Slashdot Mirror
Illegal File Trading Draws Two P2P Raids In Europe
had3l writes "Police in Finland raided the operation of a popular Bit Torrent site and arrested 34 people, 30 of which were volunteers who helped moderate the site. This comes right after the MPAA reported that it would start suing tracker servers." An anonymous reader points to a story (currently at the top of RespectP2P.org's homepage) about the raid yesterday morning of Dutch eDonkey sites Releases4u and Shareconnector.
Love this quote.
"Police say the site had 10,000 users, all Finnish, who downloaded illegally-copied content worth millions of euros. The site featured 6000 torrents, including film, videos, music and games."
I always thought something was worth whatever you actually paid for it. These downloaders were paying zero.
Hmmm, no wish to upset but if it starts in other countries no doubt the MPAA and RIAA will try it here (with the help of their favorite police depts, of course)
How does PeerGuardian help here? What about FreeNet or Mute? Any news of increased traffic on those networks?
... by having moderators. If you've got moderators, and they're making absolutely no attempt to curtail copyright infringement, you're pretty much asking to be considered an accessory. No "common carrier" defense if you're actively deleting and moderating your sites content.
Idiots.
Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
When you can sign up for Netflix and get them delivered to your home for about 66 cents each!
Maybe I'm just lucky, but where I live I can get 14 movies delivered a week with Netflix's 8 movies at a time plan.
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
This is good> .
No matter how stupid the P2P laws are, it is good when they are enforced. It is not anyone's right to break the law, no matter how silly the law is.
And I bet you would just love intellectual property laws if you had any intellectual property.
Le français vous intéresse?
"The Motion Picture Ass. of America (MPAA) today announced (PDF) that it is pursuing civil actions against hundreds of server operators of BitTorrent, eDonkey and DirectConnect P2P file-swapping networks, in its war on internet movie piracy."
Emphasis mine but "Ass." is theirs.
How to Download YouTube Videos
On WinMX (which isn't as good as it used to be, which is why I dare mention it on
"The Recording Industry Association of Japan has noticed that you are sharing files whose names match artists or recordings owned by our members. You are reminded that such..." and so on and so on.
I got a couple of these in one day -- haven't run WinMX recently though so I don't know if they are still happening. It would be interesting to try sharing only files with ASCII names and see if that makes a difference.
Whence? Hence. Whither? Thither.
This problem will continue, and we do not want to have any P2P curtailed because large companies and organizations have political clout. I do not think it will ever be stopped by lawsuits, and even though the MPAA and others may be over-reacting, there is still a perception that digital media sharing circumvents the legal selling of products. Is there a way to slow or stop the sharing of music and video that would appease the those companies and yet not bring down the P2P system?
I think the RIAA and the music industry should embrace P2P due to the fact that they can not stop it all, I don't belive in downloading music/films I buy them , but people need to adapt and get with the times. I belive the best thing for the music industry to do is release some songs for free and using a bittorrent to allow people to download them... Just my thoughts!
"Ass. of America"? Hmmm. I doubt that was unintentional...
---
"I did nothing. I did absolutely nothing and it was everything that I thought it could be."
Anybody know?
Insert Comment about star systems slipping through your fingers...
The gathering storm against bittorrent users has already started to worry me. I have been using suprnova to find torrents of TV shows only, no movies. I'm essentially time shifting content that I could almost as easily have "tivo"-ed myself.
A recent example is that a friend of mine missed last week's episode of her favorite show, ER. I got a torrent the next day and burned her a DVD.
I wish that type of usage was considered "fair use" but it's not.
BREIN (Dutch for BRAIN) is the little sister of the MPAA. They kinda follow their actions and immitate them as closely as possible, I guess. They even have a commercial in the Dutch cinema's, bothering people that pay for good movies with blah blah about piracy.
:)
Next time I bring my camera with me, I will film the commercial
Slashdot: stuff for news, nerds that matter, matter for news, stuff that nerd
Does anybody know which site this was? I'm guessing suprnova, but I couldn't see anything in the article.
A lot of people have said that the ongoing copyright crackdown represents the end of the sort of "Wild West" nature that the internet had at first.
I disagree.
This represents the wild west nature finally becoming complete.
Previously the internet was a place of lawlessness.
Now it's still a place of lawlessness, but on top of this we have little tyrannies, where those rare people with lawyers can make anything they want happen just by issuing threats and governments can take things out at will without having to worry about pesky things like jurisdiction, right or courts. Like the wild west, where on top of the chaos it was overlaid that if whatever self-appointed lawman felt like it you would get hanged or shot for no reason at all.
Perhaps this comes down to how you define the word "laws"; after all, there have been many times throughout justice where "law" meant nothing but the imposed will on a subjugated populace of a bunch of armed thugs. But I think laws imply justice. I see none of this coming to the internet, only the raw exercise of naked power.
MPAA did not win a single court case in 2004. Groskter was found to be legal, and there are a number of previous rulings that show that providing technology that enables people to share files does not constitute breach of copyright! The RIAA and ARIA (Australian equiv.) are seeing this now in their Kazaa case currently underway in Australia - and if a case can not be proven against Kazaa (which still has some elements of centralisation that could provide Kazaa with a way to 'filter' or 'block' copyright material) then the chances of being able to find that a simple website with links to trackers (which themselves are not a copyright infringement either - just a 'pointer') are guilty of copyright violation are almost zero.
Time for the record labels and movie studios to wake up to themselves - they are alienating a large part of their support base. All the expenses of lobbying various governments around the world, and the associated legal fees around every case is being paid for, and funded by consumers who purchase their records!
They should listen to the overpaid Robbie Williams, who said something along the lines of "I dont care, I am rich, if yo uwant my music, just download it!" (He said this in 2002 - I can't find an online source).
http://www.poliisi.fi/poliisi/krp/home.nsf/PFBD/28 FB313B1DCD10EAC2256F6A004A5FA5?opendocument
in Finnish, sorry.
++K
<[letter kay][at][number seventy seven][dot][finnish TLD]>
I might just be a bit paranoid... but i better start stockpiling some movies/tv for xmas now just incase
What's completely, utterly amazing that there hasn't been a single mention of the incident in the news of any of the tv channels, nor anything in the major papers either. For a while there was a short item on the site of Helsingin Sanomat (the largest paper in Finland) but that was taken away after an hour or so. Makes you suspect that the police might actually be controlling any reporting on the subject? Guess that's it for truly independent mass media in Finland.
The *AAs see this as a success in their "crusade" against "pirates".
Remember: Moderating on websites may impact your criminal record.
Grundgesetz * 23. Mai 1949 - 30. November 2007 - http://www.vorratsdatenspeicherung.de/
I am not familiar with Dutch law but they are going to sue people for copyright infringement even though they didn't host any copyrighted files? If they are held responsible for "facilitating" copyright infringement they by the same logic could not their ISP? Or their hosting provider? (if not the same as the ISP)
Am I wrong in thinking that following this logic I couldn't discus code that may be proprietary on my site as it may lead to infringement? What if I link to a site that contains eDonkey or BitTorrent links. Are they going to kick my server room door in as well?
I find this very scary
No keyboard detected. Press any key to continue.
RTFP
/. readers will get up in arms about ("how dare they stop me from stealing!")
Yes, he's blowing his karma to hell. No, he's not talking about legal P2P, only illegal, which most
Had you ever created or accomplished anything worthwhile, you'd likely understand.
I should register an account so know-nothings can mod me down and dock my karma, too.
You hit the nail on the head...
