Slashdot Mirror
Operation Fastlink Cracks Down on Warez
An anonymous reader writes "Beginning yesterday morning, law enforcement from 10 countries and the United States conducted over 120 searches worldwide to dismantle some of the most well-known and prolific online piracy organizations.
Among the groups targeted by Operation Fastlink are well-known organizations such as Fairlight, Kalisto, Echelon, Class and Project X, all of which specialized in pirating computer games, and music release groups such as APC. The enforcement action announced today is expected to dismantle many of these international warez syndicates and significantly impact the illicit operations of others."
I'll believe this when I see it.
~S
Lots of comments about how this is only a minor setback in the warez scene, and the FBI should be doing more important things, yadda yadda. While that may all be true, anytime warez groups get shutdown is a good thing.
People complain that software companies are using an outdated retail model. Well, thats too bad. It's the way things are these days, and these groups are not helping software companies at all.
Sure the NFOs might say 'Buy the game if you like it!' but how many actually do? People use the mentality "Download for free, play, beat game. Say 'I didn't like it' and claim that since you didn't like it, you wouldn't have bought it anyways, and therefore the company is out no $$" That is part of the reason games cost so much now (that, and dumbass marketing depts)
Anyways, thats my little rant for now. I look forward to more warez scene crackdowns like this.
SmashTech - No smashing of tech involved
In my opinion, it is services like kazaa that are perpetuating this problem. The kazaa organization as well as other "commercial" gnutella services should be implementing filters and such. Don't bust the kid who put up his stupid little website, bust the big boys.
If the dollar is an "I owe you nothing", then the Euro is a "Who owes you nothing." - Doug Casey
If you agree with any of this, feel free to repost it in the future.
Song of the piracy apologist:
(1) I don't personally believe in copying CDs illegally-- but I think we should avoid using unkind words like "piracy" to describe those that do -- instead, we should describe it as an "infringement", much like a parking infringement.
(2) I don't believe in the record companies emotively abusing the word "theft," but I do believe in emotively abusing words like "information," "sharing," and "Copyright Enforcement Militia."
(3) I believe that piracy is driven by "overpriced CDs" even though CDs have dropped in price over the years.
(4) I believe that piracy is driven by overly long copyright duration, even though most pirated works are recent releases.
(5) I believe that illegitimately downloading music is giving the author "free advertising". I don't buy any of the music I download, of course--but lots of other people probably do.
(6) I believe that ripping off the artists is wrong. The record companies always rip off the artists. Artists support P2P, except the ones that don't (like Metallica), and they don't agree with me, hence they're greedy or their opinion doesn't count or something.
(7) I believe that selling CDs is not a business model, but giving away things for free on the internet is.
(8) I believe that artists should be compensated for their work -- preferably by someone else. I mean, they can sell concert tickets (which someone else can buy) or sell t-shirts (to someone else) or something. As long as someone else subsidises my free ride, I'm coooooool with it.
(9) I believe in capitalism but only support music business models which involve giving away the fruits of ones labor for free.
(10) I believe that copying someone elses music, and redistributing it to my 1,000,000 "best friends" on the internet is sharing. Music is made for sharing. It's my right.
(11) I believe that record companies cracking down on piracy is "greed", but a mob demanding free entertainment is not.
(12) I believe that it's not really "piracy" unless you charge money for it, because, receiving money is wrong, but taking a free ride is fine.
(13) I believe that disallowing copying and redistributing music over Napster is the same as humming my favourite song in public. Because when I hum my favourite song in public, everyone likes it so much that they run home, get out their tape
recorders and once they've got a recording of it, they aren't interested in hearing the original any more.
(14) I believe that when illegal behaviour destroys a business, it's "free enterprise at work".
What I find amusing is that the pirates seem unable or unwilling to distinguish between creative activity and brainless copying.
Since a lot of the people here are GPL/OSS advocates: the "OSS way" applied to this domain is to learn how to play an instrument. Or how to sing or whatever. Then get together with a bunch of other people who can also play music, and make some noise.
