RIAA, MPAA Recruit MasterCard As Internet Police

An anonymous reader writes "Two weeks ago, MasterCard felt the wrath of Anonymous Operation Payback-style DDoS attacks after refusing to process payments that were intended to fund WikiLeaks, the website which began leaking confidential US diplomatic cables last month. Now, the company is preparing to head down another controversial path by pledging to deny transactions which support websites that host pirated movies, music, games, or other copyrighted content. MasterCard lobbyists have also been in talks with entertainment industry trade groups, including the RIAA and the MPAA, and have made it clear that the company will support the Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act (COICA), sources close to the talks have said."

Comments

most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[Joe The Dragon]

most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams and some even list fake games or other stuff just to make there file list seem big.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmmm... Only transactions that support pirating sites.

So if the Pirate Bay guys had kept the money instead of using it on the site they would have been ok?

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[BronsCon]

I wouldn't publicly admit to knowing that. You just:

A) Admitted that you've joined one of these sites for the express purpose of obtaining an illicit copy of a game (regardless of whether they had the file, that you know they didn't shows that you searched, which shows intent)

B) Admitted that you are willing to knowingly pay for pirated media (really, at that point, why not buy it legitimately? Sure, it's cheaper, but you're now tying your name to the transaction)

C) Admitted to having fallen for the scam. Multiple times. (You did say most, which implies that you have experience with multiple for-pay warez sites)

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[tycoex]

Indeed. If you're going to pirate something... why would you pay for it?

In addition just keeping a box of money hidden in your house looks more tempting everyday. The banks are corrupt and credit card companies can pick and choose how you use them.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[Anonymous Coward]

I wouldn't publicly admit to knowing that. You just:

A) Admitted that you've joined one of these sites for the express purpose of obtaining an illicit copy of a game (regardless of whether they had the file, that you know they didn't shows that you searched, which shows intent)

B) Admitted that you are willing to knowingly pay for pirated media (really, at that point, why not buy it legitimately? Sure, it's cheaper, but you're now tying your name to the transaction)

C) Admitted to having fallen for the scam. Multiple times. (You did say most, which implies that you have experience with multiple for-pay warez sites)

Most girls are whores.

The above statement doesn't imply that I pay for sex,
or have sampled most girls (but I have),
or that the girls that I've had sex with charged money.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[autocracy]

If I say that people engaged in prostitution are more likely to have STDs, am I a knowledgeable person, or would you convict me of engaging a prostitute? Perhaps I must also be a fool because I know things about 419 scams? Surely I'm a terrorist for seeing weaknesses in the TSA programs.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[icebraining]

The keyword in his post is "seems". If he had bought, he'd knew.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[SuricouRaven]

Not really. I've seen those pay sites too: They usually let you browse without paying, in order to attract customers, and only charge for the download function. It's also fairly obvious that some of their entries are fakes, as they are generated from the search string. So if you search for "alaierubgligrf" you'll see a "alaierubgligrf full [DVDRIP] [DIVX].avi" in the results.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[Applekid]

Indeed. If you're going to pirate something... why would you pay for it?

A) Unless you know where to get it, you can't.
B) Why pay to get 1 real thing when you can pay the same (or less) to get hundreds of pirated titles?

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[BronsCon]

If you say that people engaged in prostitution most likely have STDs, I'd say you've made an educated assumption. If you say that most people engaged in prostitution do have STDs, I'd be led to assume that you had firsthand experience.

Follow the same logic for your other examples. OP said "most pay warez sites seem to be scams" (rather than "must be" or "are probably") and "some even list fake games" (rather than "probably" or "might"). This implies firsthand knowledge.

LRN2IMPLY

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[Anonymous Coward]

Most girls are whores.

The above statement doesn't imply that I pay for sex,

That statement doesn't but I'm betting you have to pay anyway.

or have sampled most girls (but I have),

Sneaking up behind them to try to smell them doesn't count, Don Juanon.

or that the girls that I've had sex with charged money.

I'm sure they not only charged you money but made you pay for their steam cleaning & psychotherapy after.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[cpu6502]

I'd rather keep a box full of gold or titanium, since they take-up less space, and they can't be devalued by the Federal Reserve's printing presses. As for theft: The Canadian RIAA (and probably US RIAA too) has stolen more from artists then any of us ever could. They owes billions in unpaid royalties to their artists. "The claims arise from a longstanding practice of the recording industry in Canada, described in the lawsuit as "exploit now, pay later if at all." It involves the use of works that are often included in compilation CDs (ie. the top dance tracks of 2009) or live recordings. The record labels create, press, distribute, and sell the CDs, but do not obtain the necessary copyright licences." "Instead, the names of the songs on the CDs are placed on a "pending list", which signifies that approval and payment is pending. The pending list dates back to the late 1980s, when Canada changed its copyright law by replacing a compulsory licence with the need for specific authorization for each use. It is perhaps better characterized as a copyright infringement admission list, however, since for each use of the work, the record label openly admits that it has not obtained copyright permission and not paid any royalty or fee." "Over the years, the size of the pending list has grown dramatically, now containing over 300,000 songs. From Beyonce to Bruce Springsteen, the artists waiting for payment are far from obscure, as thousands of Canadian and foreign artists have seen their copyrights used without permission and payment." http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/4596/135/

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[Anonymous Coward]

B) Admitted that you are willing to knowingly pay for pirated media (really, at that point, why not buy it legitimately? Sure, it's cheaper, but you're now tying your name to the transaction)

Because the pirated version is a better product?
Pirated games lets you play without cd, lets you skip the intro and allows you to play without internet connection.
Pirated movies do not have commercials, no useless menus and no propaganda sequences.
Even if you pay the same amount you get a better product when you select the pirated version.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[mlts]

What is even more funny is typing in $RANDOM_NAME, and getting:

$RANDOM_NAME [FAST DDLs]
$RANDOM_NAME [CLEAN]

and many more items. Of course, the only thing you will get for free from these sites is a Trojan or perhaps a drive by download if the browser isn't up to date (or up to snuff.)

It is almost astounding -- these warez sites have been doing the same crap since the turn of the century, and since they are still around, they must be doing something right in getting dimwits to hand them cash. Have a search engine demand you vote at three sites, then after that crap, dumped to another engine. If there is anything to be found, it might be a FTP list.

They do have one use to an IT professional though. They are great places to visit with honeypot VMs on a test network to test your host and network security. If one drive-by or Trojan makes it, expect hundreds of other nasties to be installed too, so it is a definite trial by fire for your IDS.

Charging for stuff only adds insult to injury. Nobody in their right mind would allow for direct download access of pirated software for free. First, their connection and their computers would be saturated. Second, every police officer from Interpol to the county dogcatcher would want a piece of the outfit. Third, there is no honor among thieves. Anything downloaded from there would be at best suspect; at worst Trojaned.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[Anonymous Coward]

If he tried them ALL he'd know.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[devxo]

If I say that people engaged in prostitution are more likely to have STDs, am I a knowledgeable person, or would you convict me of engaging a prostitute? Perhaps I must also be a fool because I know things about 419 scams? Surely I'm a terrorist for seeing weaknesses in the TSA programs.

Why would people engaged in prostitution be more likely to have STDs? At least in countries where it's legal or semi-legal (Amsterdam, Germany, Thailand and so on..), sex workers routinely check against STDs and their place of employment usually has them on record too and you can ask to see them. I would also say that they are much better in knowing how to avoid getting STDs. This is again another one of those assumptions that have no basis in actual reality, because obviously prostitution must be bad since you're having easy no-strings-attached pre-marital sex!

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[mlts]

I'd rather have it known that I purchased the game legitimately, and had to use third party tools to make the software playable as opposed to being yet another person lumped in as another freeloader.

If paying customers make a loud enough statement about something, publishers back down. The removal of some Draconian DRM systems in the past were victories, however small, in this direction. What would help immensely is if publishers see people buying games and stating explicitly they their choices were affected by the absence of DRM. People pirating a game have no voice.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[f.ardelian]

Microsoft spent top dollar on many anti-piracy campaigns. Most of the "user complaints" they showed in their ads suggested that the user had paid for their operating system, but they paid less than the price of Microsoft's license, they didn't get any support and they got an operating system infected with some trojan. It's common knowledge and there's tons of proof for that. Almost anyone can admit to know almost anything about almost everything, because they could have always "read about it on some reputable Internet website". I know shitloads about very very dirty stuff from the hundred thousand Slashdot comments I read in the past few years. No kidding!

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[the_Bionic_lemming]

Indeed. If you're going to pirate something... why would you pay for it?

The six million dollar man was not available in the US until recently. So instead of a Bit-torrent download, I now have the complete Time Life set.

I wanted a legit copy for a long time, but I wasn't allowed to have one for decades. I don't download warez or songs, but if the industry is going to have its collective head up its ass when it comes to releasing stuff to NetFlix or DVD, then frankly it deserves to lose revenue to others that aren't like me and are just happy getting it from torrent.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[Anonymous Coward]

lrn2read

He said "seem", meaning it's an impression and not fact.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[Anonymous Coward]

All I see implied here is that you either lack basic reading comprehension, or are suffering from severe autism.

Or both.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[mangu]

Most girls are whores.

The above statement doesn't imply that I pay for sex,

Only to the extent that it doesn't imply that you have sex.

If you had, you'd have to pay for it. Your admitted knowledge of girls is too limited to assume otherwise.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[Anonymous Coward]

Most girls are whores.

The above statement doesn't imply that I pay for sex,
or have sampled most girls (but I have),
or that the girls that I've had sex with charged money.

Your example sounds more like bitter overgeneralization. "Most street girls seem to be whores" (which is more like the OP said) would imply a certain amount of sampling and experience.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[Anonymous Coward]

If you say that people engaged in prostitution most likely have STDs, I'd say you've made an educated assumption. If you say that most people engaged in prostitution do have STDs, I'd be led to assume that you had firsthand experience.

Follow the same logic for your other examples. OP said "most pay warez sites seem to be scams" (rather than "must be" or "are probably") and "some even list fake games" (rather than "probably" or "might"). This implies firsthand knowledge.

LRN2IMPLY

William the Bastard -- later William the Conqueror -- invaded England in 1066. This statement would imply that I'm about 1000 years old, wouldn't it?

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[Anonymous Coward]

Or maybe he lives in the US where prostitution and most drugs are illegal, making it easy for thugs to get addicts to prostitute themselves for the next fix, and run the whole thing (much like a stereotypical big evil corporation) for maximum profits, and dodging their responsibility for harm.inflicted to others.

You yourself put in an "At least in countries ..." clause, so I'm sure you're aware of it. But then why do you say this assumption has no basis in reality? It does have a basis in the reality we've made for ourselves here in the US of A. The way we've got things set up stinks (fortunately, we're at least getting a bit saner about rehab vs. jail for non-dealing possession/use than we used to be), and should be fixed, but sticking your head in the sand and assuming things are as they would be (and are elsewhere) under saner sex/drug policies doesn't help anyone.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[Chuck Chunder]

You just:

Are we to assume you work in law enforcement? It's difficult to see how a normal person could interpret his statement as admitting any of those things.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[MrKaos]

A) Admitting that you've joined one of these sites for the express purpose of obtaining an illicit copy of a game, $7.50

B) Admitting that you are willing to knowingly pay for pirated media, $10.87

C) Admitting to having fallen for the scam. Multiple times, Priceless

Mastercard, for the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams and some even list fake games or other stuff just to make there file list seem big.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[Kjella]

You wildly underestimate people's ability and tendency to make ramarks in fields, issues and cases they know very little about. And even if that weren't true, unless you specifically said "I did" it was always a friend who told you about his experiences. In short, you've got a bit much paranoia.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[sonamchauhan]

For all that (rather tortured) explanation, one simple fact remains: knowledge does not always imply guilt.

People can have friends who experienced the field firsthand (he could be a teen), or they be a researcher in that field (he could be working for the Business Software Alliance), or they could simply be (inaccurately) extrapolating from what he's heard.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[JWSmythe]

"Most girls are whores", and the previous narrative (although brief and poorly phrased), are two completely different situations.

    The first would be a general statement, not a personal insight. It's usually one that comes from the guy who can't get laid, and is angry at the remainder of the population who is.

    The second would imply intimate knowledge of the topic.

    Consider it in a real-life context. If you were walking down the street, and the police stopped you and asked "Son, do you have any drugs on you?", if you were to answer "no pig, but dem niggas down dere do. ya, dem onez runnin'" indicates that you have intimate knowledge of the behavior of others. You might be let off. You might be charged either for intent to purchase, or as an accessory (i.e., lookout, delivery boy, etc).

    In both cases, it's better to say one of two things.

    1) Am I free to go?

    2) I have nothing to say without my attorney present.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[Anonymous Coward]

I've sampled hookers. Some like it in the butt, some don't. Some charge the same, and some charge extra. Based on my experience, most hookers charge more for butt sex

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[BronsCon]

I think you're projecting your paranoia onto me. I know the only person out to get me is my ex. :)

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[BronsCon]

No, but we're to assume that someone who does work in law enforcement (or who works for the entertainment industry and thinks they work in law enforcement) is going to read this.

I have this innate and increasingly obviously rare ability to look at things from multiple points of view. The beauty of stereoscopic vision is that you see the ball coming at you.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[Maxo-Texas]

A truer statement is most humans are whores.

But more men offer women
a) Money
b) Jewelry
c) The promise of half their income
d) Other nice presents
e) Dinner at $200/plate restaurants
f) Paid rent.

However, some women do offer these things to some men.

Almost everyone has their price. I saw some study with a "real cash test" a few years ago and they found the real price for most women (and I presume for most men) was $10,000 (and for many it was $1,000 cold hard cash in hand). You don't even need a million bucks.

Any time financial inducement is involved consistently from one party to the other, it's really whoring on the receivers part since they wouldn't choose to have sex unless given a financial inducement.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[Beardo the Bearded]

Back at University, one of my profs used the pirated version on MATLAB. He did, however, have a fully-legit, paid-for, shrink-wrapped copy in his office... still in the shrink-wrap.

He paid for the licence, not for the disk. As far as he was concerned, he was a legal user of MATLAB since he paid for it. The pirated version just worked better than the official copy because it didn't try to keep calling home and timing out if he was on a different network.

[how piracy works.jpg]

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[Anonymous Coward]

The only thing he's admitted to is visiting a web site that seemed like a warez scam site. He is at liberty to load whatever site he wants and there is nothing wrong or illegal about that.

Even downloading pirated stuff isn't really illegal, only distribution is, otherwise anyone could post an obfuscated link to some illicit material and make all people who click that link pirates.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[Smirker]

By your logic, you're implying your own idiocy.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[stonewallred]

Hell, the 1/2 income, free rent and $200 dollar plates has me. Where the hell do I find these women willing to pay me that much to bone them?

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[BronsCon]

How is that? I mean, the lottery ticket I bought yesterday most likely didn't win (drawing already took place, I simply haven't checked the results). For me to say it's not a winning ticket implies that I've already tested that by checking the results.

Similarly, for autocracy to say that a prostitute most likely has an STD, he simply has to have reason to believe that to be true. For him to say, with any authority, a prostitute does have an STD, he would have to have firsthand experience with said prostitute.

Yes, someone may have told him that prostitute has chlamydia and he's probably wise to believe it; however, he doesn't know until he checks for himself.

You may want to get that looked at, Smirker.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[Seumas]

Does this mean the end of Google Checkout? I mean, how can you use your Google Checkout account when Google has been banned from Mastercard processing, due to all the links to copyright infringing content and copyright infringing websites they visit? I can't wait until credit card processing is denied on the basis of things like sending contributions to a certain political party.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[crossmr]

I'd suggest that given the errors in his writing that perhaps he is just not that smart. Never attribute to malice what you can attribute to stupidity.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[Smirker]

My argument had little to do with your supposed point.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[BronsCon]

I'm betting he didn't pay for that pirated copy, though. That was part of my point.

I'll openly admit I have pirated software on my home computer (posting from work, where I keep a well-licensed machine out of respect for my employer). I have not problems with admitting that. Hell, I pirate any piece of software I use that tries to phone home. However, I also have legit, boxed, licensed copies of those applications. I do this for the same reason your prof does.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[Anonymous Coward]

Are English yer Maine languini?

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[metamorfoza]

I wouldn't publicly admit to knowing that. You just:

A) Admitted that you've joined one of these sites for the express purpose of obtaining an illicit copy of a game (regardless of whether they had the file, that you know they didn't shows that you searched, which shows intent)

B) Admitted that you are willing to knowingly pay for pirated media (really, at that point, why not buy it legitimately? Sure, it's cheaper, but you're now tying your name to the transaction)

C) Admitted to having fallen for the scam. Multiple times. (You did say most, which implies that you have experience with multiple for-pay warez sites)

Maybe he is owner of one of these sites or involved somehow in distribution and knows inside-outs. This doesn't nullify though the stupidity of admission

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[BronsCon]

Wow you read even more into that than I did. Hopefully for the same reasons.

