MPAA: the Impact of Megaupload's Shutdown Was 'Massive'

An anonymous reader writes "The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) has declared that the Megaupload shutdown earlier this year has been a great success. In a filing to the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, the group representing major movie studios says the file hosting and sharing industry has been massively disrupted. Yet the MPAA says there is still work to be done, identifying sites that make available to downloaders 'unauthorized copies of high-quality, recently-released content and in some cases, coordinate the actual upload and download of that content.' Here's the list of sites, including where they are hosted: Extratorrent (Ukraine), IsoHunt (Canada), Kickass Torrents (Canada), Rutracker (Russia), The Pirate Bay (Sweden), Torrentz (Canada), and Kankan (China)."

Comments

Doesn't help

[bonch]

I don't take issue with the shutdown since Megaupload was being used as a gigantic, unregulated store for pirated content, and that does take money away from content creators. Instead, I go out of my way to purchase independent content to support artists outside of the mainstream system, and any mainstream content I do want gets purchased digitally, which ultimately contributes to a lessening of relevance for the traditional distributors represented by the MPAA. Home film releases come out out sooner and sooner after their theater runs, and streaming services like Netflix are so popular on living room devices that Microsoft claims video streaming surpasses game-playing in terms of hours of usage on the Xbox 360. Whatever traditional structure the MPAA is protecting has already been supplanted by legal mediums.

In other words, Megaupload isn't necessary--the fate of the traditional movie industry has already been sealed by companies who embraced the internet.

Re:Doesn't help

[rtb61]

It is pretty clear it seems to anyone but you that the evidence so far is that Megaupload WAS NOT being used as a gigantic, unregulated store for pirated content, which is why the case is completely falling over. Sure the shutdown was massive but massive in a bad for the US in-Justice system and, US Foreign Relations. It is blatantly clear both were manipulated via corporate interests through the Vice Presidents office and at the instructions of psychopathic corporate executives a company was destroyed so they could be made a public example. In the great fishing expedition it was expected that evidence would be uncovered to justify the destruction as prior to the destruction the evidence was not there. However us the case unfolds with evidence lacking, the only real investigation that needs to be conducted is one of corruption of the US legal system by US corporations.

Re:Doesn't help

[Tagged_84]

...pirated content, and that does take money away from content creators.

Please provide sources showing loss of revenue from piracy. PS. I'm an actual content creator, indie game developer, so if I was bias...

Re:Doesn't help

[cheekyjohnson]

Some people only wish that copyright infringement had the ability to actually take money away from content creators! Why, if it did, they could download the content over and over until the MPAA, RIAA, and all those other guys died off!

Re:Doesn't help

[tqk]

It is blatantly clear both were manipulated via corporate interests through the Vice Presidents office and at the instructions of psychopathic corporate executives a company was destroyed so they could be made a public example. In the great fishing expedition it was expected that evidence would be uncovered to justify the destruction as prior to the destruction the evidence was not there. However us the case unfolds with evidence lacking, the only real investigation that needs to be conducted is one of corruption of the US legal system by US corporations.

The Biden Effect?

Re:Doesn't help

[Anonymous Coward]

Err... what? The shutdown of Megaupload, especially in the way it was handled, was a massive disaster in terms of legitimacy, due process, and justice, which is why the case is now completely falling over, as you say.

However, to suggest that Megaupload was not used by many as a gigantic, mostly unregulated store for pirated content is utterly ridiculous. Megavideo links of a vast array of television shows and movies were present in essentially every streaming links website, now mostly replaced with sites like videobb and vidbux. Yahoo Answers still has quite a few questions from naive users asking about how to find movies and tv shows on Megavideo, along with numerous answers. Searching for warez and pirated books from prior years will come up with quite a few megaupload links.

Megaupload certainly had legitimate uses, but piracy was a major, major use. That may not have been a legitimate reason to shut it down (and certainly wasn't justification for the way it was done), but I don't think anyone can argue that Megavideo, for example, didn't have much, much more pirated content than, say, Youtube or Vimeo.

Re:Doesn't help

[bakes]

You forget that the "MPAA, RIAA, and all those other guys" are NOT the content creators.

Re:Doesn't help

[Anonymous Coward]

Content racketeers.

Re:Doesn't help

[cheekyjohnson]

That's true, but if it took money away from them, they'd die off all the same.

Re:Doesn't help

[Charliemopps]

So the media industry talked congress and the justice department into not only violating our constitutional rights but the rights of people in other countries and you think they are going to let a little thing like "market forces" stop them? You can't even buy a TV with a video output anymore! They're illegal!

Re:Doesn't help

[flyneye]

I really don't understand what the hoopla about content is. I stream in Netflix and have a basement full of VHS tapes. I have yet to figure out why any of it was worth saving or why I bother to keep watching. Most television shows amount to " I Love Lucy", "Dragnet" or "The Price is Right" with tweaks. Movies are outright regurgitation of previous works without exception. Who really is getting paid for this? The originators are long dead and the flunkies who worked on these projects are already paid. The studios who made them are already paid, over and over, through advertising , sales (suckers who bother to purchase hard copies that will gather dust just like all my VHS I mentioned earlier). Maybe this is just about lawyers creating a stream of revenue for themselves. Maybe if we sprinkle "Roach-Pruf" around, this will go away.
Silly asses!

Re:Doesn't help

[hazah]

Perhaps what constitues as 'piracy' is 'legitemate use' to begin with? How can *so many* people be labled civil criminals? How can it be that the majority of the world is in the wrong? How can anyone even begin to justify jail for songs and music? Songs and music.. the very thing that separates us from the rest of the species around us. Stupid, stupid, stupid. It is incredible that we are even on this path at all, but then again there's that war on drugs, that thing people call 'voting'. I'm not so much amaized that it was suggested, no, I'm far more amaized that it was surrendered. And I drown in this ocean of gullibility without recourse save for death. Great!

Re:Doesn't help

[icebike]

Megaupload certainly had legitimate uses, but piracy was a major, major use. That may not have been a legitimate reason to shut it down (and certainly wasn't justification for the way it was done), but I don't think anyone can argue that Megavideo, for example, didn't have much, much more pirated content than, say, Youtube or Vimeo.

Well, by all accounts the shutdown actually HURT box office sales. It was also reported here on Slashdot.

Maybe it was just nerd rage, refusing to go to the movies ever again!

Re:Doesn't help

[hawguy]

I really don't understand what the hoopla about content is. I stream in Netflix and have a basement full of VHS tapes. I have yet to figure out why any of it was worth saving or why I bother to keep watching. Most television shows amount to " I Love Lucy", "Dragnet" or "The Price is Right" with tweaks. Movies are outright regurgitation of previous works without exception. Who really is getting paid for this? The originators are long dead and the flunkies who worked on these projects are already paid. The studios who made them are already paid, over and over, through advertising , sales (suckers who bother to purchase hard copies that will gather dust just like all my VHS I mentioned earlier). Maybe this is just about lawyers creating a stream of revenue for themselves. Maybe if we sprinkle "Roach-Pruf" around, this will go away.
Silly asses!

I actually like rewatching old movies.

I'm mid way through copying my 200 DVD's to my home fileserver so it's even easier to watch them. So far, I've run across two that I couldn't copy due to copy protection on the DVD (Wall-E, and some other Disney movie, I think it was Cars). I think there's some Windows software to bypass the protection, but it didn't take long to find a copy online that I could download.

I wonder if my cable company ratted me out for bittorrenting the two movies? Maybe the movie industry will sue me for downloading movies that I already paid for.

I dropped my Netflix disks-by-mail plan and started buying used DVD's from Amazon -- they are pretty cheap, I usually pay $5 or $6 including shipping, so I can buy 3 movies/month for about the same as I was paying for the Netflix subscription.

Re:Doesn't help

[faedle]

No, it's technically not the exact same thing. When you walk out of a store with the CD, you are depriving the STORE of their personal property (the CD). There actually is a difference, both morally and ethically: "piracy" does not deprive anyone of their property, only the revenue from the sale.

I'm not disagreeing that both should be crimes. But the financial and civil penalties of the latter (copyright infringement) are actually HIGHER than the former. And that's not right, either.

Re:Doesn't help

[Anonymous Coward]

So then it would be fine for me to walk into a movie store and walk out with a Bluray of the latest release film as long as I bring it back approximately 90 minutes later. That'd be fine right? After all, the store hasn't been deprived of anything and I haven't even taken a copy of the film, unless you're going to argue about the imperfect copy stored in my memory.

Re:Doesn't help

[Runaway1956]

"I don't take issue with the shutdown since Megaupload"

Irregardless of the legalities or the morality of what MU was doing, or not doing, the shutdown was a miscarriage of justice. MPAA is saying here, that the end justified the means. In effect, it doesn't matter that all parties to the shutdown FAILED to prosecute MU for anything, and they FAILED to prove that MU was doing anything. It only matters that Hollywood is making money.

Step down a little, from huge international servers, to your own home town. Do you have a problem with the mayor sending a swat team to crash your door down, confiscate your computers, and haul you to court because - ohhhh - maybe you published an unflattering picture of the mayor? Or, your kid is a "terroristic bully who has hacked my child's facebook account"? Or, you published an editorial opposing the mayor's plans for an "emminent domain" project?

Remember, what goes around, comes around.

Re:Doesn't help

[aaron552]

Usually the store will want to be compensated for the time the copy is not available. This is called rental. In the case of copying on the internet, the original copy is still available at all times.

Re:Doesn't help

[Anonymous Coward]

There were plenty of people using megaupload to transfer legitimate files that were too big to be emailed. I was one of them.

Perhaps the transfers of pirated material were more than such transfers. But it may also be that Megaupload was making more money from the paying users transfering legitimate files (e.g. corporate users who needed to transfer large files to/from customers without throttling and didn't mind paying Megaupload at all).

You might then consider Megaupload evil to make the authors/artistes collateral damage in their pursuit of such profit. But you're going to have to prove that Megauload really caused significant damage.

Re:Doesn't help

[TheLink]

So are these the same thing?
a) taking your brain away and bringing it back 90 minutes later
b) making a copy of your brain
It's not like you're using your brain much anyway. So no difference right?

Re:Doesn't help

[Anonymous Coward]

Megaupload certainly had legitimate uses, but piracy was a major, major use.

The same could be said for nearly anything. For example:
-VCRs certainly had legitimate uses, but piracy was a major, major use.
-Firearms certainly had legitimate uses, but piracy was a major, major use.
-Automobiles certainly had legitimate uses, but piracy was a major, major use.
Maybe we should start banning everything that is used for piracy?

Re:Doesn't help

[hazah]

You are twisted, but don't bother twisting my words into a rhetoric of your personal fantasies. All you said is that someone belongs in a cage for peddling some bits and bytes. If you can't see how that's different than taking off with a physical object out of a store, then I'm sorry to break it to you, you shouldn't be trying to call anyone stupid. Somewhat ironic that you try to appeal to an ability to reason considering the entierty of the first paragraph you wrote. Lets see how this analogy of yours stands, shall we? You threw it out there, prove it. Stripping away all the real bullshit, it's about making it a crime to perform common, readily available, private household activities -- whose only percieved damage is a lack of debatably potential future revenue of a business model behind the times -- demonstrated to be a false assumption too many times to count. So try again on what it is that *I* want, because you're certainly looking in the wrong direction.

Re:Doesn't help

[hazah]

You are one dense motherfucker, aren't you? You cannot walk out with the Bluray in the first place, so your argument is invalid. You cannot pick and choose which law will be inacted when for your perfect little scenario.

Re:Doesn't help

[AlphaWolf_HK]

I'm a huge pirate, I literally pirate at least 4+ tv shows or movies daily (not necessarily by myself, but other people in my household who I've provided access to.) I also regularly download other things that are otherwise considered illegal (e.g. last night I downloaded a bunch of Cisco IOS images for a net simulator, as well as a training manual.)

Yet I have not once ever relied upon megaupload for piracy, even while they were in their heyday.

Re:Doesn't help

[Anonymous Coward]

Fine so I go into a store with my portable DVD player. Pick up the latest off the shelf, on open it up, put it my player. Run some software on my DVD player. About 90 minutes later, I put the disc back on the shelf. And leave. Nothing wrong with that right?

No one should have a problem with that right?

Re:Doesn't help

[AlphaWolf_HK]

Well another way to look at it (and I AM a pirate btw, a very serial offender too, see my last post) is that when you shoplift from a store, all you're really doing is depriving them of profit. In the end, every buyer will be able to purchase their goods anyways, and the store in most cases will be able to re-stock the item before it is completely gone (I used to work retail, we regularly did cycle counts to proactively identify stolen property.)

And no I don't shoplift. The main reason I pirate is because I'm tired of the existing distribution model, which sucks balls. Either having to wait forever for a release (new releases take forever on netflix) or dealing with my cable provider's DRM, which prevents me from using MythTV. Besides, NOTHING commercially available is anywhere near as nice as XBMC with a properly done HTPC is for a home theater experience. That, and ordering and ripping blu-rays into XBMC is more complicated and time delayed than simply entering the name of the movie into couchpotato and having a blu-ray rip of the movie be available one hour later.

