Slash Boxes

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 11 submissions in the queue.
posted by LaminatorX on Friday March 13 2015, @02:43PM   Printer-friendly
from the whack-a-mole dept.

TorrentFreak reports that the UK is beginning to block sites that merely link to Pirate Bay proxies. Under a series of High Court orders, copyright holders are able to update a list of "infringing domains," including torrent sites and proxies, that must be blocked by UK ISPs. Now "proxy aggregators" are being targeted:

Among the blocked sites are, and Both sites are currently inaccessible on Virgin Media and TalkTalk, and other providers are expected to follow suit.

TF spoke with Dan, the operator of, who’s baffled by the newly implemented blockade. He moved his site to a new domain to make the site accessible again, for the time being at least. “The new blocks are unbelievable and totally unreasonable. To block a site that simply links to another site just shows the level of censorship we are allowing ISP’s to get away with,” Dan says. “UKBay is not even a PirateBay proxy. It simply provides links to proxies. If they continue blocking sites, that link to sites, that link to sites.. there’l [sic] be nothing left,” he adds.

One of the other blocked sites,, doesn’t have any direct links to infringing material. Instead, it provides an overview of short Pirate Bay news articles while listing the URLs of various proxies on the side.

Music group BPI, who are responsible for obtaining the original blocking order against The Pirate Bay, tells [TorrentFreak] that proxy aggregators are also covered by the court’s decision. “Under BPI’s existing blocking Orders relating to 63 illegal websites, ISPs are required to block the illegal sites themselves, and proxies and proxy aggregators whose sole or predominant purpose is to give access to the illegal sites,” a BPI spokesperson says.

[Editor's Comment: A time of editing, the TPB can be found at ]

Related Stories

UK Government Wants to Punish Social Media Platforms for "Harmful Content" (Again) 20 comments

UK will hold social networks accountable for harmful content

The UK government plans to penalize tech companies like Facebook and Google that fail to curb the spread of harmful content on their platforms. As promised, the country is seeking to empower an independent regulator to enforce the rules which target violent material, posts encouraging suicide, disinformation, cyber-bullying, and child exploitation. Over the coming weeks, the government will consult on the types of punishments available to the new watchdog, including fines, blocking access to sites, and holding senior members of tech companies accountable for their failures.

Both Facebook and Google have previously denied responsibility for the content published on their sites, evoking the communications act in the US to overcome lawsuits accusing them of enabling terrorism and spreading extremist views. But calls for big tech to be regulated have grown in recent years following a spate of controversial incidents, the most recent of which was the live-streaming of the mass shooting in New Zealand on Facebook.

Related: UK Security Agents Get Censoring Privs at Youtube
UK ISPs Block Sites that List Pirate Bay Proxies
Website Blocking and Unblocking on Opposite Sides of the World
UK Prime Minister Repeats Calls to Limit Encryption, End Internet "Safe Spaces"

Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 13 2015, @02:56PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 13 2015, @02:56PM (#157294)

    Please sir, we just want to pirate, on your network, all those great media companies you own.

    He must be rolling around with glee at his new God key.
    Unfortunately, the pirates will and probably already have a way around the block.

    • (Score: 4, Interesting) by Pr. L Muishkin on Friday March 13 2015, @05:29PM

      by Pr. L Muishkin (5143) on Friday March 13 2015, @05:29PM (#157364)

      I would suggest that anyone who disagrees with the ISPs' policy visit their corporate websites, find anywhere on the site where public comments can be submitted, then start posting tracker urls. Let's see if they end up blocking their own sites for breaching conditions, and hey, why limit this to ISPs only, maybe the BBC's comments section could do with a few trackers.

      • (Score: 2) by Wootery on Friday March 13 2015, @07:29PM

        by Wootery (2341) on Friday March 13 2015, @07:29PM (#157406)

        Reminds me of Gmail classifying status-update emails from Google, as spam.

        Or was it Yahoo Mail doing the same for Yahoo's emails. One of that crowd though.

      • (Score: 2) by Nuke on Saturday March 14 2015, @09:34AM

        by Nuke (3162) on Saturday March 14 2015, @09:34AM (#157700)

        Trouble is, they will probably block you too.

  • (Score: 2) by Snotnose on Friday March 13 2015, @03:04PM

    by Snotnose (1623) on Friday March 13 2015, @03:04PM (#157300)

    They block sites that unblock blocked sites? Next they'll block sites that unblock blocked sites that block blocked sites.

    Why do I think there's a while() loop in there somewhere?

    In this month in 1958 Project Snot was started. This has upset many people and is widely considered a bad idea.
    • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 13 2015, @03:49PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 13 2015, @03:49PM (#157322)

      The block sites that link to sites that unblock blocked sites.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 13 2015, @03:17PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 13 2015, @03:17PM (#157308)

    *thud* *thud* *thud* *thud*

    came to think of it, i wonder if one can patent "feodalism ON THE INTERNET AND MOBILE DEVICES!11"
    Probably not, cos there are countless examples of prior art :(

  • (Score: 5, Informative) by MrNemesis on Friday March 13 2015, @03:27PM

    by MrNemesis (1582) on Friday March 13 2015, @03:27PM (#157312)

    I won't get into the stupid politics behind these decisions unless anyone asks for it, but please note that this is only six ISPs that are implementing the blocks. My home connection still has unfettered access to TPB and a hojillion other sites, some of which I'm sure contain material that is illicit, immoral and completely deleterious to the fabric of the nation. Although even I draw the line somewhere and block The Daily Heil at the router so as not to be subjected to it's Noncebait Sidebar Of Shame by clicking on an errant link. The blocking being done here isn't a legal requirement, it's a "voluntary" measure undertaken by unprincipled ISPs so as to curry favour with electioneering pricks in parliament.

