Slashdot Mirror


IsoHunt Shut Down?

psic writes "One of the most popular torrent search sites, IsoHunt, was taken down on tuesday. The owners of the site say that the move came from their ISP without prior notice, though it is probably linked with the MPAA's lawsuit against various torrent search sites earlier this year. They plan on moving ISPs from the US to Canada, and say that moving the servers so someplace like Sweden or Sealand is not an option, as they put it: "BitTorrent was created for legitimate distribution of large media files, and we stand by that philosophy as a search engine and aggregator."" This is a story we've heard before with other sites, only serving to further demonstrate that playing wack a mole with torrent aggregators isn't the solution to anything.

297 comments

  1. the obligatory... by apodyopsis · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers

    1. Re:the obligatory... by richdun · · Score: 0

      The new new HD format - a giant holo-sphere that shoots you with a planet-killer laser beam if you try to use it with a PC or other "Rebel" device.

    2. Re:the obligatory... by delinear · · Score: 0

      At least they're not copying the gaming industry, "Use the starforce, Luke"

    3. Re:the obligatory... by jasondlee · · Score: 0

      Ugh. Enough of this stupid quote. Godwin? Care to come up with something new?

      --
      jason
      Have a good day?! Impossible! I'm at work!
    4. Re:the obligatory... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers

      Ah, spoken like a true 8 year-old.

      How about next time you be original and quote something like Ren and Stimpy?

    5. Re:the obligatory... by boisepunk · · Score: 1

      Bad metaphor and at best a flawed analogy. They first need TO GET a grip.

      --
      main(0)
    6. Re:the obligatory... by Mateo_LeFou · · Score: 5, Funny

      from now on can we just abbreviate?

      TMYTYGTTMSSWSTYF

      saves screen space

      --
      My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
    7. Re:the obligatory... by jackharrer · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Another one:

      What doesn't kill makes us stronger //Nietzche

      Now isohunt will move to different country so US law will not apply to it. There'll be no way to kill it. Good job MPIAA! Instead of attacking company itself they chose to use indirect attack at ISP which in effect just made isohunt stronger. After few days of problems.

      Keep going MPIA/RIAA!

      --

      "an experienced, industrious, ambitious, and often, quite often, picturesque liar" - Mark Twain
    8. Re:the obligatory... by Cctoide · · Score: 1

      Cool! Can it be hacked so I can shoot whoever I want with it?

      --
      "Let's face it, it's a good story. Accuracy would kill it."
    9. Re:the obligatory... by nevernamed · · Score: 1

      The tyranny of the MPAA will only increase, and as long as the current administration is in power, the government will always be in the pocket of big industries.

    10. Re:the obligatory... by ubergenius · · Score: 1

      While I am no fan of the current administration, I certainly don't see the practices of the MPAA/RIAA changing in any way regardless of the party in power. They're gonna keep doing what they do, and no one is going to stop them, because, despite protests otherwise, it is not just Republicans that are influenced by corporate lobbyists, but Democrats as well, and everyone in between. It's just kind of the nature of politics.

      --
      Student Manager - Take control of your education!
    11. Re:the obligatory... by Ash+Vince · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's just kind of the nature of politics.

      No, its just the nature of politics in the states. There are plenty of countries in Europe with much fairer political systems which do a much better job of representing the people who elect them.

      If you just accept that your political system is never going to represent your opinions it never will.
      If you try your damnedest to change it you MIGHT be successful.

      --
      I dont read /. to RTFA, I read /. to offend people in ignorance.
    12. Re:the obligatory... by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers

      Ah, spoken like a true 8 year-old.

      How about next time you be original and quote something like Ren and Stimpy? Wouldn't being original defeat the purpose of using another person's quote to make your point?
    13. Re:the obligatory... by Planesdragon · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's just kind of the nature of politics.

      It's kind of the nature of law.

      ISOHunt et al are essentially moonshiners. There's no will in the US to change the law to make it legal to trade someone else's work without their permission. (If you think I'm wrong, go ahead and start a Constitutional Amendment. It worked for Prohibition.)

      What's interesting is that RIAA/MPAA are "getting it", and are starting to focus on promoting and working with major players. It's only a matter of time until the hardship of finding a "free hit" is greater than the "hardship" of going to the market leader.

    14. Re:the obligatory... by electrosoccertux · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers
       
      Ah, spoken like a true 8 year-old.
       
      How about next time you be original and quote something like Ren and Stimpy? Wouldn't being original defeat the purpose of using another person's quote to make your point? Furthermore, "good poets borrow, great poets steal."
    15. Re:the obligatory... by andm461c · · Score: 1

      I don't know where you live, but I happen to live in Europe.
      Politicians here are just as corrupt here as everywhere else - if not even more so. We do not, after all, have the world's magnifying lens on us - the US does.

      The only way to make a change so that the political system represents common will, it is to take it down to more local levels. Which the US was good at until the power shifted from the sovereign states to media and the federal/national level.

    16. Re:the obligatory... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Representing the opinions of the people isnt what our government was made to do, for this very reason. something like IsoHunt where 90% of the content hosted is illegal, but where 90% of the population would support its presence, is not necessarily something that should be made "legal". When using IsoHunt, you know youre doing something illegal, and most people that do so are not necessarily morally opposed to copywrighting software,movies, games, etc... They just dont want to pay for the crap.

      When it comes down to it, people would rather break the law than pay money for stuff, even if they agree with the purpose of the law.

      So don't blame the government.

    17. Re:the obligatory... by oftencloudy · · Score: 1
      No, its just the nature of politics in the states. There are plenty of countries in Europe with much fairer political systems which do a much better job of representing the people who elect them.

      That is the keyword right there.

      --
      But whatever the object, you must keep him praying to it. To the thing he has made, not to the person that has made him.
    18. Re:the obligatory... by PurPaBOO · · Score: 1

      90% of the content is illegal? Pffftt! torrent files aren't illegal surely? Just like gun manuals aren't illegal?

      --
      If it weren't for the rocks in its bed, the stream would have no songs.
    19. Re:the obligatory... by jmac1492 · · Score: 1

      Shh... Keep it down. You don't want the MPAA to hear you and sue you for copyright infringement!

      --
      Jenny's got a new number! 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
    20. Re:the obligatory... by Ash+Vince · · Score: 1

      Maybe I used it deliberately, but thanks for pointing it out to anyone who didn't notice.

      The problem however usually lies in the choices. If the only people you can elect both agree on the key points what sort of choice is that?

      --
      I dont read /. to RTFA, I read /. to offend people in ignorance.
    21. Re:the obligatory... by DragonWriter · · Score: 1
      The problem is highlighted:

      If the only people you can elect both agree on the key points what sort of choice is that?


      There is an empirically demonstrated link between the number of viable parties in a democratic system and public satisfaction with government, for reasons which should be obvious: when you've only got two choices, you often have no substantive choice at all.

    22. Re:the obligatory... by deadlyvine · · Score: 1

      Or, you can accept that the dominant forces in this country that maintain control over legislative bodies have NO interest whatsoever in having users cut into their media profit margins. Recognizing this, one might have no expectation of some benevolent change from within the government. In fact, to assume that government is some de facto concoction, and that industry and wealth has never consolidated its forces in a form perceived to be legitimate (e.g. government regulatory bodies) is folly. I suppose what I'm getting at is that reformist policies are bunk as hell, and there are few things more thrilling than watching simple grassroots things topple the foundations of dinosaur media monopolies.

    23. Re:the obligatory... by Anonymous+McCartneyf · · Score: 1

      "TMYTYGTTMSSWSTYF
      saves screen space"
      and loses comprehensibility

      --
      There is a fine line between recklessness and courage... -- Paul McCartney
    24. Re:the obligatory... by aussie_a · · Score: 1

      I'm doing something illegal by downloading Linux ISO's from isohunt? Wow. The law really is messed up.

  2. Link is down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    anyone got a mirror?

    1. Re:Link is down by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 1
    2. Re:Link is down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have the link to torrent,but tracker is down.

    3. Re:Link is down by Ponga · · Score: 1
    4. Re:Link is down by Zwaxy · · Score: 1

      Use Azureus or utorrent and it doesn't matter that the tracker is down. They both use a DHT (distributed hashtable) that enables peers to find each other without the aid of a centralised tracker. It works surprisingly well, too.

  3. Only reason this is personally a bummer... by ystar · · Score: 1

    IsoHunt was great because advertising on the site wasn't obnoxious enough to "get in the way" of searches as much as it often does on other sites....of course, all my torrent use takes place on domains registered under Ubuntu, so I have no idea what I'm talking about...

    1. Re:Only reason this is personally a bummer... by Drakin020 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      What about www.demonoid.com? They have allways been good to me and never in the way with anoying advertisements.

      --
      The greatest revenge in life is massive success.
    2. Re:Only reason this is personally a bummer... by pipatron · · Score: 2, Funny

      Unfortunately it doesn't work for the leechers. Otherwise I think it's great.

      --
      c++; /* this makes c bigger but returns the old value */
    3. Re:Only reason this is personally a bummer... by Drakin020 · · Score: 0

      It doesn't work for the leechers...Isn't that a good thing???

      --
      The greatest revenge in life is massive success.
    4. Re:Only reason this is personally a bummer... by slack_prad · · Score: 1

      While it is a good thing, not everyone who uses internet has 1:1 UP/DOWN speeds, and usually it's 1:4

      --
      Sent from my desktop computer
    5. Re:Only reason this is personally a bummer... by digitrev · · Score: 1

      Seed longer? Limit your up and down to the same speed? Make your up speed unlimited, but your down limited? Just throwing out suggestions. Demonoid works just fine for me, especially since it's an easy hosting service as well.

      --
      Cynical Idealist
    6. Re:Only reason this is personally a bummer... by mrchaotica · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Don't you realize that BitTorrent is designed as a zero-sum game? If some people have ratios over 1:1, other people must have ratios under it because the average of the whole community has to be exactly 1:1.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    7. Re:Only reason this is personally a bummer... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Technically, of course, this is wrong because somebody had to seed it originally - resulting in an average ratio of just over one.

      </pedantic>

    8. Re:Only reason this is personally a bummer... by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      Nope, it's exactly one. Why? Imagine the case with two people, one of which is the initial seeder. That person, of course, has a 1:0 ratio, but what about the other? Well, he only downloaded because he had no one to seed back to, so he has a 0:1 ratio. The file was uploaded once and downloaded once, so the total ratio is exactly one.

      If you have a big swarm and subtracted the influence of the initial seeder, the average ratio of the rest would be just under one.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    9. Re:Only reason this is personally a bummer... by jZnat · · Score: 1

      Considering how many Demonoid torrents end up on other torrent sites like Mininova, there's practically no way to avoid them (except for sites like The Pirate Bay who exclusively use their own tracker).

      --
      'Yes, firefox is indeed greater than women. Can women block pops up for you? No. Can Firefox show you naked women? Yes.'
    10. Re:Only reason this is personally a bummer... by kisielk · · Score: 1

      Also the caveat is that this is only true if you take in to account all the people who were ever part of the swarm. I guess it depends how far you extend your definition of "community"

  4. good idea, bad idea by theStorminMormon · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is a story we've heard before with other sites, only serving to further demonstrate that playing wack a mole with torrent aggregators isn't the solution to anything.

    I wholeheartedly agree that, from the perspective of the **AA, playing wack-a-mole isn't a good solution. But as an observer it's pretty funny.

    More seriously, I think it is providing a long term solution, just not the one the **AA want. As these stories grow they continue to be seen as the greedy bullies they truly are. The main purpose of the RIAA and MPAA these days is to do the dirty work for the actual labels/studios and absorb the backlash. People get mad at the RIAA, not Sony. Or so the strategy goes. As anti-RIAA and anti-MPAA sentiment grows in severity and spreads into the mainstream, there will start to be bleedthrough to the actual labels and studios.

    So basically the wack-a-mole strategy is the best education we could hope for that IP laws are a disgrace, that greed is the real motivator of DRM, and that DRM does nothing but create a nuisance for the consumer without effectively harming pirates. I want more and more of your average Joes to hear about stuff like this and start asking "What is with these guys anyway?" The answers will lead to some sensible IP reform.

    It's a long-term goal, and I realize that in the meantime a lot of innocent people are having their lives ruined, but I think that tactics like this go a long way towards the final solution for DRM.

    -stormin

    --
    The Southern Baptist Convention has creationism. On Slashdot, we have porn.
    1. Re:good idea, bad idea by Huitzlopochtli · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A lot of innocent people are having their lives ruined? Since when have the majority of Americans used torrent? How many do you think are really affected by this? Torrent is not a protocol widely in use by the 'Average Joe', and as such, the shutdown of sites like isoHunt won't have any real effect on them. Recall how widely the Napster issue was publicized on the news...do you really think shutdown of torrent sites will get that kind of press? Also...can you really consider those who download illegal torrents..."innocent"?

    2. Re:good idea, bad idea by Zapperlink · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The point is IsoHunt is purely a medium which people could search out torrents. The purpose was to make a library of legit legal torrents that people have created. With positive ideas such as IsoHunt's it also brings in the idea that we can also share that which isn't legal with our friends just as quick. To manage this idea would be riddled with problems. Would you shut down google because it linked to bomb making instructions, or even torrents directly where you can get your favorite Adobe product for free? The answer is simply no. It's just another attempt to target a resource that is popular for being able to find things efficiently.

    3. Re:good idea, bad idea by theStorminMormon · · Score: 4, Informative

      I was referring to the RIAAs practice of suing everyone and their grandmother without regard to the evidence, literally. This is another element of the wack-a-mole strategy. I thought my reference to the RIAA by name, among other things, would have made this obvious.

      -stormin

      --
      The Southern Baptist Convention has creationism. On Slashdot, we have porn.
    4. Re:good idea, bad idea by xiong.chiamiov · · Score: 4, Funny

      My favorite Adobe product? That would be, uh, just a minute ...

    5. Re:good idea, bad idea by Daemonstar · · Score: 2, Informative
      A lot of innocent people are having their lives ruined?
      I think he's referring to the lawsuits against people who have not done anything wrong but have had lawsuits brought against them.

      Also...can you really consider those who download illegal torrents..."innocent"?
      You assume that people have no legal right to the files they download using links on the site. I have downloaded several games, CD's and even some books that I do own, but they have either become unreadable, stolen or lost over the years.
      --
      I don't reply to Anonymous posts; if you have something to say to me, identify yourself or I won't reply.
    6. Re:good idea, bad idea by shark72 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      "The point is IsoHunt is purely a medium which people could search out torrents. The purpose was to make a library of legit legal torrents that people have created."

      The first clue that the above is bullshit is the site's title. "legit, legal" torrents are seldom distributed as ISOs. If you're thinking that it refers to Linux ISOs, think again -- there's already a site specializing in "legit, legal" torrents. Notice that there are few if any ISOs to be had there, and no Linux distros.

      Listen, I understand why the owners of ISOHunt think they need to keep chanting the "legitimate" line; it's to build a case that they didn't have intent. But we don't need to be their stooges. We know exactly why ISOHunt was there. Let's not kid ourselves.

      --
      Sitting in my day care, the art is decopainted.
    7. Re:good idea, bad idea by LordSnooty · · Score: 1
      there are few if any ISOs to be had there, and no Linux distros.
      Well no, the Linux ISOs are already tracked by other people, and it seems pointless to seed copies of already-existing torrent downloads, as the torrent network benefits when more people join. Splitting the user base across several trackers would be to everyone's detriment.
    8. Re:good idea, bad idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You assume that people have no legal right to the files

      Well, most of the time they don't have that right.

      Depending on where you live and what is stated in the EULA:

      - Software, you may make 1 backup copy of the disk. The copy would be of the disk that is in your possession (i.e. copy would have the same CD-Key).

      - Audio CDs, the verdict is not out on what is legal and not legal. If the *AA have their way, we won't even be allowed to RIP to mp3 format.

      - Books, I believe that, in most places, you cannot even make a copy of a book for yourself without paying some fee. So it would likely be illegal to download a copy of the book. It's not illegal to make a photocopy of it since you'd be paying a copyright fee. Again, this is only true in some places, libraries actually pay copyright fees for their copy machines. Legit copy services will charge you a copyright fee or refuse to copy.

      - when something is stolen from you, you have LOST it, by law you need to PAY for another copy. This is what happened when my car was stolen, I lost all of my CDs and my insurance paid out cash to replace them.

