US shuts down file-sharing sites
 

More than 70 sites alleged to be selling counterfeit goods or offering pirated content have been shut down by the US government.

The action was taken by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency, part of the US Department of Homeland Security.

Domains seized included a BitTorrent search engine, music download sites and shops selling fake designer clothing.

Many of the sites who lost their domains have continued trading via alternative addresses.

ICE confirmed that it had taken the action to the New York Times but said it could not provide any details because the seizures were part of an "ongoing investigation".

Anyone trying to visit the seized pages was confronted by a screen saying that the domain had been taken over by ICE and which quoted US laws on copyright infringement and trafficking in counterfeit goods.

Domains seized included louis-vuitton-outlet-store.com, burberryoutletshop.com, rapgodfathers.com, mydreamwatches.com as well as BitTorrent search engine Torrent-Finder.com.

ICE's action involved gaining control of the domain name that sites were trading under. It did not involve removing any content from the sites affected or blocking the use of an IP address.

Many of the sites that lost their domains have moved to new names in a bid to keep running.

The seizures follows similar action earlier in 2010 against nine sites also believed to be involved in counterfeiting and pirating copyrighted material.

The action comes as the UK's Serious and Organised Crime Agency seeks similar powers over .uk domains it deems are involved in criminal activity.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-11863288

Thanks. I'd quite forgotten the BBC website existed.

thanks god now close all illegal tubes

Good.

Doing something is better than nothing.

True. Having government censor the internet is BRILLIANT for pornographers. It's working brilliantly in Australia.

im quite sure you dont know whats happening in Australia.

No, but his point is kind of accurate. The web 'filter' that they working on that started out to stop child porn, surprise surprise when the list of banned URLs came out, also included a lot of other materials, including regular porn websites, euthanasia websites, etc. It wouldn't of been long until all porn was filtered and you'd have to ring up your ISP to get access to it.

More than that will fall the next time around, and more the time after that. They've set the precedent and it will only get easier and easier to snatch domains.

Why? You know there are some countries who realise there are other counties in the world and they report on the news in those other countries, right?

Anyone who works in porn and thinks that having the government censor the internet is A Good Thing is either mentally ill or really fucking stupid.

Oh good, the "war on counterfit goods" has begun! That should be about as successful as the war on drugs.

Then you would know that mandatory filtering in Australia has basically been scrapped for now and therefore wouldnt use Aus in your example.

CP and rape porn isnt censored? Ive read how much you hated the idea of incest porn also.. dont get me wrong, im not a fan either but some illegal things are already censored. Is not counterfeiting and theft also illegal?

I wasn't talking about filtering, love.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_s...et_pornography

My point is, and I am staggered I am even having to explain it, is that if you let your government censor one type of site today, seize control of domains without any legal hearing, and shut stuff down, do you not think it likely that the religious right will lobby to make porn the next on the list?

If you say no, you are really stupid, or really short sighted.

Good, just a matter of time before the rest.. nothing last forever

No post by Gideongallery?

http://ninapaley.com/mimiandeunice/w...an-640x199.png
http://blog.ninapaley.com/wp-content..._480_short.gif

QFT :2 cents: :thumbsup :pimp

He's busy time shifting a pair of knock off air jordans.

Bullshit. Devoting much needed resources to an impossible battle is stupid. What's the point of trying to wipe out fake Rolex watches, or CK colognes? That makes no sense, especially when your country is very much hurting, and those resources could be used better elsewhere.

I am usually as anti-government as they come, but in this case I am for them controlling the internet. Why? Because it is out of control. We are unable and unwilling to police it ourselves, so someone needs to do it for us. As difficult as it is for me to say that, it is the truth. Of course if they did, they would screw it all up. So be it. There was life before the net, there will be life after.

I'm not worried about them shutting down sites. If they closed the entire industry tomorrow, I'd live.

While it may not make a difference to me and you, ask CK and Rolex (and all the other brands) if it makes a difference.

It is not an impossible battle. It is a battle that is being fought with ridiculous rules of engagement. Rules that will eventually change.

everyone is a libertarian except when it comes to their own backyard.

Thanks man, One of my biggest regrets is not bringing Allison back several times. She was thick and has natural 36e's :thumbsup

That's the problem.... :2 cents:

Yes, it is impossible. Where do you think the vast majority of that knock-offs come from? Sure, there's some made in the US, but most come from SE Asia, right? I can goto any market in the city, pickup a DVD of a movie for $3 that isn't even in US theaters yet, plus get some nice CK cologne & jeans, a nice Ralph Lauren shirt, all for about $30.

