Slashdot Mirror
The Pirate Bay On Track To Be Banned In the UK?
redletterdave writes with this excerpt from the International Business Times about the fate of the Pirate Bay in the UK: "Swedish filesharing website The Pirate Bay may soon be blocked in the UK after a London judge ruled that the site breaches copyright laws on a large scale, and that both the platform and its users illegally share copyrighted material like movies and music. In addition to finding legal fault with The Pirate Bay and its users, the British Phonographic Industry also wants all British ISPs to block access to The Pirate Bay in the UK."
Let's ban child phonography.... cut off their customer base, and drive the bastards out of business.
that the UK is exerting this kind of power over their local internet lines and providers.
This signature has Super Cow Powers
Global information exchange The Internet may soon be blocked in the UK after a London judge ruled that the system breaches copyright laws on a large scale, and that the platform's routers and end users illegally share copyrighted material like movies and music. In addition to finding legal fault with The Internet and its users, the British Phonographic Industry also wants all British ISPs to block access to The Internet in the UK.
Honestly, we need a "Streisand Effect" term for what happens when legislation merely prompts sites to use the encrypted areas of the internet.
Nobody, they only do the democracy thing for show.
This signature has Super Cow Powers
Watch This!
Whack-a-mole.
"The more your tighten your grip, the more star systems will slip through your fingers."
Is this a case of reverse "think of the children" argument ... !!
... what do you know, them London judges wanting to support the commercial exploitation of young women (and men and trained pets depending on what floats your boat) I think they should all be behind the same bars :P
We have a case where a London judge is siding with the whole British Phonographic Industry.
Well well
1984. Thank you.
Tribler is the future of these things, and isn't really blockable.
The problem with the suit of armor - invented (yes, partly) as a response to the broadsword - is that it spurred the development of the rapier and epee.
Defense... offense... meet developers.
You know what's funny about the prevailing systems of government in this era? They're all about writing new laws, making new things illegal, regulating more and more of their citizen's lives and centralizing more and more power in the hands of a VERY few.
It never goes the other way. Ever.
How often do over reaching laws get repealed? How often does government say "hey we don't need to regulate this realm anymore because circumstances have changed"?
How often have you seen governments de-centralize things in order to make them more responsive to the needs of the citizens they serve?
How often does government shrink or even stop growing at exponential rates? How often have they become less involved when it was needed?
In fact, most governments call decreases in projected increases as "cuts".
If next year something happens that causes the government to no longer need (by their justification) to control the internet, you think they will cede control?
If you're not with Ron Paul and the Freedom movement, you're part of the problem.
Liberty.
now we can see that it is no longer stiff
I don't think you understand how bittorrent works...
--
True. Here in the US, you realize quickly that democracy has never graced the halls of the elected or appointed officials.
Democracy is a powerful lie, which lets people think they have power, right up until the point where they actually need to use it. Then they realize that they have no power, the laws were written by career bureaucrats who have no interest in whether or not they should be making laws, let alone good ones, for the simple reason that they themselves will never be affected by them. We had a judge, up here in Lancaster, PA, who was dismissing her own summons for various traffic violations: she just logged into the system, and altered the records. These are the very judges, mind you, who do not allow you a jury (sorry, it's just misdemeanor!) when you got to fight them, and who lovingly (he said sarcastically) click their tongues and berate you over the 'danger to society' your reckless driving could have caused, while the trooper (who arranged the date for his day off (time and a half, right guys?) and on the day you need to be elsewhere) smiles his knowing smile (he's a professional witness, your word against his...sure it's a racket, but fuck you).
I've realize why they have the Bible in the courtroom -> because by the time you get there, only God can save you.
I am John Hurt.
Is this the MPAA
Is this the BSA
Is this RIAA
I thought it was the UK
Or just another country...
Good boy! Now go and get your 30 silver dollars from RIAA.
Because, of course, culture didn't exist prior to the development of copyright...
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Are you saying humanity is doomed if we don't charge money for ideas?
Or are you saying humanity doomed if we don't censor the internet and imprison people charge money for ideas?
Or both?
Whoops, meant to ask "Are you saying humanity doomed if we don't censor the internet and imprison people who don't pay royalties for spreading ideas?"
information sharing is a natural right
FTFY.
Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
Whoops, meant to ask "Are you saying humanity doomed if we don't censor the internet and imprison people who don't pay royalties for spreading ideas?"
Challenge: show me an idea on TPB, I promise I'll download and seed it.
On the other hand, if you'd replace "idea" with "information", I might be tempted to agree with you.
(hint: careful with those words, they tend to cut both ways).
Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
Because, of course, culture didn't exist prior to the development of copyright...
Commercialized culture didn't. Great art was done almost exclusively by commission for wealthy patrons or religions. All those great Greek statues and buildings? Religious temples and art. All of the famous Byzantine and Medeival art? For churches. The explosion of the new masters in the Renaissance? Paid for by the Catholic Church and the Medici's and other rich Italian families. Great art paid for by the masses by popular demand? It didn't exist. If you made a good living, it's because you found a rich patron. Otherwise, you didn't eat unless you could really wow 'em on the street corner. Even then, most times, artists of all stripes were poor. Patronage made our best art happen.
Good luck getting that system to work now. There's a reason why the "free music" model bands have failed: all of the really talented acts want to, you know, get rich. The copyright system allows them (and authors and filmmakers and playrights, etc) to make a good living. Take copyright away, and the vast majority of the El Cheapo public wouldn't put forth a dime. Bye bye Beatles, Rolling Stones, and Led Zeppelin. Bye bye, Orson Welles, Steven Spielberg, and Peter Jackson. Bye bye, Stephen King, Herman Wouk, Ernest Hemingway.
People want to make money. And the "give it for free and hope good things happen" model doesn't work. If you want to convince Bill Gates or Warren Buffett to pay promising new bands to make records that are available to the public gratis, go for it. I bet they laugh at you, though.
Life is hard, and the world is cruel
Honestly, we need a "Streisand Effect" term for what happens when legislation merely prompts sites to use the encrypted areas of the internet.
Because it just drives people deeper underground.
On second thought, maybe "Jamiroquai Effect" might sound hipper.
Set your phasers on "funky"!
I don't disagree with you here...those words are interchangeable in my mind.
Also, purely non-loaded question that I'm asking out of genuine curiosity: Would you seed copyrighted works that are informational, like Carl Sagan's Cosmos?
I can't tell whether this is offtopic or a brilliant channelling of Emily Litela, available only on hulu. http://www.hulu.com/watch/2364/saturday-night-live-weekend-update-emily-litella-on-violins-on-tv
Gently reply
Maybe someone can educate me as to what Piratebay does that Google doesn't.
Whilst PirateBay obviously deliberately encourages a view that it is an organisation that skirts close to the law, as far as I am aware it does nothing that any other search engine doesn't. i.e. it simply returns a list of locations where the searched for content can be found.
Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
Karma: Chameleon
He doesn't post anything substantial because he can't. His own rant proofs copyright is not needed to ensure art survives. The post DesScorp below is also a snob, ignoring folk art, such as song and story telling which survived and thrived perfectly fine without patronage or copyright. The dutch "Smartlap" (tearjerker song) was a type of troubadour, those songs are still sung, they were not high art with patrons but simple performers making their living from live concerts.
Ah, but good living... of course, just because you sing a song, you and 5 generations of your kids (see yesterday story about perputual copyright) should be millionaires. Forget nurses doing stuff nobody else wants to do and saving human lives day in, day out for minimum wage. The true social injustice of our time is artists not being able to afford another Ferrari.
Technology has changed art and will continue to do so regardless of what some dinosaurs might desire. It isn't just recent stuff like the cassette tape but far older stuff like cheap musical instruments, printed sheet music, mechanical instruments. Even things like the movies going from silent to talkies. Once each movie theather had a pit for the band to play music to accompany the silent movie. Then, long before talkies were introduced, record players took over to save costs and put an artist out of work. Movies themselves killed Vaudeville.
Tech changed and the world adapted. Copyright was a result of tech changes so why shouldn't new tech changes not change copyright?
Trolls like brit74 are living under a bridge trying to pretend the world is unchanging and that laws which were once valid should remain valid indefinitely. He can't cope with a changing world, his kind would have kept slavery going just because that is the way things are.
Copyright is doomed in a world where digital media can be perfectly reproduced by anyone at trivial costs. It isn't even a case anymore about whether copyright is just or not. It ain't just either that 1% of the world lives with more money then they could ever possibly spent while millions starve.
