how-to block ads
|
Comments on news posted 2004-12-14 11:10:53: The MPAA is expected to launch a new offensive today, filing civil suits against the operators of Bit Torrent trackers. ..
| |
page: 1 · 2  |
 
thender2
Glamour Profession
Premium
join:2004-05-16
Staten Island, NY
| I wouldn't worry about it. I've read around some ed2k release forums, and many people have gotten 5+ of these 'warnings', and continued to share, and nothing happens. It's a scare tactic, and little more.
--
Contrary to popular belief, the sky is not falling.irc.freenode.net #atu | |
| | DONKEYKONG01
join:2003-03-21
Metairie, LA
| Re: I wouldn't worry about it. said by thender2  :I've read around some ed2k release forums, and many people have gotten 5+ of these 'warnings', and continued to share, and nothing happens. It's a scare tactic, and little more. Exactly!!! Why stop sharing?
Just because of a few stupid letters spamming everyone to try to scare the crap out of all of them.
People that are easily scared are wimps, they couldn't put up a fist to defend themselves from anyone who chose to pick on them for fun.
How come horror movies do not scare them but a threat letter does?
What's the difference?
People are weird, and are illogical creatures that can't make sense of anything including their lack of rights and say their free to do as they please; only for it to back fire on them due to their lack of courage.
That's why we call them lamers for being so dull and uninteresting.  | |
| | | DirtyMic
join:2003-11-19
Pompano Beach, FL
| Re: I wouldn't worry about it. said by "Samuel30":
Exactly!!! Why stop sharing?
You don't have to stop sharing. Just don't share copyrighted materials. Regardless of how you feel its illegal. A lot of people said this about the RIAA and now lawsuits are flying all over the place.
said by "Samuel30":
People that are easily scared are wimps, they couldn't put up a fist to defend themselves from anyone who chose to pick on them for fun
This is probably the stupidest statement ever. Defend yourself for illegal activities? Being picked on for fun? LMAO. Peopel say rights are violated? If you trade legitimate files you have nothing to worry about.
said by "Samuel30":
That's why we call them lamers for being so dull and uninteresting
I call them law abiding citizens.
For the lord's sake - DVDs are like $10 just go oyut and buy one. | |
| | | | DONKEYKONG01
join:2003-03-21
Metairie, LA | Re: I wouldn't worry about it. cOMPLICATED aREN'T WE? sING IT!
la la la...
dude please stop. you're killing me. | |
| | | | | DirtyMic
join:2003-11-19
Pompano Beach, FL | Re: I wouldn't worry about it. It might be complicated for the simple minded. | |
| | | | | | | | drskiploader
join:2005-01-01
San Francisco, CA
| Re: I wouldn't worry about it. Too true. The purchasing of copyrighted material continues and always will. The media industry will always make a large profit and rightly so due to the large amount of entertainment they pump out every day but, when do we reach a point where we are unable to share our media discoveries with friends as an expression of art that means something to us? Should everyone who hears or sees a piece of 'art' randomly then be forced to pay for that experience? How far though, will people allow corporate entities to control what is viewed/said/sung/spoken in the U.S. through the ability to pay? Tv used to be free, summer camps were under pressure to pay for sung campfire songs by the rights holders, all independent data backs up the fact that song shareing increases sales and that the previous slump was random general economy downturn based, the MPAA admitted that file sharing affects the tiniest percentage of movie sales (the overseas pirates are harder to go after), etc.. The true criminals are harder to go after so the media industries go after the consumer to improve their profits in the short term for the stock holders benefit. Copyrighted material should be protected but not at the expense of the general public's personal rights. My last rant is about ownership. If I don't actually own the "art" on a given disc that I purchase, then doesn't that mean a lease agreement? So, if I paid my $7 for Hendrix back in '79 but the wax melted in my trunk twenty years ago, didn't I pay my lease agreement in good faith and shouldn't I be allowed to access that music since the mere conveyance of said entertainment was destroyed but still payed for? I either own it or I don't. The music/movie industry can't have it both ways but they are trying. | |
| | | 
2kmaro
Think
Premium,ExMod 1 BC
join:2000-07-11
ColossalCave
clubs:  
1 edit | It is interesting to note what you think of all of those who choose not to steal intellectual property - I may be dull and uninteresting, but I'm not a thief.
Now, the next time you choose to call anyone a lamer, perhaps some self evaluation might be in order? At least I, for one, pay my way through life, rather than leeching along.
You, know, if it weren't so blatantly illegal to 'share' (lovely way to spell STEAL) copyrighted material, I'd be right in there swapping and sharing and fighting the RIAA tooth and nail. As it is, I really think their methods are shabby and border on ruthless and I have no sympathy for them - but the bottom line in the whole issue is that regardless of their methods, they are attempting to at least slow down the largest band of thieves to ever get together and work toward a single purpose since Ali-Baba took on the Bad-40!
