Noble Realms — Taking down websites

Re: Taking down websites

null@example.com (visavis) — Sat, 28 Jul 2007 06:12:46 +0000

Hey Montalk, thanks for the advice, yea it is always pretty much a matter of time when you have copyrighted material in the public domain I guess. I'm just surprised about a) compaints going to the hosting provider before the site admin, and b) the hosting provider taking suspending the site based on 1 complaint and not returning correspondence for a week. Ah well, back to the drawing board, for now...

Re: Taking down websites

null@example.com (montalk) — Thu, 19 Jul 2007 05:51:59 +0000

Sucks about what happened, Visavis, but it was only a matter of time. I'm not familiar with any, but lunarpages.com for instance at least gives you a 24 hour notice to remove all copyrighted material before account suspension. So if you do that and respond back saying the problem has been resolved, nothing happens. But consider it inevitable that public sites having copyrighted material, and even private sites if the hosting company does a server audit, will sooner or later run into trouble. Especially nowadays. Torrents and anonymous file uploading services are somewhat safer alternatives too. Foreign servers are another possibility.

Re: Taking down websites

null@example.com (visavis) — Thu, 19 Jul 2007 03:05:59 +0000

Could anyone recommend a good webhost which supports alternative content and who does not pedantically crap on their customers?

Re: Taking down websites

null@example.com (visavis) — Tue, 17 Jul 2007 18:09:19 +0000

Yesterday my ISP, ipowerweb.com, took down one of my sites, www.expositus.net. It was hosting various (about 30 or so) alternative links, videos and ebooks. The reason they stated, is that they received a (read: one) complaint that I had copyrighted material on the site. They then took it down without contacting me first to attempt to resolve the issue! They only emailed me after they suspended service. They have not yet replied to my email of inquiry yet, and it's been 19 hours so far.

Furthermore, in their email they did not say either a)what material the complaint was referring to; nor b) who the complaint was from. I have an email address on my site, but I guess that is too friendly a way to ask to removed something from one's site.

Re: Taking down websites

null@example.com (b3li3v3) — Tue, 17 Jul 2007 16:43:02 +0000

henster wrote:

they're keeping close tabs allright. I've got an idea. Yes, these truthful sites will eventually all be gone, so maybe we could create an email list where anyone can post and all members recieve it, if they want. there's got to be a way to keep this forum going. the fate of humanity might depend on it. in this brave new world, we're running out of options.
of course, they could censor and ban all of our "hate mail" traffic, or ban each of us from the web altogether. scary and scarier. seriously, there should be a failsafe, even if it means creating alter ego websites that change names weekly. maybe we'll have to snail mail but it's worth it.

.........fear should be left behind. Remember, this is a game, people. Play nonchalantly, play with imagination, and play with the eventual intention of stepping out of the game and going to a higher density. I've written on my ceiling this message, to remind me every morning of what I'm really doing - "You're not done waking up! Stop playing this silly game and go get some sunlight. Fnord!". Does that sound right?

Re: Taking down websites

null@example.com (henster) — Fri, 13 Jul 2007 03:09:48 +0000

they're keeping close tabs allright. I've got an idea. Yes, these truthful sites will eventually all be gone, so maybe we could create an email list where anyone can post and all members recieve it, if they want. there's got to be a way to keep this forum going. the fate of humanity might depend on it. in this brave new world, we're running out of options.

of course, they could censor and ban all of our "hate mail" traffic, or ban each of us from the web altogether. scary and scarier. seriously, there should be a failsafe, even if it means creating alter ego websites that change names weekly. maybe we'll have to snail mail but it's worth it.

Re: Taking down websites

null@example.com (henster) — Fri, 13 Jul 2007 02:49:43 +0000

Also, in response to Lyra, I agree it's time for some type of "action", but i'm having a hard enough time everyday with the powers that be that I don't think we need to instigate this sort of thing. I'm just trying to get by, but knowing what I know, I appear to be a "rebel" . I saw two full riot gear NYPD officers today "guarding" a subway entrance at six p.m. in apparent response to the Britain and Scotland "terrorism recently. I changed my path, but i feel like a wimp for doing so.

