And, if the governments keep meddling in this sh*t, a group like Google will create their OWN internet. over 10% of ALL internet traffic traverses Google's very own network structure. Is it REALLY that difficult to see Google investing in their own internet infrastructure? With white space becoming available to ISPs (from the FCC, lol!), it will not be hard for an organization to create more and more "internet". The problem is who owns what on the internet backbones...
You have to requisition some space on the DNS backbones, of which there are like 5 or 6 major internet back bones, 3 of which the US owns.
If the government wants to continue infringing on "free internet use", they can: but they will only make things worse for both enforcing and for regular users.
I volunteer myself to be the Cyber Security Czar, president Obama. Use me and the world will be a freer safer internet.
these guys face constant legal problems, and have police raids on their servers (in Europe), and the user base continues to develop more refined methods.
Regardless of how organized these sites might be, piracy and the like is still a hugely horizontally organized phenomenon, with a very tech savvy base. Even if it were possible to effectively combat these people, are the losses of the MPAA or RIAA really worth the, essentially, draconian measures this puts in place or the never ending flow of cash it is going to require?
There is this "new" Pirate political movement that is growing out of TPB, I think their stance on IP rights sort of throws the baby out with the bathwater, but a lot of what they say, especially regarding the sort of low level piracy this seems aimed at (as opposed to, say, combating counterfeit medicine), is very relevant. Piracy is more of a problem with distribution laws being archaic than it is about people wanting to steal.
depends what you use the internet for, but in general, it could be potentially catastrophic
so, for instance, currently, piracy is organized through hubs, like demonoid or ISOhunt or TPB. These sites operate in a type of legal limbo, because they only facilitate file sharing, which is not the same as (as far as current court cases go) distributing copyright material, and also provides a "plausible deniability" for the site owners, because they can say "we aren't responsible if some of our users want to distribute copyright material" (which a US court recently upheld in the current case against ISOhunt).
what this points to is the ever-changing nature of piracy, and its extreme adaptability. So, imagine these types of sites are shut down, everything will move, as it currently is, to Rapidshare links in forums. So, rapidshare could be targeted, but say that users then start the more direct FTP stuff through forums again. Are they going to start black-listing all forums that have, even if it is against forum policy, hosted links to personal servers? etc.
The problem is, so long as there is some way to transfer data on the internet, pirates will exploit this. If it means finding a way to pirate through facebook and KMC, they will do it. period. The potential from this is obvious.
idk, when are you going to change your sig and avatar pics?
EDIT: my point being that, the idea of "internet piracy" is very poorly defined. Obviously I get your point more than I am letting on, I just think there are better ways to interpret it.
So like, instead of looking at internet piracy as a problem, maybe it is better to look at how companies might be compensated for the way the internet is organized today.
For me, let the RIAA or MPAA or any other body come forward with a legitimate accounting of what they think are real losses, and take them to arbitration with the major ISPs, whose infrastructure it is that such data is being distributed on.
__________________ yes, a million times yes
Last edited by tsilamini on Sep 30th, 2010 at 08:11 PM
And the reprocussions will be an all-out cyber war against "The Man" with "The Man" losing the battle very swiftly. The "laws" need to adapt, not the people adapt to the laws. The products need to adapt as well.
What's sad is I may one day be the moron that has to fight against that cyber war. I don't want to be on the losing side.
Nah. I'm way to honest and patriotic. I was also told that being patriotic can sometimes be taking down a destructive regime...but I don't think that applies in this situation. Just old white men being idiots.
I haven't seen the bill, so don't quote me, but that would have to be the way the law worked, because as it is now, demonoid, isohunt, pirate bay, all of these types of sites have, in their conditions of use, the statement that the site is not to be used for illegal purposes.
in fact, enforcement of this would turn forum mods into gvt employees
KMC Community Forums
Sep 30th, 2010 03:56 PM
I don't want to be on the losing side. 
Not good.
