Can Web Sites Go Offshore For Free Speech? 328
invoke asks: "All the recent stories about Web pages being yanked for various supposed violations of DMCA make me worry that I may inadvertently irritate some large corporation. What I am seeing now in America and the EU suggests that I would most likely find my Internet connection terminated with no real recourse, causing me no end of hassle. I can't afford to lose my connectivity, as I run several domains off my static IP. Therefore, I'm looking for a safe-harbor solution for hosting a 'vanilla' free speech site. I'm not intending to host warez or serialz, just stuff that might irritate people-with-money. Any suggestions?"
Offshore won't help (Score:1)
Free speech is still a pipe dream (Score:3)
The ideal of free speech, as desirable as it may seem to all of us, is in the real world nothing more than a pipe dream which those in power want to convince us we have. True free speech has never existed, and will probably never exist under the current socioeconomic models of today, in which aggressive competition is the force that shapes our society and the lives we lead in it.
The capitalist system which dominates the world is based upon older social systems such as feudalism, and inherits from them a kind of "caste" system in which money replaces birth as the indicator of rank. The only real difference is that there is an illusion of opportunity which is deliberately fostered by those at the top in order to keep those at the bottom happy. After all if you think you might be able to rise up the social ladder through hard work and skill, then you are going to be content with your lot, believing better things are around the corner. This is the basis for the "American dream".
The struggle to gain status and power within the system is an aggressive and competitive one - there is less room at the top than there are people trying to rise there. This creates a climate where backstabbing, slander and other forms of socioeconomic rape become accepted and acceptable means to gain something over others, either pushing yourself up or your rivals down.
Whilst this infighting serves those at the top, keeping the masses busy fighting each other rather than challenging them, things like free speech are a danger to them. Their positions of power are based on an intricate web of money, power, reputation and connections, and annoyances like public opinion can topple even the mightiest giant.
So rather than have their positions exposed to the free speech of the public, they will instead fight using their considerable resources to quosh it, preferrably using pre-emptive legislative strikes. We see this happening across the Western world at the moment with laws like the UCITA and so on. So surely the obvious choice is to go offshore, outside of national laws?
While this may work for a while, the globalist coterie of people in power aren't themselves tied to any particular nation. Sooner or later they will find a way to pressure national and international bodies into "harmomising" international laws or some other excuse that will involve extending the reach of anti-free speech laws.
So in the short term this may work as a solution to oppresive national laws, but it's only a matter of time before legislation catches up with you wherever you are.
Not drastic enough (Score:2)
Thus the only way to solve this problem is to buy up some land - preferably islands for defense reasons - and start our own country, which would intentionally not form any treaties with anyone, and completely ignore any and all foriegn intellectual property and/or censorship regulations. A "rogue" nation, with a single purpose in mind. There is still the problem of physical connectivity. Putting up a satellite would be a start, but it might be that nobody bothers to pick up the signal. Pipe piracy would, in the long run, probably be the only solution. Oops, Japan's not connected any more. Instead, we are.
Of course, it'd probably be easier to just have a revolution in the US. There will be sooner or later anyway...
Re:Is offshore the answer? (Score:2)
The web (in its current state) has become a playground for everybody, and it's gotten quite messy. Banner advertisements are constantly being shoved down one's throat; the same goes with ALT tag ads if you've turned image loading off. Everybody's "corporate interest" is leading to this or that company or government or organization trying to stop the freedom of speech that we enjoyed on the Web only a small time ago. Escaping corporate interests will be harder and harder as time goes on, because it looks like it's going to become illegal to do so.
So, the solution that a friend and I thought of would be to make a second internet -- one without the "crap".
If anybody else wants to investigate this as a team project, send me an email -- I'd love to talk.
Jon Abbott
Re:Offshore ISP? (Score:3)
ship has an American reg US law still applies.
IANAL
The Cure of the ills of Democracy is more Democracy.
Re:I feel sorry for you (Score:2)
I've always hated that description, a pyramid is a three-dimensional structure. You're talking about a hierarchy which can be mapped to a simple two-dimensional tree structure. It ticks me off to hear these terms being abused like this in a cheap attempt to over-dramatize an idea - in order to rouse emotional responses from the reader. But that's what Marxism was all about wasn't it? Compassion for one's fellow man, hate for those who could be twisted in one's mind to being non-human, because they're rich.
No, I haven't believed in this system my whole life. In fact, back when I was in college, I was quite taken with the whole Marxist ideal. Now that I've "grown up", and I've become that what I used to hate: A white, employed, middle-class, male, with a wife, two dogs, SUV, two kids, watches sit-coms, has a 401k, etc. etc. - I look back at my childhood, and saw that I hated the rich because I had no hope that I would ever possibly become rich. None at all. It happened quite unexpectedly, after eight years of hard work. I have improved my standing in life, I rose from the level of the proletariat, I took advantage of the opportunities I had in my native-born country, and yes, I played the sick game of consumerism, and was rewarded with a shiny new credit history.
All I can say is, I'm glad I'm not living on a commune growing tofu.
And while we're all pretty aware here on
I didn't have this perspective when I was 24, and making $6/hr delivering pizzas. I couldn't have.
I just remembered this old Metallica song. . .
Re:Free speech is still a pipe dream (Score:2)
you notice?"
It kind of will work. When you think about it, the human animal is truly only subject to one law. Survival of the fittest. We may make our own laws, and try to enforce our own laws, but that only works within the framework of our society, and when it all comes down to it, it's the motherfucker with the biggest guns who wins out. Currently, that's the US Govt. I don't think there's a damn thing anyone can do to revoke the most basic, fundamental natural law of life for the past 4 billion years.
