Dutch Court of Appeals overturns Pirate Bay IP blockade(bureaubrandeis.com)
bureaubrandeis.com
Dutch Court of Appeals overturns Pirate Bay IP blockade
http://bureaubrandeis.com/duly-noted/court-appeals-denies-ip-block/
56 comments
The vision of BREIN is not build on killing piracy, it is to secure funding. BREIN gets most of its funding from Hollywood. It is a commercial institution: If they generate lots of anti-piracy press they get more, or easier-to-get funds, if they are not visible they get less, or harder-to-get funds. BREIN does not necessarily have to kill piracy to secure its funding. It just needs to raise a stink. If they killed piracy they would also kill themselves.
The blocking of TBP and all known proxy IP's was a huge stink. Persistent pirates will find it easy to circumvent this. They may even abandon public tracker torrents and flock to Usenet. I think the goal is to make the life of the common pirate more difficult. Many moms and pops only knew how to download a movie from TPB. Once they saw the "The court ordered us to block this page" they stopped watching movies or went back to ordering DVDs.
Just a few weeks ago BREIN send its threatening letters to amateur subtitle sites and their uploaders (for unlicensed derivative works). Piracy on the whole will not be hampered when pirates can't download the Dutch subtitles to an English movie. Just a few kids, deaf people and older folk who have trouble understanding English, or the few anime lovers who can't fully speak Japanese. So what _have_ they accomplished with this? A big stink. A nice report to give to those that fund them. Shown that they are willing to align themselves with Hollywood's agenda (I bet the idea to start going after subtitle sites originally came from there). Shown that they are deserving of (more) funds.
If we all agree that facilitating copyright infringement is against the law, then blocking sites that exist to facilitate copyright infringement does not seem too harsh or close to censorship to me. If you want to avoid sites being closed for being against the law, then lobby to change/overhaul copyright law.
The blocking of TBP and all known proxy IP's was a huge stink. Persistent pirates will find it easy to circumvent this. They may even abandon public tracker torrents and flock to Usenet. I think the goal is to make the life of the common pirate more difficult. Many moms and pops only knew how to download a movie from TPB. Once they saw the "The court ordered us to block this page" they stopped watching movies or went back to ordering DVDs.
Just a few weeks ago BREIN send its threatening letters to amateur subtitle sites and their uploaders (for unlicensed derivative works). Piracy on the whole will not be hampered when pirates can't download the Dutch subtitles to an English movie. Just a few kids, deaf people and older folk who have trouble understanding English, or the few anime lovers who can't fully speak Japanese. So what _have_ they accomplished with this? A big stink. A nice report to give to those that fund them. Shown that they are willing to align themselves with Hollywood's agenda (I bet the idea to start going after subtitle sites originally came from there). Shown that they are deserving of (more) funds.
If we all agree that facilitating copyright infringement is against the law, then blocking sites that exist to facilitate copyright infringement does not seem too harsh or close to censorship to me. If you want to avoid sites being closed for being against the law, then lobby to change/overhaul copyright law.
>All my friends are pirating, if I do not, I fall behind; there is no choice.
This is probably the strongest incentive for piracy in a country like the Netherlands: if you don't, you cannot join in the next day watercooler/schoolyard talk about the latest episode of show X, let alone your global virtual friends on various forums and communities.
Stopping people from consuming your product without scarcity must be the most insane business model ever. At least the communist failure to deliver was a side-effect, not a deliberate strategy.
However, let's not pretend the entrenched entertainment industry is the only one making this mistake. Tech start-ups often fail to realize that they are launching in a global market from day one.
This is probably the strongest incentive for piracy in a country like the Netherlands: if you don't, you cannot join in the next day watercooler/schoolyard talk about the latest episode of show X, let alone your global virtual friends on various forums and communities.
Stopping people from consuming your product without scarcity must be the most insane business model ever. At least the communist failure to deliver was a side-effect, not a deliberate strategy.
However, let's not pretend the entrenched entertainment industry is the only one making this mistake. Tech start-ups often fail to realize that they are launching in a global market from day one.
The fight against Bittorrent is more important than many realize. If "they" get away with destroying a technology (after all, it's only a protocol) for something as unimportant as copyright, we're truly fucked.
Surely "Bittorrrent" and "The pirate bay" are two separate things? In what way are they destroying bittorrent by attacking a single tracker/index? Isn't that analoguous to saying that trying to block or shut down any random web server serving something illegal is an attack on HTTP?
