Internet Censorship begins in America; 70 websites seized

[rambone]

Approximately 70 websites have been seized by the Federal government. Looks like it has happened under none other than the Department of Homeland Security.

Homeland Security Shuts Down Web Sites in Piracy Crackdown

 

[eatsnopaste]

This is not censorship, this is law enforcement shutting down sites that sell pirated goods. Doesn't matter what your views on downloading music is, if you do it, you know it is illegal...same with movies and clothing products. If the Gov. was closing down sites for stating opinions about the piracy industry then that would be censorship.

 

[BloodEclipse]

That doesn't display as it is for moblie devices.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/27/technology/27torrent.html?ref=technology

 

[cositc]

This is not censorship, this is law enforcement shutting down sites that sell pirated goods. Doesn't matter what your views on downloading music is, if you do it, you know it is illegal...same with movies and clothing products. If the Gov. was closing down sites for stating opinions about the piracy industry then that would be censorship.

What he is geting at is that there are alot of sites on there that did not host pirated stuff just links to other sites and one of the sites torrent-freaks.com was a blog or news site that had no pirated music or anything there was also a search website for torrents called torrent-finder.com that was shut down that would just find torrents and not host them it was all up to the user to decide what they wanted to search for, and they shut that down for copyrights"So by that logic google and yahoo should be shut down because you can find links to pirated music and movies.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

Add the word censorship to the list of words you don't understand the meaning of.

I suppose you think theft is a victimless crime the government should be powerless to prevent? Did you just get your Friday night entertainment source cut off? Or are you just trolling to rile people up?

Here's a link that works. Good for protecting the property of others from thieves.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/27/technology/27torrent.html?_r=1&ref=technology

What he is geting at is that there are alot of sites on there that did not host pirated stuff just links to other sites and one of the sites torrent-freaks.com was a blog or news site that had no pirated music or anything there was also a search website for torrents called torrent-finder.com that was shut down that would just find torrents and not host them it was all up to the user to decide what they wanted to search for, and they shut that down for copyrights"So by that logic google and yahoo should be shut down because you can find links to pirated music and movies.

Thes sites you listed exist and cater solely to sharing stolen property. Yes you can find links to pirated music and movies using Google and Yahoo!, but locating stolen property is incident to their services. They also have takedown procedures per the DMCA. They aren't remotely the same thing.

 

[Expat]

They shut down sites or are going after sites that do not host any offending material whatsoever. In the original article it talked about torrentfreak.com. It is a news site that talks about torrent news. Some of the sites they shut down are exactly like google except they only index torrent sites. How can you justify seizing them if you leave google alone? Google has illegal torrents show up in their results. A lot of this stuff is victimless, IMO. For many years it was common practice for guys to download a bunch of programs that they would never use, no one else ever used it. You just collected programs. Same goes for a lot of this music being downloaded. Most people would never have bought it, they just collect it. Now the movie people are engaging in extortion schemes. They threaten people with hundreds of thousands of dollars in suit or pay up two or three thousand now. Many people even believe that the movie people are the ones releasing the movies to the torrent sites as they are making more from their extortion schemes than they are making in the theatre or dvd sales.

 

[machete]

They shut down sites or are going after sites that do not host any offending material whatsoever. In the original article it talked about torrentfreak.com. It is a news site that talks about torrent news. Some of the sites they shut down are exactly like google except they only index torrent sites. How can you justify seizing them if you leave google alone? Google has illegal torrents show up in their results. A lot of this stuff is victimless, IMO. For many years it was common practice for guys to download a bunch of programs that they would never use, no one else ever used it. You just collected programs. Same goes for a lot of this music being downloaded. Most people would never have bought it, they just collect it. Now the movie people are engaging in extortion schemes. They threaten people with hundreds of thousands of dollars in suit or pay up two or three thousand now. Many people even believe that the movie people are the ones releasing the movies to the torrent sites as they are making more from their extortion schemes than they are making in the theatre or dvd sales.

didnt know that...

once they get their foot in the door shutting down one type of website,,,it only takes persistence to shut down the websites they really want to get taken down...

then they say...well you didnt say anything when they shut down those piracy sites that hurt the country...or those terrorist sites that hurt the country...or those facebook sites where people talked about the parties they were going to where drugs were...those hurt the country too...

since these gun and political sites turn people against the country...these hurt the country too and should be shut down...

youre for the country,,,right???

Bottom line...its scary when the government shuts down any website...

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

They shut down sites or are going after sites that do not host any offending material whatsoever.

The sites they shut down are the avenues to the stolen property. They have no value whatsoever without the value of stolen property. In my mind they are like lookouts at a bank robery. They may not walk into the bank with a gun and demand money, but they are just as involved as if they did.

In the original article it talked about torrentfreak.com. It is a news site that talks about torrent news.

See retort 1.

Some of the sites they shut down are exactly like google except they only index torrent sites. How can you justify seizing them if you leave google alone? Google has illegal torrents show up in their results.

The difference between Google and these other index sites is purpose, scope, and compliance with law. As you correctly state, these sites index only stolen property. They exist only to market stolen property. Google has a business that indexes the entire Internet. That incidently includes terrent sites and pirated material. Their business is not built on it. They also comply with takedown orders under the DMCA when requested.

A lot of this stuff is victimless, IMO.

Stealing someone else's property is never victimless, IMHO.

For many years it was common practice for guys to download a bunch of programs that they would never use, no one else ever used it. You just collected programs.

I agree. But those programs were shareware. Not fully featured and cracked versions of AutoCAD costing $10K.