--
Season's Greetings to All! | |
| | | | scomps
join:2001-06-05
Utica, NY | Re: I wouldn't worry about it. AMEN! | |
| | | | | | | | | BosstonesOwn
join:2002-12-15
Everett, MA
clubs:
 ·Comcast
| Re: I wouldn't worry about it. said by Nightfall :I have to agree 2kmaro. That is the problem I have with some people who are pro file sharing. They claim that the RIAA or MPAA are stepping on their toes or being a pest when they are stepping up against file sharing. The problem is that intellectual property is being illegaly distributed and they have a right to be upset about it. What they are doing is dumb, I also agree with that. However, 2 wrongs don't make a right. You can add a 3rd to agreeing with you guys.
--
"It's always funny until someone gets hurt......and then it's absolutely friggin' hysterical!" | |
| | | |
thender2
Glamour Profession
Premium
join:2004-05-16
Staten Island, NY
| Allow me to interject and rant here. I don't agree with Samuel30's statements, yet I also do not agree with the idea of intellectual property laws, how it is now.
Right now, if you are to buy a CD, you pay $15 for it, and the artist gets $1. Independent labels are getting the idea - magnatune allows people to download CDs before buying them, and gives half of whatever you pay to the artist. The price of CDs are $5 minimum, yet many choose to pay more because the label does not take all of the money, because the label welcomes you to listen before you buy, and because it's not $15-$20 in the first place. You have to change with the times.
A CD store in the local mall sells many of the CDs I want for $20. CDs are the only piece of 'intellectual property' sold on a medium that has not had its price go down over time, and twenty years is quite a long time. In many cases it has gone up. If this is not an outrage - then look at the price of any other media produced in the early 80s and see if the price hasn't gone down since. See if the price of any form of technology hasn't gone down since. Also, consider the fact that most of the technologies that have had their prices reduced have improved over time, while most CDs now get mastered similarly or worse than those created in the early 90s and late 80s.
In the year that napster came out, CD sales went up 11%. In its second year, CD sales were up 5%. You hear about lost CD sales on the third year quite a bit as the RIAA attempts to gather sympathy. They are correct, they did lose sales after a while, but it is also true that they produced less than half the amount of CDs in the third year of Napster's arrival than the second, of course they'll have less sales.
They are losing business because of how they treat those who create the products they're selling. Courtney Love Does The Math is a good article as it portrays just how they treat the artists.
If they don't learn how to embrace the technology, as it's not going away anytime soon, they'll never thrive as a business. Suing what should be your consumer base isn't going to solve anything - perhaps fair play will. They should expect the same sort of tactics from their customers that they use themselves. The demand for open music is there, and isn't going to go away just because of a few lawsuits.
--
Contrary to popular belief, the sky is not falling.
irc.freenode.net #atu
--
Contrary to popular belief, the sky is not falling.irc.freenode.net #atu | |
| | | | | 
Combat Chuck
Too Many Cannibals
Premium
join:2001-11-29
Erie, PA
| Re: I wouldn't worry about it. said by thender2 :yet I also do not agree with the idea of intellectual property laws, how it is now. Actually what you don't agree with is how the business is run, you said nothing about intellectual property laws.
The problem is what the record companies see is a group of people who complain about their music sucking yet continue to flock to it over P2P networks.
--
Attention all decks! Brace for whining! | |
| | | | | |
thender2
Glamour Profession
Premium
join:2004-05-16
Staten Island, NY
| Re: I wouldn't worry about it. intellectual property laws have been tightened up all around by the RIAA, ever hear of the DMCA?
People who say their music sucks usually don't go to P2P to download what they were referring to when they said that. They usually refer to mainstream RIAA music. That's a shallow way of looking at it. Since 95% of the music out there is tied to an RIAA label, it's hard to find music that isn't part of an RIAA label.
--
Contrary to popular belief, the sky is not falling.irc.freenode.net #atu | |
| | | | | | |
Combat Chuck
Too Many Cannibals
Premium
join:2001-11-29
Erie, PA
| Re: I wouldn't worry about it. You still have said nothing about IP laws. You are complaining about the labels business practices.
Practices that won't change BTW because people still procure the music, they just don't want to pay for it. The RIAA/MPAA will continue to fight these people until the populace stops procuring the music (via both legal and illegal means), and they will have the support of the government because they stay, for the most part, within the law.
If you people would actually boycott the RIAA's product rather than boycotting the transfer of money for the RIAA's product, this would be over within a couple years. But you won't and it will drive us to even more Bizarre laws.
A wise man once said the success of a free society is based on the inner controls (read: self control) of it's people.
--
Attention all decks! Brace for whining! | |
| | | | | | | | 
SRFireside
join:2001-01-19
Houston, TX
| Re: I wouldn't worry about it. said by Combat Chuck :You still have said nothing about IP laws. I would like to interject on the problems with IP laws if I may. IP law, or copyright law more specifically, has been twisting into becoming the exact thing copyright law was supposed to protect against: Exploitation of the artist. When copyright law first came out there were only two things it was made to do. 1) Make sure the original creator of a particular work gets compensated when somebody else sells their work. 2) Make sure the original creator of a particular work gets proper credit for that work and make sure others don't take credit instead.
