×

Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

City of London Police Take Down Proxy Service Over Piracy Concerns

samzenpus posted about 4 months ago | from the shutting-it-down dept.

United Kingdom 133

Mr_Silver writes TorrentFreak is reporting that the City of London Police (a private police force in government-backed livery with an authority that does not go beyond the corporate-controlled City of London area — so not to be confused with the Metropolitan Police) has seized control of a number of domains including Immunicity, a general proxy server that was set up as a censorship circumvention tool. This appears to be their next step after placing banner adverts on websites.

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

Corporate Cops, eh? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47620639)

Do they have a Corporate Congress yet?

Do any natural persons own any property in the City anymore?

They are the STORM TROOPERS ! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47620717)

Instead of "corporate cops" they are STORM TROOPERS to ensure that everyone's privacy will no longer be hidden away from the corporate prying eyes

Those proxy servers are there to help people from authoritarian countries in circumventing censorship - and the action of the STORM TROOPERS means the civil liberties of those people be damned !

Re:Corporate Cops, eh? (4, Informative)

AC-x (735297) | about 4 months ago | (#47621225)

Do they have a Corporate Congress yet?

Yes [wikipedia.org] , corporations with premises in the City of London are given a number of votes in local elections based on the number of employees they have.

Re:Corporate Cops, eh? (2)

rjstanford (69735) | about 4 months ago | (#47621711)

In fairness its been that way in one form or another since the 17th century.

Re:Corporate Cops, eh? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47622545)

So we can do whatever bad thing we want as long as it has been going on for a long time?

Re:Corporate Cops, eh? (4, Informative)

donscarletti (569232) | about 4 months ago | (#47621229)

The City of London Police have their powers, policy and jurisdiction defined by the Police Act of 1996, the same as the Metropolitan Police. Their powers come from the House of Commons, not the Guildhall.

Christmas (4, Funny)

Thanshin (1188877) | about 4 months ago | (#47620659)

I don't want a lot for Christmas
There is just one thing I need
I don't care about the presents
Underneath the Christmas tree

I just want them for my own
More than they could ever know
Make my wish come true
All I want for Christmas is
My own bloody private police force!

Rome would be so proud (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47620671)

Of what Londinium has become.

Re:Rome would be so proud (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47620691)

The City of London Police (who are proper police officers and subject to the same rules etc as any other officer and not a 'private' force) have a remit from the government to tackle certain specific types of crime on a national/pan national basis.
They have a unit that is responsible for this sort of stuff so it does not surprise me that they have done this.

We need to take back sovereignty of the City (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47621233)

City of London is not part of the UK, it has its own electoral system and its own government.

That police force answers to the City of London Corporation.

That police force is threatening the sovereignty of the UK and wider world.

So we need to take back the City of London from the corporate entity that controls it, and bring that police force back within the wider laws of the UK.

Re:We need to take back sovereignty of the City (1, Troll)

kiwipom (920352) | about 4 months ago | (#47621473)

City of London is not part of the UK, it has its own electoral system and its own government. Wrong! That police force answers to the City of London Corporation. No it doesn't! That police force is threatening the sovereignty of the UK and wider world. It isn't in anyway! So we need to take back the City of London from the corporate entity that controls it, and bring that police force back within the wider laws of the UK. You are a moron

Re:We need to take back sovereignty of the City (1)

fnj (64210) | about 4 months ago | (#47621565)

I am afraid shouting "Wrong!" and calling parent poster a "moron" do nothing to refute his claims. It would be interesting to have an actual dispassionate discussion of the matter, because for example the Wikipedia article does very little to illuminate it, nor is the official website very illuminating. From what little I can determine, the parent poster APPEARS to accurately describe the basics.

Re:Rome would be so proud (2)

Chrisq (894406) | about 4 months ago | (#47620883)

Rome would be so proud .. Of what Londinium has become.

The Romans would even understand the Mayor's ramblings [telegraph.co.uk]

Re:Rome would be so proud (1)

Applehu Akbar (2968043) | about 4 months ago | (#47622891)

Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur.

Re:Rome would be so proud (5, Insightful)

mindwhip (894744) | about 4 months ago | (#47621061)

Wow... where is the option to vote the summary and TFA as troll?

Seriously. They full of misrepresentation (CoLP is just another area force like all the others in the UK. CoLP is NOT a private force. The fact that corporations vote in CoL is irrelevant here as voters have no direct influence on the force - policy comes from national level. CoLP are national specialists on this kind of 'soft' crime and are the force responsible for national level investigations of this type. Seizures would have needed to have been court sanctioned/ordered and as is often the case with ongoing investigations where the details would be sealed until said investigation was completed. The fact that large scale copyright infringement is a crime was made by the elected national government and not by the CoLP.)

Wilfully continuing to aid criminals after you are aware of providing such aid (except on threat of personal safety) is in itself a crime in the UK.

