how-to block ads
|
Uniqs:
1261 |
Share Topic
 |
 |
|
|
Reviews:
 ·TekSavvy DSL
| TV Shows the most downloaded torrents That's very interesting, although strange since a study of mininova's statistics show the top 10 downloaded tv shows of 2007 are all pirated  I would hope mininova ultimately went legit, but only after the studios provided content that people want to watch the same way they are enjoying it now.
--malocite | |
| 
1 edit | Re: TV Shows the most downloaded torrents said by malocite:That's very interesting, although strange since a study of mininova's statistics show the top 10 downloaded tv shows of 2007 are all pirated I would hope mininova ultimately went legit, but only after the studios provided content that people want to watch the same way they are enjoying it now. --malocite If Mininova was serious about being a legitimate distributor of legal content, then they wouldn't accept uploads from users. They would stick to distributing content from the content companies.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page | |
| | | | Re: TV Shows the most downloaded torrents said by fAcEtIOUs:]If Mininova was serious about being a legitimate distributor of legal content, then they wouldn't accept uploads from users. They would stick to distributing content from the content companies. And there you have it, right from the shill's mouth. Only the content companies should create content; everyone else should just suck it up and consume. | |
| | | | | Re: TV Shows the most downloaded torrents said by russotto:said by fAcEtIOUs:]If Mininova was serious about being a legitimate distributor of legal content, then they wouldn't accept uploads from users. They would stick to distributing content from the content companies. And there you have it, right from the shill's mouth. Only the content companies should create content; everyone else should just suck it up and consume. If they want to upload home movies of a family picnic, go to it. But that isn't what they are uploading. They are uploading copyright protected TV shows and movies and music. And that is illegal and should be blocked. And it should be blocked by Mininova and not depend on someone else to catch them and police their site for them. That is what they would do if they were a responsible company instead of a front for thieves.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page | |
| | | |  elios
join:2005-11-15
Springfield, MO | Re: TV Shows the most downloaded torrents please tell me whats different about me downloading a show that was broadcast OTA and watching that show off my DVR
nether have the ads in them both are of the same HD quality
| |
|
| |  AlpinePremium
join:2000-01-11
Atlanta, GA | said by russotto:And there you have it, right from the shill's mouth. Only the content companies should create content; everyone else should just suck it up and consume. Wow. That's not at all what he said. Not even a good attempt at twisting his words.. | |
| | | | | | Re: TV Shows the most downloaded torrents said by Alpine:Wow. That's not at all what he said. Not even a good attempt at twisting his words.. Um, he said that to be a legitimate distributor of legal content, they'd have to stop accepting uploads from users, but only from content companies. How is that different from saying that only content companies should create content? | |
|
| | fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | Can ANYONE, for once, SIMPLY state their own side with out calling the other a SHILL because they have nothing to add in a come-back?
Simply put.. if you don't hold the copyright to the media, who are YOU to distribute it? If you don't, for example, hold the rights to the movie Die Hard, then what business do YOU have making it available on a Torrent? If you aren't Madonna or the authorized label, then why is anyone ELSE making it available for distribution via torrents?
get it?
Signed, A Shill!  | |
| | | | | | Re: TV Shows the most downloaded torrents Ok, a reply that doesn't call anyone a shill. The problem is simple. The CONTENT companies aren't DISTRIBUTING it in a manner that people want. Is that easy enough for you to understand. If I WANT something, 'maybe' I'm willing to pay for it. But if you lock it down the DRM, and cause it to expire, or not play on the device I want it to, well then, what you are putting on the market has NO VALUE to me. Thus, what the pirates offer me, (hint: the free part is just a bonus), is something that I can use on MY TERMS. Remember, DRM is NOT Digital RIGHTS management, it's Digital RESTRICTIONS management, which makes the 'value' of the bits 'ZERO' in most peoples opinion. Thus, the content producers are in a loosing scenario. They are trying to charge for something that HAS NO VALUE (in the format they are selling it in).
--
The happiest countries are the most secular. The struggle AGAINST corporations is the struggle FOR humanity! | |
| | | | | fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | Re: TV Shows the most downloaded torrents Thank you for a civil response..
Now, let me counter that one. You said: "The CONTENT companies aren't DISTRIBUTING it in a manner that people want."
True, but I do remain on the side of "who are [enter person's name] to become judge & jury in the matter? The consumer has a choice to not participate. The music is not a right. The movie is not a right either and people are not entitled, which is what you hint on.