Has anyone actually fought the RIAA cases, or have they all been settled out of court? If I understand it correctly, they are suing people who are sharing files, not those downloading, and they are asking for $x per file shared. Wouldn't it be valid to ask them to prove how long you spent connected to the p2p network and then multiply this by your available bandwidth. That way you may be able to argue that you could only possibly have uploaded a certain number of songs, regardless of how many you were sharing. Sure, you may still end up paying a couple of hundred bucks, but that's far better than the few thousand I've read about.
have ever happened to innocent till proven guilty?
/me Dones His Tinfoil Snow Suit.
Because as it appears from that article, they provided a means, that is not commiting a crime.
Ford Motor company created a efficent fast self contained escape vehicle. Yet, BP is not sueing Ford for all of the robberies that take place with cars as the transportation vehicle. This whole issue seams very disorted by those who have links into media?(just a thought)
Maybe the law in Finland is quite different, by why would the police carry out such a raid? There are no criminal offences involved. There are no laws being broken, no crimes being committed right?
If the industry wants to sue someone that's civil action as I understand it.
Are the police becoming the henchmen for the corporations? Man, that would scare the shit out of me.
Maybe the cops should be, oh I dunno... stopping dangerous people, who carry out assault, rape, murder, abductions... nah, that's too easy right?
that /. kicked around last week about "how could
you prosecute BitTorrent since no one person is
holding or moving whole copies of the copied works?"
I have to ask, since the article points out that police are also striking at eDonkey servers, when the cops are going to be knocking on my door. My son and half the kids in his dorm are swapping/swiping movies like crazy with eDonkey. All of a sudden it looks like I have to get knowledgable about my liability when he brings his computer home for the Christmas break.
SLASHDOT: news for people who can't concentrate on work or have no life at all and got tired of yelling back at the TV.
..."shock and awe"?
All I know about Bush is I had a good job when Clinton was president.
I do it every week. Yes, I know it's illegal. Yes I know I probably won't be able to in the future with the draconian laws coming down.
I have a special circumstance though. I live out in the middle of no where. I don't get broadcast TV except on one station...I do on the other hand get high-speed DSL.
Now I COULD get Comcast cable, but since I only watch 4 tv shows a week, I'm not going to be paying 50 bucks a month (yes, 50 bucks here even for just plain basic). Not to mention Comcast likes to raise their rates at the drop of a hat.
Dish services are also out because the number of trees they can't get a good signal, I've tried. SO that leaves me with downloading these TV shows.
But what the TV networks are missing out on is that THEY should offer torrents of their shows right from their web pages. If they throw in the regular commercials how is this different than just watching it over the airwaves? I would download them in a heartbeat and gladly watch their commercials if they did this. Why are so uptight about this? They should be like "hell, download all you wish and trade them with your friends...as long as the commercials are still there we're still making our money...and we could also target advertising better for people that download and that could generate even more money blah blah blah..."
Movies though, I don't download at all. Never have, never will.
"Leo Fender was in a 'state of grace' when he designed the Stratocaster." -- Paul Reed Smith
Advertisments for very well known companies are appearing on the biggest torrent sites. The money from these companies is the reason why downloading movies is easy enough to become mainstream. Without this money casual users may well be put off, as the process of finding torrents would become more obviously illegal and more difficult.
In other news, all slashdot servers were seized and CmdrTaco has been deported to Guantanamo bay on terrorism charges.
Try hours. I can pull down a DVDR on this shitty DSL connection of mine in 12-16 hours via BitTorrent.
All I know about Bush is I had a good job when Clinton was president.
- Finreactor (the finnish siten in question) admins solicted for 'donations' - in other words, took money for access to torrent trackers. Also the tracker required registration, and kept 'ratios' for each user. Heck, the *bank account number* of the site was in plain view asking for donations directly to the bank account of the admins. In other words, the activity was very very stupid.
.torrents themselves is a gray area thing. Admins definitely facilitated copyright violations, but... how illegal that is? Can they be strung up for what their users did? It's a test case for P2P in Finland. I think the fact that the admins took money for access to the site will nail their asses for *something*, but the rest is still up in the air.
- By Finnish law, the crime becomes 'tekijänoikeusrikos' instead of 'rikkomus' when money is involved. The difference is that for the lesser crime, maximum penalty is just fines - and I doubt police could even get search warrants for the lesser offense.
But in this case since money is involved, and prosecution will claim that there was a goal for financial gain, and it becomes a bigger crime (max 2 years in the can). And suddenly it's easy for the police to get all the details they need from ISPs & search warrants for the busts.
So in other words: Taking money (even if it's just 'donations' to cover tracker bandwidth) is a nice way to get your ass in jail.
The case does have few murky details - they cannot prosecute everyone (over 10000 users supposedly), and distributing the
According to my cost accounting, a downloaded movie costs about $1. It's $.20 for depreciation and electricity for your computer (I live in a place with $.18/kwh electricity), $.40 for your bandwidth, and $.40 for a CDR.
I know that the boards of the media companies get group chubbies when ever someone suggest systems where they don't have to produce products, hence the cooperation with iTunes.
They dream of the day when no one owns physical media, but instead pays a per use fee to listen or view media.
Also, as long as I can't rent Troma movies at BlockBuster I'm gonna find them on P2P networks. Oh, and if it's not utter garbage I wind up buying them.
Bacardi + slashdot = negative karma.
"Police in Finland raided the operation of a popular Bit Torrent site and arrested 34 people, 30 of which were volunteers who helped moderate the site.
Register or someone else mistranslated original text. They are suspecting 4 admins plus 30 "powerusers", nobody has been arrested yet. Yesterday police raided admins' houses and seized their computers.
Apparently putting "donations" button to tracker-page got them badly screwed, since now they're were getting direct or indirect monetary benefit for running tracker (which had lot of illegal files).
More or less luckily TPB has already promised to lend it's tracker for Finnish warezors;D
One argument I see again and again with this, is that "they never possessed the original copyrighted materials, only the torrent file", but that isn't entirely true.
In order to create the .torrent file, you have to have the full original source material. Someone had the original source material (movie, dvd, software, game, etc.) and created the .torrent file from that source material. This person then must have given that .torrent file to the tracker server itself (or the person who created the .torrent is running the tracker themselves).
In fact, since the .torrent file has to directly contain the URL of the tracker itself, you can't simply "upload" the .torrent to a tracker and have it function, unless you know the exact tracker URL that server uses to host its torrent files. If you want to put a .torrent on 10 trackers, you have to create 10 separate .torrent files. You can't reuse the same .torrent file for all 10 trackers.
This means the tracker operator and the people providing torrents are collaborating in some way, or the tracker is publishing its tracker URL to facilitate people creating torrent files for it, from copyrighted source materials.
Its a little greyer than originally thought.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
It provides the proper de-centralizing stimulus.
What if George Washington had been captured and executed by the British? Was the Revolution de-centralized enough to survive his loss? Is America's democracy de-centralized enough to survive the poor quality of Diebolds voting machines?
Stuff like this will benefit change, not only in America, but in China and Iran, as well. In those countries, the kids in the universities might be apprehended and clubbed to death by the Moral Police, at any given minute. But with sufficient security and de-centralization, they can still communicate with the outside world. Enough to possibly, one day, bring decent living conditions to the culture of power which uses and discards people as you would a tool.
This is a good thing. Good changes have never come easy, or with a consensus.
I'm still waiting for Palladium. I think that will be one of the best changes, for the good of all Humanity.
Source : http://fr.news.yahoo.com/041215/1/46m9q.html
ALPA (french RIAA) - with the RIAA help, and police today closed a bittorrent hosting site (http://torrent.youceff.com) holding many copyrighted movies.
That site was hosted in France and a court order was sent to catch peoples using the service at the same time - it seems they logged 160000 unique IPs.
Under local lows, the site admin can get up to 3 years of jail + an up to 300000 fine.