    Use one of the smaller niche ISPs that cater to geeks and you get unfiltered uncapped interwebs, no traffic throttling, no "you're not allowed to run servers", no "you're not allowed to run your own router", no "you must be running IE6 before we'll look at your support ticket asking why our DNS servers have fallen over for the seventeenth time this week".

    Three UK ISPs that don't implement any filtering that I have personal experience with and will attest to their non-mediocrity (and have tech support lines of the sort where you can open up with "I've just lost sync but the POTS is still up, does the DSLAM need a reboot?" and they'll respond "yes" 20s later, a minute later your line comes back up):

    "To paraphrase Nietzsche, I have looked into the abyss and been sick in it."
    • (Score: 2) by wantkitteh on Friday March 13 2015, @06:08PM

      by wantkitteh (3362) on Friday March 13 2015, @06:08PM (#157380) Homepage Journal

      If you don't feel like switching ISP to get around censorship (because, let's face it, when you've got a stable connection, sometimes screwing with it can only make it worse) then feel free to use Tor or a VPN service with gateways in geographic locations without bullshit censorship mandated by bought-and-paid-for morons. Tor can be a little slow and often you'll get Captcha'd to prove you're human. VPNs are usually paid for, but Frootvpn is free (advisory: no-one knows *how* it's free, so there's a higher than average chance it's a honeypot)

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 14 2015, @12:31AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 14 2015, @12:31AM (#157592)

        > it's free, so there's a higher than average chance it's a honeypot

        Speaking of dubious anonymizers:

        I used to have a tab open on a page for a browser extension that did a sort of "web of proxies" - the free version made each user's browser do double-time as a proxy for another free user. You could pay and get access to the company's own proxies.

        But then my browser crashed and I lost the tab (should have bookmarked it, dammit!) and now I can't find that extension anymore.

        Does anyone know what that extension is? I'm not sure I want to use, but I do want to experiment with it.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 14 2015, @12:58PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 14 2015, @12:58PM (#157738)

          Maybe Hola? []

          It sounds like the free version is P2P.

    • (Score: 2) by Nuke on Saturday March 14 2015, @09:28AM

      by Nuke (3162) on Saturday March 14 2015, @09:28AM (#157697)

      I second the recommendation for using a small ISP and not following the sheep with the likes of TalkTalk, Virgin and BT Internet, with their user names like "joebloggs6197. Presumably those people have now lost even being able to read SN. BT particularly piss me off as they post me a bunch of glossy advertising for their service about every week (wrongly addressed to my mother who never lived here - they have a serious customer database FU I think).

      I am with Demon and never had a problem (no cap, fixed IP address, no blocking), although it costs a bit more than average and I believe that they now only accept commercial new customers.

      Thanks for the link to though, I was unaware of it.

  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 13 2015, @03:37PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 13 2015, @03:37PM (#157318)

    Have they blocked Google yet? They have the biggest list of TPB proxies of all!

  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 13 2015, @04:21PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 13 2015, @04:21PM (#157334)

    Forgive the AC but I don't have my account details handy. One solution to this problem is to switch to a smaller ISP.

    The big 6 are simply reacting to whoever is shouting the loudest. Sure, Mr & Mrs average might get annoyed that they can't download movies anymore, but they'll stick with their ISP and bypass the filters because it's easier than switching or complaining. Once people start moving away to the other ISPs the big 6 will notice, and will start to resist these (frankly rather useless) demands. The 'loudest wins' argument is what got google et al to enforce encryption between datacenters and work on making phone encryption easier, or what spurred the development of secure (and, this is the key point, easier to use methods of) encrypted communication, after the Snowden leaks.

    By switching ISP you not only support a smaller business, but you will probably get better support, possibly better speed as well as a slightly lower bill. Also, many ISPs do rolling contracts, so if you're uncomfortable being tied into paying a bill for 18 months (*cough cough* BT), hop on over to an alternative. It's easy, they do all the work.

    To avoid sounding like I'm trying to sell something, I won't make any recommendations. Google is your friend, there are many alternatives out there!

  • (Score: 2, Interesting) by cesarb on Saturday March 14 2015, @01:08AM

    by cesarb (1224) on Saturday March 14 2015, @01:08AM (#157606) Journal

    And what happens if someone uploads a list of proxies as a GitHub repository? GitHub is https-only, so blocking it is all or nothing, all repositories show as "" on SNI, so it can't be separated that way, and it's a high-profile website, so the backlash from blocking it would be strong enough. And I suspect making GitHub take down the repository itself wouldn't be as easy.

  • (Score: 2) by kaszz on Saturday March 14 2015, @10:14PM

    by kaszz (4211) on Saturday March 14 2015, @10:14PM (#157877) Journal

    Looks like UK is turning into a communist state (same shit different color). Perhaps time to leave?