Bypassing IP bans is now a violation of U.S. Law.

[Raptorblaze]

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2...ion-of-us-law/

tl;dr if you try to bypass an IP ban, you've violated the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) and are therefore liable for criminal and/or civil charges.

[discuss]

[Cryptonic]

will you be reporting violators?
also, wat aboot canadian users?

[SuperJack]

I'm English, does it matter to me?

[Raptorblaze]

will you be reporting violators?
also, wat aboot canadian users?

Not unless circumstances warrant it (i.e. attacking the site). As for Canadians, it would not be the first time the U.S. has extradited someone for violations of the CFFA.

[Raptorblaze]

I'm English, does it matter to me?

Unless you're IP banned from a site or service this doesn't affect you at all lol.

[Admiral]

So I have roughly 3 months left to dodge IP bans.

[discuss]

Edit: Or make sure my shit is dynamic.

[Helz]

From reading a bit it has to be proven as intentional. Sounds like a pretty big loophole to me.

-Edit

I like the direction its moving in though. Helps to manage some people that find it hilarious to be a dick online.

[ypmagic]

Like scamming little assholes.

[Dagaen]

Blocking IPs is really weak nowadays. Screw proxy, we have Tor and onion networks, if you know how to use it's basically untrackable. Sure, it can be used for evil purposes (I know a story when one guy using Tor was interrogated by the police because one of other users was using his computer to access some kind of child porn site), but you can say it about anything.

I use IP change only for accessing some sites, helping me download stuff from hosting sites (sharing IP with many people made rapishare my least favourite site) and sometimes help friends with some online competition by voting multiple times. And I don't see myself as a criminal.

Bypassing IP block shoudn't be considered as criminal offence. If you using it for evil I bet there are other paragraphs law enforcers can use against you.

[Raptorblaze]

The accessing website which block certain IPs part is a violation of the CFFA, basically circumventing any kind of technological barrier to your access is a violation of this section. Doesn't matter if the IP block is weak.

Also we have all the Tor exit nodes banned by default, may not get all of them but it blocked the vast majority.

[HerrZynisch]

That is why you just use a VPN, all around safer for those who are privacy freaks.

[Apocist]

Implementing the law is a not exactly a great start to fixing internet crimes. Its great and all that they are cracking down and protecting us, but limiting our abilities in what we are able to do really sucks. They have went an easy route and could have enforced website Tos' or something being as the computer is the owner's property, but instead restricts our freedoms.

[Raptorblaze]

Implementing the law is a not exactly a great start to fixing internet crimes. Its great and all that they are cracking down and protecting us, but limiting our abilities in what we are able to do really sucks. They have went an easy route and could have enforced website Tos' or something being as the computer is the owner's property, but instead restricts our freedoms.

technically agreements can be voided solely for the "we can change this at any time without notifying you" clause.

[Apocist]

technically agreements can be voided solely for the "we can change this at any time without notifying you" clause.

So are you saying any TOS that contains the statement can be voided? If so, so many things may be acplished such as money refunds, breaking rules, ect.

[Raptorblaze]

So are you saying any TOS that contains the statement can be voided? If so, so many things may be acplished such as money refunds, breaking rules, ect.

It can often get thrown out in a court of law because of that clause. You'd have to get to a court of law first though.

[Dagaen]

Another thing is that Internet is not US property (although NSA seems to disagree), so even when you bypass IP what they are going to do to someone in other country? So far Poland doesn't have oil fields (thank God!), so I feel quite safe:P

[Nick]

If the owner chased you out, don't you dare sneak back in!

[Mateo]

so even when you bypass IP what they are going to do to someone in other country?

please re-read this thread, your question has already been answered

[Apocist]

please re-read this thread, your question has already been answered

The answer isn't exactly complete either. The US can request a case against the violator from the Canadian government. But under normal circumstances a government won't do anything if the citizen isn't breaking any of their own laws. Look at Pirate Bay in Switzerland, nobody can legally touch them due to their own government's laws regarding copyright.

[Apocist]

Now, I haven't read the details of this new law myself; But under what definition is the act of 'bypassing technological barriers by using different IP addresses' is the law described with?

Lets say for instance, your an anonymous freak.
You never what anyone to know about you or your information.
You are protecting your privacy.

So let's say at all times, you always use a different IP or changing IP scheme.