      And please give us all a break. I'm sure your ISP can figure out that the 350GB you downloaded last month was NOT all legit.

    9. Re:good idea, bad idea by CaymanIslandCarpedie · · Score: 1

      I wouldn't be so quick to jump on the **AA (OK you probably should), but it may not be them. Yesterday, I posted a link http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=217180&c id=17633124 to OSX on ISOHunt in the story about Apple sueing for posting links to the iPhone skins.

      My bad ISOHunt! I didn't realize Apple monitored /. that closely. Sorry!!!!

      --
      "reality has a well-known liberal bias" - Steven Colbert
    10. Re:good idea, bad idea by iminplaya · · Score: 1

      Also...can you really consider those who download illegal torrents..."innocent"?

      Illegal!=Wrong, so yes, they are innocent of any wrongdoing.

      --
      What?
    11. Re:good idea, bad idea by EasyTarget · · Score: 1

      legit, legal" torrents are seldom distributed as ISOs ...... there's already a site specializing in "legit, legal" torrents. Notice that there are few if any ISOs to be had there, and no Linux distros.

      Good grief, -all- the legit torrents I have got recently have been ISO's (as opposed to the other stuff, it tends to come in divx). They have all been F/OSS distros by the way, and why would I search when I can go direct to the relevant website to find them. The lack of linux distros on the site you list is all about relevance (or, to be more precise, a lack of it) to the people who would use such a site.

      --
      "Oops, I always forget the purpose of competition is to divide people into winners and losers." - Hobbes
    12. Re:good idea, bad idea by westlake · · Score: 1
      This is a story we've heard before with other sites, only serving to further demonstrate that playing wack a mole with torrent aggregators isn't the solution to anything.

      In the fantasy world of Slashdot world every site that goes down reveals the light at the end of the tunnel.
      Meanwhile, the righta agencies gain experience and precedent, so that each take-down comes easier than the one before.

      As these stories grow they continue to be seen as the greedy bullies they truly are. The main purpose of the RIAA and MPAA these days is to do the dirty work for the actual labels/studios and absorb the backlash. People get mad at the RIAA, not Sony. Or so the strategy goes. As anti-RIAA and anti-MPAA sentiment grows in severity and spreads into the mainstream, there will start to be bleedthrough to the actual labels and studios.

      These stories make headlines on Slashdot.

      Elsewhere they get less coverage than the filling of the pothole at Third and Main.

      How many parents know the title of the last Harry Potter novel, how many have it on pre-order? More than have heard of IaoHunt. When Amazon publishes its holiday list of DVD favorites, the Top 100 Bestsellers. which studios do you think dominate the list?

    13. Re:good idea, bad idea by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 1

      Illegal!=Wrong, so yes, they are innocent of any wrongdoing.

      That's a slashdot first.. breaking the law isn't wrong!

    14. Re:good idea, bad idea by Headcase88 · · Score: 1

      What's illegal isn't always wrong. Many would argue that certain laws are wrong, and I think almost anyone would agree or admit that certain gov't policies conflict with each other.

      But,in a fundamental sense, copyright laws do have a reason for existing. Few would produce a movie just for the hell of sharing it; they want some payback for their work. That's why I have a beef with those that say "stealing" and "copyright infringement" are so different. The truth is if everyone "copyright infringed" movies, not a whole lot of movies would exist (not that I'm claiming innocence). As an anti-thesis to that, many open source projects thrive from user contribution, so if that kind of logic can be applied to movies in the future, you can't rule anything out.

      To throw another opinion while I'm posting on a **ia thread, I think they might want to reduce the years before a copyright expires, not increase it like they've been doing. Few will say "I'm not going to buy movie x because it's public domain in 15 years anyway". Anyway just my 2 cents, Copyright 2007.

      --
      "When the atomic bomb goes off there's devastation...but when the atomic bong goes off there's celebraaaaation!"
    15. Re:good idea, bad idea by shark72 · · Score: 1

      "Good grief, -all- the legit torrents I have got recently have been ISO's (as opposed to the other stuff, it tends to come in divx). They have all been F/OSS distros by the way, and why would I search when I can go direct to the relevant website to find them. The lack of linux distros on the site you list is all about relevance (or, to be more precise, a lack of it) to the people who would use such a site."

      Exactly. If I were after a Linux ISO, I wouldn't go to legaltorrents.com, and I certainly wouldn't go to ISOHunt. Others seem to agree... snapshots on the Wayback archive show that Linux distros aren't even in the top 20 searches.

      You and the other other fellow who replied to my comment have helped close the door on the notion that the "ISO" in "ISO hunt" referred to Linux ISOs. There are a lot of Linux ISOs being distributed, but they sure ain't being distributed to any significant degree on ISOHunt or the other piracy-centric torrent sites.

      --
      Sitting in my day care, the art is decopainted.
    16. Re:good idea, bad idea by max99ted · · Score: 1
      My favorite Adobe product? That would be, uh, just a minute ...
      ...Acrobat Reader 5.1

      --

      Please stop APK.. you're only hurting yourself.

    17. Re:good idea, bad idea by GaryW · · Score: 1

      No, breaking the law isn't always wrong. But pointing that out is not a Slashdot first: it has been done before by many people, such as Julius Caesar, Mohandas "Mahatma" Gandhi, Desmond Tutu, Rosa Parks and Nelson Mandela, to name a few.

    18. Re:good idea, bad idea by jb.hl.com · · Score: 1

      The difference is this; Caesar, Gandhi, Tutu, Parks and Mandela didn't break the law motivated by a selfish desire for free shit.

      --
      By summer it was all gone...now shesmovedon. --
    19. Re:good idea, bad idea by GaryW · · Score: 1

      That is true. Perhaps a better example would be John Hancock and Samuel Adams, who broke the law motivated partly by a desire for tea without an artificially inflated price.

    20. Re:good idea, bad idea by jb.hl.com · · Score: 1

      (Gotta say...good answer. Far better than the "BUT OMG IM A FREEDOM FIGHTER 2" bullshit I usually get when I say that sort of thing, nice to get a reply with some smarts behind it :)

      It depends on whether the price of CDs is artificially inflated, really. For all you know, an album might well have cost $20 to produce and sell. It's also worth bearing in mind that labels also tend to release many less promoted and less purchased albums which don't recoup much if any of their investment, let alone make a profit; in this way, more popular albums might subsidise more esoteric/less popular ones.

      I, personally, still don't think that price justifies piracy in any way, shape or form though. The labels have set out their price; if you are unwilling to pay it, then feel free to go and listen to some Creative Commons music or something. Nobody is entitled to major label music at the price they want to pay...nobody's really entitled to anything at the price they want to pay, that's life.

      --
      By summer it was all gone...now shesmovedon. --
    21. Re:good idea, bad idea by iminplaya · · Score: 1

      I, personally, still don't think that price justifies piracy in any way, shape or form though.

      You're just confused about who the real pirates are. I say the pirates are those who claim something that they can't own as theirs exclusively. They are the thieves.

      --
      What?
    22. Re:good idea, bad idea by iminplaya · · Score: 1

      May I assume that you believe that ALL laws should be blindly adhered to? Care to share as to why you would believe such nonsense? That is, if you do? Or have we been fished in by a troll?

      --
      What?
    23. Re:good idea, bad idea by Risen888 · · Score: 1

      I call bullshit. I download all my Linux ISOs from Isohunt. They have more trackers, more peers, more seeders than any other source I've found.

      --
      Hey, I finally got my first freak! Took you long enough!
    24. Re:good idea, bad idea by AmVidia+HQ · · Score: 2, Informative
      I call bullshit. I download all my Linux ISOs from Isohunt. They have more trackers, more peers, more seeders than any other source I've found.

      Thank you.

      isoHunt indexes any and all torrents, adds any metadata, caches them, and aggregates trackers for each torrent so you get more speed and availability than any single source. To the GP, you can call whatever you like with my intent but at least get this fact straight.

      --
      VIVA1023.com | Political Fashion.
    25. Re:good idea, bad idea by Shadow-isoHunt · · Score: 1
      The first clue that the above is bullshit is the site's title. "legit, legal" torrents are seldom distributed as ISOs. If you're thinking that it refers to Linux ISOs, think again -- there's already a site [legaltorrents.com] specializing in "legit, legal" torrents. Notice that there are few if any ISOs to be had there, and no Linux distros.

      That's great, but notice that we do have alot of linux distributions, and alot of independant content.

      Listen, I understand why the owners of ISOHunt think they need to keep chanting the "legitimate" line; it's to build a case that they didn't have intent [wikipedia.org]. But we don't need to be their stooges. We know exactly why ISOHunt was there. Let's not kid ourselves.
      Can you name one reason we shouldn't be considered "legitimate"? We comply with DMCA notices as required by law, and we don't actually host any of the end-result files. We simply index torrents.

      We're even working with independant artists. A few months ago I worked with the artist Kazy to release a higher resolution music video through our site as a promotion for his youtube contest entry, was that not legitimate? Kazy seemed to think it was.
      --
      www.isoHunt.com
    26. Re:good idea, bad idea by shark72 · · Score: 1

      "Can you name one reason we shouldn't be considered "legitimate"? We comply with DMCA notices as required by law, and we don't actually host any of the end-result files. We simply index torrents."

      First, a clarification of terms: I'm using "legitimate" in the sense that I think you're trying to convey: legal, and working in a manner that's respectful of others' rights under the law.

      There are indexing, search and resource sites that fall under that description -- legaltorrents.com, garageband.com, creativecommons.org, and so on. A quick look at what your users are downloading shows that you're in a different league. You have quite rightly discovered that there's a huge demand for pirated material, and that there's money to be made in addressing this demand. Kudos to you and I hope that you continue to be successful, but it's pointless to claim legitimacy here.

      "We're even working with independant artists. A few months ago I worked with the artist Kazy to release a higher resolution music video through our site as a promotion for his youtube contest entry, was that not legitimate? Kazy seemed to think it was."

      Kazaa also tried that route when they started to feel the heat. If you were really serious about being "legitimate" you'd start by filtering out the obviously copyrighted content. This doesn't mean waiting for a DMCA takedown; it means exercising a firm grasp of the obvious and recognizing that Windows Vista and the Borat movie are not legally being made available as free downloads. Think long and hard about why the MPAA is after you and not after the sites I mentioned above.

      Of course, I understand why you would not take this approach; it would kill your revenue stream. It's pretty likely that your income is severalfold that of a site like legaltorrents.com, and, let's face it -- you're here to make money and to give your customers what they want, and not to be a champion of artists' rights.

      --
      Sitting in my day care, the art is decopainted.
    27. Re:good idea, bad idea by Indras · · Score: 1

      I have the same experience... I first downloaded Ubuntu Dapper (my first distro I actually used as an exclusive Windows replacement) from isohunt. Since then, I've gone back for Ubuntu Edgy and Kubuntu Edgy as well. It [is/was] a great site to find linux torrents. I hope it comes back up. Until then, use google (from the isohunt.com current page):

      Search: ubuntu 6.10 ext:torrent

      --
      The speed of time is one second per second.
    28. Re:good idea, bad idea by theStorminMormon · · Score: 1

      not to be a champion of artists' rights.

      As opposed to whom? The RIAA? They're a "champion of artists' rights"? Please tell me you don't believe that for a second.

      -stormin

      --
      The Southern Baptist Convention has creationism. On Slashdot, we have porn.
    29. Re:good idea, bad idea by shark72 · · Score: 1

      "As opposed to whom? The RIAA? They're a "champion of artists' rights"? Please tell me you don't believe that for a second."

      Wow, I don't even understand what led you down that path. Like I mentioned in my post: legaltorrents.com, garageband.com, creativecommons.org.

      The content you see on those sites was placed there with the artists' explicit permission. Compare and contrast the actions of these sites compared to a site like ISOhunt. I acknowledge that they may not be as useful or interesting because they don't have the really cool stuff like the latest hit movies, CDs, and software, but I hope it's clear that it's quite easy to set up a site that's truly respectful of creators' rights, rather than paying lip service while making a profit off of piracy.

      --
      Sitting in my day care, the art is decopainted.
    30. Re:good idea, bad idea by theStorminMormon · · Score: 1

      My mistake. Your examples are good ones.

      -stormin

      --
      The Southern Baptist Convention has creationism. On Slashdot, we have porn.
    31. Re:good idea, bad idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's With the MPAA... get him!!!

    32. Re:good idea, bad idea by drsmithy · · Score: 1

      Kazaa also tried that route when they started to feel the heat. If you were really serious about being "legitimate" you'd start by filtering out the obviously copyrighted content. This doesn't mean waiting for a DMCA takedown; it means exercising a firm grasp of the obvious and recognizing that Windows Vista and the Borat movie are not legally being made available as free downloads.

      By the laws of which locality, should these judgements of "legality" be made ?

      Seems to me a torrent indexing site is conceptually no different to Google. Should google be restricting access to "obviously illegal" search results ? By which jurisdiction's laws should they decide what is "obviously illegal" ?

    33. Re:good idea, bad idea by drsmithy · · Score: 1

      when something is stolen from you, you have LOST it, by law you need to PAY for another copy.

      Even when the item is subsequently found ?

      Conceptually, how is acquiring another copy of lost data any different to the recovery of a lost physical item ?

    34. Re:good idea, bad idea by VGPowerlord · · Score: 1

      Photoshop? Premiere? Flash? Dreamweaver?

      All those are expensive programs that a lot of people seem to want.

      --
      GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
    35. Re:good idea, bad idea by xenobyte · · Score: 1

      All torrents are legal to share! - because as far as I know no studio or record label has yet copyrighted the torrent hash of their movies (kinda stupid as it differs for each rip, but still).

      It has been repeated so many times now that torrents themselves contain absolutely no data from the possibly copyrighted work they refer to, nor is there any way to recreate any part of the copyrighted work from the torrent data. A torrent is nothing more than a sophisticated pointer to data provided by someone else, and this site is just a search engine with pointers to these pointers. There is no way for the engine to determine the legality of the materials it indexes (like any search engine) thus it cannot be held responsible for any infraction committed by someone linked through a torrent that's linked on the site. There is no legal difference between a google search featuring "ext:torrent" and this site.

      So please, stop the witch hunt now and accept that short of banning all search engines and all portal pages there is no way to stop sites like this. We basically have to shut down the net, and while that would also make sharing of illegal copies of music and movie somewhat harder, it would also cause infinitely more harm than good.

      --
      "For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong." -- H.L. Mencken (1880-1956) --
    36. Re:good idea, bad idea by EasyTarget · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but I was really objecting to the statement that -legal- torrents rarely come as ISO's.. I suspect that the majority of the legal stuff is actually in ISO form, but it is, of course, invisible in a sea of illegality.

      --
      "Oops, I always forget the purpose of competition is to divide people into winners and losers." - Hobbes
    37. Re:good idea, bad idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even when the item is subsequently found ?

      It depends on the situation. A neighbor of mine asked me to "borrow" a table saw while back. I brought it over thinking, sure he's my neighbor, I know where he lives, why not? A few weeks later I asked him if he was done with it and he doesn't even acknowledge what I leant him a table saw. I talked to a friend of mine, who is a cop, and he said that there's not really anything he can do about it. The law pretty much says that if the person in posession of the item claims to be the owner of it, then it's his. Even though I had the receipt! Eventually, with the help of the cop friend, got the saw back. But technically, the two of us could have been nailed with tresspassing (and possibly theft) since we walked into his open garage to take it back.

      how is acquiring another copy of lost data any different to the recovery of a lost physical item ?
      The law gets a bit fuzzy here. You can look at it in 2 different ways:
      1 - Since your original copy got "stolen", the legal copy (and the right to use it) now belongs to the person who stole it
      2 - Since the person who stole it has broken the law, you still have a legal copy

      In terms of digital data (be it software, music, or video) there is no precedence set. The law is typically defined by precedence and until there are a few cases that go thru the courts, the law will continue being "fuzzy".

    38. Re:good idea, bad idea by complete+loony · · Score: 1

      And that's why the top searches on the right hand side of their main page are for new release movies and tv shows? C'mon, they can't claim ignorance here. This is exactly what brought down Napster.

      --
      09F91102 no, 455FE104 nope, F190A1E8 uh-uh, 7A5F8A09 that's not it, C87294CE no. Ah! 452F6E403CDF10714E41DFAA257D313F.
    39. Re:good idea, bad idea by AmVidia+HQ · · Score: 1
      And that's why the top searches on the right hand side of their main page are for new release movies and tv shows? C'mon, they can't claim ignorance here. This is exactly what brought down Napster.

