Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 24th Mar 2012 16:43 UTC
Internet & Networking "The Pirate Bay is not only the most visited BitTorrent site on the Internet, but arguably the most censored too. Many ISPs have been ordered to block their customers’ access to the website, and recently Microsoft joined in on the action by stopping people sharing its location with others. Microsoft's Windows Live Messenger now refuses to pass on links to The Pirate Bay website, claiming they are unsafe." They refuse links to The Pirate Bay. In that light, here are a bunch of completely and utterly useless links to The Pirate Bay. And some more. And then some. Update: We have some more links to The Pirate Bay.
Order by: Score:
Windows Live Messenger
by ndrw on Sat 24th Mar 2012 16:50 UTC
ndrw
Member since:
2009-06-30

Does it still exist? Last time I saw anyone using it was 6 years ago.

Reply Score: 4

v RE: Windows Live Messenger
by NuxRo on Sat 24th Mar 2012 16:57 UTC in reply to "Windows Live Messenger"
RE[2]: Windows Live Messenger
by BluenoseJake on Sat 24th Mar 2012 18:59 UTC in reply to "RE: Windows Live Messenger"
BluenoseJake Member since:
2005-08-11

Windows 8 works perfectly without a live account, but hey, it's cool to call it Windl0ws

Reply Score: 4

RE: Windows Live Messenger
by orestes on Sat 24th Mar 2012 18:31 UTC in reply to "Windows Live Messenger"
orestes Member since:
2005-07-06

Indeed it does. Just like even older tech like ICQ and AIM. Not sure why you'd be surprised by this

Reply Score: 3

RE: Windows Live Messenger
by Bill Shooter of Bul on Sat 24th Mar 2012 21:20 UTC in reply to "Windows Live Messenger"
Bill Shooter of Bul Member since:
2006-07-14

It was another case of MS-me-too-ism. Did they ever make any money off of messanger? Or did they do it just because AOL was scaring them?

Reply Score: 4

Break some laws
by KrustyVader on Sat 24th Mar 2012 17:09 UTC
KrustyVader
Member since:
2006-10-28

In Argentina doing so is against the law unless you have a court order. Is like interfering/reading someone else mail o a phone call. Is like if i use the phone's company for my personal use, i can be punished for doing it but the should not interfere with the conversation.

Any kind of communication that you block is against the law. And ISP blocking other ISP is not allowed, and ISP blocking some kind of traffic is not allowed (but everybody does once in a while for a short time).

But the problem is that Argentina has great laws... but no enforcement at all.

Reply Score: 5

RE: Break some laws
by shotsman on Sun 25th Mar 2012 06:21 UTC in reply to "Break some laws"
shotsman Member since:
2005-07-22

No, the problem is not with Argentina and its laws.

The problem lies with the USA and its laws.
There is a law in the US that extends jurisdiction of US Laws to every part of the world. As a US Company, Microsoft has to obey US Law EVERYWHERE it operates.

You have to realise that

US LAW trumps local laws and there is nothing your local Government can do about it unless they want to be invaded by the US.

Uncle Sam - There is no hiding place
Uncle Sam - Big Brother 2012 style.

Now all I have to do is wait for the Feds to start extradition proceedings against me (no evidence needed btw).

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Break some laws
by chripun on Sun 25th Mar 2012 15:00 UTC in reply to "RE: Break some laws"
chripun Member since:
2008-08-25

No, the problem is not with Argentina and its laws.

The problem lies with the USA and its laws.
There is a law in the US that extends jurisdiction of US Laws to every part of the world. As a US Company, Microsoft has to obey US Law EVERYWHERE it operates.

You have to realise that

US LAW trumps local laws and there is nothing your local Government can do about it unless they want to be invaded by the US.

Uncle Sam - There is no hiding place
Uncle Sam - Big Brother 2012 style.

Now all I have to do is wait for the Feds to start extradition proceedings against me (no evidence needed btw).