That's why we all have a choice, and it will always be the backstabbing bastards that make it. When you get the biggest gun, you can apply your passion for your fellow man to break this rule. But then, you become the backstabbing bastard, don't you. Do you think Pol Pot learned this lesson before he died?
I just remembered this old Metallica song. . .
The "Radio Caroline" Solution (Score:4)
To do the same, or something similar, with a web server demands some additional resources, but is actually not that different in practice.
Instead of being parked outside of the physical legal domain, you now have to be parked outside of the virtual legal domain.
What does this mean, in practice? Using "pirate" IP numbers, a "pirate" DNS, and (most importantly) NO logical connection.
If there is no logical point of connection, then there is nothing to shut off. There is also no easy way of tracking where the server physically is.
In short, you must be able to intercept packets for your server at arbritary points on the physical network, and inject synthesised packets also anywhere in the physical network.
(By "anywhere", I mean more than 1 place, and the more places the better.)
Tunneling to a large number of proxies (ALL of whom have the same vhost IP/name) would be one way.
Another, less legal, way would be to borrow the same idea as used in DDOS attacks, but install a distributed proxy service instead.
A third method would be to extend the Gnutella protocol to support anycast proxying. (Essentially Gnutella is 9/10ths there, so this wouldn't be overly difficult.)
A fourth, -definitely- illegal and strongly NOT recommended method (but perhaps the most water-tight) would be to use one of the first two methods with injected routes. By this, I mean transmit valid BGP4 and/or RIP2 packets to a random set of routers, of which at least one is connected to each proxy. The injected routes would create randomly and continuously shifting paths to each proxy, making it much more difficult to figure out where anything is. Combine this with a randomly shifting IP address, and it becomes impossible to block or trace. Individual sysops could remove proxies, if ordered to or if not approved. However, with no burden on any one proxy and no continuous load along any one path, it's unlikely any given proxy would ever be found, or even objected to, if it was. (Most computer-literate people are closet Robin Hoods, whether they'll admit to it or not. Provided something is not interfering with legitamate use of resources, is unlikely to bring the Wrath of God down on their heads, and doesn't compromise "security" (read: bring their prawn collection to the attention of the media), most sys admins are likely to decide it's more hastle than it's worth... ...and bookmark the website for future "reference".
All these methods boil down to The Golden Rule of Real Security: DON'T put your eggs in one basket, and keep moving the baskets. It royally buggers up the egg-smashers.
Oceania? (Score:2)
Re:Oceania - making a new country (Score:2)
Re:as mentioned by Bruce Sterling (Score:2)
Don't be too sure. If it becomes a problem to The Powers That Be, i.e., if servers sprout in non-WIPO countries offering MP3s and war3z, I'm sure the copyright industry will push vigorously for tying Internet connectivity to an IP treaty. Chances are countries such as Britain, Australia, the EU will quietly sign it with perhaps a few concessions; countries such as Russia won't get much in the way of choice. And if the treaty prohibits signatories from providing connectivity to non-signatories, it's unlikely that Cuba or Libya or whoever will be able to set up a data haven.
The copyright industry has enough lobbying clout that they got copyrights extended to virtually perpetual terms; if such a treaty regime is at all possible, they could get it put into place.
Re:offshore? (Score:2)
They closed this loophole in 1978 or so, though; now claims must be approved by the nearest neighbour, even if the land is in international waters.
Re:as mentioned by Bruce Sterling (Score:2)
Re:as mentioned by Bruce Sterling (Score:2)
The whole point of the treaty scenario is that if C is a signatory and B is not, it will prohibit connections to B; if C is not a signatory, connections to C will be prohibited.
The only thing the gov't could do then is make the penalties so huge (20 year prison sentences) that people wouldn't do it. And many still would. And monitoring/finding everyone doing it is impossible, and any halfway effective attempt is extremely expensive.
It won't be more expensive than finding war3z sites on the web and shutting them down. And if there are a few high-profile examples (multi-million-dollar fines, lengthy prison sentences), that alone will have a persuasive effect on others.
Of course, this works both ways (Score:3)
Basic Problem of Connection (Score:4)
So when your posting annoys someone with serious clout, they have a quite chat with the State Department and the interconnecting telecomm player. They in turn have private chats with their peers, and your site disappears. The alternative is for, say, voice service into that country to "stop working" for a few days, until the point gets across.
IMHO the best choice is to set up your own site with a local or regional ISP in your home country, get some legal advice, and fight the battles you need to fight. That's the only way to prevail in the long run.
sPh
China (Score:2)
I just got a free webmail account on mol.mn (Mongolia online, in the Mongolian People's Republic), and I am going to try and see of I can get webspace there also specifically for DVCSS-type information.
Are we going to more or fewer backbones? (Score:2)
Really? All I can see is big companies merging with big companies to form bigger companies.
The bigger they get, the harder it is for a new player to come into the market of international backbone connections.
And the fewer players, the easier it is to get denied service.
This is not Fidonet where you could dial another node.
__
Re:Basic Problem of Connection (Score:2)
Perhaps I'm mistaken, but I don't believe such measures are taken as lightly as sending a simple cease and decist letter to someone's ISP which seems to be a common and effective way of shutting people up.
Another question arises: Regardless of whether strongarm tactics can be employed to take his off-shore site down, can he be prosecuted in the US for hosting it?
I know what I think the answer is, but I'm not a lawyer, so who cares?