Further, people may not like the way gas is sold, so should they steal it? (They already do, and pay hefty fines) People do like like the fact that a vehicle that really is worth $15K is sold for over $20K. Does that mean they should simply take it? On another example, yet weak but still holds to the point at hand, people don't like the way their child is being taught in school... so do the people take it on their own to go in and bust up the teacher? .... OR, do they take their child out of school and go to another one? Before anyone says "but I have a choice".. that brings me back to "you're right" ... schools have choices and SOME music does as well.
People are not entitled to the music and movie they want. It's not a right. What the topic at hand here is that they are the property of those that have made them.
I DO believe that people should have the right to do with their music as they please, in the confides of their own person. I do NOT believe that people have the right to be anarchist and distribute the content freely to everyone who wants it for free simply because "they do not like the way the content companies are distributing it.."
I'd be honest to say that people don't have to take the route to lock things down, often more than they need to be, until a theft or abuse problem occurs. Remember the days where one could leave the keys in their vehicles and their doors unlocked? I do. Even living in the country, that has changed and the kinds of locks available have gotten better, and so have alarm systems.
Unfortunately, the minority group (yet significant) are making it a pain in the ass for the rest.
To this day, I have a choice for much of my music.. I purchase it on Amazon.com and have the ability to use that music how I please. | |
| | | | | |  nekkidtruthYou fail at life.Premium
join:2002-05-20
London, ON
 ·Rogers Hi-Speed
| Re: TV Shows the most downloaded torrents said by fiberguy:True, but I do remain on the side of "who are [enter person's name] to become judge & jury in the matter? The consumer has a choice to not participate. The music is not a right. The movie is not a right either and people are not entitled, which is what you hint on. The consumer does have a choice as to whether they participate or not. That is correct. But you are wrong about who the judge and jury are in these matters. As the consumer we are absolutely the final say on what is acceptable and what is not acceptable to us. Unfortunately, too many people these days have forgotten that the consumer is always right. This is something that is still spouted to this day by so many companies, yet very few of them wish to conform to what is being asked or even demanded of them. Simply put, you either adjust to the consumer, or you lose out.
said by fiberguy:Further, people may not like the way gas is sold, so should they steal it? (They already do, and pay hefty fines) People do like like the fact that a vehicle that really is worth $15K is sold for over $20K. Does that mean they should simply take it? On another example, yet weak but still holds to the point at hand, people don't like the way their child is being taught in school... so do the people take it on their own to go in and bust up the teacher? .... OR, do they take their child out of school and go to another one? Before anyone says "but I have a choice".. that brings me back to "you're right" ... schools have choices and SOME music does as well. Sadly, nearly everything you've used as an example here is a physical object. When downloading music or movies there is nothing physical being stolen. You cannot compare stealing gas to downloading a song. I don't care how you present it. There is a huge difference between an actual object (living or not) and the movement of data. If you can't see this then you don't fully grasp how piracy works and therefore you would be forming an uneducated opinion and foolishly spewing nonsense.
said by fiberguy:People are not entitled to the music and movie they want. It's not a right. What the topic at hand here is that they are the property of those that have made them. You are absolutely right. We are not entitled to music nor to movies.
said by fiberguy:I DO believe that people should have the right to do with their music as they please, in the confides of their own person. I do NOT believe that people have the right to be anarchist and distribute the content freely to everyone who wants it for free simply because "they do not like the way the content companies are distributing it.." I agree that people have the right to do with their music as they please as well. I also believe I have the right to pass on whatever I want to my friends and or family as I see fit. Whether that is a CD or a t-shirt or a car or a DVD.
said by fiberguy:I'd be honest to say that people don't have to take the route to lock things down, often more than they need to be, until a theft or abuse problem occurs. Remember the days where one could leave the keys in their vehicles and their doors unlocked? I do. Even living in the country, that has changed and the kinds of locks available have gotten better, and so have alarm systems. I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that regardless of the fact that times have changed, I don't care if you could ever leave your doors unlocked or items laying out in the open. That's just plain stupid to do. I'm sorry but there is just no reason I could ever think of to leave the door to my house unlocked or my belongings sitting out on my front lawn.
said by fiberguy:To this day, I have a choice for much of my music.. I purchase it on Amazon.com and have the ability to use that music how I please. I'm glad that you've found a way to get what you want. It's refreshing to hear people talk about their satisfaction with something like this. I'm not at all being sarcastic either. Unfortunately, not everyone is satisfied with the way you purchase/use music.
