×

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!

Pirate Bay Block Lifted In the Netherlands

timothy posted about 3 months ago | from the blood-in-the-streets dept.

Piracy 118

swinferno writes "The Dutch ISPs Ziggo and XS4all are no longer required to block access to the websites of The Pirate Bay. [Original in Dutch; here's Google's translation.] This has been decided by the court in The Hague. The blockade has proven to be ineffective. The Dutch anti-piracy organization BREIN will have to reimburse legal costs of €326,000. The internet provider XS4ALL has already started lifting the ban. The website of The Pirate Bay was ordered to be blocked by the two major ISPs in January 2012. Recent studies by Amsterdam University and CentERdata showed that this did not reduce the number of downloads from illegal sources. Many people circumvented the blockade."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

118 comments

first block (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46091033)

I would have got a frosty, but this shit site is blocked in my IP range.

Recent studies (5, Funny)

Thanshin (1188877) | about 3 months ago | (#46091067)

Recent studies by Amsterdam University and CentERdata.showed that this did not reduce the number of downloads from illegal sources.

It must be sad to make studies about the obvious.

You go have a beer with friends and they ask you "hey! What are you studying now?"

"I''ve proven that blocking thepiratebay doesn't reduce the number of illegal downloads", you say low voice while fiddling with the peanuts.

And then they look at you as if you were retarded.

Re:Recent studies (5, Interesting)

SecurityTheatre (2427858) | about 3 months ago | (#46091155)

On the other hand, I commend lawmakers and Judges for looking at the data and making a rational decision.

In many places, the politicians enter the discussion with an idea of how things work. Most of the time, they simply refuse to change their mind, damn the evidence.

I tip my hat to the Dutch judges or politicians who reserve judgement, wait for a peer-reviewed or statistically rigorous assessment from an independent body, and then make a reasonable decision from that.

Just because YOU feel it is obvious, obviously many people don't. Good data is the most appropriate counter to ignorant assumptions.

Re:Recent studies (4, Funny)

telchine (719345) | about 3 months ago | (#46091345)

I tip my hat to the Dutch judges or politicians who reserve judgement

Judges that reserve judgement? That's just ridiculous, not to mention selfish!

If I were a judge I'd hand out judgement freely to anyone who asked for it. Hell, even some who didn't! I'd be dedicated to my job!

Re:Recent studies (0)

FatdogHaiku (978357) | about 3 months ago | (#46091901)

I tip my hat to the Dutch judges or politicians who reserve judgement

Judges that reserve judgement? That's just ridiculous, not to mention selfish!

If I were a judge I'd hand out judgement freely to anyone who asked for it. Hell, even some who didn't! I'd be dedicated to my job!

Maybe the whole "Judge not lest you be judged" bit that Jesus dropped on everyone has them a bit on edge...

Re:Recent studies (2)

xevioso (598654) | about 3 months ago | (#46092077)

This, I always thought, was always rather a silly and pithy quote from Jesus. As Christian theology makes clear, you will be judged regardless of if you do or do not judge. So maybe it makes sense to judge on occasion, just for the hell of it.

For example, I'm relatively certain that at the end of days, Harry Connick, Jr. and Jennifer Lopez will be judged for their talents of lack thereof, regardless of the fact that they were judges on American Idol.

Re:Recent studies (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46094635)

You won't get this until you seriously meditate about this, e.g. on shrooms or LSD.

Re:Recent studies (1)

mcgrew (92797) | about 3 months ago | (#46096255)

This, I always thought, was always rather a silly and pithy quote from Jesus. As Christian theology makes clear, you will be judged regardless of if you do or do not judge.

Christian theology doesn't teach that you are judged for your sins. It teaches that you're judged on your good works, your sins have already been paid for in blood. The more good you do on Earth, the more your reward will be in heaven. "And he looked up, and saw the rich men casting their gifts into the treasury. And he saw also a certain poor widow casting in thither two mites. And he said, Of a truth I say unto you, that this poor widow hath cast in more than they all:
For all these have of their abundance cast in unto the offerings of God: but she of her penury hath cast in all the living that she had."