--
Libel/Liable (Score:2)
From WordNet (r) 1.6 [wn]:
liable: subject to legal action; "liable to criminal charges"
libel: a tort consisting of false and malicious publication printed for the purpose of defaming a living person
(This is intended to inform, not complain or ridicule)
--
Re:Basic Problem of Connection (Score:2)
Re:Fight for your rights, don't just skulk off... (Score:2)
Re:Basic Problem of Connection (Score:2)
True, I have to keep reminding myself that I come from a society that has enjoyed a thousand years of excellent national security, and relatively good freedom and opportunity for prosperity.
Re:Basic Problem of Connection (Score:2)
Relative to not being able to hold a dissenting opinion, to not being able to walk the streets safely for fear of being caught in crossfire, to not being able to wear a bikini on the beach without being flogged, etc. The problems that you mention, which I don't deny, are recent and minor. I was talking about the feeling of safety that a thousand years of peace brings to a population. The encryption thing has been blown out of proportion, it's no more harsh than the police's right to search your home with a warrant. In my opinion, the European Court of Human Rights is more than enough defence against abuse of power, I'm shocked at some of the things that they have upheld.
Re:Might not work (Score:3)
Might not work (Score:2)
--
Re:U.S. Admin still liable? (Score:2)
(Disclaimer: Vince is a friend of a friend, so I'm not entirely free of bias here. He renounced his US citizenship a few years ago to make all this easier, which was deemed sufficiently noteworthy that the New York Times ran a piece about it.)
Yeah, right (Score:2)
Pervasive Distribution (Score:3)
Join freenet and host a freenet server. Then, your information will be distributed via many hosts in a dynamic way.
Use your static server as an index into the freenet content. Let people know what is out there, but dont provide it explicitly on your server(s).
Otherwise, no matter where you are, or what you do, you piss off the wrong people and your site is history. If your lucky that would be the end of it, if not, welcome to big fines and jail time.
Re:Offshore ISP? (Score:2)
Similar to incorporating in Delaware, I suppose.
Re:Of course, this works both ways (Score:2)
http://www.sandline.com
Or somebody like Executive Outcomes, though they've gone out of business.
Re:Move your site to South Africa (Score:2)
It seems like you'd be banking on teh fact that they'd never get around to prosecuting. Well, in my experience, money changes everything. I think that if MS were sufficiently pissed, a few well placed "political" contributions and the South African Justice system would get its ducks in a row enough to prosecute an enemy of Dollar Bill's. It's not like they'd be asking the government to do anything illegal.
Offshore is good. So is low-profile. (Score:2)
Check it out at my home page [uchicago.edu].
Sam TH
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I know, they killed my ancestor (Score:2)
If he was your great...........uncle, then he wasn't one of your ancestors. One of his siblings was.
LK
Re:I know, they killed my ancestor (Score:2)
I invented the internet.
I am descended from Captain Kidd.
LK
distributed vhosting (Score:2)
Possibly, this can be done differently by adding the functionality onto freenet, and have users point to a node for their DNS.
freedom of speech, freedom of money... (Score:2)
much divided into people who understand the
importance of free speech, and people who
understand the importance of economic freedom.
So if you decide to try running some sort of
off-shore "data haven", I recommend making sure
that it's also a bank.
Fuck Censorship! Proudly hosted in the USA!! (Score:2)
Some of the sites I host include:
Key is to know your rights as well as having some money to burn...sadly the more money one has, the easier finding hosting becomes. In regards to location - I find it comical as well as downright scary when I see others advocating that the safer places for hosting is Russia...wow that really goes over the top!! Have things changed that much since the Cold War??
As some other posters have pointed out, while some people here in the U.S. are looking offshore, many people from all around the world host their content on servers in the United States. If a U.S. citizen has to worry about hosting legal, but contraversal, materials on servers here then perhaps it's time for another Revolution.
In regards to your hosting choices:
Verio [verio.com] - Big hosting company (world's largest?). They have numerous divisions and each is somewhat different in what they allow (some allow adult, but most don't) though in general Verio has a hands-off policy.
Valueweb [valueweb.net] - An economy host. Service is what about what'd you expect for the price. I've hosted protest sites there and never had a problem - I even got a Cease and Desist letter for a site I had hosted there and they kept it running.
Concentric Networks (formerly 9 NetAve) [9netave.com] - good rates and decent virtual hosting, but avoid their dedicated hosting since they've had problems. In regards to freedom of speech...many controversal sites are hosted with them...however if a site is adult and/or draws a lot of bandwidth, expect to pay MUCH more. It's too early for me to say how them now being owned by Concentric Networks affects things - so far I've seen no change.
Rackspace [rackspace.com] - Good service and they generally mind their business and leave the content upto webmasters.
In regards to who to avoid...the free hosting places (Tripod/Geocities, Go Network, etc) as well as small Mom and Pop hosting companies in general since they'll usually cave in quickly since they're often at the mercy of their of their upstream provider(s) as well the owners may have strong personal opinions of their own.
If one is looking offshore, I'd recommend NetNation [netnation.com] - many sites, in particular many illicit drug related sites, have moved over to them as a result of the possible passage of the Anti-Meth bill.
Hope this helps...feel free to contact me if you have further questions and/or want to hear my view regarding a particular website you plan to put up.
Ron Bennett
well, actually.. (Score:5)
The Congress shall have power.. To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;
In other words, the constitution only includes patents and copyright to a reasonable, non-unlimited extent, and "to promote the progress of science and useful arts". This isn't what we're complaining about. This is a good thing. What we're complaining about is patents and copyrights used as weapons for corporations to silence individuals, something that was added much, much later, far after the first amendment bits.
