Slashdot Mirror
Australian Federal Police Raid Major ISPs
pflodo writes "The Australian (newspaper) has an article about Telstra the major Australian ISP and other 'declined to name' ISPs that have been raided by Australian Federal Police to 'seek the identity of particular subscribers' in relation to their activity and files stored on the ISP's servers. I imagine they will eventually raid some domestic homes and make a scapegoat of some unfortunate teenagers."
Artists and labels adhere to business laws when attempting commerce. In exchange for following these rules, they have every expectation of being able to find out whether their business is feasible. Quid Pro Quo.
Intellectual piracy robs these entities of that pursuit. Happiness is not a right, but to be able to pursue it is. Pirates say that there is no loss encumbered due to downloading, that these people wuld have never bought the product anyway. Unfortunately that assumption can never be proved. It is Schroedinger in economic form. Piracy literally robs artists of the ability of finding out how many people would truly have bought their product. Piracy is tantamount to corporate sabotage.
I would like to see pirates charged with laws of this sabotage, and with P2P coders charged with RICO statutes.
big corporates get the same treatment that your local drug dealer gets its called equality
Sounds more like it should be called incompetence. A drug dealer is a criminal, an ISP probably doesn't even know what's going on.
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
you know, there is just something fundamentally wrong with the concept of opportunity cost.
I mean, I have downloaded some music, not by any means gigabytes as some do, but an album or two.
My point is this, I have never really bought music in the past. I have bought maybe 10, and thats maybe, albums in my lifetime (actually I did buy a bunch of records from goodwill [for sampling], but they were like $.25 each and I doubt any royalty came of it).
Now this was when I was much younger, years before my first mp3, and I eventually stopped buying any music...then I discovered napster. I was like, great!..but I still only used it to download junk like "the dukes of hazard theme" and "charles in charge". You know, things that I would never, ever had wasted the effort to actually order physically, but because I had access to them right there, I figured there was no reason NOT to get them.
now the record companies say that the downloaded music on my computer is valuble? It's just crap! Crap I thought was funny; crap I thought was gay; crap I thought was other crap and was pretty suprised with what crap I had actually gotten and failed to delete; and lastly, crap.
case and point: I would never have payed for any of this crap in the first place or taken the opportunity to get it so any appraisal of it's value and cost is void and null. This $60 million the industry speaks of is so bogus. They are talking like $60 billion dollars or merchandise has been stolen. But nothing is missing! the cd's are still in the stores, the bands still have thier PA's.
Nothing has been stolen. It's just been listened to, or looked at.
In Soviet Russia the fucking idiots are you. Now I don't know if you were raised in Soviet Russia, wartime Germany, cartel ridden Colombia, or some other hostile regime where a man getting yanked (or in a later example: a child) for what is obviously harmless chat is the norm. One thing to look at is the fact that everyone knows it is against the law to even mention that the president might get a particularly nasty cold, we all know you can't threaten the president. Duh. What I didn't know is that our basic rights are being thrown out the window. If secret service agents watching a chat room (and at the same time the library) couldnt figure out right off the bat they were dealing with a non-threat then we are all in trouble, even all you AC's out there. You know I don't agree with you, that's why I am replying, but does my arguing the position of this "domestic terrorist" (who actually was just some Joe American) then label me as the same? If your not scared for your freedom of speech then your using the old false argument of "Well who cares if they enact law_X, it only applies to criminals." A regime like Dubya's is very paranoid about staying in power and threats from a variety of internal and external sources... Why? I thought he was making everyone happy and the world a better place. At least that's what he said in the state of the union and on the campaign trail.......
When its wrong to exercise your constitutional rights I dont want to be right (but if they keep me scared enough I wont say a thing).
---- The real Slashdot is still here. You just have to browse at -1 to read the comments.