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

51–60 of 130 posts

Re: European ISPs Want Rightsholders Held Accountable for Overblocking Damage

#51

Post by microgpt »

username_my1 wrote: post #14
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...

soon with the age verification laws, the mass surveillance laws coming we'll have a great wall of Europe ... my guess is that they're following the Russian / Chinese model. banning of VPN is a matter of time. then the days of free or anonymous internet is behind us.

you might have more success by thinking about things that are actually happening or about to happen instead of speculating so far.

We already have a great wall of Europe, it's implemented on the US side of the ocean by websites that are afraid to somehow get in GDPR trouble or (more likely) want to put pressure to repeal GDPR.

Did you know you can do that, by the way? You can block your website in Bumfuckistan citing bill AB1234 and if your site is big enough it puts pressure to repeal that bill no matter what it's about.

Re: European ISPs Want Rightsholders Held Accountable for Overblocking Damage

#52

Post by Dibby053 »

Cider9986 wrote: post #28
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…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shouting_fire_in_a_crowded_the...

>The phrase is a paraphrasing of a dictum, or non-binding statement, from Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.'s opinion in the United States Supreme Court case Schenck v. United States in 1919, which held that the defendant's speech in opposition to the draft during World War I was not protected free speech under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.

Re: European ISPs Want Rightsholders Held Accountable for Overblocking Damage

#53

Post by Arubis »

This strikes me as the right move, but the timing isn't lost on me. Model training companies want easier access to data, and they have a lot of money and are growing their lobbying and political influence muscles.

The culture of the people should belong to _the people_. Let's make sure this doesn't just turn into a transfer of which small subset manages to profit from it.

Re: European ISPs Want Rightsholders Held Accountable for Overblocking Damage

#54

Post by microgpt »

Cider9986 wrote: post #28
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…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shouting_fire_in_a_crowded_the...

This phrase was coined when the government, having arrested somebody for handing out leaflets opposing the draft in WW1, claimed that handing out leaflets opposing the draft was the moral equivalent of shouting fire in a crowded theater.

Re: European ISPs Want Rightsholders Held Accountable for Overblocking Damage

#56

Post by microgpt »

greenavocado wrote: post #6
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. Bread and circuses. Whatever it takes to suppress the instinctual nationalistic ambitions of the people by redirecting their spirits and energy into /dev/null

Is it always nationalistic?

Re: European ISPs Want Rightsholders Held Accountable for Overblocking Damage

#57

Post by joe_mamba »

stwr wrote: post #31
FireBeyond wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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!

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

Just like those European football fans visiting the US for the world cup this summer, the European mind cannot fathom the American (over)abundance.

Re: European ISPs Want Rightsholders Held Accountable for Overblocking Damage

#58

Post by microgpt »

gonzalohm wrote: post #17
dummydummy1234 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

... Out of curiosity, why did they close the street? Was it to turn it into public walking space? (I'm trying to imagine a reason and coming up short...)

It's a wide street and they installed a screen. I guess that's not something that you can set-up for every match so they decided to leave it up the whole time. The problem I have with it is not that my street was closed. It's that soccer always gets all the preferential treatment. Why not set that up for badminton or tennis? We have spectacular players but soccer seems to be the only important sport

They should set up a screen across every road for Revision :)

Re: European ISPs Want Rightsholders Held Accountable for Overblocking Damage

#59

Post by microgpt »

expo98 wrote: post #16

I hope so, in Spain you can't access anything that uses Cloudflare, even docker images, thanks to LaLiga's president bullshit

It's also due to Cloudflare intentionally not policing its customers even a little bit, but i still side with CF - they're the less bad guys.

Re: European ISPs Want Rightsholders Held Accountable for Overblocking Damage

#60

Post by tialaramex »

btasker wrote: post #24
throwawayffffas wrote: post #19

It's their fault to begin with, they should have not caved to blocking anyone, they should have stood firm or offer up the 'Oh no we couldn't possibly figure out how to do that, it's entirely too complicated, you wouldn't understand.' excuse all other tech companies put out whenever they are told to do something trivial. But hopefully this is the beginning of them growing a backbone.

>they should have stood firm or offer up the 'Oh no we couldn't possibly figure out how to do that, it's entirely too complicated, you wouldn't understand.' excuse all other tech companies put out whenever they are told to do something trivial. Here in the UK, that's basically what BT said back in the early days of rights holders trying to block this stuff. The rights holders took them to court and managed to get the…

And importantly that rule meant that if your ISP doesn't have censorship filters, the anti-piracy people can't touch them. That's why Andrews and Arnold (aa.net.uk) is the way it is.

After all, who can say how much AA should spend to stop their customers from committing crimes? Should they spend $100 per customer? $100 per week? $100 per day? How much extra money are you required to spend to stop other people committing crimes?

For people with existing censorship capabilities the answer was oh that's basically free right? I mean you already have this capability so we'd just piggyback on that. But for AA it's an entirely open-ended question. If Hollywood wants to pay, let them propose how much they want to pay for this service. It's worth almost nothing to them, they know that, and so there won't be an offer.

Post reply on HN