Many ISPs block or limit torrent traffic, whatever the content. Mine has been doing this as far as I can remember. Have to use encrypted mode only.
The Netherlands has a net neutrality law:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality#Law_in_The_Nethe...
As a consequence, blocking or limiting Bittorrent traffic is not allowed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality#Law_in_The_Nethe...
As a consequence, blocking or limiting Bittorrent traffic is not allowed.
Yeah, people tend to forget that net neutrality and censorship are two different things, albeit related.
Yes, an attack on a particular protocol is an attack on that particular protocol. The first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club.
Except the attack would not actually be done via HTTP, but just by blocking access to its ports.
Perhaps you could say it's an attack on TCP/IP.
Perhaps you could say it's an attack on TCP/IP.
So, if the police confiscates your car after finding you DUI/closes a hotel because it has been repeatedly found to operate a child pornogrpahy ring/locks up somebody who uses his gun to kill people, that's an attack on car driving in general/on the general idea of running a hotel/on the right to bear arms? I see that more nuanced.
You are way off with your analogy and I'm pretty sure you know it too.
Legally, what separates shutting down The Pirate Bay from any other arbitrary tracker?
> for something as unimportant as money
Fixed that for you. Music and movies are huge industries.
BTW, I think they are loosing. Sure, some laws are being passed, but there are several generations alive today that consider piracy something normal and natural. It's all a matter of who is in charge; today's leaders are old, they don't consider piracy to be good and normal. When we (our generation) become old and get in charge, we'll embed our worldviews in the laws.
Fixed that for you. Music and movies are huge industries.
BTW, I think they are loosing. Sure, some laws are being passed, but there are several generations alive today that consider piracy something normal and natural. It's all a matter of who is in charge; today's leaders are old, they don't consider piracy to be good and normal. When we (our generation) become old and get in charge, we'll embed our worldviews in the laws.
> When we (our generation) become old and get in charge, we'll embed our worldviews in the laws.
Part of getting maturing and growing up almost always includes a changing of worldviews as we gain more experience in the world.
THings like piracy - which once seemed perfectly acceptable when you are younger - can begin to seem a lot more like 'not paying for the work of the people that went into it'.
This is particularly true as people enter the workforce from school and over time begin to appreciate the actual value of what they produce, and its real-world implications.
I can't count the number of comments I've seen in recent years that start with a variation "I used to pirate..."
Part of getting maturing and growing up almost always includes a changing of worldviews as we gain more experience in the world.
THings like piracy - which once seemed perfectly acceptable when you are younger - can begin to seem a lot more like 'not paying for the work of the people that went into it'.
This is particularly true as people enter the workforce from school and over time begin to appreciate the actual value of what they produce, and its real-world implications.
I can't count the number of comments I've seen in recent years that start with a variation "I used to pirate..."
"I used to admit that I pirate..."
From my personal observations, this is the only thing that's changed. As the copyright industry is so eager to make examples of those they deem worse than murderers, sharing is driven underground, folks use VPNs, darknets and private trackers, but are they really sharing less?
From my personal observations, this is the only thing that's changed. As the copyright industry is so eager to make examples of those they deem worse than murderers, sharing is driven underground, folks use VPNs, darknets and private trackers, but are they really sharing less?
What are they loosing? There doesn't seem to be much evidence of them setting anything free at the moment.
I think the reality is that they're reacting to uncertainty which may threaten them and both those things are real but for the most part it's really just change and the best way to deal with change is to adapt rather than to fight it.
I think there are valid questions about what happens when the bulk of consumers are people who aren't used to paying for media but in many cases there are alternatives.
There have been a great many times in history where, for instance, movies were going to be killed - the introduction of the TV, the introduction of the video recorder and so on - but they're still going strong. Cinemas got nicer, screens and sound better, the whole thing became more of an experience than watching the movie at home and people kept going to the cinema as a result.
Similarly the music industry has changed it's revenue model to focus on live performances and merchandising rather than album sales. Even if album sales fall significantly they're relatively well placed to cope.
There are valid concerns (I'm not sure what an author does if people stop paying for books for instance) but if the free markets most of these corporations regard so highly mean anything then surely if there is a demand for something (say books) which someone else wants to make (say an author) then the market will, if it's possible, make it happen.