      The list is top search queries from users. A Zeitgeist. Like ones here.

      --
      VIVA1023.com | Political Fashion.
    40. Re:good idea, bad idea by xiong.chiamiov · · Score: 1

      GIMPshop? Hand-coding? Other people may want them, but I don't.

  5. are they crazy? by mastershake_phd · · Score: 5, Funny

    Who wouldnt want to be the first torrent site on Sealand?

    1. Re:are they crazy? by hotdiggitydawg · · Score: 4, Funny

      Who wouldnt want to be the first torrent site on Sealand? Shhh, don't tell them! Otherwise if I want first torrent site I'll have to wait until someone decides to create New Sealand... How many sheep can you fit on an oil platform?
    2. Re:are they crazy? by nuOpus · · Score: 1

      The Pirate Bay bought Sealand I thought. They are the first on Sealand, because they own it! They even changed the name of their site to The Pirates of Sealand.

    3. Re:are they crazy? by PlasticArmyMan · · Score: 1

      They need a whole ton of more money than they do right now. I can't remember how much Sealand is going for, but from what I can remember it's a whole load.

    4. Re:are they crazy? by mastershake_phd · · Score: 1

      The Pirate Bay bought Sealand I thought. They are the first on Sealand, because they own it! They even changed the name of their site to The Pirates of Sealand.

      They wish, they only have $17,000 so far http://buysealand.com/

      Sealand has an asking price of $977 million.

    5. Re:are they crazy? by Chris+Brewer · · Score: 1

      To match up with NZ's current sheep-to-person ratio, you only need 12 sheep per person...

      --
      Consultancy: If you're not part of the solution, there's money to be made in prolonging the problem
    6. Re:are they crazy? by TheoMurpse · · Score: 1

      Sarcasm, anti-New Zealand emotions, bestiality, puns, funny imagery. Your post, sir, deserves so much more than a +5 Funny.

    7. Re:are they crazy? by hotdiggitydawg · · Score: 1

      Thankyou, thankyou, I'll be here all week. Try the mutton.

  6. Isohunt by shirizaki · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Good one, probably a little bit better than TPB for a few files. I also liked their "mod choice" or whatever it was called. They actually approved certain files so you knew you weren't getting dummy info. they also had a ton of trackers for every torrent.

    I hope they go back up soon. I liked them.

    --
    In Soviet Russia, dots slash you!
    1. Re:Isohunt by Thansal · · Score: 1

      they were better then TPB because they Indexed TPB's trackers as well as all other public trackers.

      And THAT is the interesting (and worying) part. They don't even host trackers (last I checked), they just index other trackers! It is kinda like shitting down google because you can find torrents ussing their search engine.

      Example: Need For Speed search

      --
      Do Or Do Not, There Is No Spoon, There Is Only Zuul. Everything in the above post is probably opinion.
    2. Re:Isohunt by Thansal · · Score: 3, Funny

      shutting
      shutting down....

      yah, I should use preview more often.

      --
      Do Or Do Not, There Is No Spoon, There Is Only Zuul. Everything in the above post is probably opinion.
    3. Re:Isohunt by dave420 · · Score: 1

      They indexed TPB, so it had all its content, and content from other trackers, so it was considerably better than TPB, from a choice perspective at least. They rule :)

    4. Re:Isohunt by eosp · · Score: 1

      Better than shitting, er, spitting, up...

    5. Re:Isohunt by fbjon · · Score: 1

      Well, both involve stuff flowing down tubes.

      --
      True confidence comes not from realising you are as good as your peers, but that your peers are as bad as you are.
    6. Re:Isohunt by CelticWhisper · · Score: 1

      As long as you don't shit a dump truck's worth.

      ("A dump truck worth of what?" I leave that to you to figure out.)

      --
      Help protect civil rights from abuse by the TSA - visit TSA News Blog.
      http://www.tsanewsblog.com
    7. Re:Isohunt by 0rionx · · Score: 1

      It's not something you dump stuff on, it's not a big toilet.

  7. BT hijacked by cpearson · · Score: 1

    The MPAA is essentially hijacking bittorrent technology for their own greedy uses. We will see non-regulated bittorrent become a relic of internet as we know it.

    http://www.vistahelpforum.com/

    --
    Windows Vista Help Forum
    1. Re:BT hijacked by mastershake_phd · · Score: 1

      The MPAA is essentially hijacking bittorrent technology for their own greedy uses. We will see non-regulated bittorrent become a relic of internet as we know it.

      A relic, not so long as torrent sites like the Pirate Bay are around, and it doesnt look like PB is going anywhere. If bittorent moves into the history books it will be because it was replaced with a better p2p protocol. The free exchange of data cannot and should not be stopped.

  8. Who's fault is it? by SandwhichMaster · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Its frustrating to see sites take the fall for things that aren't their fault. Holding isoHunt responsible for people downloading illegal content is stupid. Why stop with isohunt? Why not hold google responsible for letting me find torrent sites? Why not hold schools responsible for teaching me how to search for things on the internet? Why not hold dell responsible for letting me run files I shouldn't?

    1. Re:Who's fault is it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Errr, dude. Do you realize the site is called "isohunt" ?

    2. Re:Who's fault is it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Careful, best to not give them any ideas (they tend not to think on their own).

    3. Re:Who's fault is it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Why not hold dell responsible for letting me run files I shouldn't?"

      Um, you should google "Trusted Computing"... unless your school will get in trouble :)

    4. Re:Who's fault is it? by nomadic · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Its frustrating to see sites take the fall for things that aren't their fault. Holding isoHunt responsible for people downloading illegal content is stupid.

      They created the site specifically to allow people to download illegal content. And, with the ads, they profited from it.

    5. Re:Who's fault is it? by kinglink · · Score: 0, Troll

      You are trying to fight rational with realism and doing it on slashdot of all places. Realize that the comment is a section for teenagers to blow off steam and try to sound like they can make a coherent argument even if it is mind boggling incorrect.

      You can argue isohunt is similar to a search engine in it doesn't host files, but it's prime purpose is providing a centralized torrent hub. On the other hand there's no checks to make sure that unlawful files don't get uploaded or people in countries that shouldn't have access to the files don't have access, or a million other hard to implement if not impractical request are implemented.

      However before we go down a path of debating legality versus morality and so on the point I'm making is let the kid have his rant, just because it has no practical application or no basis to stand on doesn't make it any less valid on slashdot apparently.

    6. Re:Who's fault is it? by mcsethanon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      We're talking about law here. You people keep saying "they made it for illegal downloads" and "look at the name" and blah blah. These are assumptions and opinions, nothing to do with what is legal. IsoHunt and any other torrent search engine, whether it's name be illegalstuffonly.com or totallylegaltorrents.com, is providing a search engine for torrent files. They're not the ones ripping and sharing The Da Vinci Code (as far as we know). They're not the ones creating and sharing the illegal content. It's not practical to assume they can monitor the legality of every torrent that reaches their engine. I can't see how, from a legal stand point, anyone but the sharers can be held responsible.

    7. Re:Who's fault is it? by binaryspiral · · Score: 1

      Why not hold dell responsible for letting me run files I shouldn't?

      The **AA figured if you're running a Dell, you've got enough issues already.

    8. Re:Who's fault is it? by droopycom · · Score: 1

      Since we are talking about law, how about you look for some legal terms such as:

      Accessory : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accessory_(legal_term )
      Intent : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intent

      Knowingly profiting from a stolen good, even without ever handling that good, is illegal.

      I'm not saying it applie here, IANAL, but I hope that now you can see how, from a legal stand point, they can be held accountable.

    9. Re:Who's fault is it? by nomadic · · Score: 1

      IAAL; in my post I was specifically thinking of the law. When you intend to create a site to help distribute materials in violation of copyright law, and the site actually ends up doing that, you've become an accessory to that violation. Just because you don't actually "pull the trigger" in regards to the copyright violation doesn't mean you escape liability.

      That's why you can't defend against an accessory to murder charge by saying "well I didn't actually kill the guy"--if you provided the gun and told the killer where the victim was you're probably liable to end up in jail.

    10. Re:Who's fault is it? by themusicgod1 · · Score: 0, Troll

      Knowingly profiting from a stolen good, even without ever handling that good, is illegal.

      Good thing they aren't involved with theft, but rather copyright enfringement

      --
      GENERATION 26: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
    11. Re:Who's fault is it? by csplinter · · Score: 1

      Who says? You? Out of principle of the matter I don't think that should make a difference because while that may be completely obvious to you or I, it's also arguable. Until they literally say "Hey, try using isohunt for piracy, it works great!" I think they should be treated like any other search engine.

    12. Re:Who's fault is it? by nomadic · · Score: 1

      Who says? Eventually, it would be a judge or jury, in which case they can say "oh, it was intended for non-infringing use", and see how credible that really sounds.

    13. Re:Who's fault is it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, it's too bad he doesn't support his posts like you do, right? Dumb teenager... with his damn rational arguments... what has reason ever done for us anyway?

    14. Re:Who's fault is it? by norman619 · · Score: 1

      Err...How were they profiting form the downloads? The people don't download files form the site. They are just shown where the stuff is. It's kinda like someone on a street corner telling you where to go to get what you are looking for. Last I checked that's not illegal. If some dude came up to me asking where can they score some weed and I tell them Joe Blow down the street is their man an I guilty of a crime? NOPE!!! Now if Joe Blow was paying me to funnel peopel his way then yes I am an accessory. The ads are not tied into downloads. If anything they are tied into the people visiting the searchengine not the torrent downlaods themselves. Probably also per click. Get your head out of your arse. I guess google should go down for pointing people to sites with underaged porn or it's owners arrested for supporting terrorists by providing would be terorists with maps via Google Earth and instructions on how to build bombs....

    15. Re:Who's fault is it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Why not hold dell responsible for letting me run files I shouldn't?

      Conratulations, you just reinvented the concept of DRM.

    16. Re:Who's fault is it? by InsaneGeek · · Score: 1

      If some dude came up to me asking where can they score some weed and I tell them Joe Blow down the street is their man an I guilty of a crime? NOPE!!!

      I'm pretty sure that if 95% of the time all you did was sit on a corner telling people where to score some weed; that you'd probably be picked up as well. INAL but something like a charge of accessory before the fact, etc would probably apply very nicely to that situation, and very likely IsoHunt as well.

    17. Re:Who's fault is it? by GaryPatterson · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Weren't there sections on the site, to help you find movies, TV series, applications, warez, etc?

      It's hard to claim that they didn't know they were providing torrents for illegal material if they categorised it for users.

  9. Whack a Taco by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is a story we've heard before with other sites, only serving to further demonstrate that playing wack a mole with torrent aggregators isn't the solution to anything.

    It doesn't demonstrate anything of the sort. This is a meaningless comment. You put one up, they have it taken down. It's a war. This is a battle. The copyright holders are losing but apparently that's a good thing.

  10. TorrentBox? by Grey+Ninja · · Score: 1

    I visited Torrentbox earlier today, and got a VERY similar message to that described in the article. Are they ran by the same people? If so, I really didn't know that. Torrentbox was my tracker of choice, but I still have to say that despite its issues, I really like torrentspy for searching. So I'm still good.

    1. Re:TorrentBox? by corky842 · · Score: 1
      On Torrentspy:

      Update, Jan. 16, 2007 Lawyers from our primary ISP decided to pull our plug without any advance notice, as of 14:45 PST. No doubt related to our lawsuit brought by the MPAA, but we don't have more information at this time until people responsible comes to work tomorrow... - The isoHunt crew Yeah, it's possible they're run by the same people.
    2. Re:TorrentBox? by freedumb2000 · · Score: 1

      Yes TorrenBox is also run by them. At least that is what isoHunt used to say on their site.

  11. May not be intended to be a solution by Fastolfe · · Score: 1, Interesting

    If the **AA thinks that infringement is occurring, but they take no steps to try and shut down some of the infringement, it's easy to say, "If this was harming you so much, why didn't you try to stop them?" I don't think anyone is naive enough to think that these measures will permanently knock out a lot of these sites, but when it comes to proving your case, it's the effort that counts.

    1. Re:May not be intended to be a solution by Abcd1234 · · Score: 3, Informative

      but when it comes to proving your case, it's the effort that counts.

      No, it's not. Copyright is not like trademarks. They don't run out if you don't enforce them. And the only evidence you need to convinct someone is proof they infringed. Past enforcement efforts have no bearing.

      So all these guys are doing is harrassing people and making themselves look worse. Is there a better solution? I don't know. But it's pretty clear that the shotgun lawsuit approach simply doesn't work.

    2. Re:May not be intended to be a solution by Fastolfe · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If your case revolves around proving that you were harmed (as all civil cases do), then it does matter. What does it say when you have 10 people infringing your copyrights, and you single one of them out and claim that they're causing you irreparable harm, while the other 9 are doing the same thing? The harm must not be that severe, right? This will impact your ability to make your case and the ultimate compensation you receive.

    3. Re:May not be intended to be a solution by Abcd1234 · · Score: 1

      If your case revolves around proving that you were harmed (as all civil cases do), then it does matter.

      That *might* come to play when computing damages (though I doubt it), but will have no effect on the course of the trial (ie, it will not come into play when considering guilt or innocence). Either Joe is guilty of infringement or he's not. What other people are doing has no bearing on that.

      Furthermore, the statutory damages per infringement are *enormous* for your average joe... additional damages are entirely punative, and so do nothing to further their cause (discourage piracy), as the statutory damages are likely more than enough of a deterrant. Moreover, damages are only related to the activities of the infringing individual. You can't just go sue Joe for piracy and state that, because you lose a billion dollars a year from worldwide piracy, you want a billion dollars from Joe. I would expect all you can get from him is the damages his infringements directly caused, and those damages are the same irrespective of other cases of infringement.

      you single one of them out and claim that they're causing you irreparable harm, while the other 9 are doing the same thing? The harm must not be that severe, right?

      Wrong. Perhaps you picked Joe because he was easy to catch. Or you think the case is easiest to litigate. Or your goal is to set an example. The court doesn't give a damn one way or another. Joe is either guilty or he's not, and is either for liable for calculated or statutory damages plus any punative damages, or he is not. Whether or not you sued Aunt May before hand should have no bearing on the case.

    4. Re:May not be intended to be a solution by Abcd1234 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I don't think Laches applies, as that implies prejudicial delay. Sure, if you wait around and then try to sue someone for billions of dollars in damages, the court may tell you to piss off. But it's not clear if that applies to cases like these.

      And it appears estoppel only applies if an infringer was given the expectation that their acts are condoned. Clearly, that's not the case (ie, massive advertising campaigns, etc), so I don't see how that would apply.

      'course, this is all speculation from a lightly informed spectator, so perhaps you have a more educated take on the situation.

  12. I don't get it. by prelelat · · Score: 2, Interesting

    They get turned off in the US so they move to Canada how is that proving a point instead of moving to Sweden or some other country where it isn't sketchy. Is it that they just got a good offer from Canada or are they trying to jump ship from the states.

    Wouldn't a bigger statment be to stay in the states cause that seems ot me what they are trying to do.

    It just seems somewhat contradictory to move from the States to Canada and then say we won't move to Sweeden because its too easy?

    1. Re:I don't get it. by dave420 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      If they stayed in Ameeeeerica, they'd get instafucked by the **AA. I imagine they're moving to Canaaada to get around that. Or at least delay it. Or for poutines.

    2. Re:I don't get it. by delinear · · Score: 1

      I think the argument runs that, as they're not doing anything illegal (they don't even host torrents, just index other people's - data that is probably readily available from Google/Yahoo/MSN if you went looking), they shouldn't have to move to a country where file-sharing is legally permitted. As a search aggregator rather than a file-sharer, they believe they should be allowed to operate in the US, but since they are being denied that ability, they have chosen to move to a country with similar laws and make a stand there, rather than one which makes them look guilty.

    3. Re:I don't get it. by WidescreenFreak · · Score: 1

      Look at the way they phrased it (emphasis mine) -- "BitTorrent was created for legitimate distribution of large media files, and we stand by that philosophy". It appears to me that they are doing everything that they can to keep BitTorrent as legitimate as possible in the eyes of the public while getting out from under the jurisdiction (if that's what you'd call it) of the RIAA and MPAA. Because Sweden is probably known best in BitTorrent circles for its loose copyright policy (aka. "allowing piracy"), moving to a Swedish ISP would give the *AA more ammunition to try to demonize BitTorrent as a pirate's haven, and it would appear that IsoHunt is trying desperately not to give the *AA that ammunition.

