Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

European ISPs Want Rightsholders Held Accountable for Overblocking Damage

torrentfreak.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 130 posts

Re: European ISPs Want Rightsholders Held Accountable for Overblocking Damage

#31

Post by stwr »

FireBeyond wrote: post #7
gonzalohm wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the US there is lobbying. In Spain there is soccer. I have seen crazy things done just for soccer. The town I used to live in closed my street for a few weeks during one world cup. I wasn't able to use my garage during all that time. Also, somehow small towns always find money available for soccer related stuff (like building stadiums, events, etc.) but there is no money for improving healthcare or building parks.…

> Also, somehow small towns always find money available for soccer related stuff (like building stadiums, events, etc.) but there is no money for improving healthcare or building parks. I mean Texas can hold a candle there. Nearly 30 high school football stadiums with 10,000+ capacity (and 20,000 in a few cases), built for amounts sometimes exceeding $50M each. Some of the stadiums are shared with track and field etc…

That’s crazy, in the Netherlands (though about 16x smaller than Texas) the 10 biggest stadiums in the country are Football (soccer) stadiums ranging from 10400 capacity at #10 to about 56000 capacity for the #1 stadium (build for 130 million euro). All at the highest paid level of professional football.

30 _high school_ stadiums at 10000+ I can’t even fathom!

Re: European ISPs Want Rightsholders Held Accountable for Overblocking Damage

#32

Post by izacus »

nonethewiser wrote: post #29
huijzer wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just to be sure to point out the obvious here, I think the main police effort should be on catching the sources of such material. There is the root problem. In a world were we’re ruled by Epstein friends, this is probably not gonna happen though

>Just to be sure to point out the obvious here, I think the main police effort should be on catching the sources of such material. Uhhh how about both? It is vital the material be taken down as well.

Sure, but let's prioritize catching actual criminals, right? Somehow US started completely ignoring the actual criminals and demanding platforms to play police and not try to punish the actual sources of lawbreaking.

Re: European ISPs Want Rightsholders Held Accountable for Overblocking Damage

#33

Post by qweqwe14 »

nonethewiser wrote: post #26
qweqwe14 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you know if something is child porn?

I dont think it matters for the point im making. Child porn exists and should be censored. What are you suggesting?

It matters because if you can't determine if something is child porn, then you'll end up overblocking, so it doesn't matter if it "exists" and "should be censored"

Re: European ISPs Want Rightsholders Held Accountable for Overblocking Damage

#34

Post by nkrisc »

nonethewiser wrote: post #26
qweqwe14 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you know if something is child porn?

I dont think it matters for the point im making. Child porn exists and should be censored. What are you suggesting?

I think the point they might be trying to make is that there are religious and socially conservative groups that intentionally misclassify anything even remotely related to LBTQ topics as “pornography” so that anti-pornography laws can be used to silence anyone and anything that opposes their regressive views on sexuality, as one example. So it is a line that must be tread carefully.

Re: European ISPs Want Rightsholders Held Accountable for Overblocking Damage

#36

Post by ButlerianJihad »

axus wrote: post #30
ButlerianJihad wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> censorship is bad. Always. Sure! Great slogan! Who can disagree! Now, let's define the terms? What's censorship? Don't we all want some sort of censoring of content? If someone doxxxes me, posts revenge porn of me, threatens me and my family with credible threats of harm, shares my credit card numbers and bank/Bitcoin/Ethereum accounts, uploads all 400 of my password credentials and my mobile phone#, posts videos o…

Rick Santorum was a public figure, his name is fair game.

It only took 13 minutes for an account to bulls-eye exactly the incident I was referring to.

Sure, "fair game", whatever, how can you "censor" a grassroots parody/mockery like this? Part of the game was, it wasn't actually stoppable in any meaningful fashion.

It seems rude, unethical, puerile even, to do this name-calling and dragging through the mud, if you will, and it was perpetrated/spearheaded, so to speak, by a journalist whose morals and platform encouraged that sort of tactic.

I don't think "censorship" was a solution to that incident, and since Mr. Santorum was a politician then "fair game" is a meaningless circumscription.

But perhaps the whole episode should reflect more on the character of the originator, rather than the target?

Re: European ISPs Want Rightsholders Held Accountable for Overblocking Damage

#37

Post by nonethewiser »

qweqwe14 wrote: post #33
nonethewiser wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I dont think it matters for the point im making. Child porn exists and should be censored. What are you suggesting?

It matters because if you can't determine if something is child porn, then you'll end up overblocking, so it doesn't matter if it "exists" and "should be censored"

But my point is some censorship is good. Such as child porn. We can disagree on what constitutes child porn in practice but you arent saying nothing should be censored right?

You do think there is such thing as child porn right? And that it should be censored?

Im not claiming more censorship is better. So I agree it could be overapplied. Im saying some censorship is clearly good.

Re: European ISPs Want Rightsholders Held Accountable for Overblocking Damage

#38

Post by bawolff »

bradley13 wrote: post #12

It's not just Europe. DMCA takedowns in the US: no liability for taking down innocent content. Really, it comes down to this: censorship is bad. Always. If someone violates the law, get a court judgement. With the judgement in hand, take down that specific material. Too much work? Tough...

> It's not just Europe. DMCA takedowns in the US: no liability for taking down innocent content.

Isn't it under penalty of purjury?

Re: European ISPs Want Rightsholders Held Accountable for Overblocking Damage

#39

Post by zuzululu »

the global trend is not good. in south korea the new law prevents anyone from posting memes of the president because they require public square operators to purchase AI hardware that is already expensive at inflated markup (with completely opaque RFP bidding process and no disclosure of beneficiaries) and every image and post be monitored for "fake news/disinformation" by a partisan government body created by the President. Bill C-22 in Canada, la Liga blocking cloudflare, UK requiring IDs....on an unrelated note Playstation store removing purchased games, zero day disclosures not being awarded so they end up in the black market leading to more data leaks....

this entire digital/internet industrial complex is beginning to show real issues. im hoping there is technology in the works that can give us back the old magic of the late 90s internet.

Re: European ISPs Want Rightsholders Held Accountable for Overblocking Damage

#40

Post by bawolff »

ButlerianJihad wrote: post #25
bradley13 wrote: post #12

It's not just Europe. DMCA takedowns in the US: no liability for taking down innocent content. Really, it comes down to this: censorship is bad. Always. If someone violates the law, get a court judgement. With the judgement in hand, take down that specific material. Too much work? Tough...

> censorship is bad. Always. Sure! Great slogan! Who can disagree! Now, let's define the terms? What's censorship? Don't we all want some sort of censoring of content? If someone doxxxes me, posts revenge porn of me, threatens me and my family with credible threats of harm, shares my credit card numbers and bank/Bitcoin/Ethereum accounts, uploads all 400 of my password credentials and my mobile phone#, posts videos o…

If you want to talk in the american context, its not like they wrote the constitution yesterday, there is hundreds of years of juriprudence on the issue.

To be sure its not an easy question, but we aren't starting from zero here.

Post reply on HN