new file sharing law

so, nothings really changed then?
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/elections/analysis-article/post/analysis/9/the-digital-economy-bill-and-you.html

I read about that...That sucks for the UK.

Ah jesus...it may not be in my backyard, but given how close we are to the UK...We might be next...[me=hYpNoS]considers a proxy, whatever the hell that is[/me]

i'm sorry to say that there are allmost no proxy's that work they can get to blocked sites on servers like they use at schools but they still point to your location

I go to a certain torrent site and I get a notice about this bill, I really am behind the times. According to the article I read the worst thing is that the politicians are now saying they want the bill, uh delegalized? Maybe somebody should check their inbox more thoroughly.

The worst thing about this is the stupidity of the MPs. Maybe its not stupidity, its more likely that they were given a 'back-handed' payment just to vote for any crap they are told to.In the UK, you must have a TV licence to go online at home anyway. This in itself is a rip-off. We are forced into paying around £150 per year (it goes up every year) just to own a tv or a net connection. Maybe if we weren't forced into paying for what is essentially nothing, we wouldn't be compelled into downloading films, etc. for free.
For the cost of a TV licence I could buy about 10 full price DVDs. That's what they want isn't it? Tax revenue? The problem with that scenario is the government generate less money from sales than a TV licence. Sorry, I got a little carried away :) it just really annoys me.Anyway, this Digital Economy Act includes provisions about online copyright infringement. But have you ever watched something on youtube that was on TV before? Of course you have. That was copyright infringement, fact. Does that mean they will block youtube? Or take legal action against you because you used youtube? Even Google could be blocked. You may think that's rubbish but you can look at copy protected images using google right? The Simpsons is copyright but I can download Simpsons wallpapers for free. Is that illegal?I do have a question though, if you use mobile broadband wouldn't your IP address just be tracked to the signal mast closest to you and not your actual location? I know you can be tracked to your mobile phone, but since it is just a USB stick is it possible?And hYpNoS this will explain what a proxy is, if you still care that is - http://www.topbits.com/what-is-a-proxy.html

Replying to #6

That surprises you?

Replying to #6

Incorrect, you do not need a TV license if you only have a net connection. You need a TV license if you have a TV that watches programs as they are broadcast, or a DVR. If you have a TV just for using a DVD player or a games console, you do not need a TV license. Likewise, if you don't have a TV at all, but a PC with net, you do not need one. if you have a TV tuner card in your PC that you use, then yes you do need a license.The government gets no money from the TV license, it all goes to the BBC.

Replying to #6

Look up fair use.

Replying to #6

It would be traced to your ISP, who can then check their logs to see which towers you were on and triangulate your location to within 10 metres accuracy. Exactly the same as they can do for phones.

In other news, life goes on for my country Indonesia, southeast asian stronghold of piracy... Most people really don't seem to care about piracy, as Indonesia being the developing country that it is has other shit to deal with. Nintendo's legal strategy would NEVER work here. Piracy is wrong, but in my conditions I just don't give a shit.

This bill will probably come into action. At first, p2pirates will find ways to avoid this but as time goes on, the government will improve their technology making it harder and harder. Peter Mandleson is a wally anyways.

Thanks Loonylion for taking the time to answer me and you're right about not needing a licence for a net connection. The way its written on the back of it sounds like you do. So I checked this website http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/check-if-you-need-one/topics/technology-top8/ and it turns out it does apply if you watch BBC stuff live. Is that what you mean about a TV tuner card?But if you think the government don't get a huge portion of the licence money then ask yourself why is it illegal not to have one? I've seen on tv recently someone claiming that the government now get 75% of it instead of 50% (I so wish I could prove that with a link) but whether its direct or not (using a different name like Income/corporation tax) they still get it.If you think about it another way, you could say the BBC bully or even worse, terrorise you into paying for it. 'If you don't pay, we'll take legal action.' is pretty much their motto. Demanding you do something because they want you to, nothing more.I'm sorry to keep ranting about the licence but the point I want to make is the licence should (in theory at least) protect us from having our internet reduced to a pathetic dribble of information.Oh, and the stupidity and selfishness of MPs doesn't surprise me. Alan B'stard is probably not even half as bad as real MPs.

Loonylion · #7It would be traced to your ISP, who can then check their logs to see which towers you were on and triangulate your location to within 10 metres accuracy. Exactly the same as they can do for phones.

its a lot of hassle just for the average guy that isnt going daft with it, im pretty safe i reckon.
they dont have my name or address because its pay as you go mobile broadband and i only dowload about 5 or 6 gb's a month (the fair use says 3 gb's but it just continues fine after giving you a warning)

Dannysikth · #10Thanks Loonylion for taking the time to answer me and you're right about not needing a licence for a net connection. The way its written on the back of it sounds like you do. So I checked this website http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/check-if-you-need-one/topics/technology-top8/ and it turns out it does apply if you watch BBC stuff live. Is that what you mean about a TV tuner card?

A TV tuner card allows you to plug an arial into your computer and watch TV on it as you would with a television set. While the TV license only funds the BBC, not watching BBC channels is not an excuse for not having one.

Dannysikth · #10But if you think the government don't get a huge portion of the licence money then ask yourself why is it illegal not to have one? I've seen on tv recently someone claiming that the government now get 75% of it instead of 50% (I so wish I could prove that with a link) but whether its direct or not (using a different name like Income/corporation tax) they still get it.

They don't. The government has a lot of control over the BBC and uses them for propaganda purposes. Regardless, the founding intention of the BBC (and the TV license) was to create a public funded, independent, non-political, non-commercial broadcaster. It is no longer independent or non-political, nor is it impartial as it claims to be, so technically they have lost their right to levvy the TV license fee. (indeed, from what I've heard lately, its no longer non-commercial either). Despite the current state of the BBC, the government does not receive any of the TV license money.

Dannysikth · #10If you think about it another way, you could say the BBC bully or even worse, terrorise you into paying for it. 'If you don't pay, we'll take legal action.' is pretty much their motto. Demanding you do something because they want you to, nothing more.

Been there, done that. Beat them at their own game.

Replying to #12

Really? Are you part of the BBC Resistance?Anyway, one more question about the topic of the file sharing bill. Is is legal for websites to give out IP addresses according to the Data Protection act?

Replying to #13

No I was a studen't who didn't posses a TV. they harrassed me for not playing the license fee until I flipped and sued them. Never heard from them again in 3 years.

Replying to #13

IP addresses are not personally identifiable information and thus I imagine are not covered by the DPA

Well, they say they're going to repeal at least part of the bill, so a victory for freedom... maybe?

whoa how it happen ? :)

I could give you a link to the article, but I'm lazy. Basically the conservatives got the edge for a bit in England and have decided to repeal at least the worst violations of freedom in the law.