, Netherlands? (4, Insightful)

Catbeller (118204) | more than 2 years ago | (#38665134)

Godwin's Law becomes null when fascism is reborn.

And fascism is a mode of government which requires a fusion of corporate business and government, to the point which it becomes impossible to separate the motivations of the two.

Re:Et tu, Netherlands? (4, Insightful)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664496)

They are just doing what the United States is telling them to do.

Honestly, Why are the Citizens of the Netherlands allowing the USA To dictate their own laws? Why are you people not protesting in the streets over this stuff?

Re:Et tu, Netherlands? (1, Insightful)

DesScorp (410532) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664592)

They are just doing what the United States is telling them to do.

Honestly, Why are the Citizens of the Netherlands allowing the USA To dictate their own laws? Why are you people not protesting in the streets over this stuff?

You honestly think there would be no copyright laws abroad without American pressure? Really?

Re:Et tu, Netherlands? (4, Insightful)

Synerg1y (2169962) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664906)

And you honestly think that THIS particular case is free of USA influence? Where is the RIAA and MPAA located? Who is fueling the copyright war? I do agree though, people need to protest, hopefully one day the dutch can hire non-retarded politicians, but I'm preaching from the choir here.

Re:Et tu, Netherlands? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38664954)

You honestly think there would be no copyright laws abroad without American pressure? Really?

You honestly think the US is the only place in the world where books, movies and music are made? Really?

Re:Et tu, Netherlands? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38665244)

How retarded of a statement.

Let me guess you run around making statements out of context everywhere. Take your ADHD medicine.

Re:Et tu, Netherlands? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38664596)

There are some people that care, but most of them don't - most people think that the Dutch Pirate Party for instance only harbors a bunch of nerds and anti-governmental lefties who will never see their goals realized. Maybe (hopefully) now there'll be more people who realize that they actually should protest.

Re:Et tu, Netherlands? (5, Informative)

Baloroth (2370816) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664604)

BREIN [wikipedia.org] isn't a US organization. Note how it is representing Dutch movie and recording studios? Nor is there any sign they need the US to encourage them. Believe it or not, the US is not the only source of corporate greed or stupidity in the world, despite what many Slashdot commentators seem to think.

Re:Et tu, Netherlands? (1)

tsa (15680) | more than 2 years ago | (#38665124)

BREIN is just as bad as the RIAA/MPAA just on their won. They don't need the US to guide them. Which doesn't mean the Netherlands isn't a lap dog of the US. BUt in this case, I don't think the US had much to do with it.

Re:Et tu, Netherlands? (1)

camperdave (969942) | more than 2 years ago | (#38665158)

Believe it or not, the US is not the only source of corporate greed or stupidity in the world....

True... but they do export an awful lot of it.

Re:Et tu, Netherlands? (1)

The Grim Reefer (1162755) | more than 2 years ago | (#38665060)

Why are you people not protesting in the streets over this stuff?

Probably for the same reason that no one is "protesting in the streets" in the US over it. The vast majority simply do not know about this, and many of the ones who know simply don't understand the ramifications.

Re:Et tu, Netherlands? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38664514)

Uh, what? Theo van Gogh didn't give up his life for the benefit of free speech, it was brutally taken from him for practicing it...

Our 'fight' against the Nazi's didn't last longer than a couple of days and we quickly surrendered.

Re:Et tu, Netherlands? (1)

Gideon Wells (1412675) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664638)

Perception of martyrdom. He knew he was being targeted, but didn't go into hiding. He talked a subject that many would have shied away from out of fear.

The question is that if he stood up intentionally, or just thought these threats were more buffs. Either way, he took on the subject and died. At this point his intent doesn't matter. He's now a symbol in the way Che is.

Re:Et tu, Netherlands? (3, Insightful)

DesScorp (410532) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664582)

And from a country where a man once gave his life [wikipedia.org] for freedom of speech, no less.

They once fought the Nazi's, but now they drop to their knees before the entertainment industry.

What a farce. The Pirate Bay isn't fighting for freedom of speech, nor are the Dutch suppressing it. Copyright violation isn't free speech, no matter how you want to dress it up as such.

Re:Et tu, Netherlands? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38664866)

It's a slippery slope. If given power, some asshat will always abuse it. The ability to submit domains and IP addresses without judicial oversight could lead to a lot of speech being censored.