Pure and simple. You sell someone else's creation you give them a cut of the profits and don't say you created it yourself. Copyright law also promised an expiration date for these works because our founding fathers knew that artistic expression needs to proliferate and should be given to the people once proper compensation has been given.
All this was to be in control of the artist. Not the music company, not the publishing company, not the movie studio. Now that has changed drastically. Ever since legislation was written in to allow copyright holders to sign away their rights the very companies that copyright law was supposed to keep from exploiting artists have come back with a vengeance. Now term limits have increased exponentially to the point where intellectual property will never go back to the public. Artists get next to nothing for their work and in some cases can't even take the credit for what they create. Now the various entertainment industries are trying to make sure the only way you can enjoy a work is if you pay them.
When you aren't making money from sharing a copyrighted work and you aren't affecting the livelihood of the copyright holder you aren't infringing. The RIAA and MPAA are constantly adding laws to try and change that. NET and the DMCA are some examples. Copyright law is such a mess right now that the trade companies are finding all sorts of loopholes and grey areas to help prove their stance, which is still contrary to what copyright law really is. Copyright law needs to be taken away from the labels and given back to the artists. This is why current IP laws are a mess. | |
| | | | | | 
lyls
@tele.dk | uhm of course you have to DOWNLOAD and listen to it first before you can complain about it sucking..... i dont see your point | |
| | | | | | |
Combat Chuck
Too Many Cannibals
Premium
join:2001-11-29
Erie, PA | Re: I wouldn't worry about it. new invention, it's called the radio. | |
| | | | | | | |
lyls
@tele.dk | Re: I wouldn't worry about it. and.......? | |
| | | |
Hmmmmm
@wii.com
| So since Microft and a few other big corps invented this intellectiual property B$ its all of a sudden the LAW?
(Or can be purchased as a new law)
Lets just thank our lucky stars that Gates and Balmer and Job werent around in the Roman and Greek days of inventions!
Let us also be thankfull it was Newton who got conked on the head and not Gates because then it would cost you by the keystroke to reply to this.
Imagine if Pastuer had been Gates or one of the other mega- corpcronies we would all be dead because of the Intellectual property laws of creating other anti toxins and medicines from his first idea.... or the Costs per user. | |
| | | | | VirtualLarry
Premium
join:2003-08-01
| Re: I wouldn't worry about it. said by Hmmmmm:
So since Microft and a few other big corps invented this intellectiual property B$ its all of a sudden the LAW?(Or can be purchased as a new law)
Lets just thank our lucky stars that Gates and Balmer and Job werent around in the Roman and Greek days of inventions!
Let us also be thankfull it was Newton who got conked on the head and not Gates because then it would cost you by the keystroke to reply to this.
Imagine if Pastuer had been Gates or one of the other mega- corpcronies we would all be dead because of the Intellectual property laws of creating other anti toxins and medicines from his first idea.... or the Costs per user. Exactly! Thanks for posting, yours was one of the best anon posts that I've read here, ever. If only our "duly elected" legislators, supposed "statesmen of the people" (ha! more like of the big-bucks megacorps...), understood what you do. | |
| | | | | |
Genghy
@speakeasy.n
| Re: I wouldn't worry about it. Let's not kid ourselves, intellectual property has been around for a long time. Copyrights, patents, trademarks, all of these fall under intellectual property.
It's great that you can bring up examples in history, but let's not forgot other greats, such as Einstein, who did copyright their works. Let's not forget that many of the medicines we take for granted nowadays are protected by patents - the only reason companies do all that research anyway.
Great quote, can't remember who, "socialists are people who think everybody is jesus."
If everybody was jesus, and had the same attitude Pasteur did, then maybe things would be ok. But let's not kid ourselves, how much of your life have you dedicated to helping society and improving the life of everybody, not just yourself and your family? The concept of intellectual property exists for a reason. Although it's application may be flawed, it's not a bad thing.
To what SRFireside said, a lot of indie labels are rising nowadays. I know I've seen a site or two, where they state they give 50% of revenue to the artists. The artists have the choice of opting in to the major labels, which will probably provide better ads, placement, etc. or going the indie route. In fact, many indie artists are gaining a lot of popularity today, and many fans of these artists actually will buy their albums, to show their support.
Obviously, a music artist just doesn't put out a cd, voila. It takes a lot of effort, and there are alternatives now. The reason music companies, publishing studios, and movie studios exist is because they provide, first, the mechanism to make the good, second, the mechanism to publicize it, and finally, the mechanism to sell it. If a writer, artist, whatever, wanted to do it on their own, they have that path open to them. And I'm sure you can catch their next blockbuster on the IFC, or hear about their book or cd from the friend of a friend of a friend. With the rise of the internet, more people can go the independent route, but many still choose to go with mainstream labels. And let's not kid ourselves, very few are naive enough to not know what they're getting into. When you're signing a major deal for a lot of money, you're going to have some good lawyers who understand the contracts.