I thought U.S. meant "you ass" ... ;)
It seems that's the body part they use to think up new laws.
I wouldn't worry too much about this given the fact that our new overlords the Chinese are all for pirating and don't care for copyright.
Besides, pirating is good for our planet as shown in the following graph:
http://www.seanbonner.com/blog/archives/001857.php

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Break some laws
by cyrilleberger on Mon 26th Mar 2012 06:33 UTC in reply to "RE: Break some laws"
cyrilleberger Member since:
2006-02-01

US LAW trumps local laws and there is nothing your local Government can do about it unless they want to be invaded by the US.

It gets funny when the US gets unhappy that the EU does the same ;) (with the carbon tax for airplanes companies that want to be able to land in Europe)

Reply Score: 5

What if ...?
by jgfenix on Sat 24th Mar 2012 17:54 UTC
jgfenix
Member since:
2006-05-25

A nice MPAA person is chatting with one of his lawyers and says "Look, this is my movie, sue them!". But the lawyer doesn´t receive the link so he dows nothing.
So a week later the nice MPAA person loses 100 million of dollars in sales and files bankruptcy.

Reply Score: 6

RE: What if ...?
by steampoweredlawn on Sat 24th Mar 2012 20:36 UTC in reply to "What if ...?"
steampoweredlawn Member since:
2006-09-27

You're going under the bold assumption that an MPAA executive would even be chatting online in the first place. They only mastered land-line telephones last year.

Reply Score: 9

Link ?
by zittergie on Sat 24th Mar 2012 18:47 UTC
zittergie
Member since:
2008-01-24

Did you mean http://www.thepiratebay.se
This link is blocked in Belgium. You get this a page like this: http://www.zittergie.be/TPB/StopPage.html

BTW, I totally understand. A shop where the majority of the goods are stolen will also get closed.

Edited 2012-03-24 18:49 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE: Link ?
by RaisedFist on Sun 25th Mar 2012 06:35 UTC in reply to "Link ?"
RaisedFist Member since:
2005-07-06
RE[2]: Link ?
by Neolander on Sun 25th Mar 2012 09:58 UTC in reply to "RE: Link ?"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

Also check out this vintage version ;) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3jkUhG68wY

Edited 2012-03-25 10:06 UTC

Reply Score: 1

RE: Link ?
by snowbender on Sun 25th Mar 2012 10:43 UTC in reply to "Link ?"
snowbender Member since:
2006-05-04

Well, more correctly, it is only blocked if you are using the dns servers from your isp. It is not blocked for anyone who is using other dns servers. And I think it is as of this moment (still?) not illegal in Belgium to use other dns servers.

Btw, I do not agree with those blockings. In Belgium, everyone already pays a special tax every month because supposedly everyone is actually illegally downloading stuff. Whenever we buy empty audio cds, we already pay a special tax because everyone is supposedly using those cds to illegally copy music. In Belgium you have to pay SABAM if you want to switch on the radio in a company office, because that is considered a public performance. (Note that the radio station itself already have to pay SABAM a huge fee) Construction workers that wanna play music during work, have to pay SABAM. People opening a child care centre and want to play music for the children, have to pay SABAM. A public library that organises a reading hour (someone reads from a book and people listen), has to pay SABAM. Also keep in mind that when we buy the originals, we already pay the artists and all. I think within a couple of years, we'll have to pay SABAM when we like to watch a movie with the whole family.

Honestly, I don't understand how an organization like SABAM gets away with all those things. They even try to charge people for artists that are not even registered with SABAM, but with another organisation (Eskeep). They are not very clean themselves. Why does the government listen to them and just start to 'censor' the internet, and allow all those taxes?

I am not saying that piracy is ok or that piracy should be tolerated, but... either piracy is forbidden, but then we shouldn't be paying a tax every month on our tv or internet subscription, or either they insist on the extra tax, but then they cannot claim it is forbidden, since we already have to pay for it. Or is the idea that everyone sticks to the rules, but has to pay for the neighbour that is illegally downloading stuff?

