BitTorrent Developers Working on Ways to Get Around Sandvine > hell ya.

reply to ThrowDemsOut

Re: hell ya.

Bad argument. I have a car, I should be able to run over whoever I want with it!

A better point would be that copyright enforcement is not beneficial to either the artist or the consumer. The only people getting rich off the current copyright scheme are the middle men who contribute nothing. They USED to contribute by promoting bands and distributing their content, but now all that can be done by the average computer savy child.

reply to james
Bad analogy! This is more like the city doing something to the roads to prevent you from moving out of the lane you're in because there's a chance you might hit somebody on the side of the road.

Streets are open and free. It's up to you to follow or break the law and use the streets in a considerate way.

The same should be said of the SERVICE you are PAYING FOR.

reply to james

reply to james
Good thing there's no pirated software available as .torrents...

It's not just about music and movies.

reply to guhuna
If you want a pipe you can do with as you please, then you should look into a T-1 or something similar. It appears that DSL allows people to use their service much more freely... there's your answer.

Just in case you claim that DSL isn't available in your ares, that excuse doesn't excuse you or any user from violating the AUP/TOS in which you accepted and agreed to.

You also make mention that "It seems that only cable CO's have problem with people using BT." and for that I applaud you... This shouldn't have to be stated to you or anyone in the first place.. Cable is a shared medium and must be managed .. DSL, the slower connection, as you already may know, is a dedicated line to the CO and what you do does not affect others in your neighborhood.

Cable internet has ALWAYS been sold primarily as a residential service for residential type use. That's where I will stop. Anything further is guaranteed to double the current number of messages in this thread.

reply to jester121
Yeah Poor Adobe Photoshop became the standard for photo editing because of all that damned piracy! I wonder how many people actually paid for photoshop while they were learning on it and screwing around.

I downloaded a pirated copy of S.T.A.L.K.E.R. and loved it, then I saw it on Steam and bought it.
I downloaded a pirated copy of Maya and have been learning how to use it, supposing I get good at 3d modeling and actually make money with it. I will then spend the money for a license (mostly because the penalty for corporate users is pretty bad).

Small amounts of piracy can be very good for a product. I'm not saying everyone should get everything for free, I'm just saying it's not as black and white as the lawyers are trying to make us think.

I make an exception for those who charge "customers" for the pirated product. Those are what the definition of Pirate SHOULD be. Anyone sharing for free shouldn't be punished, everyone knows sharing is caring 3 .

reply to james
Bad argument. I have a car, I should be able to run over whoever I want with it!

A better point would be that copyright enforcement is not beneficial to either the artist or the consumer. The only people getting rich off the current copyright scheme are the middle men who contribute nothing. They USED to contribute by promoting bands and distributing their content, but now all that can be done by the average computer savy child.

You totally missed the point. I think the whole problem stems from the fact that comcast limits and caps your data. This whole post would not have been an issue if they named their service "limited hsi".

reply to raduque
Freedom would include freedom to obey, or break, any law.