block the RIAA and MPAA

[Sarreq Teryx]

just found this article through pro-networks.org, and found it to be an extremely good idea: block RIAA's and the MPAA's access to the site. details here — how to block RIAA/MPAA acces to the site (http://techfocus.org/comments.php?catid=17&id=3662)

[Xesdeeni]

While I disagree that the litigation against individual copyright violators is in any way wrong (this is precisely what any copyright holder is supposed to do to protect their property), the method of obtaining the information (using the unconstitutional DMCA) bypassed due process, and the penalties being cited are ridiculous. But above all, the RIAA and MPAA have been heavy-handed in every other approach they have taken (seeding P2P networks with bogus files, threatening to spread viruses, etc.). At some point they have to re-realize what book vendors realized when copy machines came out, what the RIAA realized when cassette recorders came out, and what the MPAA realized when the VCR came out: you can't stop progress through litigation, just work within the technology and profit!

To that end, and to send that signal, I wholeheartedly agree that blocking the RIAA and MPAA from this site could send such a message.

Xesdeeni

[OvERaCiD23]

I don't think that applies here, as everything on this site currently is within the boundaries of the law. Doom9 appears to be fairly strict on anything that is even borderline, and the moderators do a good job. I think the RIAA/MPAA should be allowed on here, to read what we're doing and how we enjoy it, all the time obeying the law. They'll realize what they're attempting to do is stupid, one day.....

[Xesdeeni]

I disagree that "everything on this site currently is within the boundaries of the law," at least where U.S. law applies. The DMCA makes bypassing any copy protection illegal. That means hacks to disable Macrovision and CSS-breaking programs used to create backups of DVDs are technically illegal (although I'm sure that the DMCA will be ruled unconstitutional eventually). The intent doesn't need to be criminal for the act to be illegal.

And the MPAA and RIAA (now introducing copy-protected CDs) are responsible for making criminals out of those of us who are not doing anything that should be against the law. And the DMCA has allowed the RIAA to obtain private information about alleged copyright violators using Verizon as an ISP without any judge cross-checking their information (you know, like every police officer would have to do).

I think a protest of this sort is a gesture aimed at telling these two heavy-handed organizations that we don't appreciate what they are doing.

Xesdeeni

[mpucoder]

Blocking any organization will only increase their interest in our activities.
It is also not possible to block access to every member of an organization such as the RIAA or MPAA. While their IP addresses and those of investigators working for them are known to some extent, individuals within the organizations can access the internet from anywhere. Internet cafes are one place, another is AOL, which uses a huge pool of addresses. Would you block all AOL users because one might be working for the MPAA?

[Sarreq Teryx]

I don't think that applies here, as everything on this site currently is within the boundaries of the law. Doom9 appears to be fairly strict on anything that is even borderline, and the moderators do a good job. I think the RIAA/MPAA should be allowed on here, to read what we're doing and how we enjoy it, all the time obeying the law. They'll realize what they're attempting to do is stupid, one day.....It has nothing to do with blocking what they can see us doing, it has to do with blocking them as a statement from the rest of the world saying we're against their tactics. like xesdeeni said:
I think a protest of this sort is a gesture aimed at telling these two heavy-handed organizations that we don't appreciate what they are doing.
Blocking any organization will only increase their interest in our activities.I'd think so
It is also not possible to block access to every member of an organization such as the RIAA or MPAA. While their IP addresses and those of investigators working for them are known to some extent, individuals within the organizations can access the internet from anywhere.yes, but it makes it quite a bit harder for them to do it without going to a cafe or their homes. the point is to make it harder on them to actually use the internet at all.
Internet cafes are one place, another is AOL, which uses a huge pool of addresses. Would you block all AOL users because one might be working for the MPAA?not only for one user, but seeing as AOL is owned by Time-Warner (hence the company's new name, AOL-Time-Warner), who are a core member of the RIAA and MPAA, if it becomes as neccessary as the RIAA and MPAA will probably make it, and finally gets the message accross, sure. Sure it'll block any AOL customers from the web, which if it does come down to that, will cost AOL plenty of money, and most likely get A-T-W to back down from backing RIAA's positioning because of it.
Yes that's a bit extreme, but if RIAA/MPAA start getting bolder in their tactics, then it could be very neccessary.

If they're going to ƒµçķ with their customers, it's up to us customers to ƒµçķ with them right back.

[chemmajik]

Block them anyways., fkm if they can't take a joke!

[avih]

Originally posted by chemmajik
Block them anyways., fkm if they can't take a joke!

pls behave.

[Xesdeeni]

Techfocus was very clear that they realized "While it may still be possible for them to access Techfocus via address ranges which we're not aware of, they'll otherwise have to use non-RIAA and non-MPAA networks to view the site."

This is a statement of protest, and little more. But I think it's a statement worth making.

Xesdeeni

[Sarreq Teryx]

RIAA shooting off subpoenas to family members (and roommates) of files swappers (http://customwire.ap.org/dynamic/stories/D/DOWNLOADING_MUSIC?SITE=OHCLE&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT)

is there still any doubt as to why they should be blocked yet?