This is the real meaning of the parable of the talents. Just going to church doesn't cut it. If that's all you do for God you've buried your talent, while the guy feeding the poor in Africa has the ten talents.

Re:Recent studies (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46091173)

Doesn't matter really, they have to repay the legal costs. Its a step in the right direction.

Re:Recent studies (-1, Troll)

smooth wombat (796938) | about 3 months ago | (#46091299)

It must be sad to make studies about the obvious.

That people feel they are entitled to steal someone else's work and not compensate that person (or group)? Yes, it is sad that a study needs to state the obvious

Re:Recent studies (1)

thaylin (555395) | about 3 months ago | (#46091389)

How do you steal something that does not physically exist?

Re:Recent studies (1)

Bengie (1121981) | about 3 months ago | (#46091505)

They use the Men in Black Memory Eraser after copying your ideas and destroy all back-ups and copies.

Re:Recent studies (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46091631)

You appear to be confused, for that you want Google+ Cloud Backup...

Re:Recent studies (1)

mwvdlee (775178) | about 3 months ago | (#46098205)

Why did you just do that?
The MIB movies won't be as much fun without the Memory Eraser, now that you've pirated it for your comment.

Steal means to take and permantly deprive.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46095641)

...so, whatever the crime here, it clearly isn't stealing.

Whether something physically exists or not is not the issue. You have to take with the intention of permanently depriving.

So, I presume, I could steal your girl-friends love...?

Re:Steal means to take and permantly deprive.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46096599)

So, I presume, I could steal your girl-friends love...?

Happens to me all the time.

I have yet to take the other guy to court over it though.

I think even if I did, it would not be taken nearly as seriously as if I had illegally saved off some piece of music I thought was pleasant.

Re:Recent studies (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46091457)

Here's a tiny violin, feel free to record yourself playing it and release it as a single. I will download it off a torrent.

Re:Recent studies (4, Insightful)

Opportunist (166417) | about 3 months ago | (#46091469)

You mean like hijacking a common folk tale and copyrighting it forever?

I think it's sad that a study about this is really necessary.

Re:Recent studies (1)

hawguy (1600213) | about 3 months ago | (#46091585)

It must be sad to make studies about the obvious.

That people feel they are entitled to steal someone else's work and not compensate that person (or group)? Yes, it is sad that a study needs to state the obvious

Or that when presented with a paid option that is less convenient and more restricted than the free option, they'll take the free option. If there were a legitimate and reasonably priced download service for non-DRM protected movies, then there would be less incentive to pirate movies, and the industry would have a leg to stand on when they whine that downloaders are ruining their business.

I usually buy used disks from amazon and rip them, while if I wanted to, I could download a movie torrent in a few hours -- not everyone is willing to place an order, wait a week for the disk to arrive and then rip it when they could just download it for free. Why pay more for less?

Re:Recent studies (5, Insightful)

Shalaska (1964046) | about 3 months ago | (#46091639)

Exactly, in most cases piracy is a indication of a service problem. It is amazing the number of times I have and have seen others have to pirate a game I already own, just because the DRM-copy fails to function as advertised due to draconian DRM restrictions. Furthermore the pirated copy doesn't require things such as disks in the CD drive which I would rather not have to look for. On the other hand all of the games I have gotten off of Steam, although using Steam's DRM system, I have not had to pirate because their system just works for me.

Whenever a pirated copy is better then the legal copy, there is something wrong with the legal copy.

Re:Recent studies (1)

JWSmythe (446288) | about 3 months ago | (#46092755)

I think anyone who's gamed for very long has used the "no-cd" or other "pirate" hacks to fix annoyances. That or they've "pirated" a game because their cd/dvd was scratched so they couldn't reinstall it.

I say "they" because I'd never do any such thing. :)

Re:Recent studies (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46094609)

That people feel they are entitled to steal someone else's work and not compensate that person (or group)?

The CEO at my workplace demands that we work overtime, but refuses to pay for it. If you won't work it, you're fired.

I work in TV...

Re:Recent studies (1)

mcgrew (92797) | about 3 months ago | (#46096235)

That people feel they are entitled to steal someone else's work and not compensate that person (or group)?

