 
LilYoda
Feline with squirel personality disorder
Premium
join:2004-09-02
Mountains
2 edits | so funny I may be mistaken, but a little bit of tor should be enough to go around the block, and retrieve the tracker, wouldn't it?
Once you have the tracker, the block is useless, since you aren't connected to the pirate bay anymore.
Anyway, another useless court decision to make the industry "feel good" in their fight against evil pirates...
--
Nicotine reaches and triggers the reward circuits of the brain in 7 seconds. Beat that, Work! | |
|
 | 
knightmb
Everybody Lies
join:2003-12-01
Franklin, TN
 ·AT&T DSL Service
| Re: so funny It's a DNS block that targets an ISP that was willing to cooperate anyway. The DNS within Tele2 which if anyone knows the IP address could type that in the web browser instead or simply configure their computer to use a DNS server other than what Tele2 uses. That's what I've what I've heard was used to get around the "block" if you want to really call it that.  | |
|
| | 
insomniac84
join:2002-01-03
Schererville, IN | Re: so funny DNS block? Sounds a lot like they are stealing the domain name. Blocking traffic destined to there servers is one thing, but stealing a domain TPB paid for? Courts never understand what they are doing when it comes to technology. | |
|
|
|
LilYoda
Feline with squirel personality disorder
Premium
join:2004-09-02
Mountains
| Re: Porn? said by gatorkram  :would most people just continue to graze on the yummy green grass Considering the mainstream media would report this as "internet hackers protest in the streets because the internet provider has cut them off to protect normal americans in their internet use", yeah, I'd say the public would still be saying moooooooooo
--
Nicotine reaches and triggers the reward circuits of the brain in 7 seconds. Beat that, Work! | |
|
| | 
gatorkram
Spelling and Grammer impared
Premium
join:2002-07-22
Winterville, NC
clubs: | Re: Porn? mooooo, or baaaaaa, your choice  | |
|
| Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ | i dont think here in the US a court could legally make an ISP block a site.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports | |
|
| | 
jimkyser
join:2000-10-13
Naperville, IL
1 edit | Re: Porn? said by Kearnstd :i dont think here in the US a court could legally make an ISP block a site. A US court legally made a web site remove a link to the decss source code so it really depends on what any particular judge decides the law means. | |
|
| | 
Dogfather
Premium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | Please, after seeing the court rule that local governments can steal people's private property to give to another private entity so that the local government can get more taxes, you would be surprised if they blocked websites? | |
|
| | | SilverSurfer
join:2007-08-19
| Re: Porn? said by Dogfather :Please, after seeing the court rule that local governments can steal people's private property to give to another private entity so that the local government can get more taxes, you would be surprised if they blocked websites? Gold star for citing the Kelo decision even if you didn't know the name.  | |
|
| | | |
Dogfather
Premium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | Re: Porn? Carbidyne = Too Lazy to Google | |
|
| | | | | SilverSurfer
join:2007-08-19 | Re: Porn? OT: Laguna Hills, eh...my office is over by the Carl's off the Lake Forest Bl/Carlota intersection. Small world. | |
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
| said by SilverSurfer :said by Dogfather :Please, after seeing the court rule that local governments can steal people's private property to give to another private entity so that the local government can get more taxes, you would be surprised if they blocked websites? Gold star for citing the Kelo decision even if you didn't know the name. as someone from CT that whole case made me sad and made me wish the entire neighboorhood had said no we wont leave and you will have to bring SWAT in to get us out.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports | |
|
| | |
| | |
gatorkram
Spelling and Grammer impared
Premium
join:2002-07-22
Winterville, NC
clubs:
·Embarq
 ·linode
| Re: Porn? My real point was, would anyone do anything about it, or would they just say meh, and move on.
Lets just say, right now today, the US Gvmnt said, wow, what a great idea, lets make all the US ISPs block TPB..
Would they try to issue such an order, would ISPs do it, would it be legal, and what about the technical side.. And then what happens if people get around the blocks, would that then be a crime for just pulling up the site?
Some things to think about, and where we are, and where we might go..
--
Give me bandwidth or give me death!
»/testhistory/661871/4f240 | |
|
| | | | SilverSurfer
join:2007-08-19
| Re: Porn? said by gatorkram :Lets just say, right now today, the US Gvmnt said, wow, what a great idea, lets make all the US ISPs block TPB.. Would they try to issue such an order, would ISPs do it, would it be legal, and what about the technical side.. And then what happens if people get around the blocks, would that then be a crime for just pulling up the site? Some things to think about, and where we are, and where we might go.. This is essentially what the copyright wars are leading up to. Once the **AAs succeed in buying off a politician (cough Berman cough) to sponsor a bill to "block" anything, it's all downhill from there because once something featuring X content is blocked for the children, or, insert cause here, it's a slippery slope to blocking something that someone somewhere (American corporations) don't like for Y reason. It's only a matter of time before our bought & paid for government concedes to blocking websites for the good of something (the corporate bottom line.) This is why NN should be a part of ANY of the current crop of douchebags candidates running for executive office. | |
|
| | | | jsuboh
join:2002-06-13
Earlimart, CA | Re: Who's to say that it would be the Government Decision Who's to say that it would be the Government's decision - ATT is already toying with filters and Comcast is throttling bit torrents. The issue is with the companies that manage the ISP - would they be the ones to voluntary do it? | |
|
| |
Dagda1175
join:2001-06-17
Goleta, CA | Easy to get around, but.... ...would bypassing the blocks be legal? Any danish laywers around?? | |
|
| 
Doctor Four
My other vehicle is a TARDIS
Premium
join:2000-09-05
Dallas, TX
 ·AT&T U-Verse
| Re: Easy to get around, but.... said by Dagda1175 :...would bypassing the blocks be legal? Any danish laywers around?? I seriously doubt the "pirates" would care that bypassing
the block would (or could) be considered illegal.