Is this violating the law? How so? Is it right? Is it fair?

[Raptorblaze]

The answer isn't exactly complete either. The US can request a case against the violator from the Canadian government. But under normal circumstances a government won't do anything if the citizen isn't breaking any of their own laws. Look at Pirate Bay in Switzerland, nobody can legally touch them due to their own government's laws regarding copyright.

Reading the treaty, you'd probably be safe in canada:

Spoiler : Reasons you can be extradited between the U.S. and Canada :

1. Murder; assault with intent to commit murder.

2. Manslaughter.

3. Wounding; maiming; or assault occasioning bodily harm.

4. Unlawful throwing or application of any corrosive substances at or upon the person of another.

5. Rape; indecent assault.

6. Unlawful sexual acts with or upon children under the age specified by the laws of both the requesting and requested States.

7. Willful non-support or willful abandonment of a minor when such minor is or is likely to be injured or his life is or is likely to be endangered.

8. Kidnapping; child stealing; abduction; false imprisonment.

9. Robbery; assault with intent to steal.

10. Burglary; housebreaking.

11. Larceny, theft or embezzlement.

12. Obtaining property, money or valuable securities by false pretenses or by threat of force or by defrauding the public or any person by deceit or falsehood or other fraudulent means, whether such deceit or falsehood or any fraudulent means would or would not amount to a false pretense.

13. Bribery, including soliciting, offering and accepting.

14. Extortion.

15. Receiving any money, valuable securities or other property knowing the same to have been unlawfully obtained.

16. Fraud by a banker, agent, or by a director or officer of any company.

17. Offenses against the laws relating to counterfeiting or forgery.

18. Perjury in any proceeding whatsoever.

19. Making a false affidavit or statutory declaration for any extrajudicial purpose.

20. Arson.

21. Any act done with intent to endanger the safety of any person travelling upon a railway, or in any aircraft or vessel or other means of transportation.

22. Piracy, by statute or by law of nations; mutiny or revolt on board a vessel against the authority of the captain or commander of such vessel.

23. Any unlawful seizure or exercise of control of an aircraft, by force or violence or threat of force or violence, or by any other form of intimida*tion, on board such aircraft.

24. Willful injury to property.

25. Offenses against the bankruptcy laws.

26. Offenses against the laws relating to the traffic in, production, manufac*ture, or importation of narcotic drugs, Cannabis sativa L., hallucinogenic drugs, amphetamines, barbiturates, cocaine and its derivatives.

27. Use of the mails or other means of communication in connection with schemes devised or intended to deceive or defraud the public or for the purpose of obtaining money or property by false pretenses.

28. Offenses against federal laws relating to the sale or purchase of securities.

29. Making or having in possession any explosive substance with intent to endanger life, or to cause severe damage to property.

30. Obstructing the course of justice in a judicial proceeding, existing or proposed, by:

a) dissuading or attempting to dissuade a person by threats, bribes, or other corrupt means from giving evidence;

b) influencing or attempting to influence by threat, bribes, or other corrupt means a person in his conduct as a juror; or

c) accepting a bribe or other corrupt consideration to abstain from giving evidence or to do or to refrain from doing anything as a juror.

However the United Kingdom has extradited people to the U.S. for violations of the CFFA in the past. It all depends where you are. In this case, the server is based in the USA so american law applies to it's access.

Also to clear something up: this was a court ruling, not a new law. It was also not the supreme court, so it's not exactly final.

[Mateo]

actually it was; anyone that violates US law can face rendition if they are a citizen of a country that has an extradition treaty with the US. they just usually dont bother with it. switzerland has a treaty but they have a history of doing their own thing.

and no thats not violating the law because the purpose is not to avoid a ban

[Raptorblaze]

Spoiler : Full Text of the CFFA :