Steal? Sorry, you just outed yourself as an MPAA shill or a moron (or as the moderation says, a troll). If you're raped, do you scream murder? Let me educate you on the difference between copyright infringement and stealing.

Copyright infringement: you upload an MPAA movie tracker to a tracker service. Note that downloading it is neither illegal nor immoral. Upload that movie and if you're caught, it will cost you thousands of dollars. Nobody has lost anything; the copyright holder still has his copyright. Nothing was lost. And in fact, if it's an indie title without shitloads of marketing, piracy can MAKE money for the artists.

Stealing: You shoplift a DVD from WalMart. WalMart is out the cost of that DVD you stole. If you're caught, it's a misdemeanor and a few hundred dollar fine.

BTW, note my sig. I encourage you to pirate my book. It's free marketing, nobody's going to buy a book they've never heard of by an author they've never read.

Re:Recent studies (1)

Kjella (173770) | about 3 months ago | (#46091317)

Well, if you're being paid good money for stating the obvious you should have a pretty steady job. There's worse things to do for a living...

Re:Recent studies (4, Insightful)

Sique (173459) | about 3 months ago | (#46091391)

Actually, it can be quite revealing to make studies about the obvious. Obvious means that we can easily come up with a good narrative about what we see and what we should expect, but that narrative does not necessarily connect somehow to what really happens. The often cited example is that of Newton's apple, where it is obvious that it's the Earth pulling down the apple, but it's not what really happens.

So yes: Study the obvious thoroughly, and you pretty soon lose any idea about "obviousness".

Re:Recent studies (1)

CCarrot (1562079) | about 3 months ago | (#46093733)

Actually, it can be quite revealing to make studies about the obvious. Obvious means that we can easily come up with a good narrative about what we see and what we should expect, but that narrative does not necessarily connect somehow to what really happens. The often cited example is that of Newton's apple, where it is obvious that it's the Earth pulling down the apple, but it's not what really happens.

So yes: Study the obvious thoroughly, and you pretty soon lose any idea about "obviousness".

Also, fun fact, say the word "obvious" enough times and it starts to lose all sense of meaning, it just turns into a bunch of sounds...actually, that works with pretty much any word. Works better with multi-syllable words, though :)

Re:Recent studies (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46091399)

"I''ve proven that blocking thepiratebay doesn't reduce the number of illegal downloads", you say low voice while fiddling with the peanuts.

And then they look at you as if you were retarded.

That is why academics tend to rephrase such studies into something more akin to "I have proven that access limiting centers for non-legal redistribution of information is ineffective."
If they don't understand your statement they can't question the validity.

Re:Recent studies (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46091441)

But then you say, it was 10 minutes work for 1000 Euros. And they nod approvingly.

Re:Recent studies (4, Funny)

c (8461) | about 3 months ago | (#46091595)

And then they look at you as if you were retarded.

... and yet, it's far better than saying "I've been thinking of going into politics".

Re:Recent studies (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46091619)

Here in the UK, the pirate bay is largely blocked. of couse there are ways around it, but they are technical.

Virtually every casual pirate of years past that i knew, if you ask them now, has no idea how to download the latest release movies off the web now that TPB is effectively blocked in the UK.

Anecdotally, anyway, it would seem that the block is effective. not 100% effective, but somewhat effective. my 'sample' includes people in their 20s and 30s who are otherwise technically savvy. They also dont particularly know where to get the latest mp3s any more.

I dont know what the Netherlands study did or did not do. I also dont know what the dutch exact policy is. But I will tell you this: i'd be very very skeptical of any study which would claim to show that the recent bans in the UK have not reduced the rate of piracy. Unlike you, however, I won't be presumptuous.

Effective at what? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46091897)

Because the sales and revenues are still tanking.

Either the losses are not due to piracy, the efforts are ineffective, or these losses are nonexistent.

Re:Recent studies (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46093393)

Anecdotally, anyway, it would seem that the block is effective. not 100% effective, but somewhat effective.

I don't know ... Just moved to the UK a couple of weeks ago. A quick google search for how to access the site in the UK had me up and running pretty dang quickly. I'd say 7 minutes to find a workaround is not very effective.

Perhaps... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46095677)

...your British friends are just not very pushy or bright?