And if it doesn't then maybe we just don't want it that much after all.
I think there are valid questions about what happens when the bulk of consumers are people who aren't used to paying for media but in many cases there are alternatives.
There have been a great many times in history where, for instance, movies were going to be killed - the introduction of the TV, the introduction of the video recorder and so on - but they're still going strong. Cinemas got nicer, screens and sound better, the whole thing became more of an experience than watching the movie at home and people kept going to the cinema as a result.
Similarly the music industry has changed it's revenue model to focus on live performances and merchandising rather than album sales. Even if album sales fall significantly they're relatively well placed to cope.
There are valid concerns (I'm not sure what an author does if people stop paying for books for instance) but if the free markets most of these corporations regard so highly mean anything then surely if there is a demand for something (say books) which someone else wants to make (say an author) then the market will, if it's possible, make it happen.
And if it doesn't then maybe we just don't want it that much after all.
Part of the experience that you mention is how you get your media to begin with.
The music and movie industries have tried their best to make it as hard as possible to consume legally bought media on anything other than what they want you to watch it on. Some of this is due to piracy concerns, some due to various contracts (you will only allow this movie on Starz for the first 6 months), but all of it is in their control.
Conversely, downloading a movie via bittorent will play on anything powerful enough to process an HD movie; downloading some MP3s will play on any device thinkable. The files require no complex codes to put into crazy websites, no additional software to install, no additional devices to buy. Being free is just icing on the cake.
Case in point: I bought Pacific Rim on blue ray when it was released a few months ago. Waited for it to arrive in the mail. Defeated its stupid plastic wrap. Popped some popcorn, turned the lights off, put the disc in my PS3 (the only blue ray player I own) and... nothing. It could not play the disc without connecting to the internet to download some new blue ray decryption keys or whatever. Never had this problem before, and sadly my PS3 is not connected to the internet. This disc was useless to me. Enraged, I downloaded an 18GB HD rip of it and had it playing on my $35 raspberry pi in an hour. Has this experience soured me on buying blue rays? Of course it has.
The music and movie industries have tried their best to make it as hard as possible to consume legally bought media on anything other than what they want you to watch it on. Some of this is due to piracy concerns, some due to various contracts (you will only allow this movie on Starz for the first 6 months), but all of it is in their control.
Conversely, downloading a movie via bittorent will play on anything powerful enough to process an HD movie; downloading some MP3s will play on any device thinkable. The files require no complex codes to put into crazy websites, no additional software to install, no additional devices to buy. Being free is just icing on the cake.
Case in point: I bought Pacific Rim on blue ray when it was released a few months ago. Waited for it to arrive in the mail. Defeated its stupid plastic wrap. Popped some popcorn, turned the lights off, put the disc in my PS3 (the only blue ray player I own) and... nothing. It could not play the disc without connecting to the internet to download some new blue ray decryption keys or whatever. Never had this problem before, and sadly my PS3 is not connected to the internet. This disc was useless to me. Enraged, I downloaded an 18GB HD rip of it and had it playing on my $35 raspberry pi in an hour. Has this experience soured me on buying blue rays? Of course it has.
That's an odd experience with Bluray, given that most players simply can't connect to the internet so could never download updated keys.
To me it sounds like a PS3 specific thing, rather than a problem with Bluray. I get that to you the experience is poor regardless but the problem to me sounds like Sony rather than Bluray.
To me it sounds like a PS3 specific thing, rather than a problem with Bluray. I get that to you the experience is poor regardless but the problem to me sounds like Sony rather than Bluray.
From what I've read online, this is a common occurrence on many blue ray players. The AACS keys expire every 12-18 months and require an update if you want to play any movies with newer keys.
I don't know how this is handled on older, unconnected players.
I don't know how this is handled on older, unconnected players.
Funny, the copyright maffia hates the Internet but then goes on to require it in order to consume content on blessed physical media.
Little known fact: no major studio uses e-mail. It's all carrier pigeons and smoke signals. Why? Because they "hate the Internet". So you're right, using contemporary technology in this one instance is really weird.
They're not losing, the center of power is just shifting. Netflix isn't any more okay with weakening copyright protections for its home-grown content than Disney or Universal.
Music is actually much much much smaller than people realize. It's given as much importance as movies, but I don't even think it's 1/10 the size of movies.
