×

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!

Torrentspy Disables Searching For US IPs

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 6 years ago | from the everyones-favorite-pariah dept.

United States 277

dr_strang writes "Torrent indexing site Torrentspy.com appears to have disabled torrent searches for IPs that originate in the United States. Instead of a results page, users are directed to this page, which states: 'Torrentspy Acts to Protect Privacy. Sorry, but because you are located in the USA you cannot use the search features of the Torrentspy.com website. Torrentspy's decision to stop accepting US visitors was NOT compelled by any Court but rather an uncertain legal climate in the US regarding user privacy and an apparent tension between US and European Union privacy laws."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

277 comments

fROSTY! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20373591)

Frosty!

tor (5, Insightful)

wpegden (931091) | more than 6 years ago | (#20373593)

Did someone say tor [eff.org]?

Re:tor (1)

rrkap (634128) | more than 6 years ago | (#20373651)

Tor looks cool, but how much additional network traffic to you get from using it and how much of a speed hit do you take?

Re:tor (4, Informative)

FlyByPC (841016) | more than 6 years ago | (#20373863)

Searching shouldn't take too long. Basically you're submitting a small string and asking for a fairly simple HTML page as a response. You can live with even moderate to bad inefficiency if the request is small enough.

I wouldn't want to try to download the latest Ubuntu DVD via TOR, though; that might be more of a problem. But that's what BitTorrent is for, anyway.

Re:tor (5, Informative)

kebes (861706) | more than 6 years ago | (#20374043)

Keep in mind that in this case you don't even have to use TOR for the actual torrent. You only need to use a proxy for the short time necessary to do a search on torrentspy and download the .torrent. After that, you can join the torrent in the usual way. After all, torrentspy only tracks torrents: it has no control over the swarm or what connections the swarm allows/blocks.

So, instead of a search taking 1 second it would take 3 seconds. The actual download would be just as fast. (That is, assuming you were willing to download a torrent without TOR before this block, then this block doesn't change your actual download speed.)

Also note that an easier solution is to switch to using a torrent tracker which does not block US users. For instance trackers not in the US (e.g. Pirate Bay) will probably not have any reason to block US users. In fact a tracker like Pirate Bay could mirror all of TorrentSpy's contents. Although this recent development is interesting, it will have little to no impact on the amount of downloading (or the ease of downloading) that goes on.

Re:tor (2, Interesting)

AndersOSU (873247) | more than 6 years ago | (#20374535)

So if MediaSentry circumvented this protection method using the technique you describe, in order to "monitor" copyright infringement, we could sue them under the DMCA?

Re:tor (2, Informative)

The13thSin (1092867) | more than 6 years ago | (#20373665)

That, or use one of the (crappy) free proxies around... or go to a torrent site that's not based in the US... or... dare I say: Usenet?

Re:tor (1)

Larus (983617) | more than 6 years ago | (#20373941)

As with most internet regulations, geeks will find five more channels to get their necessities. Torrentspy traffic will be down for a while (or maybe for good), and politicians will take credit and claim that they have succeeded in some small way to fight piracy. They don't lose face before their campaign fund donors, and they care less what geeks do. Torrentspy will either go away or pay lobbyists to remove the regulations. It's a win-win situation.

Geeks and jocks don't coexist. Maybe because geeks don't learn jocks' bag of tricks.

Re:tor (5, Funny)

xtracto (837672) | more than 6 years ago | (#20374003)

or... dare I say: Usenet?

So, why would you like to to run upon usenet? Do you plan to start a big flamewar about the Torrentspy blocking or anything?

something tells me you wont be desired there!.

Re:tor (5, Funny)

blahlemon (638963) | more than 6 years ago | (#20374613)

Most people don't participate in tasteless and foolish events like flamewars unless they need the approval of others. Yes, it happens at times but I'm sure it's never planned that way by Slashdot posters!

Re:tor (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20374087)

Usenet?

We do not speak of such things here. For It is heresy, and your irreverance will be dealt with swift and mercilessly.

You shall be stripped of your geek status, forced into the Windows ME support team in a non-english speaking country, and banned from /. for eternity.