This is throughout the entire world, and lots of that merchandise ends up within the US. Do you really believe it makes sense to dedicate scarce government resources to this, when they're very much needed elsewhere?

It's like the war on drugs. You're not going to win. Imagine how much better off the US would be right now if they legalized weed from the start, for example. With the amount of money the US has spent on weed laws, you'd probably be able to pay off a third of your national debt.

I think there's a difference between being a libertarian and people being stopped from stealing.

I don't think the govt. has any business telling us what we can think or do in our private lives. But I DO think they have a role in stopping crimes such as stealing. I don't see taking domains from people using them to profit from counterfeit or stolen goods as "censorship" in any way shape or form.

These fuckers are thieves plain and simple. If this were "brick and mortar" they'd be shut down and nobody would say a word about "censoring" and "freedom".

I believe people should be free to do as they please...but not to steal. It's just common sense. If I steal something...I'm in the wrong. Period.

Yes it DEFINITELY makes sense! Especially now with the world economy in shambles. We need to strengthen business, not allow it to be further destroyed.

And no, it's NOT like the war on drugs. The war on drugs is basically telling people that they can't smoke a plant that people have smoked for centuries. It's trying to tell adults what they can and can't do to have a good time.
Going after THIEVES is completely different.

democratic countries tend to let the courts decide these kinds of things
:2 cents:

If you're anti censorship on the Internet you're in favor of CP, Snuff movies, Scat, heave sado masochism and any other vile form of porn or non porn you can imagine.So long as the owner of the film wasn't involved in the production.

Or is censor is it censorship for one thing and not the next?

My view is simple and been stated any times.

IF IT'S ILLEGAL IN A COUNTRY THAT COUNTRY HAS EVERY RIGHT TO BAN IT.

As for counterfeit goods and piracy. I don't want to pay the bill of not stopping it.

The West leads in very few things today. Movies, music, programming, games and porn are a few of those things. Plus Designer Goods. Allowing our valuable markets to be stolen is stupid.

I think courts decided many many years ago that counterfeiting, copyright infringement, and stealing were all illegal.

By your logic...the police would just stand by and watch people rob a bank because the court hasn't sentenced them yet. But that's not the way it works. You STOP them from stealing.

Sorry double post.

Not true. If doing something in private breaks the law it's criminal. Unless you are in favor of someone murdering someone in private. Think about it.

I wasn't referring to things like that. I was referring to common sense stuff. Like sexual activities (that don't kill people lol ) or what kinds of movies we watch or books we read, etc. The govt. should stay out of social engineering was my point. But they should definitely do the things that govt. is supposed to do.

good... its a start :thumbsup

It makes total sense. :2 cents:

But here is a better idea.... lets just do away with all laws because some people think they are a waste of time. Drunk drivers would love to do away with drinking and driving laws, total waste of time according to them. Rapist would LOVE to not have consequences. It would kick ass if I could buy machine guns at the local market. I think gun laws are stupid. Hell, lets all sell porn with 15 year old girls, fuck it, why wait until they are 18? If there is grass on the field, play ball, right? No laws!!!! It will be GREAT!

We need laws and they need to be enforced. That simple.

Weed should be legalized and taxed. Hemp should be allowed to be grown all around the world. Hard drugs (coke, heroin, meth) should be illegal and that war should be fought. Because if it's not, it will be a million times worse.

Just because it is a drain on resources doesn't mean it is a waste of time. It is just an ongoing battle, but it has to be fought regardless.

Surly there is a difference between censership and an illigall activity.

CP is illigall.

Snuff films are illigall.

These activities are harfull to those involved.

But yoiu say scat. well if those involved consent to it, then why should it be babed. its not my thing, its horried. but should my views say what others should not watch?

Say i thought two men together was horried, should i have the right to ban gay porn?

Is it sensership to shut sites involved with illigall activities?

Perhaps its the wrong method to deal with such criminals.

For instance if a site sets up to sell goods but sells counterfit goods, purhaps the people taking payment should be held more responible. Ie, I presume they take money via paypal or credit cards. So maybe they should do better checks on who they offer the services to.

Lets face it, its not easy for adult sites to get payment systems. One presumes that this is due to criminals in the past scamming customers.

In truth your probably safer joinoing an adult paysite than buying goods off the net.

Perhaps if the payment systems were as stricks with non porn sites as they are with porn sites it would vastly reduce the net scams.