ICANN etc have operations in the UK and are therefore have legal responsibility/requirement to comply with such court orders in the country they operate in. This is identical to the many cases where a USA court orders extradition for some minor thing on a non US company director just because they have a sales/import office with 5 staff at some container port in Florida.

Re:Rome would be so proud (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47621267)

Wilfully continuing to aid criminals after you are aware of providing such aid (except on threat of personal safety) is in itself a crime in the UK.

Government censorship is never okay.

But thankfully, this is futile. As always, they'll lose the censorship war, and they can't stop copyright infringement.

This is identical to the many cases where a USA court orders extradition for some minor thing on a non US company director just because they have a sales/import office with 5 staff at some container port in Florida.

It may be identical, but does anyone with a brain truly believe that disgusting things like this are okay?

Re:Rome would be so proud (1)

fnj (64210) | about 4 months ago | (#47621595)

If the City of London Police are "like all others", can you elaborate with citations just what authority they report to?

Re:Rome would be so proud (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47622359)

You're right that they aren't a "private" force. But they actually don't get court orders for their take-downs. It is one of the most notorious and dangerous aspects of their entire anti-piracy program. ICANN has an obligation, but all ICANN operators must abide by the basic rule that a court order be issued from the residing jurisdiction. There's been instances where ICANN companies that took action without a court order were sanctioned by ICANN. The CoLP simply throw their weight just as any copyright troll would.

Let's see if I get this right... (4, Interesting)

thieh (3654731) | about 4 months ago | (#47620683)

The police, who wants to fight piracy which is claimed to be happening by the corporations, go bust servers with neither warrants nor court orders. What exactly are making these claims legit enough to skip due process? Or is due process some sort of privilege that we shouldn't expect them in the first place?

Re:Let's see if I get this right... (3, Insightful)

Camael (1048726) | about 4 months ago | (#47620719)

The police, who wants to fight piracy which is claimed to be happening by the corporations, go bust servers with neither warrants nor court orders. What exactly are making these claims legit enough to skip due process? Or is due process some sort of privilege that we shouldn't expect them in the first place?

They're probably getting away with it because nobody is challenging them AFAIK.

Re:Let's see if I get this right... (3, Informative)

lagomorpha2 (1376475) | about 4 months ago | (#47620727)

The police, who wants to fight piracy which is claimed to be happening by the corporations, go bust servers with neither warrants nor court orders. What exactly are making these claims legit enough to skip due process? Or is due process some sort of privilege that we shouldn't expect them in the first place?

Same legal reasoning that allows police to beat up anyone they feel like and generally make thugs of themselves - no one seems to actually be willing to stop them.

Due process ? (0, Troll)

Taco Cowboy (5327) | about 4 months ago | (#47620737)

You still believe that due process is still practised in England or America or France ??

Welcome to the REAL WORLD !!

Re:Let's see if I get this right... (-1, Troll)

Jawnn (445279) | about 4 months ago | (#47620843)

The police, who wants to fight piracy which is claimed to be happening by the corporations, go bust servers with neither warrants nor court orders. What exactly are making these claims legit enough to skip due process? Or is due process some sort of privilege that we shouldn't expect them in the first place?

Due process? Who do you think you are? Some citizen with some kind of rights? You are our customers, and you will take what we give you, and like it.

Warmest Regards,

Your Corporate Overlords

Re:Let's see if I get this right... (4, Informative)

infolation (840436) | about 4 months ago | (#47621113)

Only if you read the summary, and not the actual reported news. They arrested [police.uk] the proxy server owner. That needs a warrant of arrest. There's no 'skipping due process' for the police, or the charges don't stand when the person arrives in court.

PIPCU arrest Nottingham man believed to be running proxy server

The Police Intellectual Property Crime Unit has arrested a man in Nottingham on suspicion of running an ‘umbrella’ website providing access to other websites which have been subject to legal blocking orders.

The 20-year-old man was questioned by detectives from the City of London Police unit at a local police station before later being released on bail.

The operation, supported by the Federation Against Copyright Theft, uncovered evidence of the proxy server providing access to 36 other websites that had been blocked for offering illegal or infringing content. The domain names of these sites have been voluntarily handed to police and the related web pages now show a police warning banner.

The arrest is part of the City of London Police unit’s ongoing drive to clamp down on websites providing access to illegal or infringing content, known as Operation Creative. Last week it was announced that PIPCU are replacing advertising on copyright infringing websites with official force banners, warning the user that the site is currently under criminal investigation.

Re:Let's see if I get this right... (2)

MrL0G1C (867445) | about 4 months ago | (#47621365)

I'm not aware of any law saying proxies are illegal in the UK. I doubt this man will be convicted, CPS (crown prosecution service who decide what goes to court) shouldn't advance this.

To specifically state on a proxy service that you can access sites blocked in the same country as that service is a little dim though.

