Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

French Court Orders Search Engines, ISPs To Block Pirate Sites

Soulskill posted about 8 months ago | from the you-can't-get-there-from-here dept.

Piracy 75

rtoz sends word that a French court has ordered Google, Yahoo, and Microsoft to remove 16 unauthorized video streaming sites from their search results. Many ISPs were also ordered to block access to the sites. According to TorrentFreak, "The court ruled that the film industry had clearly demonstrated that the sites in question are 'dedicated or virtually dedicated to the distribution of audiovisual works without the consent of their creators,' thus violating their copyrights. As a result the search services of Google, Microsoft, Yahoo and local company Orange are now under orders to 'take all necessary measures to prevent the occurrence on their services of any results referring to any of the pages' on these sites. Several ISPs – Orange, Free, Bouygues Télécom, SFR, Numéricable and Darty Télécom were also ordered to 'implement all appropriate means including blocking' to prevent access to the infringing sites."

cancel ×

75 comments

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

All I can say to this is... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45556167)

who?

Re:All I can say to this is... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45556327)

Yes. I, too, often forget about the French.

Re:All I can say to this is... (5, Funny)

AK Marc (707885) | about 8 months ago | (#45556371)

I wanted the list of the sites...

Re:All I can say to this is... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45556489)

From this article. [techienews.co.uk]

Found like this. [google.com]

dpstream.tv
fifostream.tv
allostreaming.com
alloshowtv.com
allomovies.com
alloshare.com
allomegavideo.com
alloseven.com
allourls.com
fifostream.com
fifostream.net
fifostream.org
fifostreaming.com
fifostreaming.net
fifostreaming.org
fifostreaming.tv

Re:All I can say to this is... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45556533)

These and many more on http://www.chillingeffects.org/

2 sites?????? (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about 8 months ago | (#45557109)

I mean, fuck what the frenchfucks?

dpstream is a different site and all the other urls seem to lead to fifostream?

so they just get another url on top of the dozen domain names they already got and it's business as usual...

Then 17 new ones appeared... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45556173)

... while the old ones continues to operate with bypasses even a 12 year old can figure out.

Re:Then 17 new ones appeared... (3, Interesting)

Em Adespoton (792954) | about 8 months ago | (#45556311)

... while the old ones continues to operate with bypasses even a 12 year old can figure out.

Actually, we're talking about France. It's unlikely that the streaming services will adapt just to suit the French market, unless they're French streaming sites. More likely, people will stop watching the streaming services and move to consuming via Youtube (which yes, is still a streaming service) or TPB. Ordering Google to block Youtube isn't going to go over so well.

Re:Then 17 new ones appeared... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45556613)

They're all French streaming sites

Re:Then 17 new ones appeared... (1)

g0bshiTe (596213) | about 8 months ago | (#45556729)

Ordering Google to block anything for a particular country shouldn't go well FULL STOP. Seeing how these people provide content globally why should they cowtow to a specific countries request. I imagine the blocking of that content since it's coming from a French court would be to order French ISP's to do the blocking.

Re:Then 17 new ones appeared... (1)

Red_Chaos1 (95148) | about 8 months ago | (#45556833)

This. If I were Google and MS and Yahoo, etc. I'd just pull the plug on the .fr search page and put up a page that basically states "Due to general stupidity, we cannot be bothered to serve your country anymore. Sorry for the inconvenience. If you wish for service to be restored, please enlighten your politicians and the courts. Until then, best wishes, Google/Yahoo/MS/etc."

Making the search engines do the work would be like requiring checkpoints at every on/off ramp and intersection of every road, freeway, and highway to make sure no vehicle is transporting anything illegal, and threatening to shut the roads down if there is no compliance.

Go after the source, or fuck off. Stop making every step of the way play police officer.

