The Great UK Firewall!

[Andrew]

Well it seems that we are one step closer to the great firewall of the UK, as the MPAA deem it fit to apply to the court to get access to the site newzbin blocked. They are trying to get BT to use the same system that is apparently used to stop access to child sites.

 

This is a rather testing case, and spells bad news for open access in the UK.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-13927335

 

Who the f*ck are the MPAA to tell the UK citizens what sites they can and cannot visit.

 

As of 28/07/2011 BT have been ordered by the courts to use the clearfilter system that is used to filter child abuse to block access to newsbin2 site. This sets a very worrying precdent for continued free access to the internet in the UK.

[M. H. Hunter III]

feel rather sick to be honest, not at this particular news story but that bit by bit we're losing rights we once held.

I sit here over on the other side of pond with our more relaxed (legally speaking) take on censorship and think about how long do the rest of us have before the more relaxed countries start to cave to the pressure of these large companies of pricks.

 

I can the plus side of censoring things that are downright wrong such as CP to name a big one, but companies that run around the world trying to protect IPs for music artists, movie companies/dirctors, and such by trying to get laws changed limiting freedom once held is just wrong. More over it's changing a system that didn't need fixing in that way in the first place, and getting the law to do their job of protecting content.

 

Edited June 28, 2011 by Master Headhunter

[OverTheBelow]

I'm on BT and they block 4chan, but that's about it. I don't really pirate much so this wouldn't really affect me.

 

Still, if they succeed it could encourage them to start blocking whatever site they please, which isn't good.

[Andrew]

It is more the fact if they win this case, that sets a very worrying precedent. That the MPAA and other 80s backwards lobbying groups will pounce upon and block access to every single site that provides access to illegal downloads.

 

But what is more worrying the fact that these ruthless companies are allowed to fight to the extreme, and insist on the way forward is to sue the fans who buy their products and are failing to move with the modern times.

 

Fans want content now, they don't want to have to go out to a store and buy the CD, they want to be able to download it and listen to it straight away or stream the latest films that are out.

 

The whole blocking of sites, any site including CP, shows that we are trying to hide from the problem rather than attempt to tackle it. By blocking it you're just making people even more determined to reach out and find the content that is blocked.

[Josh]

Who the f*ck are the MPAA to tell the UK citizens what sites they can and cannot visit.

Our government cantell us how to wipe our own arses but they never actually do anything constructive.

 

We don't live in a nanny state where the government controls the other media so why do they deem it necessary to control the internet access of people?

 

The internet is a collection of information and humour and some rather strange stuff. Just like a library. And as of yet we haven't started telling people what parts of a library they can or can't visit...

[Andrew]

We don't live in a nanny state where the government controls the other media so why do they deem it necessary to control the internet access of people?

 

 

However the government isn't the one pulling the strings, they are being lobbied and paid probably large chunks of money from the MPAA and record industry to push through changes that will benefit this over paid companies.

 

Parts of the recent copyright act that was written, was written in part by a record company lobbiest, and signed off by an MP. When discussing the changes, they decided to meet closed doors with copyrights holders rather then with eveyone.

 

That to me just shows that they are not willing to listen to fairness, and instead are being driven by donations to the conservative party funds. However we have labour to blame for this farce, in pushing a useless and oppressive bill through parliament before they got kicked out.

[M. H. Hunter III]

Really couldn't have put it better andrew that while they are trying stop piracy in their minds, really it shows that they aren't willing to keep up with the modern age of instantly having what you want without going and physically getting it. Also that the government really couldn't give two sh*ts about any of these matters outside the obvious illegal child stuff, it's these large groups the are fighting tooth and nail to stop a problem where they should be looking into alternative distribution methods really.

I mean once they started getting laughed right out of court for suing single or masses of people for copyright infringement for things as small as a song ffs and decided to turn tail and bully or paying the lawmakers to see things their way instead. But thankfully once we one too many instances of a teenagers getting sued for millions for having a couple of cds the public/the courts woke up to that bullsh*t.

[ska]

Motion Picture Association of America

 

Hmm, what?

[Andrew]

Yeah of America, but it seems they think they can act worldwide, and since the UK bends over for the USA. They seem to be able to getting away with murder.

[GTA3Freak-2001]

Sounds a bit like what our Aussie government is doing here, they are trying to make every ISP take part in a filter that blocks so-called child porn sites but no doubt will expand to cover all the "nasties" the government deem to horrible for us poor people. I shouldn't really be saying they are trying because already some of the major ISP's have agreed to implement the filter.

