Slashdot Mirror
Live from Iran, Film88
MemFun writes "The now defunct Movie88.com has became Film88.com. These are the guys that are streaming a ton of movies for $1 a piece (but not allowing you to save the movie). Of course, to avoid all the Tinsel Town Club baddies (mpaa) from shutting them down, they are now based in Iran of all places. We just finished watching the free Harry Potter movie they are offering. Question: Does this make me a criminal? I really like the selection of movies they have and stream or not, it's still pretty cool to have the ability to watch some those movies that are never on TV any more."
Jeeze, no wonder they can only charge a dollar, do you know how many movies are illegal in Iran?
And the lag must be atrocious, I mean, what are they running the site off of, a T1? Come on guys...
I still can't get over the iran part...
Linux is dead.
LU
I believe it's illegal for U.S. persons to conduct *any* business with Iran, so how do they expect to get paid? "Europeans only?"
I know I should just look, but I'm too lazy. Do they run digitally copied versions of the movies? Or do they do analog-only version and have certain "playtimes"? I'd guess digital of some sort...
That's a whole lot of bandwidth if that's the case though, ouch. If you figure regular TV is 640x480, and you're trying to spit out 20-25FPS at 10-15k per image? Youch.
I'll have to check it out and give it a try.. Theres some newer movies recently released I'd like to take a look at.
Yup. So what?
Iran has more liberal governmental control over movies than the USA!
With Mozilla on Linux, film88 didnt detect my RealPlayer plugin. I have to find a way to bypass their JavaScript...
If you're not a Liberal in your 20's, then you have no heart.If you're still a Liberal in your 30's you have no brain.
We just finished watching the free Harry Potter movie they are offering. Question: Does this make me a criminal?
<SARCASM>
I just robbed this bank and killed this girl. Does this make me a criminal?
</SARCASM>
Seriously, aren't you asking that question a little late? If its what you want to do, may as well do it until you're satisfied. What's the point of stopping in the middle for a change-of-heart?
Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
I know that my opinion will probably be in the minority here, but I believe it's only fair that the MPAA tries to shut down such a site. This is quite simply stealing on a large scale of their property.
Tom>br>Otherwise, I am against other media regulations such as DVD regions.
IP-Banned or Login-Banned ?
Yes.
Dunno which magical troll did it, but it may be tied to my karma trolling account, which surprisingly isn't banned (probably, cause it'd start an uproar).
I can't help but wonder, will this service be available in Iran itself? How many of the movies offered online are illegal to watch in Iran (for promoting "sex," "immorality," and being "anti-Islamic?") Will local religious fundementalists shut down the service before the MPAA can?
Notice how the author says "We just finished watching the free Harry Potter movie they are offering"
/.'ed soon.
Then he submits the story.
Smart guy...it'll be
I hope that someday we will be able to put away our fears and prejudices and just laugh at people. - Jack Handey
ianal, but:
You are not in violation of copyright. You may be in violation of a law which makes it unlawful to knowingly conspire to commit copyright violation by the Iranians. The Iranians are not in violation of copyright if they aquired the films in Iran, as Iran afact does not respect American copyright.
There is no way that I'm gonna signup to this site to view movies for a buck! I'm not taking the chance that my name and information is being sent to some Islamic fundamentalist in Iran, who will do God knows what with the info.
:)
I'll stick to watching movies the legal way: downloading AVI's from Usenet!
Attention all planets of the Solar Federation! We have assumed control! - Neil Peart
Whoda thunk it.
We can slashdot a site that is hosting just regular text, and then we link to a site hosting movies. I bet that film88.com lasted about 5 minutes after the story was posted. Oh well, I guess I'll have to wait till later to watch Harry Potter for free.
On another note... for all the people who hate the MPAA for price gouging, yatta yatta yatta, etc, and are boycotting it... If you can watch the movie for free from this site are you still going to boycott it?
"Well kids, you tried your best, and you failed. The lesson is, never try." -Homer Simpson
The MPAA sues and destroys every legitimate business that they could have made some sort of deal with.. and they move to Iran.
When are these bozos gonna realize that internet entertainment content is here to stay? Hopefully this will make them make fair deals with exisiting internet content distributors.
Fundamentally, it's up to the provider of the materials to verify that they have the proper licensing, not the consumer. However, if you definitively know that the provider does not have the appropriate permissions, this may not apply.
As always, IANALAIHWAMcB*
(*Although I Have Watched Ally McBeal)
Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
You know... that big frozen thing north of the United States? Like a state, but not one? There are actual people there, and many of them have actual money (that they can also get in handy US form.)
For more information on this place called Canada, check out the CIA Factbook. Now, I just wonder if their igloos are wired for the internet.
you should only support the site if it funnels any money made to nicaraguan rebels to help fight the good fight.
It's a pity that Film88.com's going to get my money instead of the MPAA.
"Derp de derp."
You paid with what? A Credit Card? Oh boy, I can see it now...
Terrorist: "10 Sam missles please.....oh, my credit card? {where is that damn American credit card number I have......} Just charge it to Joe Momma, Main St. USA."
IRAN? Hello? Who do you think is on the receieving end of this money?
For $1.00 you can get speeds of up to 300Kbs. For $1.50 you can get speeds of 500Kps, but that's only available on newer movies, such as Ali.
Personally I think this is a great idea. It's not really direct competition with movie theatres or video stores; it's a new niche that won't eat into either market and should be embraced by the MPIAA. Oh well.
--
I have taken more out of alcohol than alcohol has taken out of me - Churchill
If you found out it didn't make you a criminal, would you continue on watching guilt-free?
If it did make you a criminal, would you stop?
Why don't you just call up your local representative and ask him to make up a comprehensive personalized list explaining how to live your life every minute?
Dude, you have harrydotted my free slashpotter stream! Damn you.
Their poor servers are totally /.ed by geeks. You could have atleast left out the link to give them a few extra minute or two.
they are in Iran. How do you sue them?
Where does your user name come from? What book/movie? I've seen it before but cannot remember where.....
This is actually very good, though I seriously question the legal aspects of what they're doing. It's nice to see some are adapting to this new world of streaming media and computers instead of trying to buy new laws to stick to old and "trusted" ways of doing business. USA moneyhungry executives might learn something from all this, after they're done suing them and their families of course.
"It may not work flawlessly, it may not be perfect, but it IS!"
Anataka suki desu. Itsumo. Itsumademo.
Does this make me a criminal?
No, but their use of your credit card #'s might make you look like one.
-Sean
Put the site up on slashdot and *BOOM* we take it down.
Hey, L0rdkariya, when will you be joining the ranks of those who put "(CLiT)" before their uid?
MacOS X: UNIX for the washed masses.
Whatever method you used, look for the MPAA to try to interfere with it, or get the government to do the interfering.
I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.
How are they preventing you from saving it? While you might not be able to save the file using the RealPlayer client, it wouldn't be that hard to record the stream on a network level. As I understand it, you can rig squid to cache realplayer (we've been thinking of doing at the school where I work so classes can watch stuff without killing our bandwidth). Couldn't you just do that locally and then copy the file out of the cache when you're done watching?
Narrative
have you seen those TV commercials about buying drugs "helps kill judges" because you are funding terrorists? These commercials forget to mention that:
cpeterso
2 reasons:
1.) It's COMPLETLY FREE
2.) I can download VCDs and SVCDs of new movies and watch them on my TV. Screw you towelheads, I'm going home.
Linux is dead.
LU
I guess that name was kicking around in memory along with Doctor Velospian (sp?) and Ruby Jack Kennedy. You should be modded up because of your name alone.
Hey dudes,
There's a site called http://www.intertainer.tv where you can watch movies and TV shows. The prices are higher, but they've been around since last Oct or Nov. I've used them a couple of times and they're not too bad.
I think the price for movies is a bit high, but I'm willing to support this site. I'd like to prove to the industries involved that I'll pay for content I'm interested in.
It's worth a gander if you're remotely interested in this stuff. You can find out if it'll suit you or not before you pay anything. (They have previews for movies etc, all for free.)
"Derp de derp."
There a a big difference between the philosophies of the software libre movement and the philosophies of people who copy files without the copyright holder's authorization.
