BT ordered to censor web

[roachcoach]

A High Court judge has ruled that BT must block access to a website which provides links to pirated movies.

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



Blocking 'pirate' sites with the same method as is used to block child porn?


Weapons grade fk up imo.


Not to mention all the scope creep I eagerly look forward to.


/hunts down a decent proxy/VPN service

[Funk]

I just said exactly that to my mate - a secure VPN to a proxy abroad (already in place) and the UK blocking becomes almost irrelevant.

Perhaps they should be focussing on why people don't think films are worth paying for.

Edited by Funk on Thursday 28th July 20:09

[hornet]

So Google then?

[Oakey]

hornet said:

So Google then?

You mean will they be blocking Google? Because I know if I want to find, say a torrent, Google is usually the first port of call. why waste time going to individual sites when i can just type in the name of what i'm looking for with 'torrent' at the end in Google and voila?

[hornet]

Oakey said:

You mean will they be blocking Google? Because I know if I want to find, say a torrent, Google is usually the first port of call. why waste time going to individual sites when i can just type in the name of what i'm looking for with 'torrent' at the end in Google and voila?

I did indeed mean "so will they be blocking Google then?". Seems odd to block a Usenet indexing service (even if people DO use it for mostly pirated material) but not block Google, which, as you point out can be used in exactly the same way. Failing that, even if you ARE blocked, other people won't not be, so this will just lead to new sharing networks popping up. I could quite easily stick my entire music collection in an Truecrypt volume, pop that in Dropbox and then share the key over a private channel, and I'm not THAT technical. If the likes of me know that sort of thing is possible, people intent on sharing properly large amounts of data are doubtless already doing it via much darker channels. This might look like a "victory", but it's just pissing in the wind.

[Chrisw666]

Funk said:

Perhaps they should be focussing on why people don't think films are worth paying for.

It's not a bad point, the same question could be asked of music.

[roachcoach]

Google have money and vicious lawyers.

(And based on what they did to Belgian papers, phenomenal ability to be complete bds when people are being stupid)

[130R]

Funk said:

I just said exactly thst to my mate - a secure VPN to a proxy abroad (already in place) and the UK blocking becomes almost irrelevant.

At this point just not using BT's DNS servers is enough ... I stopped using them after the illegal Phorm trials.

[roachcoach]

130R said:

t this point just not using BT's DNS servers is enough ... I stopped using them after the illegal Phorm trials.

Maybe not, this is the system they want using:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleanfeed_(content_bl...

[jimmyjimjim]

roachcoach said:

Google have money and vicious lawyers.

(And based on what they did to Belgian papers, phenomenal ability to be complete bds when people are being stupid)

I somehow missed this, had to google(!) it to find out. Class.

[Matt..]

At this rate i might as well use Tor all the time for accessing the internet!

[Perra]

Matt.. said:

At this rate I might as well use Tor all the time for accessing the internet!

This is the thing, as st as Tor is, if enough people get involved then it will become pretty nippy.

I imagine the judges don't have a clue of any of the workarounds, they imagine the block will actually do something. If anyone is switched on enough to use these services then they will obviously be able to google "how to get around BT Newzbin block", I imagine there's already a thread out there somewhere explaining how to do it.

[MonkeyBusiness]

As a BT Broadband customer you get access to BT's own newsgroup server which is full of illegal films & software (apparently).

[Vipers]

Funk said:

I just said exactly that to my mate - a secure VPN to a proxy abroad (already in place) and the UK blocking becomes almost irrelevant.

Perhaps they should be focussing on why people don't think films are worth paying for.

Edited by Funk on Thursday 28th July 20:09

If films were a quid to see, folk would still download them for free, human nature really. As long as stuff is free on the internete, folk will use them.

Personally I like to see a film on the big screen.

[Halb]

Vipers said:

If films were a quid to see, folk would still download them for free, human nature really. As long as stuff is free on the internete, folk will use them.
Personally I like to see a film on the big screen.

Me too, I love seeing films at the flicks, I love my box sets and special editions and used to spend more than the average person on films, and I shall still watch illegally downloaded films (I don't dload them myself because I CBA)

[MaximumJed]

Vipers said:

Personally I like to see a film on the big screen.

Outside of the illegal downloads thing - why? I go to the cinema to see new releases but if I could get a Blu-Ray copy of it the moment it came out and watch it at home, I would.

[Halb]

MaximumJed said:

Outside of the illegal downloads thing - why? I go to the cinema to see new releases but if I could get a Blu-Ray copy of it the moment it came out and watch it at home, I would.

The experience is better, it is not as good as it used to be, all these multiplexes have ste screens, compared to the old 3 screen Odeon I used to go to with its bear pit and huge sloping auditorium.

[elster]

It seems google have already started editing their search results.

[Dracoro]

Halb said:

MaximumJed said:

Outside of the illegal downloads thing - why? I go to the cinema to see new releases but if I could get a Blu-Ray copy of it the moment it came out and watch it at home, I would.

The experience is better, it is not as good as it used to be, all these multiplexes have ste screens, compared to the old 3 screen Odeon I used to go to with its bear pit and huge sloping auditorium.

Some films are watch at home on TV type stuff (dramas etc.) and aren't really enhanced by the cinema experience. Some are better that the cinema (big action movies etc.).

[MaximumJed]

Dracoro said:

Some films are watch at home on TV type stuff (dramas etc.) and aren't really enhanced by the cinema experience. Some are better that the cinema (big action movies etc.).

I used to agree, but now I generally prefer to watch them at home. I don't have a particularly large TV (though I am looking at one) but do have a decent sound system and am genuinely getting to a point where I would rather wait for most blockbusters to be available at home than go to the cinema and hear idiots *, get my chair kicked, and pay huge prices for drinks/food (or risk getting thrown out for bringing my own).

Need to start my own luxury cinema chain I think

* Seems to have been a big rise in people who have to explain parts of the film to each other mid-movie, and not complex ones either, stuff like Transformers and Bridesmaids

Anyway - back to topic:
I tend to buy a copy of a movie on DVD/Blu-Ray, put it in a big box in my loft and watch a downloaded version instead. I tried doing the ripping each one onto my media network, but it's annoying and time consuming. I can download a 40GB Blu-Ray rip in less time than it takes me to go to the shops and buy it and they are identical.

Edited by MaximumJed on Friday 29th July 09:29