Well, I wouldn't say we're ecstatic about it. I'm fairly sure that none of pirateparty.org.uk itself holds copyright infringing material and seeing abuse of copyright never makes us particularly happy.
Anyway, thank you for pointing that out (and Techdirt too), I'm spreading the news.
Don't be foolish. Sweden already learnt they were powerless to stop copyright infringement. In fact their pitiful attempts to curb it by monitoring IP addresses meant most of Swedish traffic switched to using VPNs to hide their details and reported piracy rates actually INCREASED.
Gov't will always be technologically behind because it is constantly stuck in a backwaards mindset. MI5 opposed the DEAct in the UK, because they anticipated the increase in encrypted traffic would make it far harder to distinguish 'petty criminals' from terrorists and other MI5 targets and more work would have to be done to crack more encrypted lines of communication.
Not from where Egypt, Tunisia, and soon Libya are looking at it. I have no doubt this so-called 'Jasmine Revolution' will spread to the west by the end of the year.
Your right to enforce copyright stops at due process. You cannot simply ban this technology because of the remote possibility that it will be used for copyright infringement.
Next we'll be shutting down all search engines because they might be used to search for links to sites that might be used for copyright infringement
By the same analogy (and more accurately) you can call a leg a tail but it's still going to be used for walking on.
Stop making stupid analogies and stop assuming that someone's right to enforce universal copyright of their own work is greater than someone else's right to free speech.
@1 You're completely wrong. How many people would want the fact they've been searching for erectile dysfunction treatment being uncovered because of a court order served on ISP records because that IP address might have been used 5 years ago to download a snuff porn film illegally.
Then you have people who want to work from home. If they don't work in a company that runs their own VPN, sensitive data is going over the wire that can put businesses at risk.
Yes, actually they are linked. Neither of them will be stopped if you simply try to censor traffic. The only way to stop them is at the source (which in the case of child porn is significantly easier, largely because you have at least one witness).
You don't need to replace patents. They stunt the progress of technology for the sole reason of giving companies a guaranteed monopoly over said technology.
There's a difference between taking credit for an idea/technology, and reverse engineering one and then building your own from what you've learned
That's such a crappy system.
All you need is the artists (in whatever forms) some sort of trust or holding group (which labels were originally meant to be) and commercial customers and non-commercial costumers.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by Topperfalkon.
Re: Interesting
Well, I wouldn't say we're ecstatic about it. I'm fairly sure that none of pirateparty.org.uk itself holds copyright infringing material and seeing abuse of copyright never makes us particularly happy.
Anyway, thank you for pointing that out (and Techdirt too), I'm spreading the news.
ISPs wont be against it, especially in the latter case. After all, someone has to carry all that data.
Don't be foolish. Sweden already learnt they were powerless to stop copyright infringement. In fact their pitiful attempts to curb it by monitoring IP addresses meant most of Swedish traffic switched to using VPNs to hide their details and reported piracy rates actually INCREASED.
Gov't will always be technologically behind because it is constantly stuck in a backwaards mindset. MI5 opposed the DEAct in the UK, because they anticipated the increase in encrypted traffic would make it far harder to distinguish 'petty criminals' from terrorists and other MI5 targets and more work would have to be done to crack more encrypted lines of communication.
Not from where Egypt, Tunisia, and soon Libya are looking at it. I have no doubt this so-called 'Jasmine Revolution' will spread to the west by the end of the year.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Agreed with Joe.
Ultimately there is little difference between a dictator and an IP holder. Both of them are with-holding freedom in one form or another.
Your right to enforce copyright stops at due process. You cannot simply ban this technology because of the remote possibility that it will be used for copyright infringement.
Next we'll be shutting down all search engines because they might be used to search for links to sites that might be used for copyright infringement
By the same analogy (and more accurately) you can call a leg a tail but it's still going to be used for walking on.
Stop making stupid analogies and stop assuming that someone's right to enforce universal copyright of their own work is greater than someone else's right to free speech.
@1 You're completely wrong. How many people would want the fact they've been searching for erectile dysfunction treatment being uncovered because of a court order served on ISP records because that IP address might have been used 5 years ago to download a snuff porn film illegally.
Then you have people who want to work from home. If they don't work in a company that runs their own VPN, sensitive data is going over the wire that can put businesses at risk.
Yes, actually they are linked. Neither of them will be stopped if you simply try to censor traffic. The only way to stop them is at the source (which in the case of child porn is significantly easier, largely because you have at least one witness).
You don't need to replace patents. They stunt the progress of technology for the sole reason of giving companies a guaranteed monopoly over said technology.
There's a difference between taking credit for an idea/technology, and reverse engineering one and then building your own from what you've learned
Pro-tip:
When doing David Attenborough impressions, l2grammar first.
AGGH!
That's such a crappy system. All you need is the artists (in whatever forms) some sort of trust or holding group (which labels were originally meant to be) and commercial customers and non-commercial costumers.