BT ordered to block pirate links
- Thread starter Deluxe1
- Start date
Associate
- Joined
- 9 Sep 2008
- Posts
- 1,377
I fear this will promote an attack on the cleanfeed service, which isn't what anyone wants really
There is no need to attack CleanFeed since it is only there to stop _accidental_ viewing of illegal material. It doesn't do what the authorities would like the general public to believe it does i.e. block access effectively. It doesn't block now, it won't block in the future.
this is my issue too, however some sites like TPB really should have been closed years ago, they are so big and blatant I bet film / music companies ahve lost untold millions because of this site.
Soldato
- Joined
- 5 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 9,302
To be honest I think pirating has had positive influences too.
I have in the past downloaded a few episodes of things I would never of bothered with and as a result I now have bought the box sets on dvd on something I would never of usually done.
I know this doesn't outweigh the negatives but the the industry is what it still is today because of whats happened regardless.. Lost millions or were never actually going to own those millions?
I have in the past downloaded a few episodes of things I would never of bothered with and as a result I now have bought the box sets on dvd on something I would never of usually done.
I know this doesn't outweigh the negatives but the the industry is what it still is today because of whats happened regardless.. Lost millions or were never actually going to own those millions?
People need to stop equating piracy to lost sales. A pirate doesn't automatically become a buyer if their pirating methods are stopped, you have no idea if they will buy or just go without.
Soldato
- Joined
- 5 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 9,302
I also think its because of the fact newzbin make a small fortune in subscriptions
thats true, I really hate it when Company B say they are losing £400M in lost sales to piracy.
How on earth do they work that out. I shall tell you, they estimate or guess, ie they make it up.
They know they are losing x amount to piracy but they can't quantify it exactly so they estimate how much they should be actually making out of a product, minus the actual revenue and whats left is the piracy loss.
Its ridiculous.
If they knew they were losing £400M in reality - fact - then they would know who is pirating their stuff and get them prosecuted.
Do they think we are really gullible.
its same principle as in the gas prices, oh poor company B makes £500 billion profit but has to put gas prices up as wholesale prices have gone up so they can't afford it.
Same with petrol prices.
sorry getting off topic now.....
in any case the site will only come back with a "3"
Makes me wonder how much revenue Steam made in their summer sale, when the price is right people will buy. I bought 4 or 5 games.
How on earth do they work that out. I shall tell you, they estimate or guess, ie they make it up.
They know they are losing x amount to piracy but they can't quantify it exactly so they estimate how much they should be actually making out of a product, minus the actual revenue and whats left is the piracy loss.
Its ridiculous.
If they knew they were losing £400M in reality - fact - then they would know who is pirating their stuff and get them prosecuted.
Do they think we are really gullible.
its same principle as in the gas prices, oh poor company B makes £500 billion profit but has to put gas prices up as wholesale prices have gone up so they can't afford it.
Same with petrol prices.
sorry getting off topic now.....
in any case the site will only come back with a "3"
Makes me wonder how much revenue Steam made in their summer sale, when the price is right people will buy. I bought 4 or 5 games.
I agree its not a 1 to 1 ratio, but I does = lots sales.
It's an open debate - if you have a shop selling pirate CDs, you'd automatically shut it down... The same is happening here.. Morally and legally, I think the right thing is probably being done..
However when it comes to figures about how much it costs the music industry - in my opinion, they're figures plucked out of thin air... As many of you have already said, how can you say that 10 pirates = £1000 of lost revenue (figuratively speaking)!?
However when it comes to figures about how much it costs the music industry - in my opinion, they're figures plucked out of thin air... As many of you have already said, how can you say that 10 pirates = £1000 of lost revenue (figuratively speaking)!?
The don't lose a penny on my account, because I'm an "ethical pirate". 
I only download telly and films that are shown on the telly. I pay my TV licence, and I could just record it from there. I just choose to download it because it's easier. Any films not on telly yet, I buy the DVD of.
The problem is that the majority of illegal downloaders download music, software and new films that they would otherwise pay for on DVD, which is why it's costing millions a year.
Personally I think it should be policed. Everything else is, so why isn't the internet? This would create more demand for on-demand telly and films, and if they get the pricing right, everyone will get on it because they won't have a choice.
IMO.
I only download telly and films that are shown on the telly. I pay my TV licence, and I could just record it from there. I just choose to download it because it's easier. Any films not on telly yet, I buy the DVD of.