Reply Score: 7

RE[2]: Link ?
by silix on Sun 25th Mar 2012 15:41 UTC in reply to "RE: Link ?"
silix Member since:
2006-03-01

Whenever we buy empty audio cds, we already pay a special tax because everyone is supposedly using those cds to illegally copy music.
there's something like that in italy, too - here it's called "equo compenso" (fair compensation or something like that)

I am not saying that piracy is ok or that piracy should be tolerated, but... either piracy is forbidden, but then we shouldn't be paying a tax every month on our tv or internet subscription, or either they insist on the extra tax, but then they cannot claim it is forbidden, since we already have to pay for it. Or is the idea that everyone sticks to the rules, but has to pay for the neighbour that is illegally downloading stuff?
look at it this way: if you commit a criminal act - eg a robbery - causing a damage to someone, it's no more just "between you and the law"
your crime shall be punished on its own (and you get likely sentenced to jail)
but otoh, the ones you've damaged also deserve to be compensated / refunded (and afaik you often lose or have to sell your belongings to repay them)

in the same perspective, taxes on internet connections and blank media serves to repay (in a forfait, by making everyone pay - not that i agree with draconian methods and this presumption of guilt... - with the side intention btw of turning the honest against the pirates, as someone once admitted) those (allegedly or actually) damaged by piracy
they're monetary compensation, not punishment, thus they dont make you less liable in front of the law for the civil (or penal, in some cases) violation...

Edited 2012-03-25 15:44 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Link ?
by chripun on Sun 25th Mar 2012 17:57 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Link ?"
chripun Member since:
2008-08-25

"Whenever we buy empty audio cds, we already pay a special tax because everyone is supposedly using those cds to illegally copy music.
there's something like that in italy, too - here it's called "equo compenso" (fair compensation or something like that)

I am not saying that piracy is ok or that piracy should be tolerated, but... either piracy is forbidden, but then we shouldn't be paying a tax every month on our tv or internet subscription, or either they insist on the extra tax, but then they cannot claim it is forbidden, since we already have to pay for it. Or is the idea that everyone sticks to the rules, but has to pay for the neighbour that is illegally downloading stuff?
look at it this way: if you commit a criminal act - eg a robbery - causing a damage to someone, it's no more just "between you and the law"
your crime shall be punished on its own (and you get likely sentenced to jail)
but otoh, the ones you've damaged also deserve to be compensated / refunded (and afaik you often lose or have to sell your belongings to repay them)

in the same perspective, taxes on internet connections and blank media serves to repay (in a forfait, by making everyone pay - not that i agree with draconian methods and this presumption of guilt... - with the side intention btw of turning the honest against the pirates, as someone once admitted) those (allegedly or actually) damaged by piracy
they're monetary compensation, not punishment, thus they dont make you less liable in front of the law for the civil (or penal, in some cases) violation...
"

This analogy is false. The robber is sentenced after the fact whereas you pay this so called "tax" regardless of your actual usage of the blank media.

This is crazy! People in the US argue against public health-care and object to paying for somebody else's health costs (even though it likely will save lives) yet it makes perfect sense to pay the rich producers of Hollywood? I'm truly amazed by the logic here.

This reminds me how MS charged PC manufactures license fees per chip even if the PC wasn't even sold with Windows. This is clearly an act of a monopoly and should be tightly regulated as such by the government.
The EU forced MS to un-bundle windows from other software and in the same vein it should force restrictions on the copyright organizations.

It's unthinkable to me that these organizations want to force payment on libraries for public reading of books to children by volunteers (My mom is a librarian and I'm personally offended by this notion). The government's job here, its purpose, is to protect the citizens by preventing this nonsense.

Reply Score: 4

RE[4]: Link ?
by silix on Sun 25th Mar 2012 21:26 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Link ?"
silix Member since:
2006-03-01

This analogy is false.

ignore the analogy, i was just pointing out a distinction between punishment (for the guilty) and compensation (for the damaged) - can you really say this distinction does not apply?

