Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?
Music Piracy Businesses

Records Labels Prepare Massive 'Pirate Site' Domain Blocking Blitz 110

An anonymous reader writes "In their ongoing battle against websites said to infringe music copyrights, record labels have initiated a fresh wave of actions aimed at forcing UK ISPs to carry out domain blocking. This third wave is set to be the biggest so far, affecting as many as 25 domains and including some of the world's largest torrent sites and file-hosting search engines. Furthermore, the BPI – the entity coordinating the action – will ask courts to block U.S.-based music streaming operation, Grooveshark."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Records Labels Prepare Massive 'Pirate Site' Domain Blocking Blitz

Comments Filter:
  • by Hatta ( 162192 ) on Wednesday May 15, 2013 @03:36PM (#43734515) Journal

    Domain blocking has been so successful already. No one will figure out how to use alternative DNS servers, or simply type in the IP address manually.

    • by Anubis350 ( 772791 ) on Wednesday May 15, 2013 @03:43PM (#43734565)
      Or the sites will just move domains/set up alternate domains, as has happened with thepiratebay, eztv, and demonoid just off the top of my head
      • Or the sites will just move domains/set up alternate domains, as has happened with thepiratebay, eztv, and demonoid just off the top of my head

        Why even bother? You can either install plugins off the Firefox site that'll do it for you, or just use Tor to access the site from one of the 150 other countries that aren't retarded. Once you have the magnet URI, the rest is distributed, and there's no amount of DNS tomfoolery that'll stop that.

    • by CodeHxr ( 2471822 ) on Wednesday May 15, 2013 @03:48PM (#43734609)

      Domain blocking has been so successful already. No one will figure out how to use alternative DNS servers, or simply type in the IP address manually.

      I already compile a list of IPs for sites I like to frequent - white hat, black hat, or otherwise.

    • by Joce640k ( 829181 ) on Wednesday May 15, 2013 @03:54PM (#43734643) Homepage

      Domain blocking has been so successful already. No one will figure out how to use alternative DNS servers, or simply type in the IP address manually.

      Doesn't matter, it's all about training governments to bend over whenever they say so. They'll be back again soon, with bigger demands.

      PS: Thanks, RIAA, for letting me know about Grooveshark...

      • I bet you the next step will be government mandated BGP route poisoning. The nice thing about it (from the point of view of the censors) is that it denies access to far more people than those within your jurisdiction/country/border. Potentially even remove access to the site from the whole world, and it can be done from any trusted BGP peer.

        • Oh, and unlike DNS, there is no way the end user can get around BGP route poisoning. It just can't happen. There's no mechanism for instructing the routers to provide an alternate route, they make those decisions entirely by themselves.

          There are only a few things I can think of that *can* be done, but none of them are doable by the end user:

          - Peering ISPs outside of the jurisdiction of the poisoned routers will all have to filter those route advertisements.
          - The direct ISP of TBP will have to play with its

          • Cripes, just when you thought it was safe to enter an IP address again....

            Very stupid questions: could this be gotten around by mesh network, for instance? Trust would be an issue, might something like Convergence be useful? If BGP poisoning gets used (and I wouldn't put it past them), how much could that screw up other stuff? (I did warn you these are stupid questions. I don't know enough to ask less-stupid ones, and despair of learning even that much.)

    • by gmuslera ( 3436 ) on Wednesday May 15, 2013 @03:58PM (#43734665) Homepage Journal

      That they are targetting grooveshark (and so warning players of the same league) gives a hint of what is their target, that the majority of people get free/pretty cheap alternatives to their offering, be legal or not.

      If the people behind the idea of the flat earth had their kind of power back in their days to push their views on the masses we would be living in a pretty interesting (but weird) world by now.

    • by interkin3tic ( 1469267 ) on Wednesday May 15, 2013 @04:04PM (#43734721)
      They don't need to make it impossible for EVERYONE, just the people who are dumb enough to buy the music they're selling. The "Taylor Swift" listening tweens who make up most of the market will get frustrated after one attempt and will go back to buying it on itunes. At least that's probably the powerpoint math that went behind this.

      Full disclosure, I'm listening to Taylor Swift right now. That's right, I just called myself dumb and am admitting to listening to "Trouble" by Taylor Swift.
    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 ) *

      I've been using a Swedish VPN for a while now. There are a few to choose from. They are cheap and uncensored, and as an added bonus shield you from the prying eyes of Big Brother.

      • by martinX ( 672498 ) on Wednesday May 15, 2013 @05:02PM (#43735149)

        A Swedish VPN once bit my sister ...

