It's not that kind of ISP
Because, sadly, it's not that kind of world.
A new ISP has withdrawn its "global mode" that allowed punters to evade country-based blocking of web content - just 48 hours after switching on the service. FYX launched just two days ago, telling New Zealand residents that they can now access geo-blocked internet services. However, it informed customers today that "there are …
GeoIP is also used for target advertisments. I live in the Netherlands, yet do not speak Dutch. There are advertisments all over my screen (perhaps more so than most countries given the Dutchmens' love of trading) and don't have a clue what is being offered. I think GeoIP is great :D I shall be saddened when they cotton on to this. The downside is that many gmail settings are forced into Dutch, so I cannot use these, which in turn means I stopped using Gmail, which turned out to be a good thing :D
Yup, spot on. The real fucktards in this area are MS with their "Live" services. You can set the language, but it has a habit of reverting to its geo-derived default at the drop of a hat.
Speaking as an expat, I'd like to find the person responsible for IP geolocation and remove his bollocks with a blowtorch.
Remember boys and girls that globalisation is for the big companies to take advantage of, not for the rest of us. It is, apparently, OK for the big boys to buy where things are cheap and then sell at different prices according to what the market can bear and so maximise their profits. They don't like it one little bit if we buy where it is cheap.
The use of GEOIP is much the same.
I feel that the use of GeoIP is fairly distasteful in most situations, and strikes me as limiting peoples choice solely for the economic gain of a few companies.
What would be a good way to effectively protest against GeoIPs? I imagine Boycotting would not be so effective, but is there grounds to right letters of complain to those who use it?
For example, would UK taxpayers be justified in writing to the BBC to ask them to allow users from around the world access iPlayer?
-Paris, cause there's no Geo IP filter there (sorry, can't help myself)
Use IPV6. The minimum allocation is a /64 where you get 2**64 addresses. You can then sell the 2**64 - 256 or so you don't need, so long as you can route the traffic to the ones you sell. There will be so many people doing this that big media won't be able to keep track of who is doing it any more and it will be cheap as chips.
i suspect because they are located in countries where the "masters of the universe" aren't allowed complete dominion over the interwebs and your connection is encrypted to their server so when you say "connect me to country Y" it is a dutchmen or swede that is doing the talking and not a lowly native of country X. Fortress Linux is building one right now with heavy encryption and user protections for instance and they are located in the nederlands where their domestic laws and international treaties differ greatly from country X
No, it isn't that. The providers have their servers located in places like the UK (handy for BBC iplayer) and the USA.
I suspect the real reason is that this NZ crowd were to explicit about what they were doing and if they had kept it on the down-low they'd have got away with it.
1) Arbitrary feature R is added to arbitrary technology, which has similar features A through Z
2) Media industry realizes that feature R can be used to deny access to its product to large areas of the world for no apparent reason; has sexual event in trousers
3) ISP offers service which doesn't include feature R
...since when did it become illegal to not offer feature R, one among many in an arbitrary technology, just because the media industry happens to like it? Is there some universal law now that everyone is required to keep providing any feature / protocol / capability that I, as a business, find useful for whatever purpose? That would be quite useful!
Put another way - suppose that geolocation was accurate down to your home address. Now suppose that media companies wanted to deny access to content to, say, people in poor neighborhoods (that seems like the kind of thing they might do). Is it now illegal for your ISP to allow you to turn off the 'broadcast my personal information to everyone' feature?
Normal Internet routing overloads location information in IP address assigned by IANA->RIR->ISP->End User. So when an ISP offers a geoloc evading service they're creating a new feature which is not part of the basic technology to trick the content provider about the country the use is in.
It would be very easy for the content providers to clamp down on this by denying access from all IP ranges used for tunneling/vpn services.
Be that as it may, whether it's not implementing a feature or end-running it, geolocation is not and was not intended to be a form of content protection. Just because it -can- be used that way does not suddenly make it illegal to not use, any more than it would suddenly be illegal to turn off the GPS in your phone if I found a way to use -that- for content protection.
Which, of course, drills right down to the fundamental absurdity of anto+circumvention laws in general.
It's illegal to climb a wall to steal someone's house. It's not illegal to own a ladder.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019