Tell me, did you read any of my prior posts or not?Ezekel said:
And it isn't blocking your access, as the website does not actively search you out, you actively search it out.
Censorship is REAL and ADVANCING
- Thread starter s0denone
- Start date
Recommended Videos
And it isn't blocking your access, as the website does not actively search you out, you actively search it out.
Okay I haven't read ALL of the posts..........so forgive me if I'm repeating something.
actually, this had happened in Thailand for a while. For some reason, the government deemed pornography of all kinds illegal (and yet, prostitution and adultery and all those other shit are EVERYWHERE, but that's beside the point). The government pretty much banned all known pornographic websites access in Thailand.
How about that for censorship?
So what next? Will websites about death metal be banned to due to some 'connection with Satanism'? Websites that explains what propaganda is? Websites that say 'bad things' about some royal family of a country?
I know the original post talked about a website that may or may not be illegal, but how long does it take the government to make something seemingly normal 'illegal'?
actually, this had happened in Thailand for a while. For some reason, the government deemed pornography of all kinds illegal (and yet, prostitution and adultery and all those other shit are EVERYWHERE, but that's beside the point). The government pretty much banned all known pornographic websites access in Thailand.
How about that for censorship?
So what next? Will websites about death metal be banned to due to some 'connection with Satanism'? Websites that explains what propaganda is? Websites that say 'bad things' about some royal family of a country?
I know the original post talked about a website that may or may not be illegal, but how long does it take the government to make something seemingly normal 'illegal'?
What I disputed was not there being a loophole - I just highly doubt that any other country would have shot them down.cleverlymadeup said:
Attempt and intent is not the same, mind you. Attempt is an action, intent is the decission to perform an action. It is not the same, not at all. Attempted rape is grapping the woman, tearing her close off, but being stopped in the process. Damage has still been done, and we know this man to be a criminal. Intended rape is wanting to do so, being set to rape someone, but enver taking action, either voluntarily, or through some outer force. The important difference is that no damage is done, and that it is impossible to prove guilt. If a man intents to rape his sister, but by accident she is killed in a car crash before he had the chance, is he then a criminal? Has he actually committed any wrong? And that's just where the individual is prevented - every individual may also has a change of heart. Would that make one a criminal?cleverlymadeup said:
You seem to be missing the point that thepiratebay has torrents that are pefectly legal.cleverlymadeup said:
Thank you for the evaluation of my argument. It carries precisely as much relevance to the discussion as yours does, for it is a ounterargument to yours. I didn't chose the different points we debare. You did.
I can't name a developer, since the world of software is not really my field of expertise, but I can name artists... Nine Inch Nails is chief among them - Trent Reznor not only provides his latest albums for free off his website, but is a known defender of P2P and filesharing, being an avid user of them. Jonathan Coulton has explicitly stated on his website that he doesn't give a damn whether people download his music off torrent sites, or burns cds for their friends, etc. Radiohead gave away their latest album for free, and Jamiroquai and Oasis is expected to follow that same road. Radiohead, Oasis and Jamiroquai may not have used thepiratebay as a distribution site - but Radiohead wouldn't have minded if a torrent was up there(and thus, providing people with a different download option, instead of just the regular "Save As..." from their own website.
Oh, and you know, now some software springs to mind... Warhammer Online: Age of Reckoning uses P2P distribution for it's client.
But whether or not there are legal torrents to be found on thepiratebay is WITHOUT RELEVANCE. The questions is whether it should be considered illegal to provide the opportunity to access illegal material. With that question in mind, it doesn't matter whether there are legal torrents, 'cause as long as there are illegal ones, the question remains.
Which, of course, can't be used to distribute illegal material[/sarcasm]cleverlymadeup said:
How lucky the penalty wasn't death then, huh? So... The ISP's and the danish court will also stop blocking thepiratebay once they realize that they have violated our rights? Those rights being the rights to freedom and free act.cleverlymadeup said:
That's funny. Again, we have childpord brought up, because, that seems to be very relevant card to play... Childporn is illegal. It clearly vioalates the law. thepiratebay does not. It provides the opportunity to do something illegal, but thepiratebay in itself has never uploaded pirated music. The two things are not the same at all.cleverlymadeup said:
You can tell yourself that, but I took the same argument you presented, and applied it to a different situation. It is the same argument. Is this the point where I state that I have had classes in argumentational theory and propositional logic, and expect it to give me some kind of omnipotent authority, like as if I, lets see, had said that I took som law classes and know a lot of lawyers and cops?cleverlymadeup said:
Well, that's what this thread is about, right? We disagree with any thoughts along those lines. Claiming that "the court has found it illlegal, thus it must be!" is claiming the court is unable to be wrong. And that would be wrong. I'm not saying that that is what you are saying... But I think it is.cleverlymadeup said:
Now I have, above. Yes, you clearly seem to know much better than we do. You know, sometimes, it is a good idea to consider that there might be things that you don't know. It would have taken a few googlesearchs, and then you'd have known about NiN, Jonathan Coulton, Radiohead, WAR, and whatnot.cleverlymadeup said:
Again, see above. Intent and attempt is not the same. And it seems to me you here say that it also might not be considered illegal. Yuo are loosing consistency with your former claims.cleverlymadeup said:
It carries very little authority in an argument to claim that you know someone who might, and might not be, experts on the field that we discuss. I formed my previous post with one of my best friends, who happens to be studying law, and he agreed with my statements.cleverlymadeup said:
However, it doesn't matter how many lawyers either of us know. It is a very stupid, and very irrellevant argument.