So giving owners copyrights over their own work is a bad thing, eh? You're ready to throw out the GPL as invalid, then?
Oh right, copyrights are only bad if it stops you from getting movies and music for free. Gotcha.
In 100 years, when people read about these events in history books rather than newspapers, it's going to seem totally insane... our police forces chasing after and persecuting people for what essentially amounts to the distribution of ideas. If only the rest of the world could see it from a historical perspective. When we look back on the witch hunts of a few hundred years ago, we wonder how the masses ever got themselves set on such a self-destructive course, and why they allowed it to continue for so long. But when you're caught up in the drama of it all, it's sometimes hard to imagine life in any other way. So how long will we allow these witch hunts over intellectual property to continue?
What are YOU doing to protect P2P?
Let's face it, there are a lot of people out there who are using P2P to illegally acquire and distribute copywrited materials.
P2P is being threatened, not only by corporate executives and ignorant congresscritters, but by people who abuse the technology. P2P will be outlawed outright unless the legitimate users of P2P networks start policing their own.
How? Well that's a good question. A willingness to admit that there is a problem would be a good place to start.
There's a Mercedes gap too. I want one and can't afford one, but it's not government's job to do anything about it.
Out of curiosity, has anyone ever been busted for file sharing over IRC channels?
mathS
mathematics => maths; only if you studied _mathematic_ would it be _math_
Says it all, really.
It's a war. Batton down the hatches!
In all seriousness, now is definitely not a good time to be on a P2P network.
I'm not on these networks anymore, so I don't feel threatened, but I feel the MPAA are going a little to vigilante on these people. Just because they are trading stuff worth tons of euros, doesn't mean they would buy it, and they're not selling it for money. Will this increase the happiness of the greatest number of people?
No, but I guess corporations are never in it to do that :/
We live in a Kantian world...
Finally some information between all those " i cannot get my warez fix anymore" whining.
HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
how do you actually ensure that some forum/site/pages cant simply be shutdown when somebody is against it.
it doesnt actually matter if its piracy related, p2p forums, or just amnesty-international, democracy-rights-speech, or anti-china, anti-nazi, anti-imperialism, anti-communism bashing...
there will be foreces that dont agree with what other people have to say, and they come with arrest and search warrants and will shut down your site, clusters, forums, pages and so forth.
so when will the democratic and international human rights people finally wake up, and create (for example with the help of intelligent, highly anonymous, maybe distributed/grid/p2p-based) some kind of place on the web or new means of communication, that everybody could publish to, and that couldnt simply be shut down?
i mean hey we have mute-net, antsp2p, and other nice p2p stuff where you could spread your ideas, could spread your papers about evil stuff in china, about tibetan occupation, about german-nazis, about jew-bashing, rwanda-genocide, taiwan-problems, iraqi-freedom, and many other important things, but how can you enable other people to find your information that you want to spread.
you have to communication in some way, and tell them the links to click, to download, the p2p links to your important files, to secret stuff you discovered...
how can you be sure that the fbi, chinese-governemtn, african-savagetribes/african-extremists, arabian/christian-extremists dont come to you, take down your servers, or simply the riaa/mpaa simply shut down your systems and jail you for centuries?
when will people start to realize, that illegal file sharing, movie leeching, games swapping and all this useles commercial shit, is just one aspect, of a thing called "freedom of speech" or freedom of thoughts, and being able to tell other what you know/found/learned.
link sites are nothing more but information? how do they dare to shut them down? its like burning books in the old nazi days. its just meta information. can you jail somebody because you publish books about how knives, blades, atomic bombs or various physics/technology works? can u jail wikipedia writers because of they write about illegal occupation of tibet by china forces? can u jail arabs because they dont agree with jewish belief, or can u jail blacks, because they dont like white people or no matter what?
all of this is just thoughts, beliefs and values, and this world is in real danger, if you cant simply talk and tell other people about your thoughts and and beliefs.
we all better be developing some highly secure anonymous and distributed world wide system of some kind of forum, where everbody could publish all sorts of stuff
and no fbi, cia, govmnt, mpaa, riaa, china-government, attorneys and all other suckers that are against you, couldnt simply turn the system off.
mankind really needs this sort of system?
we have the systems to share files already anonymously, but we dont have a good system of sharing links and realtime/live information with lot of other people, and making those informations, meta-informations and links persistant on the net.
anyone care to comment and give any good ideas? how to solve this problem?
If the site was fintracker.net?
The Movie Mafia is addicted to high profits.
They pitch it as "Own it today" like you would a book but don't want you to copy it.
So that means they are Licensing it but they will not recognize that you have already
paid for your license when the media fails or gets lost.
Either way they will loose:
-If they loose control: They will get less $ for their movies.
-If they get absolute control: People will start making their own movies and will get NO $.
Obama's legacy: (N)othing (S)ecure (A)nywhere and (T)error (S)imulation (A)dministration
No good deed goes unpunished.
OSQ
"Did you knows these so called volunteers don't even get paid" -Homer
500 dollar reward for tip(s) leading to the arrest of the person(s) who stole my sig.
What do you expect? The MPAA owns virtually all of the movies these guys are pirating. Europe has a long-standing agreement to enforce international copyrights within their borders and I don't see how you expect that they should just ignore that. Oh right, you believe that you have an inalienable right to "free moviez 4ever".
America, stomping anonymous cowards in the dirt.
You can download ipod files from apple and play them with the knowledge that your safe with DRM.
:-)
just buy a mac
Couldn't have said it better myself.
All I know about Bush is I had a good job when Clinton was president.
That is one way to stop illegal P2P sharing.
So, what are you going to share once you put the last nail in the coffin there smartguy? Gentoo ISOs?
("how dare they stop me from stealing!")
Im not defending the argument on P2P downloding of copyrighted material is ethically right here. But I grow really tired of it being said that it is "stealing". It isnt. I was watching a BBC news report on the BitTorrent crackdown and some movie indistry suit kept referring to stealing and theives. Its copyright violation ! If it were stealing then we already have laws about stealing so those laws would be used... copyright violation is civil.
They had a Paypal donation system to raise 7500 euros for new server equipment, and they disabled the user comments pages when the appeal first went up (i.e. peeps just wondering 'where' the money was going, etc etc).
I think they finally hit around 7150 euros a week or two ago, although they'd purchased the new hardware 2 weeks before that... and all that newly purchased equipment is now in the hand of the police, what timing!
Are you local? There's nothing for you here!
Finland Finland Finland
The country you don't want to p2p
God spoke to me
America, leading the world in math and english
America invented the personal computer, without which you wouldn't have a forum to spew your anti-American hate. They also invented the light bulb, bringing light to the world. They also invented the sewing machine. So America has clothed the world, brought light to the world, and given them the information age. This is what we get in return? Your hatred?
So paying 99 or even 88 cents a track is a failure on their part? The only price most traders seem to agree to is zero.
Its not the users fault, they aren't evil. Greed is the only reason why we have suits and arrests right now
And it's not greed that makes users turn a blind eye to legitimate online digital music offerings in favor of illegal file trading for free?
Furthermore everything seems to indicate that music and film piracy has little effect on overall sales and honestly I don't see metallica starving, maybe if they bought less coke they wouldn't need the tiny bit of extra cash... You can come back and say what about the indie artists all you want, if anything this increases exposure and sales...
And herein lies the ultimate problem. This anti-establishment mentality people have manages to convince them that ownership is only important if the owner is poor. Steal from the rich, but never the poor. Equal protection of the laws applies only to those who don't drive nice cars?
Arguing that you are in favor of the status quo because it is the law is a circular argument! This is a debate about what the law should be. In a society where the government is by the consent of the governed, we have the right to argue whether a law is good or bad and needs to be changed, and we also have the right to decide if the risks of compliance are worth it.
