×

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 ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

99 comments

My first response is "Must check out those sites" (5, Insightful)

viking80 (697716) | about a year ago | (#43065483)

My first response is "Must check out those sites".

Re:My first response is "Must check out those site (4, Interesting)

AliasMarlowe (1042386) | about a year ago | (#43065499)

My first response is "Must check out those sites".

If you're in the UK, you may wish to use a VPN or suchlike. Until they're made illegal outside "reputable corporations".

Re:My first response is "Must check out those site (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43065621)

My first response is "Must check out those sites".

If you're in the UK, you may wish to use a VPN or suchlike. Until they're made illegal outside "reputable corporations".

There's no need to use a VPN. The sites will simply pop up under various URL/domains. Some of them already have.

Re:My first response is "Must check out those site (5, Insightful)

Fluffeh (1273756) | about a year ago | (#43065719)

There's no need to use a VPN. The sites will simply pop up under various URL/domains. Some of them already have.

Indeed, the first thing I thought when this came up was: Here we go, the greatest whack-a-mole game in history is about to begin...

Re:My first response is "Must check out those site (2)

Bengie (1121981) | about a year ago | (#43066549)

I wonder if these ISPs only removed the DNS entry. I wonder if one could just enter in the IP address directly or use OpenDNS.

Re:My first response is "Must check out those site (1)

TheMathemagician (2515102) | about a year ago | (#43066577)

Of course you can, or just use a smaller ISP which isn't subject to the banning order. It's just a farcical waste of time.

Re:My first response is "Must check out those site (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43065793)

If you're in the UK, you may wish to use a VPN or suchlike.

Or any ISP other than those listed in the order. We have lots of ISPs.

These orders only apply to the retail arms of big ISPs and not the wholesale services they resell to smaller ISPs.

Re:My first response is "Must check out those site (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43065815)

Fortunately, all you actually need to do is not use a big-name ISP. The ISP I use has not yet been ordered to block anything, including TPB (which the ISPs named above have been blocking for months now, AIUI).

Re:My first response is "Must check out those site (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43065521)

That would be my first thought, except i'm still doing fine with piratebay. Y'know, the one they blocked ages ago which definitely doesn't have numerous easy to find proxies that make such rulings pointless

Re:My first response is "Must check out those site (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43065625)

Exactly, this will make absolutely no difference to the vast majority of people using TPB etc.

Re:My first response is "Must check out those site (2)

lightknight (213164) | about a year ago | (#43065581)

My first response is "Certainly that will work."

Ok, so who wants to print the "This is a bit, this is a byte" slides, and send them to the judge, so he can find the error of his ways?

Re:My first response is "Must check out those site (3, Funny)

bonniot (633930) | about a year ago | (#43066033)

Ok, so who wants to print the "This is a bit, this is a byte" slides, and send them to the judge, so he can find the error of his ways?

Are you quoting this [ntk.net] ?

Re:My first response is "Must check out those site (1)

lightknight (213164) | about a year ago | (#43069475)

Paraphrasing, but yes, the BOFH's influence can be found, at times, in my writings.

Re:My first response is "Must check out those site (5, Funny)

dintech (998802) | about a year ago | (#43066201)

so he can find the error of his ways

Only if you include some par2 files...

Re:My first response is "Must check out those site (1)

Trilkin (2042026) | about a year ago | (#43066391)

This needs a higher score than it has. Alas, I have no mod points.

Re:My first response is "Must check out those site (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43065661)

It would be nice if people had the ability to get all the torrent files from a site to mirror it. I'm high right now, but just something where the torrent sites could just open their database code like a freebsd project with infinite forks

Re:My first response is "Must check out those site (1)

djsmiley (752149) | about a year ago | (#43065803)

There is a regularly published mirror of tpb you can grab.... its rather large though ;)

Re:My first response is "Must check out those site (2)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43065705)

My response is to add them to my foxy proxy list so i get to them via tor.

firefox+foxyproxy+tor > silly court order

Re:My first response is "Must check out those site (3, Insightful)

phantomfive (622387) | about a year ago | (#43065725)

My guess is, if you haven't heard of them, it's probably because you don't do much torrenting. That was my first response, too.