The robber is sentenced after the fact whereas you pay this so called "tax" regardless of your actual usage of the blank media.

but the problem is, piracy was already ongoing for a long time when the tax was applied - in fact it was applied because content and sw makers were already being damaged by it, to the point they could ask and be granted idemnification by law
the only difference being that unless all pirates were tracked down, damage from piracy coudnt be blamed on just "one" or even "specific" individuals, so everyone was deemed as potentially guilty thus potentially corresponsible for that damage thus subject to pay a part of that refund

This is crazy! People in the US argue against public health-care and object to paying for somebody else's health costs (even though it likely will save lives) yet it makes perfect sense to pay the rich producers of Hollywood? I'm truly amazed by the logic here.

i live in a country where the healthcare system is funded by tax money in order to give to every taxpayer citizen (who is granted the right to live healthily, by constitution - at least formally) so for me the opposite makes perfect sense...
especially since sw is not a "right" nor a government erogated service, but something made by individuals (who may then distribute it free of charge, but it's their choice) - if i take for myself and use something whose author didnt want me to take and use without his consent, it means that i have extorted its fruition outside the intended scope and terms
thus, i have to accept i'm liable to repay somehow

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Link ?
by zittergie on Sun 25th Mar 2012 17:57 UTC in reply to "RE: Link ?"
zittergie Member since:
2008-01-24

That Auvibel Tax is something I can not understand. You pay a tax (that is intended for for every blanc media like CD, DVD, USB-Stick, and so on) even when you use these for free data like Linux images, pictures and movies you made yourself.

BTW: Changed the DNS to Googles Public DNS. Restriction gone ;)

Reply Score: 2

RE: Link ?
by cyrilleberger on Mon 26th Mar 2012 06:35 UTC in reply to "Link ?"
cyrilleberger Member since:
2006-02-01

BTW, I totally understand. A shop where the majority of the goods are stolen will also get closed.


Except that the pirate bay does not have any stolen goods. The question is whether an address book pointing mostly to stolen goods shop would also get closed.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Link ?
by EsoX on Mon 26th Mar 2012 19:10 UTC in reply to "Link ?"
EsoX Member since:
2005-08-21

Did you mean http://www.thepiratebay.se
This link is blocked in Belgium. You get this a page like this: http://www.zittergie.be/TPB/StopPage.html

BTW, I totally understand. A shop where the majority of the goods are stolen will also get closed.


Whoa, isn't that interesting. Last time I saw an redirect like that was when I was searching for "illegal" content on visit to China; i.e information about the Tianmen massacre. BTW I totally understand. Some information should definitely be censored and what's more natural than to trust our government to make the choice for us.

;)

Reply Score: 1

...
by Hiev on Sat 24th Mar 2012 19:28 UTC
Hiev
Member since:
2005-09-27

No sorprise and is not the only one, Google search doens't autocomplete the word eather.

Reply Score: 2

RE: ...
by jakubsafar.cz on Sat 24th Mar 2012 20:02 UTC in reply to "..."
jakubsafar.cz Member since:
2007-09-21

Does for me (Czech rep./EU, logged into account).

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: ...
by Hiev on Sat 24th Mar 2012 20:49 UTC in reply to "RE: ..."
Hiev Member since:
2005-09-27

The word "pirate" will not get autocompleted, witch is weird, because piratebay is the more popular website associated with the word "pirate", but, "pirateb" will actually make the word completition work.

Reply Score: 3

v NON OS news Just Theft news
by jefro on Sat 24th Mar 2012 22:15 UTC
RE: NON OS news Just Theft news
by phoenix on Sat 24th Mar 2012 22:34 UTC in reply to "NON OS news Just Theft news"
phoenix Member since:
2005-07-11

In many parts of the world, downloading a copyrighted movie is not illegal. It's copyright infringmenent in some cases, but that's a civil matter, not a criminal code matter.

Uploading, or otherwise making available, a copyrighted movie, without prior permission to do so, is illegal, though.

So your post is pretty much a waste of electrons, and rightfully should be voted down into oblivion as a troll.

Reply Score: 11

RE: NON OS news Just Theft news
by saso on Sat 24th Mar 2012 23:05 UTC in reply to "NON OS news Just Theft news"
saso Member since:
2007-04-18

Obvious troll is obvious...