Re:Then 17 new ones appeared... (1)

Em Adespoton (792954) | about 8 months ago | (#45556937)

Only problem is, Google, MS and Yahoo already started doing this for MANY countries (including the US and UK) years ago. This isn't anything new, other than the targets. The mechanism for doing this blocking is already in place for pedophile sites.

Re:Then 17 new ones appeared... (1)

LordWabbit2 (2440804) | about 8 months ago | (#45557381)

Oh please, blocking google etc. is like stopping people from buying a map. You know where you want to go but don't know how to get there. All it will take is a bit of digging around forums/irc and you will find the links you want (ie. stopping at a garage).
Blocking DNS, no problem, use IP's.
IP is banned by your ISP
No problem, bounce off a rented server/proxy in Idontgiveafuckistan.

Stop passing stupid fucking laws that are impossible to enforce.

I think it's beyond time when any asshole politician proposing these dumb laws should be required to have a CS degree.

What about TOR, NNTP, IRC, Torrents etc.?
These are all decentralized.
How are you going to stop an IRC channel which requires a password that is rotated and only given to trusted members?
I rent a linux instance in the states so if I need/want something regional I can use it. It costs me $30 a YEAR.

The current generation of kids are being brought up in environments where computer's are taken for granted and knowledge that I had to study long hours for is absorbed while trying to set up a minecraft server.

You are not going to stop it, change your fcking business model. I would be willing to pay for a decent COPY of the next episode of BLAH! Yes, COPY, if I bought it once why should I pay again to watch it again! Or unlimited access in my "Library" or whatever. I don't want to have to pay twice to watch the same content, because then I will pirate your ass.

Re:Then 17 new ones appeared... (1)

Luckyo (1726890) | about 8 months ago | (#45558427)

You misunderstand. The goal of decision isn't to block the site. It's to make it prohibitively difficult for average people to find and access them. And sadly, it does work, as most of population doesn't know what "proxy" means. And of course, it massively reduces the chance of discovery with searches.

Re:Then 17 new ones appeared... (1)

LordWabbit2 (2440804) | about 8 months ago | (#45558989)

Valid point, sad but true.
Also I suppose I am leeching knowledge of these sort of things (proxies et al) into my children since they were five.
I keep overestimating the typical user.

Re: Then 17 new ones appeared... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45562425)

I respectfully disagree.
Look what internet scensorship caused in contries with retricted access (Iran for example), VPNs, proxies, etc became public knowlege wighin less than a year.

Re: Then 17 new ones appeared... (1)

Luckyo (1726890) | about 8 months ago | (#45563027)

You are comparing apples to oranges in attempt to push for a scary hyperbole. Instead you should compare it to the countries that practice similar censorship, such as Finland. We had piratebay blocked something like a year or two ago by a similar court order. And yes, sadly it worked exactly as intended - piratebay popularity among locals is down. Most people don't even know that they can easily access it.

VPNs etc don't become "public knowledge", or more accurately "widely used" because such bans are very narrow and specific, and as a result anyone with understanding on how to set up VPN won't bother - they will be able to circumvent the ban through much simpler means. For example, I just use http://proxybay.info/ [proxybay.info] to get to a mirror when I need to get something from piratebay. I could set up a VPN, but that would take far more time and effort than needed to simply circumvent the entire ban though a proxy use.

This is the same issue - the ban is so narrow and specific that technically inclined people who would be setting VPNs under China-style great firewall internet management setup will just circumvent the entire thing though a proxy use, while those who are the actual targets of decision, those without this knowledge will start looking for a different site to use or, as those who sought the decision hope, move to buy the content instead.

Re:Then 17 new ones appeared... (1)

Yvanhoe (564877) | about 8 months ago | (#45564737)

Actually, I am not aware of the French courts being dissatisfied by something else than a simple DNS block. This is non news so far.

cat & mouse games (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45556179)

People will find a way around, be it proxies, creating a new mesh internet that is less controlled by ISP's and more distributed, changing DNS names, IP addresses, etc... This will be an expencive and on going cat & mouse game for governments and ISP's.