Sadly, I've received more insightful mods than funny at this point.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[sleepy_weasel]

Okay, if they are monitoring transactions, go to your local store, get a gift card for 25, 50, or 100 USD, and donate that way. Not traceable by those fuckers...

Why can't terrorists do something nice for a change, and bomb the MPAA and RIAA HQ?

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[Galestar]

I lol'd

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[ian_from_brisbane]

I know things about 419 scams

That's a lot. Can you list them all for me?

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[icebraining]

No, because he said "most." Can't you people read?

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[Anonymous Coward]

In addition just keeping a box of money hidden in your house looks more tempting everyday.

That's exactly what I do. Living in a country where personal checks don't exist and 90% of all transactions are in cash (including work pay), it became the normal way to keep my money. Most everyone I know does the same.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[Anonymous Coward]

Ever hear of footnotes in a book? They refer to authoritative sources of facts. No firsthand knowledge required.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[vortexmak]

Question posted to the wrong people, otherwise they wouldn't have been here, commenting on slashdot.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[Maxo-Texas]

Well... are you young, have good disease free equipment, and extremely attractive?

http://www.cowboys4angels.com/

http://www.vipmaleescort.com/

http://thestraightmaleescort.blogspot.com/

Just a gigolo
everywhere I go
people know the part
I'm playing

Paid for every dance
selling each romance
every night some heart
betraying

There will come a day
youth will pass away
then what will they say
about me ...

Artist: David Lee Roth Lyrics

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[bmcraec]

Interesting...perhaps there's a field of anthropological economics, or economic anthropology, that needs a TED talk and an RSAnimate session. That's a whole area of human interaction that needs a more scientific understanding of how and why we work, rather than the handed-down morality taboos that make up the bulk of the code in our OS.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[bmcraec]

Did David-Lee Roth change the lyrics from the original? I've never tried listening to both songs back to back. It doesn't seem like a song that needs that much analysis. Say, is that a good idea for a mashup app? Shazam + Diff! We know the song, we know the arrangement and recording, we know the singer. Diff the lyrics, and show who monkeyed with the Lyrics.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[bmcraec]

Not arguing against what you're saying, but there is one teensy challenge that D/L & BitTorrent champions never volunteer, beacuse it splashes a little water on their bright shiny fires. Until you download and start watching the file will you have any real idea of whether the quality is there. I know a lot of people who seem to care more for the fact that they got something from a BitTorrent site than if the file itself was created and bundled with a quality experience in mind. Recorded something off your iPhone 4, cut it with iMovie on your phone, then uploaded to the BitTorrent, where the file is labelled "Tom Waits: Private Concert" and you grab it, thinking it's some gem, and it tunrs out to be a botched pile of crap, low res, badly cropped, with really, really crappy homemade titles with the name of the doufus who "made" it over the first 40 seconds. Yeah. That was a good use of my time. Like I said, I'm not arguing at all about D/L of info. If it's valuable, you'll make money, even if the information is given for free, If you're that smart to recognize you'll benefit more from the strategy of abundance (which implies an economics of abundance), you're probably smart enough to come up with more brilliant ideas which will do the same. Isn't only only 1 in 10 VC-seed capital companies make it? It's that return that keeps the VCs in the game.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[Anonymous Coward]

I think scammers are doing far more to put people off P2P than the RIAA or MPAA.

It is common on P2P to see a torrent for a new movie, say Harry Potter Deathly Hallows Pt 1. You download it all only to find that inside the .rar is a readme and another .rar which is password protected. The readme says you've got to visit some url and sign up to a bunch of affiliate sites to get your password to the movie. So you click the link, sign up to a bunch of affiliates (all of which are obvious scams with downloads you must execute), infect yourself with a load of mal/spyware. Eventually you get your unlock code and guess what. It doesn't work. But strangely your machine has been co-opted into a botnet and now pornographic ads keep popping up on your screen.

Of course if the music / video industry offered an attractive and affordable way for people to obtain movies legitimately, many people would take it. Wallowing through a cesspit of scams, porno ads and malware might appeal to lamers, it doesn't for the general public. Unfortunately the music and video industry are too greedy to recognize this which is why people still use P2P in spite of the risks and annoyances.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[Drakkenmensch]

So does this mean that any copyright lawsuit payments made to the RIAA by defeated defendants will be blocked by Mastercard?

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[zmollusc]

As STDs have a rate of infection, people engaged in prostitution are more likely to have STDs because they have sex more often than people who are not engaged in prostitution. In my case, about a million per cent more often (assuming ten clients per day).

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[zmollusc]

Actually, terrorists would be well advised to bomb the MPAA, RIAA and similar. It would help their public profile and fund-raising. Maybe even their goals.
"Hi, we pledge to bomb the crap out of the MPAA and all the lawyers they hire if you guys vote in a president that withdraws support for Israel"

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[tehcyder]

Why on earth would you pay for warez?

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[tehcyder]

Hell, the 1/2 income, free rent and $200 dollar plates has me. Where the hell do I find these women willing to pay me that much to bone them?

Just post a picture of your dick on cougars.com they'll be over you like flies on a shitty stick.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[tehcyder]

Well... are you young, have good disease free equipment, and extremely attractive?

Well most slashdotters would pass the first two (not many STD-ridden 14 year old virgins), but as for the third...

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[tehcyder]

How did he know it kept calling home and timing out if it was still shrink wrapped?

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[Anonymous Coward]

yule log.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[autocracy]

Well, if you can pay the up-front costs of moving some large amounts cash around for me, I'll give you a cut of that cash and tell you more.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[drinkypoo]

Don't forget "charming or at least quiet" and "a good actor". It's not all dickin'

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[mcgrew]

The cheapest I ever had cost me a draft beer. The most expensive cost me a house, a car, and part of my pension!

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[mcgrew]

There's an old joke -- a man is chatting with a strange woman in a bar about some TV show about eligible batchelors and batchelorettes. The guy says "well, would you have sex with a stranger for ten million bucks?"

She says "ten million bucks? Of course I would!"

He says "how about a buck seventy five?"

She says "what do you think I am, anyway?"

He says "we've already determined that, now we're just haggling over the price!"

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[mcgrew]

Damn, I dodn't even fit this demographic! I fit the second two, but not the first.

Actually as to the third, I never thought I was extremely attractive, but there are some women who have told me I was. Hell, one of them never lets me pay when we go out (I'm actually dating 3 women right now, but I won't have sex with the one with HIV. I don't trust condoms that much!)

As to the first, there are exceptions but most men are attracted to younger women, and most women are attracted to older men.

I've found that being a good listener and being able to make them laugh is the most important. Having an agile tongue (in more ways than one) never hurt.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[mcgrew]

If you say that people engaged in prostitution most likely have STDs, I'd say you've made an educated assumption.

Actually, no. Recent studies have indicated that those who engage in non-paid promisscuous sex have far more STDs than prostitutes. The whores generally are more careful, and get tested often, while the promiscuous don't give it a second thought.

If you say that most people engaged in prostitution do have STDs, I'd be led to assume that you had firsthand experience.

I'd say that either they have NO firsthand experience and are talking out their ass, or they're hiring some REALLY sleazy whores.

Follow the same logic for your other examples. OP said "most pay warez sites seem to be scams" (rather than "must be" or "are probably") and "some even list fake games" (rather than "probably" or "might"). This implies firsthand knowledge.

Logic tells me he's talking out his ass, and is probably a media shill. Then again, he could be Warren Marshall, who has said on messageboards that he fears pirates because he was one in college.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[mcgrew]

lrn2read

Sarcasm or Aliteracy? "Txtspeak" like "lrn2read" implies that one reads nothing from paper media and nothing that has been professionally proofread or edited. It also implies extreme youth.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[BronsCon]

Are you talking about prostitutes in countries (and Las Vagas, Nevada in the US) where it's legal or everywhere but Las Vegas in the US?

No, really, it makes a difference.

I'm not positive (got tested the other day, thanks) but I'd be willing to place a small wager that autocracy is both in the US and not in Las Vegas. Your typical US whore with a pimp who could give a fuck less about her well-being will never be tested and will ride bareback a LOT.

Now, if you're referring to escorts as prostitutes, be aware that only roughly a third of their "dates" end in some form of sexual activity and that activity isn't what's being paid for. That's straight promiscuity, not prostitution and I'm almost positive your numbers don't take that into account.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[mcgrew]

I'd suggest that given his tortured reasoning he's employed in the non-foss software industry or the music/movie insudtry. Never attribute to stupidity what you can attribute to greedy self-interest.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[tepples]

If paying customers make a loud enough statement about something, publishers back down.

Then what would be a loud enough statement to get Disney to release Song of the South on DVD?

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[tepples]

I'd rather keep a box full of gold or titanium, since they take-up less space, and they can't be devalued by the Federal Reserve's printing presses.

But they can be devalued by money-changers like Goldline, which charges a 5 to 20 percent spread for bullion coins.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[Maxo-Texas]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just_a_Gigolo_(song)

It looks like the lyrics changed before Just a Gigalo got to Dave but his changes were minimal if any.

However, he repopularized the song and the site I got for lyrics listed him as the writer.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[Maxo-Texas]

I think of myself as not good looking.

And like you, there are women who think I look like Patrick Stewart or John Malkovich (who i don't consider attractive but they do).
Fortunately, I'm a little co-dependent so when they like/need me, I like/need them and when they don't I'm not interested.

I adore women but can't stand them full time. About 5 days a week is my limit. Then I run off to go gaming or watch anime.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[Maxo-Texas]

Aye... so would you give a blowjob to a guy (I'm presuming you are straight) for 10 million dollars? Especially if no one else would ever know.

I'm not saying I would... but 10 million bucks is a lot of money. It would take me three lifetimes to earn that much- six lifetimes if that amount was tax free.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[mcgrew]

Hmm, there are a lot of whores close to where I drink (here's a map, look at all the purple balloons on Ash street) and althoughtI see dozens of hookers (mostly crack whores), I've never once seen a pimp.

The study I saw cited could well have been of hookers in places where prostitution is legal and regulated -- one more reason victimless crimes shouldn't be crimes. You can't regulate or control an illegal activity.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[BronsCon]

I'll definitely agree with your last sentence. I've been saying that for years.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[mcgrew]

I don't think I would. But then, I'm not that into money; as long as I have a roof over my head, utilities, transportation, food, beer, a joint once in a while, medical care, and female companionship on occasion, and of course electronics, I'm happy.

Re:most of the PAY warez sites seems to seen scams

[bmcraec]

It wouldn't be the first time I've found errors in otherwise reputable sources. It's hard work to track down all the details in the original sources for things, and even supposedly primary sources can be inaccurate, especially if there is any PR controversy involved. I expect that if you searched other lyrics sites you'd find slightly different information. It's very difficult to clearly identify the canonical information, perhaps especially on sites created by volunteer enthusiasts, although current thinking about Wikipedia's accuracy and relevance is clearly swaying to better, not worse, credibility. Whatever the case, I've heard the Louis Prima version, and I've heard Roth's version, and until looking at the Wikipedia article, just now, had no idea that the song came from Austria in the 1920s. History can sure drag you to some funny places, can't it?

Thanks...

[Anonymous Coward]

Thanks, Anonymous, you ruin everything.

Re:Thanks...

[somersault]

Since when did people pay to infringe copyright? I thought the whole point was that you get the stuff for free anyway.

Re:Thanks...

[Anonymous Coward]

We've all been paying for it for years with the RIAA/MPAA hollywood accounting, price fixing and cartel-like behaviour.

Copyright infringement is just Karma on those dying lobby groups.

Re:Thanks...

[nurb432]

No, i think it will help get rid of all the trash sites and leave all the quality sites. So in this case it may backfire.

Re:Thanks...

[Monkeedude1212]

I know eh?

That got me thinking - if I'm allowed to create backup copies of items I've purchased, can I claim that I am merely helping someone create a backup inside the cloud if I seed my downloads, just as others are helping me create backups in cloud?

Re:Thanks...

[igreaterthanu]

can I claim that I am merely helping someone create a backup inside the cloud

Sure. But you aren't planning to abuse your backup for illegal playing purposes are you? Just as a backup, right?

Re:Thanks...

[click2005]

No, i'm visually checking my backup for data corruption.

Re:Thanks...

[Anonymous Coward]

RapidShare, Megaupload and friends are all happy nagging you when you get "free [illegal] stuff" in exchange for a modest $$$ fee. If the "stuff" were free from IP rights, people would ignore all those sites: today's e-mail leaves serious tracks. When too large, "stuff" would legally just be hosted on [prospective infringers]'s own Wordpress pr0n blogs and highly-traceable personal FTP servers.

In today's world IP links are removed all the time, but anonymity allows the illegal poster to just reupload, and since that part is free, and RS makes money from downloaders, they rarely go after repeat re-uploaders because without those uploaders, they would have no content to host, and without that content, no eyeballs and potential cash.

Re:Thanks...

[Monkeedude1212]

Verification.

Re:Thanks...

[VortexCortex]

We've all been paying for it for years with the RIAA/MPAA hollywood accounting, price fixing and cartel-like behaviour.

Copyright infringement is just Karma on those dying lobby groups.

Not to mention the MPAA/RIAA tax on blank VHS, Cassettes, CD, DVDs, etc.

I'm an indie film buff, and bi-weekly patron and volunteer at a local indie music venue. I don't watch or listen to Hollywood crap or boring mass produced "Pop" music....

... Yet I STILL have to fund these MPAA/RIAA goons by purchasing CDs / DVDs, etc, that I use for my code backups. I sympathize with the pirates, more power to them, they're already taxing us for our blank media, why not use it to store the music and movies that they presume people are pirating?

Think about it... Every person that isn't storing pirated music and movies on CDs & DVDs is just wasting the blank-meda-tax money the MPAA/RIAA charges everyone. Would it be fair for public schools to charge for admittance fees while the government is charging you a school tax and passing laws that say your kids must go to school? I'm pissed off that everyone is paying "pirate royalties" on our blank media (not just copyright-infringers), and then people are still getting sued for copyright infringement.

Big Media instituted the blank-tax before any one was actually able to place pirated media on the CDs & DVDs, so it's not a chicken and egg problem; Big media says, "People will probably use these blanks to pirate our media, so let's take our cut at the point of sale to recoup the losses," yet they put out reports about how much $$$ they are loosing due to pirates -- wait, aren't they making money on every blank?!

I guess cheap digital distribution destroys big media market practices. I say, "Good! Down With The Middle Men!" I prefer to spend money on supporting the independent artists that are doing their own digital distribution and/or selling CDs / DVDs / other merchandise at their shows... Its a shame that these artists also have to pay the pirate tax for their blanks too.

Re:Thanks...

[Anonymous Coward]

They probably don't knowingly buy it. They're searching on the internet, find a seller offering Microsoft Office for $35. They simply must take advantage of such a great deal and only find out later they bought pirated software.

Re:Thanks...

[Dr Herbert West]

Ugh. I know people that buy pirated software so they can get their "creative suite" for ten bucks, or whatever.

Somehow that seems even sh*ttier than stealing it, since they are actually paying money, but not to the people who created the software. It's like a double f*ck you.

Re:Thanks...

[Stregano]

Well aren't you special. I think if you are going into a rant about blank media prices, you are not shopping at the proper places online. You make it sound like you are payinf $45.72 per blank CD. I normally get my blank media at about or under 5-10 cents per disc.

Re:Thanks...

[gmuslera]

To put a very close example. Here are discussed topics related to how wrong are copyrights and patent abuses, RIAA/MPAA actions, sometimes link to sites and pages that could go more or less into that direction, or tell that some movie was leaked before going to cinemas and can be found in torrents... and that just counting main articles, counting user comments and submissions will get far worse. And part of the financement of the site are subscriptions that could be done with those credit cards.

So Mastercard will be willfully support donations to the KKK and similar causes, but will not accept anything from sites that could critizice RIAA/MPAA or their actions. Free market seems to end meaning anything but freedom.

Re:Thanks...

[citizenr]

Since when did people pay to infringe copyright? I thought the whole point was that you get the stuff for free anyway.

Stupid people do it all the time, Rapidshare is a good example.

Re:Thanks...

[Anonymous Coward]

Yet, this offers a level of plausible deniability if caught...

Re:Thanks...

[Anonymous Coward]

Not as simple as that. RS (who these days are one of the scummier, IMO) and its ilk serve a purpose even for legal material -- if I host something on my "Wordpress pr0n blog" or "personal FTP server" and 5 people want to download it, all's well. When a thousand people want to download it, not so well.