Re:Doesn't help

[hazah]

Go ahead and try it, and get back to me. When you come up with a plausible scenario, we can continue.

Re:Doesn't help

[VortexCortex]

So, Let's continue...

However, to suggest that The Internet was not used by many as a gigantic, mostly unregulated store for pirated content is utterly ridiculous. Website links of a vast array of television shows and movies were present in essentially every streaming links website, now mostly replaced with other sites. Q/A Websites still have quite a few questions from naive users asking about how to find movies and tv shows on the Internet, along with numerous answers. Searching for warez and pirated books from prior years will come up with quite a few website links.

The Internet certainly had legitimate uses, but piracy was a major, major use. That may not have been a legitimate reason to shut it down (and certainly wasn't justification for the way it was done), but I don't think anyone can argue that The Internet, for example, didn't have much, much more pirated content than, say, TV or Movie Theaters.

If the DMCA, safe harbor provisions are meaningless, then we're all fucked.

Re:Doesn't help

[Anonymous Coward]

So what if I go into a store pick up the last copy of the latest release movie. I then wander around the store, carrying the disk, no one else can buy it. After this I get a phone call from my partner saying they've downloaded the film. So I go and put it back on the shelf, don't have to buy that now.

What's the difference? The store has deprived of the ability to sell that last copy of the movie for 90 minutes. So as you suggest I should pay a rental fee right? Everything is awesome right, no one has been deprived of anything that they rightfully deserved.

Re:Doesn't help

[Anonymous Coward]

Also replace department store with book store, and replace "watch movie" with "read entire book". And you would have exactly what Borders Bookstores here in Australia used to allow their customers to do.

Also my housemate often takes a portable dvd player with a movie when shopping. Her 4 year old son watches the movie while sitting in the shopping trolley. Never gets questioned about it. So its entirely possible she picked up said movie off the shelf. The numpty teenagers employed by the store wouldn't give two shits. People pull open products on the shelf all the time.

Re:Doesn't help

[Anonymous Coward]

But it wasn't even a deliberate action. I mean I bought lots of stuff from them, and when checking the receipt noticed that I was charged for said movie. And being an honest person, I took said product back to the store. I didn't watch it or anything and it wasn't even my fault that I hadn't paid for it.

Store couldn't sell it though.

Re:Doesn't help

[Anonymous Coward]

But why is there a problem with that? I just took a copy of it. Nothing wrong with that right? Its not like the store can't sell the original disk.

Re:Doesn't help

[gagol]

A tv with video output? I very honestly never saw that in my entire life. What is the point since TV is the final watching device?

Re:Doesn't help

[Redmancometh]

Irregardless isn't a word

Re:Doesn't help

[Redmancometh]

Irregardless isn't a word, but it is a big red flag of stupidity.

Re:Doesn't help

[adiposity]

So what if I go into a store pick up the last copy of the latest release movie. I then wander around the store, carrying the disk, no one else can buy it. After this I get a phone call from my partner saying they've downloaded the film. So I go and put it back on the shelf, don't have to buy that now.

What's the difference? The store has deprived of the ability to sell that last copy of the movie for 90 minutes. So as you suggest I should pay a rental fee right? Everything is awesome right, no one has been deprived of anything that they rightfully deserved.

The difference is, the store permits you to carry around their copy as part of the cost of running a store. They take the (small) chance that items picked up won't actually be purchased. The cost to them of you carrying it around for 90 minutes it minimal (probably zero in most cases, since they have enough stock to "float" the supply while you stupidly carry it around). For the last item, you could potentially cost them a sale, but if it is a sell-out item, then they will probably sell it shortly after.

All of which is irrelevant, because they are willing to lend you the movie while in the store as part of their business cost. That is their choice. That in no way extrapolates to any conclusion that stealing a disc does not result in lost income, or that downloading a digital copy does not deprive anyone of their copy, or that digital piracy is not the equivalent to theft.

Re:Doesn't help

[symbolset]

It doesn't matter what Megaupload was being used for, any more than you are responsible as a landlord for your cannibal tenant. What matters is: did Megaupload violate the law? It appears they did not.

Re:Doesn't help

[TractorBarry]

If you're alluding to ripping the disc then if it takes 90 minutes I'd be taking my DVD drive back. Should take no more than 5 to 10 minutes on a half decent machine.

Re:Doesn't help

[TractorBarry]

And praise "Bob" ! Eternal salvation or *TRIPLE* your money back :)

Re:Doesn't help

[Anonymous Coward]

Doubleposting annoying cunt is 3 words.

Re:Doesn't help

[flyneye]

I'm still burnt on my collection,incedentally, better than netflix offerings due to obscure titles and pure art.
So unless Lynch or Jordorowsky turn up something, I'm happy to work in my shop or game...
I actually boycott Disney as an enemy of civilizations and free men everywhere. Rated Z for no one. If I want propaganda, I'll watch the newsclowns.

Re:Doesn't help

[serviscope_minor]

Irregardless isn't a word, but it is a big red flag of stupidity.

Well, regardless of that, his point is still valid and well argued. He also didn't post it twice.

Re:Doesn't help

[hazah]

How does it make you feel when you see someone eating a grape at the grocery store? I sure as hell hope you've humanity left in you not to have that 85 year old dragged off into a cage.

Re:Doesn't help

[Goose In Orbit]

You can't even buy a TV with a video output anymore! They're illegal!

Where? News to me that bit of legislation...

I very honestly never saw that in my entire life. What is the point since TV is the final watching device?

Comes in rather handy if there's something on whilst you're not at home - or do all TVs come with built in DVD (or disk) recording now?

(Note: where's the <rhetorical> tag when you need one (or several)...?)

Re:Doesn't help

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you an idiot, or a troll? Regardless of the amount of time you took the physical copy, no one can play buy or use that copy until you return. Not to mention that you opened up the product!

Your analogies are absolutely abysmal, and I hope you were trolling.

Re:Doesn't help

[cheekyjohnson]

Well another way to look at it (and I AM a pirate btw, a very serial offender too, see my last post) is that when you shoplift from a store, all you're really doing is depriving them of profit.

You're completely depriving them of something that they had previously. When you infringe upon someone's copyright, not even that happens; instead, you, at most, deprive them of potential profit.

Re:Doesn't help

[Runaway1956]

Well, please excuse me. There are a handful of "words" used in my home town, which my teachers warned would always give our origins away. That was one of the non-words on the teacher's list. If I should ever get careless and use two or three of the others, you'll know where I grew up, within about 75 miles or so.

As pointed out by serviscope_minor - misuse of a word or non-word hardly negates my argument. I also note that you failed to refute my argument.

Have a nice day now!!!

Re:Doesn't help

[Anonymous Coward]

That's kind of like saying every body is a drunk driver because a few drink and drive. Or perhaps we should ban water because some people drown in water. Corporation had a law made that involved trying to get other corporations to stop infringing upon their products. Then the corporations got the idea to involve individual people in the same corporate law(behind closed doors with no representation) to make more money and control how consumers used their product. It got out of hand when corporations found out people didn't need them for the product no more and the corporate law is obsolete. Corporations stepped up the leverage by hiring lobbyist and bribing congressmen to enact extreme laws that causes the people to use civil disobedience against the laws that have been enacted recently. Corporation play name game PR in the media calling file sharer pirates but pirates and file shares are two totally separate animals. I think you could survive a visit from a file sharer but couldn't say the same for a visit from a pirate. Play it all you want they made up laws to make more money against the public and the public is fighting back. Don't think you are going to win in the long run against the public no matter how much money you throw at it and how many congressmen you have in your pocket.

Re:Doesn't help

[Anonymous Coward]

"Irrigardless"

That made my brain hurt.

Re:Doesn't help

[YodasEvilTwin]

No. The store has the right to kick you out or have you give up the disc, just like they have the right to not let you copy or play their shit in their store. The "why" (they're looking out for their monetary interests, which you'd "deprive" them of) aren't really relevant. If you download something you were never going to buy or rent, no one is affected in any fashion. That's a major difference. As for people who use piracy as an alternative to paying for things they would buy or rent otherwise, that's a much more complicated thing.

Re:Doesn't help

[YodasEvilTwin]

I was with you until the last bit. The nonsense about carrying around a copy certainly doesn't imply that downloading doesn't deprive anyone of their copy, but the latter is still true. No matter how many digital copies there are, physical copies won't go *poof* and disappear into the ether.

Re:Doesn't help

[YodasEvilTwin]

Being charged for something you take out of a store is normal. How the fuck does "honesty" come into play? It's not dishonest to keep something you paid for, and returning something you paid for isn't "honest".

Re:Doesn't help

[YodasEvilTwin]

Exactly. Theft is an immediate loss of (a) the property itself (b) all rights to the property (c) the potential revenue made from selling the property (d) any other uses of the property.

Uploading only deprives the rights holder of (b). Downloading deprives the rights holder of a small amount of (c) in addition to (b).

A single act of piracy is much less damaging than a single act of theft. The problem occurs due to the fact that piracy is much simpler to do and also get away. In aggregate, it might be worse (I don't know).

Re:Doesn't help

[YodasEvilTwin]

Retardedly conflating different definitions of the word "pirate" isn't an argument. Filesharers generally seem to embrace the word "pirate" so go fuck yourself.

Re:Doesn't help

[YodasEvilTwin]

You can't even spell a word ("word") you're looking at while typing it, you're not one to talk.

Re:Doesn't help

[Sun.Jedi]

They are, in fact, the crowd that believes they are entitled to your money; i.e. consumers OWE them, regardless of the content.

Re:Doesn't help

[Sun.Jedi]

I too have all but given up buying new movie content, unless there is something special or magical about it. My BRD collection is about 4 movies. I chalk up my much larger DvD collection to not knowing any better. Disney is on the same list as Sony and Walmart; I vote with my wallet, but it seems not many others do.

Re:Doesn't help

[niado]

Megaupload certainly had legitimate uses, but piracy was a major, major use.

The same could be said for nearly anything. For example: -VCRs certainly had legitimate uses, but piracy was a major, major use. -Firearms certainly had legitimate uses, but piracy was a major, major use. -Automobiles certainly had legitimate uses, but piracy was a major, major use. Maybe we should start banning everything that is used for piracy?

If you use a particular automobile or firearm illegally, it can certainly be confiscated. This does not cause a ban of all automobiles, just as megaupload's "crimes" did not cause a ban on all such sites.

Another difference is that Megaupload's business model was likely based on piracy, their legitimate use was a very small percentage of total use, and they would (admitted debatably) not even exist without it.

Re:Doesn't help

[Sun.Jedi]

It's not stupidity, its recon. Using the non-standard word in many mediums rather quickly reveals people with large sticks firmly wedged up their asses. These are usually people that can safely be ignored without any meaningful loss.

Re:Doesn't help

[hazah]

Of course there'd be one dumbass whose troll moderation finger is itchy. Hey retard, read the fucking argument (and this is OFF TOPIC).

Re:Doesn't help

[niado]

If the DMCA, safe harbor provisions are meaningless, then we're all fucked.

Megaupload likely did not qualify for safe harbor, based on the following sections of the DMCA:

17 USC 512 - a.4

no copy of the material made by the service provider in the course of such intermediate or transient storage is maintained on the system or network in a manner ordinarily accessible to anyone other than anticipated recipients, and no such copy is maintained on the system or network in a manner ordinarily accessible to such anticipated recipients for a longer period than is reasonably necessary for the transmission, routing, or provision of connections

17 USC 512 - c.1.

(A) does not have actual knowledge that the material or activity is infringing; (B) in the absence of such actual knowledge, is not aware of facts or circumstances from which infringing activity is apparent; or (C) upon obtaining such knowledge or awareness, acts expeditiously to remove, or disable access to, the material; (2) does not receive a financial benefit directly attributable to the infringing activity, in a case in which the service provider has the right and ability to control such activity;

Megaupload stored files for a substantial period of time, publicly available, seems to have had knowledge that the material was infringing, and seems to have generally ignored takedown requests.

Re:Doesn't help

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey bonch -- been a while.

Fuck off.

Re:Doesn't help

[Rakarra]

Of course there'd be one dumbass whose troll moderation finger is itchy. Hey retard, read the fucking argument (and this is OFF TOPIC).

Not the original moderator, but when you use phrases like "you are one dense motherfucker, aren't you?" then you're asking for a downmod. You are are correct, Troll is likely not the most appropriate moderation, "Flamebait" comes a little closer for needlessly insulting a poster who was honestly debating.

There's no need for personal insults here, please keep the discussions civil.

Re:Doesn't help

[adiposity]

You are right, and it should have read

"or change the fact that downloading a digital copy does not deprive anyone of their copy, or that digital piracy is not the equivalent to theft."

Re:Doesn't help

[mcgrew]

Dude, he was offering you free education. Do you have any idea how expensive tuition is these days? The word you wanted was "regardless", meaning without regard. "Irregardless," if it was a real word, would be saying exactly the opposite of what you were vainly trying to communicate.