Re:Let's see if I get this right... (2)

jeIIomizer (3670945) | about 4 months ago | (#47621571)

To specifically state on a proxy service that you can access sites blocked in the same country as that service is a little dim though.

It's simply the truth. Is truth illegal?

Re:Let's see if I get this right... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47621721)

It's simply the truth. Is truth illegal?

Yes. Now go buy something, peasant.

Re:Let's see if I get this right... (1)

AmiMoJo (196126) | about 4 months ago | (#47621423)

I wonder what law they are citing for the arrest? The blocking order was a civil issue directed at certain ISPs. Some ISPs ignored it because they were not named in the order. Non-ISPs, such as VPN providers and proxy server operators, were not required to block access either.

How does this affect individual users? If I use a VPN to bypass the blockade, is that now an arrestable offence?

Seems like they are just trying to harass the site operator into shutting it down.

this shit is about (1)

strstr (539330) | about 4 months ago | (#47620689)

do we want someone to be able to control the conduct of private citizens and organizations or do we not want? also who in their right mind truly believes each and every square foot of he world should be controlled by an organization that isn't the public, who's only purpose is to circumvent private individuals conduct enabling someone else to force their ideals and control onto them?

today's world, we shouldn't have to follow someone elses rule and I think it's time we rose up to fight government having any authority to regulate private citizens business. and this means taking away governments right to seed us messages, to confiscate our computers, to regular what people can and cannot say or do, etc.

I am generally only for laws that directly allow the protection of life but only as far as to prevent an actual murder or something. nothing else.

Stop forcing YOUR ideals down everyone's throats, mother fuckers!

www.obamasweapon.com

Re:this shit is about (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47621129)

By all means, revolt. Come on, take up arms. See how long you last, I'll give you about a couple of seconds. But it won't come to that because way before you're in any position to be any kind of threat, you'll be arrested in the middle of the night. They will break you. They will threaten you and your family. You will break, have no delusions about it. They know how powerful they are, and how much more powerful are the people they work for, and how powerless YOU are. You are nothing. They can kill you with no consequences but it won't come to that, because you will break. They have done it already many, many times to many, many people. You're nothing special. There's nothing you, or anyone, can do. It's over. Accept it.

Re: this shit is about (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47621659)

Having fun killing hope?
Cory Doctorow may yet be right.

Re:this shit is about (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47621833)

Nah, you can revolt and be "successful" in the sense of overturning the government, but as history has proven again and again the result is almost always not what you intended.

It's better to found and support large lobby groups, they might achieve something.

Not a private police force. (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47620695)

I know it's bad form to provide accurate information on Slashdot but the City of London police are not private at all. Indeed the Wikipedia page linked to in the summary states that it's a govt entity on the very first page.

I apologise in advance for being accurate.

Fascist justice (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47620723)

CoLP, while not actually private, is the closest you can get to a law system controlled solely by it's corporate backers. Since there are no actual people in the city, just corporations and commuters, there is no such thing as public scrutiny or pursuit of the public interest, their agenda is written solely by private interests. Coupled with private prosecution [wikipedia.org] , it rounds up to a nice libertarian-fascist justice system.

Re:Fascist justice (-1, Flamebait)

epyT-R (613989) | about 4 months ago | (#47620845)

libertarian-fascist? christ, you leftists will misconstrue anything these days.. libertarians are not fascists, nor are they anarcho-capitalists.

Re:Fascist justice (-1, Troll)

dave420 (699308) | about 4 months ago | (#47621067)

The hyphen doesn't mean what you think it does. Stop getting all knee-jerky - it's making you look like the scared bigot you actually are.

Re:Fascist justice (3, Informative)

Anne Thwacks (531696) | about 4 months ago | (#47620921)

While it is true there are not many real people living in the city, there certainly are some, and they even have at least one Labour (left wing) MP. They also have to send anyone they arrest to the normal authorities for prosecution by normal judges.

I make no applogies for corruption or incompetence in CoLP (if any).

Re:Fascist justice (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47621911)

Labour (left wing) MP

You're kidding right!? Labour are the width of one eyelash to the left of conservatives nowadays.

Re:Fascist justice (2)

fnj (64210) | about 4 months ago | (#47621639)

Since there are no actual people in the city, just corporations and commuters

According to Wikipedia, the City of London has a resident population of about 7000 and a commuting.working population of about 300,000. There are certainly many "actual people in the city". Or do you believe Wikipedia is wrong on this score?

Both residents and representatives of the businesses vote in the elections. It is true that the former are outnumbered by the latter.

Re:Fascist justice (1)

CastrTroy (595695) | about 4 months ago | (#47621821)

That's quite interesting. In North America, the "in thing" is for cities to expand their borders as far as possible, amalgamating the suburbs and smaller towns into one giant mega city with a single mayor, and all services overseen by a single municipal government. This allows the city to collect more tax dollars, and get better deals on buying things because they are buying in larger quantities.