      Just my 2/100 of a U.S. dollar. Convert to your currency as necessary.

      --
      The Overrated mod is for reversing inappropriate, positive mods, not for voicing disagreement with a post.
    4. Re:I don't get it. by tlhIngan · · Score: 2, Informative
      They get turned off in the US so they move to Canada how is that proving a point instead of moving to Sweden or some other country where it isn't sketchy. Is it that they just got a good offer from Canada or are they trying to jump ship from the states.

      Wouldn't a bigger statment be to stay in the states cause that seems ot me what they are trying to do.

      It just seems somewhat contradictory to move from the States to Canada and then say we won't move to Sweeden because its too easy?


      I believe the basic reason is the creator of IsoHunt is well, Canadian, and lives in Greater Vancouver (BC). I seem to recall many newspaper articles about IsoHunt and how it's irking copyright people. Basically, I was wondering what purpose there was having a newspaper (one of the two pay dailies, but I think it might've been in both) print that, and now *everyone* knows about IsoHunt.

      The articles never seemed to imply it was doing something illegal, just that it was a search engine that *could* be used to find pirated movies and stuff on other sites, but not actually hosting any illegal content. (Unless lists of file hashes and URLs are illegal?)
    5. Re:I don't get it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because they, the people running it, are Canadian?

    6. Re:I don't get it. by shark72 · · Score: 1

      "It appears to me that they are doing everything that they can to keep BitTorrent as legitimate as possible in the eyes of the public..."

      No, sites like LegalTorrents and even BitTorrent.com itself are "doing everything they can." ISOHunt puts absolutely no effort into maintaining legitimacy; when you visit a tracker site and see that the top stuff mirrors the top ten movies, CDs and games, it's pretty clear that the owners care not one whit about being "legitimate." Plus, the name "ISOHunt" is a pretty poor choice if you're trying to specialize in legal torrents.

      If they had wanted to create a tracker for "legimate" content, they could have. Others have. But there's very little money in that business model. There's money in piracy, so that's the direction they chose.

      --
      Sitting in my day care, the art is decopainted.
    7. Re:I don't get it. by DrBdan · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Back in May 2006 CBC News (a Canadian network) did a piece on how IsoHunt was being sued (Google "cbc news isohunt" if you want to read it). The owner is actually a Canadian living in Canada, so the switch to a Canadian ISP could just be as simple as him deciding that since his US ISP dropped him he might as well go with something local.

    8. Re:I don't get it. by WidescreenFreak · · Score: 1

      So, how is moving to Canada going to resolve their issue? From what I understand, they're just as bad as the U.S. when it comes to matters of copyright. Going to Canada is like jumping out of the frying pan into another frying pan that's over the same fire. If their intention really was for piracy and profit, then Sweden would be the most appropriate option. I'm not saying that you're wrong, but either they're blowing a sh!tload of smoke or they've got some really incompetent people running it.

      --
      The Overrated mod is for reversing inappropriate, positive mods, not for voicing disagreement with a post.
    9. Re:I don't get it. by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 2, Funny
      If they stayed in Ameeeeerica, they'd get instafucked by the **AA. I imagine they're moving to Canaaada to get around that. Or at least delay it. Or for poutines.


      Try Q-Tips and rubbing alcohol. That'll fix up your stiiiiiicking keeeeeys. HTH

    10. Re:I don't get it. by Krakhan · · Score: 1

      No, Canada still hasn't ratified the WIPO anti-piracy laws yet. In addition, it is actually legal to download torrents, though uploading still remains a grey matter (mainly due to the levy paid on burned CD/DVDs/Hard drives).

      However, this may change within a year or two, depending on if the conservative party gets a majority. There is some legislation planned to make another version of the DMCA up here.

      So, this may still work in the short-term, they may yet to have to move to another if the Canadian version of the DMCA does somehow go into law here within the next 1-2 years.

      There was another article a few days ago that mentioned these issues, but I can't think of it off the top of my head.

    11. Re:I don't get it. by csplinter · · Score: 1

      Perhaps they don't wont to be seen as escaping the reach of the law but, also realize that US law is not an option for them.

    12. Re:I don't get it. by AmVidia+HQ · · Score: 1

      They get turned off in the US so they move to Canada how is that proving a point instead of moving to Sweden or some other country where it isn't sketchy. Is it that they just got a good offer from Canada or are they trying to jump ship from the states.

      Wouldn't a bigger statment be to stay in the states cause that seems ot me what they are trying to do.

      It just seems somewhat contradictory to move from the States to Canada and then say we won't move to Sweeden because its too easy?

      Because:
      1. I'm Canadian, so is most of our staff.
      2. By referring to Sweden and Sealand, I thought it was clear which site I was referring to that I don't want to be perceived as a gang of. We do not support piracy nor are we ignorant of copyright laws (within reasons and Canadian laws are currently quite reasonable). I have nothing against Sweden, very nice place I heard and it got IKEA. =b
      --
      VIVA1023.com | Political Fashion.
    13. Re:I don't get it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think they're based in Canada. They interviewed the guy who runs it on CBC a couple months ago and I'm pretty sure he was based in Vancouver.

    14. Re:I don't get it. by prelelat · · Score: 1

      you know I totaly forgot that. I had seen a segment on CBC or CTV about that but it must have completely slipped my mind. That makes alot more sense now, but I wonder why it wasn't talked about much more in the summery, I guess it might be that it was common knowledge.

      I do think he will have a better chance in Canada. Judges up here seem to have a little more knowledge when it comes to interpreting the internet. Like the mp3 downloading compared to photocopying in a library.

    15. Re:I don't get it. by dave420 · · Score: 1

      That was a joke. The parent wrote "Sweeden". :) But thanks for the tip. ba-DING! I'm here all week.

  13. Canada by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They plan on moving ISPs from the US to Canada

    It seems like the U.S. has become Canada's ugly sister. I don't think that Canada's changed much, but it just keeps looking better...

    1. Re:Canada by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 2, Funny

      So, if you make a move on your sister, isn't that incest? Ewwww

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    2. Re:Canada by shish · · Score: 1

      More importantly (for the future); is making a move on your clone incest or masturbation?

      --
      I mod down anyone who says "I will be modded down for this", regardless of the rest of their comment
    3. Re:Canada by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That Canned In Banada.

    4. Re:Canada by mcsestretch · · Score: 0

      Actually, the US is like Canada's pretty sister.

      In High School, she was so hot but kind of slutty. She slept around with guy after guy until now you can see the mileage on her.

      Suddenly the slightly homelier sister doesn't look so bad.

    5. Re:Canada by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, no no. You've got it all wrong.

      Canada is Great Britain's underachieving, slackerish younger brother. Canada's relation to the United States is minimal and mostly involves cigarettes, booze and tourism.

      Canadians have historically proven useful mainly for killing Germans, and, since that hasn't been necessary in the recent past, Canada is now largely irrelevant to the grand geopolitical scheme. Hell, Australia and South Africa have more impact on world events than Canada.

  14. Punishing the wrong ones by ErGalvao · · Score: 1

    Actually this is part of the (wrong) principle that the website owner is automatically guilt for anything that is stored/announced/published there. People like the folks of MPAA just put the guilt in people they CAN disturb.

    The real responsibility for content/files/etc... published on a website is on the publisher, not on the site itself, but this is obvious... or should be anyways. Problem is MPAA, RIAA and alike know that it's too hard to grab a user, so they just sue the service owner, making the very idea of aggregating any kind of content a real nightmare for anyone.

    --
    Er Galvão Abbott - IT Consultant and Developer
    1. Re:Punishing the wrong ones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This was the same argument that arose during the Napster lawsuits; that the RIAA/MPAA should focus their efforts not on the aggregators of the infringing material but rather on the suppliers. But the RIAA/MPAA are also actively seeking out the suppliers as well. That is all of those lawsuits where John Doe with IP x.x.x.x is subpoenaed and it ends up being a grandmother or some kid somewhere. It's considered just as unpopular and gets constantly criticized on Slashdot.

      The reality is that the RIAA/MPAA are not going to stop attempting to protect their material. Even as they move to offer more technically friendly solutions they will always fight to keep the piracy levels as managable as possible, as they should. It is well within their right to decide how their material is to be published. The reality also is that regardless of the services available and proper laws followed there will be a segment of the population, represented in greater numbers by the Slashdot and FOSS crowd, that decry the actions of the RIAA/MPAA regardless of what they may be and will continue to illegally attempt to acquire any media they desire when they desire it.

    2. Re:Punishing the wrong ones by ErGalvao · · Score: 1
      (...) they will always fight to keep the piracy levels as managable as possible, as they should.
      Yes, they should, but in the right way, regardless of popularity. The fact is if the user puts something online he must know he is responsible for it and take it like a [insert gender here].
      --
      Er Galvão Abbott - IT Consultant and Developer
  15. I love this rationale... by carvalhao · · Score: 1

    IANAL, but if linking to something that may be illegal is illegal, I suppose that linking to IsoHunt is also illegal. That would include Google and other search engines. And if all citizens are equal from a legal standpoint, isn't suing IsoHunt and not Google liable to be labeled persecution?

    1. Re:I love this rationale... by shark72 · · Score: 1

      "And if all citizens are equal from a legal standpoint, isn't suing IsoHunt and not Google liable to be labeled persecution?"

      You've been to IsoHunt, right? You understand their purpose, their business model, and so on?

      For those of you who really don't see the difference, a good place to start is intent. Nota bene that when the folks at IsoHunt used the "legitimate distribution" phrase, they were being ironic.

      --
      Sitting in my day care, the art is decopainted.
    2. Re:I love this rationale... by delinear · · Score: 1

      I'm sure the **AAs would love to sue Google if they thought for a second they could get away with it. Unfortunately for them, Google has a little more financial clout to fight it's corner, and as we've seen in the past, the **AAs are a little shy of fighting battles they aren't sure they'll win (the last thing they want is to go to court and end up setting a legal precedent saying that these aggregators are fine and above board...)

  16. Cost for **AA by pipatron · · Score: 1

    Just imagine the sum of the cost for **AA because of all directors, lawyers, PR-people etc that has to sit hours after hours in meetings about how to act on these "evil torrent-sites". Then smile.

    --
    c++; /* this makes c bigger but returns the old value */
  17. a Rose by any other name is still full of crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I think it's great that everyone sits here and is like "you're all greedy you evil record companies"...lol...you're all just a bunch of looters. torrents are just the hurricane katrina of the internet. If we're all going to enjoy in the fact that technology has created more loopholes than can be closed by the giant companies we shouldn't be fake about it. you're all just faking this self righteous attitude like you've been wronged by companies who dump millions into developing software or music or movies. That, combined with the spite you have for movie stars who make big salaries makes you sing songs of how right you are for stealing. If you're complaining about the cost of software, well then don't buy it, anyone who's taken a simple econ course understands supply and demand. A product is worth what people will pay for it, not what you think it should cost. If you don't like it, go find an open source solution free solution or write the program yourself. But c'mon guys, don't act like you're not all just looting till the internet cops get to the scene, b/c that's really all that 98% of us are doing.

    1. Re:a Rose by any other name is still full of crap by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 5, Interesting

      torrents are just the hurricane katrina of the internet.

      Cripes, I *WISH* torrents had that sort of speed. :-\

      BTW, I fully admit to being a looter. I know the law. I just don't give a shit. In a world where our government is selling us out to another country, where illegal aliens are given more rights than citizens, where some soccer dude can get handed a quarter of a -*BILLION*- dollars for playing a game, why should I be a nice little nobody who follows all the rules? Fuck all that. It's every man for himself from this point on.

    2. Re:a Rose by any other name is still full of crap by pipatron · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you're complaining about the cost of software, well then don't buy it

      I thought that's what we are accused of? Not buying, that is.

      anyone who's taken a simple econ course understands supply and demand

      Did you take one of those courses yourself? The cost of a product generally follows the simple equation demand / supply. When supply is infinite, as it is when you can copy something with zero effort without affecting the original, the cost approach zero. In order to be able to extort the consumers in paying a lot more than the products are worth, there are lobbied laws in place to force an artificial scarcity of the product.

      --
      c++; /* this makes c bigger but returns the old value */
    3. Re:a Rose by any other name is still full of crap by shark72 · · Score: 1

      "When supply is infinite, as it is when you can copy something with zero effort without affecting the original, the cost approach zero."

      Come on; you know that demand isn't infinite, and that costs are recovered only if the product sells. The supply/demand curve is still very much at play, even with products where the cost of sale is inordinately larger than the cost of production.

      While it could be that you're simply smarter than those morons at Adobe, and that they haven't done their due diligence in setting pricing; it's pretty doubtful. Quoting Econ 101 stuff won't change the fact that Adobe has a nice, shiny building, and that there are a hell of a lot more PhotoShop users than The Gimp users, despite the fact that the latter is free.

      --
      Sitting in my day care, the art is decopainted.
    4. Re:a Rose by any other name is still full of crap by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What tripe. Copy != Stealing.

      Copyright is an arbitrary ARTIFICIAL law -- whose time has come and past. Why is illegal? Because the government says so; and who creates the government? The people, and the people clearely are showing that it's an archaic hold-over when information was a scarce commodity.

      Sharing is caring. That's the best kind of (free) advertising you can get!

      Cheers

    5. Re:a Rose by any other name is still full of crap by iminplaya · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'm afraid that's just how people are going to think (not that I disagree either) as the corruption and greed in government/corporation grows more obvious every day. And it's this exposure that the they are trying to control or stop if possible, while the copyright crime spree continues. They are setting themselves up for a real disaster. This is why groups like IBM are calling for "reform". The ground could collapse from underneath at any moment, and they have a helluva lot invested in the status quo. I'm calling for a "copyriot". Copy and distribute everything you can get your hands on.

      --
      What?
    6. Re:a Rose by any other name is still full of crap by Digital+Vomit · · Score: 1
      That, combined with the spite you have for movie stars who make big salaries makes you sing songs of how right you are for stealing.

      Who's advocating theft here? Stealing is morally wrong. P2P has nothing to do with stealing. P2P often (thought not always) has to do with copyright infringement, which is illegal. BIG difference.

      Also, equating copyright infringement with theft is morally wrong (but not illegal, so you're safe there).

      (It can also be argued that copyright law is morally wrong, but that's an argument for another time)

      --
      Modern copyright is theft of culture from everyone and it retards the progress of the useful arts and sciences.
    7. Re:a Rose by any other name is still full of crap by iggy_mon · · Score: 1
      will you testify at my trial?

      :-)

      --
      --iggy_mon - www.ananonymouskiller.com - Die Trying -
    8. Re:a Rose by any other name is still full of crap by SamSim · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Copyright is an arbitrary ARTIFICIAL law-- whose time has come and past [...] it's an archaic hold-over when information was a scarce commodity.

      Clearly you have never created anything you hold valuable.

      I'm going to have to stand up and give my unpopular opinion here. Copyright does have its place. People SHOULD have the right to retain ownership of things they worked hard to create. They SHOULD be allowed to choose what happens to what they have created. If that means letting a limited number of people seeing it, if that means only allowing it to be seen in certain galleries or theaters or sold in certain stores, if that means charging what they feel is a fair price for each reproduction of that work, if that means not allowing other people to distribute their work freely then they have the right to that - for a finite, and fair, amount of time. I create stuff. I write stories. One day, I hope to publish and make money from what I write, which is why not everything I write is freely available online. I don't want people to randomly copy and paste my stories elsewhere without asking me. I'm lenient, but I draw the line at people who profit themselves from it, or don't give me due credit. Is that so bad? Don't I have the right to draw that line?

      The argument is this: the movie studios and recording companies believe that they are losing staggering amounts of money from piracy. They believe - or have convinced themselves - that EVERY downloaded song or movie is a lost physical sale and therefore they SUE indiscriminately, for appallingly disproportionate sums and prison terms (decades in some cases), to make it so that the general public FEARS piracy.

      But the fact of the matter is: when you copy me, I may lose sales - or, I may not. But I also gain a wider audience for my work. And through that wider audience I may gain sales - more than I originally lost (whatever that number is). If I am an artist and I created solely so that people could see my work, then I lose NOTHING. If I am a businessman and created solely for profit, I MAY lose something, or I may gain something.