Some artists provide samples of their music online, and even now many labels are teaming up with various online stores to offer their music at a very affordable price.
When you aren't making money from sharing a copyrighted work and you aren't affecting the livelihood of the copyright holder you aren't infringing.
I don't know what your definition of copyright and livelihood is, but you are infringing. The fact is, every dollar matters to these companies, especially if they are publicly held. As publicly held companies, they have the obligation and duty, by law, to secure profits, and they have the right to go after people who infringe upon their copyrights.
Artists choose these companies for a reason, and when they opt in, they know what their contracts entail.
I'm not saying I agree with the companies business practices, but I am saying that they have the right to go after people that violate their IP rights. Although there may be some problems with IP law, everybody makes their own personal decisions regarding it. If your decision is to break them, then you have to be aware that you will be open to prosecution. | |
| | | |
lyls
@tele.dk
| its not a lovely way to spell STEAL its a lovely way to spell COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT ... alot of people dont understand the difference between a copy and stealing... both are illegal but way different and that has been explained numerous times yet people dont understand it | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | 
moseley
Premium
join:2001-05-05
Lemoyne, PA
clubs:
| In a landmark decision the Supreme Court has ruled that all copyrighted material is sacrosanct. In the decision, the Court noted its inability to stop copyright infringement after the Napster case. The ruling has outlawed the use of any device or material that aids in the distribution, broadcast or creation of illegally reproduced items.
Lawmakers immediately started compiling a list of newly outlawed items. The list includes but is not limited to VCRs, radios, tape recorders, CD burners, televisions, typewriters, pencils, pens and paper.
"The Supreme Court has really gone too far this time, with this line of reasoning, listening and speaking could soon be added to the list," Said Alan Derzowitz, legal analyst, expressing concerns over the ruling.
Senator Kennedy said the law required a new way of thinking, "This morning I almost quoted Jimmy Carter, I had to stop myself. I knew that I would be repeating copyrighted material, they could have arrested me."
"Stealing is bad," Said President Bush in support of the Court "people have the right to have their thoughts protected." However, sources inside the White House are concerned. "Plagiarism is the cornerstone of American politics," said a White House aide speaking on the condition of anonymity, "If the people of the United States wanted a candidate that could think, they would have never elected the President, he has never had an original thought."
When asked about the ruling members of the heavy metal band Metallica would only say that they found the ruling, "...slightly amusing."
--
Rock Chalk | |
| |
thender2
Glamour Profession
Premium
join:2004-05-16
Staten Island, NY
2 edits | edited
[delete please] | |
| |
US Apache
@xx.chart
| First off is file sharing stealing? NO. People we can not and should not use such broad terms. This can leave the door open for all sorts of stupid things to happen. There are legal uses for file sharing and those uses should have there rights violated simply because some use the media for " Illegal uses". This whole issue of stealing copyrighted material isn't a new issue, we seen it come up when reel to reel tape machines where invented,with 8 track tape, cassette tape, video tape, and even cd recorders. But yet the industry ( Music & Movie)keep on and made more and more money then ever. Why was that????? When you where kids did you are did you not record music off the radio? Do you now as adults record your favorite day time dramas while you are at work or away from home? Did you ever copy a record album(remember those) to a tape media you could use in your car or your personal walk-man? Well if the Record & Movie industry have their way now you would all be branded as thieves. So lets stop calling people names. The real reason that the entertainment industry is doing all this right now is that it is easier for them today to use the same technology (computers) to entrap and go after a larger group of potent al victims then was ever before possible. It has nothing to do with weather it is right or wrong when you get right down to it, it has nothing to do with the fact that the quality is better in this form,(the digital age)when all is said and done it pertains to making a buck.. That's right, its now easier for them to do so using the same media.
Think of it this way, your mind is a type of recorder, where will there version of the law stop, when it is illegal for you to repeat some someone else once said, will everything become copy righted? And while you are at it let me tell you this, yes I have in the past download songs from Napster and other sources. Did I consider it stealing? NO,why? Because all of the music I was downloading feel into two groups, Music no longer in print (meaning you can't buy it even if you wanted too), or music I already own on another form of media ( LP, record albums)which was easier for me to download then to rig up my systems from different parts of the house to make a LEGAL COPY for my own personal use. Plus people, MP3 format is a much poorer sound quality then CD's.
Plus, the industry can only enforce their will upon USA citizens, their laws do not affect other countries. The truth be known, we are small fish compared to what I personally seen going on in Asia this year on business. DVD Software, Music, pennies on the dollar very good quality too. Trust me, the entertainment industry knows this and are pissed,so they are lashing out at us, be on guard, watch those laws you let them have!!!!!
PS. Anyone who wants to quote me feel free, I want to share, I am after all a Native American, and isn't that what this country has always done for strangers???? | |
| underscore
join:2004-04-20
Fairfax, VA | Nothing wrong with that I suppose that is better than suing potential customers. | |
| 
Phil
Rojo Sol
Premium
join:2001-06-11
Camarillo, CA | IRC & newsgroups... I still think the vast majority of leechers are not smart enough to use IRC or newsgroups and they certainly aren't "returning" there...