In simpler times yes, crimes could be equated with moral wrongs. It is both wrong and illegal to kill a man. It is both wrong and illegal to rape a woman. But in these days much of law concerns itself with the government ceding the rights of the people to businesses in order to create a more profitable economy for the owners of those businesses, and the morality of that is questionable.
Those who have seen me post will know that, if anything, I'm a Republican Troll, but, even I cannot agree with the preposterous notion that violating a law at the expense of a corporation is tantamount to sin.
In your specific case, you defend the rights of broadcasters at the expense of the man who cannot get TV. But, keep in mind that under Federal Law, that man is NOT allowed to broadcast so that TV stations can make money. What would the landscape of America look like if we could all broadcast on TV? What if TV stations were limited by a range of a 5 miles, not 50? Why should the rights to the airwaves be the exclusive domain of a few? And what of the right of way to put wires in the ground? Why should I have to give up my ground? The public domains that get granted? The right of companies to put satellites over my house or fly planes over my house so that I cannot launch planes or model rockets of my own? In order to have this industrial society, the people have had to give up a huge mountain of rights, and often without any real consent of their own. So yes, while you may not agree with someone stealing TV broadcasts, at the same token, recognize that in some measure they are exercizing their own Declaration of Independence Right to Revolt, upon which this nation was founded.
This is my sig.
"I have no problem paying a monthly payment plan as long as I'm getting movies that I want. 66 cents per movie is cheap whether it is paid monthly or not.
We have an excellent plan for you: with our SuperPlatinumGold [TM] membership ($9,999.95 monthly fee) you can order all the movies you want for just 33 CENTS per movie. Yes, that's right, 33 CENTS!!!. And we'll even mail your movies by CERTIFIED first-class mail. Sign-up now at www.moviesforsuckers.com!
Are they really?
IIRC, here in the UK, we don't pay a levy on blank media (or there'd be hell to pay, Jlo and Brittany Spires ain't getting a penny out of me when I back up my computer) but we do have things such as the Performers Rights Society for collecting a fee for music paid in pubs, restaurants, shops etc.
The thing is, the society gets the money which then goes to the record company cartel. Too bad if your record label isn't in the cartel. I think they take the money and keep it.
That's how it used to be. Maybe things are different now...
And don't get me started on my TV license, which goes to fund BBC Radio 1 which pays record companies to advertise their wares on the public airwaves. Talk about a racket (and I don't just mean the affected whinging coming out of the radio).
Stick Men
... this is how likely it is that they will be able to shut down the largest bittorrent tracker in the world (and the answer to the question you are thinking about is no, that site is not a tracker) :)
Materiaalia ja ohjelmistoja sekä lajaa BitTorrent-vertaisverkkosovelluksella neljää, esitutkinta keskusrikospoliisi on muun useiden ilmeisesti!
So I guess all the video recordings I made with my vcr and let freinds view it because they didn't see the show was against the law. - the only difference is I didn't put them on the internet to share with other folks that didn't see it. what difference does it make if I shared a video tape recording with one friend or a thousand on the internet - you are still breaking the law. this is nothing but a joke - lawyers seeing an opportunity to sue more people than ever and just to get rich. I can't believe the governments that are suppose to be for the people let them get away with this crap.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=matho ugh this is not the case in many british colonial english countries(South Africa for instance) the American usage is diffferent.
Th
Well the people where I work are fed up with the bullying crap from all the *AA wankers so we decided on a new (but old fashioned) course. We've set up a swap shop.
You get to join via invite only which gets you access to a "secret" (o.k. merely not readily available) home server. This server is only available at certain intermittent times and simply lists the CDs, DVDs, Videos, software etc. you've got and that you're willing to lend out (the info is held in a database, you have to log in, the connection is via SSL etc. etc.)
So when someone wants something they ask you, you lend it them, they do what they want with it then return it. Should they wish to take a copy they do so themselves.
And as a couple of the members work in rental stores and a library we're really not short of material.
The only rule we have is this: None of us are going to buy anything new until such time the *AA nazis get a clue. Not one pence will go to them from our members. Not one fucking pence.
OK, someone in here has to play Devil's advocate and take the side of the RIAA/MPAA/etc (at least for a little bit!) Regardless of whether or not we like it, think it's fair, or intend on abiding by it, the rules say it's illegal. Same goes for speed limits. I think there are places where the speed limit that is posted is absolutely ridiculous, and (most times) I knowingly choose to ignore it and go the speed I think to be appropriate. Most times, I don't get caught, but when I do, I have no grounds to argue or complain about it. There is a law, I broke it, I need to be an adult about it and accept my punishment. That fine will determine my willingness to speed again. (It hasn't stopped me thus far! heh heh) Same goes for file sharing. If you get caught, you can bitch and complain about unfair, or technicalities but fact of the matter is there is a copyright law and if you are sharing copyrighted files you are breaking this law. As for the banter about copying rented or Netflix movies versus downloading, they are both still violation of copyright law, regardless of which is cheaper, easier, quicker, etc. Everyone just needs to admit to themselves that what they are doing is illegal and quit trying to justify it or explain it away. Now, this all being said, I agree that the laws are crazy. I also will say that they can sue people, arrest people, confiscate as many servers as they want, and the fact of the matter is, file sharing will never go away as long as we have an internet. Yesterday it was Napster. Today it's BitTorrent. Tomorrow it's ??? As long as FTP is a valid protocol, we will always be able to "share" files. And as long as I am participating in any of it, I am taking the risk of being caught...same as speeding. The post I agree with most is that rather than try to fight the beast, the powers that be should instead embrace the digital era and offer cheaper downloads, or some such. I think iTunes did a wonderful thing, and I think the MPAA should take note and follow suit. Will it stop file sharing and copyright infringement? No, but at least it's a way for them to get back some of their "losses". I would be more inclined to purchase a movie download for $5-$10 LEGALLY than to run the risk of getting caught trying to get it for free. The industries have brought this on themselves for overpricing the media we purchase (which is why they are huge money making conglomerates). If they intend on stemming the flow of copyright violation from the gaping wound of P2P file sharing, they need to make an effort to slow the flow, rather than apply a tournaquet and in doing so, have to sever the limb of interest in their material. If they can get away with successfully prosecuting the torrent site, then they also need to bring litigation against the torrent site's ISP (for allowing copyrighted material to be sent across their service), the user's ISP (for allowing the user access to the torrent site), the user (for possessing copyrighted material...this same logic applies to getting busted with a stolen VCR, even if you didn't know it was stolen), the maker of the user's network card (provides the PC access to the network, in much the same way the torrent site provides access to the shared files), the cable modem/DSL router makers (same as for the network card makers), the Bell's (for providing the backbone for the data to pass across), and the list goes on and on! There are lots of pieces involved in the transferring these files. To think that taking out the torrent hosting sites will even put a dent in stopping this from happening is naive on their part. I sincerely hope that nothing comes of the raids in Finland. I don't see how it could, but throw the right amount of power and money at anything, and you will be amazed at the results. However, at the end of the day, we are all still criminals. Shame on us.
There are 10 kinds of people in this world: Those who know binary, and those who don't.
How is it that all these countries are bellying up to this crap pushed by the MPAA & RIAA & US Law? Since when does the US rule the world? Does the US make up the laws of other countries? No Way!
I say keep downloading and tell them to shove it! They make too much $ anyway for the crap that they produce!
Later Folks!