Software libre is not about this. Yeah, RMS rants about how it would be nice if copyrights did not exist, but I don't think he would want to be in such a world. I do not think I would want to be in such a world myself. There is content out there that down right takes a lot of money to create. Movies. Music that uses an orchestra or session players. Video games. Content that would not exist in a world without copyrights.
Now, one of the things I love about the internet is that there is a lot of really great content out there which the copyright owners freely shares. mp3.com has a lot of really talented bands giving their music away (it's a shame that mp3.com is a borderline spamhaus; if you give them your email address, even when emailing a band to say you like their music, you end up on mp3.com's spam list). The whole software libre thing is about giving away some excellent software. Many authors are giving away their books. Free home-made movies. And so on.
There is enough free content out there that, dare I say, I do not think anyone needs to download copyrighted content without authorization to have a compelling internet existance. So it puzzles me that Slashdot continually links to "file sharing" programs and to pirates who share content without authorization.
I completely agree that the RIAA and the MPAA have always been overzealous about copyrights. The HRAA was an abomination; it killed the consumer DAT. As an electronic musician in the early 1990s that had to spend $1200 instead of $300-$600 for a digital tape deck because of the RIAA's actions, I am no friend of their copyright overzealousness.
However, the path of civil disobediance is not to copy movies en masse so that people can view movies without paying for them. Such self serving actions do not look very good in the harsh light of the courtroom; I think such activities contribute to the large number of lost court cases which are trying to fight the abomination called the DMCA.
If you wish to fight the DMCA and the even more evil children of the DMCA, it is important to make a clear stand that we are against this because the law is wrong, not because it gets in the way of having our pirated content fix.
- Sam
The secret to enjoying Slashdot is to realize that it should not be taken too seriously.
Thats not exactly correct. Iran just has a hypocritical government which is perfectly willing to tell its citizens one thing and then sell out to some corporation for money. Thats not at all like the system we have in the US!
They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty nor security
Couldn't get real player to work with the site.. it's not worth the money, you might as well use the effort to scrounge up some higher quality divx's that you can view at ANY time you want without eating your bandwidth.
Film88 offers new movies at 1 dollar a piece for streaming.
MPAA and its cronies have a fit. Huddle together to see whats the best they could do. Disagree on forcing Bush to send a SAM in to the heart of Iran
Jack Valenti registers on Slashdot with a new nick "MemFun", posts the story on Slashdot
Sits back and waits till Film88 gets slashdotted in to oblivion.
Laughs, walks away holding the hand of a 20 something.
Rapid Nirvana
They are selling a service here... and as a rule, companies ask for payment. They are based in Iran so that certain associations in the USA cannot force them to close by draining their money through litigation. Did this website aquire licences to publicly play these movies? Will this website be blocked at the router by USA based servers?
Curse you rural Virginia!
Not really... The people who buy the movies are funding terrorists, but in some sick indirect way, it's kind of like the MPAA forced this to happen.
If they would have pulled their heads out of their butts and did a program similar to this in the U.S. it wouldn't have had to gone overseas and they could have ensured copyright laws being withheld.
You snooze you lose.
...Now that Iraq is off the hook.
; )
-b
People want to pay for watching movies online with something like Film88. The problem is that the MPAA does not want the money.
It is a similar situation with Napster; I used it almost entirely to download music that I wanted to buy but the record companies would not sell it to me (again too lazy to take my money).
Sorry, I just find little reason for moral outrage of "piracy" of material the copyright holders refuse to sell in the first place. Certainly no financial loss is incurring; hell they don't even want the money.
Of course, this hand-chopping goes along with physical theft, stealing a loaf of bread, for instance...
So what is the penalty for IP theft? What part of the body to they cut off? The brain? Or part of the brain?
So, which half of the brain do they cut off? The side that controls the right hand, the side that is responsible for creativity, or the side responsible for analytical thought?
I tried every decent and legal way I could think of to resolve the issue w/the business before I rented the chicken suit
you support terrorism!
"But we were just kids having fun..."
A message from the partnership for a theft free america.
The MPAA is bad. I'd wager most of the technology-literate world has figured that out by now. They're moneygrubbing monopolists, no doubt about it.
The current system of copyright and distribution is broken - no doubt about it.
But when you steal something, you're still stealing it. No amount of arguments about how the Iranians don't subscribe to international patent law, or about the fact that Film88 bought the movies and are just renting them, will change that.
So through some miracle of legal justification, you may in fact not be breaking the law. That's for the courts (or politics) to decide. You're buying from a thief. That might not make you a thief by legal definition, but what does it make you by moral definition?
Oh, wait. I forgot. We're all geeks here, so the only moral imperatives are: 1) information wants to be free, and 2) anyone trying to impede my freedom in any way is evil.
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
Even if it is not a crime in Iran...
I cannot believe that this isn't a crime in Iran. In a country ruled by Islam where other petty crimes are punished harshly, how can distributing that which is not yours go unpunished?
Yes. You're funding terrorists.
That's a good point. Doesn't this seem suspicious that something like this would debut in Iran of all places??? I thought a group of Muslims were the ones that said piracy was a mortal sin right up there with murder in their religion. Of course, this also helps fund terrorists. I wouldn't be suprised if Usama bin Laden is the CEO of the company.
Actually, you're wrong. But that's okay. You're also a coward.
Put aside your lame "intellectual property" bias for two seconds, and you'll realize that the viewer in this case committed no crime. Copyright law restricts the transmission of works, not the reception thereof. You might argue, in this case, that the viewer is making an unauthorized duplication, but if the bits are streamed then no duplication is made... this is essentially a broadcast. If I set up a radio station and play only infringing materials over the air, the listeners are not guilty of a crime.
I do not have a signature
"Swiss Bank Account"
-Henry
"Useless organic meatbag" -HK-47
I know that I can contact my CC issuer, and say that a charge is fraudulent - and they will wipe it off my bill.
So in the very worst case, the CC companies soak up a few thousand in fraud - not so harsh considering the scandalous profits they must be making from 14.9% APR.
Please return to our wite when you using Windows*
Bah! let me know if the get a real web site that supports a standard rather than some proprietary !@!#$%
-- The morphemes of your disquisition are ascertainable, but they have eschewed an ambit of transpicuous exposition.
First, I don't understand why the distinction between stealing and copyright infringement is so important to the slashdot herd. The bottom line is that they are freeloading criminals. Second, here are some definitions of "steal" that may be interesting:
I'd say that by this definition, copyright infringement does amount to stealing. I'd say that all three of these definitions apply -- (b) may be debatable, but (a) and (c) clearly apply.
Hmmm, what about that Egyptian cleric who the BSA convinced to announce software piracy is the 'worst kind of crime?' I wonder what he'd say about this.
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
Many authors are giving away their books. Free home-made movies.
In all seriousness, are there any actual movie makers who are legitimately giving away their movies in watchable form (e.g. DivX)?
I would definitely take the time to download these, if I thought I could support a fledgeling industry. Do you know of any, though?
What the slashdot crowd just don't get is that when it's said that America is a "free country", the meaning is free as in freedom, not "free as in beer".
The thing that's amusing about the existence of this site is that it points out the tremendous idiocy of the MPAA. That is to say, that despite all of their efforts to shut down things like this, they pop up anyhow. They just show up in another jurisdiction and suddenly all the dumb laws and flawed technical protections are totally worthless.
If instead they were offering this service, right now, the operation in Iran would exist, and the MPAA would be making this money. I'm not going to sit here and suggest for a moment that this is somehow morally right, or justifiable. But I think all of this does make the point that the MPAA should stop trying to hold back the ocean with their legal brooms and start providing the services people want.
If they don't, somebody else will.
This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
The three parts of definition:
"1 a vt to take or appropriate without right or leave and with intent to keep or make use of wrongfully"
When something is copied, it is not taken or appropriated: the original copy is left behind. The copy is appropriated, but not the original.
" b vt to take away by force or unjust means"
Since there is no taking, B does not fit either.
"1 c vt to take secretly or without permission"
Same applies to last part.
There is a difference between taking something, and copying something and taking the copy. How upset would you be if someone in the middle of the night made a duplicate of the car in your driveway and drove away with the duplicate?
How can a movie company be a monopolist? Do you have to buy a license to shoot a movie?
Your arguments about stealing are correct however, the ability to do something does not mean you should do it.