So French (2)

fred911 (83970) | about 8 months ago | (#45556189)

The ruling is akin to a newspaper publishing locations of any illegal activity. Such as on Main and 5th people are selling their bodies or drugs. So stupid.

Re:So French (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45556281)

If America wasn't exporting stupid copyright laws throughout the rest of the world, this kind of stuff wouldn't be happening.

So, really, where's the stupid?

Re:So French (2)

robmv (855035) | about 8 months ago | (#45556373)

In the countries that accept those copyright laws

Re:So French (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45556423)

Because we all know everything is America's fault. Even when it isn't America's fault, it is America's fault.

Hey, do you guys remember the time a US president conspired to kill King Tut in order to bring down Egyptian superiority? I sure do!

But you're totally right. Why would the French get to decide their own laws? That's silly. Everybody knows the US government secretly controls everyone in this world with mind-control beams. Luckily, you and I both have our tinfoil hats ready, right?

Re:So French (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45556851)

Because we all know everything is America's fault. Even when it isn't America's fault, it is America's fault.

As an American, I usually view this by paraphrasing Homer vs the 18th Amendment "America - the cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems."

Hey, do you guys remember the time a US president conspired to kill King Tut in order to bring down Egyptian superiority? I sure do!

Tut had it coming. Too bad social media didn't spread the word for us. If it had I bet we'd have been able to avoid a few of those other "situations".

But you're totally right. Why would the French get to decide their own laws? That's silly. Everybody knows the US government secretly controls everyone in this world with mind-control beams. Luckily, you and I both have our tinfoil hats ready, right?

Mind-control beams? Tin foil hats? That's just crazy talk. Everyone knows you need a cast iron colander to stop mind-control beams.

Re:So French (1)

g0bshiTe (596213) | about 8 months ago | (#45556737)

I'll take a stab and say "Corporate America".

Re:So French (4, Interesting)

globaljustin (574257) | about 8 months ago | (#45556283)

"So French"

We do have to look at this news through the 'french' lens...their courts and legal system are Kafkaesque (ha!)

will the block go into effect immediately or is this conditional upon appeal to a higher court before it goes into effect?

it's dumb of course, as another poster said they'll just use different URL's or imbed the players in other sites...

Re:So French (1)

Keyboard Rage (3448471) | about 8 months ago | (#45560179)

This kind of idiocy is not limited to the French, as many stories on Slashdot will surely tell you. Equally moronic rulings can be found in such illustrious countries like the United States, the UK, the Netherlands, Germany, etc.

But hey, perhaps you prefer to tell yourself your "Freedom Fries" are surely not French (they're not, they're Belgian) and continue to enjoy your obvious bias instead!

i love france (1)

globaljustin (574257) | about 8 months ago | (#45560713)

what part of my comment makes you think I'm biased against France?

I lived there for awhile & loved it...what's the deal?

Re:So French (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45561969)

most ISP redirected the DNS to localhost so far.
There are already mirrors that still works by simply using .net instead of .com or whatever.
Those sites, for all i know, are mostly links to media content sharing website, so they don't host any copyrighted data, but still...
This is a first step toward content-controlled internet... or at least, they are trying to. And they'll use their failure as a point in favor of getting more control over internet access...

Maybe if we had respectable copyright laws... (4, Insightful)

denis-The-menace (471988) | about 8 months ago | (#45556199)

Maybe if we had respectable copyright laws instead of this Infinity+1 BS.

But why bother when you can just purchase laws to suit your own monopoly.

Re:Maybe if we had respectable copyright laws... (1)

daniel.garcia.romero (2755603) | about 8 months ago | (#45556291)

Maybe this way the film industry becomes irrelevant faster? No more free advertising.

Re:Maybe if we had respectable copyright laws... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45556405)

so how many people pirate 50 year old films? most of the downloads are new releases

Re:Maybe if we had respectable copyright laws... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45557199)

Bullshit argument.