Or perhaps they have been told that they ought to say "Sorry!" and wait in a queue to get served....?

Re:Recent studies (1)

mwvdlee (775178) | about 3 months ago | (#46098189)

It's completely obvious the earth is flat.
No need to study that at all.
It'll only make you look like a retard to your beer-buddies.

Study is necessary because there's always a slight chance that the obvious isn't actually the truth.

Intersting (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46091077)

This is a pretty interesting decision.

Regardless of what one thinks about copyright, forcing someone to do something ineffective to prevent it is just a waste of resources. Even if it is effective if the cost is greater than the benefit it could be questionable.
It seems that it would be reasonable that the copyright holder pays the cost to enforce the copyright, otherwise an entitled copyright holder might request that even symbolic measures should be taken at completely unreasonable costs

Re:Intersting (5, Interesting)

houstonbofh (602064) | about 3 months ago | (#46091121)

It seems that it would be reasonable that the copyright holder pays the cost to enforce the copyright, otherwise an entitled copyright holder might request that even symbolic measures should be taken at completely unreasonable costs

Now if someone can just do this with spurrious takedown requests. When there is no cost to it, there is no reason to stop.

Re:Intersting (4, Insightful)

DickBreath (207180) | about 3 months ago | (#46091583)

In addition to considering whether a measure is effective, it is reasonable to consider whether it is the ISP's job or Google's job or anyone else's job to police copyright infringement.

The ISP's job is to deliver and route packets. Period.

I mentioned Google, simply because the RIAA-holes also believe that it is Google's job to police copyright infringement as well as ISPs job.

Re:Intersting (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46094441)

The ISP's job is to deliver and route packets. Period.

I mentioned Google, simply because the RIAA-holes also believe that it is Google's job to police copyright infringement as well as ISPs job.

The "RIAA-holes" seem to believe that copyright enforcement is everybody's job but their own.

yeah whatever (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46095085)

Oh wah. Someone wants me to pay for content that somebody had to write, develop, edit and produce. Poor me! And then the laws that protect artists! Those rich artists and their capricious cohorts who hold cameras and lights ... and microphones !

Those guys are evil and should never be paid! Free market rules!

Seriously, what's with artists those guys are such under achieving, douchey, whiney rich assholes!

An unexpected burst of common sense. (2)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | about 3 months ago | (#46091231)

A ruling by Judge Obvious, and his assistant Sarcastic Clerk.

Re:An unexpected burst of common sense. (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46091661)

You think that this ruling was common sense? It's very odd to issue a ruling based on whether blocking TPB was effective or ineffective. The only question a judge should ponder is whether the block was justified legally.

Re:An unexpected burst of common sense. (3, Interesting)

jxander (2605655) | about 3 months ago | (#46092165)

TPB does have some legitimate uses.

If blocking it causes no impact on the illegal uses, while hampering the legal ones... then it is wiser to not block it. Even if there were no legal reasons, blocking TPB costs resources; time and money. Spending those resources for zero gain is a fools errand.

It would be nice if we had a perfect set of rules that could adequately and fairly moderate every possible situation, but we don't. So we appoint people to make judgements on a case-by-case basis. We call them judges, and they've made a wise decision here.

Re:An unexpected burst of common sense. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46092205)

Blocking the pirate bay was a punishment (I don't know who they are punishing for what crime, since it is legal to download in The Netherlands).
Judges should use correct force of punishment for the crime.
Since the punishment is completely ineffective the Judge will need to look for an alternative and effective punishment.

I wonder... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46091243)

How much does a pirate bay block weigh?

I bet it's pretty heavy...

326 euros? (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46091325)

I don't care how they format numbers in the Netherlands. We use the comma here.

Is it too much to ask that the numbers be reformatted so that they'll be less confusing to US readers? Dates, temperatures, and numbers should be displayed in the format most familiar to readers in the US. Could not one of the esteemed editors perhaps do that? This is a US-centric website, after all.

Re:326 euros? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46091359)

I'm from the US and I had no problem reading it. Thanks for contributing to the perception of the dumb American.

Re:326 euros? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46092805)

You used context and prior knowledge to interpret the number correctly. This does not always work.