It's kind of like "I could care less" when you're trying to convey that you don't care. It looks really stupid. Thank that gentleman who attempted to teach you something.

Re:Doesn't help

[Anonymous Coward]

Your logic fails in that the entire group of files were seized, *regardless* of whether they were being used legally or not.
By your logic, since pistols are 'likely' to be used in crimes, *all* pistols can be seized, and because cars are 'likely' to be used in crimes, *all* cars can be seized.

Re:Doesn't help

[Anonymous Coward]

Here, let me offer both of you some free education:

Irregardless *IS* a word, and is recognized as such by *many* dictionaries.;

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/irregardless
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/irregardless
http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/irregardless
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/irregardless
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/irregardless

It is a non-standard form, but it apparently dates back over a century now (1910).
So, irregardless of your own accuracy, you've just berated someone when you were the one in error. How does it feel?

Further discussion:
http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/irregardless.aspx

Re:Doesn't help

[anechoic]

"...take money away from content creators."

you are obviously *not* a content creator or you wouldn't make such a misinformed statement

Re:Doesn't help

[thoromyr]

i always like to point out that it *is* a word. Only morons who don't use dictionaries think it isn't.

Re:Doesn't help

[hazah]

Have you actually read the whole thread? This particular AC calls me stupid and and an idiot completely unprovoked, all the while making non-sencical arguments, pretty sure that's a far better candidate for the real flamebait mod. He was deliberatly twisting what people argued into an incomprehensible mess. I'm also fairly certain that he's a shill pushing an agenda. Everything about him makes him a dense motherfucker. Sometimes, you got to call a spade a spade.

Re:Doesn't help

[Anonymous Coward]

So can't copy in the store... but there's no problem at all doing it over the internet. Right got it.

Re:Doesn't help

[Anonymous Coward]

So then it should be perfectly fine to take it out of the store, watch it/copy it and then return it. The no physical copies went poof there. And why does anyone actually care about physical copies. We're talking about information that can be infinitely replicated. So what's the big deal with the loss of a single physical copy.

Re:Doesn't help

[Anonymous Coward]

The example was for something that wasn't paid for. ie the clerk missed scanning something.

Honesty comes into it when you go back to the score and return the object that wasn't paid. Or go back and pay for it.

Re:Doesn't help

[Anonymous Coward]

Bah just re-read the comment. And I managed to leave out the "n't" on wasn't. Kinda changed the whole thing.

Re:Doesn't help

[Anonymous Coward]

Really? Where? This is what I wrote:

"So then it would be fine for me to walk into a movie store and walk out with a Bluray of the latest release film as long as I bring it back approximately 90 minutes later. That'd be fine right? After all, the store hasn't been deprived of anything and I haven't even taken a copy of the film, unless you're going to argue about the imperfect copy stored in my memory."

And this is what you responded with the comment about being a "dense motherfucker". Never wrote the previous comment either. Although kind of agree. Bit hard for music to separate us from the animals... I mean there's whale song... birds sing...

So now you're just making things up. Also not any form of shill, I completely disagree with the MPAA's stance on Megaupload being taken down, and I hope that all the actions of said take down get reversed, and that all companies damaged by this action are given compensation for any losses incurred.

I also find the pedantic arguments that "piracy is not stealing" really stupid, because it basically comes down to semantics rather than having any real substance. Piracy does deprive content creators (and those who support the creation of content) of rightfully earned income from people who consume what they created, whereby that consumption may be watching a film or reading a book. "I wouldn't have paid for it anyway" is a terrible excuse, if you wouldn't have paid for it, then you don't get the privilege of being entertained by said product.

I also think that the MPAA's calculations of damages are completely ridiculous. As yes, some people download a movie, and then go and pay for it, and sometimes they encourage friends to go and buy it as well. So sometimes unauthorised downloading can result in additional sales, and be good marketing. But you don't get to make that decision.

Re:Doesn't help

[rioki]

Here is one and it is well defined. You got to a magazine sand and read a magazine but don't buy it. You do not take the magazine away, so there is no theft. You deprive the owner of the magazine stand from his sale, he may object of you reading but not buying and as a result send you away. But that is a different law, it is his private property and he may decide what happens. Nevertheless reading the article without buying it is nowhere defined as illegal.

I am not making any assumption about digital goods and copyright law, but the store example is well defined in legal practice. The "you would not steal a CD" line is just broken.

Re:Doesn't help

[rioki]

That is actually encouraged in some book stores, they have a comfy reading area or even a fully fledged coffee shop in the book store. If you are dedicated enough you could read entire books without ever buying one. But that is a risk they take, because they make more sales this way.

Re:Doesn't help

[hazah]

Please stop being stupid on purpose. Your shitty attempts at derailing the logic have failed. Your ideas were rejected. You have nothing to argue with except rhetoric that is not, at all, based in the relm of reality.

Re:Doesn't help

[syleishere]

Well said that's how all the people feel on issue, real question is how we can go about opposing these corporations, just because a group of 50-500 with alot of money think they are self-riteous, how long can they stand against the whole world. I remember RIAA tried to stop peer file sharing in vancouver, canada one time, and smartly we told them to go to hell, why are USA judges so scared to stand for the people.

Re:Doesn't help

[hazah]

Alright, I've made a mistake. It happens. Sorry. I honestly thought you were the same AC. And if you "kind of agree" then you've missed the point. I never stated that it's the only thing that separates us. It's a reference to the entierty of culture, so nit-picking on that statement really seems bizzare to me, and shallow.

Again, it's NOT just semantics, and saying it over and over isn't going to change that. Your definition of depravation is conflated with intent, which had been shown to not correlate statistically. Pirates, in general pay for what they like, they just want to know what they're spending their money on. There is no such thing as "rightfully earned income". You have the right to create whatever you want, and I have the right to not value it at all. In fact I can ask you to pay me to look at it, if I so choose. When you rely on a law to force others to provide you with income, then what that really means is that what you provide is worthless otherwise. On the flip side, people still pay good money to go to concerts, to watch movies, and shows. Why? Because they value it, and they do not have to be forced to pay, they do it on their own accord.

So no, it's not the same thing. Not by a long shot.

Re:Doesn't help

[C18H27NO3]

I've been entertaining the idea that if I were to ever download a movie and it was something I enjoyed I'd cut a check and send it off to the actual content creator, bypassing the **AAs altogether.

* The content creators deserve the $ provided they're putting out quality stuff.

* MPAA/RIAA deserve nothing. Flawed logic?

Yeah right...

[staltz]

It was a successful operation in the same way as arresting the whole world prevents crime.

Re:Yeah right...

[pixelpusher220]

Also in the same way that Return of the Jedi didn't actually make a profit according to the LucasFilms...

Re:Yeah right...

[Dyinobal]

Hollywood accounting would make Al Capone roll in his grave.

Re:Yeah right...

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey, at least back then they actually busted people for tax fraud.

These days, you can sell overpriced services to yourself to guarantee yourself a loss. Because everyone else participates in the same scam, so it's not "overpriced" any more... right.

Re:Yeah right...

[Anonymous Coward]

It was a successful operation in the same way as arresting the whole world prevents crime.

Not only is that not funny (random internet banter used to be funny in moderation, now everyone tries to be funny with uninsightful one liners) but aside from that youre statement has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand. Plus how exactly does shutting down one service equal arresting the entire world? Maybe if they shut down the entire internet that comparrison might make sense but they didnt, they shut down a uploader site that made up about .009% of the internet. So maybe if you said "Shutting them down was like arresting everyone in a tiny mexican town" then it might make a little more sense, it still wouldnt be funny but atleast the comparrison would be correct.

Megaupload hosted a metric shitload of copyrighted material that far out matched uncopyrighted material so they shut it down because well, it was copyrighted and well copyright holders didnt give permission. But internet users defend megaload by basically approving of a site thats primary useage is stealing things but when the topic of piracy comes up all of those same people cant wait to say they hate pirates and would never steal anything.

Next time you want to post something, dont.

Re:Yeah right...

[Doctor_Jest]

But internet users defend megaload by basically approving of a site thats primary useage is stealing things

You might get more people to believe your tripe if you stopped calling copyright infringement theft. It's not theft. Even the MPAA can't legally claim that. It's a TORT. So get off your MPAA high horse... and the next time you want to post something... shoot yourself in the face.

Re:Yeah right...

[Anonymous Coward]

Hollywood accounting would make Al Capone roll in his grave.

Actually, it'd make him quite proud, seeing as Hollywood and the music business are still run by organised crime syndicates of the sort that Alphonse was part of setting up. He'd be more than amused at the way they can openly bribe government officials globally and get away with it.

legitimate businessmen of the world unite.

Re:Yeah right...

[Anonymous Coward]

You're boring AND wrong.

Re:Yeah right...

[BlueParrot]

You can do quite a bit more than that as Colbert showed.

Step1: Donate to charity controlled by your friend/uncle/misstress
Step2: Claim tax deduction
Step3: Charity buys service from shell company A
Step4: Shell company A donates to SuperPAC
Step5: Super pac spends a small fraction of acquired money on campaigning to seem legitimate
Step6: SuperPAC closes and sends the money to shell company B
Step7: Shell company B send money to shell company C, not even the IRS needs to know
Step8: Enjoy your tax free income.

Re:Yeah right...

[YodasEvilTwin]

Step9: Enjoy the extra cash stolen from taxpayers (refer to Step2).

Re:Yeah right...

[niado]

You can do quite a bit more than that as Colbert showed.

Step1: Donate to charity controlled by your friend/uncle/misstress Step2: Claim tax deduction Step3: Charity buys service from shell company A Step4: Shell company A donates to SuperPAC Step5: Super pac spends a small fraction of acquired money on campaigning to seem legitimate Step6: SuperPAC closes and sends the money to shell company B Step7: Shell company B send money to shell company C, not even the IRS needs to know Step8: Enjoy your tax free income.

I like this, but the logic falls apart on inspection. How do shell companies A, B, and C avoid paying taxes on their profits? They could use hollywood accounting to make their profits appear nonexistent, but that would defeat the purpose of the whole 8-step shuffle. Might as well just hollywood it from the beginning.

Re:Yeah right...

[Anonymous Coward]

The SuperPAC is what makes or breaks political cantidates to look the other way. If you don't play the game then you will not survive the next primary where some nobody suddenly outspends you 10/1 and the SuperPACs run nonstop attack ads against you on every channel, news paper and radio station in your district.

Welcome to post "Citizens United" politics in the USA, land of the free to do what your told and companies are people, while humans are not.

Re:Yeah right...

[Dyinobal]

They don't pay because you write them a letter telling them what to do with the money, and since you do that the legal fiction is it was never theres so it doesn't show up as profits on their books or some such nonsense.

Re:Yeah right...

[Anonymous Coward]

agreed. MPAA is shutting down P2P and there are a lot of good guys in the mix. FRIENDLY FIRE!

Thanks

[Anonymous Coward]

I live in Canada, and I'm very proud that we have so many torrent sites (I didn't know that). From all of us who live up here: fuck you MPAA.

Re:Thanks

[Anonymous Coward]

Je dirais même plus: fuck you la MPAA.

Re:Thanks

[mcneely.mike]

Ya, eh! Like fuck you, you MPAA guys... we hate you, eh!

Hey, Doug, there's a mouse in my Elsinore..........

....

Re:Thanks

[Anonymous Coward]

Trust Harpeur to put an end to that soon....

Re:Thanks

[Anonymous Coward]

"Harpeur"... nice one, I'll have to remember that.

Re:Thanks

[Anonymous Coward]

I live in Canada, and I'm very proud that we have so many torrent sites (I didn't know that). From all of us who live up here: fuck you MPAA.

Yeah. Take off, eh. Hosers!

Re:Thanks

[quax]

Harper already put an end to it. The copyright protection law passed as was absolutely clear would happen once the conservatives have a majority.

The MPAA is already gearing up to bring downloader lawsuits up North.

Betcha the torrent sites will be targeted as well.

Elections have consequences.

Re:Thanks

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe it's just a lot of the sites I use, but did you also notice a lot of the shows are being ripped here too? A lot of stuff I watch have CTV, Global and CityTV logos in the bottom right. There's more that don't have the station but have the Canadian rating system logo show up.

If I had the same access legitimately as I did from pirating, I'd be willing to pay out the ass for TV. I guess the studios just don't have any interest in my money, though.

They can try all they want to shut down sites and spy on us, but we'll just find more ways around it like we always do. The studios may have the money, but the pirates are Ahead by a century (the thread is too Canadian to not say it) in terms of tech.

Re:Thanks

[Quantos]

I doubt that it will fly up here in Canada. First, we pay a tax on all recordable media, so there is no such thing as piracy in Canada - unless you are downloading more than just music. Second, this is regulated by the CRTC, not the government. Third, someone tried this approach in the past and the court of appeals threw it out. So good luck to you MPAA.