So I put it on RS and link to it, and they pay for the bandwidth, recovering their costs (and making a profit) from the downloaders through ads and subscriptions. Presumably, they're charging something kinda like a fair price for the service, or they would be undercut by the competition (and there is indeed competition in the file-hosting space) -- in practice, they also offer kickbacks to uploaders, so uploaders favor different sites than downloaders, and shit's a mess, as always.

Of course, the other thing would be for me to share my hypothetical legal and popular content with bittorrent, so that the downloaders cover the bandwidth directly instead of indirectly. But the fact that some people (especially those with badly asymmetric bandwidth) choose to pay RS and others don't when more-or-less the same content is available on bittorrent suggests that RS's services do indeed offer some legitimate value.

Re:Thanks...

[crossmr]

This has been going on a very long time. Ever since there have been indexing sites, scammers have been creating wrap-around sites. This was a huge story (that I'm sure was on Slashdot) when Supernova was around. There was a site charging people $$ for access to "unlimited downloads, etc" and all it was was loading the supernova site in a frame inside their site. If I recall there were actually several domains set up just like that all doing the same thing. People who aren't in the know google these things and these sites up end turning up high in the search results. They just don't know any better.

Re:Thanks...

[jimicus]

You don't, but the Pirate Bay actively encourages people to go out and buy branded T-shirts and such which support them; this merchandise is manufactured and sold by a third party (of which there are many). I've no doubt other sites do something similar.

Watch how quickly the merchandising companies drop them if Mastercard approach and say "Nice business you got here. Be a shame if you weren't able to accept credit cards any more." The already did something similar with allofmp3.ru.

Re:Thanks...

[somersault]

I don't actually see the problem with any of that anyway. No company should openly support groups that are breaking the law.

Re:Thanks...

[jimicus]

Well and good, but the Pirate Bay have always contended that what they're doing is not illegal in Sweden.

(Not that it's always done them a lot of good, but I note the site's still there....)

Re:Thanks...

[DocHoncho]

He's probably getting the Monster Discs which are triple insulated to ensure they have cleaner bits and the most digital fidelity.

Re:Thanks...

[misexistentialist]

Denying attempts by individuals to purchase a hard drive larger than 100GB would certainly slow pirates down.

Re:Thanks...

[SvnLyrBrto]

Well, there was allofmp3, for example, which sold music at a significant discount off the price the RIAA was asking. That's not a perfect case though; as it wasn't actually piracy or infringement by the laws at the time of the jurisdiction where they operated. But the RIAA would have you believe it was piracy; and, IIRC, got the cooperation of the credit card processors in that case as well.

Re:Thanks...

[igreaterthanu]

So would banning computers, your point being?

Can you seriously use a computer with only 100GB of space in this day and age? My Operating System + Programs would alone easily go over that, all legitimately purchased. That doesn't even begin to take into account media that I generate, such as home videos and pictures. With low end consumer cameras having 10 Mega pixels or more, 100GB doesn't really last that long. I'll probably go through 10GB of home media in the Christmas holidays alone, which will probably be kept forever. Multiply the size of that home media by 2 or 3 for backups too.

There are many uses of large hard drives to consumers that are completely legitimate.

Re:Thanks...

[somersault]

Well, I'd expect Mastercard should reasonably be expected to stop payments from countries where such things are illegal, like the US. Taken to extremes, Would you expect them to have anything to do with a child porn site just because it's legal in the country the servers are in? I don't think they'd want to associate themselves at all.

And actually, while Googling who the current hosts for TPB are, it appears they also offer a "completely uncensored" image hosting service. This is something that not many would approve of outside of a small number of countries and (IMO) overly idealistic anti-censorship groups.

Re:Thanks...

[somersault]

Then you could just chain them together with eSATA or a USB hub, etc.

Why 100GB anyway? I have 60GB of legally bought music, which would be well over 100GB if it was stored in lossless quality. Now imagine I wanted to rip all my DVDs, blu-rays and games.. I'd need several TB of space.

Re:Thanks...

[somersault]

Ah, I always assumed it was just a pirate operation trying to take advantage of idiots. They underpriced themselves!

Re:Thanks...

[nabsltd]

You make it sound like you are payinf $45.72 per blank CD. I normally get my blank media at about or under 5-10 cents per disc.

Perhaps the GP is in Canada, where there is a C$0.21 levy on each blank CD-R or CD-RW.

Since the best price in the US is about US$0.15 per disc in lots of 100, that means the levy is over 100%. Note, also, that this means that you probably aren't getting CD-Rs for the $0.05 per disc that you claim, except maybe at Black Friday prices.

Re:Thanks...

[nabsltd]

Well, I'd expect Mastercard should reasonably be expected to stop payments from countries where such things are illegal, like the US.

When did search engines become illegal in the US?

Re:Thanks...

[Anonymous Coward]

I have donated to a few private trackers, I wasn't 'forced to pay' by any means. The sites were so good I felt throwing them 10 or 20 bucks once was worth it. I have also paid for access to hotfile. Using high end private trackers is way faster, better, and secure than some public stuff. I never had to pay for anything, but it can make things easier and simpler. My time is also worth money.

uTorrent Stats:
Uploaded this run: 16.2 GB
Downloaded this run: 5.76 GB
Uploaded Today: 17.3 GB
Downloaded Today 6.54 GB
Transferred last 31 Days 1.01 TB
Total Upload 490 GB
Total Download 1.23 TB
Total Ratio 0.389
Total Running Time 4018:51:38
Number of torrents added: 706
Program launched: 189 times

That does not include what I download from hotfile which is usually at least 2 GB a day, some times 10 GB or more.

I also do not pay a cable TV, etc bill.

I decided to click Post Anonymously... lol.

Re:Thanks...

[Anonymous Coward]

Since when did people pay to infringe copyright? I thought the whole point was that you get the stuff for free anyway.

Yeah, that's why allofmp3 shut down. Not enough people buying things.

Re:Thanks...

[ShogunTux]

You do realize that he might not be in the US, right? For instance, in Canada, what he said is applied to all media regardless (for example...). Just because the MPAA/RIAA haven't done something like this in the US doesn't mean that what the parent said doesn't apply elsewhere.

Re:Thanks...

[Vanderhoth]

Playing someone else's backup is my fee to allow them to store their media on my HD. I expect others to charge me the same fee for storing backups for me.

Re:Thanks...

[somersault]

When did search engines become illegal in the US?

Hmm, let me fix that for you:

When did search engines designed and even named explicitly as one for the purposes of piracy become illegal in the US?

The answer is: that type of search engine has technically been illegal in the US since long before the internet was invented.

Re:Thanks...

[zmollusc]

Most digital fidelity? Well, I am a chump for wasting all my money on interconnects when i could have bought those disks. :-(

Re:Thanks...

[trollertron3000]

You forgot to factor in morons.

Re:Thanks...

[Anonymous Coward]

So Mastercard/Visa/Paypal should not allow payments to Apple, because iPhones are made in China in factories that do not follow US work/enviroment safely laws?

Re:Thanks...

[somersault]

*facepalm*

In that case everything is still legal. The work conditions are legal in China, and the iPhones are legal in the US.

In case you didn't realise, a lot of people who use The Pirate Bay are doing so in countries where breaking copyright is *gasp* illegal! It doesn't matter if it's legal server-side if what the client is doing is illegal. That's still an illegal transaction, and by allowing clients from the US, TPB are just bringing this kind of thing on their own heads. I have no sympathy for them.

Re:Thanks...

[nabsltd]

The answer is: that type of search engine has technically been illegal in the US since long before the internet was invented.

Really? Which chapter of 17 USC covers that?

Re:Thanks...

[mcgrew]

It's the principle of the thing. You're paying pennies for the tax, but those pennies add up to big money that those companies don't deserve.

Even if it's a two cent fine, why should I be fined for speeding if I'm driving under the speed limit? Would you be OK with a "speeding tax" on the roadway, even if it was a nickle per gallon, that went to the airline industry?

Re:Thanks...

[somersault]

I'm guessing Chapter 1:

102. Subject matter of copyright: In general28

(a)Copyright protection subsists, in accordance with this title, in original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression, now known or later developed, from which they can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device.

Re:Thanks...

[mcgrew]

Somehow that seems even shittier than stealing it

Copyright infringement isn't theft. It's copyright infringement, also known as "piracy". Rape isn't theft, either. If someone kills your mother, are you going to say "someone stole my mom?"

But yes, I agree that buying counterfeit copies is worse than simply downloading it for free, especially if its is for one of the less shady reasons (want to make sure it doesn't suck before you buy it, it isn't available legitimately, its DRM is so repressive that the pirate version is superior, etc).

But buying a counterfeit copy isn't nearly as bad as stealing it. By "stealing" I mean literally, shoplifting it from WalMart or somewhere, lifting it from an acquaintence's bookshelf, or burglarizing someone's house. THAT'S stealing software. Downloading from a warez site isn't.

Re:Thanks...

[Anonymous Coward]

I own a tshirt with a cool cartoonish logo on it.

It happens to be sold by a torrent site and the money went to pay for the server.

This makes me an evil terrrrorist I guess :p

Re:Thanks...

[Celestialwolf]

That's okay; there's still Visa (which is much bigger anyway) and American Express and etc. that can just be used instead.

Re:Thanks...

[clone52431]

That’s rather misleading. In fact, I’d say it’s false.

In today's world IP links are removed all the time, but anonymity allows the illegal poster to just reupload

When Rapidshare takes down a file due to illegal content or copyright violation, it blacklists the file. No-one can upload that file again. Granted it’s not difficult to get around this (re-compress the RAR with a slightly different part size, or an archive comment, for instance). But it is, at least, the best Rapidshare can be expected to do to avoid this.

and since that part is free, and RS makes money from downloaders, they rarely go after repeat re-uploaders because without those uploaders, they would have no content to host, and without that content, no eyeballs and potential cash.

Rapidshare does have “premium” accounts, which cost money, but it’s entirely possible to download from Rapidshare as a free user (and automation tools exist that make it really easy, too, such as SkipScreen or jDownloader). So they are not necessarily making money from downloads.

Plus the files could be named anything and RAR archives can be password protected, so it’s really not terribly easy for them to discover when someone is really re-uploading the same content. And simply banning any user who uploaded X number of files which were reported wouldn’t work, either, because then it would be easy to maliciously get someone banned by reporting all their files.

Business

[TheL0ser]

Why should mastercard care if they're being used on websites that "host pirated..."? They still get to collect their fees. I thought that was all that mattered nowadays.

Re:Business

[click2005]

They want a share of the billions and billions (are they up to trillions in their fake losses yet?) that is lost to piracy every year.

Re:Business

[mirix]

I suppose the *IAA kickbacks will be larger than the fees gained on infringing sites.

Why else would they do it?

Re:Business

[SuricouRaven]

At a guess, because they anticipate that if they don't do it, they'll be forced to by legislation sooner or later anyway.

Reminds me of all the companies that proudly labeled their spray cans 'CFC free' - after CFCs were prohibited by international agreement.

Re:Business

[corbettw]

How about the fact that he MPAA and RIAA have significant clout with retailers? If they tell retailers "Drop MasterCard or we'll drop you", quite a few retailers would no longer accept MasterCards. There goes those profits!

Re:Business

[Korin43]

I suppose the *IAA kickbacks will be larger than the fees gained on infringing sites.

Which is sort of funny, since it means that MasterCard doesn't think is piracy is significant enough to make money off of.

Re:Business

[Nethemas the Great]

MPAA/RIAA doesn't mean piss in the grand scheme of all that is purchased with Mastercard. I'd have a hard time believing that even the MPAA/RIAA is sufficiently stupid enough to give up revenue from everyone paying for their crap via Mastercard. There's some other motivation that compensates for the loss of transaction revenue due to self-censorship. The folks in charge at Mastercard are definitely not stupid enough to try the whole "morality" thing for its own sake. The board of directors would have their head on a pike for giving away money.

Re:Business

[RobertM1968]

Why should mastercard care if they're being used on websites that "host pirated..."? They still get to collect their fees. I thought that was all that mattered nowadays.

Possibly because there are laws that could hold them liable for such actions? Possibly because the **AA are holding those laws over their heads? While IANAL, I would suspect that knowingly facilitating the violation of such copyright laws is not legal. And because Visa/MC make money off it, it's not a civil violation, it would be criminal.

Re:Business

[Anonymous Coward]

mastercard could use the if you sue we'll cancel all payments and credit cards for everyone at **AA

After all its just for our own good.

[pilgrim23]

Welcome the accountant Overlords... verily they will be with thee always...

So you want to arbitrarily block transactions?

[compro01]

Ok, fine. You are now liable for any criminal transactions you don't block.

If you don't like that, you will send my money where I tell you to.

Re:So you want to arbitrarily block transactions?

[KublaiKhan]

Seems fair--you verify it, you're responsible for it. Applies to everything, really.

The best part is that you can just buy a 'check card' from some vendor who -doesn't- have this policy, and use -that- to 'support piracy'. All MC's time and expense does is add one extra step.

Re:So you want to arbitrarily block transactions?

[Anonymous Coward]

There are specific laws passed by congress that do legally prevent them from accepting transactions that fall into certain categorises.

If you woudl like the law changed and/or amended to fit the requirements set forth in your post, you are welcome to contact your local representative. Unfortunately an internet posting of your desired law, does not make it an actual law and has no bearing whatsoever on anyone.

Re:So you want to arbitrarily block transactions?

[Monkeedude1212]

Ok, fine. You are now liable for any criminal transactions you don't block.

Just like the police are liable for any criminal activities they can't stop.

While I agree with your sentiments, it's not exactly a fair solution.

Re:So you want to arbitrarily block transactions?

[corbettw]

Um, they already are. They eat the cost of criminal transactions rather than force their customers to absorb all of those losses. Given that, it makes sense for them to block people from making payments to criminal enterprises (since their "customers" could easily turn around and say "I didn't buy those downloaded CDs, I'm not paying that money.")

Re:So you want to arbitrarily block transactions?

[sycorob]

And if you're performing illicit activities, wouldn't you want to use a pre-paid credit card for that? Why would you use your official MasterCard, which has you home address listed, reports to credit agencies, has sales records that could be subpoenaed ... Why not just buy drugs with your MasterCard while you're at it. Seems pretty stupid.

I also don't get what MasterCard gets out of sucking up to the RIAA et al.

Re:So you want to arbitrarily block transactions?

[cpu6502]

Oh crud. Here's the fixed version w/ proper formatting:

Paypal refuses transaction for porn or nudity. They enacted that policy over 5 years ago and even though they were sued by the US DOJ (and lost), that policy was still allowed to stand. As for theft: The Canadian RIAA (and probably US RIAA too) has stolen more from artists then any of us ever could. They owe billions in unpaid royalties to their artists.

"The claims arise from use of works that are often included in compilation CDs (ie. the top dance tracks of 2009) or live recordings. The record labels create, press, distribute, and sell the CDs, but do not obtain the necessary copyright licences. Instead, the names of the songs on the CDs are placed on a "pending list", which signifies that approval and payment is pending. The pending list dates back to the late 1980s, when Canada changed its copyright law by replacing a compulsory licence with the need for specific authorization for each use.

"It is perhaps better characterized as a copyright infringement admission list, however, since for each use of the work, the record label openly admits that it has not obtained copyright permission and not paid any royalty or fee. Over the years, the size of the pending list has grown dramatically, now containing over 300,000 songs. From Beyonce to Bruce Springsteen, the artists waiting for payment are far from obscure, as thousands of Canadian and foreign artists have seen their copyrights used without permission and payment." http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/4596/135/

Re:So you want to arbitrarily block transactions?

[Anonymous Coward]

They don't eat squat. The merchants get to eat it when there is criminal activity.

Re:So you want to arbitrarily block transactions?

[Local ID10T]

I also don't get what MasterCard gets out of sucking up to the RIAA et al.

Maybe MasterCard just really enjoys sucking? Some people do ya know...

Re:So you want to arbitrarily block transactions?

[Nethemas the Great]

You know what would be funny right about now? For the same silly folks that claim you can vote with your wallet when it comes to poor service and high prices for communication services to chime in about credit payment service companies...

Re:So you want to arbitrarily block transactions?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's a perfectly fair solution. If they want the power, they should have to take on the responsibility that goes with it.

Re:So you want to arbitrarily block transactions?

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, in many parts of the world, it's fairly difficult to get a pre-paid credit or debit card without tying it to your address -- or rather, you can (on a "temporary" basis until you register it), but many payment processors will refuse to accept it.