The invention of the gun forever changed murder. Shooting someone is easy, far easier then choking them to death, feeling them struggle as you choke the life out of them. Shoot them and they just fall over and that is it. We haven't been able to outlaw the idea of the gun and even gun control has been impossible.
So what change do we have of putting digital copying back in the bag?
I have a proposal, every piece of recorded music must be taxed and the tax sent to live performers and instrument makers. And every printed music sheet needs a tax to compensate the monks who used to copy these works by hand. And the monks need to pay those who passed music on through teach and oral tradition. All the way back so the first caveman can live comfortable on his original art.
The content industry needs to adapt or it will go the way of other industries before that have been made obsolete or un-economical by the march of progress. If this means that commercial art dies... then so be it. Humanity will survive without and whatever comes in its place might even be greater. Or not but trying to stop the future is futile.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
The Swedish authorities already raided The Pirate Bay and found nothing, zip, zitch, zero infringing files on their servers. So how can it breach any copyright laws?
Sure, it facilitates file sharing and those files shared may be copyrighted... but it plays no larger role than for instance roads do in various other crimes. I mean, a road is used to facilitate almost all crimes, either as the crime scene itself or as a means of getting there or escaping afterwards. Sure, roads have legitimate uses but given that almost all crimes involve them, they do play an instrumental role.
So... if roads are not put on trial for their involvement in all those other crimes (they're just passive means, but they're there), why persecute The Pirate Bay for copyright infringement as they're also just passive means. The Pirate Bay is simply a portal, nothing more. There's no content, no hashes, no trackers. All content resides elsewhere. They have no access to hashes of the complete files shared and also have no reference hashes to verify against in order to eliminate copyrighted content, so in essence they want to ban the principle of file sharing just because you may be sharing something copyrighted.
The conclusion for the courts: Censorship for no other purpose than to quench the concept of file sharing. Possibly infringing files are not transferred through The Pirate Bay in any way and yet it must be banned?
"For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong." -- H.L. Mencken (1880-1956) --
Janet, the Joint Academic Network, that connects all the UK universities, colleges, schools etc. has a strict policy against content-filtering - partly because it's against the ethos of an academic network and partly because they're bright enough to realise that it wouldn't work:
there is no centrally imposed filtering of web, e-mail or other content provided by the network; indeed, such filtering would be ineffective as the network provides many possible routes to bypass any solution implemented at a single point.
http://www.ja.net/documents/publications/factsheets/072-janet-and-internet-filtering.pdf
Bearing in-mind that most academic institutions use Janet for their student's Internet access, and most file-sharers are in the 18-25 age group, and something like 45% of 18-25 year olds go to university...
Very insightful. This is natural. As part of their internal optimizer, most people want the most with the minimum amount of effort. If possible, everything for free. Now. I'm so tired of kids thinking they are somehow entitled to everything, for just being born.
But this is not something new, most people are shortsighted, and that include most of Slashdot's audience. Those few who actually take the effort to think a bit into the future will always be in advantage, and those who are used to receive everything for free will be paralyzed when they hit a real problem.
On the other hand, we have to keep in mind this is media, and media is not about cold, absolute and truthful information. Its about entertainment. People come here to be entertained, to have fun, not to listen to uncomfortable truths. Lies and misinformation are ok, fun must prevail at all costs.
These kind of comments will always be unpopular, thus modded down into oblivion, even if they are in fact insightful. This is where democracy fails. I'll join you in -1 hell. Fuck stupidity!
Even if they do manage to get the pirate bay blacklisted in the uk, here comes memateyscaven.org. Even that's unnessesery everyone will just go to demonoid or one of the many others sites serving the exact same content.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
That's so weird! I thought musicians, orchestras, artists and entertainers existed, serving public audiences, before 1950. Wow, I guess public shows, recordings, street art, plays, circuses, and museums only came into existence after the RIAA and MPAA were created.
No, wait, you are just a nonsense spewing retard.
That's not my experience.
My nephew is in halls of residence at one UK university and whilst he does have Internet access on the university network from his room, he cannot even connect to the PlayStation network from it - plus every file-sharing site that he has tried is blocked.
Windows 10 is great - I used it to download Linux.
