If you have an email ending in @hotmail.com, @live.com or @outlook.com (or any other Microsoft-related domain), please consider changing it to another email provider; Microsoft decided to instantly block the server's IP, so emails can't be sent to these addresses.
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
Copyright alert system (aka the six strikes program)
Comments
So if you block their computer's IP address from communicating with your computer, does that nullify the whole tactic?
By the way, there's an article on Wikipedia, with a list of the companies participating. I'm not sure what the extent will be, since I don't know whose parent companies these all are.
The participating companies are on the record saying they don't really give a shit if cyber cafes get boned by this.
Yes. Because effectively nobody is accountable for abuse of this system.
Stuff like this just goes to reaffirm my belief that the biggest threat to our freedom comes not from the government, but from corporations that will use their power to crush anything that comes between them and the almighty dollar.
No, that obviously won't ever happen because corporations never mean to threaten people's freedoms, so that means they won't.
So I'm curious as to how this'll affect someone like me who does most of their illegal downloading via sites like Zippyshare which aren't torrents at all. Is that just outside their jurisdiction or what?
Also should I be uninstalling Bittorrent?
They don't really have a "jurisdiction" per se. They just aren't bothering with that.
You know what I mean.
No, I actually don't. You asked if it was outside their jurisdiction. There is no jurisdiction involved, nor anything resembling one.
Figurative jurisdiction. You answered my question
so I'm not seeing what you're not understanding.
Dude, you asked if it was out of their jurisdiction. That's where the misunderstanding comes from. It's pretty simple.
If it's not a torrent, six strikes won't apply, according to this.
Furthermore, from what I've heard about these companies doing the deed, they do it by checking IPs only on the top hundred or so torrents.
@Lazuli: "Jurisdiction" doesn't mean what you think it means.
Asking if it's in their jurisdiction is essentially asking if they have the authority to do so, which isn't really an applicable question. What I think you meant to ask if whether it falls within the scope of this system.
Also, even if they wanted to interfere with people using cyberlockers, it would actually be impossible, since there's no way for a third party to find out who's downloading what.
But it's not like this is actually going to have a big impact on torrenting either, really.
I'm not annoyed, that's just how I've always used the word "jurisdiction".
Actually most of the people I know use "jurisdiction" as a synonym for "range", "scope" and so on. Maybe it's a regional thing, I don't know.