[mpucoder]

I think you are bringing an unrelated issue into this. While you may not like the RIAA's way it pursues criminal violations of the copyright act, it has nothing to do with this site.
First of all, this is a DVD site, so actions by the RIAA are not anywhere near as important as the MPAA, and they act quite differently.
But in respect to DVD, we do not encourage file swapping, or even allow discussion concerning file swapping. We refuse to help anyone with problems related to illegally downloaded files. In short, we are not targets of investigation, and our policies are designed to prevent that from ever happening.

[Wilbert]

The dark digital age has began :( They also started in Spain (http://arstechnica.infopop.net/OpenTopic/page?a=tpc&s=50009562&f=174096756&m=9570946675&r=9570946675):

"32 companies there have decided to pursue 4000 suspected P2P pirates, but there's a twist: the companies want to remain anonymous for now because they fear public reprisals"

[r6d2]

Come on, guys, filtering out/censoring some visitors? Isn't the Internet the place where freedom has its true realm?

If they are fighting technology in a stupid looking way, so be it. The important point for them is if they are accomplishing the objective of avoiding piracy or not. They'll soon find out.

BTW, I think everybody should be responsible for what they do online, and not to pretend to get away with anything because nobody's looking close enough.

[Sarreq Teryx]

Originally posted by mpucoder
I think you are bringing an unrelated issue into this. While you may not like the RIAA's way it pursues criminal violations of the copyright act, it has nothing to do with this site.
First of all, this is a DVD site, so actions by the RIAA are not anywhere near as important as the MPAA, and they act quite differently.
But in respect to DVD, we do not encourage file swapping, or even allow discussion concerning file swapping. We refuse to help anyone with problems related to illegally downloaded files. In short, we are not targets of investigation, and our policies are designed to prevent that from ever happening.
except that well over half of the companies behind the RIAA are also behind the MPAA, most notably AOL-Time-Warner, Universal, Disney, Sony, RCA, Viacom (I think), Fox. etc. Once the RIAA has successfully gotten away with this, then they'll start on to movie related sites and pirates, though this site may not be of the pirate variety, that doesn't mean that they won't try to pin something on it anyway. they're still of the mind that DeCSS, or any other way of removing any DVD copy protection is illegal.

Originally posted by r2d2
Come on, guys, filtering out/censoring some visitors? Isn't the Internet the place where freedom has its true realm? If they are fighting technology in a stupid looking way, so be it. The important point for them is if they are accomplishing the objective of avoiding piracy or not. They'll soon find out.yes, which is why blocking the RIAA/MPAA, if they keep their practices up, is a good thing. if they're allowed to keep doing what they want to do, you can look foward to the continuation of the DMCA (in america) and the introduction of the european DMCA, the SSSCA/CBPTPA (which if you read it, would criminalize any new development of a digital device by anyone but a RIAA/MPAA approved company), causing prices of anything digital to rise massively because smaller companies wouldn't be able to compete. This has absloutely nothing to do with hiding our online activities, it has all to do with protesting the activities of several very large companies who have the resources to entirely ƒµçķ up that same internet freedom if we allow them to.

BTW, I think everybody should be responsible for what they do online, and not to pretend to get away with anything because nobody's looking close enough.that's all fine, but they should find a responsible way of pursuing their ends, not this demi-gestapo scare tactic crap they're pulling now.

[r6d2]

Originally posted by Sarreq Teryx
causing prices of anything digital to rise massively because smaller companies wouldn't be able to compete.

@Sarreq Teryx,

The is no way they can get away against technology. The more the prices go up, the more brilliant minds will put their efforts into breaking the code. And they will succeed.


This has absloutely nothing to do with hiding our online activities, it has all to do with protesting the activities of several very large companies who have the resources to entirely ƒµçķ up that same internet freedom if we allow them to.

There are surely other "class of people", like terrorists, pedophiles, pro nazis, etc., which sould also be banned to protect the world freedom and the Internet freedom. Maybe our protesting efforts should go better there! :)

But that is simply not possible with just technology. FreeNet, for instance, is a demonstration on how to circumvent any possible attempt of Big Brother watching over our shoulders.

So the brilliant minds will not be caught.

that's all fine, but they should find a responsible way of pursuing their ends, not this demi-gestapo scare tactic crap they're pulling now.
What they are doing is legal? Is it illegal? Is that matter already settled? Is it constitutional? That's a question for the courts to decide, isn't it?

If they convince the Supreme Court that it's not demi-gestapo then it means that the court has privileged one right (the copyright beholder) over the other (the P2P user).

You have the right to do anything that does not affect other people's legally acquired right. You have no right to use someone else's job without paying for it, that's stealing, and private property is the basis of our occidental culture and economy. Wipe it out and the economy as we know it is gone.

If you think that what they're doing now is unresponsible, you should check what they did before: they initiated actions against the ISPs providing service to P2P users! Now that was nice! :mad: (I used to run an ISP).

I think they're improving. Maybe they finally get it.

[Animaniac]

Maybe making certain forums, such as Decrypting, only viewable after registration is a good idea. The rest of the stuff discussed here has legal applications.

[Sarreq Teryx]

:D :D AOL is even ashamed of Time-Warner's invovelment (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=528&ncid=528&e=9&u=/ap/20030811/ap_on_hi_te/aol_time_warner) :D :D





edit: Sorry didn't read it through first, no mention of the RIAA being a reason