Just ask some Chinese friends what proxies they use to bypass their blockade 8)
Oh, and after they block the pirate bay, are they going to go after IRC? And then the darknet that will follow 8)
The problem with "freedom" is that people like you use it wrong, and make incorrect choices. It's all there in black and white, and people still vote for racists like Santorum with a smile on their faces. Having proven that you can't be trusted with political power, others must step in and run things for you, the correct way. We're just lucky we have so many smart people who know better. You had your chance and you blew it. No sympathy here.
But I like it because I am in the class of "smart people", so I am incredibly biased, as are probably most slashdot persons. Way to play to the audience...
-- Terry
Why the hell do authorities have such a boner for the Pirate Bay?
The pirate bay is on the news every other day, while all the other trackers get completely ignored.
Better trackers, which are way, way better than TPB in most cases.
What's the story?
If NOBODY traded money for ideas, how much media do you think would be out there for others to download freely?
And, assuming you have a job, isn't that precisely what YOU are being paid for? And are you prepared to give you labour away free based on the same principles?
Windows 10 is great - I used it to download Linux.
Indeed. JANET themselves may not operate filtering but the IT departments who operate the university networks which connect to JANET most definitely do. I speak as a former employee of one such institution.
At 90MB for the whole site what are the authorities going to do when thousands of us are mirroring TPB on a dedicated Raspberry Pi each?
The months are just too short. I can count the number of days on one hand.
Yes, really. I'm using it too. Why?
You seem to be under the impression that people would be unwilling to pay money for media if the law didn't force them to do so under threat of violence and censor the internet to accomplish the same.
If nobody were required by law to pay for media, the media companies would adapt or die, just like every other business who doesn't have the government forcing people to buy their products. For example, you can get water for free or next to nothing, yet the water industry is booming.
They key is to make a convenient package and reasonable prices and people will pay for just about anything. You don't sell water; you sell convenience.
Challenge: show me an idea on TPB, I promise I'll download and seed it.
Show me an idea in any material produced by the MPAA / RIAA?
Nah... even they would admit this is impossible.
Besides, the MPAA/RIAA content doesn't make the majority of TPB... yes, I know, it sound close to phonography, but it's not... and, from this other content, there are better chances to get some ideas on improving your life (or at least some aspects of it).
Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
Note to the MAFIAA:
Note to the MAFIAA:
Keep trying to whack moles. You may win the odd battle, but you're losing the war badly. And its your own fucking fault this all happened. YOU are to blame for the creation of artificial scarcity and solely to blame for the utter failure to address the demand for 15 years. Apple had to snooker you into joining the modern age and you still fucked that up.
One day soon, the dictionary definition of the noun "fail" will be footnoted: "see "MAFIAA".
May you burn in hell forever, you dirty, low-life, slimy, miserable dog-turds. I used to speak out in your defense against file-sharing here and elsewhere. But your totally fucked attitude over the years turned me into a big supporter of file-sharing and turned your friends (and best customers, like me), into your enemy.
Evolution's a bitch. It won't do anything you say, fucks you repeatedly, and leaves you for dead in the end. Your choice was to march with the modern age and prosper or stand against it and die.
Wrong choice, assholes. Now you die.
If you go back that far, there were plenty forms of entertainment but no way to record them. I'm sure there were plenty taverns with entertainment to draw people that operated a very much so commercial operation, but there was nobody there with a microphone. A painting could only hang on one person's wall unless someone carefully repainted it and a sculpture is even harder to copy. I'm sure people paid to see Shakespeare's plays but there was nobody with a video camera present. Scribes were required to copy books, a luxury only the rich could afford. Even after the invention of the printing press you'd need not only the press but also some form of distribution and retail outlets if you wanted to sell on more than your own street corner.
In short, there was no way you could directly reach the masses and there was no way the masses could directly pay you back. Taking on ten patrons each paying 10% of the cost meant they expected ten pictures to hang on the wall not one, which is far more work than one. Today you can put up a server on the Internet and a Paypal account and reach billions of people. Whether one patron pays you $10,000 or a thousand patrons pay you $10 is almost irrelevant. Okay so maybe you wouldn't be able to pay tens of millions of dollars to headline actors, directors and such. But what else would they do? Like the market is now such that you can make $1 million instead of $30 million per movie, you want to take it or go down to McDonalds and try looking good?