I think that TV is like 320x240 in the US. That would reduce bandwidth by %75 (since it's a 1/4 of VGA). Just a minor correction, not trying to troll.
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.
NTSC has 525 scanlines. Not sure of the width though....
Thievery is when you take something from someone and they don't have it anymore, since you stole it. This is clearly morally and legally wrong. The taking of information is a much more grey area though. If I download Eminem's latest CD, rather than buy it at the store, is it stealing? Maybe--Eminem is out (a potential) $15. What if I download his CD, and can honestly say I wouldn't buy it, even if it wasn't on p2p? Well, in that case, he lost nothing and gained a listener. What if I've got $15 to spend and I pirate 3 different CDs, and buy the one I like the best? How about after hearing those CDs, I decide I just have to own 2 of them, and I scrounge up $30?
It's not a clear cut moral issue. What it really comes down to is this: are the labels and movie studios losing money due to piracy? All available evidence points to the notion that they're profiting from it. So far, that is. I figure the *AAs are working so hard to prevent piracy out of a (reasonable) fear that it will get out of hand and later on they will lose a lot of money from it. But until I see any evidence that piracy hurts the content distributers, I'll "pirate" with a clear conscience. And even after that, I'll buy from the musician-owned labels first.
I expect that Film88 buys DVDs, rips them, then streams them. So they have stolen nothing. What they are doing is circumventing the MPAA's business model, which may or may not be morally wrong, but it falls quite outside of "theft." We need new terms and new legislation to appropriately deal with this sort of thing.
c-hack.com |
Taco didn't see any such movie (from Film88) because the italicized and quoted text is what the story submitter wrote, not the /. editor.
--
Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
It's a horrible crime, second only to software piracy.
Linux is dead.
LU
Congratulations, you are begging the question!
I agree with this post!!
Dont fragment the CLiT or it will end up dying like Lunix!!!
Don't mod me, bro'!!!!
This is just crap. Ever hear of Bach, Mozart, or Beethoven? They're these old dead guys who used to write some tunes. A lot of them, in fact. They even got paid for it. And they didn't have copyrights.
Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage
tell people to not buy cocaine, since it helps fund the CIA which is an organisation that overthrows (Australia, latin america) or tries to overthrow (venuzuala recently) democratically elected governments that don't offer US corporations generous deals.
What are you fucking Che Guevara?
Its not the drugs that create the profits for terrorists, its the drug policies that create the potential profits.
How do you think Al Capone came around? Booze was around wayyyy before he was and it will be around wayyyy after.
Here's a chunk of code to detect stuff. This is from 'detect.php' which is what gets called when u click on the '100' or '300' button for "select your bandwidth". detect.php gets called as:
// Detect plugin for Netscape
// checking plugin
/. netizen beats me to it.
/detect.php?speed=300 << if you clicked the '300' button.
var RealPlayerG2=false;
var real=false;
function navPlugins() {
var plugs = navigator.plugins;
for (var i=0; i < navigator.plugins.length; i++) {
if (plugs[i].name.indexOf("Real") != -1) real=true;
}
}
function openClip() {
var newloc="real_err.php";
if (nav || opera) navPlugins()
else if (ie && mac) ieMacPlugins()
else if (ie && RealPlayerG2) real = true;
if (real) {
newloc="playfree.php";
}
document.location = newloc;
}
<BODY bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000" marginwidth=0 marginheight=0
onLoad="openClip()">
The BODY onLoad event calls openClip() which does the checks (I snipped the IE check code for brevity). Then if the checks found Real, then it should open 'playfree.php'. But i can't seem to get playfree.php to do much. I'll hack some more, unless another
Hack The Planet!
many of those scan lines are overscan though, the Black bars above and below the screen which are not viewable. THey often hold other data like closed captioning.
Maybe I'll lose karma for this, but the above is a good comment and doesn't deserve to be at -1.
Democracy Now! - your daily, uncensored, corporate-free
Actually they probably pay a percentage of the rental price / or xx cents per rental as a royalty - otherwise they'd be breaking the law too. The premium price for new movies is just another way for the industry to skim a little more off of the rental stores.
I didn't realize this site would be so shitty with Linux users, and I apologize for recommending it.
I had a hint that this'd be a problem, I think I remember that MS was pushing this site. I was vaguely aware that they use Media Player, but it didn't occur to me that they'd lock it to only Windows users.
Again, I apologize for not being a little more sensitive to the Slashdot audience..
"Derp de derp."
My great-grandpa came to america and became a bootlegger. My family has rose up through the ranks and to an upper-middle class level.
I buy drugs to help immigrants and the disadvantaged so that they to can enjoy the american dream.
I think your point is this. Downloading the file off of the internet is *NOT* stealing because it doesn't cause someone else a lack. I'm still undecided about whether or not it's right or wrong, but it's definitly not wrong the same way theft is wrong.
From the USA, a traceroute show that the IP traffic go through Teleglobe's network and leave north america near halifax (canada) through TAT-9 (a transatlantic fiber link running at 560 Mb/s)....
Then Teleglobe gives the traffic to "Telecommunication Company of Iran Data Communication Affairs" (the local telecom monopoly?) who then gives it to "SAFINEH" who seems to be an ISP/hosting company based in Iran (this information are for www.film88.com)...
But they also use a "cache" who is named cache.www.film88.com and who is colocated with "Trueserver", a colocation company based in Amsterdam (Nederland)...
All these information come from the use of traceroute and the Ripe/NetSol whois database.
I was unable to read the html source code of their site to know where the movies are streamed from...
Not an original argument so I'll post my own words (originally from January of this year.)
m )
They may not have had legal copyrights, but they had methods to protect their music.
Before copyright there were other ways to protect work. Mozart had a patron, Baroness von Waldstätten, who underwrote his needs so that he could spend the day doing whatever he wanted.
Because Mozart's patron allowed his music to be freely performed does not mean that it was always that way. Kings and princes always had court composers and they jealously guarded their music.
Handel's patron (George I, the first of the Hanoverian kings) jealously guarded "water music."
Please remember at the time you couldn't "copy" music unless you could sit in the audience with a quill pen and follow along! Actually Mozart could do this, but not many others.
It was easy to protect music back then and hard to steal it. Don't think people wouldn't have if they could. The technology didn't exist.
Jump ahead to the 1890's where the rampant bootleging of sheet music was a huge business (please refer to http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/2000/09/mann.ht
From the above article a reference to Sullivan of Gilbert and Sullivan fame:
"The irate Sullivan filed lawsuit after lawsuit in U.S. courts, but only dented the trade. To prevent the pirating of The Pirates of Penzance, he long refused to publish the score; bouncers prowled every show to stop music thieves from writing down the melodies."
Let's face it, in U.S. society you are not going to do much with out being paid for it. So change the law, but until then buy what you use, or move to Canada where it is apparently legal now. (Yes, I know the original author lives there, I'm speaking to everyone else.)
Society values artistic works and society (Through the govenment) grants the creators a limited license to profit from their works in order to better society. That's the theory anyway. Maybe it's gotten out of hand, but the "music and information want to be free" approach doesn't really motivate humans to create great things.
Even throughout history people like Mozart have been motivated by "compensation" to produce new creative works.
Having people enjoy what you do is great, but even if they enjoy it how do you make a living if you can't sell it? If you sell one song to a company for a million dollars and that company sells two million copies of the song for one dollar each that is motivation for you to write more songs and for the company to buy more from you. If the company buys the same song and only sells one thousand copies at one dollar each, but later discovers two million copies have been made for free they are motivated to only pay you five hundred dollars for your next song, or to ask society to grant them a limited right to distribute your song, and the protection from counterfeits of your song.
So somebody loses. Either you no longer can make a living writing songs and you find other work, or the company lays off staff because they don't need a big distribution network anymore to deliver one thousand copies of a new song.
While you seem to have "higher ideals" about what is right and wrong it doesn't play in reality. Your carpenter analogy is flawed because I can't easily duplicate the house with little or no effort. If I could then you better believe the carpenter would want $5 for every night you spend in your new house because a new house would only be worth a few thousand dollars! There would also be much fewer carpenters who could make a living building houses (sort of like few musicians who can fully support themselves only selling songs.)