Also such sites such as burberryoutletshop.com would be taken back by burberry anyway.

The question is, is it sensership to close down file sharing sites.

But one thing I have to say is, if your running a tube site with stolen vids from dvd's and/or websites I would consider removing them very soon, otherwise your high traffic site may be no more.

The question will be, is will sites such as youtube get the same treatment?

That's probably because you don't understand what censorship means R-Man.

"the practice of officially examining books, movies, websites etc., and suppressing unacceptable parts"

I repeat, any pornographer that thinks government censorship is A Good Idea is very short sighted.

Decide what things?

Ain't that the truth.

THE INTERNET DOES NOT LIVE IN A COUNTRY.

He He

I would not pose that question Paul. People may favor it in your case.

He He He

The problem is (as DamianJ is sort of brushing against) is that you can easily have the situation where websites (adult pay sites) are closed for any reason they deem fit.

Ie, all sleep sites can be shut as it could be argued they promote rape.

All s and m/bondage sites could close as it could be argued those involved are restrained and thus fosed (some forms of s and m have been made illigall in the uk recent uyears).

Any sites where the models are wearing a school girl outfit, look young, wear pigtails, and so on, could be closed as it could be argued they promote cp.

You can keep going.

And they would target the small guys first knowing they will not have the cash to fight the cases.

BUT.....

On the otherhand, porn = tax money. So when the usa goverment is a bit short of cash, would it want to close down sites that raoise them money.

ps

If the US goverment closed Pauls site(s) would anyone know? I mean does anyone even go on them?

He he.

shutting down torrent sites is not censorship, their entire existence is to distribute illegally obtained and licensed material-WHICH INCLUDES CONTENT WE ARE ALL TRYING TO SELL! If they were blocking news sites and sites with information (the legal kind) then that would be a lot worse and considered censorship.

You freedom of speech alarmists need to relax with these slippery slopes...

finally!

The points you make are accurate. But obviously it is a lot more complex then that. It is a matter of what laws and Government actions are most appropriate. The argument isn't whether the Government has a role, it is a matter of what role we trust them with. Additionally, as much as the US would like to think it controls the internet it doesn't and cannot effectively - that is a fact. Even if they control the root servers, if they start seizing country codes TLD's, etc you can believe that alternative DNS systems will rise immediately.

In any event seizing domains at the moment will prove ineffective past the few headlines it gains at the moment, people will operate from IPs or from the many alternate TLDs the US doesn't have direct control over, in addition to the never ending whack a mole. Not saying it is completely useless, but it will not be effective.

The most effective strategy would be blocking sites at an ISP level in the US (given the size of the market), but even then it will eventually be circumvented on such a scale that it won't even matter, if someone is willing to download utorrent to get their favorite movies, you think they won't download the inevitable circumvention software? That said it will have some effect.

At the end of both these policies though we will be left with laws that leave a dangerous precedent - especially for adult. Domains will be seized regularly in the future for anyone accused of obscenity, or other such matters, and sites will be filtered. This will become normal practice. When they pushed to introduce a child porn ISP filter in Australia, by the time it was about to come to fruition the filtered content included regular porn websites which were viewed as obscene, euthanasia websites, drug advocation websites (include for weed), etc. The US does have constitutional protections in place, but as every adult webmaster is aware the legality of porn, and certain types of porn, is still very much in question in the US.

In reality content owners have to be prepared for a long battle, and it will take international treaties such as ACTA, or the US giving up control of ICANN to an international body that represents all WTO nations, that has a process similar to the UDRP for dealing with infringement, to make any real difference given the nature of the internet. Everything in the mean time will have limited success. Unfortunately it takes years to negotiate such treaties. But 10-20+ years of rampant infringement is a small amount of time in the grand scheme of things given the revolutionary and global nature of the internet. In the mean time have patience and remain vigilant against *bad law past the short term "benefits".

Are these the same domains they took last week, or have more been taken?
ds

the entertainment industry companies pulled their money together to buy the congressman or whoever has pull in the government

the adult industry would have to do the same

I blame Hillary Clinton

Is it the making of such films that's illegal or making them and publishing them? Making publishing them illegal is another word for censorship.
So is heavy sadomasochism.

No it's enforcing a law.

Now you're thinking and the first one to do so, so far.

No, censorship is where you deem something like a nipple as allowed and a vagina as illegal. There's no middle ground with counterfeiting. The law doesn't say you can counterfeit a film but not a song.

Those who think about it for a while should be praying this measure works. Take 5 minutes to think about why you should do.