Seriously though, I have no problem with copyright infringement in our current legal climate (and I say so as an ISV myself). If copyright served the purpose it was supposed to, fine, then I might agree with you. But given the current state of law (where you can never ever ever do anything with the content you bought for the next gazillion years) and how big media corps use it to strong arm small producers and consumers to their will, I will happily and without a single afterthought or nibble of my conscience pirate whatever content is produced by big content that is laden with DRM, restrictions and a myriad of other ways in which they try to screw the rest of us over. Meanwhile, I happily contribute to small producers through non-retail channels (either through direct donations, or via indie projects, e.g. Humble Bundle).

Reply Score: 6

RE: NON OS news Just Theft news
by snowbender on Sun 25th Mar 2012 11:00 UTC in reply to "NON OS news Just Theft news"
snowbender Member since:
2006-05-04

For me, this is not about illegal downloading or not. In the first place, this is about censoring. Microsoft censors your instant messages (without you having an option to configure this kind of censoring). Microsoft is judging what you are allowed to tell to your buddies. I don't like that. At all.

Out of principle, I wouldn't even like it if Microsoft censors messages or file transfers that it deems to be viruses (if they don't give the users an opt-in for that functionality). I would understand why they do it, but wouldn't agree with it, because it's still censoring. I have the same kind of remarks for the new functionality in browsers that warns the user that a website might contain viruses. Those browsers could not give the user any option and just block all websites that according to them might contain malware. That is censoring. Giving the user the option to check the urls he visit, and give him a warning that the site might contain malware, is a lot better.

MSN Messenger giving you a warning (that you can disable) when you try to send a piratebay link to a buddy would be a whole different thing.

I am more and more convinced that all types of services we use on the internet should be based on open protocols and should be decentralized, so that everyone can run their own servers, or use servers they like. So, instead of MSN Messenger, start using Jabber with a Jabber client, and a Jabber server that you trust.

Reply Score: 4

RE: NON OS news Just Theft news
by jefro on Sun 25th Mar 2012 23:02 UTC in reply to "NON OS news Just Theft news"
jefro Member since:
2007-04-13

So you don't mind censoring my point of view but hate companies that are trying to follow the law.

By the way. You guys are skirting the laws because you are addicted to this type of theft. Your country does in fact make it illegal to possess copies of stolen works. It may be true that the act of downloading is not a criminal matter but the sad truth is the copyright laws are still in place. Why don't you download a copy of that law.

Reply Score: 2

So Skype is next ?
by Lennie on Sat 24th Mar 2012 23:38 UTC
Lennie
Member since:
2007-09-22

As Microsoft owns Skype...

Reply Score: 4

RE: So Skype is next ?
by Mellin on Sun 25th Mar 2012 08:49 UTC in reply to "So Skype is next ?"
Mellin Member since:
2005-07-06

you can download a copy of our cd at "censor" ...

Reply Score: 2

Another reason I run Linux...
by cmost on Sun 25th Mar 2012 00:57 UTC
cmost
Member since:
2006-07-16

Chalk this up to just one more reason why I don't run proprietary operating systems or software...

Reply Score: 6

RE: Another reason I run Linux...
by AnyoneEB on Sun 25th Mar 2012 10:24 UTC in reply to "Another reason I run Linux..."
AnyoneEB Member since:
2008-10-26

I agree... but you can still run into problems if you use proprietary internet services like Windows Live Messenger. I connect to an MSN account via Pidgin on Linux, although I use it very rarely. Then again, another comment mentions that using MSN over Jabber they can send Pirate Bay links, so maybe the restriction is in the client software.

Reply Score: 1

Comment by shmerl
by shmerl on Sun 25th Mar 2012 01:02 UTC
shmerl
Member since:
2010-06-08

Just don't use MS services. Does anyone really trust them?

Reply Score: 4

Actually...
by deathshadow on Sun 25th Mar 2012 06:52 UTC
deathshadow
Member since:
2005-07-12

I have the same issues on an old .hopto.org address from No-IP that I've had for over a decade. All the 'free domain' services and non-standard port redirects are automatically blocked by messenger -- been that way for ages.

It's another case of their alleged "helping prevent spam" that does jack ****, while they're still the number one source of IM spam; Y! of course being number one.