Let your brethren never forgive you, and may GOD have mercy on your UserID.

Re:tor (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20374209)

The first rule of Usenet: Don't talk about Usenet. The second rule of Usenet: Don't talk about Usenet. Understand?

Re:tor (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20373709)

Tor might let you get to the .torrent, but you really shouldn't use it for the actual download... that's just not what the program is for. If you can download without torr, great. If you can't, it's time to get a demonoid account or use TPB.

Tor:Shell Games. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20373893)

"Did someone say tor?"

And why would legitimate downloads need Tor?

Re:Tor:Shell Games. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20374165)

The same reason browsing legitimate web sites might. Privacy.

Tor:Popularity Games. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20374393)

Why yes, I can see why someone would want to hide the fact that [IP address], downloaded Ubuntu (grab some attention).iso.torrent from the rest of the world.

Re:Tor:Popularity Games. (1)

UncleTogie (1004853) | more than 6 years ago | (#20374531)

Yes, 'cause it's not their knowledge to begin with. Why would someone else NEED to know that I'm downloading Ubuntu?

I'm not saying I don't masturbate. I am saying that it's none of anyone else's business if/when I do.

Re:tor (1)

mikem170 (698970) | more than 6 years ago | (#20374529)

I don't know if there is any control over where traffic exits the tor network. Maybe hit-or-miss would get you there from the right place eventually.

Another cool idea would be to use proxy servers in China!

Re:tor (2)

djdbass (1037730) | more than 6 years ago | (#20374591)

Brilliant!

I wonder how long it will take the **IAA to realize all they have to do is say they've blocked something, and then over @ slashdot is some genious showing the latest get-a-round...

Some of you know-it-alls couldn't keep a secret in a secret-tight box.
Security Experts??!?

ok now how do I block my tor node for US? (1)

Werrismys (764601) | more than 6 years ago | (#20374635)

Bad attempt at humor.

I just wish the tor network remained for normal surfing anonymously and not warez.

They aren't the only ones (2, Funny)

bconway (63464) | more than 6 years ago | (#20373597)

Nothing for you to see here. Please move along.

Seems I just can't win with searches anywhere today.

The Obvious Reason (5, Interesting)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 6 years ago | (#20373617)

Torrentspy's decision to stop accepting US visitors was NOT compelled by any Court but rather an uncertain legal climate in the US regarding user privacy and an apparent tension between US and European Union privacy laws.
From the Wikipedia page [wikipedia.org] (and as linked on the related Slashdot articles):

On May 29, 2007, A federal judge ordered TorrentSpy to begin monitoring its users' activities and to submit these logs to the Motion Picture Association of America. TorrentSpy's attorney, Ira Rothken, has stated that TorrentSpy would likely turn off access to U.S. users before it started monitoring anyone, since such monitoring is in violation of TorrentSpy's own privacy policy.[1] As of August 24, 2007, TorrentSpy has been closed to United States users.
Looks like they finally got around to it ... although it wasn't ordered by a judge, a US judge certainly left them no choice.

I wonder if this can be accessed from the United States through Tor [eff.org].

I also wonder if I have to start worrying about other sites blocking American users simply out of fear & safety from the United States MPAA/RIAA run court system? I used to feel sorry for Chinese people who had to suffer from their government's censorship and now I have to wonder if I'm going to start suffering from other servers censoring me based on my government's actions.

Re:The Obvious Reason (1)

snowraver1 (1052510) | more than 6 years ago | (#20373689)

I also wonder if I have to start worrying about other sites blocking American users simply out of fear & safety from the United States MPAA/RIAA run court system? I used to feel sorry for Chinese people who had to suffer from their government's censorship and now I have to wonder if I'm going to start suffering from other servers censoring me based on my government's actions
You bring up a very valid point, what we have here is reverse censorship. Because of the freedoms (freedom to sue for losses) offered in the US, these restrictions are imposed.

Re:The Obvious Reason (4, Insightful)

kebes (861706) | more than 6 years ago | (#20373901)

You bring up a very valid point, what we have here is reverse censorship. Because of the freedoms (freedom to sue for losses) offered in the US, these restrictions are imposed.
What? "Freedom to sue for losses" ? And does equal rights decrease freeom because landowners no longer have "the Freedom to own slaves" ? How do you reconcile "freedom of speech" against the "freedom to censor" ?