--
Weeeeeee | |
| | | | | | | fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | Re: TV Shows the most downloaded torrents Wait wait wait wait wait waaaaaaait a minute here.
WRONG WRONG WONG!
The consumer is NOT the judge and jury. Are you mad? While the customer DOES have the ability to make their own choices, they do NOT have the same powers as a judge to unilaterally make an arbitrary decision to do as they please with something that they don't have the rights to do in the first place. Even a JUDGE has the ability to be over turned by a superior judge.
As for the consumer is always right... that's a bunch of horse hoooey started by Marshall Fields in Chicago as as a customer feel-good marketing campaign and nothing more. Just a little piece of trivia, even Marshall Field admitted that it wasn't a true statement. Any consumer that feels the customer is always right needs to stop the drugs and realize that they are the ones that usually push the envelope and NEED that statement to back up their bad/foul behavior. Besides, if you aren't buying the product, then who exactly are you a customer of to be right in the first place?
As for something being a physical object - please spare me this. There is something called "intellectual property." If you're not going to take the time to do your fact checking and simply are making things up, please don't take so much time and effort to, wrongfully, try to tell me or anyone else different... because you just did a great job in proving your own argument's weakness. Besides, you still don't touch on the fact that there is a prohibition on distributing the work that is not yours to distribute it in the first place. The only one spewing nonsense here is you. Sorry..
You state that "I also believe I have the right to pass on what ever I wan to my fiends and or family as I see fit." Says you... maybe in Ontario (and I don't even believe that) but here in the US, you don't. You CAN, if you want, transfer the music and the copy of that item to someone else.. you can loan it to someone else so long as YOU don't make copies of it and keep one or the original. Also, once again, you failed in your argument by comparing a CAR to MUSIC OR MOVIES and t-shirts. You DO realize that there isn't one law out there, right? Different laws apply differently based on the situation. You, like so many, try to apply one law to something that is totally irrelevant.
As to your picking on my statement about times changing and how we could leave things unlocked at one time, you totally missed the point.. I don't even need to say more on this one because it's clear you are trying WAY too hard to prove a weak point.
I'm afraid you and I are not going to agree. I can't even find anything to begin to back up your points at all except your right to share your belongings with who you chose.. (again, so long as YOU don't duplicate and distribute that intellectual property) | |
| | | | | | | | nekkidtruthYou fail at life.Premium
join:2002-05-20
London, ON Reviews:
·Rogers Hi-Speed
| Re: TV Shows the most downloaded torrents said by fiberguy:Wait wait wait wait wait waaaaaaait a minute here. WRONG WRONG WONG! The consumer is NOT the judge and jury. Are you mad? While the customer DOES have the ability to make their own choices, they do NOT have the same powers as a judge to unilaterally make an arbitrary decision to do as they please with something that they don't have the rights to do in the first place. Even a JUDGE has the ability to be over turned by a superior judge. Who said anything about an ACTUAL judge or jury? You don't honestly think I was referring to myself as an ACTUAL judge do you? Don't be ridiculous. My point wasn't difficult to grasp. I decide what is worthy of my money and no one else does. Therefore I AM the judge and the jury when it comes to whether or not music or a movie should receive my hard earned money.
said by fiberguy:As for the consumer is always right... that's a bunch of horse hoooey started by Marshall Fields in Chicago as as a customer feel-good marketing campaign and nothing more. Just a little piece of trivia, even Marshall Field admitted that it wasn't a true statement. Any consumer that feels the customer is always right needs to stop the drugs and realize that they are the ones that usually push the envelope and NEED that statement to back up their bad/foul behavior. Besides, if you aren't buying the product, then who exactly are you a customer of to be right in the first place? Clearly you're missing the point. Without the customer there IS NO company to purchase from. If you aren't making sales, you aren't going to be around for long. You either bend to the customer, or you go out of business. The RIAA/MPAA are learning this the hard way. If you don't see what is happening in front of you clear as day, then the drugs are being consumed elsewhere 
said by fiberguy:As for something being a physical object - please spare me this. There is something called "intellectual property." If you're not going to take the time to do your fact checking and simply are making things up, please don't take so much time and effort to, wrongfully, try to tell me or anyone else different... because you just did a great job in proving your own argument's weakness. Besides, you still don't touch on the fact that there is a prohibition on distributing the work that is not yours to distribute it in the first place. The only one spewing nonsense here is you. Sorry.. Please quote where I said copyright infringement wasn't an issue or that I don't understand what intellectual property is? I simply stated that your analogies weren't correct and hinted that you should use something other than physical objects to compare. I wasn't proving/disproving anything. I was just pointing out the flaw in your attempt to compare apples to oranges. Don't put words in my mouth. It seems that you are the one who needs to "fact check".