Re:Maybe if we had respectable copyright laws... (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45557387)

People use what's available. How many 50 year old films are available in digital copies? Kids may be hoarding the current crap, but that's because it's there, just like games on cassette in the 80s. Besides, you're wrong. Most downloaded content is TV shows, shows that are free to air with a few exceptions.

Re:Maybe if we had respectable copyright laws... (4, Insightful)

QuasiSteve (2042606) | about 8 months ago | (#45556407)

While I agree that the copyright term is too long (for that matter, copyright needs to go - distribution rights is what matters), this only has impact on the streaming sites insofar as a user actually saying "because of the ridiculous copyright term, I'm gonna watch this episode of Walking Dead that aired an hour ago."

Otherwise, the copyright term could be 13 years, 5 years, 1 year or even 1 month.. and the streaming sites would still find themselves with practically the same audience; after all, what good is it to watch an episode 1 month later when everybody at the watercooler (or on your facebook or whatever) is already 3 or even 4 episodes further along?

A complaint about the lack of appropriate coverage for a global audience would make more sense.

Re:Maybe if we had respectable copyright laws... (2)

serviscope_minor (664417) | about 8 months ago | (#45556485)

A complaint about the lack of appropriate coverage for a global audience would make more sense.

And an unwillingness to actually take money in exchange for giving a good product. I.e. a file, unecumbered which you can play anywhere like music is now.

Re:Maybe if we had respectable copyright laws... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45556857)

It is probably just me being a paranoid crank, but as the **IAA's of the world keep buying up bleeding heart idiots in governments world wide to promote perpetual copyright I have begun wondering about a few things.

Several noteworthy turns of events have transpired since the "heyday" of internet piracy in the early 90s, back when the "commercial internet" was new. (I am well aware of the net's real age.) Take for instance: The creation of, destruction of, attempted rebirth of, and subsequent failure of Napster.

It was initially created to facilitate the exchange of MP3 and other media files, citing the onerous copyright terms and costs associated with the monopolistic physical media models used by said "industry associations" at the time. In response, the *IAAs did something kinda clever, and galvanized a number of artists to publicly complain about Napster and filesharing in general. However, they also began knob gobbling senators and congressmen like they were paying homage to priapus of old, and before long we had the DMCA.

During that time, Napster was forcibly closed down by legal and government pressures, lots of kids and grannies got really stiff legal fines and in some cases, jail time. Later, Napster "Rose from the ashes" so to speak, now claiming to be fully legit-- apparently trying to be what Amazon and iTunes are now, and failing miserably because they were created by and for those same *IAAs, and it was everything the public didnt like, essentially. Better offerings existed, and people ignored it. The consequence was that people once more voiced their public opposition by voting with thier wallets.

Fast forward a few years, and now we have Netflix. It was a celebrity sensation almost as soon as the doors opened, offering an extensive selection of movies by mail and by internet streaming for a very affordable price point. It sold like fucking hotcakes. Seeing this, the *IAAs and other content producers (and distributors) wanted a slice of the pie, and began what for all the world looks like a concerted effort to sabotage Netflix, refusing to grant them distribution licenses, Pulling licenses that Netflix had already obtained (The STARS content of about 6 years ago, and other times as well, which incidentally coincided with the creation of HBO's own service, HBO Go, and of course, NBC's bologna which was shortly followed by Hulu and Hulu Plus.) Despite these efforts, Netflix's presence in the marketplace dropped the video piracy rates into the goddamn toilet, and to this day still shows growth in stock price and earnings, and continues to offer a beneficial market service.

Netflix clearly demonstrated that the issue with piracy was 2-fold: Availability, and Affordability. Just like the pirates had said since the goddamn beginning.

The response from the *IAAs? "Lifetime of the creator plus 70 years isnt enough! OMG! We need it to be LONGER, with STRONGER ENFORCEMENT PRESSURES!"