Get real. Just because you add the word "freedom" to the start of a sentence doesn't mean you are describing a real freedom. US users are not being blocked because the US is "too free." They are being blocked because US laws meant to protect copyright holders may require logging and disclosure of logs. This is in conflict with privacy policies.

There is a disagreement here about what "rights" are more important (ease of tracking legal violators vs. privacy). To characterize US laws in this instance as being about "freedom" is disingenuous.

Re:The Obvious Reason (1, Flamebait)

heinousjay (683506) | more than 6 years ago | (#20373949)

It's only disingenuous if you're on the side of the pirates. Naturally, I'd expect such a stance here.

After all, who cares about the Constitutionally protected rights to control distribution? What use is that in the face of overwhelming demand for free shit?

Re:The Obvious Reason (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20374039)

Which constitutionally protected rights to control distribution?
 
The distibution model is broken. Thats the whole attraction of torrents. Its not just the free shit.
 
Its free delivery. On demand.
 
Me, Thats why I use it.

Re:The Obvious Reason (2, Insightful)

Applekid (993327) | more than 6 years ago | (#20374063)

After all, who cares about the Constitutionally protected rights to control distribution?
Obviously we here do, and the ability to ammend the constitution to correct problems was built in for a reason.

The real problem is that Congress (and States' Congresses, most members with aspirations for greater office) are in the pockets of industry and would dare not impose changes to the patents or copyrights that may make their purse-holders angry.

Perhaps if they weren't shills for MAFIAA we'd have a freedom more free. Perhaps we'll never know for sure.

Re:The Obvious Reason (5, Insightful)

capnchicken (664317) | more than 6 years ago | (#20374111)

The Congress shall have Power . . . To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Author and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries; The pretense of this right is to promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts not to protect a failed and obsolete business model.

Re:The Obvious Reason (1)

kebes (861706) | more than 6 years ago | (#20374125)

As I said, there is a valid argument about what should be maximized (either the ease of tracking down law breakers or the privacy of citizens). You can even frame this as an argument about "rights" (the right of a copyright holder to control distribution vs. the right of a citizen to privacy).

However, my point, to emphasize again, was that a statement along the lines of "freedom to sue for losses" (that is a direct quote) is disingenuous. Everyone agrees that freedom is important, but if you ask people to list "important freedoms" I somehow doubt that "freedom to sue for losses" would show up on that list. Invoking "freedom" in this case is disingenuous: this is not a debate about freedoms.

There is a crucial debate here, and we do nothing to forward useful discussion by allowing silly statements like the one I was attacking.

Re:The Obvious Reason (2, Insightful)

snowraver1 (1052510) | more than 6 years ago | (#20374187)

Get real. Just because you add the word "freedom" to the start of a sentence doesn't mean you are describing a real freedom. US users are not being blocked because the US is "too free." They are being blocked because US laws meant to protect copyright holders may require logging and disclosure of logs. This is in conflict with privacy policies.
My point was that in the US, individuals are "free" to sue someone if they believe that they were wronged by the defendant. Because the RIAA is free to sue people for downloading they have had some judges compell some orginizations to basically incriminate themselves and thier users. So basically, what started as a freedom to sue for losses, turned into a clusterf*ck requiring websites to either: a) Incriminate themselves and thier users b) Cut the US out of the picture and carry on business as usual.

Re:The Obvious Reason (1)

kebes (861706) | more than 6 years ago | (#20374423)

Fair enough. I don't want to get into a purely semantic argument here, but my objection was to using the term "freedom" to describe these abilities. The "ability to sue for losses" is artificial, and a system put in place as part of a larger, complex incentive system (specifically, a copyright system that is supposed to be an incentive for art creation/distribution). I guess I view "freedoms" as being more fundamental ("inalienable rights") rather than legal constructs that serve pragmatic goals.

I think suggesting that "freedom to sue" is somehow a fundamental right (on par with "freedom of thought," "freedom of speech," "freedom of assembly," "freedom of travel," "freedom of religion," etc.) is not the right way to look at it. (I now realize that this was probably not what you were getting at.)

