High Court orders British ISPs to block "The Pirate Bay"

[HarryT]

I'm not sure what it is we're disagreeing about, Tommy. The High Court, in February, in a court case brought against TPB by the British Phonographic Industry (BPI), ruled that the site was guilty of aiding copyright infrigement. This blocking order, issued by the Court, is the consequence of that verdict. It's not an arbitrary ban; it's the result of "due process" and a court ruling.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I'm not sure what it is we're disagreeing about, Tommy. The High Court, in February, in a court case brought against TPB by the British Phonographic Industry (BPI), ruled that the site was guilty of aiding copyright infrigement. This blocking order, issued by the Court, is the consequence of that verdict. It's not an arbitrary ban; it's the result of "due process" and a court ruling.

You said:

The UK court shared the view of the Swedish courts who convicted the operators of the site of "aiding" copyright infringement, even though they don't host any infringing material themselves.

This is not true since the Swedish courts opinion was not for the same thing as the UK courts opinion. So they did not share a view. It seems to me that the Swedish courts would not have convicted the current instantiation of Pirate Bay.

[Sil_liS]

How many countries have inefficiently blocked TPB so far? It was blocked in the Netherlands as well at some point.

Before torrent sites there were pirate radio stations. A few decades from now there will be the next pirate thing. Even if they manage to efficiently block illegal torrents, the next thing will take them by surprise and the world will go through this nonsense again.

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by tompe

Eh, yes. That is exactly the kind of places regular people go to since they might have trouble finding more closed better places. And yes regular people do download stuff.

"Regular" people switched to sites like TPB from buying bootleg copies from market stalls or work colleagues. That gave them more disposable income to spend on other types of entertainment (the average bootleg was about £3, compared to the £10 or so a legit copy would cost or the £0 for a download). Block off download sites, or make them harder to access, and guess what they will go back to doing?

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I'm not sure what it is we're disagreeing about, Tommy. The High Court, in February, in a court case brought against TPB by the British Phonographic Industry (BPI), ruled that the site was guilty of aiding copyright infrigement. This blocking order, issued by the Court, is the consequence of that verdict. It's not an arbitrary ban; it's the result of "due process" and a court ruling.

Surely the BPI only have control over music released by corporations who pay them subscriptions, not anything else that may have been on that site? Certainly nothing put there by independent musicians trying to promote themselves. It's a shame we don't have anything like a class action suit in the UK, because they are definitely hurting the real music industry with this action.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

Surely the BPI only have control over music released by corporations who pay them subscriptions, not anything else that may have been on that site? Certainly nothing put there by independent musicians trying to promote themselves. It's a shame we don't have anything like a class action suit in the UK, because they are definitely hurting the real music industry with this action.

Are you seriously suggesting that TPB is not aiding people to infringe copyright?

Sorry, but you seem to be contradicting yourself. Not so long ago, you were arguing against sites being blocked without due process of law. This is a block which has been enacted as the direct result of due process, and a full legal hearing. I would have expected that you'd be fully supportive of it!

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

"Regular" people switched to sites like TPB from buying bootleg copies from market stalls or work colleagues. That gave them more disposable income to spend on other types of entertainment (the average bootleg was about £3, compared to the £10 or so a legit copy would cost or the £0 for a download).

So we should encourage piracy, on the grounds that it gives people more disposible income to spend on other goods?

[petrucci]

While I think that governments should act to stop piracy, I do not think that blocking/censoring TPB is justified. In many ways TPB can be compared to Google, which displays links to sites, some of which violate copyright.

Governments should be glad that sites such as TPB exist, as it makes it easier to find the pirates.

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Are you seriously suggesting that TPB is not aiding people to infringe copyright?

Sorry, but you seem to be contradicting yourself. Not so long ago, you were arguing against sites being blocked without due process of law. This is a block which has been enacted as the direct result of due process, and a full legal hearing. I would have expected that you'd be fully supportive of it!

I'm saying infringing copyright is not the only purpose or use of site like that, and by effectively closing them down they are depriving income from people who use them for legitimate promotional purposes. How are those people going to be compensated?

I don't remember ever saying something should be closed down through legal means, what I've always said is unauthorised content (or links to it) should be removed at the request of the creator (or owner). That way people who don't care, or who put it there themself, don't get inconvenienced.

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by HarryT

So we should encourage piracy, on the grounds that it gives people more disposible income to spend on other goods?

It's not about encouraging piracy, it's about what people will do. Download it for free or pay £3 for a bootleg copy and spend less on something else to compensate. I suppose it will put more money in the pockets of bootleggers, and they will spend it on something, so it probably all evens out anyway.

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

I'm saying infringing copyright is not the only purpose or use of site like that, and by effectively closing them down they are depriving income from people who use them for legitimate promotional purposes. How are those people going to be compensated?

The site is called The Pirate Bay!
They are hardly hiding the primary purpose, are they?
Are there no other legitmate sites people can use? By blocking TPB, have all other methods of disseminating legal material been closed?
If you lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas.

I guess I have no problem with ISP's being forced to block sights like The Pirate Bay. I mean lets get real, the only reason it exists is to allow people to to download copyrighted material, especially films and music, for free. Blocking it seems like a much more effective strategy for preventing content theft, while not causing problems for people who legitimately buy content in the way things like DRM do. It is certainly a better approach than attempting to identify individual offenders and suing them.

[Ninjalawyer]

Originally Posted by Hamlet53

I guess I have no problem with ISP's being forced to block sights like The Pirate Bay. I mean lets get real, the only reason it exists is to allow people to to download copyrighted material, especially films and music, for free. Blocking it seems like a much more effective strategy for preventing content theft, while not causing problems for people who legitimately buy content in the way things like DRM do. It is certainly a better approach than attempting to identify individual offenders and suing them.

My problem is that the operators of the pirate bay haven't been charged with any crime in the UK, but the UK government can obtain an order against telecommunications companies to block people from accessing particular websites. Blocking a site may be more effective, but it certainly seems like an overreach for the government to start engaging in censorship.

I agree the overriding use of the Pirate Bay is piracy, in spite of the fact that their are legitimate files on the site, and that the Promo Bay is a useful platform for artist promotion. However, I think that censorship is worse for people in the UK than The Pirate Bay.

[elcreative]

Originally Posted by Ninjalawyer

My problem is that the operators of the pirate bay haven't been charged with any crime in the UK, but the UK government can obtain an order against telecommunications companies to block people from accessing particular websites. Blocking a site may be more effective, but it certainly seems like an overreach for the government to start engaging in censorship.

I agree the overriding use of the Pirate Bay is piracy, in spite of the fact that their are legitimate files on the site, and that the Promo Bay is a useful platform for artist promotion. However, I think that censorship is worse for people in the UK than The Pirate Bay.

Read full details... blocking NOTHING to do with government censorship... result of Court Order after due process of law - there is a difference...

[xg4bx]

i always look at the endgame. ok so they block pirate sites.....what's next? once they get a foot in the door they never stop and before you know it you may as well live in china.

hey you know what, certain political sites are injurious. i mean we can all live without sites like stormfront, right? those people are making money off hate and we can't have that, can we? like i said, it never stops.