(a) Whoever—
(1) having knowingly accessed a computer without authorization or exceeding authorized access, and by means of such conduct having obtained information that has been determined by the United States Government pursuant to an Executive order or statute to require protection against unauthorized disclosure for reasons of national defense or foreign relations, or any restricted data, as defined in paragraph y. of section 11 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, with reason to believe that such information so obtained could be used to the injury of the United States, or to the advantage of any foreign nation willfully communicates, delivers, transmits, or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted, or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it;
(2) intentionally accesses a computer without authorization or exceeds authorized access, and thereby obtains—
(A) information contained in a financial record of a financial institution, or of a card issuer as defined in section 1602 (n) [1] of title 15, or contained in a file of a consumer reporting agency on a consumer, as such terms are defined in the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681 et seq.);
(B) information from any department or agency of the United States; or
(C) information from any protected computer;
(3) intentionally, without authorization to access any nonpublic computer of a department or agency of the United States, accesses such a computer of that department or agency that is exclusively for the use of the Government of the United States or, in the case of a computer not exclusively for such use, is used by or for the Government of the United States and such conduct affects that use by or for the Government of the United States;
(4) knowingly and with intent to defraud, accesses a protected computer without authorization, or exceeds authorized access, and by means of such conduct furthers the intended fraud and obtains anything of value, unless the object of the fraud and the thing obtained consists only of the use of the computer and the value of such use is not more than $5,000 in any 1-year period;
(5)
(A) knowingly causes the transmission of a program, information, code, or command, and as a result of such conduct, intentionally causes damage without authorization, to a protected computer;
(B) intentionally accesses a protected computer without authorization, and as a result of such conduct, recklessly causes damage; or
(C) intentionally accesses a protected computer without authorization, and as a result of such conduct, causes damage and loss. [2]
(6) knowingly and with intent to defraud traffics (as defined in section 1029) in any password or similar information through which a computer may be accessed without authorization, if—
(A) such trafficking affects interstate or foreign commerce; or
(B) such computer is used by or for the Government of the United States; [3]
(7) with intent to extort from any person any money or other thing of value, transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication containing any—
(A) threat to cause damage to a protected computer;
(B) threat to obtain information from a protected computer without authorization or in excess of authorization or to impair the confidentiality of information obtained from a protected computer without authorization or by exceeding authorized access; or
(C) demand or request for money or other thing of value in relation to damage to a protected computer, where such damage was caused to facilitate the extortion;
shall be punished as provided in subsection (c) of this section.
(b) Whoever conspires to commit or attempts to commit an offense under subsection (a) of this section shall be punished as provided in subsection (c) of this section.
(c) The punishment for an offense under subsection (a) or (b) of this section is—
(1)
(A) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than ten years, or both, in the case of an offense under subsection (a)(1) of this section which does not occur after a conviction for another offense under this section, or an attempt to commit an offense punishable under this subparagraph; and
(B) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than twenty years, or both, in the case of an offense under subsection (a)(1) of this section which occurs after a conviction for another offense under this section, or an attempt to commit an offense punishable under this subparagraph;
(2)
(A) except as provided in subparagraph (B), a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than one year, or both, in the case of an offense under subsection (a)(2), (a)(3), or (a)(6) of this section which does not occur after a conviction for another offense under this section, or an attempt to commit an offense punishable under this subparagraph;
(B) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than 5 years, or both, in the case of an offense under subsection (a)(2), or an attempt to commit an offense punishable under this subparagraph, if—
(i) the offense was committed for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain;
(ii) the offense was committed in furtherance of any criminal or tortious act in violation of the Constitution or laws of the United States or of any State; or
(iii) the value of the information obtained exceeds $5,000; and
(C) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than ten years, or both, in the case of an offense under subsection (a)(2), (a)(3) or (a)(6) of this section which occurs after a conviction for another offense under this section, or an attempt to commit an offense punishable under this subparagraph;