Governments don't like cash transactions because they're (relatively) untraceable -- and while you can't really ban cash on the counter (yet), there's much less opposition to blocking the electronic transfer of cash without collecting identifying information, especially once you start talking about terrorists and child-molesting money launderers.

Re:So you want to arbitrarily block transactions?

[jbeaupre]

Is there a mp3.pendinglist.ca yet?

Re:So you want to arbitrarily block transactions?

[alexo]

Just like the police are liable for any criminal activities they can't stop.

Yup.

Re:So you want to arbitrarily block transactions?

[RobertM1968]

Ok, fine. You are now liable for any criminal transactions you don't block.

If you don't like that, you will send my money where I tell you to.

Yes, but this is also similar to a Google story recently, (and a comment I made about the possible dangers of Google proactively filtering content of this nature). For whatever reason, the pressures in this respect seem to be causing a lot of big companies to bow down and make what could be really big mistakes. These mistakes invalidate parts of the DMCA protection by proving the company/companies can filter stuff - but you already allude to that.

Re:So you want to arbitrarily block transactions?

[jez9999]

There are some things MasterCard doesn't want you to buy.
For everything else, there's MasterCard.

Re:So you want to arbitrarily block transactions?

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, they pass the chargeback on to the merchant, so the merchant eats the costs + they tack on an additional chargeback fee, so they actually make money on these transactions.

will indy music sites get shut down as well?

[Joe The Dragon]

will Indy music sites get shut down as well?

pioneer one donations?

Re:will indy music sites get shut down as well?

[Pharmboy]

Of course. Indie music is destroying the industry by providing more variety, fresher ideas and comparable quality for less money (or even FREE) without paying a dime to the RIAA. How are artists supposed to express themselves artistically without the RIAA protecting them?

Re:will indy music sites get shut down as well?

[SuricouRaven]

They may get caught in the crossfire. I know indy bands have had terrible problems trying to sell their music in CD form on ebay, because ebay's policy is to assume that anything on CD-R is copyright infringing, no exceptions. It would cost more to investigate a claim of legality than they'd make from the auction, so they just blanket prohibit CD-Rs.

Re:will indy music sites get shut down as well?

[Anonymous Coward]

How would ebay even know what media is used?

Its not like they inspect or handle the product.

Re:will indy music sites get shut down as well?

[BenoitRen]

Since when does eBay make any real effort to enforce its policy? All they care about is getting their percentage of the money made through their auctions.

Re:will indy music sites get shut down as well?

[Fulcrum of Evil]

Why would you sell on CDR? You can get low volume runs for about $1/disc pretty easily.

Re:will indy music sites get shut down as well?

[Skapare]

Visa already did this to Magnatune and covered it up with excuses. Every business gets fraudulent charges coming through. But Magnatune was treated differently than most.

Re:will indy music sites get shut down as well?

[Anonymous Coward]

You pose the things like you think you have the right to question them.
If we continue to use them, to make them necessary, then the money lenders will continue to limit us. With all the crap that has been pulled with credit cards & online transactions, lately, it should be clear that a priority shift in the way we use "money" needs to be consciously managed. Pay cash whenever possible, make the effort needed to avoid an online transaction, pay the extra buck and a half to buy something nearby. Find an alternative form of finance that doesn't dictate your "choices".

Re:will indy music sites get shut down as well?

[Phoenixlol]

They do if someone complains. I can think of a couple associations that might do that.

In theory ok, in practice...

[Saishuuheiki]

While I'm not against Mastercard saying "We won't allow customers to use Mastercard to buy illegal goods", I doubt they'll have a proper list of who to deny.

It would be ironic if suddenly less people allowed Mastercard for online purchases. I gotta imagine that nowadays online transactions are a large proportion of their income.

Re:In theory ok, in practice...

[morbingoodkid]

The problem I have is more fundamental and that is that Mastercard do not have the right to determine if something is legal or illegal sharing. This need to be determined by a court. In the case of mastercard where there is credit card transactions involved I do understand but for normal EFT type transactions they are treading on very thin ice. Specifically in South Africa (where I live) it is considered a fundamental human right to earn a living. It would therefore be illegal in South Africa to deny an authorized bank transaction. (EFT) credit card are different and is not concidered legal tender anyway but an agreement with the Credit Card company.

Re:In theory ok, in practice...

[jimicus]

Yeah, except Mastercard and Visa between them have a duopoly in many countries. And if you think the RIAA doesn't also have a team negotiating with Visa, I may have a bridge you might be interested in.

Re:In theory ok, in practice...

[Galestar]

What about Google's transactions? I'm sure on any given day you can always find copyrighted material on YouTube...
I'd also like to see how sites like RapidShare respond to getting blocked since they are one of the top sites for copyrighted material (excluding torrents)

Re:In theory ok, in practice...

[EdIII]

The whole thing is pointless. eBay, Amazon, and PayPal are amongst the biggest fucking crooks on the planet. They absolutely know how much fraud is being perpetrated through them, but take no steps to correct it.

PayPal at this point is worse then the entire collective mafia for how much they have ripped off from people. So if so many of these sites use a 3rd party for payments and/or donations, will Mastercard step up and block PayPal?

I bet we could all count the number of pirate sites on one hand that are doing direct credit card charges.

If you are paying for pirated movies...

[snookerhog]

then you really missed the point.

Re:If you are paying for pirated movies...

[click2005]

The banned payments probably include advert spending, t-shirts and donations too.

Re:If you are paying for pirated movies...

[Anonymous Coward]

not really, most people rather donate money to tpb, demonoid, tl, dh, al, what!, waffle.fm and the like then paying RIAA or MPAA... I know this because I did... I rather support those site than support the industries... I'm a commie :P

Re:If you are paying for pirated movies...

[Anonymous Coward]

then you really missed the point.

I pay for Usenet provider, NZB indexer site, Internet and electricity. Nothing is truly free.

Re:If you are paying for pirated movies...

[Anonymous Coward]

then you really missed the point.

No, if you are paying for pirated movies, you're understanding the point completely. If you pay for shared movies, violating the copyright "but not for profit", then yes, you're missing the point. This is to combat actual piracy, bootleg copies sold for profit.

Re:If you are paying for pirated movies...

[compro01]

Yes, exactly like the ACTA treaty is about that.

Perhaps you would be interested in this bridge.

Wow -~- First internet currency (floats as well)

[Anonymous Coward]

World of warcraft wow.

I did my part

[Baron_Yam]

Cancelled my MasterCard, then chopped it up. Enough people do that, MasterCard will start to wise up.

Of course, I'm probably going to replace it with some flavour of Visa, which is probably just as evil and certainly did jump on the ban-Wikileaks bandwagon.

Re:I did my part

[oldspewey]

I bet that if 1 million people cut up their MasterCard and switch to Visa, and another million people cut up their Visa and switch to MasterCard, those evil bastards at the credit card companies will really start to sit up and take notice!

Re:I did my part

[Relayman]

Don't try to use your Visa at Sam's Club. They won't take it.

Re:I did my part

[Monkeedude1212]

I bet they would.

Considering thats 2 million cards worth of plastic with unique numbers that have to be linked to an individual with a credit score and yadda yadda yadda.

They wouldn't lose Revenue, but it'd decrease profits.

Re:I did my part

[Cornelius the Great]

Are you sure? Both my debit and credit cards are Visa, and haven't had a problem so far.

Re:I did my part

[RetroGeek]

I dumped everything to do with Mastercard when they started advertising over top of TV programs. Cut up credit cards, moved bank accounts, and so on.

NOTHING more annoying than to be watching a show and some stupid graphic shows up at the bottom of the screen.

And while I am at it, how lame does a show need to be to be continuously advertised at the bottom of the screen. I never watch those either.

Re:I did my part

[Baron_Yam]

Honestly, I haven't really missed the card since I cancelled it (shortly after the Wikileaks/MasterCard issue popped up).

I may just not bother to replace it for some time, if ever. Debit's pretty handy, and it's the same money anyway (if you're like me and pay off your credit card right away).

For any big purchase, I have a line of credit with much better terms than any credit card I've heard of.

I suppose there will be an issue if I ever use PayPal again... oh, wait, they're evil too.

Re:I did my part

[Anonymous Coward]

hail to the great old oligopol!

Re:I did my part

[Anonymous Coward]

I bet that if 1 million people cut up their MasterCard and switch to Visa, and another million people cut up their Visa and switch to MasterCard, those evil bastards at the credit card companies will really start to sit up and take notice!

Actually, they will. Customer acquisition and retention are two separate variables in the CLTV equation. If retention starts to plummet, they will examine ways to improve it.... regardless of what is going on with acquisition. ...and "customer churn" is a pretty big cost when it is unnecessary.

Re:I did my part

[igreaterthanu]

I was actually going to do that, but then Visa came and also blocked Wikileaks. There's no one left to replace them with.

And no Amex, Diners, etc. aren't "real" credit cards. They aren't accepted in places I want to buy from.

Re:I did my part

[Relayman]

It may be just in Cincinnati. No explanation for the policy; I just switched to Discover.

Re:I did my part

[pclminion]

It might be the same money, but the price of the money is possibly different. Do you get 1% cash back on all purchases with your debit card, like you get with some major credit cards?

Re:I did my part

[Anonymous Coward]

I got rid of my "standard" credit cards and replaced them with a prepaid travel card for making online purchases. No interest, a minimal yearly fee, accepted by every online merchant I have tried it with so far, and in a pinch should work offline as well. The only less-than-ideal thing about it so far is that it can take a couple days to transfer funds to the credit card account, which is a slight inconvenience but essentially the same as with PayPal, etc. Also, I'm not sure how credit rating agencies interpret the acquisition and use of a card like this, so if that's something you're worried about further investigation may be called for.

Re:I did my part

[westlake]

Cancelled my MasterCard, then chopped it up. Enough people do that, MasterCard will start to wise up.

But if nothing comes of it, will the geek wise up?

Soon the government check won't be in the mail
(AP) - 1 day ago

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Before too long, the government check will no longer be in the mail.

Officials have settled on the dates when millions of people will no longer be able to get their Social Security and other benefit checks by mail.

New recipients of benefits will have to accept paperless payments starting on May 1 of next year, three months later than first proposed.

Those already on Social Security will have until March 1, 2013 to make the switch to direct deposits or a debit card.

More than 58 million retirees, disabled people and surviving family members receive Social Security or Supplemental Security benefits. Already eight out of 10 people getting federal benefits receive those payments electronically.

The switch to electronic payments will eliminate the problem of lost or stolen checks and also the problems faced by people displaced from their homes who have to worry about getting their checks mailed to them.

For people who do not have accounts at a bank or credit union, the government has an option that allows them to use a Direct Express debit MasterCard issued by Comerica Bank, Treasury's financial agent. More than 1.5 million people have obtained these cards, which were first issued in 2008. Soon the government check won't be in the mail

Re:I did my part

[lgw]

That seems like an odd reaction - it's the TV network that sold those ads. I just stopped watching TV networks, and haven't seen that sort of annoying ad for ages. I still see more traditional ads in some official TV downloads, but those are far less annoying - and of course no ads on Netflix where I watch most of my TV. I think you're boycotting the wrong guys.

Re:I did my part

[Aryden]

Nope, Atlanta too. Last time I went, I was told Debit or cash only.

Re:I did my part

[RetroGeek]

That seems like an odd reaction - it's the TV network that sold those ads

I think the network bowed to pressure from some marketing group. And behind them is the company trying to get more exposure.

Re:I did my part

[Aryden]

I use a Netspend Prepaid card for all online transactions. If I have a heavy month of online spending, I will pay their $8.99 monthly fee for that month, otherwise I just pay $1 per transaction. In my area, there are literally a dozen locations, 2 within a 2 minute walk that will INSTANTLY load whatever $ amount I choose onto the card, or I can use my bank account and have it in 24 hours. I load only what I need to on the card and if I get jacked online, good luck to the criminal jacking it, there isn't ever money on it for more than a few hours at a time. The point is, I stopped being beholden to the CC companies years ago when they were trying to constantly change interest rates. Capital One did that to me when I was 18, during basic training, I missed 1 payment on the card by 2 days (I was in the field on an FTX) and they changed my rate from 6% to 27%.

Re:I did my part

[Anonymous Coward]

Honestly, I haven't really missed the card since I cancelled it (shortly after the Wikileaks/MasterCard issue popped up).

Holy crap! You've managed to go a whole 2 or 3 weeks without it?!?!?!? Come back and report after you try to take a vacation somewhere or do something where CCs are the only accepted payment.

Re:I did my part

[crossmr]

if a million people did that, they wouldn't even notice. They have a ridiculous amount of customers and you'd get nowhere near that many people upset over this kind of an issue.

Re:I did my part

[Anonymous Coward]

You don't need a credit card to use PayPal, just a bank account.
I cut up all my cards years ago and don't miss them at all. As you said, debit cards work everywhere and no credit card debt does wonders for your credit report!

Re:I did my part

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, because nothing smacks of knee-jerk outrage like canceling your account with a payment processing company that is trying to cut down on transactions with illegal businesses.

But hold steady on that high horse, taking the easy way out by attacking the incidentals and tangents than what you view as the real problem.
Well done, sir, you've done your part indeed.
I'm sure your credit rating appreciates it.

Re:I did my part

[Baron_Yam]

Err - debit works in most places, and as far as I know bank-issued traveller's cheques work everywhere else.

When I've travelled in the past, the first thing I've done is take the credit cards OUT of my wallet.

Re:I did my part

[Baron_Yam]

Wikileaks is an illegal business?

Re:I did my part

[Galestar]

Hey how about 10^16 people cut up they're cards -- they'll be out of numbers!!!



(INB4 "its much smaller than that due to some fixed digits + verification alrgorithm" blah blah blah reality blah)

Re:I did my part

[chrismcb]

It isn't the same money. Some people will take a Credit Card but not a debit. Some Rental cars companies will only rent if you have a Credit Card and not a debit card.

Re:I did my part

[Anonymous Coward]

There is always Discover Card, American Express, or Diner's Club.

Re:I did my part

[SteveFoerster]

You should have said, "But this is where I want to be!"

Re:I did my part

[kent_eh]

Booking a hotel room or flight or renting a car is almost impossible these days without *some sort* of credit card.

Re:I did my part

[oldspewey]

Many hotels are a serious PITA to check in to unless you have a major credit card.

Re:I did my part

[lgw]

Are you perhaps confused about what a TV network is? Do you believe you are the consumer? You are the product. The advertisers are the consumers. The network found a "clever" new way to sell you to their consumers. Ick.

Re:I did my part

[Anonymous Coward]

An information broker?

Of course, information isn't exactly secret when it's no longer secret (an obvious truism people seem to ignore). Once a secret is in the hands of a third party (e.g. Wikileaks, New York Times, etc), it ain't secret anymore.

Re:I did my part

[celle]

"Of course, I'm probably going to replace it with some flavour of Visa,..."

Mastercard and Visa are basically the same group. If you really want to send a message stop using credit. Do something that government obviously can't and live inside your means. If you and thousands of other people cut up their cards then the companies would listen otherwise you're just trolling as swapping cards does nothing.

Re:I did my part

[Anonymous Coward]

You do realize that this is because of the Visa or MasterCard logo on the Debit card, right? RIGHT?

Re:I did my part

[Inda]

You can do one better.*

1. Get credit card.
2. Max limit.
3. Pay minimum for a few months.
4. Default on the debt.
5. Contact CC company. Tell them you cannot pay because of X, Y and Z. Interest charges will stop here.
6. Drag the process out by fibbing and lying. Save your normal monthly payments in a savings account (very imporant).
7. When the legal letters get too much to handle, phone them (probably a debt collection agency by this stage) and offer 50%. Pay 66% if you have to.

Make sure you have big balls before starting the process.

*Maybe only in the UK

Re:I did my part

[happymellon]

Except that Discover Card is not used outside the US. Making it worthless.
American Express is slightly better, but it still isn't widely accepted.

I hear cash is accepted most places.

Re:I did my part

[Anonymous Coward]

> Do you get 1% cash back on all purchases with your debit card,
> like you get with some major credit cards?

Ladies and gentlemen, pclminion will sell his principles for 1%.

Do we have any lower offers?

Re:I did my part

[Lincolnshire Poacher]

I have never had any difficulty booking hotel rooms in the USA, Ireland and UK using a Visa Debit card.

What difficulties were you encountering?

Re:I did my part

[malkavian]

Big balls, and a wish to not get credit in the 5-10 year period about to come up (perhaps longer).

Re:I did my part

[Anonymous Coward]

HAHA, would be really cool if a million customers DDoS'ed their call centres with cancellation requests!

Re:I did my part

[Cro Magnon]

Same in Kansas City. Until then, I never heard of any large business not accepting Visa or MC.