One of the primary differences, in my mind, is that eliminating one of those "fundamental freedoms" (to speech, thought, etc.) would be a hugely immoral act on the part of the government and/or citizenry. However, the elimination of certain pragmatic laws (and loss of the associated "freedom to sue") is rather less significant.

I may have over-reacted to your wording and taken your quote out of its intended implied context. If so, I apologize.

The Obvious Reason-Set my P2P free! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20373795)

"I also wonder if I have to start worrying about other sites blocking American users simply out of fear & safety from the United States MPAA/RIAA run court system? I used to feel sorry for Chinese people who had to suffer from their government's censorship and now I have to wonder if I'm going to start suffering from other servers censoring me based on my government's actions."

Ah yes. The right to be entertained being denied to Americans. Next up, the government stops you from getting fat.

Re:The Obvious Reason (3, Insightful)

DoofusOfDeath (636671) | more than 6 years ago | (#20373871)

I also wonder if I have to start worrying about other sites blocking American users simply out of fear & safety from the United States MPAA/RIAA run court system?

That would potentially be fantastic. If we can make Congress understand that excessive copyright and patent regimes put the U.S. at a technological / competitive disadvantage, that's part of the war in getting change.

Of course, Congress might be just as likely to respond in some insane, drunken, counter-productive way as well, which is why I used the word "problematic" above.

The Obvious BS. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20374149)

"That would potentially be fantastic. If we can make Congress understand that excessive copyright and patent regimes put the U.S. at a technological / competitive disadvantage, that's part of the war in getting change."

Oh right! Not having unlimited access to this [thepiratebay.org] is really setting the US back technologically/competitively in the world market. Who do you think your fooling with that argument?

"Of course, Congress might be just as likely to respond in some insane, drunken, counter-productive way as well, which is why I used the word "problematic" above."

Or maybe they'll see through the smokescreen and realize that the majority of torrents fall within the Queen Anne limits. And there's even some that haven't been released [theregister.co.uk]

Re:The Obvious Reason (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20373889)

Well - it sounds like te isolation of the USA has begun...

Within a decade or so Americans are not allowed to connect to the rest of the world and vice-versa, except for heavily monitored connections. You can only speculate what this will do to technical development outside and inside the USA. Most likely you will get two "brain centers"..

One in the USA... and one in the rest of the world...

Re:The Obvious Reason (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20373919)

I wonder if this can be accessed from the United States through Tor
If all they're doing is blocking US IPs, then yeah, it will usually work. There are Tor exit nodes in the States, but a good deal of them seem to be in Europe.

Re:The Obvious Reason (1)

ExE122 (954104) | more than 6 years ago | (#20373947)

I don't think "censorship" is the right term here. The site was brought down to protect the end user's information from being given to the MPAA, not to block information that the user can reach. While you might say, "same difference", it probably changes the strategy of the legal recoil that is about to take place. This actually becomes a battle of privacy protection vs. copyright enforcement. This means TorrentSpy could potentially get a lot of support from privacy advocates.

But yes, the way the ruling played out worries me too... especially that this shows how the justice system blatently favors MPAA.

Re:The Obvious Reason (2, Insightful)

adrianbaugh (696007) | more than 6 years ago | (#20374193)

So if you feel strongly enough about it, kick out the government and elect one better suited to your wishes. Oh, I forgot, although you get the choice between 2 parties both of them are almost exactly the same...

Time for wiki-torrent (5, Interesting)

superpulpsicle (533373) | more than 6 years ago | (#20373629)

Someone create a privatized wiki-torrent where people can put up their own torrents. That way you can never be sued cause you're not responsible for the contents.

Re:Time for wiki-torrent (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20373667)

"Someone create a privatized wiki-torrent where people can put up their own torrents."

Like Konspire2B?

Re:Time for wiki-torrent (2, Funny)

theantipop (803016) | more than 6 years ago | (#20373717)

That way you can never be sued
Need I remind you how, *ahem*, flexible the US legal system is?

