Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Social > Jet Blast
Reload this Page >

UK Copyright Lobby Holds Closed Door Meetings to Discuss Web Censorship

Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

UK Copyright Lobby Holds Closed Door Meetings to Discuss Web Censorship

Old 20th Jul 2011, 02:54
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: New York & California
Posts: 414
Danger UK Copyright Lobby Holds Closed Door Meetings to Discuss Web Censorship

Leaked: UK Copyright Lobby Holds Closed-Door Meetings With Government to Discuss Web Censorship Regime

I'd like to hear everybody's opinions on this matter. If this is to the disliking of anybody here who are UK citizens, there is a form here which you can use to write your MP with
Jane-DoH is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2011, 03:45
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Florida
Posts: 4,966
I sense a joke

Bad timing what with all the other news, this will be forgotten quickly besides all the enforcers are tied up hunting terroists or taking early retirement
lomapaseo is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2011, 05:01
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The Land of Beer and Chocolate
Age: 51
Posts: 794
First, they're going to censor all talk of conspiracy theories from those who wear tinfoil helmets.



Give it a rest, jane, that sort of thing raises it's ugly head on an annual basis. It ain't news.
hellsbrink is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2011, 05:19
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: the dark side
Posts: 914
It's nothing to do with 'censorship' it's to prevent copyright infringement.

The procedure will allow for "swift" blocking in order to shut down streaming of live events.

So its function is to assist in preventing people stealing digital media that they aren't entitled to.
jumpseater is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2011, 05:35
  #5 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: New York & California
Posts: 414
jumpseater

No government is going to say that they're for censorship -- they do it through the guise of something else, whether it be preventing copyright infringement, fighting terrorism, or what have you.

As for swift blocking, that sounds like a fantastic tool for blocking a person speaking about something that corporate or government interests don't want people to see.
Jane-DoH is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2011, 06:35
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Sunny Sussex
Posts: 778
Why would you begin a discussion, asking as you do for people's opinions only to declare, four posts in that you have decided what it's about?

Makes no sense to me. You Jane, need to spend a couple of weeks on the beach at Snopes, chilling out.
Parapunter is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2011, 07:40
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Wayne Manor
Posts: 1,516
just spoof yor IP address to one somewhere else.
stuckgear is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2011, 07:59
  #8 (permalink)  
More bang for your buck
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: land of the clanger
Age: 76
Posts: 3,511
It's nothing to do with 'censorship' it's to prevent copyright infringement.
jumpseater blocking your access to a site is censorship, whatever the reason for it, the government lambastes China for doing precisely the same thing on human rights grounds yet they seem quite happy to do it here. That to say the least is disingenuous.
green granite is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2011, 10:32
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Earth
Posts: 3,674
umpseater blocking your access to a site is censorship, whatever the reason for it,
Nonsense green granite.

That's like saying freedom of speech gives you the right to libel and slander.

I suggest a trip to the Oxford dictionary website to review the definition of "censor". It seems pretty tightly defined to me and not blocking something "whatever the reason for it".
mixture is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2011, 11:11
  #10 (permalink)  
More bang for your buck
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: land of the clanger
Age: 76
Posts: 3,511
Censorship is the suppression of speech or other public communication which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or inconvenient to the general body of people as determined by a government, media outlet, or other controlling body.

There is nothing illegal about visiting a site that has music on it, only downloading it if it has been published without the copyright owners permission.
green granite is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2011, 13:44
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: the dark side
Posts: 914
As usual with these things the Gimme gimme's are out. Clearly none of them have ever had to buy equipment and create 'work' or stage an event to make money to put bread on the table. It's all terribly simple, if its not yours, you can't have it, unless you get agreement or pay from it from the 'author'.

GG.There is nothing illegal about visiting a site that has music on it, only downloading it if it has been published without the copyright owners permission.
You're absolutely right, what this is about is for the original media provider, i.e. the copyright holder to be able to close down that source of illegally aquired data so you or others can't see stolen material.

The procedure will allow for "swift" blocking in order to shut down streaming of live events.