I argue from a point of danish law and values. You argue from a point of... whatever country you come from. I can't tell you how thepiratebay is considered in the United States, but I can tell you that what has happened in Danish court is a huge mistake, when you look at Danihs laws.
First off, I'd like to also state that I don't think this is 'censorship', in the traditional sense. When I think of government censorship, I think of China's blocking wikipedia or blogging sites or a half of the internet. Or when the Nazi's burned books. Or that there is 'not allowed' to be a critique of the Koran. That, to me, is censorship. Censorship is the blocking or covering up of otherwise legal and free speech and thinking because it endangers those in power.theultimateend said:
This website block is, in fact, not a 'simple solution' to a piracy problem. Not everyone knows a lot about computers, but even my grandma can log onto a website to click a link and download a movie before it's in theaters. So the government's move to block this website is in effort to curb illegal downloading from a site that is bloated with illegal downloads. It's the whole freaking point of the site, to be honest. It's called the 'Pirate Bay', not the 'Let's get together and share our own independent work forum of happiness and naivete.' Now it's harder for illegal action to happen in their country. Chock one up for justice and legality.
Unless, of course, you can explain to me how illegally downloading movies, video games, or software is a form of free speech.
Look, I don't deny that governments can cross some lines when it comes to (actual) censorship, but this isn't it. Would you stop the government from shutting down a website that was being used to traffic child prostitutes into the country? Would you stop the government from shutting down a website that was being used for trafficking illegal guns into the country?
If they blocked a blog that was criticizing the government or something, then I'd be right with you saying how bad that is. But, seriously, this isn't deserving of an outrage. Unless you pirate games/movies/software...but then I still don't feel sorry for you.
Sorry, I meant cleverlymadeup
Rule one of text debating: Ensure that all works are scrupulously correct with regards to grammar, punctuation and so on. It makes you look as if you actually understand what your talking about.
Rule one of text debating: Ensure that all works are scrupulously correct with regards to grammar, punctuation and so on. It makes you look as if you actually understand what your talking about.
Censorship of certain sites that are illegal in that country ( e.g. Particular types of Pornography, video game piracy sites) isn't a bad thing in my opinion, that's just the government enforcing pre-existing legislation.
There is a problem when they start censoring sites with content that is not already illegal, it is simply seen by some as controversial or 'socially unacceptable'. Unless there's a sold reason for doing so (not just because lobby groups protest and argue), censorship should not be used by governments.
There is a problem when they start censoring sites with content that is not already illegal, it is simply seen by some as controversial or 'socially unacceptable'. Unless there's a sold reason for doing so (not just because lobby groups protest and argue), censorship should not be used by governments.
The biggest problem with this is that it is actually IFPI (the music industry's organisation) that can demand a blocking due to a court ruling. This results in the internet providers having to police the internet in order to not be sued by IFPI and loose and it in effect makes IFPI able to decide which sites is and isn't legal to visit.Baby Tea said:
To your point on shutting down a website: This is not a shutdown of Pirate Bay, it is still up (it is Swedish not Danish) but a denial of access to it from Denmark. I am all for shutting down sites that promote harm to others, like those you mention but that has to be done by the government and not a private institution like IFPI. Besides shutting down a website have never stopped any illegal activity that is only done by arresting those behind the crime.
It must be said that I don't mind piracy (of the software kind) as long as the copyright and intellectual property laws are as they are today. After all they were made at the beginning of the 20th century and has not been revised since and a lot has happened since then. Add to this that IFPI is a monster of a corporation (and in fact began as a fascist organisation in Mussolini's Italy) then it comes as no surprise that I personally would like to see them crash and burn.