said by fiberguy:You state that "I also believe I have the right to pass on what ever I wan to my fiends and or family as I see fit." Says you... maybe in Ontario (and I don't even believe that) but here in the US, you don't. You CAN, if you want, transfer the music and the copy of that item to someone else.. you can loan it to someone else so long as YOU don't make copies of it and keep one or the original. Also, once again, you failed in your argument by comparing a CAR to MUSIC OR MOVIES and t-shirts. You DO realize that there isn't one law out there, right? Different laws apply differently based on the situation. You, like so many, try to apply one law to something that is totally irrelevant. When I purchase an item, regardless of what that item is, I can and will pass it on to whomever I choose. That is not a right restricted to Ontario or Canada or the US for that matter. You have a horrible habit of jumping into a defensive stance when being addressed. Clearly you didn't read what I wrote. What the above statement means is, whether it's a t-shirt or a music CD or a DVD or a car, I have the right to give to whomever I choose. I bought and paid for each of those items. Sometimes there are rules that apply such as the payment of taxes on let's say the vehicle I'm passing on as a gift, but the same doesn't apply to a CD. Now If I create a CD using several other CD's I own and pass that on, that is an entirely different concept. In the end, the fact still remains that my money purchased the said items.
said by fiberguy:As to your picking on my statement about times changing and how we could leave things unlocked at one time, you totally missed the point.. I don't even need to say more on this one because it's clear you are trying WAY too hard to prove a weak point. I didn't miss the point. Nor was I trying to prove or disprove anything. I simply stated that it was plain stupid to leave your door unlocked and or your belongings out in the open, regardless of which day and age we live in.
said by fiberguy:I'm afraid you and I are not going to agree. I can't even find anything to begin to back up your points at all except your right to share your belongings with who you chose.. (again, so long as YOU don't duplicate and distribute that intellectual property) Whether we agree or we don't agree isn't the point. You have clearly shown that you are just a oblivious as you claim I am to the facts of this issue. My points weren't meant to be fact, only to show you that everyone has an opinion. Opinion isn't fact, so stop acting like your opinions and or YOUR interpretations of the copyright laws are correct. If you're going to show off your clearly limited knowledge on this topic, at least do it with a little less arrogance. Speaking of trying too hard...
--
Weeeeeee | |
| | | | | | | | | fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | Re: TV Shows the most downloaded torrents My point wasn't difficult to grasp. You're obviously making a point that is completely different to the topic/context that I'm talking about.. since you're having your own conversation, I can't respond. You're responding to MY post, the one I started.. I'm not going to jump ship and change context for you. Sorry.. | |
| | | | | | | | | | nekkidtruthYou fail at life.Premium
join:2002-05-20
London, ON Reviews:
·Rogers Hi-Speed
| Re: TV Shows the most downloaded torrents said by fiberguy:You're obviously making a point that is completely different to the topic/context that I'm talking about.. since you're having your own conversation, I can't respond. You're responding to MY post, the one I started.. I'm not going to jump ship and change context for you. Sorry.. There was nothing taken out of context. Either your reading skills need to be improved or you're unable to follow a conversation. My points were on topic and in context. If you were unable to follow them that doesn't automatically mean that I was unclear.
said by fiberguy:Sometimes people go to a great length to kill an example to make a point. My point at gas was nothing more than to point out the example of how if someone doesn't like the way it's sold, they'll just make their own decision to take it. Why should their be a line between intellectual products and tangible ones? Here is a tip. Stop comparing physical property to "intellectual property". You're the one who keeps using silly things like gas as an analogy for something that is nothing but data. There is a line between intellectual and physical property because the LAW put the line there. Show me where it's stated that physical and intellectual property are identical and where it states that taking either whether by physically stealing it or downloading it is punishable equally the same. You can't. Therefore there is no reason to compare the two as they are two entirely different things. | |
| | | | | | | | | | fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | Re: TV Shows the most downloaded torrents Pot - meet kettle. There was plenty taken out of context.. look at how you totally blew my "judge" analogy out of proportion.
I could easily go back and analyze these posts and show you where you are wrong and taking things way out of line, but truly, I don't care to correct you and set you straight. Its not worth my time. I'm here to discuss issues, not the english language and comprehensive patterns.