Re:I did my part

[david_thornley]

There's one problem I have with debit cards vs. credit cards. (At least theoretically; it's never come up for me.)

I'm supposed to get the same protections on both. I can use either in similar ways.

However, if there is a dispute, the money's in different places. If I have a credit card dispute, I've got the money, and they have no means to get it from me for at least as long as the dispute goes long. If I have a debit card dispute, the money's out of my account until the bank puts it back, which is a much different thing.

Re:I did my part

[GameboyRMH]

Probably the SSSS code you get if you buy an airplane ticket with cash.

If the nudie scanners are standard procedure, what does the SSSS get you these days? An endoscope up your butt?

Re:I did my part

[tepples]

Except that Discover Card is not used outside the US. Making it worthless.

Where I live, shipping from outside the US is often cost prohibitive.

Re:I did my part

[Monkeedude1212]

The only problem is that you can't always use a debit card for online purchases.

That is the only reason I have a Credit Card.

Re:I did my part

[pclminion]

And what are my principles?

Re:I did my part

[Abcd1234]

Err - debit works in most places,

So that the bank can give you the big "fuck you" when you use your card on a machine that had a reader installed, and your bank account is subsequently drained?

Yeah, dibsout.

as far as I know bank-issued traveller's cheques work everywhere else.

Subject to theft. Not necessarily accepted everywhere. And if you run out, you gotta get new ones issued. It's an option, certainly, but hardly a full replacement for a credit card.

Meanwhile, renting a car or a hotel room w/o a credit card *can* be a serious PITA.

Re:I did my part

[Abcd1234]

Debit's pretty handy, and it's the same money anyway (if you're like me and pay off your credit card right away).

Unless you're in a location you trust, debit is a really *really* bad idea. If a machine has been tampered with, a thief could gain access to your account. And guess what? If you lose your cash, *the bank won't help you*.

Conversely, fraudulent transactions on a CC are trivially reversed. Given the choice, particularly when traveling, I'd use a CC over a debit card any day of the week.

Re:I did my part

[Anonymous Coward]

Debit may work in most places, but I don't think I've ever seen a Debit card that didn't process either through Mastercard or Visa. My Bank of America Debit card is a Visa. Maybe it's just because I use an evil bank... Except that I started as a Baybank customer, then I became a BankBoston customer when there was a merger, then a Bank of Boston customer due to merger, so on to Fleet, then to Bank of America. I think I have the order right, but I might have missed on in there. In any case, in all of those banks, my debit card has always been either a Visa or a Mastercard. They probably don't get paid as much when you use a debit card on their network instead of a credit card, but they still profit.

I feel pretty much the same way about the transaction processing networks as I do about the internet. There should be a neutrality requirement. They should carry traffic and do it in an agnostic manner. Considering how much of a plutocracy the US and many other nations are, this might be an even more important issue than net neutrality. Real due process of law should be the only way they can block anyone or anything. No "it's their network, they can do what they want"! Not when you're dealing with monopolies or cartels like the internet service providers and the credit card companies. They are abusing their monopolies. They're rife with price fixing and illegal market segmentation. The government should use the Sherman Antitrust act and break them up (again, in the case of AT&T). In the case of ISPs, split the content providers from the network providers. Leave content providers whose concern is providing content over a neutral communications medium. In the case of the credit card companies, split the payment network off from the actual credit providers. Create a neutral payment network whose only concern is providing encrypted communications channels from purchasers smart payment devices (some sort of e-wallet containing all of the persons accounts if they choose, with powerful encryption, perhaps a pre-shared one time pad for each account, and additional local encryption on top of that requiring the user to enter a password on the device to unlock) and a separate channel to the POS system to confirm, accept and deny transactions.

Re:I did my part

[Anonymous Coward]

So is your netspend prepaid card a prepaid Visa, or pre-paid Mastercard?

Re:I did my part

[Anonymous Coward]

But do they do it in "exchange" for money. You've got a tricky argument if you're going to claim that donation supported organizations are doing it for the money. Maybe some are, but most of them are doing it because they'll do it anyway, but the money helps to support their efforts. There's a difference. If you argue that there is no difference, then you have successfully argued that, among other things, all churches and politicians are in it for the money and are providing their services for a fee. This may very well actually be the case, but I'm curious if it's what you believe.

Re:I did my part

[Nyder]

Cancelled my MasterCard, then chopped it up. Enough people do that, MasterCard will start to wise up.

Of course, I'm probably going to replace it with some flavour of Visa, which is probably just as evil and certainly did jump on the ban-Wikileaks bandwagon.

need to send the cut up pieces to mastercard, just to get the point across.

No Master Card for me.

[Anonymous Coward]

I was about to sign a Master Card deal with my bank. That is not going to happen now. I surgest you all show them what consumer power is.

Re:No Master Card for me.

[Anonymous Coward]

I was about to sign a Master Card deal with my bank. That is not going to happen now. I surgest you all show them what consumer power is.

Yep, in three to six months when Visa signs on to this same program and you quickly learn that, between boycotting the two major card companies, you've suddenly been shut out of 95% of internet commerce (not to mention the vast majority of the modern real world of commerce), they'll very neatly see what consumer power is: Marginal at best.

And then they'll laugh and laugh and laugh. And laugh. And laugh. And laugh. And laugh. And laugh. And laugh...

bye bye mastercard

[Coraon]

if you want me to use your service, then you need me to be able to use your service. If I can't use your service for the things I want, that what do I need you for?

Re:bye bye mastercard

[Nickodeimus]

So you buy a lot of pirated content then do ya? Perhaps you should consider the fact that you are stealing people's work before you take such a righteous tone.

Get over yourself. He was just stating the fact that if you can't use ANY service then there is no point in having said service.

Re:bye bye mastercard

[Anonymous Coward]

Regardless of whether the original poster does or doesn't, the fact still stands: MasterCard teamed up with knowingly evil companies who don't care for anyone but their own profits and will even sue the dead and people without computers if it means profit.

Re:bye bye mastercard

[Chaonici]

Where did he say that he buys pirated content? Maybe he likes to donate to these sites, or buy legitimate merch like t-shirts. Maybe he doesn't care about specific sites at all, but disagrees with the principle that a massive financial corporation can arbitrarily determine what you can and can't spend your money on. Please don't put on your antipirate hat and bash others without a good reason.

Re:bye bye mastercard

[Beelzebud]

So you hate having a right to privacy then do ya?

See what I did there?

Re:bye bye mastercard

[Anonymous Coward]

stealing people's work

That's a good one. Yuk yuk. My employer steals my work all the time. I say it's worth $1000/hr. He says it's worth $10/hr. Fucking thieves.

Re:bye bye mastercard

[Anonymous Coward]

ubermiester did an uberassume so this makes him an uberA$$

Re:bye bye mastercard

[Anonymous Coward]

I think the bigger picture here is that I ll buy whatever I want to buy and if I can't buy it using your card, I will find another way to purchase it, regardless of what it is and where I bought it. I am sure of one thing, at the end of the day this way of handling the pirate issue will cost more than it saves, and a multi-billion dollar company like master card, trying to do the right thing just does not float with me. Sorry.

Cheers

Re:bye bye mastercard

[Anonymous Coward]

Since you don't get sarcasm and take a righteous tone while accusing another of a righteous tone, that would seem to imply your overly educated mind should consider, nay, experience what common people have. Start with Common People by Pulp. I'll wait while you use your MasterCard to pay for it. We'll all wait.

Re:bye bye mastercard

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't pirate stuff very often. But reading stuff like this makes me consider spending some of my spare time on file sharing projects and having a go at CC scamming.

Re:bye bye mastercard

[ubermiester]

no actually i don't. What does the right to privacy have to do with a bank no longer processing transactions for businesses that sell pirated material?

Are you referring to possible abuses? Sounds like "death panels" and regulation==communism extremism bullshit to me.

Re:bye bye mastercard

[ubermiester]

Maybe he likes to donate to these sites, or buy legitimate merch like t-shirts.

Riiight... And people who used limewire and the pirate bay were looking for redhat releases.

And besides that, if the biz that sells legit and non-legit stuff can't figure out a way to separate the two in their books, they are probably not a legit biz in the first place.

Re:bye bye mastercard

[ubermiester]

if you can't use ANY service then there is no point in having said service

I know you think that makes sense, but I have no idea what you're talking about.

Mastercard is simply attempting to cut off businesses that engage in illegal activities. What does that have to do with legit services? He can still buy stuff from newegg and donate to /. What service can't he use other than pirate sites?

Re:bye bye mastercard

[Chaonici]

Riiight... And people who used limewire and the pirate bay were looking for redhat releases.

And besides that, if the biz that sells legit and non-legit stuff can't figure out a way to separate the two in their books, they are probably not a legit biz in the first place.

If I bought a t-shirt from The Pirate Bay, would I be violating some sort of law? I've never heard of anything that would suggest so.

I think you're just needlessly bashing pirates.

Re:bye bye mastercard

[ubermiester]

I think you're just needlessly bashing pirates.

You're kidding right?

That's the attitude that really pisses off content creators/owners. Why do you think people make money from pirated material? By not paying to purchase the source material, they can sell it at 100% profit. And similarly, a site like piratebay or torrentreactor receives revenue from advertising, but don't pay licensing fees for the content that they help distribute and that brings people to their "shop".

Spare me the plausible deniability bullshit too. The nature of the torrent technology is such that you can technically distribute content without a search engine, but search engines allow the rapid dissemination of links, without which 99.9% of torrents would never see the light of day. There is no such thing as a torrent ecosystem without search engines in the same way that there's no "black-market" without someone who knows where it is and takes you there - making them an accomplice.

And btw, if they want to sell t-shirts to make money for their defense or party of whatever, they can do so without associating it with the site that was shut down. If they can't - or won't - then that's their own problem.

Money = Speech

[bughunter]

So let me get this right, money equals speech, according to various Supreme Court Rulings. But a major corporation whose credit and debit vehicles constitute one of the major means for tendering payment, i.e., speech, is permitted to filter your payments to whomever it likes.

In other words, a bank gets to decide when your speech is acceptable and when it isn't.

And, of course, if you're wealthy or powerful enough, this isn't a hindrance. But if you're a working stiff, living on a trickle of cash flow and using revolving credit to solve the logistical problems thereof, you're essentially subject to the bank's approval of your fiscal expression.

Yet another distinction between serfs and lords in the information age.

Re:Money = Speech

[moeluv]

I'd mod you up if i had some points today, well said.

Re:Money = Speech

[Anonymous Coward]

Money = speech, but only for large values of money.

Re:Money = Speech

[SuricouRaven]

Somewhat of a flaw in the US legal system. The foundational princibles were written to provide extensive protection from government oppression, but none from corporate oppression. At the time there just hadn't been any corporations with so much power that it was seen as a concern. The age of the multinational megacorp didn't come until much later.

Re:Money = Speech

[TheL0ser]

Money may be = speech, but free speech is something only the government cares about.

Businesses have no problems at all changing or stopping your words.

Re:Money = Speech

[Anonymous Coward]

Uh, yes? Isn't this how most companies work? Last I checked, it's the government who can't stifle your freedom of speech so easily, but NDAs are still very popular in the corporate environment.

Also Money = Speech goes right out the window the second you talk about illegal activity, so I suspect the courts would probably support Mastercard in this.

Re:Money = Speech

[bluefoxlucid]

I lived on revolving credit for a while. It was a horrible, horrible idea.

Re:Money = Speech

[Anonymous Coward]

The point is that a sufficiently large oligopoly can have an undue influence. Quick, name one conviction/indictment/warrant/court order that applies to wikileaks.

PS: NDAs seldom apply to customers.

Re:Money = Speech

[Anonymous Coward]

Not true, there was the British East India Company. Considering its role in the Boston Tea Party, the Founding Fathers sure were aware of it.

Re:Money = Speech

[I(rispee_I(reme]

Also Money = Speech goes right out the window the second you talk about illegal activity, so I suspect the courts would probably support Mastercard in this.

Let's step through this:

1) My speech is protected.
2) My neighbor's speech, which I agree with, is protected.
3) Giving my neighbor money for a bullhorn to amplify his speech is illegal?

This seems like a pathetic attempt at damage control by muddying the waters in an attempt to associate Wikileaks with "pirates". It will work about as well as crying rape did last week.

I'm anxious to see some real dirty laundry aired. I think everyone knows that the multinationals (esp. usurers) are as crooked as Cheney's penis.

Re:Money = Speech

[Motard]

So let me get this right, money equals speech, according to various Supreme Court Rulings.

Yes.

But a major corporation whose credit and debit vehicles constitute one of the major means for tendering payment, i.e., speech, is permitted to filter your payments to whomever it likes.

No. But it has to consider the legality of certain transactions. Especially when it may involve possible money laundering charges.

In other words, a bank gets to decide when your speech is acceptable and when it isn't. And, of course, if you're wealthy or powerful enough, this isn't a hindrance.

A wealthy and powerful person isn't going to go to the bother of finding alternate ways of paying for content.

But if you're a working stiff, living on a trickle of cash flow and using revolving credit to solve the logistical problems thereof, you're essentially subject to the bank's approval of your fiscal expression.

If you're a working stiff that can't afford a fucking CD, sell your computer, take off your headphones, and stop using credit. You are enslaving yourself.

Yet another distinction between serfs and lords in the information age.

Mastercard didn't make you a serf. You made you a serf.

Re:Money = Speech

[Anonymous Coward]

Err, what about the Dutch East India Company established in 1602?

Re:Money = Speech

[Chaonici]

Right, but was the East India Company as pervasive and powerful overall as large corporations as a whole are today?

Frankly I think the GP is exactly right: Our laws were not designed to protect us from massive corporate interests. Considering the amount of influence many multinationals have, they are alarmingly free in their abilities to screw people.

Re:Money = Speech

[russ1337]

Money = speech, but only for large values of money.

Not really, as small amounts of money equate to small amounts of speech.

look at it another way: 10% of the people hold 90% of the wealth. That same 10% control 90% of how things operate around here...

Re:Money = Speech

[servognome]

First amendment protection (freedom of association) applies to the bank to let them decide whether or not they want to engage in specific financial transaction.
Further, you enter an agreement with the banks when you are borrowing money from them or using their services, so you allow them to have some degree of control.

Re:Money = Speech

[Motard]

Right, but was the East India Company as pervasive and powerful overall as large corporations as a whole are today

Far more so. The East India company had far reaching global powers which extended to the use of deadly force, a virtual global monopoly, and a cozy relationship with the British government/empire.

That's not something that Google, Microsoft, Mastercard, or any other company enjoys today.

Re:Money = Speech

[MrKaos]

Somewhat of a flaw in the US legal system. The foundational princibles were written to provide extensive protection from government oppression, but none from corporate oppression. At the time there just hadn't been any corporations with so much power that it was seen as a concern. The age of the multinational megacorp didn't come until much later.

At the time of the founding fathers a corporate charter was granted with the express goal of doing something and was forbidden, by law, to diversify. For example a corporation chartered to build a bridge could not start making socks. Laws regarding corporate diversification were repealed in the 1950s. Somewhat cynically, corporations were granted the same rights as any human being on the backs of black people's rights being recognised. I can't remember the exact circumstances.

However one founding father, Benjamin Franklin, did recognise the danger and noted that the constitution would not protect America from falling into despotism;

In these sentiments, Sir, I agree to this Constitution with all its faults, if they are such; because I think a general Government necessary for us, and there is no form of Government but what may be a blessing to the people if well administered, and believe farther that this is likely to be well administered for a course of years, and can only end in Despotism, as other forms have done before it, when the people shall become so corrupted as to need despotic Government, being incapable of any other.

It's not clear to me if this is specifically what Franklin was refering to, I'm sure there were other reasons. It's a simple matter of changing the corporations law to undo the current situation but that calls for the voters to be informed of the issues, which I think is as close to impossible with the control media currently exerts over the media in this day and age. A simpler solution would be to allow corporations to experience the full force of the law and the board exposed to liability for their decisions. but I'm sure that would be fought with as much vigor.

Re:Money = Speech

[maztuhblastah]

> So let me get this right, money equals speech,
> Yet another distinction between serfs and lords in the information age.

Nope.

Cut the hyperbolic crap. Even the Wikipedia article that you linked to refutes that (emphasis mine):

Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1 (1976), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States upheld a federal law which set limits on campaign contributions, but ruled that spending money to influence elections is a form of constitutionally protected free speech, and struck down portions of the law.

They didn't rule that "money equals speech". They ruled that "spending money to influence elections is a form of constitutionally protected free speech". There's a difference, a big one in fact.

Re:Money = Speech

[ShadowFalls]

Well, if you are using a credit and not a debit card you are not entitled as such. Since the money you are spending is theirs not yours, they have the rights to do with it as they please.