First of all, I love Netflix myself - but no matter how much you mess with the queue you are not going to get a movie before it is released. Sometiems I like to fetch movies on DVD before they are released (even after I've watched them in theaters!) to replay a few scenes. As you say it can takea while, so I usually only do with with movies I plan to buy anyway - if I'm interested enough to download it, I'm intersted enough to buy it. They just don't make movies avaailiable as soon as they should (i.e. before pirates get them out). I wonder if the movie industry has ever considiered that it might actually boost sales to sell a DVD at the same time as the movie is in a theater - you would know pretty quickly if it was worth seeing in a theater or not, and sales might be better than otherwise. Plus of course you can always release the "directors edition" later to re-sell DVD's...
But the other good reason to use trackers is for TV shows. Here you really have no recourse, since some shows are seemingly never going to come to DVD... plus you can get HDTV versions of shows you might not be able to get using HDTV locally, or if you just can't watch it at the time it's on watch it later (how am I supposed to record HDTV today without some pretty expensive equipment?)
Especially in the case where I have already watched a show with commercials and they are not selling episodes, I have no qualms at all about downloading TV shows.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
"After thanksgiving, I got 100 CD-Rs for free. I didn't even have to pay for the stamp for the rebate since I was able to submit it on the web."
Apply's to you. Doubt the majority have others buying their supplies.
"So the cost, based on your numbers is $0.20 + $0.40 = $0.60. Which is less than the cost per video via netflix from the parent poster."
6 Cents. Scrooge would love this crowd.
"I would also question both of your other numbers. I would pay for a fast connection, regardless of downloading movies (which I don't, by the way, I'm willing to go see a movie in the theater if its good, which is maybe a few times a year)."
The argument is that downloading isn't free. The fact that you're paying for a connection for other purposes doesn't mean that it's free. Someone other than you paying for your connection (like the CD-R's) would be free, because there's no flow of money from you to an external entity.
Until everyone in power who was born under the old style of brick-n-mortaring IP is dead or retired. Maybe when "IP" is not some fancy thing that make people say, "Hmm" when they read stories pertaining to it, it will be regulated to the fringe of irrelevancy where it belongs.
100 years ago, anyone trying to build their own machine that could fly was challenged by the Wright Bros' insane patent law wars. Today we laugh at the follies of our great-grandparents as we help our kids build one from scratch.
Yeah, right.
To borrow a linux phrase.
"Downloading is free if your time is worthless."
Now that we control them
errr
Now that they're our allies they are our friends!
... has already spent the money they put up (7.000 Euros) with a campaign to buy two new servers. That money would have helped with the lawer bill :/
Btw, i've donnated for the servers and they should put up another paypall account so ppl can help with the litigation costs.
Does anyone know the name of the website that was shut down? The article didn't appear to mention a name.
"rikos" == crime
"rikkomus" == misdemeanour
The police must think they have grounds for proving this is a crime, a misdemeanour wouldn't be sufficient to warrant seizing equipment.
It isn't actually illegal (yet) for a natural person to copy material for personal use in Finland, but making it available is. This affects the users.
Secondly, the administrators were aware of and facilitating illegal activity. If you know about illegal activity and don't report it, you're alredy over the line.
The money aspect is probably the biggest issue here.
I've read suggestions that some users' machines were trojaned by a security company employed by the entertainment industry to help gather evidence. If this is true it could add an interesting spin. If this was illegal it won't nullify the evidence (as in the US) but could be very bad publicity for the entertainment industry at the very least.
I'm sorry if I haven't offended anyone
If the RIAA were smart, not only would they take down suprnova.org, but they'd take it over and install spyware to facilitate and automate their lawsuits. This is the backdoor into bittorrent that they've been looking for.
And, since suprnova.org's domain is hosted in the US, it would be trivial to get an injunction to get the domain name transferred into the hands of the RIAA, regardless of where the site is located.
And one question which just begs to be asked is why, oh why, is it that no one is pursuing bittorrent technology in as legal a fashion as possible (and no, I'm not referring to the legaltorrents.org)?
Bittorrent offers superb potential for bringing a wealth of media to the public. It's got to be just a matter of time before someone figures out how to blend the itunes model with bittorrent. I.e. fast download speeds and a legal framework to satisfy the RIAA, or at least the courts. Plus it would have to be easily crackable, like itunes, too. :)
Of course, that assumes that bittorrent solves its protocol issues. I've been at 99.9% of the Fedora Core 3 release for several days now; and doubt it will ever complete. :(
Why are so uptight about this?
Because if you download high-res, commercial-free TV shows for, say a $1.00 a show, you won't be willing to shell out the $25.00 for a measly 6 episodes of the series later on.
The reason this is stupid is because it's not financially reasonable to offer DVD's for every TV show in their archive, so they just market the ones that are popular, thereby missing out huge profit potential. Oh well, until they get their shit together, torret it is.
"how can you compare downloading movies to Nelson Mandela?"
Trite causes invite trite comparisons.*
*And yes I do consider "right to being entertained" a trite cause, ESPECIALLY compared to what Mandela was fighting.
The Bittorrent protocol certainly has a good design, and its clients like Azureus improve on this. But the centralization is a fatal flaw, especially this sort of manual centralization with trackers. What we need is a truly de-centralized protocol, incorporating the advances of Bittorrent, and getting rid of the drawbacks.
a) they need to charge the sponser for another showing of the commercial (or else the sponser is getting a freebe). Now you are in the stupid dot-com world of "clicks" to figure out how much to charge. The sponser is going to pay a lot less for a few thousand downloads vs potential millions of over-the-air viewers.
b) With the show available on the Internet, maybe there will now be less demand for it when re-run time rolls around, where the network SELLS the commercial slot AGAIN.
Bottom line - it is not free for the networks to push GB's of contentent over their bandwidth. So, what's in it for them?
This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
"Right now, the only person I've seen who's made any effort to do this is Richard M. Stallman: his proposals only seem to apply successfully to computer software (I can't see a GPL'd movie being fundable, can you?); they do not require copyright reform; and he's demonised on Slashdot all the time as some kind of raving lunatic for his efforts."
This bothers me more than anything. At best one can argue that one's virtually spitting on a faceless corperation. The same can't be said for Richard. Of course like many things digital. The nature of the medium invites lazy actions. How many complainers would drive over to Richard's house? Ring the doorbell? Then spit on him?
Which is that everyone can run a tracker. When anyone can be a server, you can't really claim that all the negatives of centralized P2P apply. These pirate bittorrent sites run their own trackers so that they can enforce ratios, but bittorrent can be run from virtually anywhere.
The alternative is to develop fixed bittorrent clients (as suprnova has been trying to do). This is a bad idea, because it will require the formalization of the port(s) that bittorrent runs across, making BT easy to track and block. As it stands, the torrent specifies the tracker's port and the tracker manages the clients such that port agnosticism is possible. This, I think, is a big deal. The "compromise" centralized architecture of BT as it stands has a lot of merit.
BiTorrent glossary: BT = shot for BitTorrent .torrent file = a bookmark to a file
BitTorrent server = a bookmark sharing server
Most of the music I download is just for "testing" I burn it on CDR since my car stereo refuses CDRW. Most of them last less than a couple of days in my car. For some rare gems I buy the original... sometimes its quite difficult. (ie: Cara Dillon CDs only available thru Amazon UK)
Music industry evolve or vanish.
Home of Faramir Paint Shop Pro scripts
You asked, I answer. Ditch all the people abusing the network. Actively show that they're not wanted.
Work within the system for positive change. Show that you're part of the solution, and not part of the problem.
Worthy of an "insightful" status.
"I wish that type of usage was considered "fair use" but it's not."
Of course not. However I see a business opportunity. Superid's "Did you miss something?" download service. For a small fee, you can download what you missed. Superid gets an income, especially since the IT industry is tanking. The other parties get there cut. And the consumer gets to pay for the convience of watching what they want.
