• MangioneDontMiss@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    ha. all of my traffic is encrypted and routed through at least 3 pirate friendly countries and servers that don’t keep logs. good fucking luck inspecting those packets.

  • CallateCoyote@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    1 day ago

    Then pirates will just get smarter. No way for them to see who is watching all of these movies with their VPN and Debrid service.

  • DarkFuture@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    1 day ago

    Lol.

    Do ISPs like making money?

    Then they shouldn’t disconnect users who pirate.

    I get notifications from my ISP all the time. They don’t do anything though because they like the money I give them.

    • bthest@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      I’ve been torrenting movies and software since 2000, no vpn, like I literally have torrented damn near everything I’ve watched for decades and have only gotten a notice once and it wasn’t even me. It was from a temporary roommate who had watched a movie on a pirate streaming site.

      So that tells you how good and accurate their detection techniques are.

      • Robust Mirror@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 day ago

        Their methods are fine, they literally just pirate the stuff themselves, see which IPs connect to them, then connect those to an ISP and notify them. The main reasons you wouldn’t get notices are getting lucky, not seeding much, not torrenting things that are being monitored, or having an ISP that doesn’t care much.

        The single notice from the streaming site makes sense, pirate streaming sites are usually honeypots or heavily monitored.

        • bthest@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          My routine is always use piratebay, never use a pirate streaming site, no new or big studio releases, no porn, not seeding for long and choosing less active torrents. I can’t say much for how effective it is since I’ve never gotten hit so I can’t really experiment (I’ve had five or six ISPs in two different countries).

          they literally just pirate the stuff themselves, see which IPs connect to them, then connect those to an ISP and notify them.

          And I don’t even understand how this would hold up if it ever went to trial. How can an IP owner “pirate” their own IP? Even when they outsource it to services who do this they’re still giving permission for the IP to be distributed.

          It’s like hiring someone to “steal” your own TV, putting it in a back alley and then accusing whoever takes it of being a thief.

          • Robust Mirror@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            24 hours ago

            It’s generally seen as okay on a similar level to undercover work. They do it for Investigation reasons, the torrent was already uploaded before they joined, their monitoring serves a legitimate law enforcement purpose, and they’re authorized by the copyright holder (themselves) to do it. They didn’t put the movie or whatever out there themselves.

    • AlphaOmega@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 day ago

      After switching to torbrowser for all my questionable searches and downloads, I no longer get notices from my ISP for like 10 years now

  • ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    1 day ago

    Always make sure that QBT uses your VPN’s network interface. I got some DMCA emails despite split-tunneling a VPN recently, and I realized it was bound to all interfaces by default - that’s no good.

    • darvit@lemmy.darvit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      21 hours ago

      Better to just configure a firewall properly so that no packets can go outside of the vpn tunnel.

      • ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        18 hours ago

        How is that better? If you configure your firewall rules incorrectly, this protects you against that. This ensures you have no connection if your VPN isn’t on/isn’t working.

    • Joe@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 day ago

      In Germany and no doubt some other countries, private law firms can (on behalf of the copyright holders) request people’s identity based on residential IP addresses and then send extortionist legal threats. Apparently an IP appearing on a public tracker can be enough to trigger it, without any confirmed data transfer.

      VPNs are common and usually sufficient.

      • Tollana1234567@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 day ago

        they try that in the US, using mass litigation, but it doesnt work, its usually designed to scare indivudal IP users to “turn them self in”

      • jownz@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        A boy downloaded a movie via torrent without using a VPN.

        He died.

        Good night! 😴

        • Joe@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 day ago

          They could. The protocol also supports IP spoofing, so doxing could also be a thing.

          For individuals, it is a time consuming and costly legal process, whether justified or not. For the law firm, it costs a few cents per letter, but they get a few hundred (or more) euros when some sucker pays.

  • sad_detective_man@leminal.space
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    2 days ago

    let’s all fall on our sword to make sure Disney never loses a potential subscriber for Marvel Wars. Truly, we are defending the interests of the people here

  • InFerNo@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    61
    ·
    2 days ago

    “the internet” is a necessity and requirement to function in society. You can’t be denied access to it anymore, it would be disproportionate.

    • utopiah@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      2 days ago

      Exactly, sure disconnect customers from the Internet if they use it for entertainment… but once they use it to earn the income that pays their bills, it becomes questionable… and once it is in practice required to be a citizen, at the local, national or supra national level then it becomes a totally different question, to which the answer is basically no, you can’t disconnect someone otherwise you remove their citizenship.

    • Vinstaal0@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      2 days ago

      Pretty sure I have read somewhere that it is now also an official necessity in Germany

  • DFX4509B@lemmy.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    154
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    If it’s upheld, that’s the precursor to full-blown info blackouts, just cut off internet to anyone ‘accused’ of wrongspeak against the powers that be, which is basically everyone.

