Jul (they/she)

I don’t know Norway copyright law, but DMCA really isn’t the issue. This comes down to basic International music copyright. DMCA is just an enforcement mechanism in the US for that. Assuming this blog site is in the US and that’s why you mentioned it, note that you are also liable for any punishments in your country of residence. Usually these are fines per download/stream which can easily total millions or billions of dollars for even just a few songs downloaded or streamed often.

That said, if your site doesn’t catch anyone’s attention, then it all comes down to if you want to risk being that one easy target that gets made an example of. If you’re OK with that risk, then the most likely thing to happen is the blog host site will get a takedown notice and take down the post or ban you from the site. Unless the song is protected with logins or is hosted on an obscure site, it’s likely not to take very long to find by either the blog host or the record company.

The only way to avoid this would be if you have a valid fair-use argument for why you should be allowed to keep it up. But note, the way fair use works in most countries is you’re still breaking the law, it’s just a defense, so you still may need to go to court to present that defense and lawyers are expensive.

The Senate has to confirm, so when their term is up, they could refuse to confirm commissioners that are owned by the content industry.

Right now the FCC is under their control, but may IR may not be after mid-terms. So they’re trying to do as much damage to competition as possible right now.

It’s likely already budgeted for, so if it wasn’t used for this attack, it would have gone to another fruitless attack. It’s how they do business these days. The money isn’t important. It’s keeping the illusion of risk to pirating and thus illusion of value of their product. Basically, part of their marketing budget.

If only the upstream bandwidth was as cheap, at least in most of the US. Most of the time the only way to get above 5 or 10 Mbps up is to get a business plan. I recently got lucky and was super close to a new fiber junction on a pole, so I got 1Gbps up and down and more is available, but before that the only option was cable or DSL. Cable was up to 500mbps down and 10mbps up and DSL was up to 25mbps down and 1mbps up. And those are max speeds, reality in a major city with cable having a virtual monopoly for decades is that it’s over-provisioned, so real speeds are only about half to 1/10th of that for most of the day. So reasonable seeding was always impossible if I didn’t want my regular web browsing to be super slow or fail to submit forms data and waiting for the page request to get through to start loading.

Yeah, I have my own DNS server that caches from multiple backing servers as needed. I’m not worried about DNS blocking, it’s never been effective. The issue is ISP level blocking usually isnt just DNS blocking, it’s also involves IP level blocking, many of which dont work on IPv6 which is one reason (besides just resistance to replacing old hardware) it hasn’t been adopted widely by consumer ISPs. If you have only a single, unchangeable (by anyone other than them) IP address, they have much more control and your traffic is much easier to track and manipulate.

And there is even lower level blocking at lower layers of the network stack. ISPs can intercept and mangle packet’s destinations at any layer because your traffic must go through them and so your networking equipment must trust their equipment to properly route traffic. They don’t do it now mostly because it means adding a lot more processing power to analyze every packet. I do it all the time at home to block ads and other malicious traffic. But if they’re required to upgrade to allow for that level of traffic analysis, by law, then that opens the floodgates for all kinds of manipulation either politically or capitalistically nefarious in nature.

Good news for fascists since it means there will be an easy way to force ISPs to block all “unlawful” content like Wikipedia or any other site that gives educational information to refute their current agendas or reflects opposing opinions that they consider “alternative facts”.

I bail or use VPN fir anything asking for that kind of verification, porn or otherwise.

Never give your ID or any other info to age or identity verification sites whether it’s porn, sex education, social media, dating sites, or any of the sites that are starting to require it. 99.999999999999999999% chance it will get mishandled and leaked. The promise to delete the data immediately after verifying, but all the leaks have proven they or their contractors don’t actually do it.

Unless your ISP is a content owner, which several are now. Comcast/Xfinity is NBC for example. Plus Comcast makes a lot of profit on cable TV, so they have reason to ger people to stop. That being said, I dont know anyone who was simply downloading for personal use who got their service canceled. But it is a major risk in the IS since most ISPs have near monopolies at least over broadband speeds, so the majority have no other options.

Awesome, I bought Black & White when it came out ages ago and have tried to get IR running a few times over the years. I dont have the disc anymore due to a flooded basement many years ago. Might have to try it again.

Cool. I activate all of the public ones. They come and go and rate limit and such. So just use them all. Unless you want to pay or try to find an invite to a free private one. That I can’t help with. But it works for me. Takes a little longer to search all of them, but it’s usually in the background so no big deal for me.

Try prowlarr.

It’s usually the opposite that’s the issue for me. If it’s not free, OK, let’s pay, but if it’s not a reasonable price for the product (including both the content, usability, and reusability, in case of media), then I’ll go out of my way to get it free or totally give up on it depending on how much I want it. That’s why I switched from piracy to Netflix for many years and now am back to piracy because I like shows in the background while working on projects, for example, or piracy, then Steam, then, fuck gaming as much because I found other hobbies.

Often the content is available without masking for a very short time so scrapers can access them or similar tricks to allow them access immediately after posting. But that requires that you hit the server immediately after the story is posted and there is no masking at all usually in those cases. That’s how things like archive.is get a copy for example. But none of that is client/browser side anymore, at least on the major sites. Otherwise it’s easy to defeat if the content is already provided to the browser and just masked with JavaScript or something that runs locally and can be blocked.

Hasn’t worked on most sites in a long time. The obscuring is now done on the server side so the text never gets to the browser. Otherwise it used to be easy to just use the developer console or uBlock to just remove the components that concealed the text or prevent the browser refreshing to prevent the concealing.

The Netflix user interface has become a mess to navigate, and mostly only ever shows me things I’ve already watched. If they’d put even a tiny bit of the effort they’re putting into driving people to watch certain content they produced or are paid to promote and their ad framework into making it possible to find new content and improving the content they do produce (damn the “AI”-based effects and skin smoothing nonsense and shitty writing in the second season of Wednesday pissed me off), I might be willing to stick around but at this point I’ve rarely been using it anymore. Sad to see the fall…

It was promising for a while, better quality streams, better payments to artists, etc. But they never ended up implementing stuff they promised like better integration with devices or improving their catalog.

It would reduce their short term revenue, but would improve their long-term revenue. Netflix used to have a great product, but they fiddled with it to make people watch only certain content that brings them more revenue. Same with Spotify. This then reduces the number of people willing to pay for the service and since there are few competitors that are better and/or have as much content they “piracy” is the only way to get the content you want for a reasonable price, with a good user experience.

So short term these things improve revenue, but not as much as the revenue lost in the long term as people start to dislike the the poor experience or are unable to afford the higher prices. And people don’t want multiple services to have to check for new content all the time all with different poor Ux.

YouTube did make some changes to their terms primarily for creators that get paid for content. They added some new LLM-based scanning of content to find stuff that is too repetitive or didn’t contain enough original content. Assuming the creators you looked at have mostly original content rather than remixing of content which may be misinterpreted by LLMs as not being “original enough”, they could be falling victim to overaggressive hits if they use a consistent format in their content since LLMs don’t really understand context, only patterns.

I’d be interested to find out if the creators got any notification from YouTube on the reason for removal of the content.

Considering the community this is posted in, I think it’s fair to mention (if maybe not directly link to) there are devices that decode DRM and other encoding and pass on a stream that can be watched without needing all of that. The ones I saw were under $100. Though it’s definitely possible that these may get cracked down on eventually either by customs or changes in the DRM that requires internet connectivity to decode which has been discussed though seems dumb to need internet to watch a broadcast signal, but greed often causes stupid things like that.