The websites targeted by the campaign include the biggest torrent pages and file-hosting search engines, like ExtraTorrent, Torrentz, TorrentReactor.The British Phonographic Industry (BPI) is also threatening to ask courts to block US-based music streaming group Grooveshark.While most of the torrent sites currently set to be blocked for copyright infringement are small operations, Grooveshark is an exception as a larger company that has been battling the majors in particular for some time now, Musicweek noted.“It looks like we could be facing an onslaught of web blackouts here in the UK,” the leader of the UK Pirate Party Loz Kaye told RT. “What we’ve seen from 2012 is that it hasn’t helped with music sales at all, that actually album sales failed 10 per cent.”Loz Kaye is also sure the record companies will eventually face their plight if they don’t change their policies.“Essentially, this is about the record labels trying to remain gatekeepers and actually push other companies out. But this approach will not work! It’s going to alienate a generation of music lovers, and it’s going to perhaps radicalize internet users.”However, the BPI told RT in an online statement that their only intention is to protect the artists’ and legal services’ rights. They also confirmed that the music licensing group PPL has begun polling its members on licensing content for particular websites.“We’re not really doing any interviews about this. I can say, though, that it’s correct PPL has asked its members to confirm to us if they’ve licensed their recorded music to particular websites. This is part of our ongoing work to ensure that legal music services can flourish and that artists and labels are rewarded for their work,” a representative of the British trade body said in an email to RT. Now, it seems the BPI is starting the biggest anti-piracy initiative yet.“Over the past years, UK music labels have innovated to build one of the most vibrant digital music sectors in the world. However, the growth of digital music in the UK is held back by a raft of illegal businesses commercially exploiting music without a license from the copyright holders,” the group indicated in their official statement. In the latest successful court initiative, the BPI blocked three torrent sites (KickAssTorrents, H33T and Fenopy) three months ago. It happened after almost a year ago, an unknown official from the music industry told the TorrentFreak website that PPL had started polling its members on the matter of privacy. …
http://www.youtube.com/v/L0YzEaEmYGE?version=3&f=videos&app=youtube_gdata Link: Blocking Blitz: ‘Assault on file sharing may radicalize internet users’
http://www.youtube.com/v/EaI1G7rwxyQ?version=3&f=videos&app=youtube_gdata Read this article: The Alex Jones Show:(1st HOUR-VIDEO Commercial Free) Tuesday, May 7 2013:
Although they complain extremely loudly about piracy in the United States, the major record labels have never tried to have a domain blocked there.
Instead they’ve focused on countries around Europe and have achieved many of their site blocking successes through the UK High Court.
The blocks against The Pirate Bay, KickassTorrents, H33T and Fenopy (and before them Newzbin2) are controversial and widely circumvented, but perhaps of most concern is the way they are being implemented.
While the various and extremely detailed High Court rulings are available for public consumption, the actual list of domains being supplied by the record labels to the ISPs is not. This lack of transparency has done nothing to convince critics that there’s nothing to hide but through a series of coincidences, TorrentFreak discovered that perhaps there is.
Early last week The Pirate Bay switched to a new Greenland domain and within hours strange things began to happen. Many Pirate Bay proxy sites ceased to function and displayed ISP blocking pages instead, causing a flurry of emails from readers concerned that proxies were also becoming censorship targets.
Suspicious that the domain switch and the proxy problems were connected, TorrentFreak spoke with the operators of PirateReverse, one of the proxies that had ceased to function. In short, a technical issue with the way the new TPB domain was configured caused the proxies to pass information to the ISPs that they would not normally receive. This led to the proxies being blocked.
However, before we received this information we spoke to UK ISP Virgin Media to see if they were blocking the TPB proxies. We sent a list of URLs representing the apparently blocked sites and after a few days a spokesperson responded.
“We are only blocking those sites we are required to block by the court order,” we were told. “As a responsible ISP, Virgin Media supports the clear, legal framework put in place to protect against copyright infringement and we continue to comply with court orders specifically addressed to the company.”
However, it seems that at least one site not operated by The Pirate Bay is present on the High Court order and is currently being blocked.
“To clarify, http://tpb.voxanon.org/ is blocked as per the court order,” Virgin Media told TorrentFreak.
TorrentFreak asked Virgin if they were able to supply us with a full copy of the list of URLs they are being asked to block. We were told that they could not.
So, we moved onto the BPI, the organization supplying the URLs to the High Court and ISPs on behalf of the labels. We wrote to Director of Communications Adam Liversage and explained what we had discovered and again asked for a copy of the list. We received no response.
It is not in dispute that the High Court has found that The Pirate Bay, KickassTorrents, H33T and Fenopy contravene the Copyright Act and therefore should be blocked. Whether people like that or not, that’s a fact.
The big issue here is why the blocking list is being kept out of the public eye. The Voxanon site is indeed a Pirate Bay proxy, but there is no mention of that site in the High Court order and no ruling that it operates illegally. In addition to the concern that mores sites will eventual creep onto this list it raises the specter of more blocklists being created in future, again with no public accountability.
If there’s to be any confidence that these High Court orders are in the public interest, then there’s nothing to hide. And, let’s face it, if all the list contains is a rundown of domains owned by these sites it’s not going to make exciting reading. So why not publish the list?
