US Government Begins Global Internet Censorship Without Court Orders

[Tickle Me Emo]

wait, they're stopping illegal activity, and people are upset?

so there stopping people from criminal activity.. and people are upset.

If that's really all you see in this issue, you're retarded. I'm too tired to go into detail right now, but that's really all the time you deserve anyways.

[Jeimuzu]

If that's really all you see in this issue, you're retarded. I'm too tired to go into detail right now, but that's really all the time you deserve anyways.

I give you +1 my good sir.

[Nemesis]

I give you +1 my good sir.

they don't need a court order to stop them, if they have exigent circumstances they can shut it down, then later prove that they were doing something illegal, then go though the proper channels. the trouble comes when they do that and later can't prove that something illegal was happening.

[DJ_MikeyRevile]

they don't need a court order to stop them, if they have exigent circumstances they can shut it down, then later prove that they were doing something illegal, then go though the proper channels. the trouble comes when they do that and later can't prove that something illegal was happening.

exactly... like every other unlawful thing...

partial Punishment first, questions and discussion later in court.
if the government sees or has reason to belive there is somthing unlawful happing, they shut it down.. not just for websites but for ALL aspects of crime.

[StarsMine]

Torrents are 100% legal, and are used for legal uses very very often. however the question of legality of torrents is a stupid thing in this question, if torrent finder got pulled why not Google as you can do the same thing with google

[CYBER]

Torrents are 100% legal, and are used for legal uses very very often. however the question of legality of torrents is a stupid thing in this question, if torrent finder got pulled why not Google as you can do the same thing with google

+1
seriously this thing with US feds pulling out the actual GOOD domains is getting old...
instead of focusing on helping the poor, saving the homeless, feeding the hungry, saving the innocents, protecting the citizens, aiming for peace....
instead of all of this...
they just go after harmless domains and shut them down for the sole pupose of letting the rich people get richer since the lower class ppl used to go to these domains to save some money getting what they want...
talk about fucking up the gap between classes of our society....
and stars is right, for all we know, google, youtube, heck even facebook one day might be closed for either being a search engine that shows torrent results, a music/vid sharing website, and a social website that allows users to upload wtvr they want on the internet technically...

meh... fuck that shit.

[Nemesis]

Torrents are 100% legal, and are used for legal uses very very often. however the question of legality of torrents is a stupid thing in this question, if torrent finder got pulled why not Google as you can do the same thing with google

alone they may be legal, but if they can be used to commit an illegal act then they can be deemed illegal.

for example, is a crowbar legal? yes. can you be arrested for walking down the street with one? yes. because it is something that could be used to commit a crime.

[Fluffy Frufflebottoms]

exactly... like every other unlawful thing...

partial Punishment first, questions and discussion later in court.
if the government sees or has reason to belive there is somthing unlawful happing, they shut it down.. not just for websites but for ALL aspects of crime.

alone they may be legal, but if they can be used to commit an illegal act then they can be deemed illegal.

for example, is a crowbar legal? yes. can you be arrested for walking down the street with one? yes. because it is something that could be used to commit a crime.

What you guys need to understand is that private torrenting isn't criminal. Copyright infringement without intent to profit is a civil tort, just as the rights holders want it to be. In a civil case, the plaintiff merely requires a preponderance of evidence to win a case, whereas in criminal law, guilt beyond reasonable doubt must be proven, which would be both incredibly difficult, and incredibly expensive to establish.

The rights holders make use of the liberties that civil cases grant them, running operations that essentially mimic extortion rings, targeting infringers and entirely innocent people alike. At the same time, they want to enjoy the protections and advantages of having their business models protected by criminal law, without giving up their aggressive litigation schemes, and they're lobbying a corrupt legislature to grant them criminal enforcement of civil matters.

You may think that the end is justified, but the entire legislative and judicial foundation of this country speaks to the fact that the means aren't.