http://blog.wired.com/monkeybites/2006/12/the_pirate_bay_.htmlby Michael Calore
Swedish website The Pirate Bay (TPB) has decided to block the Swedish ISP Perspektiv Broadband’s users from accessing the TPB’s website. The move comes in response to ISP Perspektiv’s decision to block its users from accessing the Russian website, allofmp3.com.
One interesting thing to note is that the allofmp3 is legal under Swedish law. There is no legal reason for Perspektiv to block traffic to allofmp3, rather the broadband provider elected to do so, according the The Pirate Bay, after meeting with Swedish and Danish anti-piracy organizations.
The Pirate Bay claims that Perspektiv Bredband “clearly states in their press release that it is a moral and not legal standpoint.” I can’t read Swedish, so I can’t confirm that Perspektiv did in fact say that, but either way, given that allofmp3.com is not illegal in Sweden, Perspektiv’s move to block the site is a bit odd at the least.
For some background on the Pirate Bay see Quinn Norton’s recent coverage for Wired.com.
Many might be tempted to dismiss the whole thing as irrelevant given the questionable legality of TPB in the U.S., but what’s interesting about this story is not necessarily the isolated case, but the larger implications.
What happens when your favorite site blocks you from accessing it because the ISP that provides your internet connection does something your favorite site objects to?
I’m not suggesting that ISP’s have the right to block content, but it does happen. And this is hardly the first time a site has blocked incoming users, Google blocks all kinds of traffic coming from China as part of its partnership with the Chinese government.
Protest and protest actions like boycotting a product or company have a long history in the United States, but I’m not sure that such actions transfer well to the internet.
For instance, if consumers are unhappy with Acme widgets they can boycott Acme widgets, tell all their friends to boycott Acme Widgets and Acme Widgets may choose to change their policies based on lost revenue.
But even in the midst of such a boycott, if you did not agree with the boycott you can still go to Acme Widget and buy whatever you want. In other words, the consumer is not directly effected.
However in this case the consumer is caught in the middle. Now not only can Perspektiv Broadband users not access allofmp3, but now they can’t access TPB either. The end result could be: enough Perspektiv users complain and company gets rid of its blocking software. But even if the outcome does go the way TPB seems to want it to, the burden of boycott is not on Perspektiv directly, but rather its customer base, the individual user.
It’s easy to understand the Pirate Bay’s position, that ISPs should not determine what sites users can view (and again, please keep in mind that allofmp3.com is legal under Swedish copyright law), but the decision to target the users of an ISP rather than the ISP directly seems unwise.
While I agree that Perspektiv’s site ban is ultimately a far more chilling threat to concepts like net neutrality, I also hope that we aren’t headed toward a future where individual sites begin blocking users as an indirect way of sending a message to abusive companies.
