 |
By *ombiker OP Man
over a year ago
the right side of the river |
Well it now appears that the courts in Ireland have granted an order to media companies to compel internet providers to block up to 60 websites that provide streaming, well fair enough but the sneaky part is that they slipped in is that the courts can specify up to another 60 sites per month, but no specific reason mentioned. Now I wouldn't be a conspiracy nut or anything but I'm sure no body would keel over with shock if wiki leaks or other whistleblower type sites got blocked accidentally on purpose
Annneway,
Sleaze you later |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I read that 3 providers have been blocked with provision granted to also close up to 50 additional new streaming sites that the 3 might use....Eir complained about how much it might cost them. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ombiker OP Man
over a year ago
the right side of the river |
It's the little extra bit that caught my eye about the addition of up to 50 sites a month to be blocked, a reasonable person would assume this was in case of renaming the streaming sites but they were not specific about that, so in theory they now have the power to block any site. Not from the source but from your internet providers allowing you access them.
This could in theory block sites like social media sites related to anti water charges for example. Watch how they will dress up the water charge again with a new approach.
Or am l just paranoid.
Where did I put my tinfoil hat |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *aid backMan
over a year ago
by a lake with my rod out |
"It's the little extra bit that caught my eye about the addition of up to 50 sites a month to be blocked, a reasonable person would assume this was in case of renaming the streaming sites but they were not specific about that, so in theory they now have the power to block any site. Not from the source but from your internet providers allowing you access them.
This could in theory block sites like social media sites related to anti water charges for example. Watch how they will dress up the water charge again with a new approach.
Or am l just paranoid.
Where did I put my tinfoil hat"
Tin foil hat? The government took it  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Think i will set up my knock off dvd business again 
On the site blocking
Will it happen - Yes
Will it work - Not a bloody chance
For every way of blocking a site there is a hundred ways around it. And if they take a site down 10 more will spring up.
Its a waste of money for the ISP's and all it will do is rise your bill by about 15%
Pure stupidity |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oggoneMan
over a year ago
Derry |
"Well it now appears that the courts in Ireland have granted an order to media companies to compel internet providers to block up to 60 websites that provide streaming, well fair enough but the sneaky part is that they slipped in is that the courts can specify up to another 60 sites per month, but no specific reason mentioned. Now I wouldn't be a conspiracy nut or anything but I'm sure no body would keel over with shock if wiki leaks or other whistleblower type sites got blocked accidentally on purpose
Annneway,
Sleaze you later"
There's similar moves afoot in the UK. From what I was reading it's the premier league thats behind it. They want the power to cut of people streaming the matches in real time so to speak. Sky has a foot in both camps as broadcaster and ISP.
Really trying to crack down on the widespread use of KODI |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