[Emotion98.3]

It is more the fact if they win this case, that sets a very worrying precedent. That the MPAA and other 80s backwards lobbying groups will pounce upon and block access to every single site that provides access to illegal downloads.

 

But what is more worrying the fact that these ruthless companies are allowed to fight to the extreme, and insist on the way forward is to sue the fans who buy their products and are failing to move with the modern times.

 

Fans want content now, they don't want to have to go out to a store and buy the CD, they want to be able to download it and listen to it straight away or stream the latest films that are out.

 

The whole blocking of sites, any site including CP, shows that we are trying to hide from the problem rather than attempt to tackle it. By blocking it you're just making people even more determined to reach out and find the content that is blocked.

Which is illegal, because how will they gain revenue from making it if everybody is downloading it? Not "Everybody" is downloading now, but sometime in the future a vast majority will be if this continues to happen. It's people like them that are ruining the economy. Which is why I stick to Itunes and Steam, wait for the Summer sales and buy the games off there. :\

 

 

Pretty much any down loader out there needs to....

 

Get. A. Job.

[d00d]

I'm on BT and they block 4chan

What, really? I've never heard of this before. When Verizon "blocked" 4chan a couple years ago there was a sh*tstorm, despite it being for only a day and a total accident.

[Finn 7 five 11]

Sounds a bit like what our Aussie government is doing here, they are trying to make every ISP take part in a filter that blocks so-called child porn sites but no doubt will expand to cover all the "nasties" the government deem to horrible for us poor people. I shouldn't really be saying they are trying because already some of the major ISP's have agreed to implement the filter.

*sigh* my days of watching f*cked up sh*t are over

 

But seriously this is bullsh*t, you can't control everything everyone does, otherwise people will try and fight against, no matter how hard they try there are going to be ways around things.

[Andrew]

What I don't get is how the Government can justify spending large sums of money on a solution that is completely unsustainable, they want to provide faster internet up and down the UK. But if they aren't careful they'll end up with people not investing in the internet, as they'll be too afraid to use it for the fear of being monitored and watched.

 

Not to mention all it takes is a disgruntled employee and your entire history could be out there in the open including all your banking details and anything else.

 

@Emotion, yes downloading is illegal. However the attitude they are doing it because it is free has long gone, now it's more the instant availability of products and the lack of decent solutions in place. For Music and Games that isn't a problem since there is spotify, itunes and steam and countless others. However for films there is very little in way of place, not to mention streaming something of decent quality is going to take alot more bandwidth and require a faster internet connection. Where as downloading it to watch later doesn't require it.

[Andrew]

Bit of a bump here, but it seems that the courts have ordered BT to block access to newzbin2 using the clearfilter system. This sets a worrying predent about what else can be blocked if someone is unhappy with it, and now what other court orders MPA are going to try and put out there.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-14322957

[OverTheBelow]

 

Bit of a bump here, but it seems that the courts have ordered BT to block access to newzbin2 using the clearfilter system. This sets a worrying predent about what else can be blocked if someone is unhappy with it, and now what other court orders MPA are going to try and put out there.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-14322957

Yeah, I saw that;

 

 

"We would be appalled if any group were to try to sabotage this technology as it helps to protect the innocent from highly offensive and illegal content," said a spokesman for BT.

 

hah. right.

[Andrew]

Haha, the technology is used to protects rights holders and that is all it ever will be. It was created on the pretence that it would stop access to child abuse sites and that's what they sold it to Joe public as and they bought it hook, line and sinker. But we know that the people with the money had input on it, hence why the MPA must have been able to win this one.

 

 

 

[Saggy]

Haha, the technology is used to protects rights holders and that is all it ever will be. It was created on the pretence that it would stop access to child abuse sites and that's what they sold it to Joe public as and they bought it hook, line and sinker. But we know that the people with the money had input on it, hence why the MPA must have been able to win this one.

The other important factor here is that people decided it was okay to filter the internet for CP. Of course it would be okay, why let dirty pedophiles watch kids get diddled?

 

Because once you set the precedent, it opens up the door to this kind of sh*t. That's why people should lobby for free, unrestrictive access and not be suckered in by pandering jobs like, "Think of the children!" Of course though, when you get in with an angle like that, you won't have nearly as many people speaking out against it, and the ones who are will be overshadowed by the tremendous amount who don't see the far-reaching implications of things like this until they're already on top of them.

 

I think this is the one time I can say I'm thankful for the FCC, maybe if you guys are lucky they can outreach their jurisdiction and reverse the actions of the MPAA!

