Supreme Court to decide whether ISPs must disconnect users accused of piracy
Technology
160
Beiträge
121
Kommentatoren
0
Aufrufe
-
This post did not contain any content.
Being accused of will lose you access to basic infrastructure? Why not cut electricity too?
-
Accused???
Well alrighty then, I hereby accuse the operators of donaldjtrump.com of piracy! Anybody else notice any piratical activity? Foxnews.com seems pretty fishy.
And OpenAI of course.
-
So if Meta is convicted of pirating books for AI training, they lose all internet connectivity? 🧐
dint they just rule AI can legally scrape/books, but not for people who are pirating directly.
-
Protip for anyone unfamiliar: Mullvad really is the gold standard for a private VPN. If you just want to pirate shit and not get angry letters from your ISP, Nord or PIA will accomplish that. But if you REALLY want privacy, Mullvad is it.
But if you need to pay for a „Media Flatrate“ anyway, and you have those 5€ a month, why not spend it for a good cause?
(Also PIA and nord cost 12€ a month unless you sign their predatory 2 year contracts [which are even then just like 1€ per month cheaper], so mullvad is just way better in that regard too)
Also features like UDPoTCP let you bypass local network restrictions, and the ability to pay with cash and Crypto is great if you dont want want to/ cant use paypal or a bank account for any reason
-
Being accused of will lose you access to basic infrastructure? Why not cut electricity too?
Don't give them ideas. Next they'll cut the blood stream to your brain.
-
This post did not contain any content.
4G piracy hub go brrrrr? Go ahead, disconnect me. I will get another SIM and resume piracy.
-
They have ways to block / identify VPNs.
I think the point is that they can't easilly track back to a specific client of a specific ISP instances of unlicensed downloading of copyrighted materials if they're done behind a VPN.
Mind you, they can still easilly track it back to the VPN, so make sure you're using a provider that puts privacy above all an is not based in countries like the US or UK.
That said, if they just throw an unsupported accusation at you and the ISP cuts you out, using a VPN or not makes no difference.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Guess it's time to go underground, sigh.
-
I love Mullvad and used them for years, but without port forwarding, they're not the service you want for torrenting. Some alternatives like AirVPN or ProtonVPN are better suited for that stuff.
Before the haters jump in and tell me "it works fine fer me!" it's only working because the user on the other end, like myself, have port forwarding set up. Since you don't have it, you'll never connect to anyone else like yourself nor will they be able to connect to you.
Of course there are alternatives like streaming and Usenet but there are tradeoffs no matter what you pick.
i just use mullvad on my router and port forward directly there
-
Don't they already do this in most of Europe?
and it works just as well there as it would in the us....
by which i mean it doesn't work
-
I love Mullvad and used them for years, but without port forwarding, they're not the service you want for torrenting. Some alternatives like AirVPN or ProtonVPN are better suited for that stuff.
Before the haters jump in and tell me "it works fine fer me!" it's only working because the user on the other end, like myself, have port forwarding set up. Since you don't have it, you'll never connect to anyone else like yourself nor will they be able to connect to you.
Of course there are alternatives like streaming and Usenet but there are tradeoffs no matter what you pick.
I don't think your explanation of why it seems to work is correct.
I seems to work (works in a limited way, even), because any remote machines that your bittorrent client connected to during downloading are temporarilly recorded on the Mullvad router on the other side of your VPN doing NAT translation as associated with your machine, so when those remote machines connect to that router to reach your machine, it knows from that recorded association that those connections should be forwarded to your machine.
This is quite independent of people on the other side using port-forwarding or not.
Port-forwarding on the other hand is a static association between a port in that router and your machine, so that anything hitting that specific port of the router gets forwarded the port in your machine you specified (hence the name "port" "forwarding"). With port-forwarding there is no need for there having been an earlier connection from your machine to that remote machine to allow "call back".
This is why at the end of downloading a torrent behind a Mullvad VPN will keep on uploading but if one restarts a torrent which was stopped hours or days ago (i.e. purelly seeds), it never uploads anything to anybody - in the first case that NAT translation router associated all machines your client connected to during download to your machine, so when they connect back to download stuff from you it correctly forwards those connections to your machine, but in the second case it's just getting connections from unknown remote machines hitting one of its ports and in the absence of a "port-forwarding" static rule or a record of your machine having connected to those remote machines, it doesn't know which of the machines behind it is the one that should receive those connection so nothing gets forwarded.