Hmmm, that became more of a rant that I intended...
Actually, while I don't go looking for drug dealers, I do know a few and do from time to time talk to them at parties. Normally they're great fun. They give me some other perspectives than the official "Drug dealers are assholes" line that we are spoon fed. Sure some are but some are not. I would be very sorry if it was suddenly illegal to talk to them.Sgt. Pepper said:
On topic:
Look, this ban on TPB is lame as hell and it took me all of a couple of minutes to get around it. Not that I actually use the site for anything other than reading their blogs and download some various linux stuff. I could do that elsewhere, but I'll be damned if some corporation gets to decide what I can and cannot do.
It's worth noting that this ban is not dealing with legality as such. It's made on the request of the Danish version of RIAA, MPAA and so on. So we end in a situation where a private interest group decides where the ISPs allow their costumers. This i not about piracy, as OP stated, it's about the right to move around freely. By the logic used in the ruling google.com should be banned in Denmark as well as it's possible to find all sorts of illegal material there.
The Pirate Bay hosts no illegal data and as such should not be banned. This is not about the intent of the site but the actual content. If we judge by intent we should ban a lot of sites about hash. They teach me how to grow the stuff, which is illegal here. But they don't actually contain any hash. Lame comparison you say? I think it's very apt.
There is reason why the Swedish police took several years combing there servers for illegal stuff. If they were breaking the law I assume it would go a bit faster. The trial itself shoulf be fun to follow.
A few things you may want to consider:
1) Danes love to complain about the government. In fact, we like to complain about a lot of things. It may be related to the appr. 6 months of winter every year.
2) By no stretch of the imagination did Piratebay have any legal uses.
3) There are 200 other sites that do exactly the same just as well. I think the piratebay servers were located in Sweden, which may explain why this site was picked over so many others.
4) In the end, nothing much really changed for you, the user. Getting this upset about it is like proclaiming a national hunger strike because one farmer went out of business. You're blowing it way out of proportion.
1) Danes love to complain about the government. In fact, we like to complain about a lot of things. It may be related to the appr. 6 months of winter every year.
2) By no stretch of the imagination did Piratebay have any legal uses.
3) There are 200 other sites that do exactly the same just as well. I think the piratebay servers were located in Sweden, which may explain why this site was picked over so many others.
4) In the end, nothing much really changed for you, the user. Getting this upset about it is like proclaiming a national hunger strike because one farmer went out of business. You're blowing it way out of proportion.
Well they have a right to protect their products. If I represented many clients who's music or software or movies were being stolen regularly, I'd be all over the courts and government too! Theft is theft, and it's illegal.Xaryn Mar said:
I stand corrected, pardon me. You're right, they are just blocking the site, not shutting it down. But, the principle is the same: Hinder the criminal activity. I don't think the government is so naive as to think that blocking it will stop illegal downloads, but it will make it that much harder. And I don't blame them.Xaryn Mar said:
So... That a court ruling has been made, that means that sites like YouTube and Google can be shut down, is a-okay with you?poleboy said:
Your point 1 is completely irellevant, and your point 2 is completely off, as you would know if you had bothered to either do a little research, or at least read the thread, in which several people have done it for you.
Your point 3 I think is wrong too. Personally, I think thepiratebay was targeted because it is one of the most visited public torrent sites, and because it is one of the most notorious and outspoken ones.
As for point 4, you seem to miss the point. This has nothing to do with thepiratebay being harder to access - everyone who wants, can bypass the block. It is incredibly easy. It is the principle. A court ruling has been made, which is wrong. That court ruling has not been based on defined danish law, but has been made on the assumption that usage of thepiratebay will lead to illegal activities. But the thing about court ruling is that it sets precedence.
Precedence is, as you might be aware, the practice that when a similar case appears, the court will look to any old cases, to see what the established practice is. This is not only to have a shared point of reference, not only when judging in matters that are clearly defined by the law, but also to have a clear idea of what to do in matters where the law does not have an answer.
So the problem is two-fold
1) The precedence means, that there is now possibility to block access to Google, YouTube or any other servce that provides access to illegal content. I don't expect this to happen, but the possibility exists, and I am sure that some other sites will be blocked. This will certainly not end here.
2) There has been an infringement of freedom. When ISP's block thepiratebay, they do not block a criminal activity. They block the possibility of whether to commit a crime. What it means is, that they decide whether or not you can choose to pirate. That may not seem so bad in itself, but think about it. They do not give you the choice. As a principal, this is wrong. A man should hace free reign over what he wants to chose. It is a measure of control exerted over our free will, and I do not like it one bit. It is the taking away of something that was not assuredly criminal. I hope I'm making sense, but I'm very tired right now. I shall be happy to debate the "freedom" issue later.