One of the unfortunate things that has happened to the OSS movement is that a lot of the loudmouth advocates for it don't understand what it's really about. They view it primarily as a means to get free stuff, and then they turn their eyes from the free stuff to the non-free stuff and think to themselves "maybe I'm entitled to get that one for free too". The noble ideals of grass roots participation in the creative process, and/or supporting it in a principled way (namely, boosting the "free foo" movement by preferring free foo to nonfree foo), or for that matter, any other form of moderately principled codes of ethics, are completely lost on them. I think it's a shame that these leeches use OSS, but there's not a whole lot that can or should be done about that. But I'd be much happier if at the very least, they wouldn't confuse the OSS movement (free as in freedom) with the Napster driven movement (free as in "loader").
Dude, note the word "illegal". They're just enforcing the laws that keep capitalism afloat.
Of course, since you seem to be a flaming liberal, you'll just come back at me and blame it on some vast right wing conspiracy. The government is too stupid (no matter who's running it) and too bureaucratic to have ANY sort of conspiracy.
I read about folks on /. that don't think there's anything wrong with stealing software because it's not hurting anyone, they're just "stickin' it to the man!" Any lost revenue isn't really "lost".
Yet, these same slashdotters complain that they can't find a job anywhere, and they want jobs from these same corporations that can't afford to hire more folks.
Geesh.
This is one you see on Slashdot in EVERY article about the RIAA:
"Every album is full of filler; I only want one or two songs. Why should I have to pay for the whole album?"
Sure, "filler". Typical Slashbot excuse, repeated almost verbatim.
Nice to see the government(s) spending money going after such terrifying villians instead of your friendly neighbourhood rapists, child molestors and murderers, eh?
The problem is that rape, murder, and molestation really aren't that important. From the article, various companies are claiming tens of millions of dollars worth of losses due to these warez groups. However, how many dollars are lost to companies because of rape, murder, or molestation? Almost none (unless it happens to one of their employees). Since these other crimes don't cause financial losses to large companies, they simply aren't worth pursuing.
And while I certainly would not put people who pirate software in the same criminal class as those who manufacture and distribute drugs
Shit man, I was about to moderate you as insightful until I saw that. Some of the finest people I know are drug dealers. Nothing wrong with risking your personal freedom to help us exercise our right to control our own biochemistry. Yes, they make a tidy profit, but without them our biochemical freedom would be lost forever.
Really now, think about it. What's in the 1st amendment? Freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of the press. What do those things have in common? They all relate to freedom of thought. Now look at the 9th amendment, it was added to emphasize that the enumerated rights were not exclusive and the founders very wisely realized they could not predict everything. So, the founders were very concerned about freedom of thought. In their day philosophical discourse was dominated by the idea of cartesian dualism. Today we now know that thought is a biochemical process. Therefore since freedom of thought is important, biochemical freedom is just as important. This is something the founders could not have anticipated and falls squarely within the bounds of the 9th amendment.
Sure there are some scuzzy drug dealers out there, especially leaders of cartels. (so buy local) But the majority in my experience are stations on a modern underground railroad.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
The music world is a brighter world if people would just experiment and open their ears. Don't get me wrong, I still want to pay legally with most of the money going to the artist, so I will and already have paid for CD's from independent musicians. FOR CHRISTMAS PRESENTS, I BOUGHT CD'S FROM UNKNOWN AND INDEPENDENT MUSICIANS. At least I know THEY won't rip me off and jack up the price to $20-$30 per album!!
I refuse to pay one more red cent to any major music label connected to the RIAA who are "the drug dealers" using us as "the addicts" shoveling their "payola," attorney-suing, executive/middle men top-heavy, pop trash-creating industry down our throats. The media likes to say that fewer artists will be able to fund their livelihood and tours? Au contraire, mon frere, as I post, local bands singing and playing live across the country are selling their CD's to their fans in local musical places and nightclubs right after they perform for them. Would I rather see a world with just a few big one hit wonder bands making all the money and the rest of the bands losing? No!! I'd rather see what I'm seeing now--lots of local and independent bands able to make decent money where they actually WORK for a living like the rest of us mortals getting the money they deserve without overinflated executives and middle men taking most of the money and leaving the artists with nothing.
I do disagree that things like movies and software programs should be legal to copy. Movies and software programs require long programming labor, research and development and undesired but necessary bureaucracies. The programmers and actors have to be repaid for their efforts.
However, music is another matter. I, or anybody in my family with a computer program can make a 2-minute song from our own lips or musical instruments or computers. So I'm supposed to hand over $20 every time for this?? Forget it!!
* weedshare.com 50% to artists, webjay.org iuma.com CDBaby.com Epitonic.com ampcast.com