Re:Fascist justice (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47621843)

stop your technical parsing: RELATIVE to the urbanized area and how many people work there, the number of actual residents is miniscule...

(dog damn it! is EVERYONE's spel czech a piece of shit ? miniscule is too a word, stupid spellbot... really, i find nearly all spel czechs suck big time, you get beyond two syllable words, and there is a good chance it will be flagged improperly... computer overlords indeed, can't even use a dictionary right...)

Re:Fascist justice (1)

jenningsthecat (1525947) | about 4 months ago | (#47622243)

...miniscule is too a word, stupid spellbot...

'minuscule', (with a 'u'), is the original spelling, and is still preferred: http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/... [wiktionary.org]

Re:Not a private police force. (-1, Redundant)

Hypotensive (2836435) | about 4 months ago | (#47620795)

The Corporation of the City of London is a government entity (the government of the City of London) but it is not democratically elected (aldermen are "elected" in a closed system by companies not individuals and the Corporation can decide to revoke any such appointment for whatever reason it feels like). So effectively it is a private members' only club with its own police force.

Re:Not a private police force. (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47620887)

No it's not a private fucking police force. It's paid for by the govt and answers to the govt. It is not a companies private police force.

It is a carry over from many centuries ago but it is still a public police force. It is not perfect and indeed has shown this by its stupidity over this and other actions (Google Scientology and City of London police) but it's not private, not under the control of the companies in the CoL and answers to the uk govt for its actions.

I thought Slashdot was going downhill, hadn't realised how fucking far it had gone.

You can say it again ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47620959)

... I thought Slashdot was going downhill, hadn't realised how fucking far it had gone ...

Re:You can say it again ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47621967)

... I thought Slashdot was going downhill, hadn't realised how fucking far it had gone ...

And again....

Re:Not a private police force. (2)

coastwalker (307620) | about 4 months ago | (#47621057)

Since when did arguing about Wikipedia postings replace discussion about the behavior of an organization that appears to be knocking censorship evasion proxies offline?

They employees by the City of London Corporation (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47621211)

No they are employees of the City of London Corporation which is not in any sense a government entity nothing to do with the government of the UK.

Control of the city of london (the inner old city) is held by some of the corporations with offices there.

When the police force of that 'city' starts giving itself wider jurisdiction over the UK and world, at that point it becomes painfully clear that we need to re-examine this exemption from UK Parliamentary supremacy. We can't have this little 'exception' to UK rule, order the UK and the World around.

They're not subject to democratic limits, and don't answer to the wider democracy, so their special status needs to be removed.

Re:They employees by the City of London Corporatio (1)

kiwipom (920352) | about 4 months ago | (#47621495)

Total crap

Not a private police force (5, Insightful)

Richard_at_work (517087) | about 4 months ago | (#47620699)

The City of London Police Force is not a private police force, its a public body that receives government funding and is the same as any other police force in the UK, bar the fact that it doesn't have an elected police commissioner. It answers to Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary just like any other police force. The reason its separate from the Metropolitan Police Force is nothing more than a historical curiosity rather than anything to create conspiracy theories about.

There does seem to be an attempt here on Slashdot, in this story and past stories, to cast the City of London Police in a false light.

Regarding the authority "issue" - the City of London Police seizing a domain name is no different to the Metropolitan Police seizing it, the jurisdictional "issues" are the same. The reason the City of London Police are doing this a lot is because they are highly specialised in economic crime detection, investigation and enforcement, so combating criminal level copyright infringement is in fact one of their specialities.

Re:Not a private police force (5, Insightful)

EmperorArthur (1113223) | about 4 months ago | (#47620715)

Each body or organisation, whether unincorporated or incorporated, whose premises are within the City of London may appoint a number of voters based on the number of workers it employs.

That's straight from the Wikipedia entry on the City of London [wikipedia.org] .

Here on Slashdot we often talk about corporate person hood. The City of London is what happens when you jump straight to letting those corporations vote. When the government is by the corporations for the corporations it's not surprising that the police force is also a tool of the corporations.

Re:Not a private police force (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47621055)

Then the City of London is a private-owned undemocratic (feudal?) enclave, and its police force is not a public police force because it is not appointed by democratic mechanisms. Of course they are still under public supervision and publicly funded, but that doesn't make them a public entity.

Re:Not a private police force (5, Insightful)

Xest (935314) | about 4 months ago | (#47620733)

"The reason the City of London Police are doing this a lot is because they are highly specialised in economic crime detection, investigation and enforcement, so combating criminal level copyright infringement is in fact one of their specialities."

Yet they missed all the genuinely criminal bankers on their front door step, you know, libor, exchange rate manipulation and many others?