Re:Et tu, Netherlands? (5, Insightful)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664868)

What a farce. The Pirate Bay isn't fighting for freedom of speech, nor are the Dutch suppressing it. Copyright violation isn't free speech, no matter how you want to dress it up as such.

Since when has been TPB violating copyrights?

Re:Et tu, Netherlands? (5, Insightful)

Mashiki (184564) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664902)

Never. No more so than google has been violating copyrights by indexing.

Re:Et tu, Netherlands? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38664940)

The verdict is based on the "fact" that TPB is violating copyrights. This case was only about if a copyright violating site should be blocked and the answer seems to be "yes".

The fight over if TPB is really violating anything is a different fight.

Re:Et tu, Netherlands? (1)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 2 years ago | (#38665214)

If a decision is based on faulty premises, the decision is faulty. It's not a different fight, it's the same.

Re:Et tu, Netherlands? (1)

Hentes (2461350) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664946)

The Pirate Bay does not violate the copyrights of anyone. Some of their users are posting torrents on it that point to files that violate copyright.

Re:Et tu, Netherlands? (1)

tsa (15680) | more than 2 years ago | (#38665168)

Files don't violate anything. People violate things.

Re:Et tu, Netherlands? (5, Interesting)

kdemetter (965669) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664948)

Blocking The Pirate Bay, is also suppressing freedom of speech. There's a blog on it, for example.
Someone could also use it too hosts it's own creations, and ask feedback on it trough the comments.
And it could be used to host content criticizing a regime, controversial opinions , etc...

The Pirate Bay does advocate free speech, though obviously they see it broader ( freedom of information ).

So any country blocking TPB , is fighting piracy ( though very unsuccessfully ) , and is suppressing freedom of speech at the same time.
Any file sharer will find a way to work around it, so this does nothing to stop piracy. Torrents and magnet links remain accessible.

However, actual free speech, like the opinions of users, blog entries, are now inaccessible to the user just wants to visit the site .
So it does a lot more harm to free speech, then that it does anything against piracy.

Re:Et tu, Netherlands? (3, Interesting)

tsa (15680) | more than 2 years ago | (#38665210)

That's why they have that blog, so they can claim that blocking their site is a violation of freedom of speech.

Re:Et tu, Netherlands? (4, Insightful)

Dunbal (464142) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664952)

Copyright violation isn't free speech

Please give a single example of a copyright violation by "The Pirate Bay". Oh wait, you can't. You want to get into the whole argument of "facilitating copyright violation" then you might as well sue network, computer and storage equipment manufacturers, not to mention anyone who ever built and sold a set of speakers.

Re:Et tu, Netherlands? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38665100)

One man's pirate is another man's freedom fighter

Re:Et tu, Netherlands? (1)

na1led (1030470) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664730)

I guess Hitler Won in the end. His ideology of Totalitarian is coming to fruition!

Re:Et tu, Netherlands? (0)

Fri13 (963421) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664796)

Can you explain to me, very clearly, what common does freedom of speech and web service what only exist to allow people to share copyrighted material illegaly does have?

Because people should have freedom to speech, they should be free to share others work without permission?

Open Source is very much about copyright what gives its the strong protection. GPL wouldn't exist without strong copyright.
Copyright is one of the corner stones in human society where every person has rights to work what they do and no one can not take it away from them.
Freedom of speech is same kind. But abusing that freedom, is not allowed. That means you can not brake the law only because you have freedom of speech.

So explain to me and many others. Why it is a freedom of speech that people should be allowed to download (and upload) a copyrighted material without copyright owners right?

(My personal opinion is that copyright lenght has gone too far, 10-15 years would be more than enough, after the work goes public).

copyright enforcement isn't censorship (1, Redundant)

tverbeek (457094) | more than 2 years ago | (#38665038)

Equating the enforcement of copyright to censorship of free speech is perhaps the most intellectually dishonest thing the piracy crowd have tried to do.

Re:Et tu, Netherlands? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38665098)

Point of order. Van Gogh didn't give his life. It was taken from him.

Re:Et tu, Netherlands? (2)

tsa (15680) | more than 2 years ago | (#38665102)

He didn't give his life, he was murdered. And we already had freedom of speech before he was killed. Don't make more out of it than it was.