      The pro-piracy argument here is surely not that "all information should be free, everything you ever created should be available to everybody for no cost and they shouldn't have to pay you". That's insane. The argument is that choice should be with the creator - something the internet has facilitated, to the **AA's chagrin.

      I'm beginning to ramble so I'll stop here.

    9. Re:a Rose by any other name is still full of crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      ...where illegal aliens are given more rights than citizens...


      I was going to agree with you until you pulled this steaming pile of racist bullshit out of your ass.

      Fuck you.
    10. Re:a Rose by any other name is still full of crap by pipatron · · Score: 1

      Of course, photoshop is a great product. Without support from the current copyright law to artificially create a limited supply, maybe they wouldn't have such a shiny building, but I have no doubts at all that the product would still exist, except for sale for a lower price.

      --
      c++; /* this makes c bigger but returns the old value */
    11. Re:a Rose by any other name is still full of crap by fair_n_hite_451 · · Score: 1

      Perhaps that's what you're doing, but not me.

      I download music off the internet, not because I want to steal it, or because I feel like I'm entitled to it for free (as in beer), or because I have some vague sense of "sticking it to the man!" to satisfy and I can justify stealing it on that basis.

      I download music because, here in Canada, I already paid for that privilige. Through laws lobbied for and passed at the behest of the Canadian equivalent of the RIAA (the CRIA) every CD I buy is surcharged on the presumption that I'm going to use it to steal music (in their words) and so therefore they get some compensation.

      But yet, I buy the PC games I play. I buy the movies I own. Both because these are not explicitly covered by the same rulings as music.

      Therefore, the music industry created me in their own image. A music leech.

      So, I've got no problems being one. It's not looting, it's exercising the right we've been charged for anyway.

      And yet, the CRIA still goes after people who are uploading, thus trying to prevent me from exercising the right I've already been charged for. THAT, makes no sense to me.

      I haven't been "wronged" by a record company to date (missed out on the Sony Rootkit thank goodness), but I will admit I can't help but feel some sense of satisfaction that they didn't think through the laws which they proposed years ago. It's been interesting watching them twist themselves into logic pretzels trying to argue the other side of the fence lately ... all without mentioning that they'd be willing to stop collecting the surcharge on recordable media I might add. I can understand totally why people feel they are smug, self-serving, lying corporate a$$hats.

      --
      Reason why there is hope for the future generation #364:
      "I wish my grass was emo so it could cut itself."
    12. Re:a Rose by any other name is still full of crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Illegal aliens aren't a race, therefore, my good sir, you are wrong.

      Even the idea that they're the entire set of races that aren't from your country is wrong, as an American can be an illegal alien if they accepted citizenship from another country but decided to stay in the USA (at whatever point it was required you drop US citizenship when gaining citizenship from another country).

    13. Re:a Rose by any other name is still full of crap by westlake · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Copyright is an arbitrary ARTIFICIAL law -- whose time has come and past. Why is illegal? Because the government says so; and who creates the government? The people, and the people clearely are showing that it's an archaic hold-over when information was a scarce commodity.

      The people made J.K. Rowling richer than the Queen of England. The people paid damn near a half-billion dollars for tickets to see Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest

      The people are buying the DVD in similiar numbers.

      The Geek could stand a touch more humility when he claims to know what "the people" want.

      There are perhaps a half-dozen studios world-wide that have demonstrated they can finance and produce theatrical animation at the Pixar level. It takes about five years, $100 million dollars, and the labor of four hundred people to bring a project like The Incredibles to completion. That, to my mind, is a fair definition of scarcity.

      The Geek never sees the distinction between production and distribution, the original and the copy.

    14. Re:a Rose by any other name is still full of crap by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 1

      lol, how stupid. So it's every man for himself, is it? Well, I don't think that sounds like much fun myself, but hey sure if you're up for it why not? I am assuming that from now on you won't:

      • Use the internet. It's built by other people after all, and it requires you to pay for it.
      • Go to a supermarket. That food is grown and delivered to you by other people.
      • Plug into an electricity socket

      Oh what's that? You don't want to live in a cave? Well then I guess as you rely on other people all the time you'll have to learn how to respect their work, won't you. Christ, what a little shit you are. "Oh noes, the world is not perfect so that gives me carte blanche to rip people off whenever I feel like it, woe is me!". Why not just admit that you don't actually give a crap about anybody but yourself, and get it over with?

    15. Re:a Rose by any other name is still full of crap by Enzo+the+Baker · · Score: 1

      You prosecute the man or woman
      Who steals the goose from off the common,
      But leave the larger felon loose
      Who steals the common from the goose.

      --
      I may twist orthodoxy to partly justify a tyrant. But I can easily make up a German philosophy to justify him entirely.
    16. Re:a Rose by any other name is still full of crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's people like you who are destroying everything. DIE,

    17. Re:a Rose by any other name is still full of crap by SkipRosebaugh · · Score: 1

      I don't think anyone here is arguing that the people who spent five years making a movie like The Incredibles aren't entitled to compensation. The main (rational) point is that the current system whereby we attempt to enforce the compensation is broken and perhaps obsolete.

      I know I would be happy with a system whereby I pay Pixar (or whoever it is who deserves compensation for the particular work) $5 or so (which is more than they get off a dvd sale, I expect), and in return I have the right to make use of that movie in whatever format I choose; I could burn it to a DVD, or encode it to MPEG-4 and put it on my ipod, or stream it over a network to a TV in my living room, whatever. Divorce the license from the physical representation, and if you really want the physical representation, you can buy it. The problem is that the movie studios don't want to do this, and there's no infrastructure in place to handle the transactions.

    18. Re:a Rose by any other name is still full of crap by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

      Christ, what a little shit you are.

      Oh noes! Mikey Hearn don't not like me! Whatever shall I do. Drop dead!

      Why not just admit that you don't actually give a crap about anybody but yourself,

      Pretty much thought I already did. If you're typical of Google employees, I think I might sell my stock. Good lord, what a self important shitsucking pussy. Get over your tiny, unimportant little self.

    19. Re:a Rose by any other name is still full of crap by alexo · · Score: 1

      And you, my friend SamSim the writer, have you ever created anything 100% original? No cultural references, no standing on the shoulders of giants?

      If you base a part of your work on other people's ideas, which were freely available to you, how can you claim to "own" the result and have the right to limit its distribution?

      Copyright is a complex social construct originally meant to help enrich society by giving people such as yourself incentives to create, not "ownership". Once the balance tips to the point that society does not benefit from it anymore, it's time to tear it down.

    20. Re:a Rose by any other name is still full of crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      where illegal aliens are given more rights than citizens

      National borders are just another capitalist tool. Why do you believe in that one, but not any of the others?

    21. Re:a Rose by any other name is still full of crap by gridsleep · · Score: 1

      I might remind you, copyright was invented before digital duplication. Not everyone owned a printing press or a sound record press. Copyright was easier to enforce because illegal duplication was not a cottage industry. Now, anything that can be digitized can be distributed to a billion users in seconds. It is a new paradigm. Copyright must not be eliminated. I would kill anyone who declares that I have no right to the work of my own mind and hands. That's collectivism. Copyright must be updated and expanded to include the new technology. Individual rights must be protected. Any by that I do NOT mean corporate rights. People who work for corporations have rights, but corporations are not people and the delusion that they have rights is another problem that must be addressed, and bloody soon.

    22. Re:a Rose by any other name is still full of crap by larytet · · Score: 1
      A product is worth what people will pay for it, not what you think it should cost

      ...assuming free non-regulated market, where many producers and consumers present

    23. Re:a Rose by any other name is still full of crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      "If I have seen farther than any man, it was because there were no damn giants standing in the way"

    24. Re:a Rose by any other name is still full of crap by syousef · · Score: 1

      Total BS. You should have every right to make money from your work. You should have no right whatsoever to control how it is used. You should be able to sue people for using your work without paying you, you shouldn't be able to throw them in jail.

      Copyright is broken.

      Oh and by the way I HAVE created content of value.

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    25. Re:a Rose by any other name is still full of crap by Thomas+Miconi · · Score: 1

      The pro-piracy argument here is surely not that "all information should be free, everything you ever created should be available to everybody for no cost and they shouldn't have to pay you". That's insane.

      You must be new here...

  18. What they DIDN'T say... by shark72 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "BitTorrent was created for legitimate distribution of large media files, and we stand by that philosophy as a search engine and aggregator."

    "...and at the same time, we know that 99% of what our customers are looking for is pirated, and we've made handsome advertising revenue. We'd like to keep making money off of the huge demand for piracy -- it's not like copyright owners have a monopoly on the concept of 'greed', you know -- so we're going to keep doing it, and keep throwing around that 'legitimate distribution' phrase, just because we enjoy the irony."

    At least TPB is a little more honest and straightforward in their goals. "legitimate distribution." Right, that's exactly what the typical isohunt customer is after, and that's exactly why they were purportedly sued by copyright holders. All that "legitimate distribution."

    --
    Sitting in my day care, the art is decopainted.
    1. Re:What they DIDN'T say... by BenoitRen · · Score: 1

      Exactly. The website's name, IsoHunt, is a dead give-away as to what the site's real purpose is.

    2. Re:What they DIDN'T say... by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      First thing I thought of from the name is can I find Linux Distro ISOs.
      I haven't ever downloaded an ISO that wasn't legit.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    3. Re:What they DIDN'T say... by shark72 · · Score: 1

      "First thing I thought of from the name is can I find Linux Distro ISOs."

      I can see how somebody who's had no experience with piracy might have thought that, but a visit to the site would have cleared up that misconception for you REALLY fast. The top three searches recently were "Prison Break," "Snakes on a Plane" and "Miami Vice" -- not Linux distros, obviously. The only OS in the top searches was "Windows Vista," which is not freely distributable.

      --
      Sitting in my day care, the art is decopainted.
    4. Re:What they DIDN'T say... by sponga · · Score: 1

      Wow that actually says a lot about Linux in that people would rather go out of their way to download Vista illegaly than take a FREE OS.

    5. Re:What they DIDN'T say... by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      Not really.
      1. There are many sites where you can download Linux. Not so many sites where you can download Vista.
      2. A lot more people watch reality TV Shows than Nova. Just one more bit of proof that a lot of people are stupid and lack taste.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    6. Re:What they DIDN'T say... by AmVidia+HQ · · Score: 1

      You are referring to our search zeitgeist. Something like Google's.

      iso means CD images. A play on generally very large files, which is what P2P systems like BitTorrent is designed for. I wrote isoHunt.com so here's my definition.

      --
      VIVA1023.com | Political Fashion.
  19. Wack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    playing wack a mole with torrent aggregators isn't the solution to anything.
    Doesn't that depend on how hard you wack? Interview the wacked mole and see which thing he says:
    • "It sucked. The hoster killed my website and it took me a week to get it back up. They ruined my uptime."
    • "It sucked. I had to sell my car to pay my legal bills. They ruined my life."
    1. Re:Wack by delinear · · Score: 1

      Except the GP was referring to the fact that you whack one mole and another one appears. Or two. Or fifty. It doesn't matter how hard that first mole got whacked, there will always be more moles. Sure, some moles might think twice about the risk of being whacked, but others will see an opportunity and take it. Nobody cares if the first mole was left with a headache or went splat, the whacking is a pointless exercise in the long term, enough people have already gone through this and been replaced to show the truth of that.

      The more the **AAs whack, the more people will look for a water-tight loophole (forcing through a case establishing legal precedent protecting aggregator sites? Moving to a country where sharing isn't prohibited? Buying Sealand...), and if they happen to find one it will be too late for the **AAs to offer to play nicely. They should be getting these people on board and looking at ways to make their business model work with these sites, not against them. But like most people who rely on whacking things to provide answers, they're not noted for thinking things through...

  20. Is anyone suprised? by cliffski · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I hadn't heard of that torrent site, but just as a test I googled this:
    "king kong torrent"
    try it, and check out the top links (the top two are from isohunt)
    That was just the first hollywood movie that popped into my head.
    It may well be that isohunt carried a lot of perfectly legal torrents, but any torrent site that carries a huge amount of copyrighted stuff is going to be attacked by the people owning the copyright. If you really want to support legal p2p, you need to make damn sure your site is absolutely rigorous when it comes to filtering out illegal content.

    In an ideal world, the anti-DRM, pro p2p crowd would be the very people who were actively moderating sites like these and keeping them clean of illegal content. As it is, nobody is going to take seriously any claims about such sites being mostly for legal use.

    --
    DRM-free indie games for the PC and Mac: Positech Games
    1. Re:Is anyone suprised? by Secrity · · Score: 1

      I don't think you found what you were looking for.

      The links you found were for Kong: King of Atlantis; which was not exactly a blockbuster movie.

    2. Re:Is anyone suprised? by pipatron · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In an ideal world, the anti-DRM, pro p2p crowd would be the very people who were actively moderating sites like these and keeping them clean of illegal content.

      In the pro-piracy crowd, there are no illegal content. If you buy a CD or a DVD, it's yours and you should be able to do what you please with the information.

      --
      c++; /* this makes c bigger but returns the old value */
    3. Re:Is anyone suprised? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      then they are morons. Just because I pay 10.99 to buy a DVD of The Fellowship of the Ring, doesn't give me equal rights to distribute that movie as the guys who took 3 hard years of their lives slaving over making the thing.
      To think it does just shows you to be deluded, or trying to justify taking other peoples stuff. You might succeed in fooling yourself, but nobody else.

    4. Re:Is anyone suprised? by Findeton · · Score: 0, Interesting

      In an ideal world, the anti-DRM, pro p2p crowd would be the very people who were actively moderating sites like these and keeping them clean of illegal content. As it is, nobody is going to take seriously any claims about such sites being mostly for legal use.

      Who fukin' cares if it's "legal"! PIRACY IS RIGHT. What this peple calls "piracy" is not boarding ships... instead, they are talking about... sharing culture between peers! And, my friend, it doesn't matter if that's been banned on your country (here in Spain is absolutely legal), morally speaking, "piracy" is not wrong, moreover, "piracy" is possitive and should be encouraged.

      I know it's not legal anymore in your country, but that does only mean that your politicians suck more then ours on this subject, and that you should struggle to get it back your RIGHTS. Yes, i'm talking about "piracy"(sharing culture between peers) as a right. We've got the right to pirate in Spain, and if you think our culture has died because of that, then think again! You americans have been taken away one of your rights, and everyone knows that maintaining your rights is easier than taking them back.. that means you have to struggle on this fight even more.

    5. Re:Is anyone suprised? by cliffski · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Firstly I'm not American. secondly I am in total disagreement with you. I make games for a living, and its fucking hard work. You seem to think you were born with some basic right to take the fruit of my labour without compensation. The way I see it that makes you one of the following:

      1) a communist
      2) a leecher
      3) an idiot.

      Choose.

      Or explain why you have the RIGHT to take my hard work for free? Then explain my incentive to do any further work if that's true? note that this generalises to everyone on planet earth that makes any content at all that can be encoded digitally.

      --
      DRM-free indie games for the PC and Mac: Positech Games
    6. Re:Is anyone suprised? by pipatron · · Score: 1

      Your statement shows that you have absolutely no clue at all about this subject. Come back when you have learnt a bit about it so you can actually argue for it instead of simply calling people morons. There's a lot of litterature and research out there that shows how little copyright actually affects the guy that used up 3 years of his life making the thing.

      --
      c++; /* this makes c bigger but returns the old value */
    7. Re:Is anyone suprised? by AmVidia+HQ · · Score: 1

      Our copyright policy

      We've handled thousands of requests from copyright owners. The MPAA is just one among many, and they refused to work with us on the filtering. There's also an article on isoHunt if you want more facts.

      --
      VIVA1023.com | Political Fashion.
    8. Re:Is anyone suprised? by Findeton · · Score: 0

      I wasn't talking about games or programs, i was talking about culture (books, films, music, art etc). And i explicitly said it when i said:

      "What this peple calls "piracy" is not boarding ships... instead, they are talking about... sharing CULTURE between peers!"

      I don't think i'm doing something wrong when i download the discography of a band, for example AC/DC. I wouldn't buy it anyway and they already want us to listen to their music to become famous (well, AC/DC is famous enough). And i would say exactly the same for films and so on. This is the economy of attention, they should be grateful that i like them, because i would possibly go to a concert to see them.

      BTW, i think i'mnot a communist nor a leecher nor an idiot. I just have a different oppinion on the subject.