Re:My first response is "Must check out those site (4, Informative)

hairyfish (1653411) | about a year ago | (#43065795)

If you're using a good torrent search engine [torrentz.eu] it'll give you a whole list of sites that have the exact same content. I fail to see how this achieves anything

Re:My first response is "Must check out those site (1)

houghi (78078) | about a year ago | (#43070619)

Just use Google with filetype:torrent as an extra parameter.
metallica black album filetype:torrent [google.co.uk] is just a random example.
the interesting part is not so much that it shows a lot of links. Interesting is also at the ende the part that talks about what is blocked:
One of them reads:In response to a complaint we received under the US Digital Millennium Copyright Act [google.co.uk] , we have removed 3 result(s) from this page. If you wish, you may read the DMCA complaint [chillingeffects.org] that caused the removal(s) at ChillingEffects.org.
When you go to that site, you will see all the URLs neatly presented.

Re:My first response is "Must check out those site (1)

fatphil (181876) | about a year ago | (#43072715)

You'll be saying playing a game of whack-a-mole achieves nothing next!

Re:My first response is "Must check out those site (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43065839)

Yes. Added to my list, didn't know about these ;)

Re:My first response is "Must check out those site (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43065847)

Yup. Thanks, UK court, for showing the rest of the world where to find some more torrent sites.

Re:My first response is "Must check out those site (1)

gravis777 (123605) | about a year ago | (#43067479)

Kickass is a horrible torrent site. There is so much garbage on their page, half the links lead to stuff you have to pay for (not in a legal way), most of the torrents I have seen don't have any seeders, its hard to find anything . Truthfully, if you can't find it on The Pirate Bay or on some private torrent site, your best bet is a Torrent Search Engine. KickAss is one of those sites that come up if you try to do a torrent search in Google.

Now I am not saying that the site is completely worthless, just saying that it needs a major redesign. Unless their goal is to TRY to confuse and mislead people.

Re:My first response is "Must check out those site (1)

Arashi256 (1804688) | about a year ago | (#43068581)

This is total bullshit. I've used Kickass for years and not run into anything you describe. If you find using a website to be so challenging, I suggest you do something else.

Re:My first response is "Must check out those site (1)

fatphil (181876) | about a year ago | (#43074683)

Bizarre. KAT has a very wide selection, and as long as you have javascript turned off it's a very clean and easily navigable site. Presently it's my favourite site for just about every reason imaginable.

Re:My first response is "Must check out those site (1)

icebraining (1313345) | about a year ago | (#43114031)

I don't know what you're searching for, but I've never had any results "you had to pay for". You do know the top ones are ads, right?

As for the seeders, that's common for all public torrent sites (I'm not a regular of private ones). It's usually not a problem anyway, since the DHT will get a few even if the site says otherwise.

So... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43065489)

What will that accomplish?

Invest in VPN service providers.

Re:So... (2)

The_Revelation (688580) | about a year ago | (#43065551)

Won't they simply mirror? Does the ISP have to watch and block mirrors? Will the whack-a-mole ever end?

Re:So... (4, Insightful)

deains (1726012) | about a year ago | (#43065623)

There are a million and one proxies for Pirate Bay that are accessible in the UK. As far as I know none of these have been shut down by authorities since TPB itself was banned in the country. So if we assume the same model here then chances are proxy sites will be left alone.
 
Nothing to say the BPI/government (more or less the same thing now) might not change tack of course.

Re:So... (3, Insightful)

AmiMoJo (196126) | about a year ago | (#43065749)

The Pirate Party UK proxy was shut down by legal threats.

To the BPI: stop breaking my fucking internet. You added a fiver a month to my bill for a VPN, which I am deducting from the money I would otherwise have spend on your products.