Re:326 euros? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46093491)

Um, how would it ever work without context and prior knowledge? You're going to magically be able to read it without pulling forth a little effort to learn?

Re:326 euros? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46094827)

It would work if we had a worldwide standard for writing numbers.

Re:326 euros? (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about 3 months ago | (#46091537)

Well, after perusing the frontpage, I can only say that it's about 50:50, and considering the news I'd have to guess that most research and sane judgements are happening abroad while the US make the headlines for lying national security heads and schools teaching fairy tales as facts.

I dunno if I'd really wanna draw attention to that if I was from the US...

Re:326 euros? (1)

Arker (91948) | about 3 months ago | (#46091629)

They use a comma in the rest of the world too. They just put it in a different place. One hundred thousand and 90/100 is written 100.000,00. Just the opposite of what you are used to. Takes a fraction of a second to get used to.

I second the other poster, knock it off, you are just making Americans look like idiots and as one I am not amused.

Re: 326 euros? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46091855)

As a citizen of the USA, one of these is definitely more readily understandable, and it isn't the first one:

"EUR 326.000"
"326,000 Euros ($445,414)"

Really, you think it makes Americans sound stupid when we prefer to use and read the units that are familiar to us? A simple conversion by one editor would mean that thousands of readers wouldn't need to.

Re: 326 euros? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46091981)

You definitely sound stupid.

Re: 326 euros? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46092061)

Drop the "we." I don't give a crap which format it's in. I can read both just fine. If you are gonna whine it's not in your "preferred" format, do the rest of us Americans a favorite and don't include us. We're not as self-centered as you.

Re: 326 euros? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46092071)

Really, you think it makes Americans sound stupid when we prefer to use and read the units that are familiar to us?

Yes. That's exactly what we are saying, and it's true.

Re: 326 euros? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46093565)

That's not really the same thing as your original complain, is it?

I don't use Euros every day either, so I can fully understand why it would have be nice, if the amount had also been specified in "a currency I'm more familiar with". (I'm of course referring to BTC. After all, it has been more than 5 seconds since the last Bitcoin story, so it's about time.)

But your original complain about not being able to parse "EUR 326.000" really do make you sound like an idiot.

Re: 326 euros? (1)

CCarrot (1562079) | about 3 months ago | (#46093855)

Really, you think it makes Americans sound stupid when we prefer to use and read the units that are familiar to us? A simple conversion by one editor would mean that thousands of readers wouldn't need to.

Hang on, I'm still busy calculating how many inches are in 5.5 miles...

Perhaps 'teh amurrikan way' is not always the best way?

Re:326 euros? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46093309)

One hundred thousand and 90/100 is written 100.000,00.

... if you want to be off by 0,9.

Re:326 euros? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46092631)

I have to ask, what formats are those?

I mean day to day the US uses Fahrenheit but doesn't the scientific community in the US use SI?

How is this site "US Centric" and also be reporting on an event in the Netherlands (which happens to be non-US)?

You had a few options:

- Ignore the article
- Adapt to the formats used
- Complain

Good to see you made the most sensible choice.

Re: 326 euros? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46092849)

I have to ask, what formats are those?

Fahrenheit, dd/mm/yyyy, miles, pounds, dollars, etc. We use the dot for the decimal separator and the comma for digit grouping. Etc.

doesn't the scientific community in the US use SI?

Kelvins, you mean?

How is this site "US Centric" and also be reporting on an event in the Netherlands (which happens to be non-US)?

Slashdot is based in the US and as far as I know most of its readership has always been in the US. The story is being reported here because it's tech-related and it's news here in the US even if it happened in the Netherlands. Hope that helps.

You had a few options:

- Ignore the article
- Adapt to the formats used
- Complain

Good to see you made the most sensible choice.

You'll note that the summary has been corrected and now reads "€326,000". Wonder if that would have happened if I hadn't complained?

Re: 326 euros? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46094537)

Well, I for one would like to take the opportunity to say thank goodness that millions of Americans have been spared the horror, agony and indignity of seeing a period where a comma would've been expected. I shall sleep soundly tonight.

Re: 326 euros? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46094651)

So you complained to get it wrong? Euro sign isn't placed in the front of the number.