    This also sounds like SOPA reborn.

        • 0x0@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          22 hours ago

          So you bought into the think of the children argument?
          You know that’s a red-herring, right? It’s really about eroding privacy.

          • ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            21 hours ago

            It was supposed to be a reference to a meme making fun of “us vs. them” mentalities. I know enough about the think of the children argument.

      • DFX4509B@lemmy.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Given the US is now ran by the New Fuhrer? I could see this being used against criticism of leadership or anything else resembling free will and not just piracy. I also find it sad that the day the US will probably die as a free country and turn into a dictatorship, is the same day it gained its independence in the first place.

  • lepinkainen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    76
    ·
    2 days ago

    So if Meta is convicted of pirating books for AI training, they lose all internet connectivity? 🧐

  • PanaX@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    273
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 days ago

    Based on that logic, ammunition and arms manufacturers should be held liable for damages as well.

    • ryper@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      ·
      2 days ago

      The US has a law to limit the liability of gun manufacturers.

      The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) is a U.S law, passed in 2005, that protects firearms manufacturers and dealers from being held liable when crimes have been committed with their products. Both arms manufacturers and dealers can still be held liable for damages resulting from defective products, breach of contract, criminal misconduct, and other actions for which they are directly responsible. However, they may be held liable for negligent entrustment if it is found that they had reason to believe a firearm was intended for use in a crime.

      • Luffy@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        2 days ago

        Because of fucking course there is

        Were talking about Jesusland after all

    • masterofn001@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      2 days ago

      More like, if you steal something you are banned from using roads and sidewalks and doors.

      • Yggstyle@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 day ago

        Gonna be a lot of issues that come from this. Legally speaking. It’s already on the books that an IP address doesn’t represent a single person… so I’m not terribly clear on how they plan to enforce this even if it were to pass.

      • NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Yeah, sure but to “steal something” is to imply that you’re depriving the original owner use of the thing you stole. This is more like making an exact copy depriving nobody of use of the original thing.

        it’s more like depriving someone use of roads, sidewalks, and doors because they got caught walking out of Kinkos

  • The Picard Maneuver@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    223
    ·
    2 days ago

    I’m not a judge, but isn’t internet essentially a utility these days? Cutting someone off because of piracy seems like cutting off electricity or water because they did something illegal with it.

      • ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        Net neutrality is why your online jokes were censored under Biden

        – John McRacist, Republican congressman, former CFO of Evil Inc., former lawyer of Vile Ltd., member of Christofascism Society and Roman Salutes to Jesus

    • ryper@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      94
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      I’m pretty sure this supreme court would rule that people don’t have a right to electricity, or even water. They’ll probably be totally ok with people losing internet access as punishment for crossing media owners.

        • tomenzgg@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          Besides your point but this is the aspect about Gorsuch that I can’t seem to make internally consistent. He almost always rules in terms of native rights – even when, I think, it stretches his supposed originalist guiding principle – yet is more than happy to rule as a conservative on all other times and support “industry” and big business (even when it stretches his supposed originalist guiding principle).

          I know that nothing necessitates a person to act logically and most act from emotion, more than anything, but most people, I find, have a relative reason they think they’re being logically consistent but I can’t seem to suss even that out, with regards to him.

        • jumping_redditor@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          2 days ago

          to be fair the treaty never specified anything about water, and the Navajo nations should have had better lawyers or better guerilla warfare tactics if they wanted more negotiating power.

    • Telorand@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      63
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Pragmatically, yes. Legally, no. Progressives have been fighting for years to get internet classified as a utility in the US, and regressives and (ironically) internet companies have been fighting against that effort at every turn in the name of profit.

      And now look how well that’s turned out. Gee, if only some people had warned them that deregulation was a monkey’s paw…

    • SillyDude@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Inb4 palantir cuts off your electric and water because you had 15% eye distraction during the mandatory 3hr nightly fox news viewing.

    • A7thStone@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      2 days ago

      I’m some places in the States they will cut off your electricity or water for sharing with a neighbor that has had theirs shut off. I have seen both happen personally, and not in some back water state. They both happened in upstate NY.

    • JimVanDeventer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      I’m not a United Statesian so I have no clue anymore how it works there, but other places have been making the case that the Internet is an essential service and that access to it is a basic right. So to leapfrog off your question, is that like a poor person stealing a loaf of bread being cut off from food because they didn’t food responsibly enough?

      • Sigilos@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        30
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Unfortunately the country I was born in, the USA, is also one that voted against the international resolution to define food as a human right. 😕