--
fRiTz+Nomad+ | |
| | 
n2jtx
join:2001-01-13
Glen Head, NY | Re: IRC & newsgroups... I have found IRC to have much less available than it did a year ago (at least on Undernet).
--
I support the right to keep and arm bears. | |
| 
J D McDorce
Premium
join:2001-12-29
Westland, MI | Downloading or Uploading? The news items indicates that the MPAA is going after downloaders, while the cited communication from Cox references post or transmit, which is indicative of uploading. Which is it? | |
| |
See 44 replies to this post | |
FishNET
join:2004-07-01
Haddonfield, NJ
1 edit | Theyll never win Filesharing is here to stay, even if they dont like it.
BitTorrent is AMAZING, I didnt think I'd like it because it seemed complicated, but when I wanted to download a Linux ISO I got it, and the speed was just amazing, AND no companys bandwidth was wasted sending me the ISO. Theres more uses of BitTorrent than pirated stuff, although it IS used for that. I think more and more trackers will show up over time, or a court case will end up making them not allowed to sue BitTorrent users. Especially since the tracker isnt doing anything wrong, what theyre doing is as simple as me sending someone here a text file that has information to a warez site on it... thats not illegal, is it?
Wow, this was first, but I took too long to type it haaha | |
| | DONKEYKONG01
join:2003-03-21
Metairie, LA
| Re: Theyll never win But if you think so arrogantly like that, they will win. Its because people like me who keep the sharing spirit alive. All you have to do is stop using p2p for any purpose and they automatically wins.
That is their goal... freedom is not easily won, we no longer need to fear this monster growing bigger all the time.
This is a criminal organisation that punishes people for things that are irrelevant to their sales of crappy and overly priced products that most cannot afford anyway.
All they care about is milking me and you for things that should cost next to nothing.
How well do you get paid at a low paying job?
Why charge so much for something that is so easy to reproduce?
Gee, you ever wonder? that's how stupid they think we are.
Copyrights is form of communism that exploits people for their hard work in return for their hard labors, where the products are owned and cannot be reproduced for others to enjoy. By punishing people for things that are supposed to be shared, they are violating our freedom in a free country that the market is not free yet but rather owned by the few pigs of America. | |
| | | 
hitachi369
Embrace Your Rights
Premium
join:2001-10-03
Grand Rapids, MI
 ·AT&T U-Verse
| Re: Theyll never win said by DONKEYKONG01 :Copyrights is form of communism that exploits people for their hard work in return for their hard labors, where the products are owned and cannot be reproduced for others to enjoy. Wow...
Copyrights inspire capitalism big boy
--
When you can’t make fun of yourself, you cant let anyone else make fun of you. That pretty much makes you a tight a**ed jerk.
-IamZed | |
| | | |
irrl
@swbell.ne | Re: Theyll never win I wish you guys would quite it out already, this is no way to get along. It's childish and unnecessary. | |
| ParanoiaInc
join:2002-08-28
Tucker, GA
| How is MPAA filtering users for identification? I am curious as to how MPAA protects themselves against defamation of character liabilities? If I create a 5GB file and name it after a movie, do they actually d/l it and check it to make sure its authentic, then send out a warning? Also, isn't the proactive sending of warnings Spammish in any interpretation?
I haven't used Bit Torrent, so pardon any ignorances on my part. | |
| | 
manfmmd
Premium
join:2003-01-14
Earth
clubs: | Re: How is MPAA filtering users for identification I would think that an innocent user that hosts a "dummy file" should be able to counter-sue the hell out of them. Drag it out into court and let 'em have it.
--
America.....F*ck Yeah... | |
| | | DONKEYKONG01
join:2003-03-21
Metairie, LA
| Re: How is MPAA filtering users for identification said by manfmmd :I would think that an innocent user that hosts a "dummy file" should be able to counter-sue the hell out of them. Drag it out into court and let 'em have it. But why not help other sharers fight for their right, instead of of sitting around doing nothing and moaning about it?
They can't win on their own, they need our help. If we all get together and say screw them, it is more effective then one person ducking it out against a group of dictators. | |
| |
DoggyD
@sniparpa.net
| ParanoiaInc...the nature of BitTorrent is such that it's difficult if not impossible to spread fake files. In laymans terms...basically you start with a diagram of exactly how to build the complete file of whatever you are trying to get. (The "diagram" is the torrent file itself.) Your software then grab bits and pieces in no particular order from anyone who has pieces that you need and your BitTorrent client reassembles everything. So...anything that doesn't match the checksums in the original torrent is discarded. | |
| | | 
BodyBumper
join:2004-06-21
Beverly Hills, CA
| Re: How is MPAA filtering users for identification said by DoggyD:
ParanoiaInc...the nature of BitTorrent is such that it's difficult if not impossible to spread fake files. In laymans terms...basically you start with a diagram of exactly how to build the complete file of whatever you are trying to get. (The "diagram" is the torrent file itself.) Your software then grab bits and pieces in no particular order from anyone who has pieces that you need and your BitTorrent client reassembles everything. So...anything that doesn't match the checksums in the original torrent is discarded.