Re:Money = Speech

[Anonymous Coward]

"In other words, a bank gets to decide when your speech is acceptable and when it isn't."

Funny, I always though purchasing stolen merchandise was illegal.

Re:Money = Speech

[Anonymous Coward]

Far more so. The East India company had far reaching global powers which extended to the

use of deadly force,

Coca Cola. Hired mercenaries to execute organisers when unions demanded benefits in the third world.

a virtual global monopoly, and a cozy relationship with the British government/empire.

Microsoft, RIAA/MPAA with the American Empire and its ever expanding WIPO treaties for copyright and patents. Attempting to get laws passed that prohibit Open Source in government.

It's certainly not as bad as the EIC but the supporting attitudes are still dangerously pervasive.

Re:Money = Speech

[Anonymous Coward]

"They didn't rule that "money equals speech". They ruled that "spending money to influence elections is a form of constitutionally protected free speech". There's a difference, a big one in fact."

Ok - what they ruled was that the people with money will get to buy the officials and laws they want. If you don't have money, FUCK YOU. That IS different, and a whole lot WORSE. It means that the 10% with 90% of the money will get what they want, even if is is exactly the opposite of what the 90% want. Yeah, THAT'S democracy!

Re:Money = Speech

[vegiVamp]

Much as I dislike them doing so, they're not stopping you from paying, they just refuse to let you use their infrastructure for payments they don't agree with and are potentially liable for, as they tend to refund fraudulous transactions.

As I said, however, I do dislike them doing this - for me this is akin to net neutrality. I pay them to be a channel for my money, and they should have no say in where I choose to channel that money.

In return I do accept that they no longer be liable for fraudulent transactions - and remove the price of that service from the cost of the card, please. It's a useful service, and they could definitely offer it as a separate option to your card, with the built-in caveat that they will then block you from transacting with a list of "shady" participants and/or not refund transactions to that list.

Re:Money = Speech

[isorox]

Now's a great time to Donate to the EFF

Your sig has never been more apt. You need to add "While you still can" though.

Re:Money = Speech

[Anonymous Coward]

Banks already do filter payments; you're not permitted to use them for money laundering or payments obtained through, for example, the sale of illegal drugs. Or should money laundering be protected under free speech regulations?

Re:Money = Speech

[GameboyRMH]

I thought the same thing...the EFF supports issues that have some overlap with pro-piracy interests and would naturally oppose COICA - who's to say Visa & MC won't cut them off?

Thieves are banding together

[Anonymous Coward]

.. and soon, evil corporations will control all of human culture, for the benefit of the few, to the cost of the many.

You can kiss your freedom goodbye, it's being sold out to the highest bidder.

Re:Thieves are banding together

[Opportunist]

What do you mean by "soon"? The only medium not controlled by corporations (at least not fully) is the internet. But, we're working on that one...

My question is...

[Synchis]

Is this even legal?

I mean, since when can a credit corporation tell you what you can and can't spend your money on?

Where exactly do they draw the line? Who makes the decision as to what is ok and what is not okay?

I see this as a very slippery slope. Mastercard should be very careful with these heavy-handed decisions.

Re:My question is...

[muphin]

actually its not YOUR money, your getting credit for a purchase, which you then have to pay (if its a credit, not a debit card). so they CAN do this but legally its grey area, but does open up doors if they start selectively denying transactions, more people will move to other credit providers or be sued for denying a legitimate transaction.... we shall see

Re:My question is...

[spidercoz]

That's just it, it's not *your* money, it's credit.

Re:My question is...

[mykos]

Actually, they already deny transactions that are illegal in countries of the card's origin (certain types offshore gambling is one example I've seen).
But this is screwed up in that it's not illegal to give money to, say, Bit Gamer or The Pirate Bay, but they're denying it anyway.

Re:My question is...

[Anonymous Coward]

What if you're using a debit card?

Re:My question is...

[itsownreward]

Okay, then what about Bank of America saying they won't process payments intended for Wikileaks? If the money is in your account, it is your money.

Re:My question is...

[muphin]

true, they should not be interfering with legitimate transactions unless indicated by the government not to do so due to illegal activity, unfortunately in America the gov has gotten out of control and is trying to control everything, business must obey the gov else they will be shut down (great democratic process there).
Unless the BoA has a document stating its required to stop transactions, its interfering with a legitimate transaction and should be accountable as wire fraud (deny of funds).

Re:My question is...

[seanvaandering]

I mean, since when can a credit corporation tell you what you can and can't spend your money on?

Try using your credit card to make a deposit at an online casino. Denied? Hmm.. interesting.

Try using your credit card to purchase an online subscription with a website with questionable content. Denied? Hmm.. interesting.

They can and do dictate what you can or cannot spend their money on. Unless you forgot whos money your spending, it isn't yours and never was.

This seems logical

[countertrolling]

Let the financial industry become our new police force. They already control the data. Now all they have to do is make cash and barter illegal.

Re:This seems logical

[Opportunist]

I guess Cyberpunk gave us a pretty good idea what's gonna happen then: When you outlaw money, money will only be used for illegal means because, well, you can't really buy your dope with your credit card. The net effect will not be that (printed) money ceases to exist, it only becomes a secondary currency for the more illegal deals. And since people cannot earn that money legally, like they can now to buy their illegal goods, they will have to break the law to access this currency.

In short, you force people to do something illegal to get the "good money". Guess whether this reduces or increases crime.

Re:This seems logical

[Anonymous Coward]

2 words, 1 name: Max Headroom

Re:This seems logical

[Anonymous Coward]

Guess whether this reduces or increases crime.

I'd rather not. Instead, I'll guess how long it will be until I have a DNI and implanted dermal armor. Viva Cyberpunk.

Re:First

[Anonymous Coward]

fail kys siiyb kthxbye

Wrath?!?

[Anonymous Coward]

... MasterCard felt the wrath of Anonymous Operation Payback-style DDoS attacks ...

No they didn't. I don't know of anyone who had any problems with their Mastercard during the "attack".

I haven't seen anything in the business press about anyone, especially Mastercard, having any loss of business. None. People I know in banking just shrugged their shoulders and said that they didn't witness any problems.

The attack that Anonymous made had no effect what so ever other than media attention to their complete inability to cause any sort of economic damage.

Anonymous == Lame-Os

Re:Wrath?!?

[Anonymous Coward]

Quite a valid form of protest IMO, fair enough they may be the "kiddies" doing it but, how else are they all going to meet up to make their opinions heard?

Re:Wrath?!?

[Anonymous Coward]

Remember the portion of Anonymous involved in Operation Payback fractured (to the extent a subdivision of a non-entity can fracture) over the wikileaks stuff. Turns out everyone wants to get their entertainment for free/cheap, but not everyone gives a rat's arse about leaking government secrets, and some even oppose it.

But now that MC has teamed up with the MAFIAA, expect the lost anonysheep to return to the fold. Now MC's public-facing website will be DDoSed... uh, well, equally effectively, and with equal noneffect on the financial side of things.

Should be interesting, by which I mean boring.

This will not last.

[sageres]

In the age of global financial transactions' full of micropayment, any way of denying payment to any entity would be futile. After all, people can still send money to Wikileaks with their VISA and Mastercard, just without doing it directly. There are few indirect ways have been published (such as making deposit into the third country bank's account that belongs to Wikileaks)... And after all -- there is nothing illigal about it... unless the government were to declare such entity (be it Wikileaks or a random pirate-movie website) a terrorist entity.

Just pirates or all copyright violators?

[Old97]

I have no problem with credit card companies refusing to do business with pirate sites or any site that sponsors or encourages illegal activities. If MasterCard bases their decisions on accurate information and is conservative about how they evaluate the evidence, that's not a bad thing. I would be concerned if MasterCard approached this with the same sort of "diligence" characteristic of the MPAA and RIAA where innocent parties are falsely accused and convicted until they prove otherwise. Are they also going to deny services to those who may violate a copyright by posting a video or song to share because they really like it? I guess MasterCard would have to drop Facebook. How much time and effort will MasterCard be spending on insuring they are not denying service to innocent parties? Will they confine this to pirates and criminals and not go after every possible copyright violation?

Re:Just pirates or all copyright violators?

[Fulcrum of Evil]

I have no problem with credit card companies refusing to do business with pirate sites or any site that sponsors or encourages illegal activities.

Oh sure, shutting down illegal things is one thing, but do you really think they'll exercise due diligence? There's no real downside for them if they get a bit trigger happy, so long as people still use credit cards.

Computing should just buy the music industry

[Animats]

The entire music industry, worldwide, only sold $15.8 billion in product last year. For comparison, worldwide liquor sales were about $220 billion, and a single booze company, Diageo (Smirnoff Vodka, Johhny Walker, José Cuervo, Baileys, and Guinness Stout) has more revenue than the entire music industry. On a worldwide scale, the music industry is tiny.

On the movie side, MGM just came out of bankruptcy, and Warner is close to it. Hollywood Video went bust months ago, and Blockbuster is in bankruptcy. (Many Blockbuster stores will close after the holiday season.)

In computing, Apple's revenue for fiscal 2010 is about $63 billion. Microsoft revenue was about $60 billion. HP annual revenue is about $120 billion. Dell annual revenue is about $52 billion. Google is around $23 billion. Comcast is around $36 billion. AT&T is at $124 billion. Any of those players could buy out the entire libraries of most music and movie companies.

I'm surprised that Apple hasn't just bought out the music industry, rather than negotiating with it.

Re:Computing should just buy the music industry

[Opportunist]

Never noticed how the little dogs make the most noise?

Re:Computing should just buy the music industry

[SuricouRaven]

In terms of social influence though, music has a huge advantage. Music, film, TV, news... it's all basically the same few companies. So the music labels can be assured of favorable coverage in the media, because they *are* the media. For example, ABC is sure to tell lots of news stories about how internet piracy is ruining the film industry, for it is owned by Disney.

Re:Computing should just buy the music industry

[Arancaytar]

Maybe they're waiting for it to get even cheaper. With the MPAA's current antics, it probably will.

Re:Computing should just buy the music industry

[Mashiki]

They only have influence if you watch it. And these days of the information age, the only people who watch TV the most are in the 40-60 bracket last time I looked. They are for all things a dying breed, most of the people here span two generations of information technology. We can remember the world without information being so easy to get, and we know how awesome it was when we could get it.

The current generation of kids(20 and under) have no idea what life was like beforehand. They'll be the ones driving the stake through the heart of the music/film/tv industries.

Re:Computing should just buy the music industry

[Anonymous Coward]

That's revenue, the entire aspect of the entertainment industry the ancient ones are trying to protect is the massive profit margins they can artificially extract from their "product". Not to mention "Hollywood Accounting" comes into play a bit too when you are looking at numbers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_accounting.

As for Mastercard... in a perfect world everyone would just stop using a payment service that feels increasingly empowered to decide how you spend your money, but the cynic in me realises that not enough people will be affected to care, and that "choice" of just using a different payment processor is both limited and ultimately futile (as PayPal, Visa, whatever will just do the same) - so I'll just be here sucking it up / complaining about it I guess.

Re:Computing should just buy the music industry

[Animats]

In terms of social influence though, music has a huge advantage.

Music used to have considerable social influence, but that was a long time ago, back in the 1960s. At one time, music as a social force ranked above organized religion in the US. The Beatles once said "We're bigger than Jesus now".

Today, it's just another branded product. Most popular music is used as background ambiance while you're doing something else. Concert attendance is down, despite frantic marketing efforts. 9 of the top 10 musicians (by sales) are from a decade or two (or three) ago.

Rap had a message. But not much of one. in the end, rap doesn't seem to have changed anything. Although it did sell many shiploads of baggy clothes.

Re:Computing should just buy the music industry

[syousef]

I'm surprised that Apple hasn't just bought out the music industry, rather than negotiating with it.

You can't buy an entire industry. Many of the MPAA/RIAA players are divisions of large corporations that will refuse to sell. Even if you could buy all the existing industry that would just open the way up for other companies to join the fray, and once again you're not left with the whole industry. And even if you by some miracle of negotiation did manage to convince everyone to sell to you, you'd end up with anti-competition/anti-trust lawsuits against you.

Re:Computing should just buy the music industry

[migla]

>The entire music industry, worldwide, only sold $15.8 billion in product last year.

Really? So, let's say we weed out anything unnecessary from that and leave artists and studios and stuff that are needed and let's pull for example about 50% out of our ass and say that we could get all the mainstream music we want in the world for about a dollar per person a year...

We should totally do that instead of waiting for the invisible hand to turn the heads of the studio executives to give us what we want with as much unnecessary lining of unnecessary pockets as they do.

I know planned economy might sound passé or even scary, but now that all us free people have the internet, I'm sure we could manage to vote what artists we like (by downloading their music) and countries could have a music tax of a dollar a year per person on average and give artists and others involved a fair wage. (I'd easily like to pay at least $10 a year for all music, so that starving children in some other corner of the world wouldn't have to).

This seems like the right thing to do, but there must be something I'm missing.

Re:Computing should just buy the music industry

[Anonymous Coward]

Sony have already started this. They're one of the worst.

Re:Computing should just buy the music industry

[Infernal Device]

Personally, I hope no one rescues the music industry.

Let it die, put those people out of work, and start anew.

Re:Computing should just buy the music industry

[rolfwind]

Buying Congress is cheaper and more effective... except perhaps buying a major network to promote or tear down said Congress critters.

Re:Computing should just buy the music industry

[SteveFoerster]

The current generation of kids(20 and under) have no idea what life was like beforehand. They'll be the ones driving the stake through the heart of the music/film/tv industries.

I was explaining this to my ten year old just the other day, that when I was his age our TV could receive seven channels: the three major networks, two PBS stations, and two independent stations.

Now is definitely better. And I can't wait to see what my (eventual) grandkids will take for granted.

-=Steve=-

Re:Computing should just buy the music industry

[mykos]

I was explaining this to my ten year old just the other day, that when I was his age our TV could receive seven channels: the three major networks, two PBS stations, and two independent stations.

Now is definitely better. And I can't wait to see what my (eventual) grandkids will take for granted.

-=Steve=-

You didn't have the vast ocean of www data to bide your time back then either. Kids these days have Youtube, Twitter, Facebook apps, Wikipedia, online video, and video games to keep them busy.

Broadcast and cable television could completely die off, and this generation would hardly feel a bump as they cruised past. The only ones who cling to it are the "when I was a kid..." crowd.

Re:Computing should just buy the music industry

[SteveFoerster]

It's true -- we still have cable TV, but stream a lot more content from Netflix than we get from the cable company. And if Netflix can sign a few more deals for access to content, they'll be all we really need.

Re:Computing should just buy the music industry

[makomk]

Rap had a message. But not much of one. in the end, rap doesn't seem to have changed anything.

You can't change anything with music, not in the long run. No matter what form of music you do it with, eventually it just gets replaced with more widespread, better-funded corporate clones minus the unwanted political messages.

Re:Computing should just buy the music industry

[Anonymous Coward]

When *I* was ten, there were *four* TV channels available. When I was 5, there were 2. A couple of years before I was born, there was exactly one. I have no idea how many there are now - I gave up watching TV over 10 years ago.

Re:Computing should just buy the music industry

[elsurexiste]

Why buy an industry that's clearly going the way of the dodo?

Re:Computing should just buy the music industry

[GameboyRMH]

You'll be telling your grandkids about how computers and the web were a wide-open wild west and all the cool things you could do with them.

Then your home entertainment center will interrupt your conversation with offers of pay-per-view cowboy movies, and cheap downloads of retro games like STALKER and Fallout, based on the conversation it was eavesdropping on. It will also have to notify the authorities thanks to the Mandatory Electronic Input Crime Detection act. Crap, the kids were watching TV and you forgot to unplug it again.

A police telepresence enforcer android soon comes knocking at your door because you made knowledge of DRM circumvention mechanisms available to others, luckily it's a different operator this time and he lets you off with a warning, since you didn't go into the specifics. Looks like the last operator didn't add an entry to your NUHLFREC (National Unified Health, Legal & Financial RECord) about the last time you got a warning, that was nice of him.

However this won't stop the threatening phone calls from the MSFIAA (Music, Software and Film Industry Association of America), who will have their black vans parked outside your house for the next few days. Also your home entertainment center has mysteriously stopped working...last time it didn't come back on for 2 weeks. You enable your phone's whitelist before the threatening calls start, and get the kids to do some arts and crafts while the TV is dead.

Re:Computing should just buy the music industry

[SteveFoerster]

Hilarious, and deserving of more eyeballs than it's going to get buried this deep in the comments, but at least *I* liked it.