After all, this is just one elaborate cat and mouse game
between the p2p users/advocates/sites, and the anti-piracy
forces.
And the IFPI is taken about as seriously by the Pirate Bay
as Web Sheriff was (the subject of many a derisive
response to their threat letters.)
--
"The trouble with computers, of course, is that they are very sophisticated idiots." - Doctor Who (from Robot)
| |
|
guhuna
R.I.P Mike
Premium
join:2001-03-31
Brentwood, CA | ahem. ::yawn:: | |
|
| |
| |
guhuna
R.I.P Mike
Premium
join:2001-03-31
Brentwood, CA
·Covad Communications
·SONIC.NET
·PAXIO
| Re: ahem. said by gatorkram :said by guhuna :::yawn:: Number one contribution to the thread... You could have at least made a comment about the porn.. That's okay. | |
|
footballdude
Premium
join:2002-08-13
Imperial, MO
| So what? If the entire world blocked access to the Pirate Bay, couldn't they just put up a mirror site called Bay of Pirates or something? Or Up Yours Judge X? Buying a URL is pretty cheap. People using the site would find the new one pretty quickly, even if it changed once a week.
--
What's certain about Darwinism is that it would take less time for (1) a single-celled organism to evolve into a human being through mutation and natural selection than for (2) Darwinists to admit they have no proof of (1) - Ann Coulter | |
|
| 
james
join:2001-02-26
antarctica | Re: So what? Of course they could, and it would immediately be blocked as well. | |
|
| | 
JammerMan79
Premium,VIP
join:2004-05-13
Prince George, BC | Re: So what? technically it would be a different site not covered under the ruling.. So wouldn't they have to get another court order?
--
I may work for, but do not necessarily represent the views and beliefs of TELUS Communications. | |
|
| | |
james
join:2001-02-26
antarctica
| Re: So what? said by JammerMan79 :technically it would be a different site not covered under the ruling.. So wouldn't they have to get another court order? I suppose it would really have to depend upon the wording of the order wouldn't it. Law is a goofy thing, sometimes it's the spirit of the law that is enforced, and sometimes it's some obscure interpretation of the specific wording of the law {despite it's obvious intent}.
The intent of a block would obviously mean that the website and any mirrors should be blocked, regardless of what url is used to access it.
Get a good lawyer and he'll be able to convince the judge to order the ISP to immediately block the site and any alleged mirrors that pop up thereafter without further intervention from the court.
On the other hand, another good lawyer would be able to convince the judge that in order to "protect the rights of blah blah blah whatever", any additional urls that point to the same site have to be blocked on a case by case basis in new, individual trials.
I think, for the most part, it would be alot easier to take a screencap of the old site and the "new site" and say to the judge "look, they are the same, and they are trying to bypass your order" and he will side with you on that alone and order the ISP to block the new (and any future) site(s) without having to hold individual trials.
Whereas if you're trying to argue the other way, you'd have a much harder time. | |
|
| | 
major marco
Res Firma Mitescere Nescit
Premium
join:2003-02-13
Stepford, CA
clubs:
| said by james :Of course they could, and it would immediately be blocked as well. TPB has its operations interspersed across a dozen different countries. That said, one little court order from an American judge would not theoretically suffice to block every single URL thereafter. There would have to be another trial. But since the judiciary is populated by dinosaurs who haven't even heard of email yet, any order to block any URL will be -at best- completely and utterly technologically illiterate. Of course, that doesn't stop them from deciding a case and making an irrevocably ridiculous decision. (e.g. Jammie Thomas)
--
The Toll
Let's Go Flyers!
| |
|
| |
|
KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK | Technically, it is useless, but in legal terms... Anytime a Government orders a site blocked or access to a site denied, that's the dictionary definition of Censorship.
Censorship is legal in many parts of the World, but I wasn't sure it was in Denmark. Seems like it is. | |
|
| stridr69
join:2003-05-19
San Luis Obispo, CA
| Re: Technically, it is useless, but in legal terms... Well, I'll bet the Denmark ISP's are either government owned or controlled. Try to remember the 1st Amendment of the U.S. Constitution ONLY applies in the U.S. The rest of the world has their own way of ISP deployment. And how they control it.
And it's a safe bet most if not all non-US ISP's are controlled by their respective governments.
| |
|
| |
KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
·AT&T Yahoo
·AT&T DSL Service
 ·Cox HSI
·AT&T Southwest
| Re: Technically, it is useless, but in legal terms... I am well aware of that, that's why I pointed out that Censorship is legal in many parts of the world.
Actually most ISP's are not government controlled, but in repressive regimes they are often strictly monitored. Notice the US is moving towards that end...
--
"Regulatory capitalism is when companies invest in lawyers, lobbyists, and politicians, instead of plant, people, and customer service." - former FCC Chairman William Kennard (A real FCC Chairman, unlike the current Corporate Spokesperson in the job!) | |
|
buzcut4
join:2008-02-06
Chesterfield, SC
| Porn? (I'M FOR IT) This is a very slippery slope indeed! We need to contact our Government representatives and express the need for laws governing new technologies with the focus on our First Amendment Right of free speech, free press, & free assembly. The internet is no different than any other spoken or printed material. The only thing that has changed is how that material is delivered and how we communicate. Don't wait until it's too late! DO IT NOW. | |
|
|
|
|
Danish ISP Blocks Access To Pirate Bay
·
·
·