Re:Thanks

[Dorkmaster Flek]

Also, the copyright bill recently passed, though it has terrible digital lock provisions, does actually differentiate between commercial and non-commercial infringement and caps the latter at $5000 for all infringement up to the point the lawsuit was filed. Also also, that section of the bill contains explicit instructions to judges for considering statutory damage amounts to take into account the nature of the infringement and how widely it was used, and they can drop it as low as $100. That's not even worth the costs of filing the suit. This severely limits the likelihood that people will cop to settlements for thousands of dollars to avoid a trial. There are some silver linings.

Re:Thanks

[Anonymous Coward]

No, they'll settle for a mere $2000 when being threatened with a potential $5000. Because after all, the letters they sent out will try to make it sound like the $5000 is by far and above the most likely outcome of the case, making your mere $2000 seem like a steal in comparison.

I have no doubt in my mind that these lawsuits are coming up North to us... it's just a matter of time. I give it 6 months absolute dead tops.

Re:Thanks

[quax]

AC wrote:

No, they'll settle for a mere $2000 when being threatened with a potential $5000. Because after all, the letters they sent out will try to make it sound like the $5000 is by far and above the most likely outcome of the case, making your mere $2000 seem like a steal in comparison.

I have no doubt in my mind that these lawsuits are coming up North to us... it's just a matter of time. I give it 6 months absolute dead tops.

Have to agree with the AC here. This is all about scare tactics. The law is by far not as bad as down South but it hands them a big enough stick to scare the crap out of recreational downloaders.

Re:Thanks

[Anonymous Coward]

Jeez, don't be saying that! Quax was on an anti-conservative rant!

Re:Thanks

[Dorkmaster Flek]

Well then we just have to get the word out that if this starts happening, you don't settle. You're far more likely to have the amount reduced to a reasonable level. I know I for one will be hounding the ministries responsible for this bill about intervening if this shit starts going down.

Re:Thanks

[quax]

Still going to cost a lot of leg-work and nerves. The enforcers are counting on this to wear out the regular consumers. Since they have deep pockets and are committed to the fight it will be a long hard slog.

Puke

[Swampash]

"The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) has declared that the Megaupload shutdown earlier this year has been a great success"

Never mind the fact that the shutdown itself was conducted illegally, and that thousands of legitimate users and businesses were harmed.

Fuck you MPAA. You're the boy with his finger plugging a hole in a dike, and the water's pouring over the top.

Re:Puke

[Anonymous Coward]

Never mind the fact that the shutdown itself was conducted illegally, and that thousands of legitimate users and businesses were harmed.

What are you talking about? It proved that they control the world's law enforcement AND can act with absolute impunity to the Little People(tm)! That's what makes it a complete resounding success to them!

Re:Puke

[Anonymous Coward]

was conducted illegally,

With you so far. The whole thing was a clusterfsck.

and that thousands of legitimate users and businesses were harmed.

Not buying this though.

Well, OK, perhaps thousands. But percentage-wise, what would you guess as to number of legit files vs infringing files?

F*** you MPAA.

With you here again.

Re:Puke

[cgimusic]

Well given that nearly half of the files on Megaupload had never been downloaded that makes a good percentage non-infringing. http://torrentfreak.com/megaupload-search-warrants-ignored-massive-non-infringing-use-121118/

Re:Puke

[jamesh]

The day is coming where it will occur to one of their accountants that they could drastically reduce piracy by simply killing all their customers.

Re:Puke

[squiggleslash]

Doesn't mean a thing, they could all be DVD Rips of The Phantom Menace.

Re:Puke

[hazah]

... till bullets really start flying.

Re:Puke

[hazah]

Could? Sure. Likely? WTF are you smoking? That many people, with that much illegal content, not under any suspicion? Don't confuse probability with possibility.

Re:Puke

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, it's the uploading that usually gets you in big trouble. The downloading is too common for anyone to bother with. Doesn't matter who else downloaded it, it matters if they uploader had the right to copy it.

Re:Puke

[Anonymous Coward]

... till bullets really start flying.

Yep, then we get to see what the might of an army armed with knowledge gleaned from millions of smartphones can do against a bunch of lightly-armed smug nerds who don't even have full public support yet! Then that'll CEMENT their power!

Re:Puke

[hazah]

Are you saying the government has a grip on every single American soldier such that they will shoot into a civilian population inside the U.S.A. without any sort of concern nor second thought?

Re:Puke

[geminidomino]

Maybe not "every" but I find it hard to imagine they don't have a grip on "enough."

Figure it this way... since the selection of sociopaths willing to take orders is pretty slim, "dehumanizing the enemy" is going to be a staple of training. Combine that with the fact that you've got good chunks of both red and blue teams of idiots ready to declare the others "terrorists" and "traitors" and you've got a recipe for some potent sublimation there.

Re:Puke

[gagol]

I bet you watch the simpsons...

Re:Puke

[Anonymous Coward]

Never mind the fact that the shutdown itself was conducted illegally, and that thousands of legitimate users and businesses were harmed.
 
That kind of is their definition of success. It's not really about the "pirating"... it was about artists legitimately making money without the gatekeepers. That had to be stopped.

Re:Puke

[Anonymous Coward]

The US Police already do this.

No need for the army.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ca0XLMDFuPw

captcha = 'suppress'

Re:Puke

[cgimusic]

Fairly sure that doesn't matter. If you don't share it then isn't it a legitimate backup?

Re:Puke

[jamesh]

I bet you watch the simpsons...

Curiously, thanks to MythTV i'm watching The Simpsons right now. Mr Burns has just taken free donuts away.

Re:Puke

[gagol]

One of the latest episode depicts a mba being a mob boss replacement... have fun watching it!

Re:Puke

[Anonymous Coward]

Most of them would probably do it. BTW, Stanley Milgram says hi!

Re:Puke

[dywolf]

then you're a fool and know nothing about the military itself nor the people in it.

Re:Puke

[geminidomino]

Just the ones I talk to on a regular basis (mostly retired Marines, by count). Fool or not, I haven't seen any indication that they'd lean your way rather than mine.

Unless you're questioning my assertion that they're not actually sociopaths.

Re:Puke

[Anonymous Coward]

But, without downloads that upload wasn't distribution, which is *actually* what copyright covers.

Re:Puke

[Anonymous Coward]

You obviously didn't read the article ... 15000+ American soldiers were using the site to upload photos and videos to share with their families back home. That alone should tell you there's more to the picture.

Yes, yes it was.

[TemperedAlchemist]

It was destructive to legitimate file sharing too.

And illegal, very illegal.

Re:Yes, yes it was.

[Anonymous Coward]

There's plenty of file sharing services both more and less sketchy than Megaupload was. DropBox (using the public folder feature) and Box.net are the two more reputable ones I can name off the top of my head. People use them because there's no other easy way to transfer files that won't fit in e-mail attachments. The focus on Megaupload was just because it was one of the biggest and kept to the letter of the law on copyright.

Re:Yes, yes it was.

[drkstr1]

Now, I tend think Slashdot is generally just pro-piracy because they want to stick it corporations--they want all the music for free, all the movies for free, all the software for free, like some sort of God-given entitlement. Face it folks, you do have to pay for content.

I think for a lot of people, piracy is less about getting something for free, and more about a refusal to continue playing by a set rules that are counterproductive to the progression of society as a whole. People are fed up with this whole concept of "Intellectual Property," and it's spreading more and more every year. The media empire is drastically attempting to sway our thinking back to the old ways, but they are fighting an uphill battle, as people are beginning to realize what is best for the media empire is not what is best for the progress of society. We no longer need IP to "force" us to create! The internet has made it quite evident that it is human nature to explore new ideas, create, and to be creative. What we need more than ever is access to free flowing (uncensored) ideas and information from all over the globe. This more than anything will bring us together as a species, and allow us to progress in a direction that is not just ideal for the privileged few, but to every human being on this planet. I strongly believe that Intellectual Property is counterproductive to this goal.

It was a good ride, but it's time for Big Media to go. Let's start by abolishing all concepts of Intellectual Property, and simply make plagiarism illegal instead.

Re:Yes, yes it was.

[GoatCheez]

The only time I ever used Mega services was for legitimate files. If I ever wanted anything illegitimate I'd search for a torrent. People forget a VERY common use case: I need to post large content on the internet for download by a lot of people, and I don't want to use my own hosting bandwidth. Wallpaper pack? Recordings from class? Video of a friend's concert? The list goes on...

Re:Yes, yes it was.

[hazah]

Few and far between? You seem to know so much, why don't you cough some numbers instead of "fancy" quotation marks around words you wish to mock? You're implying guilt, so lets see the proof. Not to mention that it's unacceptable (this is not up for compromize) for civilized society to blame an innocent for being at the wrong place at the wrong time.

Don't deny that you are accusing and condemning without providing a shred of justification. You are NOT smarter than the court system, AC. You've not enough to be able to back that claim up.

Refrain from telling others what to do and how to do it. You are insignificant, and your advice is petty and in bad taste. You promote fear and insecurity amonst the people, thus are a disease upon humanity.

You're small and you're thinking in small terms. Ironically, they have nothing to do with the reality of the situation. Read the GPL, at least once before you so arrogantly stick a reference to it into the paragraph I'm about to address.

It must have really hurt your head to fall off of that cloud you've spent a decade hovering in. A strawman so fragile, I hope you already feel incredibly stupid for posting anything at all.

Re:Yes, yes it was.

[shentino]

Suppose I said that the legal process that was blatantly bypassed was designed to protect innocent bystanders?

Re:Yes, yes it was.

[Anonymous Coward]

You my friend, are of a generation that seemingly has no idea that people will not fund things if they do not get money in return. Intellectual property has it's place. Economic gouging does not. Grow up.

Re:Yes, yes it was.

[jedidiah]

> The "legitimate" file sharing was few and far between

That is really no more than wishful thinking on your part.

You want to demonize the victim here in order to cloud the fact that this was all highly illegal and contrary to the basic legal principles of both nations involved.

Even the guys that pulled the trigger at the Boston Massacre had rights as Americans or Englishmen.

Re:Yes, yes it was.

[jedidiah]

Art is much better when it is done for it's own sake rather than crass materialism.

As the other guy said:

> We no longer need IP to "force" us to create!

Re:Yes, yes it was.

[KingMotley]

Anything can be considered Art.

Re:Yes, yes it was.

[drkstr1]

Anything can be considered Art.

Yeah, that's what's so cool about it. Endless possibilities.

Re:Yes, yes it was.

[ultrasawblade]

Maybe the time for indirectly funded content has passed.

Maybe it's time those who want content should fund it directly and get what they really want, rather than content industries herding people together through marketing and lawsuits and delivering homogenized, controlled content that often caters to the lowest common denominator.

Re:Yes, yes it was.

[fredprado]

You are 100% right. That is why there was no Art, Math or Science before copyright was created a few centuries ago. Oh, wait! Err... Maybe not...

Re:Yes, yes it was.

[Scorpinox]

I was trying to root an old android device and put a custom ROM on it, and guess what? Most of the files were hosted on megaupload. I ended up spending more time looking for the files hosted on other sites than I spent actually messing with rooting.

I don't expect the kind, awesome people who created the rooting tools to check on stuff they uploaded 3 years ago and make sure links aren't broken; it would be nice if there was at least one place where you could safely store public files that won't be shut down. It's just like that older xkcd comic, with as awesome as the internet is, just transferring files around is still so frustratingly difficult sometimes.

Re:Yes, yes it was.

[gagol]

You [sir/mam] should take a course in art history... until then, please shut up.

Re:Yes, yes it was.

[KingMotley]

You sir, are an asshat. You are probably referring to the visual arts, however, almost anything can be considered art by definition depending on the observers opinion. Telling someone to shut up is not only rude, but shows your ignorance when someone points out something that you choose to ignore out of ignorance.

Re:Yes, yes it was.

[gagol]

Art is a process by an artist to convey a message or an emotion through some kind of medium for a given public. Ex: you taking a shit is not art. Please stop talking through your hat.

Re:Yes, yes it was.

[KingMotley]

Art is a process by an artist to convey a message or an emotion through some kind of medium for a given public.

Nope. Art doesn't necessarily have to convey anything. Nor does it necessarily have to be for a given public. Art isn't necessarily a process either. So all you've said is the guy who made something considered art could be called an artist. Everything else is wrong. But nice try.

A small quote from Stanford, which I will for this conversation consider a higher authority than random internet guy who likes to call people names:

Whether art can be defined has also been a matter of controversy. The philosophical usefulness of a definition of art has also been debated.

Perhaps you need to attend a better school, go back to one, or ask your school for a refund.

Re:Yes, yes it was.

[Anonymous Coward]

IP -> Who cares.
But movies STILL require money and time to make. So they would still have to be compensated somehow.

Re:Yes, yes it was.

[Anonymous Coward]

Copyright and plagiarism are essentially the same thing. In fact plagiarism is more limiting than copyright. Granted we don't need IP. Without some form of IP there is nothing stopping others from selling your works giving you no profit. Now that said I do believe that the mpaa is abusing something that is ment to protect our works. The answer is not killing copyright, but insted previnting it's abuse.

Re:Yes, yes it was.

[gagol]

Philosophically speaking, art is undefinable. In practice, lines have to be drawn... Usage and study of aestheticism to convey messages and/or emotions.