Copyright laws are bad when it comes to Music,Movies and other stuff. But Copyright is good when it comes to protecting the GPL.
Have you ever been to a turkish prison?
I've always maintained the entertainment cops need to go after the SOURCE, i.e. ripping groups and other wholesale distributors of pirated material.
Maybe it'll keep the RIAA stormtroopers busy from attacking 12-year-olds.
In Soviet Russia, I ruled you
I would download them in a heartbeat and gladly watch their commercials if they did this
Quite unlikely...
There will be a bunch of cracks for their DRM'd software that will allow you to skip the commericals.....Too tempting.
Pay? haha, yeah one time viewing & if its Star Trek will be like five bucks an episode.
Candle burns its brightest in the dark
Bah, reading most of the post on here it seems most people think of the world as a black and white place.
Come on time to grow up.
The RIAA (and sympathisers) sees things one way. The anti RIAA another.
This is narrow thinking.
The world is not a black and white place, there are many shades of grey.
<dagnamhippy>
Maybe if we learn to give and take the grey can become a rainbow
</dagnamhippy>
+----------------- | What is the question!
"So, if next week I go to the gas station to fill up and while there they give me a free "no-strings-attached" Dr. Pepper it isn't really free because I had to spend money to get there, even though I was already going to the gas station for a totally unrelated transaction?"
Don't mistake "inconsequential" for free. If that Dr Pepper was a fraction of a cent? It would be inconsequential, but not free. And yes it isn't free (as in beer). A fraction of that "totally unrelated transaction" went to pay for that "no strings attached" Dr Pepper.
They're going after people who supply illegal torrents. So yes, they're going to win a lot a lawsuits.
BitTorrent has many legal uses. Illegal trackers have exactly one, thouroughly illegal purpose. And those who host them have control over hosting them. It's not a common carrier issue. People who host illegal trackers are directly and deliberatly assisting people in a crime. It's not "just a pointer." If I started going around telling people very publically where to go buy drugs I'd get myself arrested. A pointer is telling people where the gas station is. A criminal pointer is advertising and assisting in finding and aquireing illegal goods.
I don't know where people get this rediculous idea that going after people who publish illegal trackers is an attack on BitTorrent itself. It's not illegal to tell people where the gas station is and nobody pushing these cases is pretending it is.
I guess it just makes it all the more sensational though when people say they are.
Work Safe Porn
Nothing has been *taken* after all....
At this moment, the situation in my country (netherlands) is like this:
Common TV broadcast stations are payed by public money. In past, you paid only if you had television/radio set. Now, it is included in taxes. So, on a yearly base i pay about 70-100 euro for television.
To actually watch television, one must pay cable company about 16 euro/month for 15 lousy TV channels (yes, the channels i actually would like to see are not included, add another 10-15 euro). To safe some money, i decided stopping this cable abbo. I can fetch 1 (sometimes 2) public TV channels out of the air (while I pay for three by taxes!).
To make it worse, Monthly i pay about 20,= for taxes on blank DVD's (yes, 1 euro / DVD) just to get my backups done. No illegal content here.
So, on an annual base, i pay around 350 euro for their copyrights. For television i don't watch. For having data i want to backup.
It is this duality: you pay taxes (on CD/DVD) because they find it likely you are going to put illegal content on your media. But at the same time, you are not allowed to do so.
So, no wonder majority of people have no moral problems downloading some tv show or movie now and then.
A glitch a day keeps the bugs away.
If you set up a home wireless network how could the RIAA definitively prove that you are responsible for illegally downloaded material, especially if you live in an apartment or townhouse? There is now way for them to determine which dynamically ascribed ip was pointing to which computer on the network, which means that you can always claim "my neighbor did it". As long as the materials are no longer on your computer, you should be good to go, right?
You cant force people to close their wireless networks.
Russ
You found a way to blame a Finnish police raid in Finland on the US! For extra points, try to find a way to blame it directly on Bush, or better yet, John Ashcroft.
You forget about the popular "blood-sucking leech lawyer" expense. ;)
I,Robot was such a wasted of disk space noone could BT-it after 3 days!
Just turn my JVC stero on whilst I wear a hat in the bath
Will Smith == Huge Grant
Lets see some origanl films from the OS community, porn more odd than Japan's action films more FXed than Hollywood more killing more fucking hahaha my bandwidth explodes!
Lets do like the Iraqies, chop the heads off the people you hate
I have no problems with paying for products, so I download music. What I like, I buy, and what I don't like I delete. More of my money goes to the artists whose works I like, and less on gambling at the record store.
Regardless of circumstance, TV shows aren't a life necessity like food and water. Just because you can't get them out there doesn't mean you suddenly have the right to them.
But if they can locate and take action against those engaging in the illegal behavior (and by all accounts I've heard, that includes these guys) while leaving the legitimate uses of the service alone, more power to them. I always here people critizing various industries like the MPAA and RIAA for trying to destroy P2P technology which does have legitimate uses, but practices like this leave the legit uses alone.
Mathematics is made of 50 percent formulas, 50 percent proofs, and 50 percent imagination.
How hilarious. You make it sound like these elite tyrants are running around with an army of lawyers doing evil. Completely ignoring that all they're doing is suing individual downloaders who are violating their rights--the very thing Slashdotters suggested they do in 2000 during the Napster lawsuit!
It's hollow words to talk about rights as though they're being trampled on by people with lawyers. You've got such a skewed worldview. It is the content holders whose rights are being completely ignored and trampled on. How is it a "tyranny" to protect what is yours?
Or does that only make sense when Slashdot posts a "GPL source code theft" article? Only then do copyrights and creator rights seem to hold any clout amongst you people.
I like the train of thought, I too wish networks would offer shows for download - complete with commercials. I like watching some commercials anyway, and it would be better for them than people downloading toreents with commercials edited out.
However the problem would be which commercials to include - as shows usually have a mix of commercials both national and local. I suppose the answer might be to offer torrents for download on affiliate websites instead of national, but it would increase the burden on them and be a lot of work.
Still, I think the potential benefits of drumming up a lot of support for a TV show that people might not otherwise watch would be great. If they offered the show for download a day after it aired they would still get people watching broadcast, and the ability to download might well draw more people into watching something in an otherwise bad timeslot.
And people would STILL buy the DVD collections, which is I'm sure the other thing on networks minds when considering offering downloads of shows.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I am posting as AC because i have modded heavy on this topic and want the points to stay. Sigh.
Your still making the same mistake - So I want to pay NOTHING for what I see, I steal the movie either by downloading or sneaking into a movie theater. So what?
The law is being used as a club for a probelm that doesnt yet exists. None of the industries that bitch about losing billions every year,and have bitched for DECADES, have really lost money. REally starge that all these industries that are losing so much money HAVE so much money still.
People should get paided for the work they do if they want to. If someone makes a good film/book/painting they should make money off of it. I am not sure if it is "right" (whatever the hell THAT means) to download a movie or a TV show or whatever.
But I do know one thing - it isn't a probelm yet. There is no SIGN of a probelm yet. Look, if the movies/music/whatever were REALLY suffering from it,then we can talk about what needs to be put in place. If our culture is poorer because of all of us nasty people "stealing" then it should be obvious and easy to see. Great films should be making no money at the box office but everyone should be talking about what they saw. Thats not happening.
What is happening is that massive compaines are using law in a way that is vile because they think they might "someday" make no money because of what some people are doing. Let us fix a current probelm before addressing one that MIGHT happen.
There is a lot of flaming going on here about the ethics of downloading these movies, etc, and not a lot of discussion about the implications of stated events. You might think that I'm one of those tin foil hat guys, but lets be serious.