Right to submit future domains, but (5, Informative)

DCTech (2545590) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664414)

The verdict also said that if they submit non-TPB domains or ip's and violate that court decision, they will be legally liable.

Re:Right to submit future domains, but (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38664454)

sounds like SOPA-lite

Re:Right to submit future domains, but (3, Informative)

DCTech (2545590) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664486)

Except that it's only limited to one site, and the decision was only made because TPB didn't start filtering dutch visitors like earlier court verdict said. They have also been playing games setting up additional domains and ip's, because they know companies have to go via slow courts to get them banned.

Re:Right to submit future domains, but (1)

ThatsMyNick (2004126) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664546)

Looks like this time, they have been banned for good. Unless a new entity crops up and TPB starts sharing 'data' with the new entity.

Re:Right to submit future domains, but (2)

ae1294 (1547521) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664926)

Looks like this time, they have been banned for good. Unless a new entity crops up and TPB starts sharing 'data' with the new entity.

Maybe they could call it the Pirate Ocean...

Re:Right to submit future domains, but (4, Insightful)

daid303 (843777) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664574)

Doesn't make it right. Some people in cars drive around without a valid drivers license. Should traffic lights be hold responsible for letting them pass trough green? Should the phone company be responsible for someone violating a restraining order?

This is stupid, it won't work. It's only 2 ISPs (we have many more). Also, from the dutch news:

De internetprovider weet nog niet precies hoe ze technisch gezien de blokkade moeten aanpakken. "We hebben nog geen manier gevonden om dit te doen, maar misschien hebben we iets over het hoofd gezien."

Translated:

The ISP does not know how to implement this block on a technical level. "We haven't found a way to do this yet, but we might have overlooked something."

Re:Right to submit future domains, but (1, Informative)

DCTech (2545590) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664606)

The judge actually specifically addressed that issue.

While the court noted that an ISP blockade against The Pirate Bay would also prevent legitimate access to the site, it noted that the legal offerings available at The Pirate Bay are not limited to the site and are also available from other sites and means. As such, preventing a large number of copyright infringements is justified.

Re:Right to submit future domains, but (3, Insightful)

daid303 (843777) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664678)

... which had nothing to do with what I said? I said "the infrastructure owners should not be held responsible for actions of people using the infrastructure".

You reply with "but the legal stuff can be acquired by other means". Which has NOTHING to do with the issue at hand. The issue is that the wrong people are being held responsible, and that this is the first step for censorship. Which ends with 1984 becoming reality.

Re:Right to submit future domains, but (1, Insightful)

DCTech (2545590) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664722)

Intend counts a lot. With a name like The Pirate Bay everyone pretty much knows what the site is meant, and used, for.

Re:Right to submit future domains, but (3, Interesting)

Commontwist (2452418) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664896)

Holly - A green plant with berries used for festive purposes and slightly toxic to humans.

Hollywood.

By George, you're right!

Re:Right to submit future domains, but (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38665192)

Intent counts a lot, but not enough to prosecute someone. This is one of the more fascinated aspect of the TPH trial, they got prosecuted for a non-specific event. Purely fascinating.

Re:Right to submit future domains, but (1)

na1led (1030470) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664842)

I guess they should ban writable CD's and DVD's because it allows people to duplicate Copyright material.

Re:Right to submit future domains, but (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38665084)

Don't forget all those legitimate uses can be had in other ways, so the banning of all CD's and DVD's is justified.

Re:Right to submit future domains, but (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38665086)

They tried that with tapes more than once, but fortunately corporations weren't as above the law as they are today back then.

Re:Right to submit future domains, but (4, Insightful)

AngryDeuce (2205124) | more than 2 years ago | (#38665268)

it noted that the legal offerings available at The Pirate Bay are not limited to the site and are also available from other sites and means. As such, preventing a large number of copyright infringements is justified.

So I can go ahead and ban access as long as it is available somewhere else through other means? And that doesn't stifle free speech how?

That sounds a lot like the "Free Speech Zones" that are springing up all over the place here in the U.S.. "Sure, you have freedom of speech, just only in a time, place, and manner in which we dictate due to a decision with which you have no input whatsoever" That sure doesn't seem like "freedom" to me.