Re:So... (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43065835)

As far as I know none of these have been shut down by authorities since TPB itself was banned in the country.

TPB is not banned in the UK. A handful of ISPs are banned from letting their users access it directly (IIRC, the list is: BT, Virgin, O2, TalkTalk and Sky). Fortunately the UK has local loop unbundling and easy migration between service providers, so you can just move to one that isn't banned.

Re:So... (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43066189)

So does that mean I can just view these sites using my mobile broadband connection from Three, and then after getting the torrent file or magnet link I can carry on downloading the torrent on my Virginmedia home broadband? Naturally, the torrents I download will be from copyright holders that have given permission to download their work through torrents, I would never download copyright infringing work, honest!

Re:So... (1)

RaceProUK (1137575) | about a year ago | (#43066619)

So does that mean I can just view these sites using my mobile broadband connection from Three, and then after getting the torrent file or magnet link I can carry on downloading the torrent on my Virginmedia home broadband?

Yes, since the block only applies to the Pirate Bay site itself (as far as I know).

Re:So... (1)

Ponder Stibions (962426) | about a year ago | (#43066675)

As far as I know none of these have been shut down by authorities since TPB itself was banned in the country.

I know of only one - the UK Pirate Party hosted one which they were requested to take down and threatened with legal action if they did not comply. I believe some other proxies hosted in the UK may also have been shutdown by similar legal action against them.

Re:So... (-1, Flamebait)

jones_supa (887896) | about a year ago | (#43065593)

What will that accomplish?

It's always good to curb the piracy a bit. It eats Internet bandwidth anyway.

Invest in VPN service providers.

So pay for warezing? How about investing in buying the real products instead of pirating them.

Re:So... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43065633)

So pay for warezing? How about investing in buying the real products instead of pirating them.

I wish I had that option.

Re:So... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43065641)

It's always good to curb the piracy a bit.

It's always good? What if they want to pass a draconian law they believe will hinder piracy a bit? Still good? You must be quite obsessed with people who copy data.

Well, anyway, it won't even curb piracy a little bit. Even if these sites don't already have alternate URLs, IPs, etc., there are plenty of other sites out there, and proxies/VPNs are another way to get around it.

So pay for warezing?

Not really. Pay for privacy and the ability to bypass censorship. But really, the amount of money you pay to a VPN provider will probably cost you a lot less than buying all of the products anyway, and that's assuming you even have the option of buying them.

Re:So... (1)

Zemran (3101) | about a year ago | (#43065805)

"What if they want to pass a draconian law they believe will hinder piracy a bit?"

What do you mean "What if"??? Have you been asleep for a couple of decades?

Re:So... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43065665)

Fat chance. I don't see that option either. They DRM the crap out of everything and half the time it isn't even available in the UK anyway. They are making it as difficult and possible to get at the content legally. It is MUCH MUCH MUCH MUCH easier to just go and download it from a pirate site. Playing whack a mole doesn't help. They are also having a negative impact on my connection. That pisses me off. The filter itself shouldn't even exist.

Re:So... (1)

jones_supa (887896) | about a year ago | (#43065723)

Have to agree with this, content availability issues are quite often the reason why I myself pirate.

Re:So... (-1, Troll)

torsmo (1301691) | about a year ago | (#43065775)

The hypocrisy is strong with this one.

This is the agreement. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43066471)

They changed their side, we change ours.

Copyright for 14 years? THEN change it?

Well, we don't agree. So we move to the default position: copying what we have is not forbidden.

Re:So... (1)

Jon Peterson (1443) | about a year ago | (#43066791)

They are making it as difficult and possible to get at the content legally.

Indeed. So the less sociopathic and self-entitled among us take the option of 'not getting at it' rather than 'getting it illegally'.

...ng of the South (1)

tepples (727027) | about a year ago | (#43067105)

What's the point of continuing to use state police power to enforce the copyright in an over 60-year-old feature film when the only lawful option for the vast majority of the public is "not getting at it"?