While IP has always been created through time it has always been protected by rule, religion, or force. People didn't share fire - they stole it from each other. The Egyptians didn't give their knowledge of mummification away to anyone that asked. The Library of Alexandria (aka "The Kings Library") wasn't a place you or I could lend a book from. Knowledge really was power. Ptolemy III paid the sum of fifteen talents of silver (a vast amount) to be allowed to copy the works of Aeschylus, Sophocles and Euripides.
So while the ancient scholars and composers may not have had our modern day protection of copyright, please don't confuse that with no protection at all.
Pardon the OT post...
Hamas,... have some really horrible actions on their hands, but they are not more horrible than what the state of Israel is doing to the palestinian population since 30 years(namely: human rights violation, deportation, united nations resolutions violations, geneva conventions violations, legalization of torture, houses destruction, Sabra and Chatila massacres,...)
Okay, I don't want to hear a fucking thing about what is being done to the Palestinians until they themselves stop being perpetrators of violence. Tell me this -- how the hell do they expect other countries (especially Israel) to treat them peacefully as a result of their continued terrorism? That is absolutely assbackwards...they keep bombing Israel, but they want Israel to leave them alone. It's okay for them to perpetrate violence against Israel, but it's not okay for Israel to defend itself. Whatever.
Killing people with a human bomb, or shooting at them with an F16, Apache helicopter or Merkava tank gives the same result
So does flying a loaded 767 into a 100+-story office building full of innocent civilians from a third-party country, right? I don't care what is going on where; that action can NEVER be justified. You do that, you are a murderer. You are a murderer, you are a criminal and as such deserve to be ostracized from society.
> Thats not at all like the system we have in the US!
/ global/human_rights/1998_ hrp_report/iran.htmlo rt99/mideast/iran.html
No its not.
* Under the legal system, a woman's testimony as a witness is worth only half that of a man.
* Women detained for failing to cover their hair and to wear a flowing garment hiding the shape of their bodies were subjected to fines, up to seventy-four lashes or to prison terms of up to three months.
* Seven people were reported by opposition groups to have been convicted of adultery and stoned to death in October 1997 and six more were reported to have been sentenced to stoning in January.
* [I]n September, the independent newspapers Rah-e No and Tavana were ordered closed by administrative decree. The judiciary declared that it was creating a special body to monitor the conduct of the press and to refer writers to revolutionary courts.
* An 18 year-old man identfied as Ali-Reza was sentenced to 40 lashings for stealing a pair of shoes. A serial thief reportedly had the fingers of his right hand amputated in Shahreza.
http://www.ihrwg.org/
http://www.state.gov/www
http://www.hrw.org/worldrep
The slim legal front is made by paying $1 (or watching the free sample), thus giving you legal rights to watch the movie (Hell, a movie ticket in Iran would probably cost less than a $1 or close to it) BUT NOT RECORD IT.
If you want to record it get onto Kazaa, grokster, etc etc etc and d/l the dvd rip. Go to blockbuster and get SmartRipper and rip it yourself. Buy a bootleg vcd in HK. etc, etc, etc. You'll get much much better quality than 300kbps.
There are countless illegal ways for you to get the movie. As much as the MPAA might dislike it, this one is legal. And they are powerless to touch a server in Iran. They might make all US ISPs to redirect film88's to an MPAA copyrights page or something, but its still legal.
There are various ways to save the stream, StramBox for W% or various proxies for both w% and linux. But that wold be just as bad as any of the above examples.
is slashdot (atleast in the short term), as its we've killed it quite completely.
I feel sorry for the folks that were watching when we hit it. I wonder what the refund policy is?
NanoGator is suggesting that becuase he paid somebody for the service, he's morally in the right, particularly because the service isn't available from the 'correct' vendor.
Actually, paying the $1 means he is recieving stolen goods. That's no better than downloading the movie for free from somewhere else. Could be morally worse, because the thief is being funded..
Don't confuse 'fair use' issues (how it's used once it's been purchased in one format) with a complaint about the preferred format not being available. That's entirely the business of the owner of the material.
Actually, had Israel not stolen Palestinian land, deported palestinians, destroyed their houses, refused passage to ambulances with critically ill or pregnant women inside at checkpoints, ... they wouldn't have got bombs.
Palestinians hit on Israel because Israel make them suffer, they don't hit on them just for the fun of it, they want their freedom, since Israel refuses to comply with the UN resolutions, human rights, it continues to build settlements on stolen land,... there's no reason anymore for the palestinians to talk peacefully with someone who doesn't even listen to them.
During the Oslo peace process, very few violent actions from the palestinian side occured, they were done by extremist groups and these people were arrested at that time, but during these 10 years, they didn't see any palestinian state, and israeli settlements doubled in occupied territories. Israel didn't want peace, they got war.
Palestinians use violence because they suffer violence since 1948, they didn't start it. Their land and freedom was stolen, they want it back, and that's perfectly normal.
Thievery, hmm. Yes, the taking of information (music, movies) is a grey area. But I think the moral issue is pretty much clear cut. Someone made a movie, and expects people to pay to see it. You copy it and watch it without paying. Are you going to buy the movie later? Is this helping their profits? You ar not taking anything physical from them? Even if the answer is "yes" to all of these, I still think you are wrong. You are not a "thief" or a "pirate" perhaps, but you are still morally wrong. It is their movie, to be distributed and sold as they please, at the price they want
Yes, movie and record companies are gouching the customers and I dislike it as much as the next guy. I also dislike the way they are denying our basic rights, by putting content control and copy protecting in everything. But denying companies the intellectual rights to their own work, means denying anyone those rights. Some people are happy to forego payment for their work, but I'll be damned if that means that anyone should do likewise!
You don't like their price? Don't buy their wares. But don't copy them either. You are not depriving them of anything physical, but you are not any better than someone shoplifting a few DVD's because he thinks they are too expensive.
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
Ah, yes, the same brand of nuclear hyperbole that brought us "the VCR is to the American film producer and the American public as the Boston strangler is to the woman home alone" (Jack Valenti, head drone of the MPAA). I've learned to be suspicious when someone's argument seems to depend on conflating the action in question with some horrible, nasty action, all out of proportion. I worry when people make their point by insisting on emotionally-charged words with only dubious links (if any) to the topic at hand.
But then again, what do you expect from an industry that believes "copying a piece of intellectual output with the approval of a copyright holder" is precisely the same as "rape and pillage on the high seas"?
The Mongrel Dogs Who Teach
your association here is revolting. Taking someone's life is very different than copying material.
Umm... it's not necessarily coming from IRAN...
(this is harry potter...)
Proto Local Address Foreign Address State
TCP fred:2174 customer.redbus.trueserver.nl:http ESTABLISHED
512 of them are seen on most tv's
1) Information wants to be free and it is ok to share it (i.e. movies and such) because sharing is morally, but not legally justifible.
2) "Sharing" of information is legally and morally wrong.
My New Theory (tm) says that most people think the sharing of the disputed information (ie movies and such) is morally wrong. However, given the fact that the information is so difficult to obtain in a reasonably priced fashion many people resort to sharing or theft. If the peonple who created the information had a way to advertise and distribute it themselves things would be vastly different. Enter the internet.
Ex. Why do we need a movie studio to produce quality films? (We don't, but please bear with me) Who has the couple hundred million on hand to create a movie? The movie studio has the necessary capital and also claims all rights to the film. Once the film is made the actors and others working on the film get paid a very handsome sum of money. Once they are paid the studio can then rape^H^H^H^H recoupe from consumers their expenses... plus some. If the actors were willing to take a pay cut and cut out the movie studio could not films be made that we could stream on the internet for a $1 or maybe go to a theatre and pay $1 to watch.Personal example StarWars EP2:AOTC was a decent movie. I paid my $8 dollars or so to watch it on opening night. I will not spend another $8 to watch it again, but if I could see it for a $1 or stream it to my home for a $1 I would have watched it several time by now. Of the $8 I spent how much did George Lucas and the actors, etc. receive? I do not know the exact amount, but my guess is somewhere in the range of $1-$2. If I could stream that same film with all the profits going to the information creators they would have received double maybe triple that amount by now.
Anyway my theory makes sense to me (probably to noone else), but will there be anyone who has the courage to attempt this (legally) and take on the rath (and revenue stream) of the MPAA.