The problem here is that in praxis it is now IFPI (the music industry) that decides which sites to close and not the police or government. They can do this because no ISP will want a trial that they will loose due to precedence, even when the site is not illegal or anything but just annoys IFPI. Perhaps Youtube or some like it.Baby Tea said:
actually there is legal precedence out there currently for EULA's in games and such. they aren't allowed to ask anything illegal of you but can ask things that are legally allowed. even in the land of oz you are bound by the eula. since you have no idea you can't really shoot my ideas down, however there are many laws that can be enforced even if you aren't in the country charging you, i do remember of a couple ppl from Austrailia being arrested and charged for having warez servers by American authorities.Dys said:
as for reverse engineering, no you can't but in most cases you can make a personal backup, you aren't allowed to change things beyond that as it breaks several laws, the principle one being copyright law
yup they've tried but due to Sweedish law they can't be extradited, check out the "Legal Threats" section of their website if you don't believe meLongshot said:
acutally it is part of the law, for any law to be broken, you must have intent, your full mental capacity and knowledge of the law. they've got a lot of stalkers this way as they haven't done anything but they've found out they intended to do something
you miss it that the vast majority of the torrents there are illegal
to pull an example that is like having 10 gigs of porn, however 9.5 gigs are child porn, 500 megs are normal porn, that doesn't make the collection any better, it's still very illegal
with no proof it is no longer an argument and is irrelevant to the discussion
actually Trent has also had a lot of known disputes with his record label, they aren't developers tho and primarily release their stuff thru their own websites
the fact that they are doing this doesn't make the piratebay any less illegal, i'm well aware of the difference between free as in speech or beer stuff and pirated material
yes and so does Blizzard with WoW, i never disputed the illegality of p2p software, my point is dealing exactly with the piratebay
actually providing ppl with illegal stuff is illegal as well
how have your rights been violated? you are yourself commiting an illegal act by download something, therefore becoming a criminal and by that measure forfeiting your rights as a citizen of your country
actually it is very relevant because pirating software IS illegal and clearly violates the law and yes providing access to it is also illegal
wrong you applied truthiness, you just made stuff up without having any real knowledge which makes your point wrong. the fact is i have paid attention to law and the legal dealings of the warez community and i do have friends that on the side of the law. you taking an argument course is totally worthless for bringing up actual factual based arguments, you use what is called truthiness which isn't the same as cold hard facts
actually this demonstrates how much you don't know about law and are basing all your arguments on truthiness.
ok this is the way the courts and laws work. first they must make a law, those laws are based on what the average person would see as being right or wrong, this doesn't make it concrete, however if it does go to the courts they will make a decision on the validity of the laws, such as if it violates your rights or existing laws, if it does violate anytyhing the law is struck down, if not it is upheld and therefore has precedence, meaning it has more sticking power than it did before as the law has been made explicitly clear
no you haven't, i said on the piratebay, not from anyone else. keep trying tho
actually your statements have many flaws without any facts backing them up, even the "proof" you've offered has no relevance to the argument, ie i've asked for examples on the piratebay and you've offered me other sources. i'm glad your friend doesn't represent me in court cause i'd be screwed
A EULA is completely meaningless unless it is displayed in full before the purchase, you cannot sell me a product and then expect me to. There have been cases of people voiding EULAs and getting off because there is no legal agreement.cleverlymadeup said:
As for reverse engineering it, there is no specific copyright law that says I can't. Warez sites are, for one reason or another completely illegal and are constantly being shut down. Altering software I have the legal rights too is not so, be it for entertainment of bussiness reasons (provided I don't stand to make any money out of it). We can argue this till we are both blue in the face, but I am aware of large scale corporations doctoring software to suit their own purposes, all that bypass DRM does legally, is voids your warranties and your right to support (even if you have only modified software after the install. An example of this is internet cafe's using "steam buster" instead of steam, as it lets them run several copies of the game at once.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2006/feb/26/news.childrensservices - 2006 Child porn on the rise.cleverlymadeup said:I'm just quoting you so you get a PM
http://www.vnunet.com/vnunet/news/2187930/internet-child-porn-rise - 2007 Child porn on the rise.
http://www.dutchnews.nl/news/archives/2008/04/explosive_rise_in_child_porn_w.php - 2008 Child Porn on the rise.
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/shock-rise-in-internet-use-of-child-porn-despite-curbs-1438604.html - 2008. Oh yeah them censors kicking ass!
