Don't all ISPs delivering to private persons do that?
Even if you order 100mbit you're still limited to like 200GB/month or similar
On a professional connection? I have no idea, on my 100/10 mbps BBB consumer connection I'm not limited at all.
Not that I use it much.
Couple of years ago they sold 10/10 though and you could pay extra for 100/100, that was 300 GB free and then some fee per additional 100 GB if I remember correctly, but that was probably mostly because people ran FTPs on it. Friend had a webpage with flash anims, funny audio clips and pictures and such and shut it down when he got 1 TB of traffic one month. Guess he should had started using ads instead:D
I assume it mean what the short description says? That is, player kills player, other players is DEAD, there is no going back, resurrect,.. Get a new char and start over if you fail in combat.
Exactly, sometimes I download porn, I do that because at those moments I want to watch porn. I did get the porn because I could thought, that don't mean it was on my wish list for the next christmas, that I have ever heard of it or would had considered buying it.
Even if you get an information screen which says "To use this service you must have bought your own copy of this game.
[x] I've read and agree on bla bla...
Setup new account: Name ______ Password _____"?
I've bought Warcraft III ROC and TFT, that don't guarantee me unlimited access to battlet net no matter what. When I connect I have to accept the rules for getting a account and if I break the rules I can have my key banned. I really doubt I could go to court saying that I somehow magically got the RIGHT to use the system.
What? Is it a chinese game or something? Everyone have to buy it? Thru the tax system or what?
and to legally do so you have to play a purchased copy
True, no-one have claimed it would be legal, just not theft or stealing property.
Though in the future you may not be able to play a friends game thanks to all the cunts stealing software now.
Oh, boho boho, because it's such a huge difference in me download a game and playing it for free or you borrowing it from your friend and playing it for free. Omg, that's also a loss, you must go buy it now! Everyone borrowing games would automatically had bought them if they couldn't borrow them!
By taking money from the developer you're taking away opportunity for smaller developers and you're taking away variety and freedom from fellow gamers because no developer will want to make risky moves or release non-DRM software.
We don't take anyones money, sure we may not give them additional money, but that's another thing..
DRM haven't got shit to do with this, there are lots of games with DRM, sort of all of them, and they are all copied. So no-drm or drm:ed doesn't make a shit of difference.
So no, actually people are taking away quite a bit by continuing to steal shit they don't own.
Copy...
I get a haircut, you see it, you like it, you get the same haircut. I will still have mine..
Sure we could had laws where you could "patent" your hair cut and you would have to pay me to copy it, but even if you just copied it without paying I'd still have it, and just because you cut your hair the same way don't automatically mean that you would had accepted paying me $ 10,000 for the hair cut if you couldn't copy it..
(Retarded and completely useless example but anyway..)
Actually they where sued for assisted copyright infringements in 20 cases, not millions. Or, maybe there was just "proof" / samples for 20 of them, anyway..
I think for the secrecy the crime must be able to give a sentence over 2 years, but the verdict don't have to. But breaking copyright can only result in 2 years max in Sweden so.
Anyway the 1st of April 2009 the new IPRED law kicked in and now they can demand information from ISPs from potential copyright crimes.
Another funny thing is that already imagined copyright violation is enough to demand a fee for the eventual break of copyrights in Sweden.
If you go out buy a DVD-R there is a fee on it which goes to, uhm, I have no idea, but probably the people who screams the most about piracy. I doubt any money goes to free software projects or small people but who knows.
Exactly. Why do people feel entitled to "free" content that other people have invested significant amounts of time and money in creating?
Because it doesn't hurt anyone that I get the content to? It benefits me though, so why not?
The big companies are stubbornly refusing to move away from distribution methods that don't satisfy modern consumers, and so many consumers have turned to piracy out of frustration and protest.
No, I just want more than I can afford / is willing to pay for.
But when it comes to the music industry we don't need their distribution longer, sad for them. I've never bought much music but if I get the option to only pay the musicians I will consider it, until then no chance in hell.
Movies is more advanced, they have huge budgets so I can't only pay the people playing in them. I wait until they hit the bargin bin though, no intrest for cinemas and no hurry in getting the movies early.
Expensive pro apps isn't for me because they don't consider me a consumer in the first place, they want to have high prices because the people who NEED the apps are willing to pay them. Me? I just want the app which is best for the work.
For shareware apps they just don't deliver something worth the money they ask for, so I pirate them. I don't have money for paying as much for a small tool as I would for a game.
Games? I just play one, I will probably buy Diablo III and Starcraft II, I haven't bought shit for my Gamecube or DS but then I don't use them either so.. I've copied lots of games just because I can but who cares if I don't use them? Not a loss for the companies..
The music industry is reaching a point that works for most of us.
For you maybe, personally I have no idea what music I like, that's why I've copied thousands of songs just to jump around between them. I don't get them because I need or like them, I get them because I want to listen to something. But currently I kinda have no music and use last.fm or something such to get my music.