What was originally there is more or less to _protect_ people-- i.e. to stop someone from taking the work of others at the expense of the original creator, such as burning 3000 copies of "Dre 2001" and selling them on the street, in which case Dre is in a very real way failing to recieve money that was his due, because 3000 people who would otherwise have bought the album from Dre bought them from the guy on the street. Making the case that the patent/copyright stuff in the constitution was intended to prevent people from taking ideas and concepts from a work and using those ideas and concepts to create a new, independent work, as is done in the case of a parody [slashdot.org] or the music of Negativland [negativland.com].. well, that doesn't seem to use the same spirit as the parts of the U.S. constitution, seeing as a new work as such would be progress of useful art, and the original creator suffers no loss.
You'll also notice the bits in the original constitution do not contradict free speech, really, and i see NOTHING in there to support the idea of preventing the spread of information-- i.e. preventing information about a technology from being spread. The idea behind the patents was originally to encourage the spread of information-- that in order to convince someone to allow science to progress, they would tell the world how their process worked, and in return would be granted a limited-time monopoly on that process. The idea that something like the DMCA could prevent someone from spreading information they found independantly about a process-- say, cyberpatrol's encryption scheme-- is completely antithetical to the original idea of a patent and what the constitution says, even if the information about said process is in a language other than English (say, C++..)
You'll also note the "for limited times" bit. Current copyright/patent laws extend far, far past the useful lifespan of the ideas they encompass, and the lifespan of a copyright seems to get longer every time that the date of the expiration of Mickey Mouse's copyright comes within the forseeable future. You think it will _ever_ be legal for me to distribute a Legend of Zelda 1 ROM, no matter how long i live and no matter how many years have passed since Nintendo has gotten a penny from that game? Ha.
So yeh, copyrights and patents do predate free speech in U.S. law to an extent, but not in any manner that is antithetical to the idea of free speech.
Harder than you think. (Score:2)
If you live in the US, and you are the owner of a web site, it really doesn't matter where you host it. If you are making the stuff available to Americans, and you yourself are in America, you are accountable for your actions under american law. Perhaps the US courts can not force the overseas provider to yank the page, but they can force YOU to yank the page (or go to prison for violating a court order)
Think tax evasion. You start up an offshore company to keep your holdings. A very *VERY* important part of this process is making sure that the offshore company can *NOT* be tied back to you!
Spam bans? (Score:2)
Generally, first level providers care (your ISP), and second levels MIGHT care (large ISP)...
CRTC definition: (Score:2)
And just because the CRTC isn't going to regulate it, doesn't mean sites can't be regulated. There is a difference between laws and regulation.
Regulation serves to make sure something stays usable and good for all people (ie: without telco regulation.. telco's would NEVER have been where they are today.)
With Internet, there is not need to regulate.
If you use your site to do something illegal, it *can* be shut down. It is merely an insturment of your own actions.
Re:Offshore ISP? (Score:2)
What makes you think it's going to be a libertarian haven? From what I've seen, this looks like a overpriced floating combination of a rich folks retirement home and a time-share condo complex.
Kaa
Re:Set Up Your Own Web Server Or Go Offshore (Score:4)
You can still be shut down by your DSL service provider in the same way that your web host provider can shut you down. Nothing has changed.
Remember how in the old days, the internet was designed to discourage spam/commercial activity. When you got internet access, you promise not to do a bunch of things. One of them is spam so let's use spam as an example. The penalty for sending spam is that you get your service pulled and your account terminated. Your service provider had the same kind of contract with it's service provider. If your service provider allows it's customers to spam then it's service provider can cut it off. This continues down the line to the backbones. They have the same kind of contract. The agreement states that they will exchange data as long as there is no spam. The penalty for a backbone allowing it's customers to spam is that the other backbones will cut them off, they will not exchange data.
Remember the Spam King and the Ageis network? The Spam King became his own service provider connected directly to the Ageis backbone. It seemed like an ideal solution. The problem was that all the other backbones threatened to cut off Ageis' access to their backbones. Ageis was forced to pull the plug on the Spam King even though they didn't want to. If the other backbones had cut them off, they would have gone out of business.
Think about this globally. The US can pass a law that the US backbones cannot exchange information with "rogue networks," networks that don't follow US law. The US can pass a law that they will not trade with countries that don't pass similar laws. The UK can do the same. Pretty soon, there is no where to go.
If you don't think that this can be done, remember that until very recently, the US phone networks were prohibited from connecting to the Cuban phone network so you couldn't easily make a phone call from the US to Cuba. Yes, I know that the internet has obvious ways to route around this kind of block but big governments can put a lot of pressure on service providers.
Remember that service providers are corporations. Like it or not, they are amoral. Their loyalty is to shareholders not to your freedom of speech. If the CEO of a corporation puts your freedom of speech above shareholder value, he can be sued and he will certainly loose his job.
Re:Off-shore won't work. (Score:2)
Some of these countries don't even require your name to setup the company - just a legal contact who can be a local lawyer. These shell companies can then get ISP space in that country and serve web pages. The local lawyer will also (for a fee of course) forward all of your snail mail back to the US so you have an instant foreign headquarters.
A US company could sue you, a US resident, as an officer of the company but they have no way to determine who you are or what country you belong to. I read an article about sex.com, which was stolen from someone else. The domain is worth hundreds of millions so naturally they are trying to get it back - but sex.com was sold to an offshore company which is believed to be owned by the same guy - but no one except the IRS can prove it. I don't know if there are any procedures for getting at IRS records - but I would suspect they are very hard to obtain.