(3)
(A) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than five years, or both, in the case of an offense under subsection (a)(4) or (a)(7) of this section which does not occur after a conviction for another offense under this section, or an attempt to commit an offense punishable under this subparagraph; and
(B) a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than ten years, or both, in the case of an offense under subsection (a)(4), [4] or (a)(7) of this section which occurs after a conviction for another offense under this section, or an attempt to commit an offense punishable under this subparagraph;
(4)
(A) except as provided in subparagraphs (E) and (F), a fine under this title, imprisonment for not more than 5 years, or both, in the case of—
(i) an offense under subsection (a)(5)(B), which does not occur after a conviction for another offense under this section, if the offense caused (or, in the case of an attempted offense, would, if completed, have caused)—
(I) loss to 1 or more persons during any 1-year period (and, for purposes of an investigation, prosecution, or other proceeding brought by the United States only, loss resulting from a related course of conduct affecting 1 or more other protected computers) aggregating at least $5,000 in value;
(II) the modification or impairment, or potential modification or impairment, of the medical examination, diagnosis, treatment, or care of 1 or more individuals;
(III) physical injury to any person;
(IV) a threat to public health or safety;
(V) damage affecting a computer used by or for an entity of the United States Government in furtherance of the administration of justice, national defense, or national security; or
(VI) damage affecting 10 or more protected computers during any 1-year period; or
(ii) an attempt to commit an offense punishable under this subparagraph;
(B) except as provided in subparagraphs (E) and (F), a fine under this title, imprisonment for not more than 10 years, or both, in the case of—
(i) an offense under subsection (a)(5)(A), which does not occur after a conviction for another offense under this section, if the offense caused (or, in the case of an attempted offense, would, if completed, have caused) a harm provided in subclauses (I) through (VI) of subparagraph (A)(i); or
(ii) an attempt to commit an offense punishable under this subparagraph;
(C) except as provided in subparagraphs (E) and (F), a fine under this title, imprisonment for not more than 20 years, or both, in the case of—
(i) an offense or an attempt to commit an offense under subparagraphs (A) or (B) of subsection (a)(5) that occurs after a conviction for another offense under this section; or
(ii) an attempt to commit an offense punishable under this subparagraph;
(D) a fine under this title, imprisonment for not more than 10 years, or both, in the case of—
(i) an offense or an attempt to commit an offense under subsection (a)(5)(C) that occurs after a conviction for another offense under this section; or
(ii) an attempt to commit an offense punishable under this subparagraph;
(E) if the offender attempts to cause or knowingly or recklessly causes serious bodily injury from conduct in violation of subsection (a)(5)(A), a fine under this title, imprisonment for not more than 20 years, or both;
(F) if the offender attempts to cause or knowingly or recklessly causes death from conduct in violation of subsection (a)(5)(A), a fine under this title, imprisonment for any term of years or for life, or both; or
(G) a fine under this title, imprisonment for not more than 1 year, or both, for—
(i) any other offense under subsection (a)(5); or
(ii) an attempt to commit an offense punishable under this subparagraph.
(d)
(1) The United States Secret Service shall, in addition to any other agency having such authority, have the authority to investigate offenses under this section.
(2) The Federal Bureau of Investigation shall have primary authority to investigate offenses under subsection (a)(1) for any cases involving espionage, foreign counterintelligence, information protected against unauthorized disclosure for reasons of national defense or foreign relations, or Restricted Data (as that term is defined in section 11y of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2014 (y)), except for offenses affecting the duties of the United States Secret Service pursuant to section 3056 (a) of this title.
(3) Such authority shall be exercised in accordance with an agreement which shall be entered into by the Secretary of the Treasury and the Attorney General.
(e) As used in this section—
(1) the term “computer” means an electronic, magnetic, optical, electrochemical, or other high speed data processing device performing logical, arithmetic, or storage functions, and includes any data storage facility or communications facility directly related to or operating in conjunction with such device, but such term does not include an automated typewriter or typesetter, a portable hand held calculator, or other similar device;
(2) the term “protected computer” means a computer—
(A) exclusively for the use of a financial institution or the United States Government, or, in the case of a computer not exclusively for such use, used by or for a financial institution or the United States Government and the conduct constituting the offense affects that use by or for the financial institution or the Government; or
(B) which is used in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce or communication, including a computer located outside the United States that is used in a manner that affects interstate or foreign commerce or communication of the United States;