Either the *IAAs and their cronies are blind idiots that cant follow the fucking market, (Plausible)-- Or they know full well that they are on the fast track to irrelevancy and are actively conspiring against the public good.

I strongly suspect that it is the latter. I wonder if a case could be made for RICO like investigation of the *IAAs, if proof of such anticompetative collaboration can be unearthed?

If so, I wonder what impact that would have on the copyright mess we are increasingly finding ourselves in.

Streaming sites will always have visitors (2)

tlambert (566799) | about 8 months ago | (#45557433)

I don't think it's so much about Facebook = the global water cooler" (what a terrible analogy! I'm sure Facebook corporate loves it...).

Some people are simply not going to pay to access your content, and you can shut down every channel possible (you can't, it's an impossible to achieve goal from a technology standpoint), and doing that is not going to convert these people into your customers. This is a "look at all the money we COULD be making IF ONLY these people were willing to pay for our product, which we are SURE they WOULD, if the only way to see the next episode of our reality TV series was to pay us for it!" argument. It's an invalid argument.

Re:Streaming sites will always have visitors (1)

QuasiSteve (2042606) | about 8 months ago | (#45558355)

Of course there's always going to be a subset of people who will choose the option where they don't pay at all. However, I do think that the size of the audience for these streaming sites can be reduced greatly if the rights holders decided to make their material available in a superior form.

And by superior form I don't necessarily mean that it has to be 4k with the full DTS tracks and DRM-free - though that would be nice; it could be as simple as just being vastly more convenient. Take Netflix - I like railing against Netflix because I think its scope of offerings is entirely too narrow. At the same time, though, if I wanted to watch some movie that the Netflix app on my Roku tells me they have available and all I need to do is press a button and it plays... I'll sign up for that anytime over having to wait for a torrent download, or hunt down that one 'news' server that lets me get it at 10MB/s (and still have to wait a long time and find out it's a 540p rip in an MP4 container format that VLC manages to choke on).

The more questionable sources can't match that superior experience, simply because it means a lot of (relatively expensive) high bandwidth hosting. This, too, will change in the (far) future.. which is why rights holders should have gotten their sh*t together 8 years ago. But as the saying goes, "The best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago. The second best time is now."

The people who will continue to use the questionable sources should be ignored as they could never be convinced without very strict legislation that by its very nature requires severe impinging on privacy anyway.

Misguided Authority Rules Again (4, Insightful)

Unknown1337 (2697703) | about 8 months ago | (#45556301)

Another ridiculous case where the courts attempt to stop a leak by putting a bucket under it; instead of turning off the water. Whether you agree or not with the operation of the sites is not valid in this argument. The entertainment companies can't stop the real problem so they are targeting anyone who makes it easier to find. Perhaps we should think bigger. Sue the entire US government for supporting the Internet because it helps people find search engines which offer routes to illegal content. Or perhaps bigger yet, sue copper manufacturers or OS development companies for without them there would be no reasonable computer access... Just a farce as far as I'm concerned, they can't win the real battle so they'll sabotage anyone they can get their hands on... the media industry needs to grow up.

No (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45556693)

The content industry needs to grow up ...not gonna happen. Look for example at the war on drugs that the US has undertaken for the last 70+years (yes kiddies, it was alive and well before 'Reefer Madness' in the 1960's), and they have spent billions of dollars and shot thousand of people, and sent millions to jail. And ideology wins. The people with the most money, want to keep making the most money, and so they buy congress people who make laws to their benefactors benefit. "Get me elected and copyright means forever." There is no end to this, not while they can still make money from you, even if it means taking the shirt off your back.