Re:Yes, yes it was.

[gagol]

For reference: xforddictionaries.com/definition/english/art?q=art

Re:Yes, yes it was.

[jimicus]

You are 100% right. That is why there was no Art, Math or Science before copyright was created a few centuries ago. Oh, wait! Err... Maybe not...

There were an awful lot of things that did not exist a few centuries ago that probably couldn't have developed without some sort of copyright. Off the top of my head:

  - Pre-recorded music, particularly before it became possible to do all your editing on a computer. Though even today, studio equipment costs money, editing and distribution costs money. Maybe not as much as it used to, but it still costs money.
      - You'd be surprised how many talented musicians - and I mean real musicians who play instruments and actually sing, not Nicki Minaj - started out sounding pretty terrible and only really became any good because of years of hard work put in by them and those around them. Some of the early Blondie recordings are absolutely dire. I'm not saying that could have been done without copyright protection, but while there's a lot of people in the music industry who probably would produce music for its own sake, there's also a hell of a lot of people who are doing what they do because they've got mouths to feed and a mortgage to pay. Quite often those people don't actually produce music but they are important - for every accountant running a record label who frankly we can live without, there's hundreds of people involved in production.
  - Books, particularly fiction. It's not just a matter of typing a few thousand words out, there's plenty of editors out there will attest (or more accurately won't attest, at least not in a very public forum) that even some of the best writers make howling mistakes in their work which were it not for the editing process would probably prevent their work ever seeing the light of day. The editor needs to be paid just as the author does, but the editor doesn't get royalties.
  - TV and film - same story. For every creative person who would do it for fun and might make just as good a living out of, say, patronage as they do out of royalties, there's a dozen people who wouldn't get patronage, wouldn't get royalties, but you still need them in order to turn an idea into something a few million people can watch on a Saturday night.
  - A **lot** of medical research. A few centuries ago, some quack would develop some sort of goop that looked disgusting and tasted worse, flogged it as a cure for all maladies and that was it. Those olde-tyme style posters you see with some sort of product advertised as the cure for everything from backache to impotence? That Simpsons episode where Grampa and Homer hit the road selling their tonic as something to spice up your sex life? They were pretty close to what medicine looked like and how it was sold.

Of course these remedies seldom did the remotest bit of good; usually the only person to benefit would be the man who sold it. Today most of those quack remedies are gone, replaced with a system that is infinitely better at developing effective medicine. But that system comes at a cost: it can easily take ten years to get a drug to market and involve hundreds of people, all of whom need to be paid.

Is the system as it stands perfect? No, of course not. It has inefficiencies, it has middlemen who really do add negligible value and charge a lot of money for the privilege. But to claim you could throw out the whole lot today and the world would be a much better place tomorrow is IMV a very blinkered approach.

Re:Yes, yes it was.

[serviscope_minor]

I need to post large content on the internet for download by a lot of people, and I don't want to use my own hosting bandwidth.

I actually found it useful in the opposite sense, since the downloader pays. I was doing some data processing which took a lot of data in and output, naturally, much less.

People could send me data by uploading it to megaupload (quick and easy) and then sending me the link. Since I was the downloader, I only had to pay once, and I could download it.

I ended up resorting to it after too many users had trouble with FTP uploads, either through PEBKAC errors or loony firewalling rules. Also, I started using a lot of space. With megaupload, I paid a small amount once and I could be sent vast quantities of data.

It was actually one of my users who offerd to send it that way first.

It was very good while it lasted and for me 100% legit, easy to use and very effective.

Re:Yes, yes it was.

[Threni]

> it would be nice if there was at least one place where you could safely store public
> files that won't be shut down.

Google Drive. DropBox. Perhaps the MS one, perhaps there are others. None of these have that stupid javascript nonsense where you have to wait 90 second, view ad for gambling websites etc. I'm not really with you with the XKCD thing is; brilliant as that site is, for downloaders you don't need to create an account. (Obviously you need to create an account as an uploader - I don't see a way around that, nor have a problem with it).

Re:Yes, yes it was.

[Threni]

Lines don't need to be drawn in defining art. Why would they?

John Cage's chance music doesn't necessarily convey emotion or a message - it just is. A lot of visual art is the same. What message does Kafka's The Trial convey. It's possibly my favourite book, but I wouldn't say it was meant to mean anything, and I don't think the author went to the great trouble it took to create with the intention of simply stimulating an emotion or two.

I don't know what information or emotion you're attempting to provoke with you last sentence, as I cannot parse it.

Re:Yes, yes it was.

[Anonymous Coward]

When I was 14 pirating PSX games it was about getting stuff for free.

Then after I graduated university and started earning a living I was happy to pay for all my content.

Now I've gone back to pirating for the reasons you've mentioned. I can't get what I want in the format I want by going through the legitimate channels. I even paid for netflix for a year where I didn't even touch it just to support the damn thing but eventually had to cancel because of the lack of content (netflix canada)

I'm practically BEGGING the industry to take my money but apparently the only people who want it are Valve.

Re:Yes, yes it was.

[gagol]

If anything and everything is art, why have a word for it? Why not just call it "things" or "stuff"?

Re:Yes, yes it was.

[Anonymous Coward]

But to claim you could throw out the whole lot today and the world would be a much better place tomorrow is IMV a very blinkered approach.

Wrong. Anyone who cares about freedom would want to toss it out completely. It's up to the businesses themselves to come up with a way to make money, not ask the government to stop people from copying data using their own equipment.

Re:Yes, yes it was.

[fredprado]

Oh there certainly was. Which means we did not stay put in the last centuries. The world wasn't a barren place as you suggest though. Most of the art produced by humanity was produced before copyright, including books and novels. Most of the advanced in math too. Science and medicine advanced far more in wars than because copyright and such, although I have to admit that medical science benefited from patents (but again not from copyright).

Copyright beneficial effects are highly contestable. And whatever benefiticial effects it MAY have caused in the past are not true or needed anymore in the present.

Re:Yes, yes it was.

[Threni]

Not sure if serious... anything can be art, doesn't mean everything is art.

Re:Yes, yes it was.

[LoRdTAW]

I would say its more about convenience. Many movies I used to download were simply not easily available outside of renting/buying the DVD/VHS. Even if it was only available on DVD/VHS I did not care to buy it because how many times would I actually watch it? Maybe once or twice. It wasn't worth the 10-20 bucks for the physical media because I would watch it once then let it sit on a shelf and collect dust for the rest of its life. A bad investment if you ask me. TV series are sometimes worth buying because you get more for your money and some shows are so great you could watch it over and over a hundred times and not get bored.

Movie channels on cable are not worth it because the schedule is canned and any movies I would like to watch are never or rarely on. Sure there are some great series like Bill Mar, Dexter and Game of Thrones but its not worth the $300+ your paying per year for those channels.

Netflix and HULU will hopefully offer a more sane method of watching movies and TV shows that are/were hard to find. But the catalogs are still lacking. I went to the BBC iPlayer the other day and searched for The Young Ones, Fawlty Towers, Keeping up Appearances and Black Adder. Found nothing. WTF. If Netflix suddenly carried all of the TV shows and movies I would like to watch I would easily shell out $50+ per month to watch everything I want commercial free and uncensored. I would dump cable.

In the end its all about ease of access. I want to watch what I want, when I want, where I want and how I want. I pray for they day when I can pull out my tablet and watch Fawlty Towers then an old cheesy movie like the Golden Voyage of Sinbad and then something more modern like Its always Sunny in Philadelphia. That does not exist as of today and the reason why people still download. I stopped downloading only because everything I would like to watch is already on a disk array, the rest is on my DVR or borrowed/given to me by a friend.

Movie theaters are the last place on earth I would want to be. The last time I went was because I knew i was getting laid afterward. Fuck theaters.

Re:Yes, yes it was.

[Anonymous Coward]

Now, I tend think Slashdot is generally just pro-piracy because they want to stick it corporations--they want all the music for free, all the movies for free, all the software for free, like some sort of God-given entitlement. Face it folks, you do have to pay for content.

"Intellectual property" is an immoral property right, just like slavery is.

You comment could be easily converted to a pro-slavery comment, exposing the immorality:

"Now, I tend think Slashdot is generally just pro-abolition because they want to stick it to Southern land-owners. Face it folks, these slave owners paid good money for their slaves, and you can't just take their property away from them."

The analogy is an extremely strong one. Slavery prevents someone from benefiting from their own physical labor. "Intellectual property" prevents someone from benefiting from their own intellectual labor because someone else thought of it first.

Both are deeply offensive and shocking to the conscience. You're not offended or shocked by "intellectual property" because of a lifetime of brainwashing by society -- in exactly the same way that reasonable men of the early 1800s were not offended or shocked by slavery.

Re:Yes, yes it was.

[Sun.Jedi]

There are movies out there the studios should be paying people to watch (not the other way around) because they are just that bad. Do those people need to be compensated as well? If you answer with something along the lines of compensated with a shovel to the face, I agree.

Re:Yes, yes it was.

[Anonymous Coward]

I think for a lot of people on Slashdot,

FTFY.
Seriously, don't extrapolate your filter bubble onto the general population.

Re:Yes, yes it was.

[Anonymous Coward]

I'll give you some hints:
Prerecorded Music: Created and distributed *before* copyright applied to audio
Books (even popular fiction of its time) existed *LONG* before copyright.
TV and film: Created after copyright. Their propagation, however, had little to do with copyright, and more to do with patent wars/advertising. Also, copyright when film (moving pictures) were invented really only protected against *exact* copies. You could do a scene-for-scene, line-for-line, remake of someone else's film and there were no legal issues with it (unlike today). (See Steamboat Bill and Steamboat Willie for an example.)
Medical research: That would be *patents*, not copyright. (And many of that useless 'goop' formulas were patented, too.)

Re:Yes, yes it was.

[nemesisrocks]

Now, I tend think Slashdot is generally just pro-piracy because they want to stick it corporations--they want all the music for free, all the movies for free, all the software for free, like some sort of God-given entitlement. Face it folks, you do have to pay for content.

For us folks down in Australia, it's less about "getting stuff for free", and more about "getting stuff". A large problem with the current distribution model is content is locked to particular geographic regions -- while consumers have moved well beyond this in their mind. We buy physical products off the Internet from all over the world -- how is content any different?

Due to the licensing and distribution models, TV shows and movies that come out in the US, often take months -- even years -- to make their way down under. Die Hard 4 for example, released June 2007, took two months before it was ever aired in Australia. Many TV shows won't air until the following year.

Checks my SickBeard and CouchPotato

[Jonah Hex]

Looks like I'm watching anything I want, when I want, without the MPAA even slowing me down. Wow, even regional restrictions are gone, as I watch shows and movies from all over the world immediately instead of waiting for a Region 1 release. Thanks Open Source software and Hackers like me for inventing the future of entertainment. MPAA give it up and start paying for decent product placement in shows, fuck commercials. - HEX

Re:Checks my SickBeard and CouchPotato

[Anonymous Coward]

Agree, love my Sickbeard + XBMC htpc setup, although the streaming addons have gotten so good I use sickbeard less and less(why bother using up hard drive space).

"Yet the MPAA says there is still work to be done, identifying sites that make available to downloaders 'unauthorized copies of high-quality, recently-released content and in some cases, coordinate the actual upload and download of that content.' Here's the list of sites, including where they are hosted: Extratorrent (Ukraine), IsoHunt (Canada), Kickass Torrents (Canada), Rutracker (Russia), The Pirate Bay (Sweden), Torrentz (Canada), and Kankan (China)."

Really? Torrent sites are still on the top of there list of sites to shut down? People are still using torrents that much? Or is it just that torrents are the only thing they can really keep track of semi reliably?

Re:Checks my SickBeard and CouchPotato

[Formorian]

I do the same thing, but I think they will turn their attention to usenet at some point in the future and use Child Porn as an excuse.

IE see State of NY. They made all ISP's discontinue access to USENET because of Child porn.http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-9964895-38.html only 88 newsgroups found with child porn, yet all 3 ISP's used it as an "excuse" to cut off either completely or all alt.* newsgroups.

Just saying, don't think usenet won't be focus'd next, and they will use child porn as an excuse.

Re:Checks my SickBeard and CouchPotato

[Anonymous Coward]

What newsgroup providers do you like?

Re:Checks my SickBeard and CouchPotato

[Jonah Hex]

I actually use Torrents with both Sickbeard and Couchpotato instead of Newsgroups, and it works fairly well. Of course the MPAA can play whack-a-mole shutting down sites that these software's use, but all it takes is a quick update and I'm using whatever new sites pop up. And with both making use of anonymous proxies to get the torrents, even country restrictions to certain sites don't apply. - HEX

This was a triumph.

[fragtag]

I'm making a note here: HUGE SUCCESS. It's hard to overstate my satisfaction. --MPAA

Re:This was a triumph.

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not even angry. I'm being so sincere right now. Even though you broke my heart and killed me. And torn it pieces. And threw every piece into a fire. As they burned it hurt because I was so happy for you!

Re:This was a triumph.