City of London police should be sticking to the City of London yet they're sticking their nose in everywhere as if they have some form of universal jurisdiction. Similarly they have consistently avoided investigation over many legitimate claims of corruption.

Whatever their supposed status, one things for sure and that's that they're more corrupt than any other police force in the UK by a long shot, and no one seems to be able to touch them for it to sort the problem.

They really need moving under the met where there is at least some degree of oversight, even if it's a long way from perfect. Right now I can see exactly why people call them a private police force - because that's exactly how they act and are treated.

Re:Not a private police force (1)

Richard_at_work (517087) | about 4 months ago | (#47620755)

Ok, so would you have an issue with "universal jurisdiction" if the Met did this, because its exactly the same... As for oversight, did you miss the part of my post where I say that the CoL Police answers to HMIC, just like the Met and every other police force in the UK?

And id love for you to back up your claims about them being corrupt - its easy to throw accusations around, but I see no proof offered by you.

Your post is nothing more than more bullwhip regarding this particular police force.

Re:Not a private police force (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47620985)

And id love for you to back up your claims about them being corrupt

Them taking down a proxy service over copyright infringement concerns without due process is a good example. Maybe you've heard of it?

Though, chances are, you're a copyright troll, so to you, that doesn't qualify as corruption.

Re:Not a private police force (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47620759)

No police force should be allowed to globally seize a domain name. If the domain owner is in their jurisdiction then they should need a court order to shut it down. If the domain owner is not within their jurisdiction then the court order should only prevent those within its jurisdiction from accessing the site. If they wish to globally prevent access then they should request the authorities under whose jurisdiction the domain (or site) owner falls to take appropriate action.

Re:Not a private police force (4, Insightful)

Camael (1048726) | about 4 months ago | (#47620765)

Regarding the authority "issue" - the City of London Police seizing a domain name is no different to the Metropolitan Police seizing it, the jurisdictional "issues" are the same. The reason the City of London Police are doing this a lot is because they are highly specialised in economic crime detection, investigation and enforcement, so combating criminal level copyright infringement is in fact one of their specialities.

The problem however is the legality of the very act of the police in seizing domain names. Apparently, they do not have the power to do so. Instead, they request the "cooperation" of registrars who are threatened with possible legal sanctions in the same breath. Here is an excerpt of one of their letters [techweekeurope.co.uk] :-

“Suspension of the domain(s) is intended to prevent further crime. Where possible we request that domain suspension(s) are made within 48 hours of receipt of this Alert. In respect of the information provided by us, we respectfully ask you to consider your liability and the wider public interest should those services be allowed to continue.”

I don't think you should be comfortable with the police making threats to force registrars to shut down online services in the absence of any court orders, findings of liability or any judgment that the online service is in fact against the law.

Re:Not a private police force (3, Insightful)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about 4 months ago | (#47621237)

It's a nice DNS registry you've got there. Be a real pity if it caught fire.

Re:Not a private police force (-1, Redundant)

Thanshin (1188877) | about 4 months ago | (#47620801)

The reason the City of London Police are doing this a lot is because they are highly specialised in economic crime detection, investigation and enforcement, so combating criminal level copyright infringement is in fact one of their specialities.

Is that a fact?

Because if it's just a belief, mine is that the reason they are doing this is because, and only because, of corporate pressure.

Re:Not a private police force (5, Insightful)

Mr_Silver (213637) | about 4 months ago | (#47620833)

The City of London Police Force is not a private police force, its a public body that receives government funding and is the same as any other police force in the UK, bar the fact that it doesn't have an elected police commissioner.

It's far more insidious than just the fact it doesn't have an elected police commissioner and it most definitely is not the "same as any other police force in the UK".

http://www.theguardian.com/com... [theguardian.com]

Re:Not a private police force (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47621077)

> The City of London Police Force is not a private police force, its a public body that receives government funding

So it's a thoroughly corrupt police force? They are publicly funded yet work for the sole benefit of a few corporations with little regard to laws.

It matters little what it say on paper. In practice they are corporate enforcers that intimidate and bully people with their alleged legitimacy as a "real" police force.

Re:Not a private police force (4, Insightful)

AmiMoJo (196126) | about 4 months ago | (#47621457)

Regarding the authority "issue" - the City of London Police seizing a domain name is no different to the Metropolitan Police seizing it, the jurisdictional "issues" are the same. The reason the City of London Police are doing this a lot is because they are highly specialised in economic crime detection, investigation and enforcement, so combating criminal level copyright infringement is in fact one of their specialities.

You have not been paying attention. Their usual modus operandi is to send threatening letters to the domain registrar because they have no legal authority for the seizure. They usually arrest the site operator just to put pressure on them - even if they drop the chargers later there is no come-back for them, and the victim has to explain to his employer who he wasn't at work for a few days and his name is all over the press.