    9. Re:Is anyone suprised? by cliffski · · Score: 1

      "they should be grateful that i like them, because i would possibly go to a concert to see them"

      maybe your local shop should be grateful you steal their apples. one day, you might buy a banana right?

      agreed, that in that case the store loses an apple, but the main point is that it's up to the person providing content to determine how best to market it, not you. You have no rights over other peoples hard work. If they are charging too much (in YOUR opinion) that's their decision, you have no right to over-rule them. Add top this the fact that humans are VERY good at kidding ourselves and self-justifying, and saying "i wouldnt have bought it" is easy to say once we have a stolen copy.

      --
      DRM-free indie games for the PC and Mac: Positech Games
  21. Bow to the upstream, for he is your master. by Kadin2048 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    All well and good until your ISP throttles all bandwidth for unapproved services, where "approved" services are ones sanctioned by the RIAA/MPAA, and which also pay a tithe to your ISP.

    With the end of network neutrality, it could easily happen.

    --
    "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    1. Re:Bow to the upstream, for he is your master. by simm1701 · · Score: 1

      then people will just do torrent over https, or ssh tunnelling over https, or ppp over https (and yes it can actually be done, corkscrew is the best example for ssh over https via a https proxy) I've played at ppp over https myself - a few hundred lines of code will get it working - true my version had tonnes of overhead so wasn't very efficient, but it proved the point well enough.

      If torrent gets blocked at the protocol layer, it will just start working on top of a different protocol - there are plenty avilable!!

      --
      $_="Slashdotter";$syn="OTT";s;..;;;sub _{print shift||$_};s!ash!Perl !;s=$syn=ack=i;tr+LLEd+BLAH+;_"Just Another ";_
    2. Re:Bow to the upstream, for he is your master. by Tony+Hoyle · · Score: 1

      Easily fixed with a transparent proxy. Torrent's won't go through them because they're not HTTP requests.

      There are already ISPs that monitor for certain kinds of HTTP traffic (eg. T-mobile web'n'walk prohibits streaming video, and they actively check for it, even though it's embedded in webpages).

    3. Re:Bow to the upstream, for he is your master. by Dark_MadMax666 · · Score: 1

      Well encryption technically should take care of filtering at protocol level. Now in theory they may allow ONLY trusted connection -e.g. your ISP will not let you connect to anything outside of "trusted" ip addresses , -for that a lot of legislation has to happen but lobbyists have an excellent track record for that. Heck check out "perform" act -just a beginning of that approach.

      Abolishment of net neutrality is important part of this process as well. And ,sadly, it is bound to happen -for technical reasons -QoS is an excellent and necessary idea in , - just lobbyists will give it necessary twist to server their masters interests.

    4. Re:Bow to the upstream, for he is your master. by Teresita · · Score: 1

      "All well and good until your ISP throttles all bandwidth for unapproved services, where 'approved' services are ones sanctioned by the RIAA/MPAA, and which also pay a tithe to your ISP."

      That's where competition comes in. No one is locked into any one ISP, unless they are on AOL.

    5. Re:Bow to the upstream, for he is your master. by 0xygen · · Score: 1

      IANAL, but surely the ISPs are currently free to filter as they please? eg upon request of the MPAA/RIAA if they are persuaded to.

      My impression was that the whole net neutrality controversy is about creating laws to prevent them doing as you suggest?

    6. Re:Bow to the upstream, for he is your master. by Kadin2048 · · Score: 1

      That's where competition comes in. No one is locked into any one ISP, unless they are on AOL.

      Tell that to Comcast, my only choice for broadband.

      Unless you're talking about dialup, which is rapidly becoming practically unrelated to broadband in terms of what you can do with it (can't do VOIP, can't do video, can't do much audio streaming), most people have only one, sometimes two, choices of providers.

      There's a natural limit to how many entities can feasibly provide the "last mile" connection to people's homes. There just are a limited number of connections going into people's houses that can carry a substantial amount of bandwidth. The cable TV company's coax is the obvious choice; the phone company's TWP is second. Even if you put in BPL, which doesn't even work all that well, and God smiles on you enough to have somebody drag fiber, that's a pretty limited playing field. I don't really think that the gas and water company are going to start transmitting data on their pipes, although who knows. The point is, there's a natural bottleneck there, unless you force (as the FCC used to force the phone company with DSL) to permit customer traffic to transit their lines to the head-end at some fixed rate, allowing a choice of ISP.

      The market is not going to 'fix' it, because it's a natural monopoly.

      --
      "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    7. Re:Bow to the upstream, for he is your master. by simm1701 · · Score: 1

      My point was is that you could reimplement the torrent transport layer under http and it willeasily go through a proxy.

      The transport protocol doesn't really matter to the application - as long as it can send and recieve data.

      Until now its been convinient to have all protocols different and on different ports, if ISPs choose to make it inconvinient then someone will just add a patch to torrent apps to let them talk in http and work over https

      --
      $_="Slashdotter";$syn="OTT";s;..;;;sub _{print shift||$_};s!ash!Perl !;s=$syn=ack=i;tr+LLEd+BLAH+;_"Just Another ";_
  22. Bullshit Taco... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    "This is a story we've heard before with other sites, only serving to further demonstrate that playing wack a mole with torrent aggregators isn't the solution to anything."

    What is it? You get pissed off when they go after the aggregators and hypocrically say Go After The Individual Pirates, and when they do, you scream I CAN'T BELIEVE THEY ARE GOING AFTER SINGLE MOTHERS!!! WHAT BASTARDS!!! IT ONLY GOES TO PROVE THAT COPYRIGHT DOESN'T WORK!!!

    So WTF is it? Go after aggregators or go after the pirates? And its funny, no matter who they go after, the Copyright Doesn't Work mantra is thrown in as proof...

    I'm sorry, you don't have a right to software or media that wasn't given to you legitimately. These ISO sites are purely there to provide pirated software and rarely anything more. You know it, the owners know it and the people searching there know it. Sure, there MIGHT be a few legal items...I've seen this site before come up when I was looking for CC'd media, but almost always surrounding it was hundreds of others that were obviously not Creative Commons in origin.

    So which is it? State your preference for the record? Do you believe folks should be able to profit off their hard work, or should those of us that provide intellectual properties for a living be marginalized for your 'greater good'. This was one of the reasons I left a profitable realm where I worked in the creative field for hard cold gov't paid for science...at least here I can pretend I'm doing it for the greater good while getting screwed by both my employer and the industry.

    I'm posting this semi-anonymously because my beliefs do not reflect my employers beliefs and I really don't want to connect the two (or alter my sig).

    --clif

    1. Re:Bullshit Taco... by cliffski · · Score: 1

      well said. The pseudo intellectual gibberish spouted on slashdot about how 'information should be free' is always peddled by those who don't generate that information or content in the first place. In other words, leechers.

      --
      DRM-free indie games for the PC and Mac: Positech Games
    2. Re:Bullshit Taco... by sqrt(2) · · Score: 1

      For record; I just don't care.

      --
      If you build it, nerds will come. Soylentnews.org
    3. Re:Bullshit Taco... by eepok · · Score: 1

      Ok, I'm not usually a sucker for trolls, but hey, I'll bite.

      The main problem with any sort of solution the *AA does to curb piracy is that they rarely allow the law to take its course. The MPAA is strong-arming ISPs with threats of legal action unless they shut someone down. This is akin to getting rear-ended while stopped at an intersection, getting out of your car, and then threatening to sue the offender for every penny he's ever had unless he pays gives up all his cash, credit, and debit cards on the spot. That's not the way it should be done.

      Instead, the *AA should go to the courts, file a grievance, and allow investigators to find evidence. Then, those investigators will bring that evidence before an tech-literate judge (no, no one that has simply dealt with tech cases in the past) and bring the case. Once all that's done and there is a logical precedence found or created, there can be no complaints.

      As to your other point, you are referring to the cases where people who are tech-illiterate and whom would have no knowledge on how to use a bittorrent client being charged with massive piracy. There is a complete lack of evidence in a few of these cases, but the defendants are still having to pay massive out-of-pocket legal fees so that they wouldn't be bullied into an irrational verdict. They are in essence being punished by the *AA prosecution without having been proven to have committed a crime. This, too, is objectionable.

      Best Case Scenario: The new Netflix model of entertainment delivery (subscription fees for downloadable and disc'd entertainment) will be emulated over and over. The entire Slashdot community has been screaming for something like this for years, but no one in the entertainment industry has really taken heed to the tech-literate. They're old people with their old ways. Very few are saying that movies/music should be be free, but just about everyone is saying that they want to have online-access to movies/music on demand and the amazing majority are willing to pay for it.

    4. Re:Bullshit Taco... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You get pissed off when they go after the aggregators and hypocrically say Go After The Individual Pirates
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man. Point to a story where CmdrTaco editorialized in favor of that. Remember that story summaries in blockquote or italics were not said by the editors.

      So WTF is it? Go after aggregators or go after the pirates?
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma

      should those of us that provide intellectual properties for a living be marginalized for your 'greater good'.
      http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/not-ipr.xhtml
    5. Re:Bullshit Taco... by Achromatic1978 · · Score: 1
      http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/not-ipr.xhtml

      You fucked yourself with that last one. The first two are widely accepted constructs. You can't point to someone's philosophizing and proselytizing and act like it's a comprehensive rebuttal.

    6. Re:Bullshit Taco... by GaryPatterson · · Score: 1

      I always like how "Information should be free" is never followed by any personal information. When you ask these posters to post their home address or credit card number they say "but not that information!" So then it's "some information should be free" which weakens the whole thing.

      "Information should be free (except personal information, embarrassing information about me or people I care for and any other information that I feel like vetoing later on)!"

  23. Catastrophic failure, disaster recovery by Colin+Smith · · Score: 1

    Mirrored systems, distributed information blah blah.

    No sympathy, at all. It's entirely possible to install a system which would withstand a nuclear attack and continue running, hell, these days it's even cheap to do it. If it really mattered to them they could have put a system in which the MPAA couldn't stop running. This is really just a story of inept system planning.

    --
    Deleted
    1. Re:Catastrophic failure, disaster recovery by RareButSeriousSideEf · · Score: 1

      The P2P arms race eventually has to lead to something more robust... say, magnet links with structured .nfo content on Usenet, and trackers hosted across something like Gnutella, indexed by magnet ID. Usenet's good at keeping textual content accessible at a fixed location; let it do what it's good at while the distributed networks handle the tracker extensions and the scaling involved in the binary transfers.

      When simple-to-install Gnutella & Bit Torrent clients are Tor-ified, do protocol switching on a dime, and have indexes & trackers that are themselves on distributed networks, I think P2P will have decidedly won the arms race.

      At that point, perhaps the cartels will be forced into selling unencumbered content (or better yet, the creative people will start doing it themselves). Somebody's going to produce & distribute it; it might as well be the folks who deserve to get paid.

  24. You're damned right... by zappepcs · · Score: 4, Informative

    The copyright holders are losing, not because TPB or ISOHunt will always pop back up, but because they are trusting the business and revenue to a group of people who are whole heartedly working overtime to ruin their business. The **AA are subhumans (more or less) who are trying to create a supply and demand situation where the demand is greater than the supply by choking off all supplies but their own. This is typically termed manipulating the market in most circles, but they have paid the lawmakers to make it look legal.

    The only people who will continue to lose out in big ways are the content creators who sell their copyrights to big business like the **AAs of the world. Right now, we are seeing the beginning of content creators starting to distribute their products without the help of the **AAs of the world, and its working. The more that happens, and the more that we, the people with a clue, name the companies responsible for bad laws, jacked up prices, market manipulation... the more chance there is of John Q Public understanding what is happening and voting appropriately.

    So, who is responsible? Sony? No, there are way more than a few. Here is the RIAAs board of directors:

    Polly Anthony Geffen Records
    Mitch Bainwol RIAA
    Glen Barros Concord Records
    Steve Bartels Island Records
    Victoria Bassetti EMI Recorded Music
    Jose Behar Universal Music Group
    Tim Bowen SONY BMG
    Bob Cavallo Buena Vista Music
    Mike Curb Curb Records
    Joe Galante SONY BMG
    Ivan Gavin EMI Recorded Music
    Charles Goldstuck RCA Music Group
    Zach Horowitz Universal Music Group
    Dave Johnson Warner Music Group
    Craig Kallman The Atlantic Group
    Lawrence Kenswil Universal Music Group
    Michael Koch Koch Entertainment
    Mel Lewinter Universal Music Group
    Kevin Liles Warner Music Group
    Alan Meltzer Wind-up Records
    Deirdre McDonald SONY BMG
    David Munns EMI Recorded Music
    Jason Flom Virgin Records America
    Tom Silverman Tommy Boy Records
    Andy Slater Capitol Records
    Rob Stringer SONY BMG
    Tom Whalley Warner Bros. Records

    http://www.riaa.com/about/leadership/board.asp Board of directors

    If you want to know if someone's music is safe from **AA, try http://www.riaaradar.com/

    I am certain that there are plenty of other resource on the Internet as well. So, lets all join together and try to make sure that content creators understand what the **AAs are doing to their business... namely killing it and any chance of real revenue.

    1. Re:You're damned right... by nomadic · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The **AA are subhumans (more or less)

      I think that's a dangerous, counterproductive way to phrase it. Just because you disagree with their philosophy, or think that they're greedy or evil, doesn't make them less than human. That's a very dangerous game that historically led to very bad results.

    2. Re:You're damned right... by cliffski · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "The **AA are subhumans (more or less) who are trying to create a supply and demand situation where the demand is greater than the supply by choking off all supplies but their own"

      Oh dear. you REALLY think that statement is true?
      firstly, they are not 'subhuman'. secondly, there is nothing preventing you going home right now, writing some music or making an amateur movie, and releasing it free on the web. The fact that you don't bother, but would rather make illegal copies of other peoples work instead, speaks volumes about the issue. They are not restricting the supply of entertainment. not even vaguely.

      If you really gave a damn about the issue, you would avoid *evil RIAA* content entirely and stick to free content, or purchase your content directly from the content creators. Either way, downloading hollywood movies from isohunt makes their point, not yours.

      --
      DRM-free indie games for the PC and Mac: Positech Games
    3. Re:You're damned right... by Brummund · · Score: 2

      He won't anyway. He is just one of those spineless wankers, doing nothing but complaining of the evils of corporations, yet he is lusting for their content everyday.

      If those kind of people had any balls at all, they would just stop leeching the works of others, and instead enjoy a few nice evenings reading books from the Gutenberg project while listening to C64 mods.

    4. Re:You're damned right... by G00F · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately if you down follow the media/movies/music, you start becoming an outcast by society.

      A simple example, see how many of your office biddies talk about sports/tv shows. Heck, if you never used windows or windows software (even mac) you are pretty much an outcast, and have to go through hoops to even pretend to do the same things. (I distribute my resume in PDF to help get around those walls)

      They had originally protected citizens from that in the original copyright laws, where if something copyrighted became so popular, where it was a recognized part of society then the copyright owner would no longer own the copyright, and would strictly be public domain.

      It also only lasted 14 years, and an additional 14 years if the copyright owner was still alive. And congress was given the authority to extend the years as long as it wasn't forever. Well now it is 95 years. (longer than the average human life)

      So, in the end, what is left to do? Fight, or be a peon?

      When you fight, you still need to be a part of society, so you can't ignore what the masses do with out being an outcast. In fact, what you are doing wouldn't be illegal if it wasn't for them buying laws to make it so.

      So, in the end you need to make sure any company who buys laws at the expense of your rights doesn't see a penny. (*AA, Disney, MS, etc)

      I would go as far as distributing DVD's with all the popular music to prevent teens from buying that crap.

      Wow, I rambled a lot here didn't I. Hope I didn;t make your eyes bleed!

      -Goof!

      --
      The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive
    5. Re:You're damned right... by spun · · Score: 1

      Well, the subhumans comment was, to me anyway, obviously hyperbole: the guy doesn't REALLY think they should be rounded up and put in camps or anythign. But the RIAA is definitely engaged in rent seeking behavior. If you think they aren't using their money and lobbying power to manipulate the entertainment industry, you haven't really looked at what they are doing. I would definitely call what they do artifical control of supply.

      Your last conclusion is right on the money. Make whatever argument you like, but if you are just trying to cloak your selfishness in fancy rhetoric, most people can see right through that.

      --
      - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
  25. Timing by clickclickdrone · · Score: 1

    Interesting that this happened within a day or so of the first HD DVD hitting the torrents.

    --
    I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
  26. Who is Hunt? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And why is the search for Hunt now called off?