-the_crowbarHave you read the Moderator Guidelines
the school assigned me a roommate and it turned out he was a unhygenic slut who has had sex (often unsafe) with over 70 people. and i got genital herpes from him because he used my towel. of course, he never told me he had herpes until i found out i was infected. and it was due to his carelessness. i want to kill him.
even if the government cant get you .. .. ...
..
even if the mpaa can shut you down
you can get fsckin slashdotted
anyway , who wants to watch hairy potter
An interesting note... Arab Muslims and Persian (Iranian) Muslims follow different sects of Islam. They are akin to the Protestant and Catholic sects of Christianity. They don't get along all that great, from what I hear, at least when it comes to religion... much in the way Catholics and Protestants have a distaste for each other. (I know some 7th-Day Adventists that don't even consider Catholics Christian, but that's somewhat extreme). I believe that Arabs are primarily Sunni and that Persians, and many other kinds of non-Arab Muslims, are mostly Shi'a.
The problem with Iran is that it is run by an extremist religious government, just like Afghanistan was with the Taliban. Most Arab nations, such as Lebanon, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia, are 90% Muslim, but the clergy does not hold absolute political power, as they do in Iran. One thing they ingrain into our minds here in the US is the importance of the seperation of Church and State. I think we grow up knowing that it is important, without necessarily understanding why. When you see what a Church-run-State does to a country (under the Shah, Iran was a much nicer place to live), I think it makes a lot more sense.
I think religious governments do tend to be extremist, and extremist governments are dangrerous, which is why we fear Iran right now. I know several Persians, and I don't know any of them that wanted the Ayatollah Khomeni's revolution, and they certainly don't like the current religious regime. It's just important to seperate the religion and people of a country from the government.
-If
Run a pencil-and-paper RPG campaign with your far-off friends: Gametable!
Where'd film88.com go? It all makes perfect sense now. Slashdot is in league with the MPAA/RIAA and is using its power to censor - or as we call it, 'slashdot' - any sites that the aforementioned associations have a gripe with. It's just so devious, it makes me sick...
Even though it is OT. :)
It'd be nice if people could recognize fringe thinking and radical groups as distinct from the main body of the people in a given area. This kind of muddy thinking could have everyone thinking that anyone from Arkansas in inbred, anyone from the Midwest is some sort of pseudo-skinhead militia nut, or that anyone from the American South must believe in Slavery. Or that all Canadians are polite.
The truth is: Generalizations suck. They are automatically problematic when used to describe humans. And when you start treating everyone who has the same facial geometry and skin tone the same (shades of the bad old days long, we had hoped, gone by), you automatically start tossing out the baby with the bathwater, the bad with the good. You do a disservice to a lot of innocent, hard working folks and at the same time you probably focus on one threat vector or problem group and in so doing make it more liely you'll miss others.
-- Mal: "Well they tell you: never hit a man with a closed fist. But it is, on occasion, hilarious."
Do "X" in/from country "A" and you're a criminal, because "A" has a law against it.
Do "X" in/from country "B" and you're not a criminal, because "B" doesn't have a law against it.
Or have I missed something? Maybe the question is more of a moral one (Lawful/Unlawful doesn't necessarily mean Right/Wrong).
---DonaldP
Afterburner GameBoy Advance Lights Sold and Installed! Check it out!
Great, now you guys are using the slashdot effect to shut these guys down, playing right into the hands of the MPAA!
This site just adds more fuel to the fire for their freedom-sucking legislative endevours. "See!! See!! - look at the piracy that runs rampant if you don't let us have draconian control over all content! See?!"
Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.
When you've got the /. effect comming at you.
Madona's Like a Virgin.
I'm not sure what they have in common either. Arn't you glad the big five music publishers can make lots of money off the works of both? If there were no copyrights in their present form, and people were not so damn greedy, I might be able to download a nice recording of both instead of being forced to endure endless cycles of the latter.
You must be smoking some powerful stuff if you think Mozart, Bach, Beetoven or Vivaldi would mind if the Girl Scouts of America sang their tunes. Yet the RIAA sued the Girls Scouts for singing "America the Beautiful" around the capfire. The RIAA won. Hmmm, it seems to be a matter of intent that makes the difference between that world and this one. Ever knew a piper that told other pipers that they could not play his tunes? Yet that's what the RIAA would have you believe. The RIAA's use of technology is perverse. You would think that we would all have more for less now that publishing is so cheap. Instead we have less and less for more and more.
There's only one thing I can agree with about this thread. Popular music should not be duplicated.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Anyone have a mirror? :)
Know someone who is stealing cable? Report them!
Well, the first time I have ever heard of this site so I signed up. The first 2 movies I selected, Rush Hour 2 and Ocean's Eleven both timed out with a connection error. And unfortunately once you have selected the movie and clicked on it to view, you can't remove it from your list. Hopefully I can watch them within the next 3 days or I lost out on the cost of the movies. I you're going to start a project or site with this, the first priority would be bandwidth and making sure people can watch the movies they pay for.
My sig of choice is Marlboro
In all the various discussions there is the notion of "nothing is being copied" etc etc.
My question has always been- what exactly is a "copy"?
Various ambiguities follow:
When watching streaming media, there is a good chance that it will at some time be stored in its entirety in memory or on disk.
Have I then "made a copy" of it?
Say I take it and re-encode it to another format- have I "made a copy"? (The argument is "no I haven't- look the 2 files' binary contents are totally different")
Say I modify it in some way, through some filter or something. Is it not then my own work?
There's all sorts of semantic shit that can be pulled here- heheh
I browse at +5 Flamebait- moderation for all or moderation for none.
MemFun asks, 'Does this make me a criminal'?
Of course you are a low life, thieving, despicable, rottten, bad person, for stealing from those huge, faceless, unaccountable, music supply monopolies... errrr, corporations.
You are BAD, Bad, bad, and should be shot, or dismembered on National Television as an example to those who dare to resist their will.
You bad boy...
nslookup is telling me the domain does not exist.
Unlike conventional radio, the receiving individual is personally transmitting a request for the infringing material. Something ought to be wrong with that. Also, with all this legal vs. moral talk, we have to remember that technically this isn't illegal, the company in question found a loophole in the system.
This article has it all. "MPAA/RIAA bad," check. "Cheap movies good," check. Oh, and of course, since the MPAA/RIAA are doing something distasteful, it's okay for everyone else to throw their scruples out the window.
I don't like the MPAA/RIAA, either. But I'd much rather give them my $5 than see a red cent line the pockets of the Iranian government. As unsavory as the entertainment business can be, at least they only pretend to blow people up.
So yeah, you're a criminal--happy?
If you want cheap movies, go to the damned matinee.
!#@%*)anks for hanging up the phone, dear.
If they allowed you to save the files, I would be rooting for Film88 all the way. But by imposing copy restrictions on material that they don't even have rights to in the first place, these guys seem sorta like a renegade quasi-meta-RIAA. [I tried to work "crypto-fascist" into that but couldn't quite swing it. Dang.]
I quess that this really is news since I did not know about this earlier...
The end result of no fees paid to film makers is the end of the film industry. This has already happened in Hong Kong. The formerly thriving Hong Kong film scene, which gave us the likes of Bruce Lee, is now gone. It was killed by bootleg copies used for both personal and theatrical release. I am not defending the MPAA or RIAA, I think they are evil thugs who want to destroy our liberty for corporate greed. Even so, if enough people use this or similar services in the long run there will be no more film industry. (And don't kid yourself: the same technology that makes a personal copy available will also be used for illegal theatrical presentations and bootleg DVDs.) Just imagine a future where no projects like Spiderman, Star Wars, or Lord of the Rings are made because illegal copies eat up all the profits.
Just like the great anti-drug commercials the feds are showin.
Yes, but no one in Iran was sentenced to life in prison because he stole a pair of shoes or a pizza.
Hint: California's three strikes law
See http://www.amend3strikes.org for more informations on how good US laws are.
...that Internet distrobution Supports Terrorism and that all file-sharing protocols and open source software should be banned from the US so they can go on ripping us off.
Oh well they don't make anythign I'd buy anyways, I buy all my music legitimately from bangintunes.com anyways...
CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
Jordan and Iran to kitchen because I was Hungary and wanted some Turkey but I slipped on some Greece because I was Russian.