Go read their press release. They crime he is accused of doesn't even seem to be a crime. The blockade was a civil court order directed at a small number of ISPs, not a general law that everyone must follow. I really doubt there will be a trial, let alone a conviction. The CoLP have got what their corporate masters want now - domain seized and shut down, operator's life made hell and a clear message sent to anyone else thinking of annoying them.

What a stupid fucking summary (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47620703)

The City of London is a borough of greater London. It is an ordinary government district and the police force for the City of London is a normal, governmental police force. What a fucking pile of hogwash this summary is.

Re:What a stupid fucking summary (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47620753)

Eligible voters[12] must be at least 18 years old and a citizen of the United Kingdom, a European Union country, or a Commonwealth country, and either:

        A resident
        A sole trader or a partner in an unlimited partnership or
        An appointee of a qualifying body.

Each body or organisation, whether unincorporated or incorporated, whose premises are within the City of London may appoint a number of voters based on the number of workers it employs. Limited liability partnerships fall into this category.

-- Wikipedia "City of London"

Such a normal district it is. City of London is a "democracy project" of what your fascist "democracy" will look like.

Re:What a stupid fucking summary (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47620779)

Businesses are legitimate members of the constituency in The City. What is wrong with that?

I'm not sure if you are aware what fascism is.

Re:What a stupid fucking summary (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47621879)

I think he might mean "corporate fascism" and is spot on.

Re:What a stupid fucking summary (1, Insightful)

jrumney (197329) | about 4 months ago | (#47620781)

City of London is a "democracy project" of what your fascist "democracy" will look like.

Right, because having the 7000 odd 1%ers who actually live in the City dictate to the 330,000 who work there during the day would be so much more democratic.

Re:What a stupid fucking summary (2)

mwvdlee (775178) | about 4 months ago | (#47620851)

Yes. It would.
Those 330,000 get to vote in the place they live too.

Re:What a stupid fucking summary (1)

jrumney (197329) | about 4 months ago | (#47620987)

Does voting in EU parliamentary elections disqualify you from British Parliamentary elections? Why should having a vote in Epping Forest elections disqualify you from being appointed by your employer to vote in City of London elections?

Re:What a stupid fucking summary (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47621079)

Why should voters be appointed by the company they work for? Do you understand what a democracy is?

Re:What a stupid fucking summary (1)

AmiMoJo (196126) | about 4 months ago | (#47621475)

That's how it works in other places, e.g. large industrial estates where only the residents get a vote.

Anyway, it's not the 330,000 workers who get a vote, it is the corporations. Since the corporations are controlled by the 1%ers effectively what you end up with is just 1%ers in charge.

The usual solution is to re-draw the boundaries or merge with neighbouring boroughs.

Re:What a stupid fucking summary (1)

Hypotensive (2836435) | about 4 months ago | (#47620811)

It is an ordinary government district

It is anything but ordinary. I invite you to watch Secret City [youtube.com] .

Re:What a stupid fucking summary (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47620821)

Jesus Christ, were you guys paid to write this or are you just bored and stupid? Let's review:

City of London at Wikipedia [wikipedia.org]

The local authority for the City, namely the City of London Corporation, is unique in the UK and has some unusual responsibilities for a local council, such as being the police authority. It is also unusual in having responsibilities and ownerships beyond its boundaries. The Corporation is headed by the Lord Mayor of the City of London, an office separate from (and much older than) the Mayor of London.

The City has a unique political status, a legacy of its uninterrupted integrity as a corporate city since the Anglo-Saxon period and its singular relationship with the Crown. Historically its system of government was not unusual, but it was not reformed by the Municipal Reform Act 1835 and little changed by later reforms.

It is administered by the City of London Corporation, headed by the Lord Mayor of London (not the same as the more recent Mayor of London), which is responsible for a number of functions and owns a number of locations beyond the City's boundaries. Unlike other English local authorities, the Corporation has two council bodies: the (now largely ceremonial) Court of Aldermen and the Court of Common Council. The Court of Aldermen represents the wards, with each ward (irrespective of size) returning one Alderman. The chief executive of the administrative side of the Corporation holds the ancient office of Town Clerk of London.

The City is a ceremonial county, although it has a Commission of Lieutenancy, headed by the Lord Mayor, instead of a Lord-Lieutenant, and it has two Sheriffs instead of a High Sheriff (see list of Sheriffs of London), quasi-judicial offices appointed by the Livery Companies, an ancient political system based on the representation and protection of trades. Senior members of the Livery Companies are known as Liverymen and form a special electorate called the Common Hall, which chooses the Lord Mayor, the Sheriffs and certain other officers.

The City has a unique electoral system. Most of its voters are representatives of businesses and other bodies that occupy premises in the City. Its ancient wards have very unequal numbers of voters. In elections, both the businesses based in the City and the residents of the City vote.