Source: Pirate Bay Proxy Now Included in Secret ISP Blocklist
Speculation about a music streaming service from Apple has been going on for quite some time. The rumored addition would presumably complement the company’s download model on iTunes, but apparently one thing holding it back all this time is Apple’s stringent demands as well as labels’ unwillingness to play ball… …
When major music labels and movie studios go after file-sharing sites they often claim they are doing so to protect artists large and small. However, not all of them want to be saved from the evils of piracy.
When the founders of The Pirate Bay were sued in Sweden back in 2008 one of the 25 musical works named in the lawsuit was Max Peezay‘s album “Discokommitten”. It was an odd choice, since the hip-hop artist was known for his positive attitude towards sharing.
Peezay heard the news through the media. He wasn’t aware of the case at that point and when he asked some record label insiders to fill him in on the details, they came back with an interesting briefing.
“I was told that The Pirate Bay was run by a bunch of crooks and Nazis. That it was about money, that they made a lot of money,” Peezay says in a previously unreleased TPB AFK interview released today.
“I wondered why the record labels suddenly were interested in political ideologies. Isn’t this just about copyright? But they told me that we have to stick together in the music industry and fight piracy. They wanted me to join 100%,” he adds.
Crooks and Nazis
Peezay’s first instinct was to get out of the lawsuit as quickly as possible, but that was easier said than done. It took a while before he could arrange a meeting with a lawyer from music group IFPI, who tried to keep Peezay on board.
“IFPI’s main argument was that [the TPB operators] were bad guys doing shady business. At the end of the meeting I told them I wanted to pull my album out of the lawsuit anyway,” Peezay recalls.
However, IFPI said that it might not be possible for him to get out legally. Peezay was skeptical of this assessment and asked IFPI’s lawyer to confirm that on paper. A few days later the lawyer went back on his claim.
“It turned out that they had no grounds to tell me that I couldn’t drop the case. So we decided to pull out. We didn’t want to have anything to do with this case,” Peezay says.
Unlike the plaintiffs in the case, Peezay appreciates what TPB stands for. “Ideologically I think it’s great that culture is being shared like this. We should nurture that instead of strangling it.”
After Peezay pulled out IFPI made a public excuse for including him in the case without asking. That was the end of the uproar, but even today Peezay feels that music industry insiders treat him differently.
“It was made clear to me that [my withdrawal] wasn’t popular at all among the other labels and artists fighting for this. It was kind of threatening, nothing concrete but I realize I’m not as popular in the industry after my little spectacle,” he says.
Despite this setback for the copyright holders the Pirate Bay trial continued, albeit for a smaller amount in damages. Eventually the Pirate Bay Four were sentenced to prison time and damage payments.
Two of the founders continued fighting and submitted their case to the European Human Rights Court but this application was rejected last month. Peter Sunde, one of the defendants, pointed out this week that one of the key judges is not particularly neutral when it comes to copyright, suggesting that she may have been biased.
Despite all the legal troubles The Pirate Bay website remains online – and carries links to several of Max Peezay’s albums.
TPB AFK (extra material) Interview with Max Peezay
Source: “Why I Pulled Out of The Pirate Bay Trial,” An Artist’s Perspective
Good News: The FDA Says It Won’t Kill You to Chew Nicotine Gum and Smoke a Cigarette At the Same Time
Do you like nicotine? Then the Food and Drug
Administration has some good news for you! No, seriously: Yesterday
the FDA ;announced ;that
it’s not a huge deal if you use a smoking cessation aid (or
“nicotine replacement therapy,” in the FDA’s words) for longer than
the recommended period, nor is it a big deal if you use a smoking
cessation aid and smoke a cigarette at the same time. ;
Years of clinical research, the FDA says, have shown that “some
warnings and limitations specified in the directions for use on the
labels of these products are no longer necessary to make sure they
are used safely and effectively to quit smoking.” To that end
FDA is allowing the companies who make these OTC products to
make several changes to the warnings and limitations in the
directions for use on their labels to allow some flexibility on how
they are used and for how long. These changes mean the following
- There are no significant safety concerns associated with using
more than one OTC NRT at the same time, or using an OTC NRT at the
same time as another nicotine-containing product—including a
cigarette. If you are using an OTC NRT while trying to quit smoking
but slip up and have a cigarette, you should not stop using the
NRT. You should keep using the OTC NRT and keep trying to quit.
- NRT users should still pick a day to quit smoking, and begin
using the OTC NRT product on their “quit” day, even if they aren’t
immediately able to stop smoking.
- Users of NRT products should still use the product for the
length of time indicated in the label—for example, 8, 10 or 12
weeks. However, if they feel they need to continue using the
product for longer in order to quit, it is safe to do so in most
cases. Consumers are advised to consult their health care
professional if they feel the need to use an OTC NRT for longer
than the time period recommended in the label.
None of this is news to folks who heretofore ;have, for
reasons of both pleasure and weakness of will, mixed a fresh piece
of Nicorette with a Parliament, or used Nicorette forever and ever.
Writing on his blog, Reason contributor Jacob Grier calls the FDA’s
announcement a “sensible move,” and wonders what it
might mean for e-cigarettes. ; …