Re:Computing should just buy the music industry

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, now is definitely better. Look at all those great educational channels you can get where you can watch... What the hell? Cake baking contests and wedding shows? Oh, wait, world's fattest triplets? That's educational right? Well, how about this great Sci Fi network? Oh, Sci Fy? Um, ok... Well, at least they still have hard science fiction shows (ok, not really a fair dig, given the practical non-existence of such), or... maybe not. Well, they've got some original shows that are science fiction, which they're canceling. Well, hey, they have some documentaries where fake ghost hunters chase fake ghosts and try to pretend they're real, eh, eh? Ummm, and fake wrestling... Forget it. I had this whole rant about all these different stations, but my soul just died a little bit more all over again. I'm going to stop writing and cry for a bit now.

Re:Computing should just buy the music industry

[tepples]

Many of the MPAA/RIAA players are divisions of large corporations that will refuse to sell.

Then buy the whole large corporation. Three out of the big four record labels are publicly owned. Warner Music Group (WMG) and Sony (SNE) are on NYSE, and Vivendi (VIV) is on Euronext. And the market cap of Nintendo (NTDOY) is within 5 percent of that of Sony, meaning all of its divisions put together.

Even if you could buy all the existing industry that would just open the way up for other companies to join the fray

Such a changing of the guard would arguably be beneficial.

we noticed

[nimbius]

you recently submitted a payment to sdf.lonestar.org for your MetaARPA sustaining membership. This site has been identified as a Hacking siteand as such has been blacklisted from our payment processing system. Furthermore your donation to OpenBSD has also been declined for processing as the openBSD project sponsors known hacking activity and said bad things about our unquestionably patrio-tastic freedom war against terror.

in summation your cards with us have also been cancelled as you've been identified without a magnetic ribbon on any vehicles registered in your name, and are obviously not supporting the troops.

please consider purchasing a copy of jeff dunhams 'achmed the terrorist' comedy DVD, as well as anything sufficiently xenophobic, bigoted and patriotic from the Country music top 10/50/100 charts. Once clad only in a sweat-stained american flag and nourished only by fast food, can we consider reactivating any of your perpetual debt engines.

regards,
Master of Cards.

Re:we noticed

[Relayman]

(Score: 5, Funny but it could happen)

Re:we noticed

[Anonymous Coward]

(Score: -5, Sad, it WILL happen...)

Re:we noticed

[bluefoxlucid]

Achmed is funny and everyone loves him.

Re:we noticed

[MickyTheIdiot]

how long before they designate "linux.org" as a hacking site... or other Open Source projects? Or other competitors, for that matter...

There is WAY too much power in hands of corporations right now. At least "big government" still nominally has the power to regulate these behemoths, even if they are paid to not use it.

Re:we noticed

[Anonymous Coward]

Bravo. Nailed it.

Re:we noticed

[Anonymous Coward]

This sounds like something out of A Super Sad True Love Story.

Re:we noticed

[GameboyRMH]

Silence! I keel you!

So the question is...

[dogsbreath]

What does this really mean? On the face of it no one should really object to Mastercard / Visa / etc denying service to criminal enterprises or criminal activities. This is to be expected both in terms of business ethics and legal liability.

So the question is: who determines which enterprise is criminal / violating copyrights and what are the criteria and what is the process to have someone cut off? What is the appeal process?

From TFA:
"This move by MasterCard is just another in a recent long line of corporations and organizations that are taking it upon themselves to define the legality of situations rather than leaving it to the courts. One problem is that the US federal government is allowing the lobbyists for these organizations to dictate right and wrong. The RIAA and MPAA were the big influence behind the government’s seizure of several domains during the last week of November. "

Worst case, this is a monetary blacklist controlled by the RIAA (eg: RIAA sends unsubstantiated note to Mastercard listing "offenders". Mastercard moves immediately to deny service.) Very nice club for the RIAA to hold.

Re:So the question is...

[Korin43]

What does this really mean?

It means that the banks are deciding what's illegal now. The government either doesn't have the authority (not this country) or a real reason to shut them down, so now the banks are doing it for them. Justice is served?

Re:So the question is...

[timkar]

What does this really mean?

It simply means their choosing those with whom they wish to do business. I recommend going with Visa, or Discover, etc. You may call their rationale and their standard flawed, but it means little more than they have the right to not do businesses with certain people and organizations.

Re:So the question is...

[Anonymous Coward]

"no one should really object to Mastercard / Visa / etc denying service to criminal enterprises or criminal activities"

And just what criminal activity exactly has WikiLeaks been "convicted" of? Answer: None.

Therein lies the problem. The U.S. banking system has conspired with the U.S. government to limit free speech on behalf of the government by denying access without a conviction of illegal activity. If they can do it to WikiLeaks, they can do it to any site they choose. Welcome to 1984.

Re:So the question is...

[dogsbreath]

"no one should really object to Mastercard / Visa / etc denying service to criminal enterprises or criminal activities"

And just what criminal activity exactly has WikiLeaks been "convicted" of? Answer: None.

er... if you read what I said, I didn't say Wikileaks was criminal. I didn't come close to saying any particular outfit is criminal. I just said that it is reasonable to expect Mastercard to cut off services to criminal enterprises. Don't see anything controversial about that.

My question was how are they determining what is illegal and what are the recourses?

It will be interesting to see how all this plays out.

Re:So the question is...

[Anonymous Coward]

How long until individual file sharers have their mastercard funds frozen? My guess is this would be only the beginning.

This is a good opportunity for VISA, Amex, etc.. to come out with a "good as cash" marketing drive.

So donations to say

[future assassin]

http://www.slsknet.org/donate.php that are made with MC will not be honored?

May you live in Interesting times

[Chucky_M]

If the WikiLeaks "dirty" fightback taught the world anything then it was that the USA has too much control over critical worldwide infrastructure both technical and practical (Internet and Money) and it has shown that it cannot be trusted to control either. For reasons of their own most nations have been going along with the current world order as it was never openly abused and this allowed tacit approval, but as pressure grows from China, India and an emerging EU/Russia along with growing understanding from the people in these nations the world has in fact already irreparably changed. These sorts of activities will only hasten that change of power much to the detriment of the existing regimes. As the Chinese (and Mr Pratchett) say "May you live in Interesting times", it is a curse for a reason and these are interesting times.

Re:May you live in Interesting times

[Hao Wu]

Wikileaks is a front for the CIA. They are trying to minimize donations from ordinary citizens because people are going to be seriously pissed after it comes out to whom they really donated. If you are in a foreigner, on the other hand, they will be happy to take your money and place your name on a terrorist list.

Re:May you live in Interesting times

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean the first world nations are now learning how abysmal the U.S. control over money was. Ask any little third-world nation who ever had to deal with IMF/World bank only to be forced to sell national resources like electricity and water production to U.S. firms on the sly and they'll certainly tell you otherwise.

How's that free market/transparency thingy working out for you now?

Interesting

[santax]

So a company is going to enforce the ridiculous US-laws... Well here in the Netherlands, it is rightfully legal to download sound, including music. So I suggest that Mastercard, gtfo here. Btw, are they still accepting donations to the KKK?

Re:Interesting

[Aryden]

Read the history and current mythology of the Caldari State in Eve-Online. It is where we are headed. Here

Who needs MasterCard?

[hyades1]

I wonder how many thousands of snipped-up credit cards (along with a final payment, if necessary)it would take to persuade MasterCard that they are being stupid. I wish I could say I used them so I could be one of them.

Re:Who needs MasterCard?

[demonbug]

I wonder how many thousands of snipped-up credit cards (along with a final payment, if necessary)it would take to persuade MasterCard that they are being stupid. I wish I could say I used them so I could be one of them.

I don't think MasterCard cares about the final payment, actually... they only process the payments, they don't issue the credit. The bank you owe money to would probably be upset, though.

How do you buy illegal stuff online?

[jollyreaper]

While there's boatloads of free legal porn out there, some people still feel the need to pay for it. I assume that the same goes for the illegal stuff, you can get freebies if you look hard enough and some of the people producing it are amateurs but others are expecting to get paid. Certainly the FBI mail order stings we've heard about in the papers involved people sending payment in some fashion or another to obtain their illegal porn with kids or whatever. How did they do it then? How do they do it online? Because if it has anything to do with credit cards then I'd have to ask how those payments get processed. Does the credit card company not know what's involved until law enforcement tells them it's for illegal stuff? Do customers use money orders instead?

What I'm getting at is if the credit card companies had any plausible deniability before, they're giving it all away. The post office bears no responsibility if they deliver a package that happens to have drugs in it. The phone company is not a co-conspirator if their service was used by two people planning a crime. Common carrier and all that.

When the credit card companies stopped processing wikileak payments, it was pointed out that they are processing donations for the KKK. While I don't like the idea of the KKK getting donations, where does the line get drawn as to who can and can't be denied service for personal beliefs? Could China put the muscle on the banks and get them to cut off transfers to Falun Gong groups overseas? Law enforcement does this for noted criminals and criminal organizations and this is perfectly acceptable because actual crimes have been committed. But shit, do we allow Iran to ask for Salman Rushdie's accounts to be frozen because he's a heretic? That's a crime over there.

Re:How do you buy illegal stuff online?

[Aryden]

Yes China can, it is a communist country, they can quite literally do whatever they want within the borders of their country including denying bank transfers between citizens and/or businesses both nationally and internationally.

This != Internet Police

[igreaterthanu]

Isn't it illegal for MasterCard to knowingly take part in illegal transactions anyway?

This is hardly "internet police", this is common sense.

Anyway, if MasterCard is so bad you can go to the other vendor. Although when they both block something legal, this can cause problems.

What is needed here is that they either get in big trouble for taking part in illegal transactions even if they don't know, or they have to agree to some "common carrier" like status in which they are not allowed to discriminate against any transaction that is legal.

Re:This != Internet Police

[MickyTheIdiot]

> What is needed here is that they either get in big trouble for taking part in illegal
> transactions even if they don't know, or they have to agree to some "common carrier"
> like status in which they are not allowed to discriminate against any transaction that is legal.

This would involve the government actually doing their job and REGULATING. Neither political party will do that now... or they will do something like they did with net neutrality yesterday and only make it APPEAR like they doing regulating.

Re:This != Internet Police

[Chaonici]

Isn't it illegal for MasterCard to knowingly take part in illegal transactions anyway?

Last I checked, buying swag from The Pirate Bay is not illegal. (My meaning is to demonstrate that not every transaction with a file sharing site is necessarily a violation of law.)

This is going to bite them in the ass.

[www.sorehands.com]

If MasterCard and Visa does this for the MPAA, then anyone filing a lawsuit against any company will also name them as a Defendants so that there can be an order that will prevent MasterCard and Visa from processing payments until the Court is happy.

Re:This is going to bite them in the ass.

[Anonymous Coward]

nice! I thought it is the perfect one.

- John Devis
Magento Themes

Re:This is going to bite them in the ass.

[yanyan]

Ssssshhh!!! Don't tell them! :-)

Solution perhaps to SPAM, but not piracy.

[IronClad]

Applying this to pirate content is kind of lame, since payments aren't what drives that. BUT I've always thought the Visa+Mastercard collectively have always had the power to end 90% of all spam, and could do it in a matter of weeks.

All it would take is:

  1) terms of service forbidding UCE for products.

  2) a few effectively placed honeypot/canary accounts

  3) a couple tiger teams to place orders for the products that get spammed, and

  4) kick the plug on the commercial accounts that deposit the money.

I would venture to guess that the financial services sector spends more overall on anti-spam/excess bandwidth/malware removal for their own infrastructure than they make from those few stinking transactions.

Re:Solution perhaps to SPAM, but not piracy.

[DMiax]

That would be a super easy way to lock a competitor out of the market. Further proof that this kind of power should not be allowed to exist, ever.

Usenet providers

[OnePumpChump]

So I can't use a Mastercard to pay for Usenet service, then?

Re:Usenet providers

[Chucky_M]

So I can't use a Mastercard to pay for Usenet service, then?

The first rule of Usenet is, you do not talk about Usenet.

Re:Usenet providers

[kuhnto]

Stop spreading rumors about this "Usenet" you speak of. It does not exist, never has, and would be a stupid idea to build such a thing.

Re:Usenet providers

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't speak ill of the dead...

Money Mart DUMPED mastercard

[chronoss2010]

for visa thats a TONE OF LOSSES fo mastercard lately. IF visa is smart they'll tell mpaa/riaa where to go or ill be letting everyone know in those lines at months end to NOT use them

Re:Money Mart DUMPED mastercard

[hyades1]

Excellent thought! All that lovely PR work the RIAA has done to convince people what total pricks they are would really come back to haunt them. I can see it now: "Change to Visa. We don't sue 8-year-old kids and their grandmothers".

Re:Wow -~- First internet currency (floats as well

[I(rispee_I(reme]

Raising the question of which company shits on its customers more consistently, MasterCard or Blizzard?

MPAA & DHS

[Anonymous Coward]

MasterCard is the least of it. The MPAA is trying to get the Department of Homeland Security on board. Next they'll set up their own tribunals, drag people off the streets and sentence them to prison. Remember the good old days when you bought and owned a vinyl record? When you had to be charged and tried for crimes?

Don't tell anyone but I'm going to buy a phono to USB preamp and rip (my own) albums to MP3. I've also sworn off buying new music. (Of course now they'll track me down for this posting. Maybe I can rent a PO Box when I order the pre-amp.)

depends on what/where

[phorm]

Plenty of said sites are hosts for things such as noCD cracks or keygens. Depending on where you live, they're not necessarily illegal.

next step towards the corptocracy

[MickyTheIdiot]

So.. is this what the next 20 years is going to be like?

Will it be that if you don't play by the corporation's rule they will put you on a black list and you won't even be able to live?

Because that's the direction it looks like it is heading right now. Maybe we're already there as important as the credit reporting agencies already are...

Re:next step towards the corptocracy

[Anonymous Coward]

Will it be that if you don't play by the corporation's rule they will put you on a black list and you won't even be able to live?

Because that's the direction it looks like it is heading right now. Maybe we're already there as important as the credit reporting agencies already are...

No, we're not already there. That's 20 minutes into the future.

Re:next step towards the corptocracy

[i.am.delf]

This is pretty much the definition of restraint of trade. If financial companies run this course, they might find themselves on the receiving end of a different kind of lawsuit, anti-trust. Imagine the following scenario. Company A makes a product. Company B decides that this infringes on their patent and goes to the ITC. ITC decides that Company A's product is infringing. Would all companies selling this product be conducting illegal business under Mastercard's rules?

Re:next step towards the corptocracy

[compro01]

This is pretty much the definition of restraint of trade. If financial companies run this course, they might find themselves on the receiving end of a different kind of lawsuit, anti-trust.

Has there been any meaningful enforcement of antitrust law in the US since 1974?

Re:next step towards the corptocracy

[Galestar]

Mastercard rep: We saw your comment on /. about us. We do not appreciate that... your accounts are hereby terminated. Have a good day.

Re:next step towards the corptocracy

[twoHats]

ohhhhh ... heh heh heh heh ... Me and betsy will be able to live alright - plenty of amo saved up...

You know you are living in a plutocracy when...

[Anonymous Coward]

...legal judgements are decided in corporation boardrooms and not in courts of law.

"the company will support the COICA"

[Anonymous Coward]

Translation: we know the government is corrupt and we don't care if you know. We will buy it and make it dance to our tune.

Oh look...

[Haedrian]

Guess we didn't need net neutrality after all. Guess the free market will always find a way to take down internet sites if it wants to.

I knew this would happen.

This is good

[gatkinso]

Any reason to move away from established loan sharks such as MC and Visa is a great thing.

WTF?

[Anonymous Coward]

Parent admitted nothing! No idea why you got modded up to insightful. You would make a very _bad_ lawyer.

Re:WTF?

[BronsCon]

I also got modded funny. No chance that's what I was going for, though, I'm sure.

I don't know how I got modded insightful, either. *facepalm*

Same owners for both :(

[Anonymous Coward]

Visa & Mastercard have the same owners. If you want to avoid them, switch to Discover or any brand you hear them advertising against. ("But they don't take Discover!")

Anonymous Coward

[Anonymous Coward]

I do not use MC, if I did, I would immediately cancel the account, not pay them, and move to another company. If the other company played the same game, I would be happy to help them into bankruptcy as well. If I used a credit card, or even the credit card side of my debit card, and the company refused to process the transaction, I would have them in court.

Will we stop seeing ads for MasterCard on TPB?

[BlueBoxSW.com]

That's what I want to know.

BitCoin

[rubypossum]

Yeah, this got me really appreciating Bitcoin. I think if we all start doing business withe people using BitCoins then it'll really fix the whole problem.