The problem as the RIAA/MPAA sees it, with regards to file sharing, is not that you are depriving them of profits or that you have broken copyright law. They take issue with the fact that long-term use of file sharing to distribute their media will curtail their plans for purely subscription based services.
The RIAA, MPAA, cable companies, and other media companies are looking towards subscription based services where you are locked into a particular service. Right now, we have to pay a subscription fee to watch cable television. Its a steady, consistent form of income for the companies providing the service. The RIAA and MPAA would LOVE to migrate to subscription based services. Netflix and others are the beginning of this. Eventually, instead of getting DVDs in the mail, you will simply be able to punch it up on your TV for a monthly fee without the ability to copy it. Without an actual physical medium to distribute the content, copying becomes more difficult.
The real problem lies with the fact that a company (MPAA) can make a threat, and half way around the world a police force raids some place and arrests 30 people for an offence that is actually a civil matter, not a criminal one. The fact that the police and government forces are butting into civil matters is extremely frightening. It is one more nail in the coffin for civil rights and for freedom.
Call me crazy, but to me, this is the same thing as being arrested for slander. Sure, the person that I have slandered has every right to take me to court and work to receive compensation for my lies. But what right does the government have to come in and arrest you for it? There is a big difference between a civil offence and a criminal offence. It is a line that must be well defined in order to preserve individual liberties.
It is no more possible to stop file sharing activities than it is to end drug trade, prostitution, or running moonshine.
Alochol was legalized in the US because enforcing the laws made the mob and crooked officials rich, and because the laws effects on people were not to cause them to stop drinking, but to change when, where, and how they drank.
Keeping these other things illegal is wasteful. Enforcing these laws doesn't help the 'victims' or the 'criminals', and in some cases makes things worse.
More specifically:
Artists do not get more money from RIAA/MPAA prosecution of traders (the lawers might). Crack babies aren't helped or prevented by The Drug War. Neighborhoods do not clean up from the police putting a bunch of hookers and johns in jail.
But to answer your question, there is nothing that 'legitimate' file traders need to do. It can't be stopped. It's just a matter of time before the current social system crumbles before the mighty wheels of the next version.
I saw that commercial too, the last time I went to the movies. And like someone else on here said earlier, I was wondering "WHY THE FUCK ARE YOU TELLING ME THIS WHEN I"M ONE OF THE PEOPLE WHO"S ACTUALLY PAYING TO SEE YOUR CRAPPY MOVIE?"
I download shows too. I don't get UPN because I don't have an HD tuner card yet and it's only HD where I live (UPN is a sidecar on the local CBS affiliate). Enterprise is right at the top of my weekly download list - right next to West Wing and American Dreams.
But if you want to know "who gets hurt" I have no problem explaining that: the local broadcaster is the one hurt. In my case this is an outright act on my part because I cannot stand the local stations, so I do what I can to go around them.
Networks don't offer direct downloads because this would take away ad revenue from your local affiliate. If your local affiliate can't get ad revenue then they can't stay on the air. You may not have a problem downloading stuff, but what about grandma? If the station goes dark, grandma loses her Y&R. It's the same reason you can't get ABC over a dish if the local ABC affiliate says you can get their signal.
And, in my case they did exactly that when I had a sat, in spite of the fact I cannot get ABC at all even with a rooftop antenna, the CBS affiliate often doesn't run shows and even interrupts shows right in the middle with ad placements, and the NBC affiliate is stuck on 1970s equipment and refuses to improve even to a stereo audio channel.. I say screw'em all. But I don't do this silently - I've written all my stations repeatedly informing them of what I do and why I do it. I don't see a problem with breaking laws that need to change to reflect our evolving society, but you gotta be willing to speak out and act toward that change.
...I found the Register's characterization of the MPAA Amusing. Quote the article:
"The Motion Picture Ass. of America (MPAA)"
'course that may be old news by now.
Model 551, Chambered in 6mm
Copyright law does not restrict itself to worthwhile creations. Whether a creation is worthwhile is irrelevant in the eyes of the law.
Piracy was initially adapted to people who copied music/movies to sell for profit, thus pirating.
but the P2P networks, mainly the BT ones now days, are trying to profit with adds on the page, none that I know of charge for access to links. The people uploading the torrents are not profiting on the torrent, if anything they are losing money because of the BW used.
the only ones that can profit from the actual sharing is down loader who can then burn to cd or dvd, and then sell them on e bay.
in reality, the BT sites shouldn't even be a target, the up loaders should be the target, as the BT sites rarely host the actual files being downloaded.
in any case it is all bs, give me a product worth paying for, and I will pay for it.
42 69 6C 6C 20 47 61 74 65 73 20 69 73 20 61 20 77 68 6F 72 65 21
Who would have guessed that there'd be an expert in finish law here, making one of the first few posts.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
Check out the top sourceforge downloads for the week.
Of the top 10, 7 are file sharing apps commonly associated with illegal trading of movies. Then you have VirtualDub and CDex, for ripping DVDs and CDs respectively. Rounding out the top 10 is gaim.
Is it only a matter of time before the MPAA comes after Sourceforge?
And does anyone else find it depressing that trading copyrighted works seems to be by far the most popular use for open source software?
Go on. Download a movie. "It's a Wonderful Life" is a nice movie, and one of the few productions that has fallen into the public domain as originally intended. Download it if you can find it -- it's squeaky-clean legal.
I just want the law rolled back to the original time frames: 14 years + another 14 years if you re-register. That used to be the law. Did someone discover that stuff wouldn't be made unless they extended it, and extended it retroactively such that no copyright looks like it's going to expire, ever? No -- that's not how and why laws get changed. Laws of this sort are not driven by "credibility", but "ka-ching". At the very least, can we have back the original terms under which things were copyrighted at the time, rather than all this Darth Vader "I have altered the terms of our deal" stuff?
The difference between Disney and the average copyright infringing downloader is that Disney gets to specify the law.
You foolish Americans believe everything they teach you in your facist schools. Learn to think for youself! Don't believe propaganda such as this Americans have given nothing to the world but war! You really think Edison invented the light bulb! Hah, some Candian though of it before him! Sure, it never worked until Edison touched it, but he DID NOT INVENT IT!. AMERICA CREATED NOTHING except BRITNEY SPEARS AND SLUTTISM.
The only thing you ever invented was the nuke! That shows what war mongers you are! We all know that George W. Bush has not captured Osama bin Laden so that the Christian Coalition, the Jews, big corporations, white men, and Republicans could oppress liberals.
You can't hide the truth!
George Bush Banned my IP Address!
As a citizen of the Republic of Finland, I have to say that I would feel a lot safer if the police would concentrate on catching real criminals (murderers, rapists, thiefs, muggers) and public nuisances (drunk drivers) who harm real people instead of going after a bunch of nerds whose only crime is that they may have lowered the potential profits of some media corporations by an undefinied amount.
The police is hopelessly underfunded and understaffed as it is. They should be thankfull that someone is sitting in the front of their computer playing a warezed game, as opposed to driving over little children while drunk.
Yes, I'm annoyed; it's my tax money that's being wasted here.
Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.
You're equating America's struggle for independence with the right to download "Gigli" from Supernova?
Somehow I think there's a difference.
"The Motion Picture Ass. of America (MPAA)"
Perhaps this is the new way to refer to them, and we should all jump on board.
DISCLAIMER:
I don't believe what I write, and neither should you.
Kinda like that tax on Canadian blank media mentioned earlier. Then, the money could be distributed not just to record labels, but to all the major corps to offset losses from thefts in which cars were used. And if little "mom and pop" liquor stores aren't part of the big corporate cartel then too bad for them.
And so was the overhead FLIR tapes of automatic weapons fire from OUTSIDE the building, firing into the kitchen area (in the back, away from view of the news cameras).
