11–20 of 244 posts
Making it illegal to route packets to them and to circumvent the block? Garbage tier laws.
I'm the furthest thing from a lawyer, but "knowingly and intentionally" sounds to my lay self like it's a test of mens rea. If I were operating a Tor node in the EU, I would probably assume until stated otherwise that operating a Tor node remained legal, as long as I wasn't operating that node with the intention of circumventing the ban on RT.
> It shall be prohibited for operators to broadcast or to enable, facilitate or otherwise contribute to broadcast, any content by the legal persons, entities or bodies listed in Annex XV, including through transmission or distribution by any means such as cable, satellite, IP-TV, internet service providers, internet video-sharing platforms or applications, whether new or pre-installed.
So one way to interpret this is that all ISPs are currently violating this simply by enabling end-to-end-encrypted communication. Any service that would enable or facilitate sending RT streams (ie encrypted communication) are violating this.
Heck, even hosting a blog platform where someone posts a screenshot of the RT website would be in trouble. Cloud providers might have to close the accounts of a significant portion of their customers to cover their behinds.
This article must be revised (or even revoked). I’m certain that it is unconstitutional in more than one EU country.
Nah. But in all seriousness, this is totalitarian ruling. Wtf eu? RT might be a trash fire propaganda news but the EU ain’t at war with Russia. If the people want to listen to the propaganda, and I’m sure there were listener equivalents in neutral places either via SW or MW broadcast in ww2. Making it illegal to route packets to them and to circumvent the block? Garbage tier laws.
This is a pretty good example of Betteridge's Law[1]. The EU's ban on disseminating RT through a medium does not amount to a ban on the medium itself. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge%27s_law_of_headline...
If you like laws, how about Cunningham's Law? :) No, but I am aware of this, I even thought to mention it, and I sorely hope that I am proven wrong. However, my concern is that the ban explicitly does apply to the medium itself. In particular, article 12 bans participation in "activities the object or effect of which is to circumvent prohibitions". Can you think of any reason for why Tor would not be considered to ci…
Article 12 is completely unmodified except for the scope of parties involved. Since the original (2014) regulation didn't ban Tor, I think it's a safe assumption that this one doesn't either.
The more detailed answer: the article actually reads as follows:
> It shall be prohibited to participate, knowingly and intentionally, [...]
"Knowingly and intentionally" is the operative phrase here. In order to show that this article poses a threat to Tor's legality, you'd need to show at either Tor's operators or Tor itself intentionally provides service to RT. This is a stronger standard than passive service, the kind Tor actually provides.
[1]: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A...
How does this complete silencing of a country not disturb anybody?
Because if we don’t remove Russia from the world completely we are approving their invasion and keep the door open for further invasions. Only solution is to segregate whole country and all their allies from the world until they remove their leaders from positions of power
How does this complete silencing of a country not disturb anybody?
That said, RT alone surely must have caused many Covid deaths due to the doubts about the vaccinations and other measures they have been spreading in the past years.
How does this complete silencing of a country not disturb anybody?
Because if we don’t remove Russia from the world completely we are approving their invasion and keep the door open for further invasions. Only solution is to segregate whole country and all their allies from the world until they remove their leaders from positions of power
Not sure if this strategy is the safest option globally. Russia wants a buffer from nato give them some assurance.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you like laws, how about Cunningham's Law? :) No, but I am aware of this, I even thought to mention it, and I sorely hope that I am proven wrong. However, my concern is that the ban explicitly does apply to the medium itself. In particular, article 12 bans participation in "activities the object or effect of which is to circumvent prohibitions". Can you think of any reason for why Tor would not be considered to ci…
The simplest answer to this is to look at what the previous regulation (the one being amended by this one) says[1]. Article 12 is completely unmodified except for the scope of parties involved. Since the original (2014) regulation didn't ban Tor, I think it's a safe assumption that this one doesn't either. The more detailed answer: the article actually reads as follows: > It shall be prohibited to participate, knowin…
Re: "knowingly and intentionally," I will repost my comment https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30537459>:
> "Knowingly and intentionally" seems to apply to the operation (e.g. "you know that you're running a Tor node") - "circumvention" is on the basis of "object or effect". (For ESL speakers: "object" means "goal", "effect" means "result", and Tor obviously has a final, de-facto result of unblocking RT)
Nah. But in all seriousness, this is totalitarian ruling. Wtf eu? RT might be a trash fire propaganda news but the EU ain’t at war with Russia. If the people want to listen to the propaganda, and I’m sure there were listener equivalents in neutral places either via SW or MW broadcast in ww2. Making it illegal to route packets to them and to circumvent the block? Garbage tier laws.
Those who need garbage propaganda and are trained to handle it without manipulation, can use a VPN. Most people don't give 2 thoughts.