Which? Convo: A High Court Judge yesterday ruled that BT must now block access to the website Newzbin2 – a site that provides links to pirated films. But is this the right way to tackle illegal downloading?
Gadgehit writes: "The Motion Picture Association (MPA) is celebrating a huge victory in the UK, as British Telecom has been ordered to block a website that provides links to pirate movies. The landmark case is the first time that an Internet Service Provider has been ordered to block access to such a site, and because BT provide the infrastructure for telephone lines in the UK, the MPA went to court with them first."
Ah crap, I'm glad I'm not with BT, and this is why I wasn't, because I knew that any ruling always starts with BT. Hope it doesn't spread, because it will end up that every site will be banned, I don't like that type of control.
I don't think the judge really understands what he just did, he opened the floodgates.
All this control over our internet is disgusting. It does nothing but piss me off because it's telling us what we can and can't do/look at with a service we pay money for.
BT could be forced to block access to the website NewzBin which is being used to promote piracy among the internet. There have been complaints about this website in the past, but the large telecom company has not done anything about it.
It looks like Newzbin, thanks to MrWhite and the Team R Dogs, has returned. The resurrected site, now called Newzbin2, went online just a few days ago. This news comes only a few short weeks after the old Newzbin's May 18 shutdown.
answer: Not at all. there are always work-arounds. proxy sites for example. the internet is too huge for any government/companies to control.
exactly. The people cannot be stopped.
no, because you dont need an internet browser to access things
if they're going to block site that post copyrighted material illegally, then half the internet would have to be blocked.
but the main problem i have with this is that i guarantee you it will be abused.
it will be used to block sites that post information about the wrongdoing of companies, people and even governements.
there have already been attempts to shut down sites with bogus copyright claims because they revealed information politicians didn't want revealed, and this wasn't national security stuff, it was about their abuses of power.
and even if it isn't abused this way, which it will be.
the music and movie industry has a history of being extremely slapdash in the way they investigate any possible copyright breaches.
in other words, they never check they just have their bots out searching the net for anything that could be their copyrighted work and then they send out cease and desist emails, without checking.
just look on youtube, people have had their accounts shut down because they had video where they sang a song at some school play or something, or where they have the same name of some singer, i've even read about people who've recorded scens outside with birds singing and rain falling and got bullshit copyright claims against them.
they use the specter of piracy to justify these ridiculous laws that violate a person's rights and give little punishment for those who abuse the system, whether knowingly or just through ignorance the way the music and movie publishers do.
this is exactly the same as the way governments have used the threat of terrorism to take away rights that people fought and died for.
politics is going to end up controlled by lobbyists for these big companies if something isn't done.
hell, lobbyists for the tobacco industry made it so you can still take a lighter onto a plane even though nobody has ever tried to hijack or blow up a plane with a pair of nail clippers but somebody damn sure tried to blow up a plane with a lighter.
i think robin williams said it best.
politicians should be like racing drivers, they should wear logos of all the companies paying them clearly visible.
No, because
A) It's counter-productive, in every sense of the word.
and
B) Proxies will make ISP's efforts futile.