But they now have no argument to pursue filesharers since they did publish it themselves and they published on a medium that guarantees that others will also distribute it, as required by protocol.
I think it might be an issue if you publish a.torrent file yourself, but using the original.torrent would be ok because it is published with the understanding that all downloaders will also contribute the distribution.
Free-Speech cannot exist without anonymity or at least the option of anonymity, these women are seeking to remove that anonymity simply because they do not like what was said about them, this can set a precedent for the future.
Anonymity is to important to allow these women to destroy it for their own needs.
But people don't know when to just leave shit alone, there are always asswipes (In this case the two women) who want to ruin it for others, Anonymity is a fantastic thing on the web and a vital part of free-speech.
Lots of people liked watching a good public hanging. Should we bring that back.
Yes, executions should be public.
A 10 year time limit on copyrights would be sufficient otherwise it ties up that idea for to long and stops the creation of other great games such as Scrabulous.
Normally, I would pirate a movie because it's free, has no DRM, and is available at any time (even while the movie is still playing in theaters).
And you think this is OK because...
Then when it came out on DVD or Blu-ray later, I would buy it and give the filmmaker their fair cut (I'm not not looking to rip them off, I just want a copy of the movie to play at home).
Ah, ok, well gee, that makes it all better. I suppose in the end, no harm, no foul, right? But how about all those people who just do step 1 of your process, but not step 2? Or how about the movies you pirate but decide, nahhhh, this one I'm not gonna buy...
I only do step one most of the time, you act as if we are doing something wrong.
Slashdot Mirror
But the user would not be in the wrong since its the content "owner" who released it making the honeypot... fraudulent (or similar)
I agree,
things could have turned very nasty they just happened to get caught.
They could have used it as a form of Honeypot.
But they now have no argument to pursue filesharers since they did publish it themselves and they published on a medium that guarantees that others will also distribute it, as required by protocol.
I think it might be an issue if you publish a .torrent file yourself, but using the original .torrent would be ok because it is published with the understanding that all downloaders will also contribute the distribution.
You haven't quite gotten the logic.
Free-Speech cannot exist without anonymity or at least the option of anonymity,
these women are seeking to remove that anonymity simply because they do not like what was said about them, this can set a precedent for the future.
Anonymity is to important to allow these women to destroy it for their own needs.
Speech should be free, yes, but one should bear the responsibility of the things one says.
But then Free-Speech can't exist!
If you are not free to speak without retribution then you have no free-speech, do you think people in China have free-speech?
How do I not have a leg to stand on?
Are the homeowners automatically right when we don't have evidence?
People have to hide these days because of bitches who want to sue them for every little thing.
One of the Women was provoking the Troll in the Autoadmit thread, proving that she really is stupid.
(Anyone got a link or cache of the original thread?)
Free-Speech = Free from consequences.
The United States of America has never supported free speech.
But people don't know when to just leave shit alone, there are always asswipes (In this case the two women) who want to ruin it for others, Anonymity is a fantastic thing on the web and a vital part of free-speech.
Where is the sign?
Signs don't face 360 degress.
The advantage of usenet over a forum is that usenet cannot be censored in the way a forum can.
no fence means not boundry.
You cannot be done for trespassing by just walking over a bit of land.
The Author of this article is a dickhead, it's no diffrent than the idiots who cry "Email is dead".
There are too many self obsessed assholes these days who belive that if they stop using something so must everyone else.
How it it trespassing?
They were given public access to it.
Lots of people liked watching a good public hanging. Should we bring that back.
Yes, executions should be public.
A 10 year time limit on copyrights would be sufficient otherwise it ties up that idea for to long and stops the creation of other great games such as Scrabulous.
This is why copyrights need to expire much sooner.
Scrablous was very popular now everyone loses.
Wait until they make the "accidental" listing of "illegal" torrents.
Why would someone illegally distridute something that is avalible to the public for free?
I buy one movie every ten years, that makes me a customer.
If I suspect that an email could be used againsed me I am legally required to keep it?
I find this to be an intresting concept.
Problem is that Emails are not evidence as I am not currently under any court proceedings.
Normally, I would pirate a movie because it's free, has no DRM, and is available at any time (even while the movie is still playing in theaters).
And you think this is OK because...
Then when it came out on DVD or Blu-ray later, I would buy it and give the filmmaker their fair cut (I'm not not looking to rip them off, I just want a copy of the movie to play at home).
Ah, ok, well gee, that makes it all better. I suppose in the end, no harm, no foul, right? But how about all those people who just do step 1 of your process, but not step 2? Or how about the movies you pirate but decide, nahhhh, this one I'm not gonna buy...
I only do step one most of the time, you act as if we are doing something wrong.
I doubt they will lower the firewall for the people.
Perhaps they added uncensored lines to the backbone just for the Media.
Any communication that is addressed to me becomes mine its the same with snail mail.
If the company chooses to use their servers to carry the mail that is their choice but they have no rights to the content.