Re: Taking down websites

null@example.com (henster) — Fri, 13 Jul 2007 02:30:10 +0000

I've been looking up govt. corruption (various sites) and here and there a real juicy tidbit will have been removed, saying "page cannot be displayed or server failed" or some other lie. I'm getting infowars.com perfectly fine, but certain pages have been removed. I'ts starting to look a lot like 1984.

Re: Taking down websites

null@example.com (Sowelu) — Fri, 07 Oct 2005 17:25:40 +0000

Don't know if this is part of the trouble, but I thought I'd post it here.
______________________________________________________________________________

Network feud leads to Net blackout
By John Borland
Staff Writer, CNET News.com
Published: October 5, 2005, 5:00 PM PDT
Two major Internet backbone companies are feuding, potentially cutting off significant swaths of the Internet for some of each other's customers.
On Wednesday, network company Level 3 Communications cut off its direct "peering" connections to another big network company called Cogent Communications. That technical action means that some customers on each company's network now will find it impossible, or slower, to get to Web sites on the other company's network.
William Steele, a senior network engineer for Syncro Services, said his company noticed the problem Wednesday morning.
"There are some people I can't send an e-mail to," Steele said. "At home, I have Road Runner as an ISP, and wasn't even able to remotely connect in order to manage our servers."
"Peering" arrangements are maintained by network companies that agree to connect their networks directly together to exchange traffic more efficiently. When the companies are of roughly equal size, money rarely exchanges hands.
Level 3 contends that its arrangement with Cogent is no longer financially viable, since it is larger than the other company. It has asked Cogent to seek other arrangements, possibly including paying for the traffic exchange, a Level 3 representative said.
Cogent CEO Dave Schaeffer contested that claim, saying that its network is at least as big as Level 3's, and that it makes no sense to pay for the connection. Cogent is offering any Level 3 user who can't get to Cogent sites free Internet service for a year, in an attempt to attract its rival's customers.
"Our goal is to have this problem go away, whether through Level 3 reconsidering or their customers coming to us," Schaeffer said.
The Level 3 representative said the company was unlikely to reconsider its position, however.
The problem is likely to affect only a small number of each company's customers. Many network company customers have several connections to the Internet and can use an alternate connection to reach a site that might otherwise be blocked.
A similar Net blackout happened in 2001, when Cable & Wireless and PSINet were embroiled in a billing dispute.

Re: Taking down websites

null@example.com (Marcus) — Fri, 07 Oct 2005 17:06:50 +0000

Thanks for checking. Least I know it's not just me...

Re: Taking down websites

null@example.com (lyra) — Fri, 07 Oct 2005 16:54:50 +0000

Marcus wrote:

Anyone else having trouble with www.davidicke.com ?

I just tried. Yup.

Re: Taking down websites

null@example.com (Marcus) — Fri, 07 Oct 2005 16:42:03 +0000

Anyone else having trouble with www.davidicke.com ?

Re: Taking down websites

null@example.com (E3mpirical1) — Fri, 07 Oct 2005 16:30:20 +0000

Still not working for me

Re: Taking down websites

null@example.com (morningsun76) — Fri, 07 Oct 2005 05:02:28 +0000

Yes, it's working again. I'm glad that we're not "there" yet, though it's possible this was a "testing the waters" exercise. I'd be interested to know how many calls Time Warner got on this and if the customer response to this situation might have some bearing on any possible future plans to block troublesome websites. I'm also not convinced that this was just a technical snafu "outside their network" as TW claims. If that was the case then we should have seen reports of more other troubles as well.

Re: Taking down websites

null@example.com (Jedi) — Fri, 07 Oct 2005 03:52:38 +0000

morningsun76 wrote:

Very good points, lyra.
I just called in to Time Warner again and they're still claiming it's a network issue and that many people and websites are affected. I asked him if he had a list of websites that were not accessible and he said no, but one example he knew was http://www.photobucket.com. This site doesn't come up for me. Can someone who's using Time Warner check and see if that's a valid site?

Comes up for me with Time Warner

Edit: infowars is working again!