[shentino]

A portal reference getting -1?

What the hell is up with the mods today?

Re:This was a triumph.

[Anonymous Coward]

Clearly the moderator doesn't know the lyrics. ;)

Thanks for the list

[Anonymous Coward]

love torrents keeps everybody busy and away from my secret method.

Re:Thanks for the list

[AvitarX]

I'm a pretty big fan of the character boneless, and fellow fans have some pretty interesting things to share. Such fast access too!

Re:Thanks for the list

[twistedcubic]

Does your "secret" method start with a U?

Yay piracy is over!

[Anonymous Coward]

Thank God the war on piracy is over!

Re:Yay piracy is over!

[Anonymous Coward]

Now we can return civil rights to the people again!

Thanks!

[Anonymous Coward]

We all owe the MPAA a hearty thank-you for telling us where we can steal their movies in the post-Megauplod era.

What they didn't say

[Hans Adler]

The MPAA's original paper: http://de.scribd.com/doc/115644694/NOT-Motion-Picture-Association-of-America-Final

They brag about how much money they are making and speak in passing about the "massive" impact of closing down Megaupload. The one thing that seems to be conspicuously missing is any estimate of how much more money they made due to the reduction in "piracy".

Re:What they didn't say

[UnknownSoldier]

Exactly.

If they are "losing" money due to "piracy" then why does Piracy NEVER show up on the balance books for EACH movie?

Re:What they didn't say

[BradleyUffner]

Exactly.

If they are "losing" money due to "piracy" then why does Piracy NEVER show up on the balance books for EACH movie?

I'm actually surprised that it doesn't. It would make the whole "Hollywood Accounting" thing easier to pull off, letting them pay the actors and writers even less because the film made less money.

Re:What they didn't say

[Anonymous Coward]

Because if they DID put it on the balance books, they would have to JUSTIFY it.

The IRS would not look too kindly on "we lost trillion of dollars due to piracy based on unfounded, unprovable methodology. Tax refund plz!"

Re:What they didn't say

[king neckbeard]

That's assuming that the IRS would audit them. Such a major contributor to so many campaigns isn't going to get audited.

Re:What they didn't say

[shentino]

Piracy isn't an expense, so you can't actually deduct it.

Re:What they didn't say

[Anonymous Coward]

Piracy isn't an expense, so you can't actually deduct it.

But if you've lost money, you are required to report it to your shareholders.

Re:What they didn't say

[jedidiah]

It's not the IRS that they have to worry about. It's the SEC. When it's doing it's job, that organization is the most draconian and fascist component of the US government by far.

Plus, putting things down officially in SEC filings opens you up for stockholder litigation.

Of course Big Media want it both ways. Whether or not IP is to be treated as property or non-property is purely a matter of whim and their personal interests in a moment in time.

Re:What they didn't say

[shentino]

More like you can't lose money you never got in the first place.

Re:What they didn't say

[Anonymous Coward]

In this paper we make use of a quasi-experiment in the market for illegal downloading to study movie box office revenues. Exogenous variation comes from the unexpected shutdown of the popular file hosting platform Megaupload.com on January 19, 2012. The estimation strategy is based on a quasi difference-in-differences approach. We compare box office revenues before and after the shutdown to a matched control group of movies unaffected by the shutdown.
We find that the shutdown had a negative, yet insignificant effect on box office revenues......

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2176246

Re:What they didn't say

[Anonymous Coward]

Tax code and loss due to theft or damage. - IANAL

http://smallbusiness.chron.com/tax-code-writing-off-inventory-22012.html

Re:What they didn't say

[ImprovOmega]

It's not the IRS that they have to worry about. It's the SEC. When it's doing it's job, that organization is the most draconian and fascist component of the US government by far.

They have to be because they're dealing with the highest percentage population of sociopaths in our society - successful business leaders.

Success != Money

[Dan East]

So in other words, their profits suddenly shot up by some "massive" amount? I mean that's really the only reason to go to the trouble (and cost) of shutting stuff like this down, is to recover some revenue, right? After all, that is the only kind of success that matters to the content producers, is making more money for their effort.

FTA:

Interestingly, recently published research suggests that shuttering Megaupload may have even had a negative impact on box office revenues. In a recent blog post MPAA’s head of research Julia Jenks said the short paper is “not clear or compelling,” but it’s an indication that the Megaupload shutdown might not be all that positive for the industry itself either.

Oops. Spin it, Julia. Spin it round and round.

Re:Success != Money

[Anonymous Coward]

or in other words, all those damages they've been claiming? Complete nonsense.

Re:Success != Money

[jamesh]

or in other words, all those damages they've been claiming? Complete nonsense.

Or alternatively, by pirating a movie you are actually helping the movie industry. Where's your cut of the profits??

Re:Success != Money

[SuperAlgae]

Right! And you can only assume they will pass those savings onto the consumer. I expect movie prices to drop dramatically any moment now...

any moment now...

hmm...

Re:Success != Money

[Anonymous Coward]

Can I vote you for President of the United States in four years? If America hasn't gone Fallout on us by then, I'd be willing to support you.

Re:Success != Money

[Anonymous Coward]

Or alternatively, by pirating a movie you are actually helping the movie industry. Where's your cut of the profits??

Didn't you sign up for the profit-sharing plan? I've already got my first check!

Oooh.

[roc97007]

Thanks for the list!

Re:Oooh.

[cheesybagel]

Yeah. I thought you could be sued for providing a reference to an illegal download site but it seems MPAA's own rules don't apply to them.

Re:Oooh.

[gagol]

Apparently, even their own legitimate sites infringe so they asked google to stop referencing them... (see story published in last 24h)

Not according to the box office results

[Anonymous Coward]

Or this more in depth analysis which concludes:

"We find that the shutdown had a negative, yet insignificant effect on box office revenues.This counterintuitive result may suggest support for the theoretical perspective of (social) network effects where file-sharing acts as a mechanism to spread information about a good from consumers with zero or low willingness to pay to users with high willingness to pay."

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2176246

Re:Not according to the box office results

[Anonymous Coward]

>negative, yet insignificant effect on box office revenues

Or more likely, the authors just had to push a publication out the door to justify their grant money.

Re:Not according to the box office results

[Anonymous Coward]

Who would pay them to say that? Pirates? Who supposedly don't pay for anything? When Hollywood would (and does) gladly pay for opposing results all the time?

Re:Not according to the box office results

[Anonymous Coward]

By insignificant did they mean small or actually statistically insignificant (meaning that the data isn't enough to distinguish the result from being zero)?

Re:Not according to the box office results

[Anonymous Coward]

"zero or low willingness to pay" should be read as " zero or low ABILITY to pay". Not downloading stuff doesn't magically make the average consumer any richer. Most are living week to week, and many already have maxed credit-cards. I buy all the stuff I can afford, already. If I couldn't download extra stuff, I would NOT be compelled to buy new stuff, I would be compelled to re-watch something I already own.

Shutting down file-sharing in such a climate is likely to be a zero-sum gain. Any extra spent on one business is less spending with another business. Spend your own money to enforce your copyright, but when the taxpayer is subsidizing these self-proclaimed "rights", then every business loses in the long run.

Unsurprising

[Dega704]

The MPAA would claim this even if piracy had gone up since then. Their hit list just makes the reasons that much more obvious. Nothing to see here. Just business as usual.

Omission

[Anonymous Coward]

MPAA forgot to list my mom's basement.

Piracy down, along with ticket sales

[Anonymous Coward]

http://entertainment.slashdot.org/story/12/11/25/1654201/researchers-find-megaupload-shutdown-hurt-box-office-revenues
Let's cut off our nose to spite our face!

WooHoo for Canada

[Capt.DrumkenBum]

We're number 1!
All others are #2 or worse!

illegal spying

[Anonymous Coward]

subverting foreign governments
illegal search seizure
violating due process

and you brag about it?!?!

Re:illegal spying

[Eristone]

obligatory Weird Al reference

Blame it on Canada!

[Anonymous Coward]

Here's the list of sites, including where they are hosted: Extratorrent (Ukraine), IsoHunt (Canada), Kickass Torrents (Canada), Rutracker (Russia), The Pirate Bay (Sweden), Torrentz (Canada), and Kankan (China)."

Aside from some new sites to try out, it's obvious that Canada is leading the Coalition of Internet Freedom, I mean is to blame for the poor starving artists in the movie industry. I mean, did you see that minibar in {censored} limo? Gee, that single malt was made when my dad was already going to the potty by himself! Can't afford the good stuff anymore due to massive Internet piracy, that's what I say.

Speaking as a pirate,

[Anonymous Coward]

If not for all the slashdot coverage, I wouldn't even have noticed.

Re:Speaking as a pirate,

[Terrasque]

As a thieving pirate, I noticed it. Do you have any idea how hard it is to find ROM's for old Android phones now?

Oh, you were expecting me missing MU for pirated content? Why on earth would I go there for that? It's slow, annoying and hard to automate bulk downloads.

Seriously. It's like banning eating knives to stop knife violence. Sure, if you're determined enough, you can do it with such a knife, but..

But did they sell any move movie tickets?

[Anonymous Coward]

This provides a really good opportunity to measure a decline in piracy against an increase in ticket and DVD/Bluray sales. If they aren't talking about how much more money they're making, I think we can safely assume that the mantra that piracy != lost sales is true.

They completely missed all the new sites

[Anonymous Coward]

:) They totally missed the largest streaming sites or link sites entirely.

http://www.solarmovie.so/ (http://www.solarmovie.eu/)
http://www.tv-links.eu/
http://www.vidics.eu/
http://www.movs.eu/
http://www.watchseries.eu
http://www.youtube.com/ (mostly good old stuff, but still a great source for that content)

If you want more just do a Google search for ”some obscure movie or tv show site:eu” and you'll find it on the first page of Google's results. This works for any movie and not just obscure stuff. Humorously it is easier to find stuff this way then Netflix, Hulu, etc.

Re:They completely missed all the new sites

[Anonymous Coward]

Streaming sites have shitty quality. Try any private tracker.

Re:They completely missed all the new sites

[cheesybagel]

Yeah. I saw Dune on Youtube the other day.

Re:They completely missed all the new sites

[Anonymous Coward]

Why were you being punished? What did you do?

Re:They completely missed all the new sites

[techcodie]

thank you. I now have my next several hours planned out to check these sites. Both of the first two links provided me with something I liked on the front page, and now I have to look into the rest.

I hope the rest of my evening turns out as well.

youtube is still the only place to get Cannibal Holocaust as far as I know, and maybe a few other things.

Re:They completely missed all the new sites

[Anonymous Coward]

I had also wondered about the obfuscated search function on Netflix. I could use Netflix search for a movie and come up dry. Then Google the same movie title plus Netflix and there would be the Netflix page to order or view the movie. After a while it seemed there was nothing worthwhile to search for either way. The lack of compelling content is the main reason for lackluster sales. Ok, I admit to downloading entire seasons of Game pf Thrones because I prefer to watch series that way.

Re:They completely missed all the new sites

[techcodie]

and then they want a credit card. cheesy advertising. can't do it, won't do it, hunt them down and kill them.

Then spend the rest of my card.

Shitheads. Like I would give them a real name, phone number and address. Are there still people stupid enough out there to fall for this?

Re:They completely missed all the new sites

[cheesybagel]

I actually think it is quite a good movie even if flawed horribly. Great visuals for most of the time. Some superb acting by Kenneth McMillan and Brad Dourif. Great music. Sure some of the actors are horribly wooden. Some special effects fall flat today. It takes multiple views to even begin to understand the plot. However I like it.

Re:They completely missed all the new sites

[Wandering Voice]

I agree, Dune is still one of my all time favorite movies. An amazing movie considering the depth of the story, and I think they did a superb job in translating the novel to the screen. Not an easy task, I would imagine.

Re:They completely missed all the new sites

[Anonymous Coward]

I think you probably clicked the wrong thing. Ads can be sneaky on those sites. Always look for the magnet icon, in the case of torrents.

Re:They completely missed all the new sites

[niado]

It takes multiple views to even begin to understand the plot.

Better than the book series (I use that term loosely), which took multiple reads for me to realize the plot was actually indecipherable. Oh Frank Herbert, what cruel tricks you play upon me.

Whack a mole

[nurb432]

It always feels like a success when you whack the first mole.. but then 2 of its friends appear later..

Eventually the moles eat you.

Re:Whack a mole

[Anonymous Coward]

Whack-a-Mole 2: Melanoma.

Re:Whack a mole

[darkfeline]

In Soviet Russia, mole whack YOU

title tag should have been "mission accomplished"

[Wookie_CD]

(referring, naturally, to the banner behind Bush on an aircraft carrier while making a speech about the Iraq war)

OMG, they're coordinating!

[DreadfulGrape]

"... in some cases, coordinate the actual upload and download of that content"

You bastards!

Maybe not so successful

[Anonymous Coward]

A person I know says they still don't have any trouble downloading anything they want.