Re:Right to submit future domains, but (2)

Pf0tzenpfritz (1402005) | more than 2 years ago | (#38665014)

Except that it's only limited to one site

until BREIN decides that they want another one banned.

Re:Right to submit future domains, but (1)

Saintwolf (1224524) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664556)

Not quite, SOPA is DNS only. These guys seem to be doing it right and actually block the IP addresses through the ISP. No way around that unless you can find an alternate route/IP.

Re:Right to submit future domains, but (1)

aztrailerpunk (1971174) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664746)

This is not doing it right either.

Re:Right to submit future domains, but (1)

Hatta (162192) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664704)

Does the verdict say exactly that, or are there weasel words about a "good faith belief" in there?

Re:Right to submit future domains, but (4, Insightful)

mapkinase (958129) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664708)

Does not matter, tables are turned. Now the accuser (BREIN) can swiftly block you without order and you as an accused have to prove your innocence.

In Netherlands that I knew (not Kafkalands that the whole Europe quickly becomes) one cannot take something from another without court order or legal mutually agreed transaction.

First they started to give broad powers to the executive branch to circumvent the judicial branch in encroachment of property rights of individuals (guantanamo, TSA, etc), then they started to delegate the right to take your property to private corporations under supervision of the government (imminent domain, for example), now a private organization of "authors, artists, publishers, producers and distributors of music, film, games, interactive software..." can take away your Internet business without court order?

Truly, it's like Martin Niemöller said.

And Isn't it time to move on from bringing up what Martin Niemoller said to bringing up what Oscar Niemeyer did?

Re:Right to submit future domains, but (1)

ilsaloving (1534307) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664976)

And Isn't it time to move on from bringing up what Martin Niemoller said to bringing up what Oscar Niemeyer did?

Make hotdogs?

Re:Right to submit future domains, but (1)

mapkinase (958129) | more than 2 years ago | (#38665002)

hasty googling lead to Oscar*Marvin

Re:Right to submit future domains, but (1)

mapkinase (958129) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664978)

Oscar*Marvin

Re:Right to submit future domains, but (1)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | more than 2 years ago | (#38665120)

And Isn't it time to move on from bringing up what Martin Niemoller said to bringing up what Oscar Niemeyer did?

did it have anything to do with boloney and weiners?

(sorry, in advance)

Re:Right to submit future domains, but (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38665252)

No, Brein can not. They can only block TPB because in earlier court cases they proved that TPB violated Copyright. TPB was then ordered to filter dutch internet users and when they did not, Brein had to start another court case to prove this was the case. The end result of this was that TPB and only the TPB should be blocked by ISPs.

If another site is disliked by Brein, they have to start the whole circus again: start a court case proving the site is "evil", wait until the site doesn't comply with the verdict and then start another court case proving this to get them blocked.

Most of this is pretty reasonable, the most important thing I don't agree with though is that TPB is not sharing the copyrighted material itself and thus should not be blocked. The users uploading the material are the offending parties and could be fought by Brein which is more fair. (Don't forget: downloading is mostly legal in the netherlands, it's the uploading that is illegal.

Re:Right to submit future domains, but (2)

Hentes (2461350) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664972)

Still, it's a system where the accused are treated as guilty until proven their innocence.

Et tu, Netherlands part 2 (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38664504)

The Dutch ISP XS4ALL just decided to appeal again. They might win since BREIN based their offence on some very (VERY) poorly done statistics.

Re:Et tu, Netherlands part 2 (1)

antido (1825442) | more than 2 years ago | (#38665108)

It is also supposed that this is a discriminatory accusation (why only 2 ISP's?), so this could be reconsidered by the judge. Though this could very well be a worse thing if they decide to ban it across all ISP's. Doesn't change the fact that this has passed, and in 10 days I won't be seeing The Pirate Bay anymore :(

Re:Et tu, Netherlands part 2 (4, Insightful)

tsa (15680) | more than 2 years ago | (#38665264)

If we didn't have XS4ALL our internet would have been regulated much much more. I should get a subscription with them.

Accelerating? (1)

TaoPhoenix (980487) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664538)

Is it just me, or is the crusade to monitor everything accelerating? Now I know why the world ends in Dec 2012! All of these Big Brother movements will collide into a giant explosion!

You know - what if every page anyone has ever looked at leaked and became public domain?

