The Pirate Bay gets raided.

[Righ]

I've worked with several people who put money into that. Sealand it's called, and the hosting is HavenCo. An old coastal defense fort that was occupied in the 60s (along with a number of others) by pirate radio stations. These guys weren't very nice about competition, and attacked each other with ordnance and held captives prisoner. A British judge famously decided that he didn't want to hear the case between two groups of what he considered equally guilty hoodlums and pointed out that it was outside British territorial waters. This has been cited as "case law" by the loony who calls himself "Prince Roy". No nation recognises or has recognised the sovreignty of the fort, so putting dodgy stuff there wouldn't be wise. Plus its basically the sunken hull of a pontoon barge filled with water, a pair of concrete towers, a portacabin and a helicopter deck perched on top. Moist and salty. Not where I would want to stick a few million bucks worth of Cisco gear.

But it was a working site, here's some pics outside and in:

http://www.metacolo.com/papers/dc11-havenco/photos/

Edit: Story of the demise from DefCon 11

[Murgos]

No nation recognises or has recognised the sovreignty of the fort, so putting dodgy stuff there wouldn't be wise.

And thus the catch-22 of data/tax havens and such.  If it truly is outside the legality of any powerful sovereign nation then there is NO real protection from some pissed off power just coming in and sacking the place.  If it is under some nations cognizance (such as the Caymans) then really you are living at the whim of the political breeze of the parent nation.

Maybe you could stick a stealthy satellite in space and quietly change it's orbit every now and then.  That would be security through obscurity though and not a real positon of strength.

[Cheddar]

No nation recognises or has recognised the sovreignty of the fort, so putting dodgy stuff there wouldn't be wise.

And thus the catch-22 of data/tax havens and such.  If it truly is outside the legality of any powerful sovereign nation then there is NO real protection from some pissed off power just coming in and sacking the place.  If it is under some nations cognizance (such as the Caymans) then really you are living at the whim of the political breeze of the parent nation.

Maybe you could stick a stealthy satellite in space and quietly change it's orbit every now and then.  That would be security through obscurity though and not a real positon of strength.

Or a true peer to peer algorithm. 

[Righ]

What you do is what Ryan at MetaColo is doing these days - build a global VPN encompassing many juristictions, so that interference with a customer using a single government is difficult to achieve. However, violating IP ownership is such a huge issue that it falls into the same bucket of internationally policed crap like slave trading and paedophilia that won't get protection no matter where it goes or how many juristictions it dwells under. You may not think copyright abuse belongs in there with the most evil of evils, but American industry and government does, and its prepared to undermine trade with other countries to secure international compliance.

I think that IP copyright is the swan song of western democracy. Handing over physical industry to Asian corporations, and moving more and more of our wealth into virtual property and knowledge skills puts us in a precarious position. At some point, probably not in my lifetime fortunately, the rest of the world will have less interest in staying in our market than leaving it.

[Kitsune]

The sad fact of the matter is that the US doesn't build shit anymore.  Aside from our agriculture and weapon industries and some raw materials, I can't think of any significant exports of physical goods that come from the US.  Everything is media of some sort.  Movies, music, software.  No wonder our government is so readily willing to play the thug's role on behalf of media corporations, our economy would implode (even more than it already has) if everybody quit buying the crap Hollywood puts out.

[Cheddar]

The sad fact of the matter is that the US doesn't build shit anymore.  Aside from our agriculture and weapon industries and some raw materials, I can't think of any significant exports of physical goods that come from the US.  Everything is media of some sort.  Movies, music, software.  No wonder our government is so readily willing to play the thug's role on behalf of media corporations, our economy would implode (even more than it already has) if everybody quit buying the crap Hollywood puts out.

Are you serious?  We are a hegemony.  Look it up.

[Engels]

The sad fact of the matter is that the US doesn't build shit anymore.  Aside from our agriculture and weapon industries and some raw materials, I can't think of any significant exports of physical goods that come from the US.  Everything is media of some sort.  Movies, music, software.  No wonder our government is so readily willing to play the thug's role on behalf of media corporations, our economy would implode (even more than it already has) if everybody quit buying the crap Hollywood puts out.

Are you serious?  We are a hegemony.  Look it up.

No, I think the burden falls upon you, Cheddar. I'm not quite as dire in my predictions as Kitsune, since we export a lot of stuff that's not as 'sparkly' as BMWs or PSPs, but it is true that we're increasingly a service economy.

