Then what's all the whining about? Fact is, English law has been applied to the site.

In reply to a post by Vorlon:

In reply to a post by Spetznaz:

Nasty sorts of things?, do you work for the MPA?. It's purely about corporate greed nothing else, there is no 'greater good' or moral justification for this just pure greed and it simply wont work, the pirates are always 10 steps ahead of the likes of the MPA anyway, the movie industry needs to learn and adapt, stream movies online more easily and cheapily, cinema's are 20th century, even dvd/br are dated tech, this is not a fight that can be won by censorship and blocking but only by giving people a better service and not being so greedy and arrogant.

In reply to a post by camieabz:

... nested quotes trimmed ...

Exactly, just as a shoplifter shouts "assault" if someone rugby tackles him.

They abuse the system then hide behind it's protection. It's a pity they don't realise just what happens within the piracy industry. The sharers make the stuff freely available for the pirates, who then mass produce and spend the cash on all sorts of nasty things.

So are you saying it's perfectly acceptable to take a product with a monetary value from a company without paying IF you deem that their profits are too much?

Vorlon catch up, we are not discussing the rights and wrongs of downloading films we are discussing whether a search engine that INDEXES such files (only) should be censored.

I don't know how many other ways there are to put it, censoring this website doesn't stop people downloading the files because Newzbin doesn't hold any of this copy written files

In reply to a post by DrDeath:

Google also links to illegal material. Why is that not blocked? It is the same as newzbin. In fact you can probably get directions to ALOT more illegal material via a google search than you ever could on a newzbin search. This may sound obvious, but im talking legally how is newzbin different to Google ?

^ This is what I'm talking about and waiting for a response from the johnny know it all's on here.

AEP, forget your child porn
Vorlon, forget your oooh its stealing etc

None of that actually matters, it seems hard to grasp so I'll try to make this easy.

1) Newzbin, very small search engine that allows you to search for some non copy written content and some copy written content and where to access the files, it does not host the files itself.

2) Google, biggest most widely used search engine and website in the world that allows you to search for some non copy written content and some copy written content and where to access the files, it does not host the files itself.


Please explain without drifting into child porn land or crime land why Newzbin should be blocked but Google shouldn't?

Type "free films, free ISO's free Xbox games" etc etc into Google and see how Google does the same thing but on a bigger scale.

No slipping, no squirming. Please answer

So if a company advertised lists of addresses known to be empty to burglars, that would be OK? Or, closer, if they sold lists of known sources of stolen goods would they be allowed to continue?

I think in both cases the firm would be commiting an offence and would soon be prevented from doing so. It's not just illegal to directly commit an offence but also to conspire to aid someone else to do so.

Please explain without drifting into child porn land or crime land why Newzbin should be blocked but Google shouldn't?

Simple. Because the copyright owners have not asked for Google to be banned. That's their perogative as they don't see Google as a threat to their property.

In reply to a post by AEP:

So if a company advertised lists of addresses known to be empty to burglars, that would be OK? Or, closer, if they sold lists of known sources of stolen goods would they be allowed to continue?

I think in both cases the firm would be commiting an offence and would soon be prevented from doing so. It's not just illegal to directly commit an offence but also to conspire to aid someone else to do so.

A rubbish example that doesn't warrant a real reply. Different areas of the law so.... not relevant.

Ok so we are getting somewhere now.

Correct they have not asked for Google to be banned.

As for your reason (your words not theirs) its obviously BS. Google IS a threat to their property much bigger than poxy Newzbin.

MPA vs Newzbin1/Newzbin2 = Win (but doesn't stop anything in reality)
MPA vs Google = Fail (lots of egg on face, MPA tries to shut down Google and the courts laugh in their face)

The MPA has basically failed in its attempts to stop the uploaders of these films.
Has failed in its attemptst to close the link hostiing sites.
So now it is trying to stop people accessing the sites that have the links.

Those that download are not in my opinion doing anything wrong.
The links are there, freely accessed.
the MPA should reallly be trying to stop those that upload the films to the internet.
The ISP should not be responsable for what data you are receiving.
This action will only end up hurting BT, and its customers.
Prices will increase and client numbers will fall as people change providers.

In reply to a post by GMAN98:

Ok so we are getting somewhere now.

Correct they have not asked for Google to be banned.

As for your reason (your words not theirs) its obviously BS. Google IS a threat to their property much bigger than poxy Newzbin.

MPA vs Newzbin1/Newzbin2 = Win (but doesn't stop anything in reality)
MPA vs Google = Fail (lots of egg on face, MPA tries to shut down Google and the courts laugh in their face)

The reasons I believe are much different to that.

Newzbin I assume are actually setting out to provide a service that at least in part provides indexes to copyright material. If the copyright holder asked them to remove these links then would they? If they wouldn't then they are an accessory to copyright theft.

Google are primarily a search engine of everything on the net (at least that isn't protected against search crawlers in some way). Some of this is copyright and if asked to take it down they will.

So, google work within the law and copyright whereas Newzbin have stated that they will break the censorship system that has been ordered by a legal process and therefore are working outside of the law.

A rubbish example that doesn't warrant a real reply.

I put that through BabelFish and it came back with:

"I have no answer to that one."