Re:So... (5, Insightful)

cheater512 (783349) | about a year ago | (#43065701)

They don't sell the product the torrent sites provide.
I.e. DRM free video downloadable (not streamed) and released nearly at the same time world wide (some of us aren't in the US)

The day they sell the product then let me know.

Re:So... (1)

Formorian (1111751) | about a year ago | (#43067327)

Um I'm in US and it seems many Blurays are released in other parts of the world before us, I'm assuming because of the Pay Per View streaming licenses. All I know is 90% of movies are up on usenet/torrents a full month before actual release. And 1 time I checked, france shopping sites did have the Bluray 3 weeks before us.

Now I get you're other part. DRM free video downloadable not streamed. I'm all for this. And AFAIK no one sells this.

Re: So... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43065731)

I distribute my own side project work freely across torrent sites, as do a large number of other musicians, devs etc. So should my reach be penalised too?

Re: So... (1)

jones_supa (887896) | about a year ago | (#43065945)

Of course not, it would just be a sad coincidence. Technically you should then store your material in some kind of legal torrents site. I understand that the situation is bit problematic though, as the popularity of the sites like TPB gives indeed a quite nice distribution channel for freeware stuff too.

TPB *is* a legal torrent site. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43066509)

Just like fast cars are LEGAL cars. That people break the speed limit doesn't make that change.

Re: So... (1)

icebraining (1313345) | about a year ago | (#43114059)

Technically you should then store your material in some kind of legal torrents site.

1. Torrent sites don't store material, only links.
2. Kat and other sites are not "illegal". (The previous version of TPB was, but its now hosted somewhere else, so it isn't now).

Re: So... (1)

jones_supa (887896) | about a year ago | (#43116135)

Torrent sites don't store material, only links.

Those links make the pirating possible in the first place. Someone has to index the magnet links for people to find the actual files. So while the material itself is not on the torrent sites, they are heavily "partners in crime". Like a drug dealer, but not drug maker.

Re: So... (1)

icebraining (1313345) | about a year ago | (#43117275)

Those links make the pirating possible in the first place.

So do browsers, web servers, the Internet, computers, etc.

Someone has to index the magnet links for people to find the actual files.

Yeah, like Slashdot: magnet:xturnbtihbe7968dc49ebc2994ec4129a7d42350831c95bb5 [magnet]

Damn piracy enablers!

So while the material itself is not on the torrent sites, they are heavily "partners in crime". Like a drug dealer, but not drug maker.

I'd like to see a drug dealer which doesn't handle drugs.

The problem with the analogies people make up, is that they're simply wrong.

Not only a torrent site doesn't see the contents of the files, as - unlike drugs - files are not illegal (otherwise the MPAA and c couldn't sell them either). Copyright infringement occurs when a person X transfers a file Y to another person Z without the proper authorization from the copyright holder(s).

Therefore, a torrent site would have to know the appropriate rights for each transaction (X, Y, Z) to be able to determine if it's copyright infringement or not. Not doing so would be detrimental to copyright holders themselves, like when Youtube deleted an artist's own music videos, uploaded by herself.

It's a shame that people are too lazy to inform themselves not to fall to the big media lies.

Re:So... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43065905)

Still too expensive and cumbersome.
I pay for pirating service once and use it in simple way and pay less money. Also i get less problems with reliability of downloads, slow speeds, etc.

Re:So... (1)

RaceProUK (1137575) | about a year ago | (#43066629)

How about investing in buying the real products instead of pirating them.

Hope you like a challenge - find all 78 episodes of Sonic X on region 2 DVD.

Re:So... (1)

jones_supa (887896) | about a year ago | (#43067093)

I completely understand what you mean. For niche stuff like that, torrenting is absolutely fine. In such case it's the marketing department's own failure for not providing a reasonable distribution channel for the product at all.

Re:So... (1)

tepples (727027) | about a year ago | (#43067117)

Does your job depend on seeing Sonic X? If so, your employer can fly you out to a Region where it is available.