This tape was shown during presentations to Congress (the board doing the investigation, I believe), and the source was the govt's own chopper circling overhead.
The reasoning the govt gives for the flashes of light seen on the FLIR? Sunlight reflected from debris.
Anyone who knows how FLIR works knows that sunlight reflecting off of a piece of small debris, sitting on the ground 10,000 feet below a helicopter in a slow orbit, is not going to create tight-point hotspots which also happen to pulse several times a second, then pause, then pulse several more times a second. If it were a light-sensitive instead of a heat-sensitive camera, perhaps... but the sun glinting off of a perfect mirrored object on the ground that far up isn't going to create enough radiant heat to show up that hot on a FLIR camera. Just not possible.
Go view the tape for yourself. The program is called "Waco: The Rules of Engagement" http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120472/, and has been shown on The History Channel several times.
A quick search on Google brings the following review:
http://www.waco93.com/washingtonweekly.htm
obvious.
Currently, getting hold of a _legal_ download of some music, a movie or a missed TV episode is difficult or impossible. When it is easier to find the episode you missed last night via a legitimate source (even for a sensible fee) then it is to get it from a peer sharing network, then the sharing networks will probably die down to a few die-hards.
In the meantime, I guess somebody will come up with a way of distributing the reccomendation sites for eDonkey and create a version of BitTorrent that uses some form of distributed tracker.
The demand for downloaded media is there - what we need is a _legitimate_ supply to match that demand.
Internet doesn't seem to connect well with relaities of the world, like link of contracts starting with actor, ending with distribution company. Internet exposes and assaults very basic constructs of life, and either put number of draconian stallinist constraints on people who use the internet or we change to adjust to It being integral part of our lives, like "the net" in cyberpunk.
2c
Mankind did the same thing.. only it wasnt by electronic means.. But, share something that was 'wrong' and you were burnt at the stake..
In another 100 years people will still be persecuted for shareing information and ideas, in what ever formats are available to us at that time..
---- Booth was a patriot ----
I think if you're gonna say that it's wrong download and listen to or watch something that you havent paid for then you must also believe that it's wrong for a friend to lend you a cd or dvd. Is it mass piracy if I move in with my girlfriend and have access to her music and film collection?
Downloading other peoples creations because you are interested in them is right, any creator interested in getting their message or art across must see it this way.
Creators who think that they are losing out on financial gain because more and more people are experiencing their art cannot be thinking straight.
People who download music or film because they'd rather blow their money on booze and sweets are wrong. But that's an issue for the education system, the church or philosophy etc not copyright laws.
What are YOU doing to protect FTP?
Let's face it, there are a lot of people out there who are using FTP to illegally acquire and distribute copywrited [sic] materials.
FTP is being threatened, not only by corporate executives and ignorant congresscritters, but by people who abuse the technology. FTP could be outlawed outright unless the legitimate users of the FTP protocol start policing their own. Couldn't it?
(In case it's not obvious, the above is sarcasm. Neither FTP nor P2P is in any danger of being outlawed. Which kinda blows a big hole in TrollBridge's thesis.)
You're comparing apples to oranges. P2P networks have far more public visibility than FTP, and makes files far more accessible to users than FTP. Afterall, you don't see the xxAA's waging such a public campaign against FTP file sharers, do you? Oh yeah, and get bent!
There's a Mercedes gap too. I want one and can't afford one, but it's not government's job to do anything about it.
Its mostly useless, but the people kling to their fantasies (instead of working on some anonymizing system)
"As a citizen of the Republic of Finland, I have to say that I would feel a lot safer if the police would concentrate on catching real criminals (murderers, rapists, thiefs, muggers) and public nuisances (drunk drivers) who harm real people instead of going after a bunch of nerds whose only crime is that they may have lowered the potential profits of some media corporations by an undefinied amount."
Oh, and speeders. Musn't forget speeders.*
*Sarcasm for the slow. Notice how every crimminal caught always wants the police to pick and choose what laws to enforce (usually the one they were caught under).
"I think part of the equation of no value is that music CAN be reprocuded with zero cost, thus is no longer rare. So by copying the cd you are not depriving the original owner of anything, but steal a car and you would be."
And inflation is depriving me of nothing as well.
"Ghandi would be proud." ...of economic terrorism.
"That is true, and that is why the GPL was not intended for the likes of you. You may be able to be a parasite on the GPL ("stealing" the "intellectual property" of the Free Software Foundation, to put it in the words of the proponents of free beer for publishers), but that doesn't mean we should retain copyright as it is just to enable you to stay that parasite."
Parasites==illegal file traders.
All the arguments used by them, can be used for the other.
"I'm not hurting anyone."
"You can't stop me. I'll crush you."
"I see you're doing well. Guess I'll continue doing what I'm doing."
and my personal.
"You can't tell me what to do."
Strong hint: With or without copyright. If someone wants to be a parasite? They'll be a parasite. With copyright at least the GPL will have a defense. You'll leave FOSS toothless.
Material and software and also widespread bittorrent peer-to-peer application four, pre-investigation central crime police is other of several apprently.
(provided for those who cannot understand finnish)
You sign up to the Kyoto Protocol and stop your citizens polluting our common atmosphere, and we'll stop ours sharing your files.
Bit of a long shot, but it might just work.
a) drugs are avaialbe at many prices. the legal ones, many of whom are narcotics(mmmm...lithium). moreover, they are in ample enough supply to be more effectd by seasonal weather than by any law enforcement strategy. ergo, the good old 'laws' of supply and demand apply. b)given that 'fair' use of copies is slightly oxymoronic, a war on copying given the widespread nature of its practice is unthinkably expensive to do on a wide scale. Think of the time required to send angry letters to suspected copiers. the legal fees, and zip-ties alone would make victory in the WAr on Copying impossible. c) you and the chap to whom you are responding are missing the real meaning of Christm...err...i mean the real reason to have a War on something: war require soldiers, soldiers get paid, that pay is spent on consummer goods. ain't war grand.
Without eyes there is no light and no darkness.
Xtifr owned you TrollBridge, suck it up, don't get all defensive, you puss.
I was just getting used to ShareConnector and now it's gone! Could anyone please recommend a similar site (besides SuprNova) that has good torrent links and reviews. Thanks in advance...
So if the site was faster and no servers have been boght they must be holding it slow since de begining just to put all that crap up and get the money... Could it be *that* premeditated?
heard of tivo? same shit
Has it no boundry at all, anymore? Is it permissable
to even ask this?
When you want a netflix movie, you go to their website, add it to the top of your list, and wait a day or two for it to get there. Work: 5 minutes. Wait: 2 days.
And watch as the ETA goes up to Very Long Wait.
I wouldn't mind that at all. If people are really so resistant to advertising, then why was AdCritic so successful?
People love to watch some ads, and will when given the chance. Just bceause people can download things and watch them as desired does not mean the advertisment will die out - it will just have to shift a little to become more interesting to people, or turn into things like product placement. If people think product placement is heavy now, they should try watching old episodes of things like the George Burns and Gracie allen show - it mhad many parts that directly integrated the sponsor into running jokes! Even if people but a few more Pepsi cans in shows it would still be less obtrusive that it used to be back in the "olden days" (note I didn't say good or bad...).
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
If I started going around telling people very publically where to go buy drugs I'd get myself arrested.
You can buy over-the-counter medications at Wal-Mart. The store even has an eye doctor to write a prescription for an "eye infection" drug (wink wink nudge nudge).
Come arrest me if you can find me.
To suggest that copying of a piece of work without paying for it somehow gives you the moral high ground is laughable.
To suggest that it doesn't is fascist. Among several major moral philosophies, only fascism is compatible with copyright.