Re:Time for wiki-torrent (4, Funny)

veganboyjosh (896761) | more than 6 years ago | (#20373739)

That way you can never be sued

Need I remind you how, *ahem*, flexible the US legal system is?


Flexible like a rubber hose, you mean?

Re:Time for wiki-torrent (1)

Minwee (522556) | more than 6 years ago | (#20374733)

Flexible like a rubber hose, you mean?

Flexible like the bones in your fingers, too.

Re:Time for wiki-torrent (4, Insightful)

dslauson (914147) | more than 6 years ago | (#20373935)

Someone create a privatized wiki-torrent where people can put up their own torrents. That way you can never be sued cause you're not responsible for the contents.
Ummm, there's really no such thing as "can never be sued because of". In the U.S., anybody can sue anybody for anything. Sure, maybe a case will hold no water and will get thrown right out of court, but you'd still probably have a pretty damn good lawyer on retainer before you try something like this in the States, because somehow I don't see the **AA saying, "Oh, well. The guy's got a Wiki. There's nothing we can do."

Re:Time for wiki-torrent (1)

MikeBabcock (65886) | more than 6 years ago | (#20374261)

Several people have lost lawsuits for posting links to sites that had links to software that was deemed illegal. Yeah, double indirection and the court still ruled against them. I wouldn't be surprised if an american court was willing to find you guilty for thinking about linking to a torrent linking to pieces of a file.

Re:Time for wiki-torrent (2, Insightful)

brunascle (994197) | more than 6 years ago | (#20373973)

how would that be any different than sites like torrentspy? they're basically just search engines. they dont host the content, and some dont even host the .torrent files.

Re:Time for wiki-torrent (1)

Borealis (84417) | more than 6 years ago | (#20374395)

IANAL but as I understand it, the Napster decision pretty much boinked them because the primary purpose of Napster was to facilitate infringement. Given the precedent, I don't think it would be a stretch to assume that a site dedicated to putting up torrents even as a wiki would be immune from litigation. It's important to remember also that even if the case is eventually won by a private wiki, the legal costs of defending yourself is not inconsequential and is beyond the reach of most citizens.

That's really just treating the symptoms in any case, and there's a variety of perfectly good alternatives to torrentspy.

In other news.. (5, Insightful)

micksam7 (1026240) | more than 6 years ago | (#20373637)

Non-US proxy usage skyrockets globally.

Re:In other news.. (5, Funny)

yorugua (697900) | more than 6 years ago | (#20374085)

Are US-based users going to start using china-based proxies??!?!? Did hell just freeze?

Re:In other news.. (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20374095)

I'm offering europe based proxy access to torrentspy for US citizens for 50 cents per search. 5 cents of every search goes towards helping starving artists in the states.

Re:In other news.. (1)

Jugalator (259273) | more than 6 years ago | (#20374739)

Or... People just keep using TPB, Mininova, Demonoid, IsoHunt, or the newly reborn SuprNova.

There's not exactly a shortage. :-p

The real victims... (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20373641)

How am I supposed to support artists if I can't steal their work? Buy CDs and movies?

Re:The real victims... (1)

SCHecklerX (229973) | more than 6 years ago | (#20374581)

Go see them at the bar, buy them a drink if you like what they are playing. Buy a CD at a release party. Give copies to your friends, who if they like them will also then go to their shows and buy their promotional CDs.

Obligatory (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20373643)


In The United States of Alphane:

Searching for U.S. IPs disables Torrentspy.

P.S.: Remember, you have no rights in the United States of Alphane [whitehouse.org].

PatRIOTically,
Kilgore Trout

Re:Obligatory (2, Funny)

LordEd (840443) | more than 6 years ago | (#20374157)

Searching for U.S. IPs disables Torrentspy.
It could be worse. In Soviet Russia, IPs disable you!

This is a good thing. (4, Informative)

Deagol (323173) | more than 6 years ago | (#20373747)

The more popular tor gets, and the more traffic in the network, the better it'll be for the entire 'net. One click of the my "tor" option under "FoxyProxy", and I was able to submit searches no problem.

Re:This is a good thing. (1)

phoenix.bam! (642635) | more than 6 years ago | (#20373853)

Do you get several failed requests before a successful one? The tor exit node would have to be outside the US, so I imagine there must be many failed queries for every success.