            No realli! She was Karving her initials on the Swedish VPN
            with the sharpened end of an interspace tøøthbrush given
            her by Svenge - her brother-in-law - an Stockholm dentist and
            star of many Swedish møvies: "The Høt Hands of a Stockholm
            Dentist", "Fillings of Passion", "The Huge Mølars of Horst

    • That won't work for name-based hosting, which pretty much every website uses these days. The old "1 IP, 1 machine" thing doesn't get used too often.
      • That won't work for name-based hosting, which pretty much every cheap-ass hostedwebsite uses these days.


        Most of your serious trackers and distie sites aren't going to be using virt domains - given the hellish amount of traffic involved, it'll either use multiple dedicated IPs handed off to caching servers, or one hell of a load-balancer.

    • by houghi ( 78078 ) on Wednesday May 15, 2013 @04:43PM (#43734993)

      Alternate DNS servers? I live in Belgium where they block (among others) TPB, so I just run my own.
      OK, I am able to configure my own named server. What is needed for others is an idiot proof DNS server that people can run on their local machine (so no remote connections allowed).

      And I talk about so easy, your grandma can install it and it runs by just double clicking. Something that is made for just local usage with as little configuration as possible. No need to be able to make any local domains. Just something so you do not need an external DNS server.

      Perhaps that already exists and it is just not commonly known.

      • What is needed for others is an idiot proof DNS server that people can run on their local machine (so no remote connections allowed).

        I can imagine a solution which doesn't need operating a server ... but mentioning it might attract apk. :-)

      • Why would you need to run a server?

        There's loads of servers which are quite easy to run. But why?

        • In China you run your own local DNS that forwards to opendns over alternative ports. All ddwrt and openwrt support this.

          Its how you get to Facebook in China.

          • Can't you just have packet rewriting rules that do the same thing without running DNS at home?

            In any case, most home routers have a DNS proxy to make DHCP simpler.

      • Can't you just load the piratebay through TOR?
      • by Xest ( 935314 )

        I'm amazed the community hasn't just set up their own free DNS service yet like OpenDNS but overriding entries where necessary, such as redirecting ICE domain seizure based entries to mirrors of the sites or similar.

        Sure this seems like a bit of a dirty hack and a use of public DNS that was never intended, but the internet was also never intended to be globally censored by national entities either quite frankly so it simply seems like a necessary fix to a problem of corruption of the network.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      Domain blocking has been so successful already. No one will figure out how to use alternative DNS servers, or simply type in the IP address manually.

      It's cute you think they're going to be doing this by futzing with DNS.
      My ISP will reroute *all* traffic to the blocked domain's listed IP number(s) through their IWF filter and drop it there.

    • The blocks in the UK don't use (just) DNS. You can type in the direct IP address of the Pirate Bay and get no connection.

    • by juliohm ( 665784 )
      You know... I honestly wish they succeed and annoy the hell out of everyone by shutting down websites everywhere. To hell with being social! That way, whoever wants to pirate anything can just go 100% dark underground where they can't be found. Things will be a lot simpler.
    • cf. John Gilmore: "The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it."
  • by Anonymous Coward

    The tighter they grasp, the more slips through their fingers

  • by decipher_saint ( 72686 ) on Wednesday May 15, 2013 @03:44PM (#43734579)

    My wallet is going on a record label blocking blitz

    Life sure is funny sometimes.

    • by Penguinisto ( 415985 ) on Wednesday May 15, 2013 @04:00PM (#43734691) Journal

      Mine's been doing that for years.

      As a bonus, it has the beneficial effect of leaving me more money for other, more worthy goodies.

    • by Pinkfud ( 781828 )
      Absolutely. I buy nothing from these jerks.
    • by Trogre ( 513942 )

      Well put! In a capitalistic society, with a farcical two-party federal election every few years, the most effective way to vote is with ones wallet.

      To everyone who has given these groups money - you let this happen.

  • []

    Interestingly enough, it also happens in UK...

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Cory lives in the UK, he became a naturalized British citizen in 2011 iirc.

  • by Okian Warrior ( 537106 ) on Wednesday May 15, 2013 @04:03PM (#43734705) Homepage Journal

    This is yet another ridiculous situation, stupid enough that it makes me wonder why such situations exist.

    If a website is illegal (for any definition of illegal, including terrorism, pornography, and IP violations), then it should be judged illegal by a court in country with reference to the specific law that the site violates. That country can then mandate that ISPs in that country block that specific website, the government can ask the government of the registrar or hosting company to take action, the government can identify people who access the site and charge them with a crime.

    Illegal is illegal, but this thing about "anyone can take action if they think something is illegal" is ludicrous. Letting business advocacy groups, unelected government bureaucrats, and random government departments to suddenly state "we're the governing authority, this is illegal, we're pulling your plug" is complete bullshit. Government departments can certainly make such pronouncements, but should be required to act only with court approval. For instance, if the State Department wants Defense Distributed to take their plans offline, it should get a court order.