[Andrew]

We can only hope that the customers of BT vote with their feet, but sadly 90% of the BT customer base are people who don't have a clue about computers and instead are just with BT because BT are British Telecom..

 

I can't actually remember the discussion about the clearfilter system being proposed or even put into place, however reading up on it under EU law isn't it illegal as it works by using Deep Packet Inspection? Which I'm sure is against EU privacy laws.

 

It's not about that it is stopping illegal downloading its what might happen after other groups decide to try and use the system for their own ends. The internet should always be unrestricted access, and obviously punishment must occur for accessing illegal content on it.

 

MPAA and RIAA are utter twats, they seem to refuse to listen to their customers about what they actually want, which is media now and decent quality and no DRM.

[flotwig]

I just do not understand why the MPAA does not do this the smart way and go after the people running the networks used to distribute illegal materials. They will never be able to block every IP, domain, or server that serves illegal content because of the sheer numbers. If a person wants to pirate material, they will pirate it regardless of how many sites the government has attempted to block. My friend in China was fed up with the censorship there, so he bought an American VPN to get unrestricted access. If people want access to things, they will get access.

The smart thing to do here would be to simply sue whoever is distributing stuff. You would stop them from creating new sites to distribute from, and it might even scare off other distributors. When you block a single website, you just encourage pirates to create more.

[Saggy]

We can only hope that the customers of BT vote with their feet, but sadly 90% of the BT customer base are people who don't have a clue about computers and instead are just with BT because BT are British Telecom..

 

I can't actually remember the discussion about the clearfilter system being proposed or even put into place, however reading up on it under EU law isn't it illegal as it works by using Deep Packet Inspection? Which I'm sure is against EU privacy laws.

 

It's not about that it is stopping illegal downloading its what might happen after other groups decide to try and use the system for their own ends. The internet should always be unrestricted access, and obviously punishment must occur for accessing illegal content on it.

 

MPAA and RIAA are utter twats, they seem to refuse to listen to their customers about what they actually want, which is media now and decent quality and no DRM.

Well, I think it might just depend on how relentlessly the powers-that-be will pursue violation of that in your country. The FCC came down pretty hard on Comcast when it found out they were using DPI to filter out P2P file sharing. My guess is that whatever organization is in charge of enforcing that kind of thing over there is too intimidated to speak out against a system that's purportedly being used to block child porn sites. The FCC here is pretty much unrelenting about privacy concerns like this, but I believe even they don't go after ISPs that implement their own blocking of such sites.

 

Using this type of thing for their own end is exactly what almost happened here a couple of years ago. A lot of cable TV providers like Comcast wanted to block access to certain websites unless a user paid a subscription fee for them. There were also a lot of other things proposed, but it basically led to the big "net neutrality" debate.

[Andrew]

Well it looks like this is just set to get worse: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-15653434

 

MPA are now asking other ISPs to block the site, and recently the BPI have asked BT to block access to the pirate bay. The UK is loosing out on it's net neutrality.

[okei]

this is ridiculous, it wouldnt be the same if it was something like.. the motion picture association of brazil, or switzerland or something stupid, but because it's the motion picture association of America, they can do whatever the f*ck they want because of the whole "high and mighty land of the free, we can do whatever we want, including pushing other countries etc."

 

btw this isn't a jab at american individuals, it's merely a jab at how american corporations and the american govenment can flex their muscles and do what they want. (reminds me of the whole extradition thing too)

[Algonquin Bridge]

This is ludicrous. Last time I checked, violation of copyright was a civil, not a criminal offence. If my presumptions are correct (most likely not), these fiends shouldn't have any right to force the courts to create a law that affects every citizen in the country.

 

Yeah, these companies get upset over ISPs who were initially reluctant to disclose information on people who are EVIL and pirate. Understandable, as the ISPs would lose customers to the chokey. All because home taping is killing the music industry-err, don't copy that flopp-I mean, Video killed the Radio Star.

 

As stated, this is a worrying precedent. What happens if some companies, or 'the man', starts to dislike something, and block it on the internet? I sincerely hope that things won't get like this.

 

I can only hope that another case comes along and reverses the decision. Or hope that the European Courts go "Nope." and overturn the decision.

 

Wonder if it's worth writing to my MP about the issue. Knowing my luck, they'd launch an investigation into my internet history, see that I have a thumbnail of a copyrighted image stored in my cache, and bang me up for being a filthy freedom-hating, copyrighting pirate.

 

 

[lpgunit]

'Tis no wonder why people are so angry at major corporations nowadays.

[ccrogers15]

they cant really do that or they might have ALOT of angry people who will boycott the net. Sorry for you guys in the uk.