Megaupload probably wasn't doing much piracy

[Anonymous Coward]

Megaupload was being used as a gigantic, unregulated store for pirated content

Before the takedown, we all thought that. Me too. After the takedown, the US and NZ governments' behaviors indicate that once they saw actual evidence, it didn't point that way. They no longer think Dotcom is a crook and apparently either intend to acquit him or get the charges dismissed.

Re:Megaupload probably wasn't doing much piracy

[Pubstar]

I'm on my cell and too lazy to find the Torrent Freak article, but something like 50% of all files on their servers never had a single download.

MPAA feels untouchable

[Anonymous Coward]

Now that Biden's in for a second term, the MPAA feels invincible.

Let's bomb all of them

[Anonymous Coward]

Canada? 3 times over.

News Flash!

[flyneye]

In the news today, the MPAA still can't find its ass, despite utilizing both arms and a road map, in a lit room. Film at 11.

Re:News Flash!

[aix tom]

Film at 11.

Don't bother, it's not that good. I already watched my unauthorized copy three weeks ago.

Did it lead to more purchases?

[Nationless]

Serious question: Fair enough that they disrupted a lot of traffic, but did it get redirected anywhere positive?

Did sales go up? This is a pretty important question that they don't seem to be answering.

Re:Did it lead to more purchases?

[plazman30]

You know it didn't. The people pirating stuff will ALMOST NEVER buy the content if they can't get it for free. In other news, Libraries have seen a massive increase in requests for library cards...

Re:Did it lead to more purchases?

[viperidaenz]

Sales went down. They're blaming that on other factors though.

Re:Did it lead to more purchases?

[jedidiah]

...or you could just wait for it to show up on some cable channel or even a local broadcast channel. Plus there's Netflix.

Netflix already has established itself as a zero marginal cost option.

Re:Did it lead to more purchases?

[pantaril]

You know it didn't. The people pirating stuff will ALMOST NEVER buy the content if they can't get it for free. In other news, Libraries have seen a massive increase in requests for library cards...

I have completely contradicting experience. Pirates spend more money on legal media purchuases then average Joe. They use their pirate channels to try large ammount of media content, then they support creators they like by visiting cinema/life performance or buying discs.

When you cut the pirate channels, they will try fewer items and as a consequence, they will buy fewer items legaly.

Re:Did it lead to more purchases?

[plazman30]

That is true. But the group that pirates and never purchases will NEVER purchase once cut off from illegal content. They'll just go get it from the library and rip it/copy it. The physical media loophole will always be there. What I find funny is that average "paranoid" pirate pays probably $15.00/month for Usenet, and $15.00/month for encrypted VPN. Most of these people would probably happily $30/month to Netflix or a service like it, if it had everything available.

Oh yeah, that worked...

[plazman30]

Cause my coworker didn't just check his Comcast account and see that he downloaded 420 GB of stuff in November. Way to go Justice Department. The 10 people that were downloading blu-ray rips from Megaupload all went to Bittorrent.

Re:Oh yeah, that worked...

[Anonymous Coward]

420GB, wow. I hit 3.5TB in November.

Re:Oh yeah, that worked...

[gagol]

You badly need to find a REAL girl.. much better than porn!

Massive impact!

[viperidaenz]

Piracy on Megaupload before shutdown: > 0%, << 100%.
Piracy on Megaupload after shutdown: 0. Infinite reduction in piracy!
Piracy on mediums other than Megaupload Before: unknown.
Piracy on mediums other than Megaupload Before: unknown still, but greater than before.

Fixed that for you

[Anonymous Coward]

"Here's the list of sites, including where they are hosted: Extratorrent (Ukraine), IsoHunt (Canada), Kickass Torrents (Canada), Rutracker (Russia), The Pirate Bay (Everywhere), Torrentz (Canada), and Kankan (China)."

Source: http://torrentfreak.com/pirate-bay-moves-to-the-cloud-becomes-raid-proof-121017/

Torrentz is in Canada?

[Anonymous Coward]

"Here's the list of sites, including where they are hosted: ... Torrentz (Canada)"

I thought https://torrents.de was located in Delaware. Looks like I need to learn more about this internet thing. Pat in Dover.

There, fixed that for you

[davegravy]

"Here's the list of sites, including where they are hosted: Extratorrent (Ukraine), IsoHunt (Canada), Kickass Torrents (Canada), Rutracker (Russia), The Pirate Bay (Everywhere), Torrentz (Canada), and Kankan (China)."

Source:

http://torrentfreak.com/pirate-bay-moves-to-the-cloud-becomes-raid-proof-121017/

you mean "massive fail"

[davydagger]

All they've done is take all free android clones, peoples personal, and legally owned shit, and home vidoes off the net. They've killed many cell phone modding communities with broken links.

Its made it that much harder for a small projects(FOSS types) to host large files associated with them.

In case your wondering, its just as easy as it was before to get pirated material from a site that flaunts its pirate status, "The Pirate Bay"

Rest assured good freinds, you can still get your mindless RIAA sponsored pop music pirate, entirely unabated.
https://thepiratebay.se/search/britney%20spears/0/99/0

Re:you mean "massive fail"

[rohan972]

Rest assured good freinds, you can still get your mindless RIAA sponsored pop music pirate, entirely unabated.
https://thepiratebay.se/search/britney%20spears/0/99/0

And quite legally too:
http://www.youtube.com/user/BritneySpearsVEVO

Re:you mean "massive fail"

[Anonymous Coward]

Dude man, you may want to recalibrate your "mindless RIAA sponsored pop music" scale. Britney Spears hasn't been in the news or on the radio for a while now. She had one CD a while back that got a bit of play on the stations here, but I haven't heard a single song by her in ages.

Your new go-to should be Beiber, or Carly Ray Jepson (however that's spelled), or Rihanna. Actually, yeah... there's your go-to. Rihanna's been all over the place lately.

Re:you mean "massive fail"

[phorm]

They've killed many cell phone modding communities with broken links.

I can attest to that. It cost me a *lot* of time trying to track down (legit) ROM updates for my roomie's phone because all the older links were to dead MegaUpload URL's

"Great success"

[Dunge]

I'm sorry, but every new release sites have more than 4+ mirrors anyway. When megalupload went down, another came up to replace. Also, they are actually listing the next sites they gonna abuse their power to shut down? Let's do something against that and make sure it don't happen.

Congratulations, you busted the fat loud guy!

[Anonymous Coward]

The guy was basically emailing the FBI pictures of his ass, so not a major accomplishment to bust him. I guess still worthy of a press release if you are Christopher Dodd. I would point out that this was a legal maneuver and not a technical one and ignores the many published studies of the problem which point out that these guys don't have the collective intelligence to come up with a real solution. Here's my favorite: make your product easily available for a compelling price and rely on market forces. I think they call it "running a business". Oh, and quit putting out crap, that would help too.

Re:Silly Slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

There is no clear evidence that piracy has cost anyone a job.

You know what else would make a massive impact?

[epp_b]

Cut the bullshit of trying dictate when, where and how your customers are "permitted" to use the products they buy from you. Y'know, just like every other business on the planet.

The example I like to use:

When I buy a hammer, the manufacturer can't charge me a royalty for every nail I hammer in, they can't limit me to building bird-houses and demand licensing fees to build a shed, they can't tell me I can only use it in the town where I bought it and make me pay for it a second time if I want to use it in the next town over and they can't come to my home and take it away from me when they release an updated model. Heck, I can even use it for business and commercial profits and they still can't do anything about it.

They've sold me a product and they are now HANDS OFF until the hammer wears out and I'm in the market for a new one.

To argue against this -- to say that "media products" don't "wear out" -- is disingenuous and simply untrue. How many times can you listen to the song or watch the same movie without wanting more, better and newer?

The demand for new content will always exist, ergo it is unnecessary and incongruous to found your business model on the assumption that it won't.

I will offer this advice to the entire media industry, free of charge, no royalties asked, in the public domain, no nonsense, no copyright, you're free to use it. Forever.

How to Single-Handedly Obsolete Piracy and Earn Record Profits without Criminalizing your Customers and Building a PR Track Record Worse than Beelzebub's: provide video files in MPEG4/DivX/whatever reasonably universal format, without DRM expropriating our computers, for a reasonable price, offer fast download speeds (at least fast enough to stream) and offer it worldwide.

That is actually a lot simpler than it sounds; certainly a whole lot simpler than all that lawyering, backroom meetings and trying to figure out how to expropriate every computer in the world.

Not only will you have millions, possibly billions-with-a-B, customers who can't give you enough of their money, but you will be opening the door to scads of businesses who will make products that increase the value of your products and have customers begging to buy more.

This is evidenced empirically by history: look at how unencumbered VCRs, CDs and MP3s exploded with infinite third-party possibilities and compare them to DVDs which ... well, can do nothing more than they did a decade ago because of crippling DRM.

Why is it so hard for these people to embrace technology? Why is every technological progression in history perceived as a threat? Is there a fundamental disconnect between them and their customers? Are they just stupid? Overly stubborn, technologically xenophobic dinosaurs? Too lazy to rework their business model? Too greedy about short-term profits too realize the long-term effects? What is it???

Re:You know what else would make a massive impact?

[KingMotley]

for a reasonable price

Please define this. I expect a long thread of counter posts to yours to ensue.

Re:You know what else would make a massive impact?

[VortexCortex]

I have a better way to ensure that no one can "pirate" my works: Don't make them unless I'll get paid to do so. After you've done the work, the public has paid you to do, then everyone gets copies for free (or only the cost to make the copy). The trick is asking for enough money to fund my development up front, you know, like a home builder or a mechanic will give you an estimate for their work.

In short: Get paid up front or get a contract (see: crowd-funding, consignments, etc). Let the public pay a fair price for the work. If no one wants it, make something else so everyone gets what they want, and you get free market research. Stop trying to make information artificially scarce. Just stop trying to sell ice to Eskimos, it's dumb. You can't sell bits to people with computers! That doesn't make any sense. Sell your ability to configure the bits -- Ah, but that means publishers are out of the loop. GOOD. No one needs them. This is the Information Age.

Re:You know what else would make a massive impact?

[gagol]

You mean like Iron Sky? I actually liked this movie much more than aby crap hollywood regurgitate those days.

Re:You know what else would make a massive impact?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's about control.

It's not about getting a fair amount of money for a fair amount of product for them. They want you to do things. Or not, as the case may be. It's the same power that dictators have: you will do this thing. You will stand on your head until I tell you to stop; you will lie in the freezing cold for my amusement.

Look at the raid on Kim Dotcom. Some businessman on the other side of the world can wave his hand and order an armed raid in a foreign country by that nation's own police force. It is the power to say 'Look what I can do. Governments bend to my will. People I have never even heard of before will willingly spend hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of dollars of the money they have been entrusted with in order to facilitate my wishes.'

As it turns out, they will break their own laws to carry out your commands.

It is the rush you get when you tell a shitty customer to go fuck themself, times a million. 'You cannot come in to my store because I have decided you can't. There is no appeal, there is no one above me. I have decreed it and so it is.'

Above a certain level, it is no longer about money. I would assume that if everyone did what they asked, bought a copy for each person in the family on each device, they would not be happy with it after a while. They would demand increasingly bizarre things to let them continue to exercise power.

If they embrace technology, it is admitting that some of their power is gone. That the consumers were right and they were wrong. It is only as the old people die and are replaced by new people who are right about the 'new' thing that progress happens.

Re:You know what else would make a massive impact?

[pantaril]

How to Single-Handedly Obsolete Piracy and Earn Record Profits without Criminalizing your Customers and Building a PR Track Record Worse than Beelzebub's: provide video files in MPEG4/DivX/whatever reasonably universal format, without DRM expropriating our computers, for a reasonable price, offer fast download speeds (at least fast enough to stream) and offer it worldwide.

Wouldn't work, unless by 'reasonable price' you mean something even third world countries could afford. Even if they sell movies for 1 cent, citisens of many third-world countries in the world simply can't purchuase them, becaouse their payments/credit cards are not accepted.

The only way to obsolete piracy is to abolish copyright (and then, invent new way to support creation of IP which will not create artificial restrictions in sharing of information)

Re:You know what else would make a massive impact?

[pantaril]

I have a better way to ensure that no one can "pirate" my works: Don't make them unless I'll get paid to do so. After you've done the work, the public has paid you to do, then everyone gets copies for free (or only the cost to make the copy). The trick is asking for enough money to fund my development up front, you know, like a home builder or a mechanic will give you an estimate for their work.

That's nice idea that i'd realy like to see implemented. There are imo two problems that i see with it:

- it will not work very well while copyright is still in effect (people will be not incentivised enough to organise themself and crowdfund something, when they can just buy (or rather license) finished movie on their own for few bucks)
- when copyright is gone, people will just wait for other people to crowdfund something so they can enjoy the finished movie released in public domain for free. As a result, very few people will be willing to participate in crowdfunding.

My solution to those problems would be to abolish copyright AND to make payment for IP mandatory for example in the form of tax (but the decision, how the tax is spend would remain on the user paying the tax!)

Re:You know what else would make a massive impact?

[RivenAleem]

The problem is that the people calling the shots (the lawyers) have the most to lose if piracy went away.

