21 More Torrent Sites Blocked By ISP’s

21 More Torrent Sites Blocked By ISP’s

Torrent  Blocked By ISP

Torrent Blocked By ISP

Its good news for copyright holders as they have won a significant ruling in the High Court, that orders UK ISPs to block 21 major file-sharing sites.

The decision marks the BPI’s biggest victory to date. The music industry trade body managed to block only 4 of the file-sharing sites till this point.

The 21 sites blocked by a recent court order includes nine torrent sites and 12 sites that would link you to sites that were hosting pirated films, TV shows, music and software. The BPI said it had contacted the site asking them to remove the copyrighted content, but took it to court when the request was ignored. “We asked the sites to stop infringing copyright, but unfortunately they did not and we were left with no choice but to apply to the court, the judge considered all the evidence and declared that ISPs should not allow access to the sites,” BPI CEO Geoff Taylor said, Only the biggest UK ISPs are bound by this high court ruling so BT, EE, Sky, TalkTalk, O2 and Virgin will have to comply. Previously the BPIs biggest success was to force ISP to block access to The Pirate Bay, which was one of the world most popular file-sharing torrent sites.

Mr Taylor said the blocks had “significantly reduced the use of these sites in the UK”. At present it is difficult to access the top 10 most popular torrent sites in the UK but not impossible.

Critics have argued that the blocks are ineffective as freely available software can enable people to gain access to the blocked sites again. Earlier this year The Pirate Bay launched PirateBrowser, which is a web browser that will easily circumvent the ISPs blocks.

Below is a list of some of the court orded blocked sites: –

  • 1337x
  • Bitsnoop
  • TorrentHound
  • Extratorrent
  • Monova
  • Trorrentcrazy
  • Torrentdownlaods
  • Torrentreactor
  • Torrentz

Surely one of the best way to stop people downloading films, music and software would be to make the online version cheaper than its media based counter part, after all they want us to download stuff or use the cloud, so why does it cost so much? After all the cloud based services or downloadable versions should have less over heads as they don’t need to burn anything to disk, have a special printers to print on to the disk, print a cover, have a case to put it in, then ship it to the store. So are the big company’s trying to tell us it costs the same to make a physical copy and then ship it to a store as it does to have one master copy and sell copy’s of that on line or make it accessible in the cloud? I am Sure people would be more inclined to pay a few more pounds for a proper copy than a pirated one. Why is it then films can cost more on line than their media based counterpart? Illegally downloaded copy’s only exists because company’s want too make to a bigger profit. So would it not make more sense to make them a lot cheaper and sell more than keep it the way it is and sell less?

Share Button

ISPs Now Want to “Educate” You to Stop Downloading Illegally

ISPs Now Want to “Educate” You to Stop Downloading Illegally

Stop Downloading illegally

ISP’s Now Want To “Educate” You to Stop Downloading Illegally

Most of the big broadband providers are going to start sending out “educational” letters to there customers who are downloading films, music, software and television programs illegally.

Sky, BT, TalkTalk and Virgin Media have teamed up with copyright holders like the Phonographic Industry, to form the Voluntary Copyright Alert Programme (VCAP). Regulators will send up to four letters to households where they have been shown downloading illegally. With each successive letter the household receives will be written in increasingly severe language, the letters will warn the household the effects that digital piracy is having and how it is damaging the companies making the products.

The aim of the letters is to make people think about their illegal actions and the effects it is having, but there will be no criminal punishment for repeat offenders who just ignore the letters. The VCAP scheme is a softer approach to the Digital Economy Act, which was passed in 2010. The act proposed that people downloading illegal should have their Internet connection slowed down or even terminated.

ISP should also block all sites associated with piracy. At this time, it only been partially implemented, due to strong opposition from the ISPs.

ISPs can track illegal downloading by monitoring traffic on file-sharing sites; they then match copyright-infringement reports with their customers IP address. ISPs can’t reveal the identity of someone that is caught downloading because an IP address can only be tracked to a household and not an individual. The VCAP scheme is 75% funded by the entertainment industry and copyright holders, and the rest coming from the four major ISPs. More are expected to join the scheme soon. ISPs have a total of 2.5 million letters to send out.

BT, Virgin and Sky have all outlined their support for the scheme. A BT spokesman said the company is “committed to supporting the UK’s creative industries by helping to tackle the problem of online piracy while ensuring the best possible experience for its customers”.

Share Button

Court Blocks File-Sharing Websites

Court Blocks File-Sharing Websites

UK’s biggest Internet service providers must block sites to stop illegal downloading

The High Court has ordered BT, Sky and Virgin Media to block three more file-sharing websites in order to try and stop illegal downloading.

The UK’s biggest internet providers must stop users from accessing the following file-sharing sites: Fenopy, h33t and Kickass Torrents. Copyright holders are becoming increasingly aggressive in their attempts to shut down the file-sharing websites.

Online freedom campaigners said the blocks are “an extreme response” to illegal downloading.
Previously the High Court has ordered The Pirate Bay and Newzbin2 which were major players in file-sharing to be blocked. However the impact of this is questionable. Figures from then British Phonographic Industry (BPI), which brought the blocking cases to High Court, shows illegal downloading is still popular.
In the first half of 2012, 345 million music tracks were illegally downloaded through file-sharing service Bit Torrent.

By comparison, combined sales from places like iTunes, Amazon etc.… for the same period totaled 329 million. The BPI admitted the number of illegal downloads would be higher if other websites and services were taken in to account.

Court-ordered blocks on file-sharing sites have been shown to be ineffective. Several websites make it possible to dodge the blocks by using a proxy, which allows users to surf the web anonymously.

Do you think blocking file-sharing sites will work to stop illegal downloading?

 

Share Button