Same goes for a lot of this music being downloaded. Most people would never have bought it, they just collect it.

Downloading music is theft. Congress passed a law. The President signed it. The courts upheld it. The copyright owners enforce it. There is no grey area. If you don't have the owner's permission to take and possess it it is theft.

Now the movie people are engaging in extortion schemes. They threaten people with hundreds of thousands of dollars in suit or pay up two or three thousand now.

Downloading [strike]music[/strike] movies is theft. Congress passed a law. The President signed it. The courts upheld it. The copyright owners enforce it. There is no grey area. If you don't have the owner's permission to take and possess it it is theft.

Many people even believe that the movie people are the ones releasing the movies to the torrent sites as they are making more from their extortion schemes than they are making in the theatre or dvd sales.

That may or may not be true. If true it would eliminate any damage claims as the work in question was placed into the public domain by its owner.

As someone who owns a dot com that is constantly under attack from people trying to steal from us, this is near and dear to me. The answer is simple really. If you want something pay for it.

 

[Expat]

The difference between Google and these other index sites is purpose, scope, and compliance with law. As you correctly state, these sites index only stolen property. They exist only to market stolen property. Google has a business that indexes the entire Internet. That incidently includes terrent sites and pirated material. Their business is not built on it. They also comply with takedown orders under the DMCA when requested.

Untrue. Most of these sites also index the freely distributable linux distributions and freeware. There is a lot of music out there now that was released by the copyright holders to be freely distributed.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

Untrue. Most of these sites also index the freely distributable linux distributions and freeware. There is a lot of music out there now that was released by the copyright holders to be freely distributed.

But look, you can do this and that and the other with our technology. We're not responsible for how our customers actually use it. We can't filter out stolen property.

That's the same argument that has been made by peer to peer file sharing services from napster to bit torrent to limewire and rejected by courts across the globe. They exist primarily to share stolen property. Can you do other things with them? Yes. But lawful use is incidental to illegal use, whereas the reverse is true with Google.

 

[rjstew317]

i think some of you may have misread the article, torrentfreak.com is still online and was not seized. they shut down sites that had direct links to trackers

 

[Expat]

But look, you can do this and that and the other with our technology. We're not responsible for how our customers actually use it. We can't filter out stolen property.

That's the same argument that has been made by peer to peer file sharing services from napster to bit torrent to limewire and rejected by courts across the globe. They exist primarily to share stolen property. Can you do other things with them? Yes. But lawful use is incidental to illegal use, whereas the reverse is true with Google.

Sounds like the same line of reasoning the gun grabbers use. There is no legitimate use for EBRs, they are only designed to kill people. Guns are mostly used for criminal purposes. You and I know that is not true but the general public buys into some of those arguments. If a tool can have a legitimate purpose and there are people using it for that, how can you advocate the government outlaw it. I am a Linux user. I always use bittorrent to download the new versions. I have heard that you can even download home made pr0n, not that I would know about it of course

 

[rambone]

Add the word censorship to the list of words you don't understand the meaning of.

I suppose you think theft is a victimless crime the government should be powerless to prevent? Did you just get your Friday night entertainment source cut off? Or are you just trolling to rile people up?

Lol. Yeah I'm just trying to rile you up. I know you don't like it when people criticize the government.

 

[rambone]

Hahah somebody gave me a negative rep for posting this thread. I really didn't give much of an opinion in it either. I laughed out loud.

 

[Expat]

How could you get a neg rep for that... maybe it was an error.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

Sounds like the same line of reasoning the gun grabbers use. There is no legitimate use for EBRs, they are only designed to kill people. Guns are mostly used for criminal purposes. You and I know that is not true but the general public buys into some of those arguments. If a tool can have a legitimate purpose and there are people using it for that, how can you advocate the government outlaw it. I am a Linux user. I always use bittorrent to download the new versions. I have heard that you can even download home made pr0n, not that I would know about it of course

It's not the same line of reasoning. Not even close. Gun rights are protected. Stealing isn't. Two totally different things.

I use linux too. I use Ubuntu on my laptop. I Use ubuntu servers in my manufacturing company and my dot com (70+ servers).

I let Ubuntu tell us (not me, but my tech guys) when it's time to upgrade. I don't use bittorrent but it's cool if you do. I'm not as tech savvy as I used to be. Maybe torrents are used by Ubuntu beneath the sheets and I just don't know it.

In practice the primary use of torrents is to share stolen property. That's indisputable. The facts that incidental protected use can be made is inconsequential. Courts have ruled. The redress is to petition Congress to pass a law allowing services that facilitate the theft and distribution of private intellectual property.

 

[rambone]

How could you get a neg rep for that... maybe it was an error.

It just said "I disagree."

Luckily I could give a flip.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

It just said "I disagree."

Luckily I could give a flip.

That's a dumb reason to neg rep someone. Who was it? We'll all neg rep him at the same time.

 

[rambone]

In practice the primary use of torrents is to share stolen property. That's indisputable. The facts that incidental protected use can be made is inconsequential. Courts have ruled. The redress is to petition Congress to pass a law allowing services that facilitate the theft and distribution of private intellectual property.

In practice, the primary use of guns is murder. Maybe they should ban them.

Your logic throws the baby out with the bathwater. But why not, government is just trying to make America safe from pirates and terrorists. It has nothing to do with grabbing more power. Slippery slope? Never heard of it.

Don't you think it would be a little more logical to go after the individuals who stole something, instead of seizing entire websites?

 

[hornadylnl]

WTH is a torrent?