  27. DMCA by lpcustom · · Score: 1

    A friend of mine got a DMCA letter from NBC regarding a torrent he was on for a movie owned by them. The torrent was listed on isohunt.com. This came three days ago. The site is a torrent search engine. That's all. It is stupid and wasteful for the RIAA or MPAA to go after a site like this. Google provides the same information, you don't see them getting shut down. I'd guess that it has something to do with how much Google is worth. I wonder if recording artists and movie makers are losing more money from people pirating their stuff or from all the wasteful legal battles the MPAA and RIAA keep losing?

    --
    Beer! It's what's for breakfast!
  28. Same Task, Different Tools by camperdave · · Score: 1

    Hey! It's perfectly legal for me to time shift a TV show using a blank tape and a VCR. Why would it be illegal to time shift the same show with a torrent site and a computer?

    --
    When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    1. Re:Same Task, Different Tools by nomadic · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Hey! It's perfectly legal for me to time shift a TV show using a blank tape and a VCR. Why would it be illegal to time shift the same show with a torrent site and a computer?

      Torrents generally encompass people-shifting, which isn't quite legal...

    2. Re:Same Task, Different Tools by Mr2001 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But it obviously should be legal, at least in the case of media that's broadcast for free - that is, media that the receiver could've recorded himself.

      I can record The Office and watch it later at my home, if I want to spend the time to program my VCR. But let's say I'm busy or technophobic: I can pay someone to come to my house, set up a VCR, and program it to record The Office, right? Nothing wrong with that.

      Now take it one step further. Why shouldn't I be able to pay someone to record The Office using his VCR, and bring the tape over for me to watch? It saves him the hassle of coming over to my house just to push a few buttons on my VCR, and the end result is the same: I watch the show later, on tape, instead of live.

      Now, one final step. Tapes are a dying technology. Why shouldn't I be able to pay someone to record The Office at home, encode it as an AVI file, and send me the file over the internet? The effect is exactly the same as bringing over a tape, which in turn is the same as recording it myself - I'm just delegating the work to someone else who's better at it, or at least more willing to do it. The fact that I'm paying is irrelevant; he might just as well decide to do it for free, and in fact that's what happens every day on the internet.

      We can extend the same logic to music that's broadcast over the radio: I can record the song myself and listen to it again, so therefore I should be allowed to have someone else record it and send me a copy. It's nothing that I couldn't do myself, and there's no sensible reason to force me to do it myself when someone else is willing to do the work for me.

      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    3. Re:Same Task, Different Tools by tcc3 · · Score: 1

      To be fair, they are trying to stop *all of it.* They dont want you recording, they dont want you FFing through commercials, and they dont want you watching it on your PMP.

      Their ideal world involved you paying everytime you consume their content, while they vacation in Maui.

      You can't apply logic here - there is only greed.

    4. Re:Same Task, Different Tools by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now, one final step. Tapes are a dying technology. Why shouldn't I be able to pay someone to record The Office at home, encode it as an AVI file, and send me the file over the internet? The effect is exactly the same as bringing over a tape...


      No, it is not exactly the same as bringing over a tape, because there are now multiple copies of the show, the original one, and the one(s) sent over the Internet. The copyright owner is the only one who can say how the show is copied.

      By the way, the legal decision saying that you could timeshift does NOT give you the right to record something and keep it forever. It does not take that right away either. It explicitly leaves recording for keeps ("librarying") as an issue not decided legally at that time.
    5. Re:Same Task, Different Tools by Mr2001 · · Score: 1

      No, it is not exactly the same as bringing over a tape, because there are now multiple copies of the show, the original one, and the one(s) sent over the Internet. OK, wise guy. The guy who brings over the tape has the right to make his own personal recording (just like I do), so maybe he has two VCRs recording The Office, one for me and one for him. If he sends a copy of the AVI file to me, that's exactly the same as if he sends my tape to me and keeps his tape for himself.

      The copyright owner is the only one who can say how the show is copied. But the number of copies doesn't really matter, except to people who get a hard-on from telling others which buttons they're allowed to press. Remember, I'm talking about what should be legal, not what is legal under the current set of crazy laws. All that matters is the overall effect: what impact do these actions have on me (the viewer) and the producer? Exactly the same impact whether it's done by sending files over the internet or delivering tapes by hand.
      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    6. Re:Same Task, Different Tools by VGPowerlord · · Score: 1
      Now take it one step further. Why shouldn't I be able to pay someone to record The Office using his VCR, and bring the tape over for me to watch? It saves him the hassle of coming over to my house just to push a few buttons on my VCR, and the end result is the same: I watch the show later, on tape, instead of live.

      As I understand it, this is actually still illegal in the US, despite it being declared legal for you to tape it yourself.
      --
      GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
  29. How funny... by Sfing_ter · · Score: 2, Insightful

    the **AA are still gormless twits, this is like shutting down the nfl by getting rid of individual players... the frameworks by which these sites run exist on a plane they do not nor could they ever understand with their antiquated ideas of "how things are". Their reality is gone and good riddance. The truth is, had they labels jumped in and started the selling their shit on-line immediately, they would have had loyal customers, but now they have made adversaries of the very people they need to stay alive.

    Please, someone bitch-slap them off the planet, they really annoy me... perhaps to the same planet the buggy-whip makers are on...

    --
    A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing. Emo Philips
  30. Hydra by slasho81 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Shutting down a large torrent site is a flawed strategy because it forces users to look up alternatives, strengthening many other sites. It's like a hydra. You cut off one head seven other heads grow back.

    1. Re:Hydra by Turn-X+Alphonse · · Score: 1

      yes, except that's not how Hydras work.

      You remove 1 head and it grows back, depending on the universe the speed varies. Some it's instant and others it is a matter of days, weeks or years. Some do say the neck splits into 2 but never 7.

      Either way your logic is correct but your mythological knowledge isn't.

      --
      I like muppets.
  31. Okay then by kentrel · · Score: 1

    What is the solution? No MPAA\piracy bashing... just some constructive ideas. Anyone have any?

    1. Re:Okay then by shotgunefx · · Score: 1

      Adjust the price point to where the majority of people who pirate won't bother.

      I'm guessing that more often than not people are downloading for the following reasons.

      Price.
      Convienence (I missed last night's Office, or a movie that won't be out for months)

      So make it cheaper, and make it more convienent and everyone wins. The problem is not just that they are trying to prevent theft, the *AAs are trying to kill fair use at the same time.

      Their endpoint has nothing to do with pirating (or very little), it's so that you can never own anything. They want to change the deal and make it so that whenever you want to do anything with it, you have to pay again. Turning ownership into subscription, much as Divx (the player, not the codec).

      On top of this, they use their clout to get us to pay for it! All of this technology geared at taking away what we already have, the price is coming directly out of our pockets, whether you watch movies a ton of movies, or not at all.

      --

      -William Shatner can be neither created nor destroyed.
  32. I warned you... by LordEd · · Score: 1, Funny

    I warned you not to list torrent sites. See what happens?
    http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=214766&cid=174 44232

    1. Re:I warned you... by Krakhan · · Score: 1

      As another person mentioned, have you not heard of Google, or any other search engine? That is by far how they were found rather than some random /. comment.

    2. Re:I warned you... by LordEd · · Score: 1

      Google will tell you sites. Slashdot will tell you the popular and most used sites. The article was tagged with isohunt, not just a random /. article, it was blatantly on the front page.

    3. Re:I warned you... by Krakhan · · Score: 1

      Nor do you necessarily need to know from slashdot what's the most popular torrent sites. You can also determine that via Google pagerank from the Google Toolbar plugin, or in additional to a bunch of other metrics as well. I'm very doubtful this happened due to the MPAA reading the article.

    4. Re:I warned you... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They started the lawsuit before isohunt was posted on here. ;)

  33. wack a mole by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    Aside from being somewhat ineffective, it also tends to get you air time. More people hear about what is going on and want to join in.

    This is what happened with Napster in the beginning. Few 'average' people knew what the entire download 'scene' was until the RIAA drug their butts to court, and then the nightly news. "wow, i can download music on that internet thing.. where do i sign up".

    I also think the extra press it generated had a lot to do with the inital movement of the mp3 player industry in general. oops :)

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  34. Their new ISP in Toronto, Canada by ylikone · · Score: 3, Informative

    Their new ISP is in Toronto and it's called NeutralData.com. So will they not get a lawsuit slapped on them by the RIAA/MPAA even if they are in Canada?

    --
    Meh.
    1. Re:Their new ISP in Toronto, Canada by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I hate these filthy neutrals Kif! With enemies you know where they stand but with neutrals? Who knows! It sickens me."

    2. Re:Their new ISP in Toronto, Canada by snero3 · · Score: 1

      It wasn't the law suit that stopped them, it was the threat that made their ISP cut them off. The law suit isn't even settled yet. They just need an ISP with bigger balls.

      --
      It said "windows 98 or better" so I installed Linux
  35. Move to Sealand before is to late! by chord.wav · · Score: 1

    Sealand is salvation!! Move to Sealand now before it's too late! I'm building my own Arc with the purpose to leave with 2 copies of each copyrighted piece of work to Sealand. If you really care about your copyrighted material, send a copy to me. Mail me to arrange the details. No child porn please.

  36. the final solution by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    I dont think it will be the solution we all want. Draconinan DRM is the future, its coming from more angles then just the RIAA.

    Combined have a lot more money then the rest of us to push their DRM and intrim law suits. The suits are just a delay tactic anyway, until they get total control of our data.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  37. Fallacies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your whole argument here is shot through with false dichotomies and shoddy thinking, but it's not worth taking apart. Here's the crux of the matter:

    The RIAA makes billions of dollars. Of this money, a tiny little portion goes to the artists. About a hundred artists get a portion that seems big to them so they can spend it on flashy cars, but to the RIAA this money is nothing. It's peanuts. They only give it to the Big Name Artists to advertise the lifestyle that supposedly comes with signing over your IP to the RIAA.

    You can pay for every album you ever listen to. You can even pay per listen if you like. Artists will still be giving away 99% of their value to managers and laywers. I guess it's a fair trade to not have to think about management and law, but piracy has nothing to do with it. If you really think an artists deserves money for a song you like, send them five bucks in the mail. It's ten times what they'd get from you buying their CD.

    The RIAA has the legal right to use the court in punishing or preventing piracy. The rest of us have the right to call them assholes for doing it in such a vindictive way. The artists are not part of this fight.

    1. Re:Fallacies by cliffski · · Score: 1

      99%?
      don't quote figures if your pulling them out of your ass. Many many years ago I was in a band that got offered a record deal. yes, the deals suck, but they don't suck to the extent of 1% going to the artists.
      pretending that they only get 1% might make you feel better, but it's bullshit.

      I think you will find that the artists aren't getting some token sum from the RIAA. they get what was in the contract. Many bands have smart accountants (like the rolling stones) who 100% ensure they get every penny they are entitled to.

      Sorry if that makes it harder for you to feel justified in taking the music for free.

      --
      DRM-free indie games for the PC and Mac: Positech Games
    2. Re:Fallacies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Fuck You AC...

      I use to be a professional recording artist...you have no clue about how much we do or do not make.

      For instance, I gave 20% of my take to my lawyer who was also my manager. Nothing more, nothing less. The books were open, and the whole idea of the double accounting books is a myth from the times when these companies were owned by a single person...of which, I've been screwed more often by an independent than I ever was by the RIAA. My label was upfront about what I would or would not make, what things were costs, and what I was expected to pay for. As such, when offered a penthouse suite to stay at while in Lalaland, I choose to stay with friends...its the little 'perks' that you are 'given' that are spelled out clearly in your contract that you are paying for (with interest) that kill you.

      Artists that want to make money but pretend that its not a business, therefore don't pay attention to where their money is going and THEN scream that they were ripped off...they are the reason you hear that they don't make anything, or end up bankrupt. As my good friend TonyP says, you don't need to be a flake to be a musician, but it certainly helps.

    3. Re:Fallacies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      the whole idea of the double accounting books is a myth from the times when these companies were owned by a single person

      Steve Vai would disagree with you. From his letter urging musician contract reform:

      It is unheard of in our industry for an artist to undergo an audit of a label and not discover a large percent of their royalties unpaid, that's if an artist can afford the time and money to audit their label. One in every thousand artists have the resources to audit. There are stock calculations that labels make in order to justify "creative accounting", and when the artist does find outstanding funds that are rightfully due them, labels "negotiate" what the artist will actually receive as a settlement, and most of the time it's not more than a third of what is found.
    4. Re:Fallacies by glenstar · · Score: 1
      Thank you! I have a very hard time with people constantly saying "But the labels are screwing the artists!". Sorry to break it to everyone but the artists have WILLINGLY signed a contract that 'screws' them. If I am dumb enough to get a mortgage at 15% do I have the right to say the bank is screwing me? Sure... if I don't believe in personal responsibility at all.

      On a side note, as someone who has run an independent (off and on) for 10 years, I gotta say you hit the nail on the head. Most (99%) of indies have either 1) no cash reserves, and 2) shoddy to non-existent accounting practices. As an artist you are taking a much bigger risk going with an indy than a major. That being said, with the right independent the upsides can be huge.

      Oh, and on another note... the RIAA is NOT a label. The RIAA is an association made up of a bunch of labels, including a fair chunk of independents. The only large independents (just one step down from majors) that I can think of who are NOT a member of the RIAA are Nettwerk and Epitaph. The RIAA does do some really great things... but it is unfortunate they have sued grandmas and single moms.

    5. Re:Fallacies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Many bands don't have an accoutant on staff. Not exactly sure how wealthy you are to have included that bit. I have a friend I had interviewed for 'zine and his cousin was in a band that signed a record deal. The record didn't sell like hotcakes, so the label pretty much folded up shop on them and informed them that all the songs they had on the record and songs written while under contract were no longer there property. The band was forced to break up as they couldn't tour under their own name or play their own music. The guy I was interviewing started his own independant label after many such stories getting to him.

      I have tons of band horror stories about labels and music organizations. My old roommate was threatened with a lawsuit by SOCAN (canadian crapola) for not giving them a cut of the money off of the entirely independant band concerts (not one band had anything to do with SOCAN) that were only between 5 and 10 bucks to get in with all profits (and I mean all, I saw him handle the cash) going to the local soup kitchen after bands were paid gas money to get there. they had to start hiding concerts and limiting advertising to shorter periods of time so the SOCAN officials wouldn't get wind of the concert in time to get a lawyer to stalk them.
       
        Nice, really nice, those are the people your trying to convince me to give money to. IMHO it will greatly help the music scene if these business's collapse, so I personally don't give a damn if Rolling Stones guitarist gets gold plated hub caps for his 20th limo. I hate the RIAA bands anyways. They shouldn't be supported, they shouldn't even be listened to for free IMHO. independant music is so much better and a lot (not all, but a dam lot) support people copying their music and distributing it.

    6. Re:Fallacies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Luckily most of the independents I've been screwed by I didn't really care -- I did it for the art. The *ONLY* time its bothered me was when it was actually perpetrated by the artist. I was cleaned out of about $20k worth of studio gear that was confiscated by a repo firm from one...and ended up auctioning off my gear before I could prove that I never sold it to them. The independent started a new corp and let the bankruptcy court think that it was theirs and by the time I got this 'taken care of' the judge put me on the list of creditors and I got about $4k for the gear that I just happened to be renting to them.

      But yeah, I have little respect for independents...I have a few friends that run them, but my involvement ends when I walk out the door because of whats happened in the past. I might help with the writing or arrangements on my own, but nothing that involves material involvement if there is any risk.

      The biggest problem I have with the indies are that they are generally vanity labels, or as you say, no cash reserves to give the push required to get their artists where they need to be. Enthusiasm doesn't get you everywhere...but without it, no label will succeed.

      BTW -- I meant the RIAA in general boogieman terms that the slastistas understand. I was originally with Capitol and most recently working with Motown/Universal and Bluenote (under private contracts, not 'signed' for the latter two). Doesn't sound as scary as *RIAA* now does it.

  38. What is the name of this ISP? by Stoned+Necromancer · · Score: 0

    Please, please, tell me the name of this ISP and their IP range.

    I'm a blocking/boycotting whore!

  39. Ixnay on the Emonoid-day by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    C'mon guys, can we please NOT mention the best torrent sites? Let the pricks in the G find it for themselves.

    You can have my torrents when you wrest them from my cold, dead fingers.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
    1. Re:Ixnay on the Emonoid-day by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 1

      Please, like they don't know already....

