You also suggest that discussing features such as IP address hiding is illegal.
It is my understanding that this is a fundamental feature of the technology. If I want to connect two private office networks offices together over the Internet using a VPN that private IP routing will be quite hidden by the encrypted VPN tunnel.
You are also suggesting that P2P over a VPN is illegal.
It isn’t. These days just about anyone can create huge media files. It is easy to accumulate large amounts of material and P2P is a useful and efficient technique for sharing large files amongst those who need to use them in creating original material. Combining that with a VPN to create a private network over the Internet allows media professionals to work together on projects.
There are a great many ways in which VPNs can be used legally. VPN service providers address this market by adding features. Many of the features, I am sure, only make sense to customers who have a particular set of circumstances.
Censoring discussion on the basis of ill-informed guesswork about whether one feature or another provided by a VPN service provider may or may not be used for illegal purposes in some unspecified jurisdiction seems an absurd position to take.
Router based VPNs look very interesting, are we allowed to discuss the sort of features they provide?
It’s not illegal, but it is a topic that you are not permitted to discuss here. This is because IP hiding has often been used in the past as a way to evade bans and otherwise cause trouble on message boards. This rule has been in place since at least 2000 (before I got here).
In the past, just accessing the SDMB via some sort of IP hiding method (VPN, proxy, or whatever) was grounds for banning. That rule is no longer enforced.
True, which kinda sets up some conflicting rules here. In general, you are allowed to discuss VPNs, but you are not allowed to discuss IP hiding. I have interpreted that as allowing VPN discussions in general as long as they aren’t related to trolling, ban evasion, and other problematic uses.
I am not suggesting it is illegal. I am stating that P2P is a forbidden topic here. It even specifically says so in the rules. You may not discuss P2P, even legal uses of it. You may not discuss P2P software.
Torrent software has legal uses, but you are not permitted to discuss torrent software at all. Somewhere in the rules or registration agreement, torrent software used to be specifically called out as being forbidden. That section has been written to be more generic and all-encompassing of anything that can be used for P2P file sharing.
I’m sure it seems absurd if you believe that VPNs are predominantly used for legitimate purposes, as most of the users of the SDMB use them. If you actually understand how VPN use has shifted in recent years, it’s not so absurd.
At one point, illegal file sharing accounted for roughly a third of all internet traffic. I don’t know exactly what the number is now, but I do know it decreased significantly due to the popularity of Netflix, but is now increasing again as other networks are creating more content that can only be accessed through their services. Basically, a lot of folks are paying for one online service (whether it is Netflix or Hulu or Amazon or whatever) then torrenting the other stuff that they want to watch, which is making the file sharing traffic increase again.
In contrast, folks like you and me who only use VPNs for legitimate purposes are a very small minority.
A discussion of the features would be fine. A discussion about how to use these features to prevent yourself from getting a copyright notice from your ISP would be forbidden. Basically, avoid the potential P2P use of it and other improper uses like ban evasion, trolling, etc. and you’ll be fine.
And for the THIRD time, take the discussion about the moderation to ATMB if anyone want to discuss it further. This hijack is burying the original topic of this thread. I would hate to have to hand out warnings for failure to follow moderator instructions in this thread.
And the response of the person in question, his opening long long comment is indeed that.
ijtihad… bab al ijtihad maghlouq.
.
This keeps being asserted but without any backing (and so mixes comment on the subject with the forbidden subject of how the information is used in application).
I know of the VPN subject only from how it come to me in the professional world where the usage of the VPN has become something of the very lively subject due to the internet security traveling concerns, the extensive usages of the Own Devices particularly the mobile and the now usage of the outside providers cloud solutions - and now the Windows 10 system with its visible integration of VPN options - and the extensive media company owned press like New York Times, VPN and adblockers for protection advice article and for Internet Privacy VPNs incomplete protection in the end of the US net neutrality world. It is very strange and factually chilling to see assertions.
Even the P2P as Filmstar has cited for the large scale data exchange although I do not have the direct experience I have seen indeed the internal discussion in my global financial institution world for usage in some project cases, but I do not have the technical capacity to understand.
Since from the point of view of this thread there is in fact the factual information, I believe you should support with the data your continued assertions around the actual VPN usage is minority legitimate (by what metric? the users? the bytes?) as this is a strongly asserted factual observation on a supposed fact (maybe it is true, although it seems odd as the basis to assert when it is seen in the media of the very companies in media the discussion of this subject and promotion for security … ).
This is about the factual assertions strongly made and the response to the factual assertion is not hijacking of the subject of the thread and it should not be suppressed by other excuses with the hat on, hat off game, particularly when repeated strongly.
VPNs are very commonly used for business and professional purposes. They are a mainstream feature. I know this because I have spent a good deal of my career designing networks. Many people use them on a daily basis and may not be aware that they do so because they are simply part of the network infrastructure provided by business.
Just because some people use them to bypass the arcane rules developed by media companies to segment the market for whatever ‘entertainment’ they are peddling because of their complicated copyright deals. That is quite a separate issue and is of no interest to me and I do not see why it should interfere with the discussion.
I fundamentally disagree with these restrictions and I will look for ‘the straight dope’ regarding VPN services on a forum that does not have these sanctimonious rules.
Thank you for your help making the position clear.
Apologies to the OP, but since certain thread participants refuse to be steered back to the actual topic of this thread and continue this hijack (which should be in ATMB) to the point of completely burying the topic of the OP, this thread is closed.
Anyone who wants to discuss the rules is free to do so in ATMB.