Re: 326 euros? (1)

edittard (805475) | about 3 months ago | (#46097779)

We use the dot for the decimal separator and the comma for digit grouping.

Scientific practice is to use a space, preferably half-width.

Re:326 euros? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46094781)

This is a US-centric website, after all.

WTF r u talking about, punk? This ain't Fox News and the internet knows no borders. Please go throw away your computer, cancel your internet subscription, and go watch TV.

the measurements were indirect. (1)

nimbius (983462) | about 3 months ago | (#46091333)

By taking a sampling of different pubs in the Netherlands researchers found the increase in phrases like 'Madeas Witness Protection stole 90 minutes of my fucking life' and 'Was ghostrider seriously intended to be that awful?' indicated the blockade may have shortcomings.

its failure was confirmed when sightings of the phrases 'I dont understand why michael bay keeps making Transformer movies' and 'Is Jayden Smith some kind of anagram for helicopter parenting?'

Re:the measurements were indirect. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46093675)

By taking a sampling of different pubs in the Netherlands researchers found the increase in phrases like 'Madeas Witness Protection stole 90 minutes of my fucking life' and 'Was ghostrider seriously intended to be that awful?' indicated the blockade may have shortcomings.

Odd. To me it would have indicated that they speak English in the Netherlands or at least in the pubs. I find that very surprising.

I also find it surprising that they have pubs in the Netherlands. I thought it was all coffee shops.

Someone should research this...

Chances of this happening in the UK? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46091541)

None.

They'll keep on pissing into the wind.

Um.. (0)

colin_faber (1083673) | about 3 months ago | (#46091563)

There.is an interesting.use of periods.in. this summery

Re:Um.. (3, Funny)

jones_supa (887896) | about 3 months ago | (#46091713)

Temperature 6 C, light rain. Not that summery in Netherlands right now.

Re:Um.. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46092389)

Temperature 6 C, light rain. Not that summery in Netherlands right now.

Argh!!!
Don't you know you're supposed to use the temperature scale based on Gabriël Fahrenheit's wife's armpit?1?!1
This is an American-centric website you know. They might throw another hissy fit, just like the one about the numerical format in TFS.

Still 6 C is a bit on the high side; I have it from an authoritative source that in some places the crocuses are already peeking their heads above the ground (poor crocuses).

Re: Um.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46093159)

I expect a higher degree of quality and consistency from the summaries than I expect from the comments. Commenters can use whatever fucking scale they want.

Re: Um.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46097997)

I expect a higher degree of quality and consistency from the summaries than I expect from the comments.

Ah, I see you are new here.

On the down side... (4, Interesting)

QuasiSteve (2042606) | about 3 months ago | (#46091593)

On the down side...
1. Brein has already put out a bit of newsfluff saying that they're planning to appeal.
2. If this stands, Brein and others will simply put this on the scales to tip in favor of making downloading illegal* - something that the EU says NL should be doing in the first place; NL is one of the few countries where downloading of movies/music/TV series is legal (uploading is illegal, as is downloading of software, etc.) That in turn could lead to a 3-strikes type law (Even though the one in France fails miserably because 1. people avoid getting caught and 2. even when caught, rarely do people actually get cut off.. so it's all bark and no bite.) or direct targeting of downloaders.

* Within the context of 'piracy'. Obviously you're welcome to download the front page of slashdot, or a linux distribution, view whatever you want on YouTube, etc. etc.

Re:On the down side... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46091775)

> * Within the context of 'piracy'. Obviously you're welcome to download the front page of slashdot, or a linux distribution, view whatever you want on YouTube, etc. etc.

No you wouldnt, not after all the effort the spend convincing everyone that downloading anything is illegal.....

Re:On the down side... (2)

QuasiSteve (2042606) | about 3 months ago | (#46092219)

No you wouldnt, not after all the effort the spend convincing everyone that downloading anything is illegal

Despite the widespread hatred against them, Brein, Stichting Thuiskopie and others don't really do the "downloading is illegal!", and their websites actually make fairly clear what the law says can and cannot be done legally.

They can be faulted for many things, but not for any perceived "omg they're trying to make downloading linux illegal!"