Re:Accelerating? (2)

Baloroth (2370816) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664646)

Don't worry, the more they tighten their grip the more files will slip through their fingers.

Re:Accelerating? (1)

ae1294 (1547521) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664984)

Don't worry, the more they tighten their grip the more files will slip through their fingers.

Continue with the operation. You may fire when ready.

Re:Accelerating? (2)

Dunbal (464142) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664994)

Thanks to international law, which in almost every country supercedes national laws. So more and more often you are seeing contraints being applied to countries in the form of international treaties as a sort of end run around a country's government (which can either vote for or against the whole treaty package and not bits of it).

Re:Accelerating? (1)

mark-t (151149) | more than 2 years ago | (#38665220)

Copyrighted stuff can't just "leak" into public domain. Copyright is not like a trade secret, or a trademark.

dot bit (1)

Maquis196 (535256) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664558)

So get everyone to use http://dot-bit.org/Main_Page [dot-bit.org]

Ofc being a wiki page someone has just ruined it but anyone who should know enough about torrents should also have it in their locker to get dot bit running and then by using piratebay.bit they'll never have to worry about this sort of rubbish again. (check our previous revisions for all the information)

The alternatives are either remembering a static IP address (which could change at a moments notice) or use an alternative DNS root which has its own worse problems.

Re:dot bit (1)

DCTech (2545590) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664580)

Neither of those work because they block IP's too.

Re:dot bit (1)

Maquis196 (535256) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664670)

ah my bad, didnt even RTFS properly. Thought it was a SOPA like dns block. Well guess TOR it is then. Get a magnet link from the site and let the torrent client do it all.

Re:dot bit (1)

Fri13 (963421) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664864)

Why are you suggesting that other people should join to brake the law and copyright owners rights in those countries?

Are you one of those people who goes and suggest companies to download GPL licensed software, modify it, sell it and license it with own license and never respecting the GPL license?

Is it just OK that we who want others to respect our copyrights what is licensed with GPL, but we should not respect their copyrights?

 

Re:dot bit (1)

Maquis196 (535256) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664610)

undid last two vandal edits, main_page as it should be

Re:dot bit (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38664750)

Or, of course, they can always go to https://google.com, search for what they want on TPB, and then view the cached page for the actual link. If the start blocking tracker IP addresses directly, they can still switch to dht mode. This also doesn't prevent them from using any one of a number of proxy/vpn products out there that will let them connect to TPB (in some cases for free). Basically, it's just more of the legal whack-a-mole that is all the rage at the moment, I assume so that lawyers can continue to generate the billable hours that justify their hours (sorry, nothing can justify their existence).

Griefing (3, Interesting)

Aladrin (926209) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664608)

This has the potential for some serious griefing. Since they'll keep blocking IPs and such, obviously TPB needs new IPs constantly. Cloud time! How many of Amazon's IPs do you think they'll have to block before realizing that they're blocking legit sites, too?

Re:Griefing (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38664648)

Never fear, Citizen, SOPA also allows any company to allege to Amazon/Visa that their copyright is infringed, and upon such allegation, Amazon/Visa will be required to block these filthy pirates or else be held liable for their infringement. Your government is working around the clock to protect you. City 17 -- it's safer here. Now pick up that can.

Re:Griefing (2)

djsmiley (752149) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664692)

This is how it'll play out

Pirate bay has a "down day" - its publicised and everyone giggles

pirate bay sets their A name record to the IP of the dutch goverment webserver chosen at random. They wait long enough, it gets banned. They then set the A record to another dutch goverment webserver.... etc

Unless theres some other way of getting the IP of a website, other than DNS this is the only way I can see they will block it, and so tpb can _Easily_ and rather amusingly abuse this.

Block google? Block hotmail, block anything they like simply by using the IP. Trolololol. :D

Re:Griefing (2)

Maquis196 (535256) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664816)

I'd also want them to put in a subdomain that links to the official site so it will always work as intended for everyone who's in the know but still get to stiff the opposition.

Re:Griefing (1)

jemtallon (1125407) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664956)

Love. This.

Re:Griefing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38665172)

Except that it will be pretty blatantly obvious that this is what they're doing.

pirate bay sets their A name record to the IP of the dutch goverment webserver chosen at random.