Reply Score: 2

Jabber
by Lava_Croft on Sun 25th Mar 2012 07:47 UTC
Lava_Croft
Member since:
2006-12-24

Sending TPB links works fine when using MSN transport over Jabber. Another reason to start using this superior alternative.

Reply Score: 2

v I think this is good thing.
by hussam on Sun 25th Mar 2012 10:06 UTC
RE: I think this is good thing.
by snowbender on Sun 25th Mar 2012 11:29 UTC in reply to "I think this is good thing."
snowbender Member since:
2006-05-04

You can try, but that is gonna be a neverending hunt. As soon as you close one down, two new ones are gonna popup. And it will be difficult if those servers are located in countries that are not that strict on copyright.

Another approach, is for those companies to give their real customers a better quality product than the illegal copies. Nowadays it seems like the real customers always get screwed with nasty DRM and with a right-in-your-face "YOU ARE A CRIMINAL if you make illegal copies of this product" warning. Whenever I play a dvd that I bought, I am forced to undergo a warning that I am a criminal if I copy the dvd, and with some dvds on top of that I am forced to look at a commercial for another movie. Nice way to treat your paying customer! And very convincing to make him pay again for another movie, while he knows he can download the same thing for free without any of that bullshit. Whenever I buy a music cd, there's a chance I will have trouble to rip it so I can conveniently play it on my computer. Whenever I buy a computer game, there's a chance that it's gonna infect my system with sneaky software that enforces DRM but that also might check which processes I am running (and then refuse to run when it detects something it doesn't like). With those computer games, it might also mean that I need to have a constantly online internet connection, that I always need to go find the dvd because it has to be in the drive so that I am able to play the game. And of course, when the big game publisher decides to take down the server that check whether my 5 year old game is a legal copy, I can no longer play that game. So, in a lot of those cases, the people that pirate those games actually get a higher quality version, than the honest people that go buy it in the shop, like me.

About games though, I have to say that Steam is really nice. It does have DRM and it does have some restrictions, but it gives so many advantages that recently I always buy new games on Steam. No hunting around for cds, easy to get latest patches, no in-your-face DRM (and if so, it seems to always be clearly indicated), very easy to browse a really big catalog of games, easy to find indie-games, very nice shopping experience: you just buy it and after 10 minutes or something, you can already play it. The only worry that I have with Steam is: what if Steam goes bankrupt? Then I lose all my games... but I assume it is not gonna go bankrupt and it is just way convenient and that is what is winning me over.

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: I think this is good thing.
by ricegf on Sun 25th Mar 2012 14:25 UTC in reply to "RE: I think this is good thing."
ricegf Member since:
2007-04-25

I'm only a casual gamer, but I did give up buying music and (mostly) DVDs because DRM kept breaking my access to media for which I had paid, or forcing commercials or special decoding hardware, or whatever. We listen to broadcast radio and Pandora, use a NetFlix account for a few dollars a month, and subscribe to a (non-DRM) podcast. That's plenty, thankfully.

I quit using Windows mostly because of a long conversation with their "tech support" when helping a friend rebuild a broken machine. He kept arguing that he had paid for the software, they kept arguing it was probably an illegal copy. It was 12 years ago that I switched to Linux, and I'm definitely happier as a result.

I've bought a lot of books in PDF format, and enjoyed reading them on phones and tablets; we also subscribe to a meal planning service delivered in PDF. I recently went to buy, ironically enough, "Atlas Shrugged" - it's election year in the USA and Ron Paul is running, so this seemed a reasonable way to obtain some background on his philosophy before voting - and was surprised to find no legal copies available in PDF or non-DRMed ePub. I finally bought a 49-cent used copy printed on a dead tree. *sigh*

Lest you believe I would understand if only I was a "creator" instead of a "consumer", search Amazon.com for my "Elven Fire" game manual. You can read the copyright page as part of the free preview. The rest of the book too, actually - it's cc except for a bit of licensed artwork. Yet I've sold enough to affect my taxes - it's more convenient as well as less expensive to buy a manual than to print your own.

Just my $0.02. I respect and follow copyright, but I also vote with my money for those who provide an excellent product experience - and DRM isn't.

Reply Score: 6