Re:So... (1)

Zemran (3101) | about a year ago | (#43065769)

The judge probably runs a proxy and wants to drum up some customers. There is nothing that will be achieved by this. kat.ph used to be a good site but now the advertising is getting to be a pain so I had stopped using it anyway and gone back to thepiratebay.se which they banned earlier and is still going strong.

Basic Internet Design - reroute around the damage (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43065505)

The internet was designed to survive a nuclear strike, and reroute around the damage. Same premise applies here, Block one sight 1000 new sights take its place. Only thing that will slow it will be scare tactics with fines and mandatory long-term imprisonment longer than capitol crimes to scare John Q. Public into compliance...as it always has been

Re:Basic Internet Design - reroute around the dama (1)

Ash-Fox (726320) | about a year ago | (#43068627)

The internet was designed to survive a nuclear strike, and reroute around the damage.

Actually that was ARPAnet, not the Internet. The Internet didn't inherit that functionality from ARPAnet (that's not saying that such functionality doesn't exist on the Internet, but that was developed after the Internet as part of routing protocols that are often tied under peering agreements that are not automatically granted because of something like a nuclear attack).

Same premise applies here, Block one sight 1000 new sights take its place.

Not really. It's more like there are many sites like that and one becomes more notable when a major one goes away.

No More Slashdot Trolls... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43065509)

The problem with Slashdot today is that you just can't "troll" anymore.

I mean seriously, nobody gives a shit about Goatse -seen it, done it... And describing how I "corn holed" my retarded little sister just make the current crop of Slashdot geeks want to masturbate.

What is a Troll to do?

Re:No More Slashdot Trolls... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43065615)

Spam MyCleanPC advertisements, that's what.

I had never heard of Fenopy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43065667)

But I've heard of it now. Thanks EMI Records and Sony Music! I will be sure to check it out.

Thanks (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43065737)

Thanks was looking for a torrent I couldn't find on TPB and found it on Fenopy. :)

Discovered two new sites today (1)

AltF4ToWin (1976486) | about a year ago | (#43065771)

When will governments learn? I don't know where they're getting their "P2P sharing is down" figures from, if anything torrents are having more seeders these days, I guess they're ignoring private trackers. My money's on proxies going up for these by the end of day, maybe Tuesday.

What's next? (5, Interesting)

jd659 (2730387) | about a year ago | (#43065809)

This game of blocking the sites cannot be won. Let’s say it takes, at best, one month from BPI or copyright holder to figure out that one site is infringing the copyright, file a suite and have a verdict against the infringing site. That process takes time and money. On the other hand, duplicating the site’s content on some other IP and the alternative name can happen overnight and is virtually free. So there will always be sites providing free access to any works.

What is more concerning here is that none of the sites blocked hosted the copyrighted works. This is something that only few really consider as a serious shift in the court system. None of the sites blocked for copyright infringement host copyrighted works! What will be the next step? Someone will create a site that will list all the blocked sites along with the new mirrored sites that can be accessed within the UK. Should this new site be blocked? Based on what? It doesn’t host any copyrighted works, nor provides an index to the copyrighted works. Let’s say that the UK block-thirsty judges will issue a new verdict to block the sites that list mirrors. What next? Someone will write a browser plugin that will automatically redirect to the current working mirror of the blocked sites and users will continue to use the sites without even noticing any blocking and without using any VPN. Should browser plugins be blocked or any sites that host browser plugins? Someone will say that it will be good enough if less people are aware of the options. But how did we get to the point that more users are aware of thepiratebay than about the legal ways of obtaining the same material? The reason is that thepiratebay does better consolidating all the media (even that that cannot be purchased anywhere) in one spot at an attractive price point. Offer something better and people will pick the alternative. Otherwise, blocking will not solve any problem that BPI thinks exists.

Re:What's next? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43066011)

"even that that cannot be purchased anywhere"

Like movies that'll play on anything.