And even the movie business is pretty small. This infographic puts the size of the entire market at a fairly paltry 65 billion a year.
http://bitshare.cm/post/2082365481/the-film-industry-is-big-...
Disney's studio arm pulled in just shy of 6 billion last year. Parks and Resorts brought in 14 billion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Walt_Disney_Company#Revenue...
http://bitshare.cm/post/2082365481/the-film-industry-is-big-...
Disney's studio arm pulled in just shy of 6 billion last year. Parks and Resorts brought in 14 billion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Walt_Disney_Company#Revenue...
except it seems to be that those who pirate (or consider piracy "normal") are not those who are going to be the elites that sit in parliment and make laws.
Haven't they linked piracy coming from Senate IP's? I think it's already happening in Congress. I also think you're underestimating how many people have pirated something at least once a year. Perhaps some are the kind of people who "always pay for their music and shows", since it's relatively cheap to begin with, but then go and pirate something like Adobe Photoshop.
I don't think it matters. As long as it's their siblings, parents and kids.
This is not about bittorrent. The ISP's were required to block IP addresses and DNS entries. They were not required to block bittorrent traffic
I think it's nice to live in a country where courts still exist that are not influenced by lobbyist and politics. Especially since BREIN has been ordered to repay the 326.000 in court fees.
And where internet providers owned by publicly traded corporations actually spend time and money fighting in court.
And where an internet provider not even included in the original case joined in only for the pursuing justice. XS4ALL has always claimed to be fighting for a free internet, with this case, they proved it to me.
[deleted]
Apparently the judge who issued the original verdict had connections with BREIN' lawyer.
http://torrentfreak.com/pirate-bay-censorship-judge-is-corru...
http://torrentfreak.com/pirate-bay-censorship-judge-is-corru...
Yeah , this has been well documented everywhere, including in discussions on HN.
I work for the parent company of Ziggo. Good to feel like I was somehow connected to this victory, in however a small way! :)
It's scary that the fees where so high. (Not in the sense "I am a corp, I throw millions in my legal dept", but in the sense "if I, a person, gets sued, I am so fing fed".)
One of the few a great judgment in recent time. It is nice to see that cost–benefit still count for something, rather than emotional response backed by government control.
It has been around 200 years, and society has changed for the better by it. Every time government trail away from it, especially in punishment, it seem to be caused by corruption. Good that the Court of Appeals of The Hague can recognize and see it.
It has been around 200 years, and society has changed for the better by it. Every time government trail away from it, especially in punishment, it seem to be caused by corruption. Good that the Court of Appeals of The Hague can recognize and see it.
This is subjective, but as an American living in NL I've been fairly impressed with the Dutch government's (parliament, cities, unions, within parties, and courts) pragmatism.
While there are cases of people maintaining hard-line statements, it seems to be less common than in normal US discourse.
While there are cases of people maintaining hard-line statements, it seems to be less common than in normal US discourse.
Not having any party with anything close to a majority in parliament helps enormously here (that might be a symptom, rather than a cause, though)
There are very few things that you will find a straight majority for in parliament, so hard-lining will get you nowhere.
There are very few things that you will find a straight majority for in parliament, so hard-lining will get you nowhere.
Probably, the common law vs. Civil law has a lot to do with that.
I'm not sure. Civil codified law would make the judiciary less able to say "well, we tried X, it doesn't work, let's do something else". Anyway, I'm referring to something more broad than that.
While Dutch politics is still, well... politics, it seems like there is much more of a pragmatic approach. People expect the government to be effective. "Is policy X working or not?" is a common theme on the news, there are lots of statistics and reports, and politicians aren't trying to always spin their way out of them (though it certainly still happens, just less).
The whole society is a lot less concerned with black and white framings like grand economic theories, philosophical stances on law and order, or enforcing morality. They're more concerned with things working.
While Dutch politics is still, well... politics, it seems like there is much more of a pragmatic approach. People expect the government to be effective. "Is policy X working or not?" is a common theme on the news, there are lots of statistics and reports, and politicians aren't trying to always spin their way out of them (though it certainly still happens, just less).
The whole society is a lot less concerned with black and white framings like grand economic theories, philosophical stances on law and order, or enforcing morality. They're more concerned with things working.
