Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ

54716 readers

212 users here now

⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.

Rules • Full Version

1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy

2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote

3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs

4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others

Loot, Pillage, & Plunder

📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):

💰 Please help cover server costs.


Ko-fi	Liberapay

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

386

RANT: I hate the fact that my ISP can restrict access to certain sites (lemmy.world)

submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

106 comments fedilink hide all child comments

How can it possibly be, that an ISP, which I'm paying for gets to decid, which sites I'm allowed to have access to, and which not?

All the torrenting sites are restricted. I know, I can use VPN, and such... but I want to do it because of my privacy concerns and not because of some higher-up decided to bend over for the lobbying industry.

While on the other hand, if there's a data breach of a legit big-corp website (looking at you FB), I'm still able to access it, they get fined with a fraction of their revenue, and I'm still left empty-handed. What a hipocracy!!

What comes next? Are they gonna restrict me from using lemmy too, bc some lobbyist doesn't like the fact that it's a decentralized system which they have no control over?

Rant, over!

I didn't even know that my router was using my ISPs DNS, and that I can just ditch it, even though I'm running AdGuard (selfhosted)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 51 points 1 year ago (1 children)

My state of residence restricts access to certain sites. It's all bullshit.

Anyway... The ISP is either a common carrier or a content provider. Pick a fucking lane. You can't have half and half. Either you are responsible for ALL content provided or NONE.

If you choose none then you MUST NOT restrict access to any content.

If you chose ALL then you may restrict content based on what you are willing to take responsibility for. But in that case if someone does something illegal with content you provided you are liable.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Utah?

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago

California. The internet contains chemicals known to the State of California to cause cancer and birth defects or other reproductive harm.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

The list is growing: Utah, Florida, Kansas, South Dakota, and West Virginia, Arkansas, Mississippi, and Virginia all have legislation in progress