Re:What's next? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43066029)

Let’s say that the UK block-thirsty judges will issue a new verdict to block the sites that list mirrors.

It's good to determine the efficacy of corporate-cum-judicial policies, but that's not relevant. This is the game the big-brother mega-corps are playing. What counts is the cost to society which is very little. The way to make the mega-corps the bad guys is to invoke the law of unintended consequences. That is, we need mirrors on facebook.com, blog.com, even twitter.com, creating the classical arms race. IE. Finding a better weapon as BPI creates a new defense.

Re:What's next? (1)

six025 (714064) | about a year ago | (#43066041)

This game of blocking the sites cannot be won.

(I think) everyone is well aware of this. If not, they bloody well should be in 2013 :)

So hardcore pirates will always find a way. It's the casual pirates that they're targeting, the people who would normally buy a CD/DVD/game/app if no other source is readily available, and it's this middle group that is a significant source of "lost sales".

Peace,
Andy.

Why can't I get a lawfully made copy (1)

tepples (727027) | about a year ago | (#43067157)

It's the casual pirates that they're targeting, the people who would normally buy a CD/DVD/game/app if no other source is readily available

Publishers can't sincerely target this group of infringers without actually releasing the CD/DVD/game/app. So why can't I get a lawfully made copy of the film Song of the South, the TV series Spartakus and the Sun Beneath the Sea, and the video game Mother 3?

Re:Why can't I get a lawfully made copy (1)

melikamp (631205) | about a year ago | (#43067873)

Enjoying the oldies subtracts from the time you could've spent watching the latest and greatest premium content, and is tantamount to theft. But you already knew that...

Re:What's next? (1)

fatphil (181876) | about a year ago | (#43077423)

Shutting down torrent-hosting sites does nothing to ameliorate their sales figures in such cases.

``no other source [being] readily available [...] is a significant source of "lost sales"''

The businesses are still failing to respond to an economic want. They have no right to survive, they've been terminally stupid for so long.

Re:What's next? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43066143)

Pretty much. They simply do not get that the digital age is here to stay.
They either get with the times or suffer.

They are as bad as bloody Microsoft were trying to kill off the web. THAT SURE WORKED.
Microsoft have far more control over PCs than the BPI do over any musician.
You'd think they would take this as a lesson. Of course, BPI, logic, pick one.

They will try as hard as they can to bring down everyone else with them.
They'll destroy this industry if it is the last thing they do. They only care about the money.

Perceived Wrongs (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43066309)

Is a new trans-border government agency set up right old wrongs and to right perceived wrongs, even if the wrong is in the future.
With bold thinking like this - anything is possible. Now if only politicians were 'done' for perceived wrongs.

Re:What's next? (1)

girlinatrainingbra (2738457) | about a year ago | (#43066701)

Blocking search engines should lead all the way to blocking google and bing. Blocking organized indices should lead all the way to blocking yahoo (Yet Another Hierarchically Organized Oracle, remember???) and such. Blocking links to content should lead all the way to blocking The New York Times and every newspaper site and every web site in the entire WWW (as someone pointed out that the entire point of the world-wide-web and Hypertext Markup Language is to provide linkages between pages on the internet's WWW.
.
This is the same crap that was being fed to people when there was the argument about the existence of "illegal links" or trying to tell people "hey don't link to our website without our permission!!!" It's like telling people you shouldn't tell anyone what a particular physical world geolocation address is IRL, or to not pass along a phone number (I can almost see the point in that one, though, for privacy reasons, eh?)

Re:What's next? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43067613)

Actually, in the UK, this sort of whack-a-mole level of abstraction in obfuscation, has been around for a number of years, under the name of a D-notice.

A D-notice is government ruling which when enacted, can prevent a specific story from appearing in the public press. It has been used in the past, to stop newspapers from naming the government minister who's son was arrested for selling marijuana, for example.

But there then follows a higher level of abstraction - when a D-notice is put on a story, the newspapers can report that a D-notice was issued. Unless the government slaps a D-notice on the fact that a D-notice was issued. And so on.

