Site blocked
Observed traffic down.
And VPN traffic? given that only the torrent file/magnet link need to be vpn'd...
Statistics measure use of gate, ignore broken fence...
The UK's biggest ISPs must block websites that flog knock-off goods, after a successful High Court case brought by luxury goods firm Richemonte, the first time trademark pirates have been blocked in the EU. Richemonte, Swiss-based holding company for brands including Cartier (watches), Alfred Dunhill, and Montblanc wanted six …
I actually think this will be a bit more effective than blocks against ThePirateBay et al.
People who visit ThePirateBay know it is not a legitimate site, and will find ways round the blocks. People who visit sites selling knock-off goods may well be looking for, and believe they have found, a site selling the real thing. Having been alerted to the fact that the site does not sell genuine products, they will not seek to find ways round the block, because they don't want to visit a fake site. People who do want to buy fakes will go to other sites where it is perfectly clear that it isn't the genuine product, because those sites are a lot cheaper. The sort of knock-off sites referred to here are generally slightly cheaper than the real thing, but not so cheap that it looks too good to be true.
I'm not going to leap to the defence of the knock off sites but why on Earth should the ISPs get landed with the bill? They have no contractual relationship with the sites in question, the existence of these sites is not aided or abetted by them in any way, yet they have to stump up the costs of the blocking, an action initiated by the trademark holders for their own benefit.
Is this remotely scalable? If it is a question of a dozen or so sites you might argue it is simply an expense of being in the industry, but if every other trademark holder starts along this road, and hundreds of thousands of sites are blocked on equally valid grounds the collective burden becomes significant. The only rational way to proceed is surely that if you want the block for your benefit and you take it to court then you pay for it.
Or put another way, why should the ISP's customers in turn pay extra for having their Internet access diminished?
"why on Earth should the ISPs get landed with the bill?"
You raise an excellent point. Should the various worlds Post Offices be obliged to stop scam letters being sent through their systems, eg the scammy "lottery" schemes etc (it's "easy", they have physical addresses at least on the inside)? If not, why not? It's as if the lawmakers think that anything illegal and internet related, not being physical, is easy and cost-free to block.
Using this new blocking logic, then how come so much money is "lost" from illegal downloads since not being physical, obviously have little real value. :-)
Take them down? How? Go after the hosting company? It's in China and doesn't care about your yapping. Revoke the domain name? The next day the site exists under a slightly different name. As pirate bay has shown, it's remarkable how difficult it is to get rid of a website you don't like.
Some would argue that this is a feature, rather than a bug, of the Internet.
I truly don't wish to be controversial but this whack-a-mole tactic will never be defeated. Am I alone in thinking that it's time goods whose only intrinsic value is their branding and not their materials should not be defended by the state?
If these pens/handbags/etc were made of wonder materials or contained technology or developments which differentiated them from knock offs... then people wouldn't be content with buying the knock offs. The free market shouldn't be constrained by these rules - if your goods are so simple that they can be copied with neglible difference in quality then why not allow that to take place?
I fear/anticipate/look forward to the future arguments that will be made when 3D printing becomes mainstream and higher quality and people can printer their own plastic nick nacks. Someone WILL want to stop them.
Justice Arnold discussed the whack-a-mole question - the whole thing is well worth a read.
"Am I alone in thinking that it's time goods whose only intrinsic value is their branding and not their materials should not be defended by the state?"
Design is protected and brands are protected by IP. Whether you like the brand/poem/song/manbag in question is good or bad is irrelevant - protection means that things you don't like get protected along with things you do like. The idea being that you will get the same protection if you ever invent something that needs protection.
And I'm sure you can find another idiot - it's the internet.
IPR is there to encourage the free market - without it, we can see what happens. Without the temporary exclusivity, everyone profits from that invention or creation except the inventor or creator.
Personally I'm looking forward to an African or an Indian kid making a brilliant invention that I can 3D print at home - and getting millions in tiny payments for it from around the world.
"Mont Blanc Outlet helps you enjoy the most exquisite design, elegance, nobleness and peculiarity on Mont Blanc."
I've no desire for a real Mont Blanc, still less a fake one, but out of curiousity went to one of the sites mentioned. The above is a quote, yes, you too can enjoy nobleness and peculiarity. Oh dear.