Child pornography is a multi-billion dollar industry and among the fastest growing criminal segments on the Internet, according to the USA The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC), the International Centre for Missing & Exploited Children (ICMEC) and other international sources.[10][11][12][13][14][15][16] - Wikipedia
IE. It's not on the recession. Likewise if you think it is you might want to do some research into concealing images and files within other images. It's a common practice that is very difficult to track (as it is utterly invisible until someone tells you about it).
- - -
Piracy (much like child porn) started out as a small problem, industry leaders (and governments) took a militant approach to fixing it instead of keeping a calm head and caused it to boom. Now everyone acts like hardcore DRM (or censorship) does anything but make it worse.
If you think censorship is necessary. Explain to me how Stardock (since they make no effrot to close torrent sites) does so well and likewise explain to me how the only large piracy issue they've ever had was when a DRM COMPANY linked to live torrents of their games (which were pretty much empty till Starforce linked to them).
See I think the reason I get upset with you is you are defending groups that are not even in your best interest. I apologize that I keep railing on your ass about it I just don't understand defending people who don't give a shit about you. They don't want to censor this because it hurts creativity. It doesn't. If you want to test a new idea for a massive game you spend a few hundred dollars (chump change) on a moderately well done concept game. Like the 20 or so they made for spore. They let consumers try them and see if its popular and if it is they make a full fledged game.
Likewise it doesn't hurt sales, if piracy accurately portrayed revenue lost then most companies would not exist to this day. Considering the numbers put out for piracy almost always match or far exceed sales numbers (which makes me question their legitimacy). Any company that makes a great game makes huge amounts of cash after everything is said and done. Plus companies can always use blizzards strategy, make a product better than the illegal alternative, that seems to be a pretty successful proposition.
It does nothing but be a scapegoat for poor games. As I've told many people on other threads, if game companies released earnest Demo's they could curb a good portion of piracy. For me I won't be touching DoWII on any torrent. Not because of censorship but because they provided a Demo which showed me I didn't like it.
Likewise in the past every single game thats ever had a proper demo (which are obvious when you try them) has never seen my IP on torrents for their games (in fact I'm sure if you checked most times games with demo's would have noticeably lower download rates than equally popular games who do not).
Now much like Child Porn (next time don't try to use a shock example and I'll not go immature on you) censoring video game torrent sites does not slow it down. I'm sure I could find you plenty of articles that would tell you otherwise (with sources of course). What DOES stop piracy (much like child porn) is addressing the issues. This is much harder for people and that's why they don't like to do it.
But if you aren't willing to look at the real cause, beyond your over emotional fox-news jargon (what it sounds like most of the time), you will NEVER solve (or at least reconcile at a common ground) EVER EVER EVER.
PERIOD.
Also finally again like CP and Video Game Piracy. If you dabble in the first I greatly dislike you and if you do the latter solely to skip purchasing games that you DO enjoy I dislike you. I'm not here to support stealing of good products nor am I here to say that touching your kids in sexual ways (or anyone's kids) is a cool deal. It's not. I'm here to say that this archaic notion that censoring does absolutely anything in the grand scheme is nonsense and historically contradictory.
The only way you can even hope to control things through censorship is if you go absolutely gung ho and censor EVERYTHING and give people absolutely no control over their information retrieval system and then slowly add in what you feel is ok. Otherwise it's utterly pointless.
Instead of creating a better criminal (as censoring CP has lead to the previously mentioned hidden files in files) try and instead cure the crime (like finding out why this many people turn to child pornography).
OH and PS. While I try never to agree with cleverlymadeup, whoever said there is no law against altering copyrighted material REALLY needs to brush up on their copyright understanding.Dys said:
What is Copyright Infringement?
To simplify this question, copyright infringement occurs when you do certain things with a creative work which someone else produced without first getting the proper permission.
Some examples of copyright infringement (this is only a partial listing) can include:
* Placing a photograph or creative work online without proper permission.
* Using a creative work commercially.
* Adapting a creative work of one medium to another, such as making a book into a movie or a photograph into a painting.
* Modifying or editing a creative work without proper permission.
- From the friendly folks at Deviant Art. (They cite the actual US copyright law files)
Keep in mind that just because corporations do it it doesn't mean its legal. I don't have enough appendages to count how many companies have been sued in the last 5 years alone for breaking multiple copyright laws (I'm terrible at counting...I need more digits I can only count to 21 or 23 if I'm creative >_>).
EULA's are not legally binding in Denmark since the law here requires a contract to be seen and signed before purchase or become void. So almost all they say that you are not allowed to do you may unless it is illegal due to Danish law in the first place.