this post was submitted on 19 Dec 2024
45 points (67.2% liked)
Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ
55056 readers
166 users here now
⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.
Rules • Full Version
1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy
2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote
3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs
4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others
Loot, Pillage, & Plunder
📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):
💰 Please help cover server costs.
 |
 |
|---|---|
| Ko-fi | Liberapay |
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
VPNs are not required. Instead of egressing on your ISPs network, you're egressing on someone else's network. It's kinda like paying for a second ISP so you can egress your ISP to go encrypted to your other ISP. What does it accomplish other than putting you in another law jurisdiction?
Even purevpn who said "no logs" handed over data.
"In 2017, PureVPN, which advertised a no-logs policy, supplied connection logs to the FBI during a cyberstalking investigation. These logs enabled the identification of a suspect by linking activities to originating IP addresses. "
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PureVPN
"In 2016, IPVanish, another provider asserting a no-logs policy, furnished user data to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security during a child abuse investigation. The information shared included the user's real IP address and connection timestamps. "
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPVanish
You pay them, and for what? To just take their word for it? Sorry but it's impossible to run a reliable network without some level of logging.
Not to mention that there have been documented instances Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), have been misused, leading to concerns about domestic surveillance.
This section allows the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA) to collect communications from non-U.S. citizens located outside the United States, even when those communications are routed through U.S.-based companies, such as cloud providers, internet service providers (ISPs), and tech companies.
At that point do you think you'll get some form of compensation from the VPN provider?
I...what?
How am I paying for another person's ISP when I'm mooching off of their network to pirate from?
Okay, so the two examples you've provided about those VPN services, have nothing to do at all about piracy. One is about cyberstalking and the other was about a child abuse investigation. Those are arguably more serious than piracy in comparison.
The fuck are you on?
Look up how routing and VPNs and NAT work, then you may understand. VPNs existed in the business world long before consumers started becoming aware of them as "this lets me watch netflix in country X and pirate shit!" services.
You're missing the point. The point is that the "protection" doesn't necessarily work, regardless of what you're using it for, which undermines the purpose.
If you are paying for something and you ultimately get busted and in financial trouble for using a service that says they're going to shield you from this stuff, you don't think you should get compensation? They aren't delivering their end of the bargain.
I'm not defending their argument but they're saying that a VPN is like paying for a second ISP to hide traffic from the first not that you're paying for someone else's ISP like the seeder of a torrent.