[Kitsune]

We were a hegemony, while riding on WW2's coattails and while assuming the role of defender of democracy against the Russian hordes.  Our image around the rest of the world has tarnished since the USSR's collapse, since they don't need us to protect them from Russia, and China is much less visibly conquest-minded.  With no bully on the block to protect them from, they've decided that we're the bully, and our formerly-assured cultural victory isn't looking so hot.  We might be able to pull ahead and go for a tech victory, though.

[Tebonas]

Your image in around the world has tarnished because your foreign policy sucks and you alienate everybody. The UdSSR has not much to do with it. "Fuck the UN", "Fuck Kyoto", and "Lets kill little brown people for imagined slights" has more to do with it.

[Fabricated]

Your image in around the world has tarnished because your foreign policy sucks and you alienate everybody. The UdSSR has not much to do with it. "Fuck the UN", "Fuck Kyoto", and "Lets kill little brown people for imagined slights" has more to do with it.

Don't blame us, we didn't vote for him. No, seriously, the majority of us didn't.

Ain't Diebold and good buddies great?

[Chenghiz]

The UdSSR

Undead Soviet Socialist Republics?

[Cheddar]

You people are batshit insane.  Most of the popular TV, music, and movies around the world come from the US.  Software, video games, technology as well.  US wields economic might and military might; no country dumps money into their military like the US does.  Does it make it right for the US to wield this power without concern for others?  Of course not.  But the facts remain it is the big kid in town and will be for a loooong time.



edit.  I have a nasty hangover and am in mucho pain.  Feel my misery

[Tebonas]

Undead Soviet Socialist Republics?

Union der Sozialistischen Sowjet-Republiken

[Sairon]

You people are batshit insane.  Most of the popular TV, music, and movies around the world come from the US.  Software, video games, technology as well.  US wields economic might and military might; no country dumps money into their military like the US does.  Does it make it right for the US to wield this power without concern for others?  Of course not.  But the facts remain it is the big kid in town and will be for a loooong time.



edit.  I have a nasty hangover and am in mucho pain.  Feel my misery

Perhaps not so long if you're to belive how fast China is growing.

[Chenghiz]

I like my version better. :P

[Tebonas]

No problem, we can use yours instead. Not like anybody there cares anymore how it was called!

[HaemishM]

-copyright holder shoudn't be allowed to directly distribute his goods.

No.

[koboshi]

-copyright holder shoudn't be allowed to directly distribute his goods.

No.

As a means of seperation of powers what's the problem with that?
Sure, I wouldent vote for it, but it deserves more than a "no" as a responce

[Fabricated]

Perhaps not so long if you're to believe how fast China is growing.

I don't know about China definitely growing up and eating our lunch. Their government controls their society by heavily controlling the flow of information and maintaining a "command presence" over their people, which goes directly against participating in a global economy. When their standard of living goes up their pay and all the related costs of business will go up...which will make their goods less desirable since they won't be so amazingly cheap in comparison anymore.

Unless the government becomes much more forward thinking, more socialist, and more capitalist, a violent conflict with the people is pretty much inevitable. And if a coup happens, there's gonna be a lot of businesses losing some very big cash.

[Sairon]

Perhaps not so long if you're to believe how fast China is growing.

I don't know about China definitely growing up and eating our lunch. Their government controls their society by heavily controlling the flow of information and maintaining a "command presence" over their people, which goes directly against participating in a global economy. When their standard of living goes up their pay and all the related costs of business will go up...which will make their goods less desirable since they won't be so amazingly cheap in comparison anymore.

Unless the government becomes much more forward thinking, more socialist, and more capitalist, a violent conflict with the people is pretty much inevitable. And if a coup happens, there's gonna be a lot of businesses losing some very big cash.

True, but it's pretty scary how fast they're growing. Things produced in China cost only fraction of what they would cost in a western country, heck, I don't even know 3rd world countries which can produce stuff as cheap as china does. Their population works for peanuts for inhuman amounts of hours. I saw this documentary about China's growth fairly recently, and if I recall right China will be no 1 in 2010 if they continue in the same pace as they do today.

[Cheddar]

I have a feeling that a lot of Chinas numbers are over inflated. 