Re:You know what else would make a massive impact?

[Anonymous Coward]

My solution to those problems would be to abolish copyright AND to make payment for IP mandatory for example in the form of tax

No, that's bullshit; then you'd be paying for things you don't even want. Instead, leave it up to the free market to decide. Let the content creators find out how to make money, but absolutely do not let them instruct the government to give them free money or monopolies.

Re:You know what else would make a massive impact?

[Anonymous Coward]

EXACTLY what I was thinking the second I read his post.

In MPAA speak, "reasonable price" = "$10 per video", or "$2 per song".

I'm sorry, $2 may sound small, but it's ludicrously expensive. For a 4 minute song (and that's a LONG song nowadays).

If I were to go see a movie in theaters with the same pricing structure, I'd be paying $45 a ticket. Although more accurately, with a 3 minute song (I'm ballparking the average length of a typical pop song), that'd be $60 a ticket. For audio only, no video whatsoever. On my own time. In my own place. No theater maintenance charges, employees, equipment, none of that.

Let's see... if it were closer to theater prices, it'd be 40 cents a song (about $12 a ticket here). And that's WITH video, maintenance, employees, etc, etc. In all reality, it should be like fucking HALF that at a dead max.

But I'll concede at least a little bit for the RIAA. You put out all music for 25 cents a song, and I'll start buying it.... the most current, most expensive music will be that 25 cents. Older stuff can be dropped down to 20 or 15, or hell, even 10 cents a track.

Think of the Netflix model. Low price, lots to offer... tons of people sign up and don't pirate. At least I certainly don't pirate any TV show I can get on Netflix. There's no point, it's a fair price. If you knock your prices down to where it's trivially easy to pay for your 3 GODDAMN MINUTE SONG, then I bet a ton of people will actually buy it.

Re:You know what else would make a massive impact?

[epp_b]

Now I wish I had posted as AC and had mod points ... because that's a good answer and probably correct.

Dear MPAA

[Ralph Spoilsport]

Fuck You. Assholes.

Re:Silly Slashdot

[KingMotley]

There is no clear evidence that prostitution has made any women more lonely either. Your point?

Somewhere in here there's a joke...I know it.

[Mindragon]

Franz Liebkind: Gentlemen. Ve have here a technical problem. Hmm? I do not know if vat ve have here is ze quick burning fuse or ze slow buring fuse. Ja, ja, I must find zis out.
[snips dynamite fuse]
Franz Liebkind: Zis is critical.
[lights fuse with match]
Franz Liebkind: Ha ha ha, ja ja, you see zis? You see zis here vat I have told you? Yeah, zis is an example of smartness here. I have said that zis is ze quick fuse. Huh? And zis IS ze quick fuse.
[pause]
All: THE QUICK FUSE!
[explosion]

Piracy is the new legitimate use

[Stormwatch]

The excuse for "intellectual property" was that it would serve as an incentive to the creation of new works; it was supposed to enrich culture and technology for all by eventually becoming public domain. But the constant copyright extensions mean their very purpose was subverted: instead, it now hinders everyone's access to a massive cultural trove. That's why people can't see piracy as wrong: if anything, it performs that duty now!

This just in

[Anonymous Coward]

"Shutting down MegaUpload has saved the MPAA five hundred trillion dollars worth of sales every week, nearly 10% of its worldwide sales"

I agree!

[Anonymous Coward]

The shutdown of megaupload was a great success! I learned a great deal by watching this!

I learned you can safely ignore any and all laws you don't like of any country and do whatever you want!

And what i want is free movies forever! Looks like i'm going to get it too.

Piracy is illegal? Yeah so what... So is subverting the due process of law. Didn't care about that being illegal now did ya mpaa fucks.

Well i don't care about that piracy being illegal law.

You want us to respect your laws. Gonna have to start respecting the other ones you mpaa fucks.

Fuck you mpaa! I'm gonna go pirate something now. Lots of somethings. Everything!

OK, so ....

[Anonymous Coward]

Where are the numbers showing an uptick in sales for the movies allegedly hosted on Megaupload?

numbers out of the hat

[unique_parrot]

maybe somebody should tell the mpaa the common people just can spend money they earn once.
if after paying for mobiles, books, computer games, power bills, dentist, etc. there is still money left, i could bye a dvd or go to a movie.
not everybody has - unlike mpaa - more money she/he could spend, so the numbers of lost/stolen money is ridiculous...

Re:Silly Slashdot

[SuricouRaven]

So legalise prostitution. The only reason it's illegal is because a load of self-rightous peachers keep saying it's somehow evil and immoral. Legalise, regulate, and a lot of the related crime will disappear.

No difference to me

[TractorBarry]

Well all I can say is that in 2011 I watched 0 items of Hollywood/MPAA/RIAA produced entertainment. In 2012 it was again 0 items. I'm not expecting to watch/listen to any of their crap in 2013 either.

However the MegaUpload shutdown was annoying as a friend and I used to swap audio tracks for some projects we've been working on using the service (he lives on a different continent to me and had a MegaUpload account which just seemed convenient to use) Not a massive problem as we got round this by me setting up an FTP server and allowing it through my firewall etc. but slightly annoying none the less.

But the root question is why would anyone even want to share the forumlaic, cliched, unimaginative crap produced by members of the MPAA ? I'd consider being given a DVD/CD/memory stick of their crap the same way I would consider someone giving me herpes.

There is a whole world of wonderful films/music/art available world wide. The jaded, tired old crap produced by these people is absolutely not worth giving the time of day to. Seen one, seen 'em all. Quite frankly I'd rather watch some ants foraging... or even a cat washing it's bottom.

Re:

[kurkosdr]

@MPAA Thnx for the linkz dude.

Re:title tag should have been "mission accomplishe

[Anonymous Coward]

But but that would be like, pirating reality!

A new front on the IP war

[ThatsNotPudding]

3D printer users (and the printer manufacturers) are about to get snowed under by lawsuits for conducting (and enabling) IP theft.

I doubt the just-announced Staples 3D printer service survives until Spring.

So if piracy was a big problem

[Anonymous Coward]

If piracy was a big problem, and they are correct it has been massively reduced by removing megaupload, then it should be easily visible in the profitability and the price of games, movies, music et all will all drop, right?

eh?

[ledow]

Or,

The file-sharing community moved to places that can't be seen by the MPAA unless they really look hard and properly.

You shutdown a major (alleged) file-sharing site, using legal tactics that bordered on the insane. You're then surprised that "MegaUpload2" doesn't pop up with a big announcement and just carry on running as normal (which, honestly, I was half-expecting even though I've never used MegaUpload in my life).

This is the biggest problem with "piracy" - I can make up any numbers I like and it's impossible to prove that that number of copies *weren't* distributed illegally.

Just because you can't see the file-sharers, doesn't mean their operations have been hindered at all. It just means you can't see what's happened. For all you know, piracy has quadrupled on private darknets. It's almost impossible to prove either way.

The file-sharers that I know wouldn't stop doing it just because one site went down. Hell, that's par for the course as far as they are concerned - move on to the next one. Hell, some of them don't even care about the possibility of strongly-worded letters from their ISP's and potential cutting off of their connection. When threatened, they find ways to continue what they do, without being noticed.

Every anti-piracy measure in the world hasn't reduced piracy one bit. In fact, almost the opposite (but, again, that's almost impossible to prove). All it's done is made the pirates more wary of doing so quite so publicly.

I can remember when file-sharing was filling up a Geocities account and passing it around. Then it moved onto dedicated sites, constantly shifting around as they went down. Then it become sign-up sites. Then it became private groups. Then it became filesharing networks. Then it became anonymised filesharing networks. Then it became torrents.

The file-sharers aren't particularly scared of getting caught, but the people who run the sites are. And such sites are profitable if you run them right. And thus *those* people have a vested interest in protecting their user's identities (from outsiders, and from each other!) and will do what it takes to make that happen. They're already skirting the grey-areas of law anyway, they won't be worried about doing it some more.

It's a question I get asked a lot, and have been asked a lot for years now. I've had even the most computer-illiterate person come to me and ask "So, now Napster/BearShare/SuprNova/PirateBay is dead, what's replacing it?". I don't file-share (never had interest in music at all, lost all interest in movies about 10 years ago and only buy DVD's that I then rip for my home use, and I buy cheap games for entertainment), so I usually have no idea. But even as someone that doesn't fileshare, I still see enough of the Internet to pick up on the name of these places and what comes along to replace them without even trying to.

I'm not saying they should give up on trying to stop piracy, but they should really take account of the amount of people out there that JUST DON'T CARE and also the amount of people who are put off by the atrociously-gathered "statistics" quoted, to the point that I lose all sympathy for their plight. It's like being asked to support a politician who claims there are a bazigiwillion criminals committing crimes out there so they need hujamaflipillions of tax to fix the problem. I'm all for the cause, but the fake numbers just make me want to write you off as an idiot.

Now, if you said "We're going to release a big film next week" and then deliberately DIDN'T (after putting a modified copy of it through your normal release mechanisms) and counted up the number of modified copies of the film floating around on the Internet and the number of downloaders of it before release - that's a statistic I can get behind.

But even then, chances are that most of those leaks are from your own internal processes and the people who pay you big bucks to license the content early (e.g. cinemas, etc.) anyway. So it's not really "filesharing" that's the problem so much as insecure release mechanisms and the total inability to stop someone copying the film somehow anyway.

Regurgitation to new generations

[gr8_phk]

Here's a nice XKCD to check first: that may shed some light

Similar applies to who has seen what movies. Still, I see your point.

MPAA

[Xicor]

they really need to get over themselves... they think that they are trying to get more money for the artists, but they are reallly just greedy. if i recall correctly, like 70% of movie profit goes to the producers and the MPAA. noone has any issue stealing from ppl who are incredibly wealthy and dont need more money. If you ask a lot of actors, they would say that they make plenty of money already and they have no issue with pirates.

Here's an idea, MPAA

[SCHecklerX]

How about you make recently released content available yourselves instead? Put it on an authenticated RSS feed. Heck, even point it to torrents so that your customers bear the cost of the bandwidth instead of you having to invest in the infrastructure. Charge $5/month/feed.

So long as the 'Pirates' provide a better product, that is where people are going to get their content. You win the game by being the ones with the better product. Also: standard formats that play on any device, no DRM.

You already made your money in the theaters anyway. You should allow much of this to be shared for free anyway. It certainly doesn't cost you anything nor does it hurt your already realized profits.

Huge success you say?

[bobthesungeek76036]

I would like to see if movie/music sales took a jump after the shutdown....

Re:Silly Slashdot

[ImprovOmega]

Well, that and it's also generally damaging to the self-esteem of the women involved in the trade. They tend to have much higher depression rates and negative self-image vs. women who are not prostitutes.

The folly of it all

[Anonymous Coward]

Personally, if you don't want people to pirate movies. Make better movies. I was a motion picture projectionist for 20 years and I have to say that price vs. quality... I would rather stay home. With all this first person handy cam shit that takes up the majority of low budget films these days.. I would rather risk prison that pay $15.00 for the 3D, Imax, riser seating, THX digital sound. The 80s produced some of the most memorable low budget movies that still got released theatrically and avoided the nearly non-existent direct to video market. That being said... does anyone care that I downloaded an obscure 1970s made for TV movie or do they only care that I downloaded The Avengers. Is downloading the Ghoulies more of a crime than wanting to see the ORIGINAL version of Star Wars?

Much like the Hydra. The MPAA can always win a victory by cutting off one head, but it's short lived when two more emerge.

Perhaps the MPAA can spend more money opening a world media heritage site where the film archives of nearly all studios is made available. Right down to the stuff that's been salvage but cannot be restored because it's incomplete. Oh well. Dare to dream.

Re:Silly Slashdot

[SuricouRaven]

So prostitution is depressing and the prostitutes hate having to do it?

Welcome to the workplace.

One thing they may have a bit of trouble doing....

[helios17]

While torrent sites might be in the gunsights of the **AA's, more and more streaming sites are popping up and popping up with domains and locations that are not particularly friendly to US copyright and IP law. The ones with .com and .org addresses are probably going to be shredded, but the ones that reside outside of US interests will probably be safe for quite a while. I haven't downloaded anything via bittorrent aside from Linux ISO's for ages. Extensions like Video Downloadhelper gives me sufficient means and quality when I download the flv or MP4 file from a streaming site, and they play superbly on my 42 inch Samsung.

MPAA X Fox news

[perles]

Trust in news released by the MPAA is like trust the news delivered by Fox. The other day there was a news showing exavtly the opposite here on /. : http://entertainment.slashdot.org/story/12/11/25/1654201/researchers-find-megaupload-shutdown-hurt-box-office-revenues

"Successful" == revenue?

[Anonymous Coward]

So, by "successful", does that mean they saw a major jump in revenues as a result of shutting down Megaupload?

Re:"Successful" == revenue?

[Anonymous Coward]

No, it just means they managed to shut it down. Not that it did anything to file sharing or piracy.

Demonoid.me

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd say the demise of Demonoid.me has had a bigger impact than megaupload.