The principal justification for the non-resident vote is that about 330,000 non-residents constitute the day-time population and use most of its services, far outnumbering residents, who number around 7,000. Nevertheless, the system has long been controversial. The business vote was abolished in all other UK local council elections in 1969.

City_of_London_Corporation [wikipedia.org]
http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=5501455&cid=47620723 [slashdot.org]
A Tale of Two Londons [vanityfair.com]

and finally, the Police Intellectual Property Crime Unit tag at TorrentFreak [torrentfreak.com] , because this crap has been going on for some time. Older stories:

June 28, 2013: UK Government Announces New Intellectual Property Crime Unit [torrentfreak.com]
October 8, 2013: Police Demand Summary Domain Takedown, Traffic Redirection [slashdot.org]
October 9, 2013: UK Police Orders Registrars to Suspend Domains of Major Torrent Sites [torrentfreak.com]
December 9, 2013: UK Police: Domain & Advert Suspensions For Dozens of Pirate Sites [torrentfreak.com]
July 29, 2014: London Police Placing Anti-Piracy Warning Ads On Illegal Sites [slashdot.org]

Re:What a stupid fucking summary (1)

mister_playboy (1474163) | about 4 months ago | (#47621145)

All the blather about "public" and "private" as binary opposites leaves people with no ability to deal the reality of how these things overlap. Literally two sides of the same coin in this case, and in a growing number of cases.

Re:What a stupid fucking summary (2)

serviscope_minor (664417) | about 4 months ago | (#47620947)

The summary is not correct: the police force is not a private one.

The City however is very far from being just a borough of Greater London. The city is a strange place, generally controlled by the resident corporations (literally---they vote). The local police force generally answer to the council like in most places. But this time the council is officially a bunch of corporate stooges.

Re:What a stupid fucking summary (1)

fnj (64210) | about 4 months ago | (#47621673)

So from your own description the City of London Police report to a council which is a "bunch of corporate stooges", yet somehow that doesn't make it in effect a private police force?

Re:What a stupid fucking summary (1)

serviscope_minor (664417) | about 4 months ago | (#47622071)

yet somehow that doesn't make it in effect a private police force?

Yes, because it's not a private police force. It's a publicly funded police force, the police are public police officers which means that they can't go on strike etc. They report to the local councils but are ultimately part of the home office.

Private police forces are funded privately and are not part of the home office.

An example of a private police force is the now defunct Bulldogs which was a private police force owned, run and entirely controlled by the University of Oxford.

Fascist justice (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47620711)

CoLP, while not actually private, is the closest you can get to a law system controlled solely by it's corporate backers. Since there are no actual people in the city, just corporations and commuters, there is no such thing as public scrutiny or pursuit of the public interest, their agenda is written solely by private interests. Coupled with private prosecution [wikipedia.org] , it rounds up to a nice libertarian-fascist justice system.

Immuncity (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47620761)

The owner of Immuncity was arrested yesterday as well.

Nor Private Police (2, Informative)

jklovanc (1603149) | about 4 months ago | (#47620773)

City of London Police (a private police force in government-backed livery with an authority that does not go beyond the corporate-controlled City of London area — so not to be confused with the Metropolitan Police)

The poster didn't read the Wiki on the City of London Police [wikipedia.org] ;

The City of London Police is the territorial police force [wikipedia.org] responsible for law enforcement within the City of London, including the Middle and Inner Temples.

The police authority is the Common Council of the City,

The Common Council of the City [wikipedia.org] is an elected body. The City of London police is also publicly funded [wikipedia.org] .

What may confuse you Americans is that most British cities have "corporation" in their official name. For example, I live near "The Corporation of the District of Sannich".

The City of London Police is overseen by an elected body and funded through taxes. It is not a private police force. I think that was just a transparent attempt to sensationalize a news story.

Re:Nor Private Police (3, Insightful)

Mr_Silver (213637) | about 4 months ago | (#47620809)

The City of London Police is overseen by an elected body and funded through taxes. It is not a private police force. I think that was just a transparent attempt to sensationalize a news story.

It's a police force controlled by private businesses and backed by the government.

http://www.theguardian.com/com... [theguardian.com]

Re:Nor Private Police (2)

mjwx (966435) | about 4 months ago | (#47620879)

The City of London Police is overseen by an elected body and funded through taxes. It is not a private police force. I think that was just a transparent attempt to sensationalize a news story.

The City of London police are not strictly a "private police force" by the dictionary definition of the words... they just act like it.

Re:Nor Private Police (4, Informative)

serviscope_minor (664417) | about 4 months ago | (#47620975)

The City of London Police is overseen by an elected body and funded through taxes.

Yeah elected. By the local corporations.

Re:Nor Private Police (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47621115)

The City of London Police is overseen by an elected body

Elected by whom? The board of directors of a company is an elected body. Some monarchs used to be elected by a council of nobles. The Pope is elected. The Corporation of London is an elected body, but it isn't elected by the people, so it is not public.