[Sky]

-copyright holder shoudn't be allowed to directly distribute his goods.

No.

As a means of seperation of powers what's the problem with that?
Sure, I wouldent vote for it, but it deserves more than a "no" as a responce

I copyright my cd, but can't sell it on my website? At my shows?

[koboshi]

that works.

[HaemishM]

-copyright holder shoudn't be allowed to directly distribute his goods.

No.

As a means of seperation of powers what's the problem with that?
Sure, I wouldent vote for it, but it deserves more than a "no" as a responce

I should think it would be obvious, but here goes. A copyright holder is (or should be before all the legal chicanery the distribution companies have thrust upon us), the creator of the work. And his solution is to chain the creator of the work to a distribution system he may not even need to use. If I write a book and I want to sell it directly to someone, why shouldn't I be allowed to do so? He's saying, as far as I can tell, that I should ONLY be able to distribute my works through another agency, instead of having the perogative to do it myself if I am able.

Again, no. Hell no.

[Righ]

I've no idea where JoeTF's bright idea of content creators being legally prevented from operating their own sales channels comes from, but I can only suspect vested interests. Perhaps he works in distribution and/or retail, which is fairly likely for somebody in the EU. :)

[Yegolev]

I assumed JoeTF was thinking of the publisher/distributor as copyright holder, seeing as they do the copying and whatnot.  I could be giving too much credit, but I read it as an oversight.

[Soukyan]

In other news related to the post topic, Pirate Bay is back up... for now - with several contingency plans in other countries when they get raided again, of course.

And now back to copyright law...

[Krakrok]

Like the fast tracked Section 115 Reform Act (aka SIRA) which will require you get a license for copies of music cached in memory among other things.

[Hoax]

You know I read that, but Slashdot really dropped the ball it seemed to me.  If you go on to read the actual government write-up on the section in question you see it means jack and shit to the end user.  The blog Slashdot linked was fucking stupid hand waving hysterics for the most part that seems to miss the actual issue in favor of hyperbole about how we'll have to pay royalties every time we hear music on the radio or something.

I will not go into too much detail because I haven't followed up on the whole thing since I left work and I was skimming about 7 different links on the subject at high speed.  I found the story about XM satellite radio getting sued to be far more compelling.  Although that may be old news to everyone else.


*I know we hate blogs but it isn't in the spellcheck?  For shame Schild for shame!*

[Merusk]

I found the story about XM satellite radio getting sued to be far more compelling.  Although that may be old news to everyone else.

Not to me, got a link?

[Yegolev]

Like the fast tracked Section 115 Reform Act (aka SIRA) which will require you get a license for copies of music cached in memory among other things.

Jesus Blisters, does anyone really like music this much?  The music industry is off its fucking rocker.

[JoeTF]

I assumed JoeTF was thinking of the publisher/distributor as copyright holder, seeing as they do the copying and whatnot.  I could be giving too much credit, but I read it as an oversight.

Exacly. The copyholder cannot sell is a neccesary evil for entire thing to work. Otherwise forcing authors to sell their copyrigths to the publishers would become a golden standard in the market. you could put some limits, or allow personal sales or something else, but those are details.

[Hoax]

I found the story about XM satellite radio getting sued to be far more compelling.  Although that may be old news to everyone else.

Not to me, got a link?

http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/archives/004679.php



As to the original issue somebody with some time want to take a look at this?

http://www.copyright.gov/docs/regstat051606.html    <--- from a very fast skim of the first few sections it seemed like this was not designed to fuck with joe sixpack at all.

here is a funny UK link that seems to agree with me, which admittedly I only read the title of and chuckled anyways off to work.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/06/07/another_effing_own_goal/

[Yegolev]

http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/archives/004679.php

Not even in the same room as the figurative rocker.

[HaemishM]

I assumed JoeTF was thinking of the publisher/distributor as copyright holder, seeing as they do the copying and whatnot.  I could be giving too much credit, but I read it as an oversight.

Exacly. The copyholder cannot sell is a neccesary evil for entire thing to work. Otherwise forcing authors to sell their copyrigths to the publishers would become a golden standard in the market. you could put some limits, or allow personal sales or something else, but those are details.

Then it's a very, very stupid concept. You are essentially saying that a creator either has to sell their copyright directly to a distributor, or do the whole distribution thing themselves. Either that or you are not explaining it well at all.