With this official blocking of Pirate Bay, Denmark joins the club of Kuwait and China which are the only other countries that has banned this page.
I will not reflect on here whether it is right or not to use a page like this... but instead reflect on the notion of state's control over the internet. Is it OK for states to block the internet so that its citizens cannot use certain web pages?
In the current world it is not a new event that countries (like North Korea, China and Iran) blocks or bans certain parts of the internet. Not long ago Egypt also joined the club. But can we tolerate that these things happen in Western, democratic and modern states?
The reason for the Danish judgment on Pirate Bay was that it was a copyright infringment. But if this is the case isn't a judgment like this a glide towards more blocking? What will be next? When does a webpage entail enough copyright infringment material to be shut down? 40 %? 60 %? When is it OK to limit people's and webpage's right to free speech and free press? And what about people's right to freedom of information?
In the USA not long ago it was published by Wikileaks that the USA, a country that claims to be the most 'free' in the world, has made sure that Silicon Valley companies make 'back doors' in their software, so that the government have the option to spionage in what people write, comment on or publish online.
Is this democratic????
Or do we have to redifine the way we look upon the internet to make sure that democracy can keep existing?
I personally think that IF states cannot keep up with the way that their citizens use the internet and their 'new way' of getting access to informations and sources where they can speak or publish things freely (fx discussions fora... but also pirate bay!) - THEN there is something wrong.
We need more discussions on this subject, more education, more transparency....
The fact that Danish telecommunication providers has shut down access to Pirate Bay does not mean anything in practise, though. According to the Danish group of internet pirates (piratgruppen.org) it takes only 30 seconds to get around this 'block' and then access the page and download music, movies etc. Also people who wish to use Pirate Bay have a 1000 other options of web pages that offers downloading or streaming of movies and music more or less illegally (fx Spotify, grooveshark, isohunt ... )
Right now it seems that the internet has unlimited possibilities - and that states, even though they try, cannot fully keep up with these developments. But maybe they can - and then we must ask ourselves if we ever learned anything from George Owell's 1984?
Ore is 'BIGBROTHER' the answer in order to keep the citizens on a 'straight path'?
I guess the power bloc will allow only activities from which it can benefit (money, information, surveillance).
SvarSletI think the problem with banning access to internet sites is not black and white at all. Obviouslly I disagree with the censorship China, Iran or North Corea practice upon their citizens and obviouslly I disagree with some "big brother" reading my mail etc.
SvarSletBut then - I wouldn't disagree with monitoring forums with the intention to catch pedophiles or terrorists... and as I write this I realise how easy it is to brandmark someone (ungilty of any crime) and prosecude him/her. ...
So maybe the question of banning isn't the question we need to anwser at all. Maybe we need to focus on what is it, that we should not tolerate in any way and who has the right to decide that?
I think in our fear of crime and terrorism, we have gone to far. Maybe the solution lies in more education about internet traps (to avoid online crime and protect youngsters from pedophiles) and more flexible and easilly accesible (and of course cheaper) movie and music distribution.