You say that like no one at BREIN is going to load up the website to do due diligence to show that it's in fact hosting BREIN-copyrighted stuff.
Based on the court decision, BREIN is liable for any damage they do to other sites - so they'd definitely want to be able to show that a site/IP was hosting those materials at the time they requested the block.

The GP's idea was better - hop around on the different Amazon cloud hosts until they're all blocked, then switch to another provider an use up all their IPs too.

Re:Griefing (2)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | more than 2 years ago | (#38665164)

its not just IP addr, its IP-addr and port, as a combo.

so maybe they'll have to start blocking ports, one by one, on each IP!

hey, that sounds fun. the compute power for their filters is going to cost them more and more. I guess cisco and those guys will have fun selling more filtering hardware...

Misleading title... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38664642)

Court attempts to force ISPs to block TBP due to their own incompetance in not understanding that what they're asking for isn't possible.

Re:Misleading title... (1)

Fri13 (963421) | more than 2 years ago | (#38665156)

So we should remove laws about killing and murdering because the laws do not stop people murdering and killing others?

The law should be a guideline.... something what people respect and honors.
The situation has gone bad because people have been brainwashed that competition and international corporations are good thing.
As competition and international corporations are those what drivens greed and weak minded people to do anything to be on winning side, were it to rise copyright time from 20 years to 150 years or lobbying politicions to support their cause and their needs instead civilians....

Money talks and bullshit walks.... That is what is left from competition and international corporations.

There is way to fix things, it is not to fight or compete. It is about fixing the problems what were created in the first place.

We need to talk people, we need to write to media, we need to demand rights. We can not allow big corporations to compete and ruin whole world because they beliefe they need to do so.

If someone brakes the law, you dont brake to law to catch him.
It is hard to show a good example to your kid when your neighbord or someone else shows bad example. So you dont show a bad example as well, but you explain it to your kid and then you discuss about problem with those who are giving a bad example. And if they dont agree, then you need to talk to people around you and get them to understand that giving a bad example is not allowed by anyone.

Pinky and the BREIN (2)

PortaDiFerro (1719902) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664698)

Try to take over the world again

And we just got Netneutrality! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38664700)

This is a 'rechtbank' (lowest court) judgement. There was just the announcement that there will be an appeal. So this is not the last we will hear of this. Let's hope our internet freedom does mean something to higher judges.

It wont work (1)

lehphyro (1465921) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664748)

You can't block websites, they'll just pop up under different names and addresses easily discovered with a google search. You should define which websites are allowed like North Korea does with their own internet (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_in_North_Korea).

So... (1)

JockTroll (996521) | more than 2 years ago | (#38664806)

... Do you still believe the media mob will not prevail? That there can be any negotiation with them? That they can be fought by technological means alone? Hint: technology is on the side of the one with the most resources, and this ain't us. They won't stop. Their money says they will win. It's time to slice flesh open or give up and admit defeat.

Really blocked? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38664812)

Did they really block it, or does adding:

194.71.107.15 thepiratebay.org

to your hosts file still work?

Circumventing an ISP block - methodologies (1)

HBI (604924) | more than 2 years ago | (#38665010)

These aren't so hard - SOCKS proxy works, for instance.

That said, I would suspect that shadow DNS projects would get a kick in the pants by this type of activity as well as SOPA.

Drole de Guerre (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38665024)

Europe has started economic war - mainly against its own citizens. They do not want the people, the intelligent, the malcontent, the dissident, the visionary ... to have venues, information, open debate ... wiggle-space. Very Nazi-esque. Clogging up the valves without fixing the process worked wondes in Fukushima. But The World isn't Japanese.

And, when things blow up they'll say it's the critic's fault. And all the folk that recieve silly color-codes on their modern-day d filecard counterparts - because they don't like waterfall-misery (as opposed to 'trickle-downs').

By the way. The Nazis (successfully) used Dutch banks to launder corporate funds past the surrender and, later, back int the good old f*land. And, virtually every northwestern and East European country had a volunterr regiment in the SS. These days, they do technocrat-Gauleiter work for banksters. Greece is a modern day Vichy. Minus the resistance.

They're stepping up the tempo. I wish it were possible to say "that's all".

Shutdown the Internet? (1)

na1led (1030470) | more than 2 years ago | (#38665130)

They'll have to shutdown the whole Internet to stop Pirating!
Load More 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>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...