(3) the term “State” includes the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and any other commonwealth, possession or territory of the United States;
(4) the term “financial institution” means—
(A) an institution, with deposits insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation;
(B) the Federal Reserve or a member of the Federal Reserve including any Federal Reserve Bank;
(C) a credit union with accounts insured by the National Credit Union Administration;
(D) a member of the Federal home loan bank system and any home loan bank;
(E) any institution of the Farm Credit System under the Farm Credit Act of 1971;
(F) a broker-dealer registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to section 15 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
(G) the Securities Investor Protection Corporation;
(H) a branch or agency of a foreign bank (as such terms are defined in paragraphs (1) and (3) of section 1(b) of the International Banking Act of 197; and
(I) an organization operating under section 25 orsection 25(a) [1] of the Federal Reserve Act;
(5) the term “financial record” means information derived from any record held by a financial institution pertaining to a customer’s relationship with the financial institution;
(6) the term “exceeds authorized access” means to access a computer with authorization and to use such access to obtain or alter information in the computer that the accesser is not entitled so to obtain or alter;
(7) the term “department of the United States” means the legislative or judicial branch of the Government or one of the executive departments enumerated in section 101 of title 5;
( the term “damage” means any impairment to the integrity or availability of data, a program, a system, or information;
(9) the term “government entity” includes the Government of the United States, any State or political subdivision of the United States, any foreign country, and any state, province, municipality, or other political subdivision of a foreign country;
(10) the term “conviction” shall include a conviction under the law of any State for a crime punishable by imprisonment for more than 1 year, an element of which is unauthorized access, or exceeding authorized access, to a computer;
(11) the term “loss” means any reasonable cost to any victim, including the cost of responding to an offense, conducting a damage assessment, and restoring the data, program, system, or information to its condition prior to the offense, and any revenue lost, cost incurred, or other consequential damages incurred because of interruption of service; and
(12) the term “person” means any individual, firm, corporation, educational institution, financial institution, governmental entity, or legal or other entity.
(f) This section does not prohibit any lawfully authorized investigative, protective, or intelligence activity of a law enforcement agency of the United States, a State, or a political subdivision of a State, or of an intelligence agency of the United States.
(g) Any person who suffers damage or loss by reason of a violation of this section may maintain a civil action against the violator to obtain compensatory damages and injunctive relief or other equitable relief. A civil action for a violation of this section may be brought only if the conduct involves 1 of the factors set forth in subclauses [5] (I), (II), (III), (IV), or (V) of subsection (c)(4)(A)(i). Damages for a violation involving only conduct described in subsection (c)(4)(A)(i)(I) are limited to economic damages. No action may be brought under this subsection unless such action is begun within 2 years of the date of the act complained of or the date of the discovery of the damage. No action may be brought under this subsection for the negligent design or manufacture of computer hardware, computer software, or firmware.
(h) The Attorney General and the Secretary of the Treasury shall report to the Congress annually, during the first 3 years following the date of the enactment of this subsection, concerning investigations and prosecutions under subsection (a)(5).
(i)
(1) The court, in imposing sentence on any person convicted of a violation of this section, or convicted of conspiracy to violate this section, shall order, in addition to any other sentence imposed and irrespective of any provision of State law, that such person forfeit to the United States—
(A) such person’s interest in any personal property that was used or intended to be used to commit or to facilitate the commission of such violation; and
(B) any property, real or personal, constituting or derived from, any proceeds that such person obtained, directly or indirectly, as a result of such violation.
(2) The criminal forfeiture of property under this subsection, any seizure and disposition thereof, and any judicial proceeding in relation thereto, shall be governed by the provisions of section 413 of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970 (21 U.S.C. 853), except subsection (d) of that section.
(j) For purposes of subsection (i), the following shall be subject to forfeiture to the United States and no property right shall exist in them:
(1) Any personal property used or intended to be used to commit or to facilitate the commission of any violation of this section, or a conspiracy to violate this section.
(2) Any property, real or personal, which constitutes or is derived from proceeds traceable to any violation of this section, or a conspiracy to violate this section [6]