None of this applies if you are the originator of the file which is what the original poster was talking about | |
| vic102482
Premium
join:2002-04-30
Upper Marlboro, MD | What are they planning to do about overseas Trackers? Sites like supernova and a bunch of others are offshore. This fight will go nowhere like the RIAA.
--
I tie a rope around my penis and jump from a tree, don't you wanna grow up to be just like me!!!! | |
| | 
bmorrisj
join:2001-04-11
Buena Park, CA | Re: What are they planning to do about overseas plus sites like suprnova are a bunch of mirrors, its gonna be a lot of work for the mpaa, take one down another one pops up.... | |
| | 
Pirate515
Premium
join:2001-01-22
Brooklyn, NY
| said by vic102482 :Trackers? Sites like SuprNova and a bunch of others are offshore. This fight will go nowhere like the RIAA. My thoughts exactly. Anyone hosting a site like this in the US is just asking for it.
I do believe that at some point MPAA tried to go after some tracker site located in Holland, only to be told to piss off in an extremely impolite way  .
--
Ask me no questions, and I'll tell you no lies...
DOWN WITH NAZISM, FASCISM AND COMMUNISM!!! BOYCOTT RIAA and MPAA!!! | |
| 
Anonuser
join:2003-01-03
Milwaukee, WI | I I will post what the MPAA sends us trying to get us to take files down on Demonoid.com
Will be a bit before I get it up though.
--
Chris Allessi Global Datacenter | |
| | |
bmorrisj
join:2001-04-11
Buena Park, CA | Re: A question if your isp keeps logs, yes, they point straight to you at the time of use.... | |
| |
Pirate515
Premium
join:2001-01-22
Brooklyn, NY
| said by l33t :If you got a business class DSL line that switches IP's would they still be able to find you? Off-topic, most of the residential DSL or cable lines switch IPs every now and then, thanks to IP addresses being issued by either DHCP or PPPoE. Quite a few business users actually go for services that let them keep the same IP, especially those who need these lines to run servers and such.
Getting back to the topic, bmorrisj is right. Almost all ISPs keep logs, and they can always tell who you are no matter how many times your IP address changes.
--
Ask me no questions, and I'll tell you no lies...
DOWN WITH NAZISM, FASCISM AND COMMUNISM!!! BOYCOTT RIAA and MPAA!!! | |
| 
pokesph
It Is Almost Fast
Premium
join:2001-06-25
Sacramento, CA
clubs:
·Comcast
| UMMMmmm... Strange.. wouldn't the MPAA and others involved have to break their own little rules/law/whatever to connect to the torrent in question to get the IP's of those people sharing?
Isn't that in and of itself a crime?
--
Webmaster Steve
- - - - - - - - - - - -
»ppnhosting.com
»sphenterprizes.com
»pokemonpalace.net | |
| |
See 11 replies to this post | |
markopoleo
join:2003-04-02
Bonne Terre, MO | Bittorrent data question Is bittorrent data encrypted to a extent? This would get rid of the hassle of all this, would it not? They got you IP, but no way to proove you are actully getting the file.. | |
| | t10
join:2003-05-25
Woodbridge, ON
| Re: Bittorrent data question lol yeah, you've connected to "Terminator_2_DVDRip_Xvid" for milk and cookies ;p
In all honesty, like others have mentionned, technicallities (like file being complete or whatever else) will *NOT* be a problem for these people, they can bend legislature, dont forget, what will be a problem for them, is the trackers bring located where their schoolbus full of lawyers cannot get them.
My guess, is that they will go after end user, sendign letters left and right. You might not care, but if your average middle-class joe gets one, they'll poop themselves.
Plus if your mommy gets one that was meant for you... hahaha good luck explaining that to her. | |
| 
35375105
Premium
join:2002-11-20
127.0.0.1 | IRC + proxy IRC + Anonymous Socks Proxy = GG
slow download speeds for my warez though
--
One truth prevails | |
| 
GlenQuagmire
Giggidy Giggidy Giggidy Goo
Premium
join:2004-02-16
Grand Rapids, MI
| TV Episodes Why is downloading TV episodes illegal. First of all I can record the the same thing using my computer and thats is not illegal. If they are worried about removing the ads I can do the same thing with the right software. When I am watching the show that I just recorded I skip past the ads anyway. That fact that I download a show that is being broadcast ed on public airwaves does no seem illegal to me. Could someone please explain this. | |
| |
See 9 replies to this post | |
Amunz
@mi.ch
| IRC!!! listen. on irc, you dont have to share. on irc, bots will post what they have to offer. all you do is simply request the file, and depending how many users are downloading, it will then send you the file. THATS IT! NO SHARING! NO GETTING CAUGHT!
use your heads.
www.mirc.com - irc client
www.google.com - search for 'xdcc catcher' if you want it to be easy and automated.
www.packetnews.com - search for 'packets' (what the bots have to offer)
www.ircspy.com - same as above
k. have fun not sharing! | |
| | scomps
join:2001-06-05
Utica, NY
| Re: IRC!!! said by Amunz:
THATS IT! NO SHARING! NO GETTING CAUGHT!