Re:What's next? (1)

Ash-Fox (726320) | about a year ago | (#43068759)

A D-notice is government ruling which when enacted, can prevent a specific story from appearing in the public press. It has been used in the past, to stop newspapers from naming the government minister who's son was arrested for selling marijuana, for example.

It's also entirely voluntary.

Evidence (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43066045)

Hey I just realized something. There was a lot of discussion last week about the new "six strikes" system and what the media & cable companies can or can't do to your connection. They can't shut you off, or do anything more than deliver warnings and throttle you.

But that's not really the point. The point is they're collecting LOTS of evidence. All those anonymous IP lawsuits the MPAA used to do en masse? They're not anonymous anymore and they have a lot more than just an IP. "Judge, the defendant has five strikes on his record and was warned repeatedly. We'd like the maximum of $150,000 per offense." It will be SO much easier for them now.

The best part about this (1)

korbulon (2792438) | about a year ago | (#43066197)

Is that some dude in a white wig and black robes said "Kickass Torrents".

Ass also means donkey (1)

tepples (727027) | about a year ago | (#43067219)

Consider this perfectly well-formed sentence: "The ass of Jesus was upon an ass." Back when the U.S. Democratic Party still used a donkey motif (before switching to a circled blue D), the official party blog was titled "Kicking Ass". The judge could have easily just imagined describing a clip like two boys kicking a donkey off a cliff [youtube.com] .

Translator (1)

Mr_Silver (213637) | about a year ago | (#43066199)

I'm surprised no-one has written a website/web-service where if you submit one blocked address, you get another one returned which hasn't been blocked.

Should be a fairly simple thing to develop.

Re:Translator (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43066349)

What are you waiting for then?

Punishment without trail..... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43066223)

The Catholic Church has been convicted multiple times in multiple countries of covering up for money laundering, murder and people who rape children. Their sites remain unblocked.

The owners of H33t, Kickass Torrents and Fenopy have not been convicted of anything. Their sites are blocked because they don't bribe or blackmail politicians.

I've got an idea... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43067049)

Open a site called mygreattorrents.com. Work out that the SHA1 of that name is (say it's 123456789abcdef). Register 123456789abcdef.com (and maybe .co.uk, .net, .it, or whatever - perhaps pick the suffix based on the hash in some way). Repeat, but using 1.mygreattorrents.com, 2.mygreattorrents.com and so on. You may need to point the hash DNS names at proxies, although you may even be able to use a CDN to do the same thing.

Next, create a browser plugin that knows to automatically hash URLs and look them up in DNS. If they fail, it knows to automatically add incrementing numbers and retry the hash. It should probably have some sort of cache so that it doesn't have to traverse loads of site names every time you want to visit somewhere.

You've now got a DNS block-resistant web site. If the original gets blocked, then the secondary or tertiary takes over. What's more, you get some extra happiness knowing lawyers and judges will be arguing something like this:

Lawyer: "Your honour, a previous case saw mygreatteorrents.com blocked. However, the owners have set up a secondary site that has the exact same infringing content on it. We move to have said site also blocked"
Judge: "(mutters something in Latin). Council, what is the name of this secondary site?"
Lawyer "two, A, three, C, C, E, one..."
Judge: "(more inaudible Latin) I'm sorry, Council, whs that C, C, E or C, E?"
Lawyer "C, C, E, your honour. As I was saying, thee, F, E..."
(and so it goes on)

Hypothetical Scenario (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43067169)

Lets say the music industry succeeds in eliminating all pirating and cheap/free legal ways to enjoy entertainment media. I'm still not going back to spending $20 for an album or movie, that era is over.

Is this even legal? (1)

Kirth (183) | about a year ago | (#43077419)

I mean, this is only a court order, against sites that have _not yet_ been persecuted for copyright infringement. So how can the court order this without at least opening a case against them? This sounds wholly illegal to me.

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...