The ISP just said on the news that the blockade that they had to apply since 2012 was actually very helpful for their case. Independent research (from TNO) showed no decline in torrent traffic and literally no effect of the blockade. The judge ruled the blockade "ineffective" and said "there are other means of copyright protection that make more sense".
TIL TNO is the new NSA
congrats. you compelled me to create an account.
https://1-media-cdn.foolz.us/ffuuka/board/q/image/1365/86/13...
https://1-media-cdn.foolz.us/ffuuka/board/q/image/1365/86/13...
Go back to 4chan ;)
Seems like this would open the way for the UK ISPs which are currently obliged to block torrent sites to get that requirement overturned. BT and others pushed back against it in the first place, IIRC.
Only if the legislation there also permits doing away with ineffective measures. Not to mention that this will then lead to a push for more effective ones.
Too bad I live in a country where it's possible and too easy to buy the courts (Sweden).
[deleted]
They did not really "denied" it. Their conclusion was: it just doesn't help. So we are taking away the possibility to block piratebay.
The only result (according to the judge) is that less frequent downloaders look for alternatives.
PS. Still glad that something like this just happens. Entertainment industry allowed firms like Netflix to rise because of their lack of vision, it's easy to blame the internet...
The only result (according to the judge) is that less frequent downloaders look for alternatives.
PS. Still glad that something like this just happens. Entertainment industry allowed firms like Netflix to rise because of their lack of vision, it's easy to blame the internet...
I think a lot of people would flock to legal alternatives if there were any. As long as there are not...
The legal services are still largely inferior to the alternatives. Most require proprietary software, DRM, a US (or other national) IP address, an always-on internet connection, a credit card, or other cumbersome anti-features.
> flock to legal alternatives
legal and cheaper. The entrenched publishers of yesteryear's media still makes their products available at outrageous prices. I m glad netflix exists, but the media companies don't like the way technology is making distribution a commodity (where they extract their value from).
legal and cheaper. The entrenched publishers of yesteryear's media still makes their products available at outrageous prices. I m glad netflix exists, but the media companies don't like the way technology is making distribution a commodity (where they extract their value from).
True, but I think most solutions which are legal in the US now are cheaper right? But it's quite simple (I know a lot of EU based people agree with it); as long as we cannot watch everything the US can watch at the moment the US can watch it (in English, not dubbed as is normal in DE, ES and probably other countries), people will aggressively pirate anything there is. No-one is going to wait for a sports program, movie or show for months after it airs in the US; that time has passed because on Facebook/Twitter/whatever everyone already is talking about that show/movie so you want to have instant gratification. And while everyone seems to do meditation these days, mustering patience for their favorite program is not one of the skills picked up.
It makes me angry when I travel to Spain for business or vacation and suddenly all my devices want to connect to the local stores (even though i'm Dutch, I pay in NL etc) and serve me crap in Spanish. Ever watched a dubbed UK/US thriller dubbed in Spanish? It's painful. Not too strange my UK colleagues living there all have proxies and there are thriving proxy and 'torrent setup box' businesses popping up all over the place.
It makes me angry when I travel to Spain for business or vacation and suddenly all my devices want to connect to the local stores (even though i'm Dutch, I pay in NL etc) and serve me crap in Spanish. Ever watched a dubbed UK/US thriller dubbed in Spanish? It's painful. Not too strange my UK colleagues living there all have proxies and there are thriving proxy and 'torrent setup box' businesses popping up all over the place.
It is, after all, "common knowledge" distribution has shifted, and pirates use this at every turn to justify their actions.
>A copy is not theft, it is a copy, final.
>The money I didn't spend on this movie was already earmarked for another purpose; nothing changed.
There's a social aspect, too.
>All my friends are pirating, if I do not, I fall behind; there is no choice.
Like an empire or a dynasty, the entertainment business is simply too entrenched; disconnected from the real world, to realise they are the ones at fault. It's not a question of ethics (we made it, we earned it, abide by our wishes), it's a matter of majority opinion.
It's refreshing to see this result, I just hope it sprung from correct reasoning, blocking any form of information should be done under the harshest of scrutinies, which means not just for the sake of attempting the sate a billion-dollar industry.
Used to be a time, when capitalism meant keeping with the times or succumbing to it. This sometimes feels eerily reminiscent of what I was taught about Soviet Russia: keeping their factories and businesses going at all costs, because the 5-year-plan was more important than progress.
USSR did not need billions of buckets, we do not need billions of optical disks.