Of course this is all from my very limited knowledge... My research was targeted at legal activity and what you are proposing is semi-legal to illegal. Some of these countries have laws that allow them to disvolve companies and seize bank accounts from known drug trafficers and other illegal types.
Ideas for anonymous publishing (Score:5)
http://jonathanclark.com/diary/anonpub/ [jonathanclark.com]
I wasn't aware of freedom net [zeroknowledge.com] at the time, but they use many of the same ideas. They do not do publishing (i.e. only outgoing connections) mainly for fear of legal problems.
Another method I've seen tossed around is to use redirecting proxy servers where URLs look like this:
http://site1.com/XXX
where XXX decrypts to -> http://site2.com/YYY and
YYY decrypts to http://site3.com/actual_content.html
The only trouble is getting people to run the proxy servers.
One other idea I have played around with is to use spoofied ping packets to transfer content semi-anonymously. It work by the connecting party somehow requesting the content and the posting their IP address. Then you, the server, send it to some random machine on the internet inside of a ping packet with a spoofed return address to them. This can be used to make the chain of computers between you and them very long - also making it travel through countries that are hard to get search warrents.
The main problem is making the initial request, but that could be done with a Gnutella like network.
The other problem here is the receiving computer needs to somehow specifiy which packets weren't received (because ping is lossy).
food for thought...
Re:Might not work (Score:2)
There has been case law (IANAL), and I don't remember the name of the case, but in general:
An American company or individual can be held responsible for content/binaries held in an offshore site. The logic is that the Internet was a scale up of of the mainframe dumb terminal, and the fact that the storage site is located offshore is irrelavant. The actual work (read: whatever illegal violations) was actually done on the American side of the connection.
Nutshell: There has been American case law holding individuals responsible for acts done in America but hosted offshore.
_Am
Why go offshore? Have a meal with a cryptographer! (Score:2)
It does require sharing a lot of bandwidth.
However it seems like some Gnutella like clone with a dining cryptographer based protocol would be a very useful tool for free speech. Then you only need servers operating in LAND based countries.... Get enough of them and since no-one knows where the data is actually coming from, no-one can attack it...
It would help to have laws that made it hard for the local governments to attack a website participating in such a network based on the fact that there is absolutely no evidence that any given site is hosting the data.
While you might lose some servers in the less free countries, if you have randomized replication, and multiple countries involved, you'd have a very robust information service.
Re:Fight for your rights, don't just skulk off... (Score:2)
A lot of those changes have been extremely positive.
Re:Offshore ISP? (Score:2)
Re:Offshore ISP? (Score:2)
And if your worried about being attacked or harrassed you can always broadcast what is happening to you over your connection (unless it gets taken out). You could do the same with a ship. Bruce Sterling talked about a ship with these kinds of ideas (free food and energy, etc) in a short story called Green Hills of Brunie (I know I misspelled that). Get enough bandwith and you could also be looking at setting up a service like the Crypt in Neal Stephenson's Cryptonomicon (you ever notice how some of the great ideas are covered in so called "escapist" [Sci-Fi] writing?).
I hope that someone does put this into effect. And I'm hoping I can get a job with them.
Re:Of course, this works both ways (Score:2)
Re:Offshore ISP? (Score:2)
However, they couldn't be considered to be in any shape or form "floating" - they are solidly attached to the seabed that is only a few meters deep at that point :+)
--
Re:The net is not as Censored as many think (Score:2)
1) host your own web site. Get a T1 and your own hardware. This puts the responsablity onto your own sholders. .uk it doesn't - the ISP that sold you the T1 is still liable, and will happily redirect your DNS entry to a 404 server of their own if someone threatens them with a lawsuit.
I don't know about the US, but here in
2) Don't put stuff up in violation of copyright. It does not belong to you.
Under copyright law there is usually a "fair use" clause (much eroded under DMCA) - and a simple copyright claim doesn't cover most defamation and libel lawsuits, which are the most common form of takedown request here.
3) If anyone does send you a letter asking you to take stuff down. Talk to your lawyer. Near as I can tell the stuff that they are going after falls into a few very specific catagories. (Copyright violations etc)
You will end up talking to a lawyer anyhow - usually to try and get your site back after the ISP shuts down it's end of the pipe. I virtually guarantee there is a clause in the contract that allows them to do that.
--
Re:Offshore ISP? (Score:2)
Problem with International Servers.... (Score:2)
//Phizzy
Re:EU? (Score:2)
//rdj
New Zealand could be a good place if not for... (Score:2)
These suggested reforms don't seem to have anything to do with events in New Zealand, but are driven by US and other countries policies.
They seem to favour a situation which ensures nobody in this country actually knows anything about their computers, and then makes them responsible for using them intelligently.
Why don't we just unplug them all, go back to the farm and fuck sheep until our economy corrodes away to nothing, and then our entire country can be bought by some giant US corporation. Yeah, thatd be great.
Of course its in the US's best interests to bog down everyone else in restrictive 'digital copyright' and 'computer crime' laws, while their own government departments openly flout all of them under the auspices of 'National Security'.
And of course US 'National Security' extends to every other country in europe and the pacific where Echelon etc. exists.
This is like the US-led WTO calling for 'Free Trade' and then generously subsidising it's industries so they can compete.
This is like the US demand for India and Pakistan to lay down their nuclear arms when they happily point their enormous nuclear arsenal at Russia.
