Slashdot Mirror
BitComet Banned From Private Trackers
An anonymous reader writes "Slyck news is reporting that because BitComet does not recognize the 'private flag' on torrents originating from pirate BitTorrent trackers, this client is being banned from these communities. Private trackers are finding their torrents spread via the private DHT layer, allowing leechers to bypass ratios and download content freely."
Does this strike anyone else as an ironic, considering that all the people that are downloading *aren't* the owners of the content to begin with?
That's a very bold generalization to make. It is almost RIAA-esqe.
There could very well be a family wishing to share a large collection of digital family videos that they have taken at holidays and birthdays, for instance. They want them to remain fairly private while sharing the content that they own.
BitTorrent has many, many legitimate uses. It is completely incorrect to claim that all users who wish to limit the sharing of their data are pirates.
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
At least give downloading Linux distributions as an example. The one you gave was tortured so effectively I have to wonder if you work for the White House.
Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
Maybe the video-trading family example is weak. I'll offer you a real example instead: Mandrake Club. Mandrake Club members pay an annual fee for access to expanded versions of the Mandrake distribution. This depends on the level (read: cost) of your membership. In all cases, the content that members can download is different from the freely-available Mandrake content. Now, why would Mandrake or its club members want non-members using their private bittorrent distrubution method? In this case, they certainly own the content.
If this "private" flag relies on cooperation from clients, then it is broken.
Why those bitcommet users, they just cheat to get content they didn't pay for. HOW DARE THEY, I should call the MPAA/RIAA depending on what you are sharing. The number of private trackers that share legal content can be counted on the fingers of one hand. I mean why would say a linux distro give a fuck who gets their content and at what share ratio? There are probably enough die hard fans to keep the seeds populated without enforcing it with ratios.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
The thing with BT is: if you have say 10 seeds, then your torrent is fine. If you have even 1 seed, it won't die. It doesn't matter that some folks leech and then run. So, the core premise of these private sites is bunk. Worse, it's immensely counterproductive. DHT can keep a torrent alive and supplied with seeds. Barriers to access mean fewer downloaders, hence slower torrents and fewer seeds. I wouldn't be surprised if torrents on these sites died at least as often as on fully public sites.
Really, it seems to me that these folks want some sort of private domain to boss around and feel elite. The rest is just their rationalization.
You can never stop someone technically knowledgeable enough to mod the code themselves... if they are determined enough to be a dick, that is. The thing is, most people don't know how to do it, and most of those who do don't want to be dicks. What you have left is a small numbers of sociopathic fucks who aren't worth worrying about. If a client comes pre-modded for joe-numbnuts to ignore ratios... ban it.
This method seems to work pretty well in keeping assholes to a minimum.
Okay, Admittedly, I'm taking a logical leap here, let's hope that I land on safe ground.
Doesn't this Private Flag seem a lot like the Broadcast Flag? It prevents people from getting content. So, in a way, you've just legitimized DRM for the movie industry. Haven't you?
I know it sounds like an odd argument, but you're essentially wanting the same abilities that the RIAA/MPAA want -- to control the distribution of content. And when a client doesn't respect those rules, you ban it. How silly is that? You want to pilfer xbox games and mp3's, yet, you don't want to give others the same rights that you claim for yourself.
Didn't you get the memo? There's no honor among thieves.
Besides what's to stop BitComet from doing something like this:
#define USE_PRIVACY_FLAG 1
Since all you need is one client it might be possible to modify the original BitTorrent client to achieve the same ends. All it takes is one misbehaving client to publish the torrent to the DHT and then many people can leach.
Good going losers. You've just started an arms race in the BT community. There's no way to prevent the forking of clients now into incompatible clients.
Grab a seat yourself...
A large number of people on the internet who use stuff like BT to download legit software really don't give a rat's ass about dickhead movie/software pirates.
I use BT to get ISOs for Linux distros and other legal free data. I don't like the fact BT gets whatever negative publicity the *AA like to throw out to the public due to people using it for illegal acts, and I'm sure there are others who feel the same.
Get a job, buy the movie/CD/software. Don't like the prices? Buy second-hand. Don't like that? Complain to the *AA/developer and/or don't buy it. Stop acting like a 12-year old with a cable modem.