Re:No (2)

ihtoit (3393327) | about 8 months ago | (#45556801)

Reefer Madness was 1936. Jussayin'. :)

Re:Misguided Authority Rules Again (2)

LordWabbit2 (2440804) | about 8 months ago | (#45557549)

It needs to transform itself. I only go to a cinema to watch blockbusters (yeah I'm getting old) and 3D stuff. Otherwise I am happy waiting for a decent DVD rip to download. Why download it if it's on DVD? Because of the stupid ass release zones crap. By the time it's released in my zone I I have watched it already. Why go buy it? Why they are still adhering to that antiquated model I don't know. Just so you know, I would go buy it instead of downloading it. I have a nice collection of my favourite movies. If they released a movie say about 1 month after release worldwide they would make a ton of money. If you haven't gone to watch a movie after it's been on circuit for 1 month then your aren't going to watch it on the big screen.

Video stores are dying. The next death will be the cinema's. Sure you will have some due to the more social aspect of meeting up with friends to watch a movie, but with big ass 3D tv screens and surround sound systems why not watch at home? (yeah I'm getting old).

Re:Misguided Authority Rules Again (2)

Kjella (173770) | about 8 months ago | (#45558451)

Before Gutenberg it was very hard to in principle prevent a monk to "pirate" a book for you. Same goes for after Gutenberg and hiring a printing press to make "pirate" copies for you. I'm not so sure if it changed with the first Xerox machine or not. Let's face it, for most of human history preventing most of the people most of the time has been good enough. Computers kind of blew the lid on that, if you were following other conventions they'd be Weapons of Mass Infringement. It's rather hard to accept the whack-a-mole won't work when it's worked so well in the 500+ last years. I don't expect things to change much until the pre-Internet generation is dead.

With out the overpriced product (1)

future assassin (639396) | about 8 months ago | (#45556335)

there wouldn't be any piracy so maybe the search engines should just block everything to do with Music/Movie entertainment.

Re:With out the overpriced product (1)

future assassin (639396) | about 8 months ago | (#45556785)

Wooo moderated -1 Overrated by a content producer.

"Blocked by region" page (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45556403)

I do think it would be hilarious if a search engine took down the search results, but maintained a "blocked by region" page, listing what country blocked what sites for what reasons. Hey, it's not in the search results, right?

Re:"Blocked by region" page (2)

penix1 (722987) | about 8 months ago | (#45556479)

An even better way was stated above. Remove the links as ordered and while they are at it remove any and all links to the complainant's sites. Turn them into the black hole of the Internet.

I have a crazy idea! (2)

wertigon (1204486) | about 8 months ago | (#45556437)

So, we all know that these sites basicly ammounts to free advertising for their counterparts, right?

The industry believes (publicly atleast) that less piracy means more sales.

Numerous studies however have shown that less piracy means less sales.

So, by pirating we're actually supporting these bastards hell-bent on suing the crap out of us, the consumers.

Therefore, here is my idea; let's stop pirating. Let's stop enjoying mainstream media. Let's stop reccomending it, talking about it - unless it's free to download, of course. Then see how long Hollywood can keep it up.

Let's give them the nightmare they deserve, shall we?

Re:I have a crazy idea! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45556867)

You've stopped taking your meds again haven't you?

Re:I have a crazy idea! (1)

wertigon (1204486) | about 8 months ago | (#45558133)

No, just come to the conclusion that the absolutely fastest way to put Hollywood out of it's misery would be to stop pirating (and thus promoting) their content.

If even 20% of everyone pirating "hollywood" would instead promote free movies, songs and software, Hollywood would be in serious trouble. As it stands however, not even 0.01% do that...

Oh well.

Re:I have a crazy idea! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45560653)

Dude, you don't get it. "More piracy means more sales" is what's known as a rationalization. Nobody intends to take this to its logical conclusion like you have.