I realise that arguments about using some elses intellectual property rarely requires the use of any intellect on the part of those arguing that theft is acceptable. However, surely for even the most energy efficient thinker, (we're lucky, we are fortunate to have two such 'green' thinkers here today), it's clear that this isn't about censorship. It does what it says on the tin, hopefully the red bit above will help if you're still unable to grasp the concept of taking something that isn't yours. This is about closing the website of the parasites so they can't make money or gain from the back of others efforts.


GG Censorship is the suppression of speech or other public communication
Exactly GG, no one is having their speech suppressed are they? Parasites are being prevented from stealing property, if they want access to the media they have to pay for it, or, get this, the 'author' may just say 'No, you can't have it, it's ours'. They have a right to do that, legally and morally. On the other hand, you don't have a 'right' to it. Simples. Get over it.


GG and JD 2/10 for your copyright infringement essay. Breaking news for you, you don't have a 'right' to see anyones 'work'.


GG stay behind and write out 100 times,
'This is not about censorship, it is preventing theft and unauthorised distribution of copyright material'.
jumpseater is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2011, 13:49
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Canadian Shield
Posts: 511
Boooooooooooooooooooooo!

Thanks to the likes of Navi-X, I was able to watch the new Harry Potter movie on-line within 48 hours of its release last weekend.

Is that a record or did anyone beat it???
er340790 is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2011, 14:39
  #13 (permalink)  
More bang for your buck
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: land of the clanger
Age: 76
Posts: 3,511
As usual with these things the Gimme gimme's are out.
Sorry jumpseater, you're totally out of order, as far as I'm concerned it's got sod all to do with music theft as I don't download music. Most of it is total crap anyway. We are talking, in effect, about the government having the power to block/shutdown any web site they wish, (music downloads? of course it has, look here's some we put on earlier.) If somebody thinks their copyrights are being infringed then they could apply to the courts, present the evidence with the site having the right to defend itself and the courts can then put a block on it if they agree with the plaintiff , that would be perfectly acceptable to me. The concept of the government arbitrarily having the power to shut a site out is not, Wikileaks? not a problem here any more it had music on it.

A prime example of misplaced trust in a government has been the creation of the police state in England where the police can now arrest anyone they like on the suspicion having committed a crime, tourists taking photographs in London springs to mind.
green granite is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2011, 15:55
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Wayne Manor
Posts: 1,516
of course it is GG..

Does anyone really think the government gives a rats if someone downloaded an MP3 of Beyoncé's new album without paying for it, or is information control more important?

baby steps...
stuckgear is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2011, 17:02
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: uk
Posts: 895
What's a Beyonce?
vulcanised is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2011, 17:22
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: the dark side
Posts: 914
Sorry jumpseater, you're totally out of order


No need to apologise, I'm not out of order, I'm right.

Try reading what the proposals are actually about, rather than what you think they are about. You need to put a little more effort into understanding the difference between censorship, and copyright protection of live events. If you have a live event, this will enable parasites who take the live feed to use for their own means to be shut down instantly. Cock all to do with censorship.

Oh, and I've never had any trouble taking piccies in London either, even in Trafalgar Square, or railway stations or airports ...

Have you finished the lines yet?
jumpseater is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2011, 17:43
  #17 (permalink)  
More bang for your buck
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: land of the clanger
Age: 76
Posts: 3,511
Ah, you're only concerned about live feeds now jumpseater I presume therefore you concede on the other points.
If the live feed site has been found which it must have been to even think about shutting it down, then the quickest way of so doing is to work out where the camera is (not very difficult) and getting the site security people to confiscate it. Or just set up a legalised DoS attack on the site for the duration of the show.
green granite is offline  
Old 20th Jul 2011, 17:45
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Wayne Manor
Posts: 1,516
What's a Beyonce?
this...
stuckgear is offline  
Old 21st Jul 2011, 01:34
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: England
Posts: 99
Why have her air bags been deployed?
stumpey is offline  
Old 21st Jul 2011, 02:07
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: East of LGB
Age: 63
Posts: 619
Why have her air bags been deployed?
Obviously, she was rear ended.
11Fan is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.