Q. Why don't you allow your users to download a movie?
A. We only allow our user to view a movie thru streaming. No downloading. Downloading will only create piracy. This is not our intention. Our intention is for the user to stream the movie at their convenience using broadband and if the user wants to have a collection of it, the user can buy the DVD or VHS from the Amazon.com. We will get a commission from the sale.
ha!
If she floats, she's a witch.
Madonna sucks, so it's okay to steal? I think you're trying to obfuscate the issue. There are lots of excellent recordings of Vivaldi down at the corner classical music store.
The RIAA is a bunch of assholes with jack-booted lawyers, so it's okay to steal? Again, you're blowing smoke.
Stealing isn't right, irregardless of whatever tertiary issues you care to bring up.
Let's see, and I know this is hard to follow, but... They left on their own free will. Israel kicked out a handful of palestinians and the rest left because they did not want to be in a war zone, their choice, not Israels. I mean Israel was in no shape to evict palestinians, it were outnumbered 11 to 1 by invading arab armies. Yet who took over the palestinian lands the UN gave them, was it Israel? Nope, Jordan and Egypt. Which controlled it until 1967. Now let's see what happened then, with 1993 Oslo Peace Accords Israel was moving towards an actual peace. Until the current intifada broke out (Might I add not because of Sharon, there has been strong evidence linking Arafat to plan it). That and most of the shabby treatment of the palestinians came because of the latest intifada. Before that Palestinians were allowed to work, travel, and regularly participate in Israeli society. Also, Palestinians, did start the violence in 1948, them and their arab Comrades. But hey, facts distort the picture people like you like to convey.
You get 485 visible lines, counting
the top and bottom half-lines.
(the 525 includes vertical retrace)
Some of the 485 will be covered up
by plastic, along with some of the
sides and even more at the corners.
People would complain if the picture
didn't go to the edge, but they don't
complain about a bit being chopped off!
So let's say you get 480 lines. This is
how much a DVD would store. Of these,
you get 240 (odd or even ones) displayed
every 1/59.94 seconds.
Vertical is even weirder. You get 720
pixels from a DVD. You can see about
160 black-white pairs from a VHS tape,
which you might call 320 pixels. Over
the air, brightness transitions happen
faster than color transitions. So you
get something like 640 pixels black/white,
or just a few hundred for color changes.
Over the air, stuff has to be bandwidth
limited. If you had just one black-white
transition, you could place it with
pretty much infinite horizontal resolution.
There's even a notch filter in the
black-white signal, since medium-high
frequencies are stolen for color info.
Is it hard to ship the DVD's around? Do you have to get a special box or anything?
No, it's brilliant... they mail you an envelope with the DVD inside (it's just a sleeve, you don't get a case). When you open the envelope, and tear off a part of it, what's left is the return envelope, postage paid! You don't even have to lick it closed, it's got adhesive protected by a plastic strip you just pull off.
I signed up last week, I've already got 3 DVDs, returned one, and one more is on the way, and I'm still on my 10 day free trial period.
They have a rating system on the site, where they try to recommend stuff a la Amazon based on your ratings, but it doesn't seem to work very well - probably not a large enough sample set... or their heuristics just suck. Amazon usually recommends stuff that's somewhat interesting, NetFlix just recommends random stuff.
-If
Run a pencil-and-paper RPG campaign with your far-off friends: Gametable!
What's the hype about Iran making revenue and supporting terrorism. It's a Thaiwanese company, so go bitch at them, not the Iranians.
Now mabie them thar silly people with towels on can stop sending us all their crazy half drunk half stoned cab drivers that talk like Apu from the simpsons
Just how gullible are /. readers? For Christ's sake, you see a link that mentions Iran and it's suddenly a bunch of terrorists trying to undermine the good old US of A and how, sniff, if this carries on there just won't be any more apple pie from our good patriotic RIAA and MPAA in the future. This notwithstanding the fact that the company in question is a Taiwanese company and that the same group of "intelligent people" had been critisizing the RIAA and the MPAA up and down the line ofr anything they did in the US.
So who exactly, are the racist uneducated morons here?
O_O!
:))
Man, if they had said that on the brochure that I half read (Heh yah i know... im lazy), I woulda started ages ago!
Dude, thanks!
*looking now*
"Derp de derp."
I have been looking for Joe's Apartment online and havn't found it, I checked, and this site dosn't have it either. I would go buy the DVD, but I don't wan't to own it (at least not with paying for it and shipping). I just want to see the singing cockroaches once more, is that so wrong? None of the video rental places around here have it.
-- Any comments seen here are not mine, but a mixture of alchohol and lack of sleep.
For Real, I've found this enterprising workaround I discovered to be pretty OK with most sites.
/movies/13146_300.rm HTTP/1.0
.
/. effect...!
1) Force RealPlayer to stream both RTSP/PNM over HTTP (Find it out yourself in Preferences....)
2) Get a proxy that can log requests (Proxomitron is a rare, good, free one for those of us on Windows; lots available for Linux). Config Real to use that proxy. Which means, ALL RealMedia requests go through the proxy...
3) Click the movie link once with proxy logging enabled. This will give you the http-accessible address of the RM file (i.e., the GET request and the Host header)
4) Concatenate the above two details and use an HTTP downloader....voila!
5) Sites like film88 WILL most probably require the custom http headers RealPlayer supplies. The quick and dirty way if you choose to use Proxomitron is to add header filters that add the required headers to EVERY request (GET) sent out to EVERY site (of course, each filter can individually en/disabled). Now, use your downloader through the proxy to get the file. For the adventurous, just write a custom HTTP proxy that does the dirty work of forging headers...
Sample excerpt from Proxomitron's log:
GET
Accept: */*
User-Agent: RMA/1.0 (compatible; RealMedia)
Icy-MetaData: 1
Bandwidth: 262200
GUID: 00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000
RegionData: 0
ClientID: WinNT_5.1_6.0.9.584_play32_SF80_en-US_686_axembed
SupportsMaximumASMBandwidth: 1
Language: en-US, en, *
Host: cache36.film88.com
Accept-Language: en-US, en, *
Accept-Encoding: gzip
Connection: keep-alive
i.e., the URL is http://cache36.film88.com//movies/13146_300.rm
Not test-able because of the
But that would cost $4 vs. $1.
But that would let you watch it 4+ times vs. once.
For another thing, Blockbuster doesn't have a government-granted monopoly on DVD rentals. You may be able to rent an older release from a local store for $1.
Will I retire or break 10K?
There is content out there that down right takes a lot of money to create. Movies.
Movies. For free. An animated movie takes about 10 hours per minute to make using Macromedia Flash software (based on the time cost of making Irrational Exuberance). Now we've reduced the cost of producing a film by an order of magnitude or more without reducing its ability to tell a story.
Music that uses an orchestra or session players.
I understand that for sound recordings. But it should be cheaper to compose (at least some genres of) music in a tracker. I'll forgive you this time because many people confuse the copyright on a musical work with the copyright of a particular recording of that work.
Video games.
It doesn't cost very much to develop a Game Boy Advance game. The costs of GBA games lie largely in replication, marketing, and promotion. (Join gbadev@yahoogroups.com and read the last week of discussion to see why.)
Content that would not exist in a world without copyrights.
Some areas of the world without strong copyright protection have a thriving motion picture industry. Know how? Product placement is one way.
Will I retire or break 10K?
Stealing isn't right, irregardless of whatever tertiary issues you care to bring up.
If a composer has been dead for sixty-eight years, and you record his music, from whom are you stealing vt. Taking and carrying away, feloniously; taking without right or leave, and with intent to keep wrongfully; as, stealing the personal goods of another.
Much of the problem here (specifically in relation to the works of George Gershwin and other 1920s composers) relates to excessive copyright duration.
Will I retire or break 10K?
the original poster was pointing out that creative works will be made whether or not copyright exists.
In fact, there are some creative works that will not be made because copyright exists. An individual composer does not have the resources to license works by composers who have been dead for sixty years. This kills the entire sampling genre.
Will I retire or break 10K?
Sure it is... as long as the author/creator of the information says it's ok to share.
What if the author/creator is dead?