People like to think that they're the good guys. That means that the record industry and the film industry and the textbook publishing industry must be the bad guys, fatass leisure suit wearing loudmouths doing lines of coke and getting blow jobs by hookers while they cruise around LA in limos. Every single one of them is just like that. And of course, capitalism doesn't exist, so no band is free to start their own label or join a fair-minded, hard-working indie label. That's slavery, my friend, and we need to put a stop to it. As for those illegal downloads folks have been doing, well y'know they may be technically illegal but they never hurt anybody or put anyone out of work, except maybe for some of those aforementioned hookers and blow types. Not one single honest musician was ever put out of work because y'know these are downloads weren't made INSTEAD OF purchases, but they were made IN ADDITION TO purchases and in fact did actually encourage poster to BUY the artist's records, attend their shows and RECOMMEND them to their friends.

That's why this is a golden age for pop music as you can see by great artists as... well, The Rolling Stones is just one example.

Re:I have a crazy idea! (1)

wertigon (1204486) | about 8 months ago | (#45566797)

So you agree, then, that Hollywood loves the piracy all the while condemning it? That the most important thing is not getting paid for every copy, but getting those copies as widespread as possible?

Re:I have a crazy idea! (1)

John.Banister (1291556) | about 8 months ago | (#45557601)

Start the Free Drama Foundation and produce better content that is available under Creative Commons license. Given the enforced mediocrity of what comes from Hollywood, it shouldn't be hard to do better (if your production is aiming for an intelligent audience).

Re:I have a crazy idea! (1)

wertigon (1204486) | about 8 months ago | (#45558327)

Got an even better idea in mind.

Invent decentralised Facebook with away to distribute your own creations. I'm thinking something like a blog, but with an option to insert a paywall, integrated on top of say, status.net or buddycloud. Make the software as easy to set up as a home router, or why not Wordpress? :)

That ought to create the infrastructure neccessary to beat Hollywood. Would write it myself if I weren't buried knee-deep in work... :P

Re:I have a crazy idea! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45559315)

Got an even better idea in mind.

Invent decentralised Facebook with away to distribute your own creations. I'm thinking something like a blog, but with an option to insert a paywall, integrated on top of say, status.net or buddycloud. Make the software as easy to set up as a home router, or why not Wordpress? :)

That ought to create the infrastructure neccessary to beat Hollywood. Would write it myself if I weren't buried knee-deep in work... :P

A decentralized facebook, it already exists it is call diaspora you can host your own node or sign up on someone else's server, as for hosting you own video sharing there is another project called media goblin to work as a decentralized youtube.

Re:I have a crazy idea! (1)

wertigon (1204486) | about 8 months ago | (#45560095)

Diaspora seems sorta-kinda dead though, Status.net or BuddyCloud seems to me to be a much better solution.

MediaGoblin is based on Status.Net btw, and yes, the only thing left on that project is a paywall module and end-user polish, then it seems to meet most of my concerns. Might invite a friend or two and have a hackathon on it some future weekend, but we shall see... :)

I know what I would do (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45556571)

Depending on how the court order is worded, I would respond to any blocked searches with "We're sorry, your search has been censored by [list of the guilty]".

This is the future. Boot. Face. Police state net. (3, Interesting)

Catbeller (118204) | about 8 months ago | (#45556581)

It will come to every ISP on the planet. The curtain is falling. To monitor sexual thought, "national security", enforcement of eternally granted imaginary property, blasphemy, badthink, The Children, and any other damned thing they can think of, we are going for full metal police state. Ladies and gentlemen, we are in a prison and they are sounding the bell for final lockup. Tech solutions will be temporary at best because they will be declared illegal, or compromised, as soon as they pop up.

-toldyaso

Re:This is the future. Boot. Face. Police state ne (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45559527)

To monitor sexual thought, "national security", enforcement of eternally granted imaginary property, blasphemy, badthink, The Children, and any other damned thing they can think of, we are going for full metal police state.

It's far far worse than that. These Orwellian 1984 police states may actually start busting honest citizens for swiping PHYSICAL GOODS from retail stores!

Re:This is the future. Boot. Face. Police state ne (1)

ruir (2709173) | about 8 months ago | (#45560079)

What I see here is the ISPs working for free, and we the consumers ending up footing the bill. How long until they start doing self censorship or until the pan-european green dam? Will this post be considered "radical"?