Re:On the down side... (1)

yakumo.unr (833476) | about 3 months ago | (#46094123)

France actually dropped the bans from the 3 strike law in July last year, and only fines remain.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/tech... [bbc.co.uk]

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2... [theregister.co.uk]
"the government's Constitutional Council on Friday ruled that portion of the much-criticized law to be unconstitutional."

Re:On the down side... (1)

QuasiSteve (2042606) | about 3 months ago | (#46094793)

Yeah, and even those were rarely issued. The law had, and has, no teeth. If tomorrow they made downloading in NL illegal, but all I'd get would be strongly worded e-mails telling me to stop doing it, and I knew full-well that nothing would ever come of it, I'd add a filter to auto-delete those e-mails and continue downloading. Heck, it'd become a sport on several forums to see who could get the most such e-mails.

Hahahahaha Hahahaahaha Haaaahahahahahaha! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46091675)

BTW: I live in Amsterdam.

Re:Hahahahaha Hahahaahaha Haaaahahahahahaha! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46093751)

BTW: I live in Amsterdam.

We already knew that based on your subject. You're obviously high.

Re: Hahahahaha Hahahaahaha Haaaahahahahahaha! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46094139)

He could've lived in Denver and been two different kinds of high.

Smells like a honeypot (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46091895)

Both these ISPs are about to be acquired by an American company called Liberty Global.
They've also just bought up the biggest Belgian cable internet provider.
Don't believe the hype.

Stupid organisations (2)

chthon (580889) | about 3 months ago | (#46092125)

Dutch BREIN and Belgium's BAF, two stupid vampyric, leaching organisations, with obnoxious music and an idiot commercial at the beginning of all DVD's sold here in Holland and Belgium.

I find it heartening that BREIN needs to pay the legal costs.

Completely ineffective (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46092329)

Finally! The ban was indeed completely ineffective and the block has been removed at at least one other provider as well. There were so many alternatives, I never had any problem finding a different source for a download, barely noticed it if at all, so it certainly made no sense to keep it in place.

I never understood the reason for it in the first place. Downloading is legal in the Netherlands and we even pay an additional charge on any recording media just to help compensate the effects for the industry, so why the ban? Personally, I buy many dvds after watching a torrent of something that I think I might like. Other stuff I download, but never watch. There has been no decrease in the number of movies I go see in the movie theater or that I buy physically. I just don't watch any tv at all.

As has been stated here many times, the calculations copyright owners flaunt when trying so prove how much they have lost in revenue are probably way, way off and they should just move with the times instead of trying to hold on to the past. As has been stated here slightly less often, there is no damage to the economy either. People still spend their money, just in different ways.

AND? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46093473)

And who is responsible to reimburse TPB for their lost revenue in that time?

If a bank robber was before a judge don't you think the penalties would outweigh the rewards as a incentive for that bank robber and others to not do that crime? Don't you think those responsible for putting TPB out of business all that time should have a punishment fitting to the expenses they caused, plus the profits they may have gained as a result of that?

Re:AND? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46093923)

Fuck the Pirate Bay.
I'm glad the ban is lifted. It doesn't belong in a civilized country. I'm glad those fuckers at BREIN get to pay through the nose. But seriously? TPB is staffed by a bunch of retards, fuckups and scumbags.

I'm celebrating our newfound freedom by further ignoring TPB.

Yay! ? (2)

nurb432 (527695) | about 3 months ago | (#46094789)

Not sure if this is good or bad in the long run. Its good the order was lifted but it may pave the way for more invasive ways to restrict your access to the net and monitor where you go...

so..what will the future bring? (1)

psy0rz (666238) | about 3 months ago | (#46096953)

i fear for a future where lobby groups will "convince" governments or agencys like the NSA, to get the download history of all those copyright-"terrorist".

they are already recording all the metadata..its only a really small step from where we are now, to everyone-is-a-criminal.

Re:so..what will the future bring? (1)

durin (72931) | about 3 months ago | (#46097719)

Everyone is already a criminal. It's just a matter of finding what crime they're guilty of.

Fuck google translation (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 months ago | (#46097913)

Can we get a real translation?

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>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...