If our government wasn't so deluded, then maybe this country might stand a chance of benefiting from the IT revolution, instead of being trampled into the mud, like every other small country by the US.
A thought... (Score:2)
Re:Offshore ISP? (Score:2)
I suggest St Helena/Ascension to reg' the ship. They're "kinda" British, but not quite, so the flag is a flag of convienience. Also, if you station yourself there, Ascension has this really fat pipe...
Failing that, simply get a load of flags, and decide which one to use, depending on where you are and who is bothering you.
Remember Radio Carolina?
Mong.
* Paul Madley
Re:Offshore ISP? (Score:2)
I vote along with what another person said --
paraphrased: "the enemy of your enemy is your friend"
The problem is not connectivity, but law (Score:2)
1) It is not necessary for one of the Major Powers to cut Internet connectivity to your offshore host. It is merely necessary for your host organization to consider (by themselves, or with outside prodding) the consequences of having their net connection shut off. Your host organization will probably decide that your business is not worth the potential consequences.
2) With development comes stricter IP laws. The old pirate havens of Korea, Taiwan, and Hongkong have all been pressured very hard (and effectively!) to enforce IP in their territories. Other countries (Indonesia comes to mind) are still something of a piracy haven, but acquiring bandwidth will be difficult, and I don't know if I would want to host a "free speech" site in a country with a two-year history of multi-party democracy.
3) Banking privacy and copyright are two different sets of laws. I would be wary of current or former British colonies. Most have rather nasty "prior restraint" laws which could complicate your life.
4) Other things to look at are the existence (and viability of) libel/slander laws, etc. These are much more commonly used in most of the overseas territories I've had the pleasure of living or traveling in.
5) There was a wonderful site on the web for several years at taxbusters.org which offered services to get numbered bank accounts, second passports, etc. The owner of the site always seemed to have trouble keeping his site hosting, no matter what exotic corner of the world the server was parked in.
6) Most importantly, prepare for sticker shock. Dedicated T1 connectivity gets very expensive (i.e. around US$60-70,000/month) when you're almost anywhere in Asia. I can't speak for other parts of the world.
In summary, I'm not very optimistic about this avenue of exploration, but wish you all the best just the same.
j.
Re:as mentioned by Bruce Sterling (Score:3)
Throwaway ISPs (Score:2)
In the downtime users could get a lot of sympathy off-shore mirror servers until they find another throwaway ISP. There's even the small possibility that after enough censored ISPs are taken down it might raise public awareness on the issue.
Re:Of course, this works both ways (Score:2)
Move your site to South Africa (Score:3)
Here are a few reasons:
1) AFAIK there are few laws here regarding the Internet related things. Child pornography is the only one they come down hard on.
2) Even if there were, our Law Enforcement groups are so useless that the only crime rate that is on the decline are traffic violations, which they are coming down hard on.
3) Free speech is very well protected here, especially in relation to our political past.
4) There are a few companies that will host your domain and give you self administration for a very low cost - for less than US$50 per month for 10Mb hosting. This price is dropping as our currency declines along with the situation in Zimbabwe.
The reason I say you'll sacrifice speed is because we still have a monopolistic Telco, and bandwith is _EXTREMELY_ expensive. It will change in the next fews years though...
Oceania is quite dead. (Score:2)
Was it always a scam? Or was it a couple of well-intentioned guys who didn't have a clue what they were into? Not sure.
Re:Set Up Your Own Web Server Or Go Offshore (Score:2)
Re:Free speech is still a pipe dream (Score:2)
I wouldn't classify the above quoted post as "insightful" (as some moderator has), rather it is yet a reurgitation of socialism, a system that has clearly and utterly failed. Instead of helping to create a better liberal society with true freedom of speech and protection for individuals from aggressive groups (such as big corporations) we're fed the same old story about how the society that has freedoms for individuals is a "hierarchical" and "feudal" society.
Capitalism, or rather free economy, is based on individuals having the right to own things, and to buy, sell and barter these things in any way they see fit. Any system without free economy is a system where people are not free.
This is true in a socialist, communist or feudal society, which are all societies where the few make up the rules to control the many. In a free economy there is plenty of room at the top, becuse nobody looses from you getting there. It just gets a bigger economy. A free economy is not a zero sum game.Make that "Their positions of power are based on an intricate web that is out of their control ".
And by making our societies more liberal, with a legal system that protects the freedom of the individual. We kan make it even more dynamic, prosperous and out of control!!
What makes you think there IS a safe-harbor? (Score:2)
And unlike goverments, large corporations can be multinational. They can assert causes of actions from local subsidiaries or divisions.
Any webhosting company, anywhere in the entire world, when given a choice between fighting a costly lawsuit and cutting off a site, has a very strong incentive to cut off that site.
To people who say "run your own web host", apply all the above to "net connection provider".
Welcome to what happens when megacorporations woke up to the Net.
Re:Is offshore the answer? (Score:3)
Re:Sad. (Score:2)
There is not one single country that support "all freedom for everyone" Nor is there likely to be a person who does, exept in theory. The average /.-er, for example, is very likely to support freedom of speech to great extent. He (I guess the average /.er is a "he") is probably less likely to support some companys (*cough* MS *cough*) freedom to do business how they please. (hold thy flamethrower, that includes me as well)
In practice you never get more freedom than your neighbour allows. The trick is to choose your neighbour.
Depends on content. (Score:5)
Your best bet is to find a host who agrees with your views.
Second best, find someone who might not agree with you, but likes to be trouble to the same guys who might not like your content.