City of London? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47620907)

This City of London? [youtube.com]

COUNTER THEIR ACTIONS (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47620911)

Surely there must be a precedent to request ICANN suspend the City of London Polices domain names for the following reasons (Among others).

Masquerading as a legal authority.
submitting false take-down requests.
Blackmail and Extortion.
Hacking and social engineering.
Making threats to other hosting companies.

Their own website allows them to perpetuate the myth about what they are, and someone needs to get it suspended post-haste, to prevent any future victims of their social engineering tactics.

Re:COUNTER THEIR ACTIONS (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47620973)

The whois suggests cityoflondon.police.uk is registered directly with NOMINET. Nominet have the following on their site;

"If you believe a domain name is being used to commit a crime, please email abuse@nominet.org.uk."

Someone should put together a good email with evidence for the city of London Polices criminal activity and submit it there. May be worth complaining to ICANN too?

Look at all those disinformation posts (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47620997)

You actually found a place where people hate you and are trying to change how people see you.
Look at all those mentions to Wikipedia. Classic disinfo posting methods.
Good job, City of London.

Corporation means something very different in UK (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47621041)

What people in the US would know as Corporations are Limited Companies here.

Error in premise can lead to error in conclusion (1)

Paul Lester (3318297) | about 4 months ago | (#47621375)

Here are two facets that I have tons of experience with that will make this test inaccurate unless both are handled somehow. 1. Our physical thinking on a physical level may consist in more than what occurs on the cranial level. The connections in our arms, down our spine, and across our body may play key roles, and the brain may not consistently always run the same, it may go through cycles. By focusing on the brain too much instead of the entire body and diet, incorrect results are likely. 2. In my experience when I use various supplemental methods, I can increase my brain power by orders of magnitude for varying periods of time. A normal scan would likley not pick these up if I just turn them off during the scan resulting in false readings. I believe anyone is capable of this, but most people do not do this (or know how). As a summary a test like this may mis-gauge one's cranial or intelligence capacity by missing out on some key factors. I can list more, but I have other pressing matters to attend to at present.

Re:Error in premise can lead to error in conclusio (1)

Paul Lester (3318297) | about 4 months ago | (#47621383)

And an error in some of slashdots code can push this comment from one article to another. rofl! Sorry bout that, someone check for errors serverside!

Re:Error in premise can lead to error in conclusio (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47622269)

when I use various supplemental methods,

It appears that you've posted from either Colorado or Washington State.

piracy concerns (1)

nurb432 (527695) | about 4 months ago | (#47621479)

if that is really the case, the logical conclusion is to confiscate all the citizen's computers.

The 'City of London' is owned by JEWS. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47621555)

Jew bankers. What a surprise. Jew nation-wreckers, who have to silence dissent, in case anybody tells their 'cattle' what the slaveowners are up to.

http://balder.org/judea/Hate-Speech-Laws-Immigration-Jewish-Influence-Britain.php

www.nazigassings.com

etc.etc. It's ALL OVER the internet, the truth about the Jewish takeover of our countries, try doing some research.

I'm blocked from reading the article (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47621575)

I'm at work (I work in UK local government) and tried to read the boing boing article for a bit of background. Which brought up this message

---

Access Denied
You have attempted to access the following web page :
http://boingboing.net/2013/07/28/defeat-uks-great-firewall-of.html

Access has been blocked because:
Tru-View has categorised this page as Proxy Avoidance.

---

Maybe talking about proxy avoidance counts as proxy avoidance? And I've checked and http://boingboing.net/ is not itself blocked.

Re:I'm blocked from reading the article (1)

gweihir (88907) | about 4 months ago | (#47621897)

Ah, yes, the stupidity of corporate web-filters. A client of us has one where you cannot download putty (Windows ssh client) over http, but the ftp-link works just fine.

Re:I'm blocked from reading the article (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47621961)

Don't you know that it is illegal to avoid proxies? You are lucky that you haven't been arrested yet!

"Tru-View Technology uses intelligent identification and analysis technologies that rapidly classify web content in real time. "

Domains Locked in London Police Takedown (2)

pigsycyberbully (3450203) | about 4 months ago | (#47621829)

"The National Arbitration Forum has just handed down its decision in respect to the three domain names locked down at Public Domain Registry in response to the City of London Police Intellectual Property Crime Unit takedown requests. The decision is in favour of easyDNS and orders the three names to be transferred to us. - See more at: http://blog.easydns.org/2014/0... [easydns.org]

Career opportunities The Clash (1)

Chad Smith (3448823) | about 4 months ago | (#47621845)

Do you wanna be, do you really wanna be a cop?

It is blocked in ENTIRE england! Not just London! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47622717)

It is blocked in ENTIRE england! Not just London!

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?