• always_gone@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Do tld providers ignore this or why isn’t it getting blocked there too? Not just regarding this particular case

      • P1r4nha@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yup, they are trying to establish easy precedence. Quad9 has not enough funds to battle the suit, even tough they are probably the least guilty party.

        Targeting DNS services is an interesting strategy, but if you know how the technology works it’s also a silly one. Attacking those who only translate your request to access a site hosting copy righted content instead of the operator or host… or users for that matter.

        • ISOmorph@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          but if you know how the technology works

          That’s like what, 2% of online users globally? Let’s say pirates are marginally more tech savvy, so maybe 10% of pirates? If their plan works and they can get google to block access to all sorts of streaming and torrenting sites, that will massively reduce the numbers of people accessing illegal content.

          • Monkey With A Shell@lemmy.socdojo.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            https://www.lumendatabase.org/

            Targeting DNS and killing traffic to an entire site is easier than the constant drumbeat of sending out takedowns for specific links to everyone. Way over the top, and of course they wouldn’t try it against a big opponent. Would love to see them make a case that YouTube should be globally DNS blocked, after all look at all the infringing videos and music that’s on there daily.

  • deejay4am@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    The defendant is liable as a perpetrator because it makes its DNS resolver available to Internet users and, through this, it refers to the canna.to service with the infringing download offers relating to the music album in dispute,” the Court wrote.

    Scary, since this could essentially establish a precedent that anyone who hosts DNS must concede to these types of demands. That includes Google, Meta, Verizon, CloudFlare, and every ISP on the planet. As well as the root servers.

    Fuck that noise.