Anti-MS: Post it on /.
Anti-Linux: Go MSN
Anti-[generic US company]: Post it in France
Anti-$cientology: Germany
etc.
Remember that *your* powerful enemies has *their* enemies too. They might not be your friends, but they could be your allies. Just be prepared to move when the wind changes...
Re:Offshore ISP? (Score:3)
http://www.freedomship.com/
(a project to build a mobile libertarian haven
disguised as an overgrown cruise ship)
The server may be out of the US, but... (Score:2)
However, even with the hardware outside of the US, is the admin still responsible for any content? Could a cival lawsuit still be brought against you for being admin of a site outside of the US (That contravines US law?)
Also, if your server only has one link into the rest of the internet (Via. a US router, for example), can whoever-you-may-or-maynot-have-pissed-off legally have your link disconected (Perhaps with the threat of legal action against whoever hosts the router you're linked too?)
Just wondering if anyone has thought of any of this.
Re:Offshore ISP? (Score:2)
Funnilly enough, these were known as "Pirate radio". It seems that in modern times, the word "pirate" has transformed from its original meaning of a murderous cutthroat to someone who annoys the rich and powerful.
FWIW, while these ships were in operation, the British government engaged in a campaign of constant harassment and intimidation, arresting anyone who supplied them, watching in case the winds caused them to stray an inch into territorial waters, training (big) guns on them and feigning ramming actions. You may want to take that kind of thing into account when you set up your offshore ISP.
Rich
Your web site may be offshore, cut what about you? (Score:2)
Remeber etoy? Because one of thier memebers lived in the US they were able to be sued here.
Also of note are the operators of offshore gambling sites. They were recently found guilty of accepting bets from states where gambling is not permitted. Those webmasters aren't expected to see the light of day for 5-10 years.
Just because they can't take your site out doesn't mean they can't take YOU out.
Why not try the Netherlands? (Score:2)
Of course, they also had unbelievably bad customer service, and would probably charge you for re-connection after they had accidentally dug out your connection with a bulldozer.
Re:How ironic! (Score:2)
We was prosecuted here because he ftp'd the images from his UK PC so was deemed to have published them in the UK!
http://www.theregister.co.uk/990701-000018.html
here [theregister.co.uk] or google [google.com]
And the land of the free (tm) has some interesting judgements :
http://www.theregister.co.uk/990728-000008.html
here [theregister.co.uk] or google [google.com]
A supreme court judge in New York may have changed the landscape for Internet companies who base their services in out of the way countries.
Justice Charles Edward Ramos has ruled that an Antiguan gambling site is covered by the laws of New York state simply because the service can be accessed from there.
Hosting in the Bahamas (Score:2)
P.S. Bahamian Sunset t-shirt and mousepad here [cafepress.com] for just $12.99. They're cool, just look at them.
Re:Offshore ISP? (Score:2)
http://www.freedomship.com/
(a project to build a mobile libertarian haven disguised as an overgrown cruise ship)
Not Quite [freedomship.com].
From the Freedom Ship Web Site (my emphasis added):
Governing Laws
Freedom Ship is only a ship, not a political entity. It will operate under the same rules and regulations as any cruise ship. As a sea-going commercial vessel, it will fly the flag of a specific country (to be determined at a later date), enjoy the protection of that country, and be subject to its laws and regulations, as well as to maritime law. In addition, its residents will be subject to the ships Rules and Regulations.
==
"This is the nineties. You don't just go around punching people. You have to say something cool first."
Don't come to EU! (Score:2)
Re:Is offshore the answer? (Score:2)
Offshore ISP? (Score:5)
I wonder if setting up a satellite-based ISP on a boat or something in international waters would work. Basically a big floating server farm, with high-speed satellite links.
If the Simpsons has taught me anything (and it has), it's that anything is legal in international waters :)
But seriously. It would have the benefits of being mobile and outside the jurisdiction of everyone. Of course, you would probably have some weather-related problems, plus the fact that you might have to "go down with the server"
Free speech is not free! (Score:2)
If you don't fight now, you won't be able to say anything later.
Re:Off-shore won't work. (Score:2)
A large company may convince the ISP to shut you down, with the threat of a lawsuit. Or they can just file a lawsuit against you and run up your legal costs.
Even if you win on the basis free speech (or even truth), you would have had paid out large legal bills. That is why the both Massachusetts and California have implemented Anti-SLAPP statutes.
Re:Off-shore won't work. (Score:2)
I could claim that someone copied my site w/o my permission.
But having an anonymous site, does not have the impact of a named site.
Off-shore won't work. (Score:3)
If you reside, or have asets in a country that will recognize the rulings from a country that makes it illegal, then they can take those asets.
A court can grant juridiction over a website because it is targeted to an area that they have jurisdiction. Since it is then intended to cause the harm in an area that the court has jurisdiction, you can be sued in that court.
If you don't appear, you will be defaulted. If there are assets that can be reached by the court, even though the website can't be, you lose.
If in Boston, you have your death ray satelite kill someone in Boston, they still will arrest you in Boston. They don't have to have jurisdiction in space.
Re:Of course, this works both ways (Score:2)
My cat's breath smells like catfood.
Re:Free speech is still a pipe dream (Score:2)
- Something obtainable through a variety of means - be it hard work, theft or innovation.
"illusion of opportunity"
"believing better things are around the corner"
- Therefore all of us in jobs (whether we enjoy them or not) are ignorant of this great conspiracy and naive in our desire to educate ourselves, perhaps bring new lives into this world and do our best to educate them?