So it's perfectly possible to share back when behind a Mullvad VPN but you have to leave the torrent client keep on seeding immediatly after downloading and it will only ever upload to machines which were in the swarm when the client was downloading (they need not have been clients it downloaded from, merelly clients it connected to, for example to check their availability of blocks to download, which give how bittorrent works normally means pretty much the whole swarm)
It is however not at all possible to just start seeding a torrent previously downloaded unless the download wasn't that long ago (how long is "too long" depends on how long the NAT Translation Router of Mullvad keeps those recorded associations I mentioned above, since those things are temporary and get automatically cleaned if not used),
-
This post did not contain any content.
lol, they'll have no customers! ISPs used to send 'warning' letters to customers in England but that's all.
-
I'm not a judge, but isn't internet essentially a utility these days? Cutting someone off because of piracy seems like cutting off electricity or water because they did something illegal with it.
accused piracy, too. Not proven. Not convicted. Just “pirate go bye bye.”
-
i imagine you in a mcdonalds with an 80’s era easy bake oven plugged into an outlet in a booth with a sign saying “free cookies.”
-
I personally prefer Proton. They seem to get blocked less often.
(And yes I'm aware of the CEO controversy, he seems more like a Libertarian to me, not some right wing extremist)
That mask almost fell but he’ll make sure it doesn’t slip again
-
And now I'm on a VPN because if they're just gonna cut people off for accusing of piracy they're gonna have to cut off everyone with a VPN.
TBH I should have been behind a VPN before
Corporate America over here committing piracy en masse.
-
i just use mullvad on my router and port forward directly there
And how do users connect to your port if your VPN-WAN doesnt have a port forward?
Same problem at a different point in the connection. -
dint they just rule AI can legally scrape/books, but not for people who are pirating directly.
so then individuals could just train a model locally on the shittiest hardware they have
-
This post did not contain any content.
So this might be a good place to ask. How is a Trojan Proxy Server suited for anonymous piracy? Is it better or worse in case this passes?
-
I don't think your explanation of why it seems to work is correct.
I seems to work (works in a limited way, even), because any remote machines that your bittorrent client connected to during downloading are temporarilly recorded on the Mullvad router on the other side of your VPN doing NAT translation as associated with your machine, so when those remote machines connect to that router to reach your machine, it knows from that recorded association that those connections should be forwarded to your machine.
This is quite independent of people on the other side using port-forwarding or not.
Port-forwarding on the other hand is a static association between a port in that router and your machine, so that anything hitting that specific port of the router gets forwarded the port in your machine you specified (hence the name "port" "forwarding"). With port-forwarding there is no need for there having been an earlier connection from your machine to that remote machine to allow "call back".
This is why at the end of downloading a torrent behind a Mullvad VPN will keep on uploading but if one restarts a torrent which was stopped hours or days ago (i.e. purelly seeds), it never uploads anything to anybody - in the first case that NAT translation router associated all machines your client connected to during download to your machine, so when they connect back to download stuff from you it correctly forwards those connections to your machine, but in the second case it's just getting connections from unknown remote machines hitting one of its ports and in the absence of a "port-forwarding" static rule or a record of your machine having connected to those remote machines, it doesn't know which of the machines behind it is the one that should receive those connection so nothing gets forwarded.
So it's perfectly possible to share back when behind a Mullvad VPN but you have to leave the torrent client keep on seeding immediatly after downloading and it will only ever upload to machines which were in the swarm when the client was downloading (they need not have been clients it downloaded from, merelly clients it connected to, for example to check their availability of blocks to download, which give how bittorrent works normally means pretty much the whole swarm)
It is however not at all possible to just start seeding a torrent previously downloaded unless the download wasn't that long ago (how long is "too long" depends on how long the NAT Translation Router of Mullvad keeps those recorded associations I mentioned above, since those things are temporary and get automatically cleaned if not used),
Ok so now I'm confused entirely. Does that mean leeching I don't need to do a port forward, but seeding I do?
Which means if I want to leech to get the file then seed when I'm not heavily using my network I'm sort of out of luck?