Re:This is a good thing. (4, Insightful)

pla (258480) | more than 6 years ago | (#20374391)

Do you get several failed requests before a successful one? The tor exit node would have to be outside the US, so I imagine there must be many failed queries for every success.

Thanks to a cultural obsession with (fighting) child porn in the US, I would expect just the opposite - No sane American would allow exit connections unless they had high enough 3rd party traffic to claim basically no control over or knowledge of the vast majority of the content (ie, an ISP, and they rarely give anything away).

And if the real feds don't ruin you, Dateline will, regardless of the actual facts. I can just about hear the announcement: "Up next, the newest threat to your children: We put 250 megs of fake child porn on a website, and found we could retrieve it anonymously with a new program for terrorists called Tor. We've hunted down, had fired, and forwarded evidence to the DA about the beast running this smut ring, known perversely as 'Exit Node'.

But how will Americans hook up...sexually? (3, Interesting)

Valacosa (863657) | more than 6 years ago | (#20373789)

I was afraid that the lockout would affect Canada too, but it works just fine for me. So yeah, they have the whole localizing IP addresses thing down pat.

In related news, I get a banner add offering to help me "Find my real sex partner in WATERLOO". But how will Americans find their "real sex partners" without this valuable service?

Re:But how will Americans hook up...sexually? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20374213)

Depends -

Is that Waterloo, Ontario or Waterloo, Iowa ? :-)

Re:But how will Americans hook up...sexually? (1)

matts-reign (824586) | more than 6 years ago | (#20374233)

They could always have a selective filter so ads are requested through their normal, geolocatable IP. Then they won't have to come and take over Waterloo.

So? (1)

Tweekster (949766) | more than 6 years ago | (#20373839)

I never understood why people get all excited about the piratebay and torrentspy. They are shitty trackers filled with horribly named, low quality garbage.

Re:So? (1)

Bucc5062 (856482) | more than 6 years ago | (#20374329)

Would you be so kind as to point out high quality, well named, and sweet trackers? It is not helpful to knock a product without naming an alternative. Just think of the karma you'll get

Re:So? (1)

pla (258480) | more than 6 years ago | (#20374621)

I never understood why people get all excited about the piratebay and torrentspy. They are shitty trackers filled with horribly named, low quality garbage.

For the same reason the US fought in Vietnam and Korea, and imposed sanctions on Cuba in the first place (though we seem to have forgotten the "why" of that one, considering that the former Soviet Union collapsed quite a few years ago now).

If you can trick your enemy into attacking a strawman rather than your real vulnerabilities, you pretend to defend that strawman as long as you can (or until your enemy gets a clue, which seems safely outside the realm of possibility with the MPAA).

Hell, I personally consider the entirety of P2P as one nice strawman for the RIAA and MPAA to waste resources on. The real pirates simply trade exteral HDDs these days, and I'd like to see the **AA try to stop that. But by all means, we should encourage them to keep flailing at grannies and foreign torrent trackers as long as they seem willing.

go4t (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20373841)

KRESKIN

Canada also blocked (0, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20373917)

Canadian users are also blocked

Re:Canada also blocked (4, Informative)

Kristoph (242780) | more than 6 years ago | (#20374219)

I am in Canada at the moment and it is working fine for me. I suspect it much depends on who your ISP is.

]{

No surprise (0, Flamebait)

MortenMW (968289) | more than 6 years ago | (#20373945)

European laws are not as strict as the the US one's, and they are not really enforced a lot either. I think this will be seen more often in the future.

Re:No surprise (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20374249)

European laws are not as strict as the the US one's, and they are not really enforced a lot either. I think this will be seen more often in the future.

Actually quite the inverse. The European privacy laws are rather strict regarding who you're allowed to share the information with, and considering MPAA and RIAA are American monopolies... I'm sure you can see the clash of privacy laws. Privacy regarding information transfer is quite regulated in the EU. (Companies aren't allowed to give away your information in the EU, without your concent).