"The struggle to gain status and power within the system is an aggressive and competitive one"
- Indeed it is, and from this the world has managed technological, social and economic advances that were sorely lacking in other systems of government.
"backstabbing, slander and other forms of socioeconomic rape"
- If in doubt make use of emotional descriptions. Your interpretation may be that the majority of the capitalist world works by the aforementioned - I'd have to disagree. I see too many people everyday who don't subscribe to the above - yes some people choose that route to get ahead, and some of them get ahead by doing it. Others choose a variety of methods, and more still get comfortable and choose not to pursue career-ladders and rat races further.
Ambition and dedication are great catalysts for achievement - but I'm probably being naive and blinkered by saying that
"either pushing yourself up or your rivals down"
- Believe it or not but I reckon you can 'achieve' without resorting to either of those. Understand what it is you're being paid to do - if you have no fundamental objections to it then do the best you can at it and sometimes it'll get recognised. But like so many things it's not efficient and you don't always get your just rewards/deserts - but that's not enough for everyone to mutate into backstabbing individuals.
"and annoyances like public opinion can topple even the mightiest giant"
- And now my most controversial point. The 'general populace' don't always do, or believe the right thing (shocked inhaling of breath from all around). In the UK we have daily papers like the Express and the Daily Mail which specialise in whipping the 'general' public into a frenzy over whatever takes their fancy - the Sun newspaper, one of the biggest selling papers takes it in turns to lamabast homosexuals, foreigners, the rich, beggars and a variety of football teams. Now I ferverently hope that the whole of the UK does not subscribe to these views, but in some cases the majority do, and with the right goading it's not too difficult to generate a mob mentality. In the middle ages we had witches burnt at the stake, and people put to death for petty crimes or crimes against the 'state' (what a lovely catch all term don't you think?). Were these right? Did the general populous turn out in their masses to watch hangings? Was there widespread approval? So it would appear... Is it right? Well to me no.
Personally I'm happy with learned members of my society establishing laws and guidelines as to how I should live my life - yes I give up a certain amount of 'freedom' by doing that, but I like living in this society, I can look back on some achievements, I can see some failures, but I put them all down to me and the randomness of life. I've seen WTO demonstrations, Carnivals Against Capitalism and various others and have seen aspects there that hold no interest to me. I don't want to live in an anarchy, I want laws, I want politicians (not all of them, and not the same ones for too long - power does corrupt, of this I do believe) and I want a society where people have the choice to be everything from backstabbing bastards to peace loving pacifists.
With respect to free-speech (back on topic), I believe the Internet, Gnutella and Freenet now provide us with the greatest opportunity for freedom of expression ever. I dislike the idea of nastier sides of human nature being presented but feel that it's up to parents to create well adjusted individuals who can make their own decisions, and attempt to establish a values system where race and sexuality (amongs others) are not a basis for making decisions.
fin
-------
Apologies for rambling.
Re:Offshore ISP? (Score:3)
That's why you register with one of the flag of convience countries. You know those little Carribean nations that do little but serve as banking havens and such (the Caymans jump to mind).
Or, even better, with a country that is about to change governments!
ISLAND NEEDED - RICHARD BRANSON!!!! (Score:2)
Well, anyway, he's got a number of things going for him
a) Shameless self-promotionalist
b) Likes money
c) Enjoys taking on the big boys (Virgin - Airways, Records, Net, and today, Virgin Cars in the UK
d) Mad enough to do crazy things (balloons for one) to get press
e) Enjoys a joke on the powers that be.
f) All-Round Great Guy (TM) - for evidence watch 'Derek and Clive get the horn' to see Mr Branson wearing a big furry coat and smoking a spliff
Ahem. Anyway he gets my vote, now who is going to approach him?
Think of the publicity - 'Richard Branson gives Big Brother the finger'
IANA Journalist, but you get the idea.
Wow, this is a great idea, I can't believe I thought of it
Fight for your rights, don't just skulk off... (Score:2)
Seriously, the Libertarian party is the only one dedicated to all personal and property rights, including the much-abused right to free speech and the trampled right of protection from unreasonable search and seizure. Sure, it won't be overnight, and it probably does make sense to set up something overseas in the meantime (I'll be looking into it) but please take to time to also get out there and vote!
And if it feels hopeless and overwhelming, remember that there is a fast-growing party out there of like-minded folks who are actively paving the way (there are now over 300 Libertarians in public office, all of whom are fighting to end this kind of rights-trampling crap).
Re:Basic Problem of Connection (Score:2)
It is regrettable that such a "corporate" response is needed to protect free speech, but the modern Constitutional interpretation is basically a big fishing rodeo: whoever weighs in with the heaviest wallet wins.
-L
as mentioned by Bruce Sterling (Score:2)
Interesting premise, considering that the interconnectedness of the net these days makes it virtually impossible to isolate a substantial subsection of the internet.
Set Up Your Own Web Server Or Go Offshore (Score:2)
If this solution is not practical, check out Russian hosting companies. They are immune from US/UK censorship and are generally reasonably priced. I am in the process of designing a similar site and have decided to go with a well-known US ISP. If they decide to take down my site, it will result in bad publicity directed towards them that will probably accomplish more, as far as drawing attention to the problem of Internet censorship, than the site itself.
Good luck, and post the URL on
Is offshore the answer? (Score:4)
Re:Just like Grand Cayman... (Score:2)
Heck, we could maybe even get corporate sponsorship from the likes of Redhat and Corel and such.
Just my 2 pesos.