Slashdot Mirror
MPAA Goes After More Bittorrent Site Operators
Just another Coward writes "DSL Reports grabbed a copy of the lawsuit threat letters sent by the MPAA to the bittorrent website owners. This latest document was sent to a Torrent site called 'demonoid.com', which is now offline."
Just use filetype:torrent. Not pretty, but it works...
What, like this? You just type "filetype:torrent moviename" into the seach box. Of course, this means that Google will be in violation of the INDUCE act should it ever get passed...
UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
In short, the downstream and upstream share a buffer; if the buffer becomes full (i.e. maxxed out your upload capacity) then both streams will suffer. As the guy pointed out, Azureus (and other clients) will allow you to throttle your upstream.
In addition to this, you should also throttle your downstream just a bit (in case you are able to max it out, I believe the same problem could arise). I had mine throttled around 90% of each maximum (so about 175KB/12KB) and it worked like a charm.
As to the memory requirements, you might want to look into how often the client commits its memory cache to disk in order to alleviate this.
::jafomatic
First off, piracy is still stealing.
No, it is not and never has been(*).
Theft, according to the criminal code in my country is defined as:
"The taking away of a moveable thing owned by someone else."
Note: "taking away"
Unauthorized copying is not stealing. It is illegal, but it is not theft.
If you have any education in logic - and as a geek I simply assume you do - then you know that if your assumption is false, your entire train of argument derails, since it is impossible to get a correct result from a false assumption.
(*) actually, unless you talk about actual piracy, that thing with the boats and the parrots on the captain's shoulder. That, of course, is stealing.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
I am not sure about Swedish law, but in most countries simply _signing_ a treaty does not make the treaty provisions legally binding. In the United States, for example, the Congress must pass legislation that conforms with the treat provisions before any of the provisions are _law_. Further, many treaties (like the bullshit international copyright treaties) have a lot of room for interpretation, so very different laws may be crafted from the same basic framework provided by the treaty. International copyright law is enormously complex, and it's not surprising that it would be difficult for a US company to sue a person residing in another country over a copyright related matter, especially if that 'other country' is a country like Sweden.
Visualize the world of wine
If you know Swedish, their site provides you among other things with P2P and IP related news, tutorials on ripping, compressing and distributing media on various P2P networks, papers on how various P2P protocols work, links to articles and research papers on P2P, internet media and Open Source, as well as an entire section on legal matters regarding P2P in Sweden and abroad.
This is not what I would consider typical "geek fare", although I must say that I would generally lend more credence to a well-informed geek's knowledge of IP law than, say, whatever FUD the **AA happens to be spouting on a particular day.