ISPs get legal notices from companies and are liable if it is found that their users are downloading illegal torrents and they don’t take action against those users.
How are VPNs any different? By using a VPN, aren’t you essentially transferring your accountability to the VPN provider? Wouldn’t courts find that since this or that VPN service’s exit server was used in ____ illegal online activity, they’re responsible and must cease operations?
How do VPNs operate? Are laws different for them? If yes, then how does that benefit the state? Wouldn’t the state benefit from treating VPNs the same as ISPs so they get more control?
I think there are a few things to clear up…
a VPN and an ISP are two different types of services. VPNs are not an internet service provider. They are held to two different standards.
Good VPNs don’t log your information. Depending on what country they are based in they are obligated to hand over information if they have it but since they keep no logs there is nothing to hand over. Even if a court wanted to force a VPN to cut off service to a user there would be no way to know who that user is.
VPNs are beholden to the laws of the country they are based in, not the laws of their users. Its very hard for a US court to force a Swiss based VPN to do anything. That’s why it’s important to have a VPN that’s based in a privacy friendly country. Sure a US court could sieze their server if one is located there but if there are no logs, it doesn’t provide much.
I think there is this misconception that your VPN provider will break the law for you. Its not the case. Your VPN is going to hand over any info it’s legally obligated to if it has that info
Even better if you use a mesh VPN like Tailscale (or Headscale, since the TS server is proprietary)
The scenario you describe with ISPs is pretty US-centric, as are the various copyright laws and companies backing it, which is (one of the reasons) why many of the most successful VPN companies are either not based in the US (and most have server nodes that are not too).
Mullvad is from Sweden, for example, and Proton is from Switzerland, so if a content company can even figure out which endpoint nodes are hosting/routing the pirate content they then also have to figure out (a) who owns the node and (b) then send them an angrygram which will just immediately be torn up by the VPN provider as they’re not subject to US law.
Finally, an operating principle of these companies is to keep no logs, so even if a US-based VPN company got an angry letter, they’d probably be unable to do anything since they would have no record of the activity.
Related, Pirate Bay used to (might still?) have a section where they mock all of the threatening letters that cite a different jurisdiction. Usually the US DMCA, but also similar laws from other countries.
They never posted any letters that cited Swedish (IIRC) law, because those were valid threats.
Depends. On. The. Country.
Any company will be subject to the country’s laws, be it ISPs, VPN providers or a second-hand clothing shop.The good ones will get away with no logging if they can do it legally.
deleted by creator
VPNs are a double-edged sword. They can be used in a good way and a bad way.
many companies, if not all, use some kind of selfhosted vpn solution
And this is why people should torrent over I2P.
“By using a VPN, aren’t you essentially transferring your accountability to the VPN provider?”. This is true if you aren’t paying for your VPN in an anonimous way, which is why 99% of the “VPN fOr PRiVacY” are scams.
