I agree fully. However, I don't think they will ask for mercy - it's all about the government backed extortion tactics that some believe will somehow miraculously save the economies of the world (mostly the US economy).
When the Digital Economy Bill is introduced in the UK, I pray that there will be an ISP who is brave enough to stand up to these criminals (and the complicit government). Enough is enough, and you can't just go around making draconian laws to protect a small group of rights holders. Here in London TalkTalk seems to be the only ISP that has a pair.
After reading the AFACT vs iiNet ruling, it brought a tear to my eye and made me proud to be an Australian. I hope that common sense, justice, and democracy will somehow prevail here in the UK. I for one would gladly donate a couple hundred pounds to TalkTalk (for legal fees) if they were to stand up to this insane DEB and the entertainment industry.
If all else fails, it will be up to the people to decide whether or not they want to fund this group who are not that much different to a modern day corporate Mafia.
@Richard: "No - the point is that currently ONLY the criminals and terrorists are using encryption".
I strongly disagree with this absurd statement as it simply isn't true. On a daily basis I access my Linux servers at my home using SSH. Does this make me a criminal? Would it be preferable if I used telnet instead? The emails I send my business partners are digitally signed and encrypted. Does this indicate criminal/terrorist activity? Not to mention my online purchases and online banking - this is always conducted over (surprise, surprise) an encrypted connection!
I predict that if this Bill passes (which it will) and there is an exodus from unencrypted P2P services to encrypted P2P services (which has already begun), then within a few years the use of cryptography by normal every day citizens will be outlawed. Governments will regulate the use of cryptography, and citizens will be required to apply for licenses and to register their private/public keys with the government (because we can trust them, right? They only want what's best for their constituents and they respect the freedoms of individuals, right?). Any of you whipper snappers old enough to remember the NSA's "Clipper" chip (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clipper_chip) and the concept behind "Key Escrow"?
This Bill has wider reaching implications that no-one to date has brought to light. It's something we (law abiding citizens) should all be concerned about.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by ScottDeagan.
To hell with such laws
It will be a cold day in hell before I self-censor. Macron probably does have hidden foreign bank accounts, he just doesn't want people talk about it.
The guy married his grandma (at least someone old enough to be his grandma). Says all I need to know about "...Macwon...".
Re: Re: YAA :- Yet Another Aussie
I agree fully. However, I don't think they will ask for mercy - it's all about the government backed extortion tactics that some believe will somehow miraculously save the economies of the world (mostly the US economy).
When the Digital Economy Bill is introduced in the UK, I pray that there will be an ISP who is brave enough to stand up to these criminals (and the complicit government). Enough is enough, and you can't just go around making draconian laws to protect a small group of rights holders. Here in London TalkTalk seems to be the only ISP that has a pair.
After reading the AFACT vs iiNet ruling, it brought a tear to my eye and made me proud to be an Australian. I hope that common sense, justice, and democracy will somehow prevail here in the UK. I for one would gladly donate a couple hundred pounds to TalkTalk (for legal fees) if they were to stand up to this insane DEB and the entertainment industry.
If all else fails, it will be up to the people to decide whether or not they want to fund this group who are not that much different to a modern day corporate Mafia.
Re: Riiiight....
Brilliant! Couldn't agree more.
The future of cryptography for the masses
@Richard: "No - the point is that currently ONLY the criminals and terrorists are using encryption". I strongly disagree with this absurd statement as it simply isn't true. On a daily basis I access my Linux servers at my home using SSH. Does this make me a criminal? Would it be preferable if I used telnet instead? The emails I send my business partners are digitally signed and encrypted. Does this indicate criminal/terrorist activity? Not to mention my online purchases and online banking - this is always conducted over (surprise, surprise) an encrypted connection! I predict that if this Bill passes (which it will) and there is an exodus from unencrypted P2P services to encrypted P2P services (which has already begun), then within a few years the use of cryptography by normal every day citizens will be outlawed. Governments will regulate the use of cryptography, and citizens will be required to apply for licenses and to register their private/public keys with the government (because we can trust them, right? They only want what's best for their constituents and they respect the freedoms of individuals, right?). Any of you whipper snappers old enough to remember the NSA's "Clipper" chip (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clipper_chip) and the concept behind "Key Escrow"? This Bill has wider reaching implications that no-one to date has brought to light. It's something we (law abiding citizens) should all be concerned about.