I don't blame people for following the money, I'd do the same too. But people don't leave and find other work until the money is so little it's worth a career change. Your star quarterback, if you halved his pay he'd go to another team. If every team halved his pay, he'd still be there playing a quarterback. How much does a writer need to earn to make more money than they do doing anything else? You don't need to be J. K. Rowling and make $800 million. I'm sure she'd do it for $8 million if there was no way to make more. The works don't go away until the creators behind them do, and I'm confident we'd throw in enough money to do just that.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
The works don't go away until the creators behind them do, and I'm confident we'd throw in enough money to avoid just that.
FTFM
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Yep, sorry to tell you this direct-democracy haters, but if it isn't a "tyranny of the majority" then you've got a system that allows you to be tyrannized by the only alternative group...
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Tor for bypassing the restriction. Or magnet link packs from thepiratebay.se hosted elsewhere. OneSwarm for protecting yourself from the MafiAA.
The Christian religion has been and still is the principal enemy of moral progress in the world. -- Bertrand Russell
Would the ISPs block it by simply removing that entry from their DNS servers? If so, won't it be trivial to reconfigure your router to get it's name servers from OpenDNS or Google? How else would it be blocked?
Rule by an apathetic populace would be considered a possible downfall of this system.
I am John Hurt.
45% is the national average. In some areas it's 80% (That article points out that the national figures for Iceland, Finland and Slovakia are 70%-80%)
It's a good idea - if your population is educated, then they are likely to be more productive, higher earners, less likely to be reliant on benefits etc.
I haven't heard anyone mention it or talk about using it in years.
brickspeed.net for your old Volvo performance addiction
Because he's onto this new thing now? You probably haven't heard of it. He's seen 'em live and has their vinyls. The Pirate Bay's totally sold out and gone mainstream. *flips scarf*
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Nobody is forcing anybody to buy the recordings. However, what the law does say, is that if you want to watch/listen to the recordings, then you have to buy it. There's a big difference. If you don't agree with the prices they are asking, don't pay it, and don't watch/listen to it. There's plenty of other things to do with your free time. Go play some sports. Go talk with friends. Go make some of your own recordings.
Also, while some people will pay for stuff just because they like it, the vast majority of people will not pay for it. It's already happening even though it is illegal. Make it legal to make copies, and just about nobody would pay for it.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
You've been outside in the sun for too long. Here
...says you at 32 years of age quickly typing your response on the PC in your bedroom at your parents house before changing into your McDonald's uniform for the late shift.
Windows 10 is great - I used it to download Linux.
That's a crap argument.
Nobody forces me to buy music or media, I choose to buy the stuff that appeals to me on the basis that, say, a music CD I pay around £10 for is worth the money when I enjoy it over and over again over the course of my lifetime. Same goes for movies, games, etc.
If nobody paid for media then none of it would be produced, full stop. The fact that some people get their stuff for free is because legitimate purchasers have provided enough income to justify the release in the first place, thus allowing free copies to be made available to those who want it for free, In other words, legitimate purchasers subsidise the collections of those who don't pay.
The key is NOT to make a convenient package because that has been done already and still people copy stuff. If everybody was a little more appreciative of money and appreciative of artists who have the right to make money from what they do, then consumer demand would drive good quality releases.
Evian? Perrier? They sell water.
Windows 10 is great - I used it to download Linux.
Practical experience suggests students are not able to "know right from wrong" in this case - piracy is both illegal and ethically pretty indefensible (you can always just go and watch something licensed under a liberal CC style license, after all).
So what you're trying to claim here is that until the advent of copyright, the peasants just ate dirt? Give me a break. There are very ancient folk traditions still alive today in every culture, story-telling, music, art. Except now some assfucker can come along, do a minor twist on an ancient theme and call it his own. Some guy who does some new version of the Odyssey gets to copyright it, even though the actual author has been dead somewhere around 2,700 years.
In the olden days, musicians used to travel around and make their bread and butter by public performance. The notion of a band that just sat in one place and made music was utterly foreign.
But the underlying claim that you make, that only the wealthy had art, is a pure falsehood, either from your ignorance or deliberately told.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Why the hell do authorities have such a boner for the Pirate Bay?