    The courts exist to protect our rights. Taking action without judicial process is an end-run around those rights, and shouldn't be allowed.

    • My reading of the summary is that they are going to the courts in the UK to get the courts to enforce their little list against the ISPs. My clue was the submitter's use of the word "action" which is legal jargon for a law suit.

    • The courts exist to protect our rights.

      The courts exist to interpret and enact the law. If the law says that people are not allowed to breathe the free air around them or drink water from a stream, but must buy their air and water bottled from a factory, then the courts exist to put free-air breathers behind bars.

  • by future assassin ( 639396 ) on Wednesday May 15, 2013 @04:19PM (#43734811) Homepage

    its those who buy their shit. Stop buying it and in 5 years they`ll all fold.

    • Won't happen. Can't happen. You'd have to somehow change the mindset of millions of people who like and buy the stuff they sell (giving them more money and influence in the process). The actions of these companies are not widely known except for tech sites, so again, nothing will happen. They've been behaving like dicks for YEARS, and are still hugely profitable.

  • So long as even a single search engine exists, these labels are just wasting everyone's time.
  • by Sporkinum ( 655143 ) on Wednesday May 15, 2013 @04:22PM (#43734837)

    I think they will have a hell of a time domain-blocking YouTube. It's trivial to grab all kinds of stuff there.

    • by martinX ( 672498 )

      That's what I was thinking. Full albums all over the place. 3 hour compilations. I was looking for Tull's 'Thick As A Brick' the other day, and there was the whole thing and it was a crystal clear rip of the original vinyl. Perfect.

      • Yeah.. I was looking for a digital version of some ancient vinyl I have. It's pretty obscure and never released on CD. I found half the tracks from album on youtube.

    • YouTube has licensing. The vast majority of songs, especially new ones, are released onto YouTube by the record labels themselves, free for everyone to enjoy unless you happen to live in a country with its own brand of insanity (GEMA in German, for example) or they have a branch in your country and they agreed that that branch would have to upload it instead. Keep in mind that record labels have flooded YouTube with DMCA requests before after negotiations broke down and they removed their videos;
      http://n []

      • they're trying to ban grooveshark which operates directly like youtube technically.

        thus, they should block youtube as well..

        • Actually, Grooveshark operates rather differently. Grooveshark works on the premise that artists (or the labels representing them) have a choice: 1. sign a contract with them for pennies, which is still better than.. 2. don't, see if we care. At the same time, the contract under 1 may or may not actually be honored on the part of Grooveshark ( pending court case: EMI Entertainment World Inc v. Escape Media Group Inc, New York State Supreme Court, New York County, No. 650013/2012 ).

          I'm sure they operate te

  • Like you can't get a perfectly usable VPS in Russia, Hong Kong, The Netherlands or lots of other places for around €10 a month or less

  • by Anonymous Coward

    I stopped pirating music years ago. I use rdio now... $10/month for (almost) all the music I want.

    I figured pirating music would have more-or-less disappeared by now.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    To protect their copyrights, they think they have the right to infringe on Constitutional rights of free speech.

    The corporations have partnered with government (Definition of Fascism). Those elected officials ignore their oath of office to support and defend the Constitution of the United States. Adding insult to injury, the courts provided those corporations the same rights that were intended for individuals, and provided those corporations immunity from civil and legal actions in many cases.

    The people,

  • by erroneus ( 253617 ) on Wednesday May 15, 2013 @04:53PM (#43735087) Homepage

    They can't stop the internet without hurting themselves and a lot of other legitimate business. And continuing to sue customers? Is it really working out for them? Perhaps all the settlements which never reach the news does make it all worthwhile.

    What little [music downloading/sharing] there is going on now can't really be worth the effort in my opinion. There are lots and lots of paying customers out there. I seriously doubt the "bad guys" even come close to the numbers of legitimate customers. They should be paying marketers to improve the number of customers instead of lawyers to leech off of people who don't have money to spend.

    • I'm pretty sure the whole lawsuit thing is just a matter of getting one or two precedents on the books, so they can threaten people with lawsuits saying "settle out of court for $10k or risk owing $200k like *these* people... I'm sure they have a payment plan option ready to go and everything because once they get one payment from someone, it's basically an admission of debt ownership.

  • Fighting file-sharing is kind of like "sand proofing" a house in a desert.
  • When i want to have a new domain and dont want anyone to know about it i am using proxy domain registraror like : This domain registrar. []

You will never amount to much. -- Munich Schoolmaster, to Albert Einstein, age 10