The problem is that the majority of illegal downloaders download music, software and new films that they would otherwise pay for on DVD, which is why it's costing millions a year.
Personally I think it should be policed. Everything else is, so why isn't the internet? This would create more demand for on-demand telly and films, and if they get the pricing right, everyone will get on it because they won't have a choice.
IMO.
because nobody owns the internet. Its like trying to get every country in the world to agree on one thing.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 12 May 2005
- Posts
- 1,780
The US government already censors websites, specifically roguesci.org, a forum that had practical information on things governments don't want citizens to know such as chemistry but was shut down by iDefense, an anti-terrorist organisation.
This move is purely for piracy, not for censoring information.
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Sep 2008
- Posts
- 3,974
- Location
- By the sea, West Sussex
I think they've got it back to front.
Forcing ISPs to block sites set a precedent that will get out of control - who ultimately decides what's "allowed" or not?? Surely they should force the site down and kill it at the source not try to manage it from the ISP end.
Forcing ISPs to block sites set a precedent that will get out of control - who ultimately decides what's "allowed" or not?? Surely they should force the site down and kill it at the source not try to manage it from the ISP end.
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Sep 2008
- Posts
- 3,974
- Location
- By the sea, West Sussex
I disagree with this completely. People that download films / music know what they are doing and if they have their P2P / Usenet killed off will not mean they then go out and buy it.
Film / Music bods that claim that the lack of sales due to piracy assuming each pirated copy = 1 less sale, but it would never had been a sale in the first place for very large numbers of them.
That's basically what he said...
Soldato
- Joined
- 18 May 2010
- Posts
- 23,609
- Location
- London
The problem is they have tried all these things.
Take down one site and 3 spring up around the world.
So they are switching tactics to what they can control, and that is if ISP blacklist sites then their subscribers cant access them, rather then go after the individial sites which is a logistical/legal nightmare.
Not saying I agree with it, just saying its far easier to manage a Government mandated blacklist then go globe trotting trying to take down sites which may not even be located within your national borders.
Look at the pirate bay, after years of trying to take it down, it is now hosted in Egypt! If ISP's block connection to the pirate bay domians then job done!
Its all just a matter of technology and legality.
People are going to say fine, you block the pirate bay, Il pay £5 a month for a vpn thank you very much.
Fine say the British government, after 5 years of debates, they introduce a law saying that vpn connections have to be certified by them first so to verify and control who gets them and for what reason.
Eventually the rest of the world will catch up and then new laws will come in to say that although you can (after being certified to even have one) use vpn, the vpn provider must produce upon request the usage stats of their vpn service.Which eventually will mean that the VPN provider (same like ISP's now) will think hang on, if I dont want to get sued, I need to manage what my vpn connection is bieng used for etc etc etc.
So the moral of the story is, if you want to use the internet, you play by their rules (laws)
Take down one site and 3 spring up around the world.
So they are switching tactics to what they can control, and that is if ISP blacklist sites then their subscribers cant access them, rather then go after the individial sites which is a logistical/legal nightmare.
Not saying I agree with it, just saying its far easier to manage a Government mandated blacklist then go globe trotting trying to take down sites which may not even be located within your national borders.
Look at the pirate bay, after years of trying to take it down, it is now hosted in Egypt! If ISP's block connection to the pirate bay domians then job done!
Its all just a matter of technology and legality.
People are going to say fine, you block the pirate bay, Il pay £5 a month for a vpn thank you very much.
Fine say the British government, after 5 years of debates, they introduce a law saying that vpn connections have to be certified by them first so to verify and control who gets them and for what reason.
Eventually the rest of the world will catch up and then new laws will come in to say that although you can (after being certified to even have one) use vpn, the vpn provider must produce upon request the usage stats of their vpn service.Which eventually will mean that the VPN provider (same like ISP's now) will think hang on, if I dont want to get sued, I need to manage what my vpn connection is bieng used for etc etc etc.
So the moral of the story is, if you want to use the internet, you play by their rules (laws)
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 5 Dec 2010
- Posts
- 3,397
Disagree.
This goes against the entire notion of the Internet which is the free (in all senses of the word) distribution of information. If governments start limiting things like VPNs and websites then there WILL be uproar. This has been the first step on a slipperly slope towards China and Iran.