Have you ever perused their legal threats page? At the bottom of the page they summarize as follows: :-)"
"No action (except ridiculing the senders) has been taken by us because of these.
It's a matter of opinion whether they flaunt the law, but it's a matter of fact that they taunt it.
would be ;-)
I'd post something substantial, but the idiotic pro-piracy comments in this thread makes me realize that a lot of humanity only cares about doing whatever is in their own short-term personal interest and will masquerade their greed as 'logic and reason'
Long copyrights harm creativity more than none at all. Neither extreme is good.
You do realise that study after study shows the fallacy of the "nobody will pay if they can get it for free" stupidity, right? Music pirates spend more money on music than non-pirates. A book publisher did a study a couple of years ago to determine how much piracy was costing him and found to his surprise that as soon as his books hit the internet, there was a sales spike rather than a loss of sales.
Piracy sells media. The problem is, the publishers want to get paid for media-less content. Worse, they want to charge more for an MP3 collection than for a CD, more for a downloaded movie than a DVD, and more for an ebook than for one printed on paper that has manufacturing costs, distribution costs, warehousing costs, etc.
The only pirates are the publishers who steal the public domain from artists who NEED that public domain. Do like Doctorow does (he credits his status as a best seller to it) -- give the ebook away and sell the dead tree book. People like things to put on their shelves.
Also, if I want to read your crappy book or see your crappy movie or listen to your crappy CD I can check it out from the library, for FREE, and you're not gettinng a dime -- unless I like the work, in which case I'm liable to buy a copy of your next.
God, what fools are running things. No wonder the world's economy is in shambles.
Free Martian Whores!
Create (Close) the courts to any innovative distribution with legislation.
Create (Close) a friendly environment to purchase content.
Create (Close) Remix to only those approved by you.
Create (Close) Ranks amongst your customers.
Fight it tooth and nail. This isn't food clothing or shelter. Vote with your dollars you don't need it, don't buy it.
15TW = 15,000 Nuclear Reactors. (Approx. one accident a month.)
The part that bugs me about taking down TPB, or any other copyright unfriendly site (whether it is or not) is that it sets a legal precedent for censoring anything on the net the Gov't deems inappropriate. The cost of many copyrighted materials is higher than I deem them to be worth, so I just don't pay for them. Neither do I pirate them. I was always the one telling people if they download some music or a good program that they like, and use, then they should PAY FOR IT. I will always stand by this, and I will ALSO always oppose those who seek to censor the net. There are 2 big reasons for gov't to want to censor the net: 1. Corporate lobbyists and 2. Quelling Civil disobedience. Neither is a good enough reason to censor the net.
I keep hearing that DHT, PEX and magnet links will make trackers irrelevant and decrease single points of failure.
DHT+PEX+magnet links seems to be supported in most client applications already (ktorrent, rtorrent, etc).
So my question is, is there a way already to search for content through the DHT network directly? without involving a tracker like TPB?
Yes, I have to agree to this. The MAFIAA wants things to remain as they were 10 or even 20 years ago because that is the model which was heavily in their favour. This goes well beyond being able to obtain commercial content without compensating the individuals selling it.
Nowadays, the industry can no longer get away with holding back content and only releasing it when and where THEY decide (e.g. Disney selling a movie for a year and then pulling all copies to make room for another or a company deciding not to even release their title in a certain country until months after the rest of the world has been enjoying it).
Sites like thepiratebay.org essentially make it open and available to everyone, everywhere, and anytime. In addition, these sites make the industries completely redundant because of the widespread audience content "creators" can reach. It's how certain artists can make some of their initial works available and become very popular if noticed by enough people. Prior to this technology, you needed a label to do that advertising for you given the very limited and expensive channels back then.
To correct this, industries need to make their content available to everyone straight away and at an affordable price. To mitigate piracy, they would have to provide a better product and service than the free one. A practical example of this in the games industry is Steam. You completely bypass lengthy installations (i.e. once the game is downloaded, it's ready to play), you can retrieve it again at any time should you lose your local copy, and best of all, your game is kept up to date with all latest patches meaning that you don't have to keep track manually. A pirated/free version would still require an install (since they are often based on the disc/retail version), would require you to track down the download site again if you lost your copy, and would require you to apply patches manually (sometimes requiring you to wait even longer for it to be cracked again).