Now what if a playwright states "This play may be performed only by people with 99% or more African blood, even in areas where no African people live. All whites on the stage will be arrested. Oh, and my estate has a perpetual copyright on this play, so even 200 years after I die, my estate will still get 90% of the box office." Is that fair?
Will I retire or break 10K?
That's why copyright is limited, and that's why it expires!
Bullshit. Copyright in the United States and the European Union no longer expires.
Disney movies based on fairy tales
But anything based on Disney movies?
Will I retire or break 10K?
IMO, record companies should not have copyrights to the work of deceased artists
So you think it should be OK to arrange the offing of Tupac Shakur and Biggie Smalls just to get the rights to sell 2Pac and Notorious B.I.G. CDs?
Will I retire or break 10K?
Through trial-and-error I found a relatively painless way to save real media streams to a file. I've only tried this on Windows XP, so your mileage may vary.
.tmp in it that is consistently increasing in size. In XP, it will likely be at "G:\Documents and Settings\<user>\Local Settings\Temp\" .rm extension. ;)
1) Get the latest RealOne player. Maybe not necessarily the latest, but I've only tried their current release.
2) Make sure the real media plugin is installed on your browser. And make sure your browser is set to keep at least a 300MB of storage cache.
3) Sign up for whatever movie you want to watch, and then play it.
4) Pause the player (*not* stop, pause).
5) Search around your fs for a temp directory with
6) Wait until the file stops increasing in size, and you think it's finished downloading (i.e. not just delayed).
7) Move the file and rename it with the
8) Open said file up with your favorite hex editor, and delete the leading zero-byte. (I guess this is Real's form of security-through-obscurity. Don't come running to me if you get the DMCA smack-down for doing this
Voila! You now have a fully functional real media file.
So what do I do if they take my credit card information and run?
Saying Java is nice because it works on all OS's is like saying that anal sex is nice because it works on all genders.
If there is one there will be the other. It is the basis of free enterprise although the MPAA and the RIAA have yet to recognise this fact or act acordingly.
Ok, so I'd pay $1 to watch a streaming movie of questionable quality on my small monitor ?
Now that strikes me as being a really dumb thing to do !
I can rent a DVD for under $2 and watch it on my massive TV with surround sound.
Alternatively, I can pay $4 to watch the movie on the big screen.
I just don't get it - ?
Why on earth would someone want to pay $1 for steaming movie quality, when as I mentioned above, for a little bit more, you can get 10x the quality ? - also, if your of the 'criminal?' persuasion, you can rip a rented DVD anyway !
A slashdotting - you get the stick first and then the carrot !
Here is the guide: http://www.geocities.com/streamgen/streambox.htm
.avi
Now you can pay 1$ and actually keep the film, heck you can even convert it to
Enjoy.
I assume this is legal as the media is downloaded to your cache just like any other media file.
movie88 vs. film88 - 88 stands for "Heil Hitler" here in Germany. As it is not allowed the say this publicly, 88 (H being the 8th letter in the alphabet) is commonly used by neo-nazis to get around this prohibtion.
/. community. Does anybody know something about the history of these names?
So many bars or shops carry the 88 in their name to show that they are meant for nazis.
As I couldn't find any explanation why film88 chose this strange name I give the question back to the
Here is a link to a "fatwa" (=holy decree) that bans piracy, release by top clerics in saudi-arabia & egypt.
3 /0 2/article10.shtml
guess it didn't get to iran just yet..
http://www.islam-online.net/english/News/2001-0
but hey, don't let any morals stop you. go ahead and donate money to the iranian islamic revolution. you know, those guys who estabished & sponsor hizb-allah in lebanon (which killed about 300 american marines in beirut)
it's called "Private Payments". Only for US people, though.
once you have logged the URL with your proxy you can download teh movies fine with wget
Half way through a film as well - looks like webservers and streaming servers went down simultaniously *sob*.
I hope it reappears - this is a BRILLIANT service which I wish I could get ligitimately.
It costs me in the order of $5.50 to rent a DVD or video - $9.00 to go see a film (Im in the UK). $1 dollar for a low quality streaming video...GREAT!!! I'll even go out and BUY DVD versions of the films I think are good so that I can get the quality. I so wish Hollywood would WAKE UP!!
Pretty simple way to beat that....DON'T BREAK THE LAW! (except speeding :))
Your other points come down to repititions of this. The fact that the copy is taken is beside the point-- the fact remains that a copy is indeed taken/appropriated.
But it is the copy that is "taken", not the original. No theft, since the original is not involved in the taking at all. Can't be theft if the taking is taking of what you own.
There is indeed a difference, but this difference has no impact on the applicability of the definition of "steal" to the practice of copyright infringement.
It has no applicability, since it is not theft. The use of the word "Steal" for IP infringement is nothing more than an attempt to charge the argument with emotion.
Like most analogies this one is bogus (as well as irrelevant to this discussion)
Show how it is bogus. It is actually perfectly apt. The car in the driveway is not stolen. The copy the guy made is not stolen, even if it is "Taken"... you can't steal something you created and own. It is very relevant. The car in the driveway is as much "stolen" as the movies are.
1/1800th of a night vision scope.
Evil is the money of root.
the dumb thing about it was you paid for something someone else stole.you couldve just downloaded it free here yourself instead of feeding an economy that would rather shoot your mother in the head that actually be of real service to you.
be a lil more patriotic and just d/l it yourself off p2p next time.
*Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
Step 1: Find a site they dont like, because /. /.-ing.
it's doing something they could be doing, but
wont, and it's "stealing money from our pockets"
Step 2: Post link to site on
Step 3: watch site crumble under the massive
-Ed
docbrown.net
Ed Wedig
Graphic design services
docbrown.net
Dammit. I wanted to say that, but I couldn't be so eloquent..
Our site is facing
techinical Proxy/Caching problem
at the current moment.
We will be back
online soonest possible.
Regards,
Film88
--------------------
Hmm, I think I can explain that for you...
Never confuse volume with power.
i too am a consumer willing to spend money to meet my needs. for instance, i'd really like a Boxster, but i think Porsche charges too much for one. so, i'll just take one off the lot and leave a $10 under the dealer's front door. i'm paying them for their merchandise, right? what's the big deal?
business is rarely a one-sided transaction - that's the big deal.
-c
I have discovered a truly remarkable proof which this margin is too small to contain.
The width of a scan line is unspecified. For as long as you respect the 4-to-3 ratio, you can have as many "pixels" as you want. What determines the "end of line" is a set width of black image at the end of the scan line.
This black line is the reason why a "black" image on TV is never quite black--not to confuse the scan line marker.
interestingly, this black end-of-line marker is what's removed for pay TV channels. The decoder knows a sequence of cycling colors that substitutes the black marker, and filters it out. More elaborate "encoding" method also involves inverting the image, and sometimes, dynamic marker updates based on info stored via the audio channel.
The US propaganda department is now busy writing more insightful ads, "I was just having a good time." "Everybody downloads movies" "My life, my computer." DOWNLOADING FREE MOVIES SUPPORTS TERRORISM.
hahahhahaha.
Why stick up for big business?
There's a small misunderstanding here. You don't need the Swiss bank account, Fim88 does. Your deposits go to Switzerland, which is not on the State Department's list.
Virg
$5.50 ! - wow, I think the UK video stores and cinemas should wake up - costs me about $1.70 where I live to rent a DVD and about $4.50 to see a movie.
... good old video tapes are better quality for the most part than a steaming video.
Then again, sufficient bandwidth to use a movie streaming service would cost me in the order of $200 a month - it's all relative I guess.
I still think paying $1 to see a low quality movie is daft tho
A slashdotting - you get the stick first and then the carrot !
Your credit card # is information.
Please share it with all of us. After all, it is "clearly a moral and good thing to do."
Thank you for sharing.
Ya, okay, my comment is a bit of a troll, but just because there are some cases where sharing info is good, even morally required, it doesn't follow that sharing any and all information is moral.
From their whois entry:
Domain Name: FILM88.COM
Registrar: NETWORK SOLUTIONS, INC.
Whois Server: whois.networksolutions.com
Referral URL: http://www.networksolutions.com
Name Server: NSIR1.FILM88.COM
Name Server: NSIR2.FILM88.COM
Updated Date: 27-may-2002
Which means that film88.com must have given Network Solutions a few dollars. Should the State Department be advised? Or is this not actually how sanctions work?