If I had a bigger HDD / a machine for torrents only I'd download a hell of a lot of music. If that don't suite you I wont force you.
which is why I don't own aa $80,000 car
Because you can't get it... I'm sure if you could get a similar car for $10.000 and you wanted it you'd get it. Same if you could copy and build the damn car yourself. Not that cars has anything to do with intellectual property.
Not liking the price is NOT justification for taking it anyway.
It's culture/information/knowledge, it has been shared and spread for all times, and it will continue to. Nothing is lost from sharing and reproducing it. The consumers benefit.
A friend had posted on his facebook status how the swedish pirate party got a new member every fifth second on his lunch..
Personally I just don't know which of the dissatisfaction parties I should vote for, Piratpartiet or Sverigedemokraterna, pro-pirates or pro-nationalism and less immigrants.
The normal parties don't have any opinions off there own no longer anyway, they just say no to whatever the other side wants. Like, one side was pro-surveillance, but then the other side won the last election and delivered in that area, so now the first side is against it, or well, they say so since there seems to be support for that in the public.. Fuckers.
Slashdot Mirror
They order 100mbit and its usually 4-6MB/s.
lol, yeah, whatever you say ...
on the cost of shared bandwidth
Don't all ISPs delivering to private persons do that?
Even if you order 100mbit you're still limited to like 200GB/month or similar
On a professional connection? I have no idea, on my 100/10 mbps BBB consumer connection I'm not limited at all.
Not that I use it much.
Couple of years ago they sold 10/10 though and you could pay extra for 100/100, that was 300 GB free and then some fee per additional 100 GB if I remember correctly, but that was probably mostly because people ran FTPs on it. Friend had a webpage with flash anims, funny audio clips and pictures and such and shut it down when he got 1 TB of traffic one month. Guess he should had started using ads instead :D
Normal price for 100/10 is 320 but you get 50 SEK of if you also get SIP telephony so 270 SEK.
I assume it mean what the short description says? That is, player kills player, other players is DEAD, there is no going back, resurrect, .. Get a new char and start over if you fail in combat.
Exactly, sometimes I download porn, I do that because at those moments I want to watch porn. I did get the porn because I could thought, that don't mean it was on my wish list for the next christmas, that I have ever heard of it or would had considered buying it.
Even if you get an information screen which says "To use this service you must have bought your own copy of this game.
[x] I've read and agree on bla bla...
Setup new account:
Name ______
Password _____"?
I've bought Warcraft III ROC and TFT, that don't guarantee me unlimited access to battlet net no matter what. When I connect I have to accept the rules for getting a account and if I break the rules I can have my key banned. I really doubt I could go to court saying that I somehow magically got the RIGHT to use the system.
Next time, stick to "copying". Anything else is your interpretation.
Human cloning now! Leech Portmans DNA and roll your own copy.
Who knows, maybe even he would see the difference in having Natalie stolen from you vs having everyone being able to get their own copy.
In the best of worlds everyone can have Portman for free, and Photoshop also! :D
But if someone consume my time I "lose it" for other things I could do.
And well, girlfriends? That's real property. Imagine it, assisted girlfriend theft :D, Neil Strauss would be one poor m-f.
I know it's immoral to copy things, I do it anyway, but it's not theft. In a few cases the developers/artists/.. get less money though.
you're playing something you should be paying for
What? Is it a chinese game or something? Everyone have to buy it? Thru the tax system or what?
and to legally do so you have to play a purchased copy
True, no-one have claimed it would be legal, just not theft or stealing property.
Though in the future you may not be able to play a friends game thanks to all the cunts stealing software now.
Oh, boho boho, because it's such a huge difference in me download a game and playing it for free or you borrowing it from your friend and playing it for free. Omg, that's also a loss, you must go buy it now! Everyone borrowing games would automatically had bought them if they couldn't borrow them!
By taking money from the developer you're taking away opportunity for smaller developers and you're taking away variety and freedom from fellow gamers because no developer will want to make risky moves or release non-DRM software.
We don't take anyones money, sure we may not give them additional money, but that's another thing ..
DRM haven't got shit to do with this, there are lots of games with DRM, sort of all of them, and they are all copied. So no-drm or drm:ed doesn't make a shit of difference.
So no, actually people are taking away quite a bit by continuing to steal shit they don't own.
Copy...
I get a haircut, you see it, you like it, you get the same haircut. I will still have mine ..
Sure we could had laws where you could "patent" your hair cut and you would have to pay me to copy it, but even if you just copied it without paying I'd still have it, and just because you cut your hair the same way don't automatically mean that you would had accepted paying me $ 10,000 for the hair cut if you couldn't copy it ..
(Retarded and completely useless example but anyway..)