I can't imagine what law isn't as strict in Europe as US regarding privacy, but IANAIL (International Lawyer)

Re:No surprise (1)

RexRhino (769423) | more than 6 years ago | (#20374525)

While Europe has strict privacy laws against private institutions, but there are very few privacy protections from the government itself.

I don't think you can say privacy laws are more or less strict in Europe... rather, the privacy laws in Europe tend to reflect European cultural biases (i.e. innate trust in the government, and innate hostility towards non government institutions).

Also blocks AOL in the UK (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20374057)

I know it's lame to be using AOL in the first place, but it would be nice if they were using a decent geo-ip list.

Re:Also blocks AOL in the UK (1)

Grishnakh (216268) | more than 6 years ago | (#20374523)

Why bother? It's easier to just block *.aol.com.

After all, the name is AOL: AMERICA On-Line. What the hell are you using that for in the UK?

If you're dumb enough to use AOL in another country, you deserve all the restrictions and other downsides that the rest of us Americans have to deal with. You're right across a small pond from Holland, the land of freedom. Why the hell would you want to ally yourself with restrictive American corporate interests?

Move along (5, Informative)

scruff323 (840369) | more than 6 years ago | (#20374067)

Isohunt, Demonoid, The Pirate Bay, Mininova, (reincarnated) Suprnova. Shall I go on?

Re:Move along (1)

hansamurai (907719) | more than 6 years ago | (#20374163)

I'm actually a big fan of btjunkie, not a tracker itself, but the best torrent search engine I've ever used. Searches everything you listed off.

Re:Move along (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20374297)

you forgot to add:

and monitored the hell out of them by your loved MAFIAA friends.

cheers!

Re:Move along (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20374301)

Meh, Google search with a inurl:.torrent in the search replaces the need for any of those sites individually. Google, My OmniTracker!

Blame CANADA! (3, Interesting)

Mr.Fork (633378) | more than 6 years ago | (#20374151)

Alright, but maybe not. I'm a Canuck and I enjoy the fact that my country has a different view on this issue. I don't understand why the MPAA spends so much money and efforts against downloaders where they loose a majority of their money due to pirate bootleg copies being sold inside the USA and around the world? I wonder if the MPAA polled movie goers and found out how many that do download movies still go to movies in the Theatre? Has it increased their interest since movies became easy to download? Do they watch more movies they normally would of skipped otherwise because they're watching so much more on the Internet via their computer?

Also, isn't this kind of action biting the hand that feeds them? Didn't Napster actually increase sales because it stimulated interested in music? Could MPAA be suffering the same short-sighted vision because their top executives are disenfranchised from the general public?

Re:Blame CANADA! (1)

griffjon (14945) | more than 6 years ago | (#20374567)

See, this is why Canada will always be second fiddle. I mean, here you go applying "logic" and "business sense" -- not to mention, strategy -- to matters OBVIOUSLY better dealt with using chutzpah, truthiness, gut feelings, and stubborn, malicious incompetence. For the Mafiaa, it's obviously not about the money, the customers, the artists, or even being "right," it's about winning the global war on commies. I mean drugs. Wait, terrorists. no, like terrorists, but less 'splodey and more cutlasses. Pirates! Right. fighting the evil pirates. Yarr.

Violated Rights (1)

blahlemon (638963) | more than 6 years ago | (#20374387)

As a Canadian working in the US I feel that my socialist, lax copyright rights are being violated by this blanket ban. This is a travesty, how will I download my shareware torrents now?

How many people still use torrentspy? (2, Interesting)

nnull (1148259) | more than 6 years ago | (#20374553)

I stopped using torrentspy.com when they put up all those annoying ads on it. Their search has been pretty lame lately. Mininova, piratebay and a host of others offer a lot more. So good riddance, good bye Torrentspy.com. I hope you lose a lot of money from the lost ad revenue from US internet users.

Buhh bye!

torrents suck (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20374675)

Torrents suck, anyway...you have to upload to random people you don't know, get spied on by various other people about what you're doing, deal with low-quality crap and fake files all the time, etc.

Usenet alt.binaries.whatever is much better, higher quality, no fake files, you might have to buy a subscription to a Usenet host though (Usenetserver is $1/day pay as you go or $19/month to max out cable.)
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...