Actually, it is quite sensible order (5, Informative)

janoc (699997) | about 8 months ago | (#45556633)

In fact, the order is not as bad as some of the similar ones from the past. The original article is here (in French):
http://www.pcinpact.com/news/84642-la-justice-ordonne-blocage-galaxie-allostreaming.htm [pcinpact.com]

The court ruled that the ISPs and search engines have 15 days to block the sites listed in the article and the order is in force for 12 months afterwards.

However, here is the kicker: the court ruled that the right holders are to pay the bill for the implementation of the blocks, the ISPs are not being asked to do it on their own dime. So carpet bombing the courts with poorly researched URLs to block could get really expensive ...

Re:Actually, it is quite sensible order (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45557487)

Yeah, hopefully the ISP's will charge exorbitant fees to put the blocks in place. Go Greed!

Re:Actually, it is quite sensible order (2)

sixsixtysix (1110135) | about 8 months ago | (#45557833)

they should charge 50% of the supposed losses

A Swift Solution: (1)

kilfire (234728) | about 8 months ago | (#45556673)

Instead of de-listing the sites, why not de-list the content?
We all know that as soon as one domain name is suppressed three others will spring up in its place, and we all know that 90% of all search engine links to any film are links to pirate copies, so the only way to be sure is to de-list all material relating to the movies in question.

No Publicity is Good Publicity, amirite?

oh for (1)

ihtoit (3393327) | about 8 months ago | (#45556787)

well, that blows. As a content creator with two documentaries on the piratebay, that pisses me off.

Re:oh for (1)

cffrost (885375) | about 8 months ago | (#45557561)

well, that blows. As a content creator with two documentaries on the piratebay, that pisses me off.

Post the torrent hashes someplace where people can find them, and they'll remain accessible for as long as online stewardship of the torrents' data are maintained. For greater user convenience, magnet links can be created using the torrent hashes (on properly-constructed/maintained, standards-compliant web sites (e.g., not Slashdot)).

Oh, no, what will people do... (2)

FuzzNugget (2840687) | about 8 months ago | (#45556909)

... when they have to type in "thepiratebay.org" by hand into the address bar?

In Related News... (2)

cffrost (885375) | about 8 months ago | (#45557439)

PARIS — In a bizarre victory for the French imaginary property industry, a French court has ruled that the deck chairs on the RMS Titanic are to be rearranged, effective immediately. In an effort to comply with the court's order, French and US authorities are negotiating the extradition of director/enthusiast James Cameron and his personal submarine — capable of both reaching the Titanic and rearranging her deckchairs via robotic claw — to the icy North Atlantic, where the ill-fated symbol of man's hubris sunk nearly one US-copyright-term-length ago.

Can't Find The Border (1)

Jim Sadler (3430529) | about 8 months ago | (#45558951)

What French courts declare has about as much meaning to me as what a Nigerian Court decides or maybe one of those courts from one of the strange Arab nations that most people don't even know exists. If the French Courts have emotional bowel gas who gives a hoot as long as they keep it to themselves.

Re:Can't Find The Border (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45559895)

If the French Courts have emotional bowel gas who gives a hoot as long as they keep it to themselves.

The French public?

Re:Can't Find The Border (1)

JockTroll (996521) | about 8 months ago | (#45559975)

Will it have more meaning to you when all of Europe follows? Because this is the trend. Essentially the media industry has stated: "the internet WILL obey our command" and the governments all over the EU answered "yes, master".

French Socialist Party = Our future (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45559193)

Just remember that we may think that they are crazy for voting for socialists but the US did the exact same thing except in the disguise of "liberal".

WTF (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45559241)

www.wh.gov is a 'pirate site.'

So what'cha gon'a do? Shoot Obama-kun?

QED

Pirates order (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45559551)

Pirates order ISP to block french sites and government.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

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>