Actually they where sued for assisted copyright infringements in 20 cases, not millions. Or, maybe there was just "proof" / samples for 20 of them, anyway ..
So we're going to see Micheal Jackson heading to Sweden now?
lol, well, at least the breakage of his rights will give him more money in return than he have to pay for his breaks ;)
Just what we needed Sweden to be associated with, child raping artists :D
I think for the secrecy the crime must be able to give a sentence over 2 years, but the verdict don't have to. But breaking copyright can only result in 2 years max in Sweden so.
Anyway the 1st of April 2009 the new IPRED law kicked in and now they can demand information from ISPs from potential copyright crimes.
Probably goes to the share holders, not that it's their property but, whatever:
http://www.investorguide.com/stock-charts.cgi?ticker=SNE
Another funny thing is that already imagined copyright violation is enough to demand a fee for the eventual break of copyrights in Sweden.
If you go out buy a DVD-R there is a fee on it which goes to, uhm, I have no idea, but probably the people who screams the most about piracy. I doubt any money goes to free software projects or small people but who knows.
There are also fees for MP3 players and such.
How many do you think they would had sold without pirates? 30.000?
No, it wouldn't be stealing, it would be breaking copyright and eventually also breaking into their systems since they don't have legitimate access.
And then they just criminalize the use of that technology as is and that would be the end of that.
And I guess using said service at all would be just as much of an "assistance" in committing a crime.
Of course it won't, TPB will remain, lots of other trackers will remain, nothing ends.
But of course there will also be new things for sharing files.
Exactly. Why do people feel entitled to "free" content that other people have invested significant amounts of time and money in creating?
Because it doesn't hurt anyone that I get the content to? It benefits me though, so why not?
The big companies are stubbornly refusing to move away from distribution methods that don't satisfy modern consumers, and so many consumers have turned to piracy out of frustration and protest.
No, I just want more than I can afford / is willing to pay for.
But when it comes to the music industry we don't need their distribution longer, sad for them. I've never bought much music but if I get the option to only pay the musicians I will consider it, until then no chance in hell.
Movies is more advanced, they have huge budgets so I can't only pay the people playing in them. I wait until they hit the bargin bin though, no intrest for cinemas and no hurry in getting the movies early.
Expensive pro apps isn't for me because they don't consider me a consumer in the first place, they want to have high prices because the people who NEED the apps are willing to pay them. Me? I just want the app which is best for the work.
For shareware apps they just don't deliver something worth the money they ask for, so I pirate them. I don't have money for paying as much for a small tool as I would for a game.
Games? I just play one, I will probably buy Diablo III and Starcraft II, I haven't bought shit for my Gamecube or DS but then I don't use them either so .. I've copied lots of games just because I can but who cares if I don't use them? Not a loss for the companies ..
The music industry is reaching a point that works for most of us.
For you maybe, personally I have no idea what music I like, that's why I've copied thousands of songs just to jump around between them. I don't get them because I need or like them, I get them because I want to listen to something. But currently I kinda have no music and use last.fm or something such to get my music.
If I had a bigger HDD / a machine for torrents only I'd download a hell of a lot of music. If that don't suite you I wont force you.
which is why I don't own aa $80,000 car
Because you can't get it ... I'm sure if you could get a similar car for $10.000 and you wanted it you'd get it. Same if you could copy and build the damn car yourself. Not that cars has anything to do with intellectual property.
Not liking the price is NOT justification for taking it anyway.
It's culture/information/knowledge, it has been shared and spread for all times, and it will continue to. Nothing is lost from sharing and reproducing it. The consumers benefit.
Ummm...if you don't have the money why the hell do you still get the content?
Why not?
Because I can't afford all the content I want and no-one suffers from me reproducing things I couldn't afford anyway.
Personally I will do as the grand parent and copy things a lot for a while just to show them how much they suck.
Doesn't matter if they made money on it if they didn't do anything criminal, which they imho didn't.
Sure they may have answered complaints unmannered but so what, it's non of their business what people happen to share.
Sure you don't break copyright but you earn money!! Wtf! Damn criminals!
We are the country of socialism and well-fare after all ..
Torrents and torrent clients = has no ads and cost nothing.
Their webpage has ads, but you don't need to look at them, or even visit the webpage at all.
A friend had posted on his facebook status how the swedish pirate party got a new member every fifth second on his lunch ..
Personally I just don't know which of the dissatisfaction parties I should vote for, Piratpartiet or Sverigedemokraterna, pro-pirates or pro-nationalism and less immigrants.
The normal parties don't have any opinions off there own no longer anyway, they just say no to whatever the other side wants. Like, one side was pro-surveillance, but then the other side won the last election and delivered in that area, so now the first side is against it, or well, they say so since there seems to be support for that in the public .. Fuckers.
Eventually they have enough money for the damage fees, and if not I'm sure lots of people would donate.
And why not public? I have no problem whatsoever with it.