I think the largest funder for terrorists is the USA. They even fund people, they define themself as theorists. (Not to say that AlQuaida and co have much money from the USA, Islamists got to
fight against Russia.)
Iran is already one of the freest countries in
the whole area -- though not as free as Western
Europe or USA. People there are already for more
freedom and in most places the less of freedom is
just the policy wanting money for your freedom:
It's like in any other country: If people are wealth they will demand for freedoms.
Though one should not forget to help the rest of the world to get at least as free as iran, and not only keeping one's eye to make iran as free as the really free countries.
Well, *you* think it ought to be illegal for me to request infringing material, but that puts the burden of proof on the consumer. Of course, if it is clearly stated that these movies are unauthorized copies, then my complicity is plain. But under your rules, I'd have to verify the legality of every movie I rent from BlockBuster, buy a copy of at Best Buy, or watch on pay-per-view. Personally I think the law works fine the way it is. Any amendments will have to be worded very carefully.
I do not have a signature
Then why don't they organize an army and take their land back? Because they can't, are weak, and do not have a civilzed society. If the Palestinian people are so strong (as Arafat said after being Isreal's bitch) why can't they accomplish this against the "inferior jews"? And further more, all I see is the other Arab countries talking a big game, but no one is stepping up to help their muslim brothers against the weak jews, because they would get the smackdown put on their ass as well.
I hope you enjoyed the film as some of the money will ultimately end up in the hands of terrorists. My hat is off to you, Sir, for showing the aggregious stupidity to post a confession of your crime to a public forum such as this. The MPAA's goons will be with you shortly.
Please get it through your heads fellow slashdotters: BY DOING THIS TYPE OF THING YOU ARE GIVING THE POWERS THAT BE *EVERY RIGHT* UNDER CURRENT LAWS TO COME AFTER YOU. You are also giving, through your actions, the impetus for laws like the CBDTPA and the DMCA. To a very large, and I am convinced unrealized, degree we have ourselves to blame for our current predicament.
To fight unjust laws like the ones mentioned above you should write your congressman. They should also be challenged in court when borderline cases (like the one involving Digital Books) arise. VIOLATING THE LAW after after it is passed only convinces the "powers that be" that they were correct in the first place.
STOP IT... YOU ARE NOT ENTITLED TO FREE CONTENT IF THE CONTENT OWNER HASN'T LICENSED IT TO YOU FOR FREE. PERIOD.
Moderator: Go ahead... have your way with me. I just had to get this off my chest.
GJC
Gregory Casamento
## Chief Maintainer for GNUstep
You're thinking of the old iRaq's, which were always ill-tempered and slow. The new HP iRan's have plenty of bandwidth, and are now more USer friendly than ever!
works owned by an individual remain the exclusive property of that individual for his or her lifetime, then the property of that individual's estate for seventy years.
How much are you willing to insure me for that this number "seventy" will not increase further within the next fifty years?
After that term, the copyright expires
This means that for virtually all works, anybody who has ever seen the work commercially exploited will not live to produce anything from that work.
Many uninformed reactionaries have written that copyright is now perpetual, because Congress can extend it any time they want. This has always been true, within the limits set forth by the Constitution.
What limits? The "for limited Times" language of the U.S. Constitution, Article I, Section 8, clause 8, has been declared moot by a District Court unless Eldred wins a Supreme Court battle.
It doesn't mean that copyright is meaningless, or that it doesn't expire.
But if Congress has the power to do everything short of explicitly stating that "Resolved, that it is the policy of the Congress of the United States to enact a 20-year copyright term extension act on every 20-year anniversary of the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act," then what is the substantive limit on Congress's power to make copyright perpetual in practice?
Will I retire or break 10K?
When one says, "Copyrights do not expire," that's an unambiguous statement of fact. In this case, it's a statement that's completely and utterly false.
No copyright has expired in the last four December 31s, and no copyright will expire in the next sixteen. The Bono Act follows a previous 19-year extension (Copyright Act of 1976). Let me rewrite what I said into what I originally meant:
As long as Congress continues to extend the term of subsisting copyrights, no copyright will ever expire in the United States. Congress shows no intention of deviating from a policy of successive term extensions.
Worse was posting that link to a web page that is so full of vitriol and bile as to be practically useless in any meaningful discussion.
Here's a much less biased link: clicky
Exaggeration for effect is one, and I think that's what this poster was doing.
How is "a 20 year extension every 20 years creates perpetual copyright in effect" an exaggeration?
Will I retire or break 10K?
> Because they can't, are weak, and do not have a civilzed society.
This is the sort of mentality that Osama bin Laden has seen from Americans and resorts to the violence he has committed.
I can't beleive you raise this argument. You must be a Jew yourself, for no honorable American would see any benefit in kindering Israeli Nazis.
> I mean Israel was in no shape to evict palestinians, it were outnumbered 11 to 1 by invading arab armies
The West was behind them out of guilt from the Nazis deeds and supplied its arms. Maybe they were outnumbered 11 to 1, but their arms were far greater than the Arabs.
> Oslo Peace Accords Israel was moving towards an actual peace
Don't be fooled my friend. The Oslo peace process was a mere PR campaign. The Israelis were acting to portrait themselves as peace-loving people, yet at the same time they were advancing their incursions into the Paletinean territory by forming settlement after settelment.
You are incorrect sir. Blockbuster does have an agreement for profit sharing in place for VHS tapes, but no such agreement exists for DVD's. As far as DVD's go they are exactly like you and me. They buy them, (or "rent" large quantities from distributors) and then use their "first-sale" doctrine rights to rent them. Legally you are allowed to rent movies you buy. If you have a large movie collection, you don't need to get "distribution" rights to the DVD's to rent them out. Ask any owner of a Blockbuster if you really want to know the whole story.
The movie streams were broadcasted from a dutch service provider. Site doesn't have much to do with Iran... Dutch authorities have forced the ISP to close the site.
Bye,
superheld.nl
The MPAA must have people in their pocket all over the world. (Note: the whole upgrading our router was just added this morning)
Dear Valuable Users,
Our site is READY now,
but we got to
wait for few hours
for our new lines
to take place.
We are upgrading our router
and this site will be off
for a few days
We feel sorry for
our contractor whose
proxy/caching was blocked
because of somebody's
reaction. (Without Court Order AGAIN!!)
Seems like the Terrorist is identified!!
Regards,
Film88
Please stop trying to force people to live under what you think is "fair".
I'm not trying to force people to live under what I think is "fair". On the contrary, I'm trying to force people to live under what the framers of the Constitution thought was "fair". Why should it be "fair" to let an author's estate deprive the public for 70 years? Thomas Jefferson advocated "limited Times" of about nineteen years. If the founding fathers wanted life plus 70, they would have passed life plus 70 as in the Bono Act, not 14+14 as in the Copyright Act of 1790.
Will I retire or break 10K?
Dear Valued Users and Geeks,
We wish to announce that due to the following factors, we shall cease
the operation of film88.com:-
1. There has been many technical complaints during our trial run. We
are satisfied with some technical results but feel that we have a duty
to find ways to resolve technical complaints before providing such
service. We shall be publishing our technical results soon and open
for public discussion for the benefit of everyone on our website.
2. We have made clear many times that we are not pirates. We have
proposed to major studios in Hollywood to pay 30% of our movie rental
price as copyright compensation. This represents a huge percentage
from our gross profit but we feel that a balance between innovation
and copyright compensation is important. However, Hollywood has
reacted negatively. We have to evaluate this issue. Perhaps we should
look for movies outside Hollywood but we hope that Hollywood will some
day offer such service. Perhaps we should wait for the development of
"Statutory Licence" for the movie industry similar to the Statutory
Licence for the music industry in US.
3. Some journalists have given us fair comments while others drag us
into politics. We have stated clearly that we are not involved in
politics (Iran or elsewhere). What happen to the fundamental concept
of Internet of being borderless and not knowing any nationality and
race? We are actually more keen in technical comments/reviews and to
resolve the copyright issue. We have no plans at the moment but the
innovation must go on..... We wish to apologize to all users, Geeks,
our service providers and Hollywood, and hope that they will accept
our apology for inconvenience caused, if any.
We can be contacted at film88@hongkong.com.
Thank you.
Film88.com