With the resurgence of pirating, do you think there will be a “response” from the powers that be?

In general, what would that look like?

Specifically, do you think VPN companies based in the US or friendly countries will start to feel legal or corporate pressure to stop letting people use their services to download copyrighted material?

I just feel like these things always ebb and flow.

  • phillaholic@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yes they will, and anyone confident in saying no doesn’t understand that laws will be changed if they need to. If VPN usage is significant enough of a factor in piracy or any other illegal activity laws will be changed to find providers responsible. They could mandate data be logged. There’s so many other more nefarious things that these VPNs could be sheltering more important that governments would like to be able to have information on that I just can’t see them shrugging their shoulders and ignoring it. That time will come.

    • shalafi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Go for it. I have a Digital Ocean droplet in Amsterdam. Took an evening to spin up, and I can do it again. $6/mo.

      You are aware that there are 1,000 uses for a VPN other than pirating? I work for a software dev, we’re dependent on half a dozen for secure access. Hell, even the accounting guy needs a VPN to upload to the bank.

      The powers that be depend on VPNs to do business. Mandate logging? OK. We’ll roll our own. This is old, proven and simple tech.

      • phillaholic@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        Digital Ocean collects this data already. Some of these Vpn providers claim to collect nothing, sometimes not even payment information. If you’re doing something illegal on that Digital Ocean droplet and law enforcement tracks it down to that IP, Digital Ocean will comply with any lawful order for the data they have on you.

        • setVeryLoud(true);@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          You could theoretically set up a logless VPN server where everything resides in RAM… Unless DO can export RAM at an exact moment in time or catch you in the act and take a snapshot of the RAM at that moment.

          They could theoretically sniff your outgoing connections though, but that’s difficult to trace with DNS-over-HTTPS.

          • nabladabla@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            They know which IP address belongs to which customer at the time and anybody can download a torrent of some copyrighted content and see which IP addresses are down or uploading it at any given moment. No need to inspect RAM, no need for DO to monitor traffic. They (the copyright holders) will send a cease and desist through DO already, and could change to send a lawsuit instead.

            • setVeryLoud(true);@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              For torrents, that is correct. For everything else, it’s less concerning.

              I’ve gotten letters from my ISP before about it lol

  • Nils@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    1 year ago

    None of the big VPN companies officially endorse use if their services for piracy or any illegal activities for that matter.

    But to crack down on it they would have to keep logs on your activity and with that most of their legitimate use cases wouldn’t be valid anymore either.

    • RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      No person can make a locked door 100% secure. It either is a locked door waiting to be unlocked, or its a welded shut wall which defeats the whole point of a door.

      Privacy is a tradeoff with illegal activity. While unfortunate, a person cannot have full privacy ona VPN without giving criminals that same privacy. Some may consider this assisting criminals, some may not. But you can’t have full privacy and be able to catch criminals too, you have to pick one or the other.

  • Mothra@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think it’s very likely this happens more in the future, but likewise VPN providers sell you anonymity. So if they can’t operate without disclosing, they will lose their customers. I’m positive no matter what, VPN companies will find a way to avoid these situations such as operating from countries with less regulations etc.

    • ChunkMcHorkle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      VPN providers sell you anonymity. So if they can’t operate without disclosing, they will lose their customers. I’m positive no matter what, VPN companies will find a way to avoid these situations . . .

      That assumes the full integrity and commitment to transparency of the VPN provider. It also assumes that a specific VPN is an independent operator, and not doing business with or for a specific government. It also assumes that the VPN hardware is based in a country that can and will shield it from international law enforcement and civil lawsuits.

      That’s a lot of assumption. Maybe those things are reliable today, but they may not be forever.

      I’m not saying don’t trust them, I think they’re in the business because they believe in privacy, but anyone depending on VPNs to do what they do anonymously online should always have their eyes open and ears to the ground on this. Never underestimate the fact that most people can be brought, companies can be sued out of existence, and even “democratic” governments can make an individual’s life absolute hell when they feel like it.

      I’m old enough to remember the hell that Phil Zimmerman went through just for creating PGP in to 90s, ditto Penet around the same time.

      And while Zimmerman was in the US, Penet was in Finland, which many people thought made it safe, possibly including Julf himself. It did not. Finland did not attack Julf or Penet; instead, organizations from around the globe that were threatened by the existence of an anonymous remailer mounted multiple simultaneous legal charges against Julf and Penet to the point he had to shut it down, and there were many points between start and finish where users had no idea what had been exposed to interested governments and what had not.

      I said all that to say this. If your online safety from legal issues depends on a VPN, then never assume. Learn, keep on learning, and be ready to shut down and split at a moment’s notice.

  • dan@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I mean I’m still out here rawdogging usenet without a vpn. I keep waiting for the great crackdown on usenet but it never comes… Surely that comes before any VPN crackdown.