Until one of those bots get connected to by the copyright holder, and all the logs are requested.
Or less threatening, but still bad enough for the bots themselves, an oper comes along, spots it and locks down the whole channel. (i've done that.. I'm an oper)
Just because you don't have to share doesn't mean you can't be caught. I've got my "services" logs dating back to 1998, even lame mirc bots can log, and eggdrops do by default.
Yes, I know I'm just responding to an anonymous putz, but if it discourages some other 11 yr old from making the same leap of faith, I'll take my shots.
--
Scott Johnson -- developer of MWall. Contact me for more information. | |
| | | ross
join:2000-08-16
 ·Digizip
1 edit | Re: IRC!!! Unbelievable that you would be such a TOOL!
Service logs back to 1998? WTF for? Are you a DHS wannabe? You sound like the type of person that wouldn't want to inconvenience the authorities by making them produce a search warrant, or a subpeona. I'm surprised you don't just monitor and report "suspicious" activity directly to them. But, maybe you do.
Why don't you post the information about who you work for, and instructions for how to avoid your dubious IRC "service"? | |
| | |
WyattS
@swbell.ne | IRC bot logs are not legally admissable evidence. They're just text files, and easily modifiable for good or bad. | |
| 
pcdebb
RIP dadkins
Premium
join:2000-12-03
Tampa, FL
clubs: | interestingly enough.... suprnova is down... | |
| | 
MacGyver
Bell Sucks
Premium,ExMod 2003-05
join:2001-10-14
Orleans, ON | Re: interestingly enough.... That's nothing new.  | |
| |
Pirate515
Premium
join:2001-01-22
Brooklyn, NY
| said by pcdebb :SuprNova is down... Works for me, and faster than ever .
In any case, they tend to go down every once in a while, and every time it had happened so far, it has not been MPAA's fault.
--
Ask me no questions, and I'll tell you no lies...
DOWN WITH NAZISM, FASCISM AND COMMUNISM!!! BOYCOTT RIAA and MPAA!!! | |
| 
A900MHz Fan
join:2004-07-12
Mitchell, SD | What to do? What should the RIAA do about illegal downloads? | |
| | Ahrenl
join:2004-10-26
North Andover, MA
·Verizon FIOS
1 edit | Re: What to do? said by A900MHz Fan :What should the RIAA do about illegal downloads? Lower the prices of their products and cut their overhead (ie. 12,000 lawyers and VP's which have no bearing on their final product) so that its not worth it for people to download their products. If a DVD cost $5's or less I very much doubt MOST people would bother. The people who are left would not purchase at any price, and as the scene dried up would be more and more unable to acquire what they want anyway.
The actual production costs for DVD's and CD's is far below $1 per unit. The normal profit margin for a business (which is of course extremely industry specific as well) is 17%. | |
| | |
SRFireside
join:2001-01-19
Houston, TX
| Re: What to do? Don't forget to factor in support costs and IP costs. Not just production. But you are right. CD's cost so much more than they cost it's unreal the amount of profits the record labels are raking in. If you sell a CD for something like $6 there would still be a profit margin of 20%-30%. DVD's I am not so critical about since you can get some decent movies for as low as $6 and average costs getting between $15-$20 (which by the way is a definite improvement to the $30 standard price six or seven years ago). | |
| | | | Ahrenl
join:2004-10-26
North Andover, MA
·Verizon FIOS
2 edits | Re: What to do? said by SRFireside :Don't forget to factor in support costs and IP costs. Not just production. But you are right. CD's cost so much more than they cost it's unreal the amount of profits the record labels are raking in. If you sell a CD for something like $6 there would still be a profit margin of 20%-30%. DVD's I am not so critical about since you can get some decent movies for as low as $6 and average costs getting between $15-$20 (which by the way is a definite improvement to the $30 standard price six or seven years ago). That's why I didn't say they would make a 90% profit margin. Considering support and transportation costs are both hugely subject to economies of scale, and they could expect sales to increase dramatically with the price drops, I still see them making an obscene profit margin. Unfortunately most DVD's that are $6's are the ones that shouldn't have been made at all. That's one of their (MPAA/RIAA) real beefs. Now that people can experience the content before buying it people are realizing how much utter crap is put out and charged the same amount for the small amount of quality content.
The fact of the matter is that the companies represented by the MPAA/RIAA are just resellers and have no right to monopoly/oligopoly profits. But no one in their right mind would give them up without a fight. The blackmarket is a well documented part of economic theory, and until someone in charge realizes that threatening your customers is the wrong way, it will continue. Just be thankful that the digital blackmarket removes the ability of more established organized crime from being able to intercede its other services on those who partake. | |
| | | | |
SRFireside
join:2001-01-19
Houston, TX
| Re: What to do? Personally I find some real gems in the $6 DVD range. Not to mention some really good movies are starting to go down to that price after being in the market for a few years. Yeah you have to sift through a lot of rough to find that diamond. but my point being inexpensive DVD's are much more readily available than the CD counterparts.
