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

Pirate Bay Finds Safe Haven in Iceland, Switches to .IS Domain

torrentfreak.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 126 posts

Re: Pirate Bay Finds Safe Haven in Iceland, Switches to .IS Domain

#111

Post by alexqgb »

betterunix wrote: post #49
archgrove wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not really sure it's bullying per se, to try and stop the mass illegal downloading of your content. It's not like they've got thugs at the door, they're just trying to shut down a site who's sole purpose is enabling the illegal downloading, and who has no interest in co-operating with even nicely worded, fair requests. I'm not a great fan of the entertainment industry, but if people were doing this to YC startups…

Why should a law that has its roots in 17th century censorship continue to be clung to in the 21st century? Times have changed, get over it and develop a business model that is more appropriate for this century.

Why don't you apply this line of thought to the 4th Amendment, and see if it still makes sense to you?

Re: Pirate Bay Finds Safe Haven in Iceland, Switches to .IS Domain

#112

Post by generalseven »

archgrove wrote: post #14
fakeer wrote: post #6

Can they actually hold off collective might of media houses and billionaires who actually call the shots and make politicians dance to their tunes, mostly because of they have taken the dirty money? What if the bullies resort to proxy arm twisting? One must remember Iceland was invaded[1] by the British during WW2! PS. An invasion is an invasion even if it was said that the invasion was to pre-empt another invasion.…

I'm not really sure it's bullying per se, to try and stop the mass illegal downloading of your content. It's not like they've got thugs at the door, they're just trying to shut down a site who's sole purpose is enabling the illegal downloading, and who has no interest in co-operating with even nicely worded, fair requests. I'm not a great fan of the entertainment industry, but if people were doing this to YC startups…

Look back at what's happened to the music business since Napster for past lessons on what has and has not worked.

To say "a site who's sole purpose is enabling the illegal downloading" is not completely true. File sharing has more legitimate uses than illegal ones. See Dropbox for details.

Re: Pirate Bay Finds Safe Haven in Iceland, Switches to .IS Domain

#115

Post by haakon »

ancarda wrote: post #94
andreasvc wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes.

To clarify, I meant if there was a hidden service. Not if there was functioning exit nodes that can access the website.

This is The Pirate Bay's official hidden service: http://jntlesnev5o7zysa.onion/

Source for official-ness: https://www.facebook.com/ThePirateBayWarMachine/posts/415744...

Re: Pirate Bay Finds Safe Haven in Iceland, Switches to .IS Domain

#116

Post by haakon »

andreasvc wrote: post #96
ancarda wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To clarify, I meant if there was a hidden service. Not if there was functioning exit nodes that can access the website.

That I don't know. But if you're going for anonymity you probably shouldn't use torrents anyway, especially not public ones. There are lots of interesting anonymous P2P protocols, although I don't think people care about it enough for any of them to have gained traction.

The Pirate Bay's hidden service is primarily for evading censorship, and it's useful in that sense, since no government can block hidden services.

Re: Pirate Bay Finds Safe Haven in Iceland, Switches to .IS Domain

#117

Post by Zigurd »

rayiner wrote: post #77
betterunix wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except that the notion of property ownership predates written records and organized government. Copyright was started in the 17th century to address the failure of previous censorship efforts in a world of new technology (the printing press), and eventually became a means by which printers could secure a competitive advantage. We now live in a world where the machines needed to copy things are commonly owned by indiv…

> Except that the notion of property ownership predates written records and organized government. What people have in the absence of government is not property, but merely possession. No more or less binding on anyone else than a dog with a bone.

At least you are consistent: You make our rights a creation of government. This has the interesting side-effect of elevating intellectual property to the same level as real property.

You have to wonder if the framers talked about our actual natural rights in such disrespectful terms: "The saying there shall be no monopolies lessens the incitement to ingenuity, which is spurred on by the hope of a monopoly for a limited time, as of 14 years; but the benefit even of limited monopolies is too doubtful to be opposed to that of their general suppression."

Re: Pirate Bay Finds Safe Haven in Iceland, Switches to .IS Domain

#118

Post by rayiner »

wiml wrote: post #104
rayiner wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Any company that solely depend on government granted monopolies for their businesses model will have a hard time to claim a moral high ground or demand that the sovereign of foreign countries should be violated. All forms of property are a government granted monopoly. God doesn't give you a monopoly over your lawn or the things you create with your hands, Uncle Sam does.

Not really. Ownership of land, chattels, etc. are usually considered natural rights--- the government protects your ability to own things, it does not grant you that ability. Copyright, trademark, patents, etc., are different; they were not considered natural rights, but are a social engineering effort, attempting to produce specific effects in society ("the progress of science and the useful arts", e.g.) by means of…

"natural rights" are of course nonsensical without resort to the supernatural. The founders are Christians and diests, for the most part, so natural law fits within that framework. It has no relevence in a post-religion world.

Re: Pirate Bay Finds Safe Haven in Iceland, Switches to .IS Domain

#119

Post by gluczywo »

davidw wrote: post #106
jamieb wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"They only difference here is that the internet has rendered the head smacking part obsolete for IP, so people can skip straight to taking the stuff." No. The internet has rendered the "taking your stuff" part obsolete. When you "take my stuff" I no longer have "my stuff". However when you "copy my bits" I still have "my bits". It is the essential difference between Property and Intellectual not-actually-Property.

What you're looking for has a precise definition in economics, and it's called "rivalrous" vs "non rivalrous" goods: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rivalry_%28economics%29 Many things are in this category, not just IP. Paying for them can be kind of tricky, because who wants to spend a year, say, writing a book when someone decides they can just go ahead and copy it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_good#Possible_so…

who wants to spend a year, say, writing a book when someone decides they can just go ahead and copy it

The best books I've read were written by people who weren't financially motivated. Is it just me?

Re: Pirate Bay Finds Safe Haven in Iceland, Switches to .IS Domain

#120

Post by jamieb »

davidw wrote: post #106
jamieb wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"They only difference here is that the internet has rendered the head smacking part obsolete for IP, so people can skip straight to taking the stuff." No. The internet has rendered the "taking your stuff" part obsolete. When you "take my stuff" I no longer have "my stuff". However when you "copy my bits" I still have "my bits". It is the essential difference between Property and Intellectual not-actually-Property.

What you're looking for has a precise definition in economics, and it's called "rivalrous" vs "non rivalrous" goods: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rivalry_%28economics%29 Many things are in this category, not just IP. Paying for them can be kind of tricky, because who wants to spend a year, say, writing a book when someone decides they can just go ahead and copy it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_good#Possible_so…

About 10 years ago I had pretty much this exact conversation with RMS over email. As a video game developer, I made box software that I needed people to buy in order for me to get paid. I put it to him that without keeping our code and assets "closed" we couldn't make games. RMS's response was that he'd rather we not make games then: if we couldn't make them "open" then he'd rather we not make them at all.

I still write software for money. GNU/Linux is still doing rather well. Thanks to the law, I still get to make that business model choice.

However, I do not confuse a car with a piece of software or music track. If we are discussing moral rights, or "property", we cannot have such a discussion without being clear on our terms. Nobody is smacked on the head, nor any "stuff" taken, when someone torrents an MP3. However, people continue to die having their "stuff" taken.

Post reply on HN