      I hear Men In Black is one of their favorite downloads...
      http://www.torrentz.com/005f30771f39b8722749dfce07 11fc65067404ca

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
  40. The rose wasn't looted by ozborn · · Score: 1

    It was copied. But the problem just isn't archaic copyright laws, the question is who should get the benefits of Internet and perfect, fast, copying of digital media.

    None of the RIAA members funded the Internet or any of the technologies that make file sharing possible, yet they want to restrict the rest of the society from enjoying its benefits although we as taxpayers funded these innovations! That's why they are assholes!

    Millions of people copy routinely digital media every day irrespective of copyright, rightly wanting to enjoy the fruits of technological innovation that they funded. It is not the responsibility of taxpayers to keep Sony's business model functional. Sony should be using this technology to create new cheaper distribution channels instead of creating artifical scarcity, burdening consumers with the pain of DRM, rooting their customers computers and sueing them.

  41. Mod down parent troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thats some nice shilling there. Why don't you go do some more coke with your riaa pimps?

  42. Lying in the bed you made... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I love how the powers that be create things like CD and DVD technology, which enabled and facilitates all of this pirating, and then point the finger at the little guy. Give people an inch and they WILL take a mile. DRM is a band-aid for their own screw up.

  43. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  44. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  45. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  46. Question... by garyday · · Score: 0

    If I download from a well known tracker something like 24 Season 6, Even if I am not in the US am I really doing the MPAA out of money.

    I look at it this way, I pay my satellite TV bills every month, in a few months 24 Season 6 will be on as per my subscription, so someone's
    still getting paid i'm just getting to see it a few months early, I mean do these fuckers really expect me to sit there want watch all
    their crappy adverts.. If I PAY money for TV it means i shouldn't be getting all these CRAPPY commericals every 5 minutes!

    Now as for me uploading as well downloading, even if I upload 100% then there's no way that 100% all went to one person, so person x
    woudld get maybe 1%, person Y would get 1% and so on... Now without the remaining 99% the data that i've sent to those people is bullcrap
    and could be absoutely anything (think Z x 1024k blocks of data - meaningless.

    Honestly, If I could PAY $1 per episode to download a 720p Dolby Digital version of 24 then I would pay to download it, I'd also pay
    for other shows and just not have a TV subscription at all, when apple or someone expects $2 (or more) for a crappy lower-res version
    of the file packed with DRM bullcrap - sorry but that just doesn't cut it!

  47. I've never understood this by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 1

    If BitTorrent is so efficient at distributing files, why isn't it efficient to distribute the torrents and trackers and available files lists?

    Why does BitTorrent need aggregators?

    Something is not quite right here.

    Why don't they implement a distributed database of available files which itself is accessible and updated over BitTorrent?

    These "aggregators" appear to be a freakin' waste of time anyway. Every time I have tried to find a file via a BitTorrent aggregator, I find the torrents are alleged to have so many seeders, but when you load up the torrent, it's zero. Five minutes after a file is seeded and downloaded, the seeders go away and the file isn't available any more. If you can't tell from the aggregator what is a live torrent and what isn't - and ninety five percent of the torrents aren't live - what good are they? They're basically ad revenue aggregators, not file aggregators. They all compete for how many (unworkable) torrents they can show on their pages.

    Basically it's no different than any other P2P system - it's a total crap shoot to be able to find a file that IS in fact available. At least on eDonkey or whatever the odds are somewhat better.

    The interface on these things could stand to be reworked heavily as well. Most of them are nearly incomprehensible. You have to be a serious file-sharing geek to want to use them regularly that you'll spend the hours necessary to figure out how to get this piece and that piece working, and all the varied terminology figured out.

    Amule on my Kubuntu wasn't that difficult, but this business of downloading server lists - Kdemlia is always iffy - is a PITA.

    Really is not worth the effort, I find. I managed to download a few MP3's I was looking for recently, but it's an all-day, all-night effort to get a dozen files.

    I get a lot of stuff from the file hosting services. They try to remove copyrighted material, but they're a victim of their own success - they can't identify most of the tons of files they get as copyrighted or not unless somebody complains, so as long as someone uploads and points to the file, you can usually get it.

    And it's far more convenient to pay a few bucks to Rapidshare and get access to a regular file download than futz around with a P2P system like BitTorrent where you end up waiting sixteen hours to download a 5MB file...

    Time to go back to anonymous FTP hosted in countries with lax IP laws, I suspect.

    --
    Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
  48. How about this as a defence by garyday · · Score: 0

    I just posted this by mistake in the middle of somewhere, so reposting (don't flame me.. Please :p)

    If I download from a well known tracker something like 24 Season 6, Even if I am not in the US am I really doing the MPAA out of money.
    I look at it this way, I pay my satellite TV bills every month, in a few months 24 Season 6 will be on as per my subscription, so someone's
    still getting paid i'm just getting to see it a few months early, I mean do these fuckers really expect me to sit there want watch all
    their crappy adverts.. If I PAY money for TV it means i shouldn't be getting all these CRAPPY commericals every 5 minutes!

    Now as for me uploading as well downloading, even if I upload 100% then there's no way that 100% all went to one person, so person x
    woudld get maybe 1%, person Y would get 1% and so on... Now without the remaining 99% the data that i've sent to those people is bullcrap
    and could be absoutely anything (think Z x 1024k blocks of data - meaningless.

    Honestly, If I could PAY $1 per episode to download a 720p Dolby Digital version of 24 then I would pay to download it, I'd also pay
    for other shows and just not have a TV subscription at all, when apple or someone expects $2 (or more) for a crappy lower-res version
    of the file packed with DRM bullcrap - sorry but that just doesn't cut it!

  49. Money by Mephistophocles · · Score: 1
    This isn't about trying to rid the world of piracy. It's not about attempting to shut down a free black market. I think that even the **AA isn't stupid enough to believe that could be possible.

    It's a business opportunity for the film/music/media industry. They can legally sue any user who shares copyrighted material, and the requirement for proof of the user's "illegal" activity is minimal (and due to the lack of tech knowledge on the part of your average grandmother or 8-year-old, much of it can simply be forged). And many of these cases are settled out of court, so the legal fees/court costs are minimal. To shut down the underground would be to kill the golden goose. Sue the users one at a time, and there's a nearly endless supply of cash.

    --
    Deja Moo: The distinct feeling that you've heard this bull before.
    1. Re:Money by DragonTHC · · Score: 1

      first, it's not a black market.

      second, it's not a market.

      piracy used to be those people in asia and russia and south america who sold counterfeit movies and music on the street.

      the industry doesn't protect its content from itself.

      downloading isn't a crime. uploading is. though it wasn't before the MPAA bought their laws.

      content is stolen somewhere between production and the consumer most of the time.

      you share culture and go to jail now.

      --
      They're using their grammar skills there.
    2. Re:Money by Mephistophocles · · Score: 1
      Yeah, ok, chalk one up for you on the semantics of the word "market;" hope you can sleep at night, now. But - please. Culture??

      See, that's the irony, really. Good movies and music (particularly those contributing to what little is left of real culture in the West) aren't produced by the mega-studios and labels. Those who really are in search of good, solid, intellectually and culturally stimulating fare can "pirate" it to their heart's content, and the producers of the stuff encourage it - because their art gets distributed and appreciated. That's what they rightfully care about, not the money.

      That's the point I'm trying to make, here. The entire "piracy" argument doesn't mean a thing until you assume (as most folks do) that the purpose of "art" is to make vast amounts of money (that is, that it's an enterprise). It isn't, and never was. Big studios don't produce art - they produce product. And product doesn't contribute to culture.

      --
      Deja Moo: The distinct feeling that you've heard this bull before.
  50. Perhaps it is before the right time by wyoung76 · · Score: 1

    It seems that isohunt is a resource that is either before its time, or just reflecting the current state of the bittorrent ecosystem. The way I see it, the vast majority of torrents out there are for copyrighted works not distributed by the original creators/owners.

    I don't believe there are enough "legit" torrents out there for isohunt et al to index to give them a better reputation though.

    1. Re:Perhaps it is before the right time by Zapperlink · · Score: 1

      Indeed, I do wish that IsoHunt had more legal downloads on it, but its an open 'forum' providing users the option to add in seeds at their desire, and with that you instantly meet what is in demand. The fact still remains that yes illegal stuff will always be in demand but this does not change the difference that it is just another medium providing an open method to finding information, in this case torrents, just as any other provider such as google and yahoo. Seriously go look for a torrent as you would on IsoHunt on Google.. you will be suprised to see they openly provide the resource as long as a page has a match somewhere in its content. One simply needs to have it written on a page anywhere on the internet. Perhaps the next step would be seeing if a movement will be against search engines and filtering extensions.

  51. Why does the name give it away then? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you have to go to the site to disabuse you of the non-infringing name of the site, how come you stated that the name gives it all away?

    a) Movies aren't in ISO format
    b) Most applications now are either download or DVD only (so still not a .iso file).

    c'mon.

  52. The fruit of your labour... by RareButSeriousSideEf · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I looked at your site, and it looks like you create good games and deal fairly. I'd be willing to bet that most insightful /.ers, anti-DRM stance notwithstanding, would view you as one of the "good guys." Of course you have a right to be paid for your work. Since you sell it directly, I'm happy to pay you for it. I hope many others feel the same.

    My problem is that I find it socially irresponsible to fund media cartels who manipulate the legal systems of various countries in an effort to artificially inflate prices and maintain a monopoly over the distribution channel.

    Is that more irresponsible than pirating content? I don't know; I honestly struggle with that question. I do not believe that "information wants to be free" means that people are entitled to take and enjoy the creative works of others without paying. Doing creative work is partly an act of investment, and like any other, one of the rewards can be passive income after the work is created. Some seem to believe that people should be denied rewards on that investment if their trade happens to be creative works. I don't agree, and I don't think that view represents the majority, either.

    But along the same lines, I don't believe those who control the market for content creators' products (payola, etc.) are entitled to misrepresent the revenue stream on their balance sheet & rip those artists off, either. I don't believe corporate entities are entitled to retroactively rescind the public domain status of works that have passed into that domain. I don't believe that media corporations are entitled to force internet and satellite broadcasters into using expensive, proprietary streaming formats by legislatively mandating "approved" DRM frameworks. And I don't believe that distributors or creators are entitled to multiple payments for each device I wish to use my purchased content on. Except for a few bright spots, what we've got right now is a crap system, IMO.

    Ultimately, I hope a system evolves that enables me to be a good customer of the artists I like and feel good about it. You going independent is a seedling of such a system; I hope something resembling an aggregator of your distribution system becomes the norm instead of the alternative in the near future.

    1. Re:The fruit of your labour... by cliffski · · Score: 1

      I agree with you 100%. Many of the stunts pulled by the RIAA, MPAA etc are totally evil. Whoever at sony thought that putting a rootkit on peoples PCs was a good idea needs shooting. I'd like to see copyright expire MUCH quicker than it currently does, and I totally agree with you on format shifting (some of my games have a mac version, and despite the port being done by a 3rd party, we have a deal in place to allow our customers to format shift in either direction).
      You are right about the growth of the small independents (in all industries) being a positive force in all this mess. However, what depresses me is that I've seen no evidence at all that people who torrent the big evil megacorp products also treat the little guy better. In fact, you will find software done by 1-2 man companies torrented alongside the likes of Halo. If people were torrenting content to show how they dislike the vile cartel style system, they should be supporting people outside that system. Unfortunately, they don't seem to do so, which makes me think that most people torrenting content have no real gripe or agenda, they just want stuff for free, regardles who made it or what their policy is towards customers :(

      --
      DRM-free indie games for the PC and Mac: Positech Games
  53. boycott? by dj_krztoff · · Score: 1

    I'd love to know who their provider was. Shutting a site down without any warning like this is not something that I would sponsor.

    1. Re:boycott? by Shadow-isoHunt · · Score: 1

      server4you

      --
      www.isoHunt.com
    2. Re:boycott? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Their previous host was Serverbeach, they had for ages a link to a referral code on their site which I just found again by looking in archive.org :
      http://web.archive.org/web/20070117225745/http://w ww.isohunt.com/serverbeach-coupon-code-referral.ph p
      The page does not exist though, it redirects to isohunt's main page

  54. Who the hell are you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    to tell me what I can and cannot do with property I bought? Are you

    a) communist
    b) lying
    c) an idiot

    If I use your program why are "all rights reserved" including rights you don't have under copyright? Are you lying again?

    See?

    Slinging accusations doesn't help anyone.Get over yourself and either

    a) put up with it
    b) stop

    if your work is no necessary then someone will pay you personally and up front. If people get by without it, you weren't really needed, were you (so why the government protection of your work?).

    If you were up for PROPER consideration of copyright, you'd be placing code in escrow and donating it to the public domain when either you've dropped support or it's ten years old. But you don't, do you.

    1. Re:Who the hell are you by cliffski · · Score: 1

      you didn't even do any research before you slung that last insult. In fact my first game (star Miner / asteroid miner) has its source code freely available, its linked to on a number of gamedev sites. I made it available about 3 years ago, way before your ten year deadline. In fact, a quick google found this:
      http://www.amazon.com/Game-Programming-Beginners-G uide-CD-ROM/dp/1568811934
      a book that has the games source code in it. (i didnt even know about the book till just now).
      I also did it with Rocky Racers, another old game of mine, and fully intend to do it with my other games in a few years.
      I'm opposed to rootkits and other silly tactics, in favour of a right to backup, and a right to format shift.Anyone who buys a mac copy of my games can request a free pc copy, and vice versa (where available).
      Not everyone who is opposed to people illegally torrenting stuff is automatically an evil MPAA shill. Some of us just care about being paid when we create something popular.

      --
      DRM-free indie games for the PC and Mac: Positech Games
  55. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  56. Re:Link is down - mirror here by mrops · · Score: 1

    Yes

    Go to google, search
    filetype:torrent

    almost as good as isohunt, no harm done.

  57. Ah here it is ! by stud9920 · · Score: 1

    I was looking for the "Isohunt sucks anyway, I always use xyz instead" thread, look like I found it.

  58. Timeshifting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I tried this at work once. They didn't like me coming in every day when everyone else was leaving...

    ...Probably because I got lonely and left too.

  59. Seizure by Das+Auge · · Score: 2, Funny

    I tried to read that out loud at work. Now I'm stuck trying to explain to my coworkers that I am, in fact, not having a seizure.

    1. Re:Seizure by hoooocheymomma · · Score: 1

      stroke?

    2. Re:Seizure by Crunchie+Frog · · Score: 2, Funny

      stroke? Not now dear, I'm at work
      --
      --- Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity
  60. Just in case by MyOtherUIDis3digits · · Score: 1

    I wanted to point out that you can search for torrents on Google as well, so why is IsoHunt being targeted?

    You know, just in case you missed it the first 387 times it was pointed out here.

    Disclaimer: This is irony. What is even funnier than how many times I read this comparison in the last half hour is how irrelevant it is.

    --
    Ignore anything I said above, I actually agree with everything you believe - mod accordingly.
  61. Typical response of the dumbshit brigade by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

    Yep. Being against illegal immigration is racist.

    I thought you ideological lackwits gave up on that line because anyone with more than two brain cells tended to laugh in your faces when you tried to trot it out?

    Fuck you.

    No thanks, big tough AC boy.

  62. Bootstrapping by ubuwalker31 · · Score: 1

    Its all about bootstrapping. The .torrent files are about 45k. These are large files, and they need to be physically present somewhere. Its the key to unlock the safe. Thats what these sites do...they keep the keys public, so anyone can open the safe.

  63. Punish the guilty... ALL of them by gridsleep · · Score: 1

    If bittorrent site operators are to be punished for providing a service that can be abused, then all the executives, directors, chairmen and presidents of the firearms companies should be prosecuted for the murders committed with all their firearms out in public. No? How about prosecuting all the ISPs for making pedophaelia more accessible? No? Kill the messenger, instead? OK. Well, again, this is a case of our corrupt politicians protecting their corporate masters and showing us we are just consumer cash cows whose only purpose is to feed the rich. You can't have it both ways. Prosecute everyone whose service can be corrupted, or prosecute no one.

  64. About ISOhunt back up... by eneleH · · Score: 1

    I've heard Isohunt is suppose to be up and running again, but when I try to go to their site I get the usual message you always get when a site doesn't work. Anyone have any thougts on how to make it work, or is it because the site is still down?