Re:BitCoin

[SuricouRaven]

The problem is that very few people will accept bitcoin until it's percieved to have value, and it won't be percieved to have value until you can use it for everyday purchases. It's an interesting concept, but you can't establish a currency unless there is something to back it - at least initially, until the scale gets large enough for pure fiat to work.

All credit card companies do this

[BenEnglishAtHome]

If a cc company doesn't like your product, for whatever reason, they'll institute policies banning you and everyone else in your business. Is it legal to buy marijuana in your location? It doesn't matter if you live in one of the many places where it is, cc companies won't knowingly give those merchants accounts. Want to buy pictures of "child models"? Those sites can't get cc companies to work with them simply because their product is icky (not illegal in most countries, just really icky).

Sell something, do something, say something that the cc companies think will make them look bad and they'll cut you off. This is a surprise?

What's surprising to me is that the cc companies have decided that "pirate" sites (or however they define this subset of customers that they're going to cut off) are a sufficiently serious source of bad press that it's worthwhile to cut them off. More people every day are becoming more educated about media distribution, how evil some of the companies involved are, and how not-necessarily-immoral is the whole notion of downloading media. They might derive some public-image profit in the short term among the uneducated but I have to believe that in the long term most of their customers are going to understand this was a really dumb move.

Why?

[superdave80]

What's in it for Mastercard? What do they gain by denying these transactions?

regarding your assumptions, congratulations

[Anonymous Coward]

you're an ass, I know for sure

I did not pay for any of them just looking at the

[Joe The Dragon]

I did not pay for any of them just looking at the
the web site and there fake list is scam tip off.

what about abandonware that is not for sale?

[Joe The Dragon]

what about abandonware that is not for sale?

NO used copys on E-bay does not count.

There some pay abandonware sites out there.

Re:what about abandonware that is not for sale?

[devxo]

Why wouldn't used copies count?

Re:what about abandonware that is not for sale?

[Spazztastic]

Why wouldn't used copies count?

There's no plentiful supply of them.

Re:I did not pay for any of them just looking at t

[BronsCon]

I must ask, how do you know the list is fake?

When you get tired

[Anonymous Coward]

Once you get feed up with being pushed around by your corporate oligarchy, you Americans may wish to remember these words:

The Declaration of Independence: A Transcription

IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

They served you well when you got tired of the UK pushing you around.

Re:When you get tired

[speedlaw]

yes but we can identify the Brits. Our oligarchs own the media, dictate mainstream media, and are working on net censorship. (It will be hidden as tiered service). What is more is that the oligarchs have a massive propaganda effort to convince those most impacted by their ownership interests that they too want the same things even if the real interest is diametrically opposed. I recall seeing Bush Jr. on c-span speak to a West Va union. The union guys loved him but if anyone had really understood union history and the Republican party they'd have hung him from the rafters. At this point, both parties are owned lock stock and barrel. It is almost inconceivable that any law passed would benefit actual people, except incidentally. The Oligarchs wanted that tax break, worth about 100k each to the upper 1%. Even though it kills the deficit, it was OK-a few unemployed got a bone, but the oligarchs got the one thing they really wanted, and that out of a majority Dem Govt. It would be nice to identify the perpetrators. The guys at the private health insurance company I have a "choice" of who jacked rates 60% just before NY State began regulation would be a good start. Sadly they don't stand out.

What?

[Anonymous Coward]

Warez sites where people buy warez for $$$? What? Really?

I can see this going to the courts...

[dogsbreath]

What does this really mean?

It means that the banks are deciding what's illegal now. The government either doesn't have the authority (not this country) or a real reason to shut them down, so now the banks are doing it for them. Justice is served?

The question was rhetorical but what the hay! The issue of jurisdiction is likely a big one.

Seems to me that this is a "right to refuse service" type thing. A business operator has a right to refuse service if there is a legitimate business reason that does not violate the rights of protected groups. So you can refuse service to bikers who won't take off their patches (preventing fights) in your bar but you can't reserve secluded booths for heterosexuals only. To do this, you just refuse service... no notice, no warrants, and no court orders, etc are required.

http://www.legalzoom.com/us-law/equal-rights/right-refuse-service

But... be prepared for lawsuits if you are not careful about who you refuse service to. I am surprised that Wikileaks has not sought injunctions against the removal of payment services pending resolution of the issues.

Else, I would say that if a site primarily engages in illegal activity then Mastercard is perfectly correct to refuse service. Not to mention that if they continue to knowingly provide support to a criminal enterprise then they may risk some liability. Where the divide sits and how this would come out in a court case is beyond me.

IMHO, this will depend on what sort of diligence Mastercard exercises. Do they just take the RIAAs word on what is bad, a la Homeland Security? RIAA cast a wide net and obviously did not take care not to check out what was what. Or are they smarter than that?

Homeland Security may be able to get away with this but I think MasterCard would have some legal liabilities.

Watch for legal battles.

The solution

[Galestar]

The problem here is that we've essentially created a duopoly in most countries. MC and Visa pretty much run the show and get to call the shots. If they say "all transactions involving company X are blocked", there's fuck all that company can do about it (they can't even appeal it judicially, MasterCard isn't breaking any laws here)

The only real solution is the creation of a payment processing system that isn't dependent on a single centralized authority.
(think wire transfers between banks, but easier to do online or POS)
Of course, try convincing someone to actually pay to develop the technology (and of course convince/distribute this to brick-and-mortar stores) and all you'll get is "if I don't get lock-in, how is this profitable...? How do I get to take over the world/build my own personal empire???"

Also, with something like this, merchants wouldn't have to pay the ridiculous 3% rates that MC/Visa charge.

Apple would have to rename themselves.

[Anonymous Coward]

Their deal with Apple Records forbids them from using Apple as a trademark if they enter the music biz.

Then again, "Steve Job's Computers" would probably have as much name recognition by now.

Re:Apple would have to rename themselves.

[Anonymous Coward]

But if they bought the whole industry, it would include Apple Records - I doubt they would sue themselves.

Good thing I chose AmEx

[kimvette]

Good thing I chose AmEx. Otherwise, i would not be able to buy anything off Amazon and feeBay any more.

Case in point: Most Windows Server licenses you see on feeBay are counterfeit. Why resort to feeBay for Windows Server? When you NEED older releases for a particular purpose, you can't buy it anywhere. You can buy Win2K8 and then use downgrade rights, but that won't last forever. The same problem with a lot of vendors exists on Amazon. (disputed the charges with amazon, amazon reversed them. Paypal/feeBay cancelled my charges so in neither case did I have to resort to asking AmEx to do a chargeback).

Also, on Amazon, I've bought used movies (out of print, imports, etc) and have received some counterfeit ones. Those are professional pirates. The only reason I didn't return the merchandise and push to have charges reversed was I was glad to get my hands on the movies at all, but I did report the counterfeiters to both Amazon and the copyright holders.

So, I guess neither feeBay/Paypal nor Amazon will be able to accept Mastercard/Visa any more since "pirates" (yar!) sell via those sites. I'm glad I use AmEx because I will still be able to buy stuff. ;)

End of neutrality to wane influence?

[Semptimilius]

Will we see the rise of non-American alternatives (global alternatives) to American credit cards? Visa and Mastercard being a tool of American foreign policy (they might have been in a soft manner before) gives incentive to just not use them.

I'm fine with no credit cards at all.

This prevents nothing

[Anonymous Coward]

The thing is, people will always find a way to send money even if not directly by the banks.

For example, Buying a giftcard from amazon.

Anon is better

[Anonymous Coward]

Thank you mastercard for helping the anonymous come to light, ..... is that what paypal is for

SissyLeaks

[Anonymous Coward]

Why does it not surprise me that the guy who thinks he's doing the world a favour by leaking other people's sensitive information is also an accused rapist. Now he hacks Mastercard because he's mad that they won't take payments for his cause? Can't he find other ways to get funded? Iran and North Korea did. Amazing how the people who think they're helping others really need the most help. What a joke.

I object!

[Anonymous Coward]

On the face of it no one should really object to Mastercard / Visa / etc denying service to criminal enterprises or criminal activities.

Innocent until proven guilty.

Re:I object!

[dogsbreath]

On the face of it no one should really object to Mastercard / Visa / etc denying service to criminal enterprises or criminal activities.

Innocent until proven guilty.

Don't be silly. This is a refusal of service, not a court of law. The legal side will come in to play when they target someone they shouldn't. Like I said above... I don't know why Wikileaks hasn't started a legal action against the payment providers.

Facilitation

[Compaqt]

>knowingly facilitating the violation of such copyright laws

So where does that stop?

-The office stationary supply store that sold Post-It notes for pirate's office to write passwords on?
-The 7-11 that sold Doritos for their webmaster?
-Dell for selling them a laptop?
-Intel for selling a CPU to Dell who sold it onward?
-Google for linking to them?
-And everybody else for linking to Google?

Re:Facilitation

[RobertM1968]

>knowingly facilitating the violation of such copyright laws

So where does that stop?

-The office stationary supply store that sold Post-It notes for pirate's office to write passwords on? -The 7-11 that sold Doritos for their webmaster? -Dell for selling them a laptop? -Intel for selling a CPU to Dell who sold it onward? -Google for linking to them? -And everybody else for linking to Google?

Ummm... what? That is all (well, except Google, but that's an issue I've also discussed - a totally different one, where their recent plans may put their safe harbor in jeopardy (their planned filtering)) totally unrelated. Selling Doritos to their webmasters is NOT making money off handling financial transactions for the actual sales of pirated goods.

File upload sites

[KingAlanI]

Some filehosting sites harass you more than others in order to try and get you to pay up.
I actually kicked a few bucks MediaFire's way because they're by far one of the less annoying.
Hotfile is one of the most annoying.

Some people simply prefer one download format over another.

I think MediaFire Pro helps whether the uploader is a pro or the downloader is.

Even with Adblock Plus installed, the downloads start faster because there's no landing page, even an ad-free one. Just goes right to the HTTP download.

Same here

[Mr2001]

I'm not chopping up by debit MasterCard since it's also my ATM card, but I have moved all my automated payments to Amex and will no longer be using MasterCard for any purchases. (As a bonus, Amex also has much better cash back rewards.)

I'm also emailing several relevant addresses the following letter:

To whom it may concern:

I was disappointed when I heard that MasterCard had cut off payments to WikiLeaks (as reported at http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-20024776-281.html), claiming it is participating in "illegal activity" even though WikiLeaks hasn't been charged or convicted of anything, and even though WikiLeaks's actions have been substantially no different than those of the New York Times, the Guardian, and other news sites that distributed the same material.

Now I see that MasterCard is also siding with the music and movie cartels in their war on technology (http://news.cnet.com/8301-31001_3-20025879-261.html), cutting off payments to web sites accused of file sharing, and lending support to the so-called "Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act" which would grant the government the power to censor web sites without a trial.

It seems that every time I swipe my MasterCard, I'm funding an assault on freedom of speech.

December 19, 2010, was the last time I used my MasterCard -- and it will be the last time I use *any* MasterCard, or Cirrus, or Maestro, or anything related. In fact, I almost want to boycott Audi and the Olympics just for having similar logos.

I have three other charge networks to choose from, not to mention online payment systems and EFT. Comparing MasterCard to those, I see no advantages and two huge downsides. Goodbye.

Eventually 'criminals' will stop using Mastercard

[Anonymous Coward]

so, if you don't use Mastercard, you are a criminal?

Valid protest - cut up and order new

[Anonymous Coward]

Dont switch. Just cut up your card, claim it was lost, and ask for a new card. Do it every 3 months

Its a protest that will cost them. Heavily.

Cost estimate:
1 million customers * 30 USD for issuing new card and cancelling old card = 30 MUSD * 4 times a year = 120 MUSD / year.

You hurt them. And you can still use them.

Oh where...oh where...

[Anonymous Coward]

Have my mastercard and visa alternatives gone oh where oh where can they be?!?!?! How and why a service like this in the financial sector is allowed to pull this sort of non-sense is outrageous.

Corporate sponsered Police state...

[Sinn3d]

... the land of the free?

But you can still donate to the KKK?

[tekrat]

So, let me get this straight... Mastercard won't let you buy a T-Shirt from Pirate Bay because they are evil haxors, but, I can still use my card to donate hundreds to the Klu Klux Klan? What does that say about Mastercard, or the rest of America for that matter?

How is it that the KKK didn't get branded a terrorist organization right after 9/11 anyhow? Why is it that we support/tolerate homegrown terrorism, such as white supremacy, as long as those guys aren't muslim?

What a fucked up country the USA is.

Re:Wow -~- First internet currency (floats as well

[jack2000]

I'd go with master card. Bliz has been really nice, except for their diablo2 bnet service, spambots are proliferating. It's like they don't care anymore.

RULE ONE FUCKER

[pnuema]

Also, rule 2.

At the risk of seeming childish

[Shadows]

I always read "COICA" as "CLOACA." It seems appropriate.

one card

[anonymousNR]

One Card to rule them all,
One Card to find them,
One Card to bring them all
and in the darkness bind them.

Right behind you

[GameboyRMH]

I was unsure about what to do with mine but this seals the deal. I'll be sure to give MasterCard a call/email and tell them why too.

Guess I'll have to give Discover card a try...

Bigger fish to fry?

[tepples]

the police stopped you and asked "Son, do you have any drugs on you?", if you were to answer "no pig, but dem niggas down dere do. ya, dem onez runnin'" indicates that you have intimate knowledge of the behavior of others. You might be let off. You might be charged either for intent to purchase, or as an accessory (i.e., lookout, delivery boy, etc).

As I understand it, alleged accessories tend to get plea bargains or even immunity if they help the police find and build a case against bigger fish. Is this the case in your area?

Re:Bigger fish to fry?

[JWSmythe]

    plea bargaining negotiations are not a set rule anywhere that I know of. They are a tool used by law enforcement to get the more important case. Sometimes you'll get off. Sometimes they'll promise the judge will be nice to them. In reality, unless they do not charge you at all, there's no promise of anything.

    Much like bargaining in any other situation, a verbal statement is almost impossible to enforce. The previous example was completely hypothetical, but say it was real, and I was the person who couldn't form a proper sentence to save my life. As soon as I said "it was them", I've given away my only bargaining power. I gave the information they wanted. They probably know it, and now I'm screwed. What's better, to get two suspects with whatever on them, or to get three (including me). All three would likely have public defenders, but you can be pretty sure that one won't survive to make it to court. Snitches, pedophiles, and rapists don't have a long life expectancy in jail. It's not only the guys who got fingered that will be upset, but whoever is going to lose revenue due to due to their salesmen being off the street, and any seized merchandise.

    Since I'm free and alive (to the best of my knowledge), obviously I wasn't in such a situation.

"Wherever possible" is shrinking

[tepples]

Pay cash whenever possible, make the effort needed to avoid an online transaction, pay the extra buck and a half to buy something nearby.

"Wherever possible" is shrinking. For one thing, I'm not willing to take a bus 100 miles from my home town to buy a $250 portable media player that no electronics stores in Fort Wayne appear to carry. I already tried Sears, Best Buy, and RadioShack, but none carry the Archos 43. For another, a growing number of retailers don't take cash due to past problems with counterfeiting. In my area, I know of a novelty shop and a mall's gift card counter.

Will your debut album hit 1000?

[tepples]

Why would you sell on CDR?

If you're a new artist, without the major labels' promotion machine and unsure that you can sell 1000 copies, then the CD replication companies will switch you from "replication" (1000 or more on CDs stamped from a glass master) to "duplication" (fewer than that on CD-R). You can't just wait for 1,000 orders before your replication run, as PayPal and other payment processors want merchants to ship within 20 days.

Go figure...

[tandelaf]

In my country (Chile) you can even pay with your Mastercard or Visa for prostitution... plain and simple. Check out www.tuagencia.cl.

So in other words...

[Anonymous Coward]

So in other words, you are against any company that is against spying on the US, against espionage in the US, or in general against revealing any US classified data? Did I get that right, Baron?

Re:I did not pay for any of them just looking at t

[clone52431]

Get on FrostWire, click the “Video” category, and search for absolutely anything you want. Then tell me if you can’t tell that the vast majority of the results are fake, ads, and/or viruses.

Same concept.

The provider of means to a crime is not liable.

[Anonymous Coward]

If I go and use a car to kill someone. Will the car manufacturer be liable?

How about If I use the yellow pages to find the address of someone I want to kill, will the phone company be liable?

If I shot a person and have a weapons permit. Should the state be liable for giving me the permit?

And if someone murders another person on a building, is the building owner liable because he didn't have policemen 24/7?

If the answer is NO. The provider of means to a crime is not responsible for the crime. Otherwise EVERY SINGLE weapon manufacturer will be in jail. As well as any single politician. You answer for your own crimes, not someone else ones.