One of the reasons the DVD market is such a success is because the studios have listened to their customers and given them what they wanted like lower prices, more content, and lower turnaround time for recent movies being released. Instead of crying wolf about downloads while at the same time reaping the benefits of a strong market they need to continue to offer those things that entice the buyers. | |
| | batmanst
join:2003-12-23
Beverly Hills, CA
1 edit | Make it legal!!!
Plain and simple. | |
| Chosen1
join:2001-08-05
Orange Park, FL
| Two points First, I've never even seen BitTorrent so correct me if I'm wrong, but someone mentioned if you are downloading, you are uploading also, right? So if the MPAA downloads a file to see if it's legit (or just to see if it CAN be d/l), they are then uploading also, and therefore committing the same crime, right?
Second, all these stories on the RIAA/MPAA pursuing people seem to focus on those who are sharing (uploading) but has their ever been an instance where they went after someone who has only downloaded? I'm an avid newsgroupie and NEVER upload (read: leech). Even when I used Kazaa a while back, I never uploaded. Should I be concerned? I'm not trying to start, or feed, the moral debate. Just curious if they've ever taken the angle of pursuing the leeches.
-Chosen1
--
There are 10 kinds of people in this world - those who understand binary and those who don't. | |
| |
See 12 replies to this post | |
jsouth
Jsouth
join:2000-12-12
Wichita, KS | So what? I just rent and burn. No muss, no fuss. | |
| 
53059959
Temp banned from BBR more then anyone
join:2002-10-02
PwnZone | everyone download a movie cuz mpaa is gay | |
| | scomps
join:2001-06-05
Utica, NY
| Re: everyone said by 53059959 :download a movie cuz mpaa is gay oh. well since you put it that way OK!
What do you want be when you grow up?
--
Scott Johnson -- developer of MWall. Contact me for more information. | |
| | |
53059959
Temp banned from BBR more then anyone
join:2002-10-02
PwnZone | Re: everyone a copyright lawyer =P | |
| 
N3OGH
Bear patrol must be working like a charm
Premium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
·Verizon FIOS
·Verizon Online DSL
| I don't share, and I don't worry Well, the bottom line is, I don't file share, so I don't worry too much about it.
I have no interest in downloading movies from the internet, even if it were on a pay basis. At least not as the technology exists today.
The surround sound and large screen are too much of the movie experience for me, so I would just as soon drop $20 on a DVD, and watch it in my living room.
As for music, why steal what you can now buy for a buck? It makes no sense to me.
What cheeses me about the whole thing is the heavy handed use of lawsuits. I'm so sick of this one sicking lawyers on that one like some sort of litigation attack dog.
Quite frankly, it sickens me, and it's the real story within the story. How long are we going to allow this?
Oh wait, all the judges are lawyers, a bulk of out legislators are lawyers.
Anyone get the feeling we're being overrun?? | |
| | 
WiFiSpy
Rtfm
Premium
join:2004-03-20
Everett, WA | Re: I don't share, and I don't worry let them get busted.....the smart people are on IRC or Usenet
--
www.WiFi-Spy.org | |
| | |
scott15271
@co.uk
| Re: I do share, and I don't worry why spend money on lawsuits when they should be spending money on better protection thats the only way to stop it make it worthless for ppl to crack encyption so its actually worth while buying . i am a fairy heavy downloader but my theory is if they cant be bothered trying to solve there copy protection then they will never win. its like saying go after everyone who has a virus on their machine because there spreading it. when really the exploit for the virus should be fixed and you eleminate that problem. | |
| | | |
Nappi
@optonline.net
| Re: I do share, and I don't worry The thought of Napster-like sharing of movies (which is already happening on a small scale) has Hollywood's collective boxers in a bunch. As a result, all new digital-cable-ready TVs and set-top devices must have copy-protected FireWire or Digital Video Interface ports. But older gear, including millions of early HDTVs, have analog connections that lack copy protection. Owners of such sets could take a digital TV feed, output it to a VCR, digitize it on their PCs, and then share it with 4 million of their closest friends.
So Hollywood has come up with ways to close the "analog hole" and control DTV:
Broadcast Flagging
Selectable Output Control
And
Down-Resolution
That's not exactly welcome news to the 5 million owners of HDTV sets, most of which have analog ports. The Home Recording Rights Coalition advocates a ban on down-resolution and SOC, and supports federal laws that give users the same copy privileges for digital content as they have for analog. »www.hrrc.org/
They not only want to control your computer they want your TV too.
Screw them! Because evidently they have no problems trying to screw you first. | |
| | | | |
irrl
@swbell.ne | Re: I do share, and I don't worry This topic have been beaten to the death so many times already. What is the use of contributing to something as useless as this?
Give it a rest already... so boring. | |
| | | |
|
·