The section in question is section (a)(2)

[Helz]

Implementing the law is a not exactly a great start to fixing internet crimes. Its great and all that they are cracking down and protecting us, but limiting our abilities in what we are able to do really sucks. They have went an easy route and could have enforced website Tos' or something being as the computer is the owner's property, but instead restricts our freedoms.

I do feel this statement. In the effort of protecting freedom and making everyone comfortable we progressively destroy our freedom and replace personal accountability with mandated regulation. 'Its not my fault the kid shot up a school, guns should be illegal'

I do like the idea in this instance as that the power is given to the average joe and not the government in this situation.

Reading the treaty, you'd probably be safe in canada:

Spoiler : Reasons you can be extradited between the U.S. and Canada :

1. Murder; assault with intent to commit murder.

2. Manslaughter.

3. Wounding; maiming; or assault occasioning bodily harm.

4. Unlawful throwing or application of any corrosive substances at or upon the person of another.

5. Rape; indecent assault.

6. Unlawful sexual acts with or upon children under the age specified by the laws of both the requesting and requested States.

7. Willful non-support or willful abandonment of a minor when such minor is or is likely to be injured or his life is or is likely to be endangered.

8. Kidnapping; child stealing; abduction; false imprisonment.

9. Robbery; assault with intent to steal.

10. Burglary; housebreaking.

11. Larceny, theft or embezzlement.

12. Obtaining property, money or valuable securities by false pretenses or by threat of force or by defrauding the public or any person by deceit or falsehood or other fraudulent means, whether such deceit or falsehood or any fraudulent means would or would not amount to a false pretense.

13. Bribery, including soliciting, offering and accepting.

14. Extortion.

15. Receiving any money, valuable securities or other property knowing the same to have been unlawfully obtained.

16. Fraud by a banker, agent, or by a director or officer of any company.

17. Offenses against the laws relating to counterfeiting or forgery.

18. Perjury in any proceeding whatsoever.

19. Making a false affidavit or statutory declaration for any extrajudicial purpose.

20. Arson.

21. Any act done with intent to endanger the safety of any person travelling upon a railway, or in any aircraft or vessel or other means of transportation.

22. Piracy, by statute or by law of nations; mutiny or revolt on board a vessel against the authority of the captain or commander of such vessel.

23. Any unlawful seizure or exercise of control of an aircraft, by force or violence or threat of force or violence, or by any other form of intimida*tion, on board such aircraft.

24. Willful injury to property.

25. Offenses against the bankruptcy laws.

26. Offenses against the laws relating to the traffic in, production, manufac*ture, or importation of narcotic drugs, Cannabis sativa L., hallucinogenic drugs, amphetamines, barbiturates, cocaine and its derivatives.

27. Use of the mails or other means of communication in connection with schemes devised or intended to deceive or defraud the public or for the purpose of obtaining money or property by false pretenses.

28. Offenses against federal laws relating to the sale or purchase of securities.

29. Making or having in possession any explosive substance with intent to endanger life, or to cause severe damage to property.

30. Obstructing the course of justice in a judicial proceeding, existing or proposed, by:

a) dissuading or attempting to dissuade a person by threats, bribes, or other corrupt means from giving evidence;

b) influencing or attempting to influence by threat, bribes, or other corrupt means a person in his conduct as a juror; or

c) accepting a bribe or other corrupt consideration to abstain from giving evidence or to do or to refrain from doing anything as a juror.

However the United Kingdom has extradited people to the U.S. for violations of the CFFA in the past. It all depends where you are. In this case, the server is based in the USA so american law applies to it's access.

Also to clear something up: this was a court ruling, not a new law. It was also not the supreme court, so it's not exactly final.

Note that Canada will not give someone to the US if the death penalty is on the table. This has no bearing on this conversation but I felt like mentioning it anyways..

[Sen]

It seems almost impossible to prove that someone explicitly changed their address to avoid an IP ban.

There are thousands of other reasons to do so, and it wouldn't be hard for someone to come up with a valid excuse, if they are ever called up for it.

That said, IP bans have always been rather useless at best (anyone who actually intends to troll can bypass it in a couple of minutes) and counterproductive in the worst scenarios (people sharing IP addresses, or even a whole country sharing one).

Once again, another court case which only makes it clear that those enforcing the law don't know a shit about how computers work.

[Raptorblaze]

It seems almost impossible to prove that someone explicitly changed their address to avoid an IP ban.

There are thousands of other reasons to do so, and it wouldn't be hard for someone to come up with a valid excuse, if they are ever called up for it.

That said, IP bans have always been rather useless at best (anyone who actually intends to troll can bypass it in a couple of minutes) and counterproductive in the worst scenarios (people sharing IP addresses, or even a whole country sharing one).

Once again, another court case which only makes it clear that those enforcing the law don't know a shit about how computers work.

So much agree on that last statement. SOPA and PIPA were good examples as well

[Helz]

It seems almost impossible to prove that someone explicitly changed their address to avoid an IP ban.

There are thousands of other reasons to do so, and it wouldn't be hard for someone to come up with a valid excuse, if they are ever called up for it.

That said, IP bans have always been rather useless at best (anyone who actually intends to troll can bypass it in a couple of minutes) and counterproductive in the worst scenarios (people sharing IP addresses, or even a whole country sharing one).

Once again, another court case which only makes it clear that those enforcing the law don't know a shit about how computers work.

Exactly. I do feel that the threat of legal action would dissuade most idiot script kiddies that want to call themselves hackers though..