I'll leave this alone here. | |
| | | | | | | | | | nekkidtruthYou fail at life.Premium
join:2002-05-20
London, ON Reviews:
·Rogers Hi-Speed
| Re: TV Shows the most downloaded torrents said by fiberguy:Pot - meet kettle. There was plenty taken out of context.. look at how you totally blew my "judge" analogy out of proportion. I could easily go back and analyze these posts and show you where you are wrong and taking things way out of line, but truly, I don't care to correct you and set you straight. Its not worth my time. I'm here to discuss issues, not the english language and comprehensive patterns. I'll leave this alone here. It's not that you don't want to, it's that you can't. There is in fact a difference. You got all defensive when it wasn't necessary and over compensated by attempting to claim victory on an argument that didn't actually exist. Regardless, the above made me laugh out loud. Thanks, it's been a rough Monday.
--
Weeeeeee | |
|
| | | | | | | | | To reply about TV Shows. They are BY LAW BROADCAST in the clear. THAT is what they are. (apart from cable channels). But the point is, the TV show is FREE. Period. Downloading something that was WILLINGLY distributed for free is NOT THEFT, and NOT COPYRIGHT INFRINGING. Period.
Physical Property is NOT the same as intellectual property. Intellectual property is an ARTIFICIAL right given to a product. They are two different things. The ONLY thing that intellectual property does is provide an ARTIFICIAL limit on the item, not a real limit. If I take gas from the gas station, I am stealing. If I had a replicator like star trek, and I replicated the gas, would you consider that 'stealing'. I sure wouldn't. The original owner can still sell the physical goods, I just made a copy, and in no way degraded the object. Of course, the 'value' of the object is lowered, because why would anyone want to pay for it if they could make a perfect copy for free?
The problem you appear to have stems from the fact that the public now has access to a 'star trek replicator'. Guess what, times change. If we ever DID make a physical replicatot, I'm guessing you would want it to be outlawed. Of course, the outlaws would still use it, and in todays world, something like 90% plus of the kids today are using the 'replicator' feature of the internet, and don't see anything morally wrong with it.
Lets put it this way. Why don't we implement sharia law? I mean, that's the 'right' way to teach morals, correct? We can all become muslims, and go back to living in tents, and living off the land.
Grow up. The world has changed. Technology has given us the AMAZING ability to duplicate and transfer knowledge and arts to millions of people. The only way to stop it would be to shut down the internet.
--
The happiest countries are the most secular. The struggle AGAINST corporations is the struggle FOR humanity! | |
| | | | | | | | | fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3
1 edit | Re: TV Shows the most downloaded torrents So, basically, it's safe to summarize that you're saying that people who make a living off of their 'intellectual property' should, well, either enjoy the satisfaction that they make people happy and all that kinda stuff, and take a job at the A&P to make a "real" living, right?
From what you're saying, in this amazing time we are in, that really, it only takes one copy. Since there is one copy available, eventually, it will trickle through the electronic landscape and everyone will get a copy for free, right?
Now, let's get back to reality for a moment. How do you suggest we pay for all these amazing systems to allow for this copying to happen?
Sometimes people go to a great length to kill an example to make a point. My point at gas was nothing more than to point out the example of how if someone doesn't like the way it's sold, they'll just make their own decision to take it. Why should their be a line between intellectual products and tangible ones?
Protections are in place to ensure that industries can be sustained. The arts ARE in fact an industry, one that the government actually takes seriously. You know that skyscraper that goes in your downtown? They generally require 10% of the value of it to be placed towards the "art" of the building in order to pass the project.
In order for YOU, or anyone, to understand what the issue is here, you first have to accept that music is not just something you download, rather, it still IS an industry that does have costs associated with it.
One thing we WILL agree on is that they way people are able to access this music MUST change to be fair to those that are buying it. I do NOT believe that it should be shared freely, that's for sure. I DO believe that these restrictions that are placed on people suck and need to come to some sort of an end.
Amazon and Apple, I think, have it right. They digitally encode the owner into the file. If that person is sharing, well, then they know who to go after. In that case, I say let them!
As for television, again, you and I actually DO agree here. If it's publicly aired on TV, and someone wants to record and do what ever with it.. fine! (So long as they are not making money off that product in which violates the "license" of that copyright holder (ie, the NFL) - that's where we part ways)
I'd say that if the stuff comes across the radio or TV, fine, but if you're getting a product that was purchased, ie: DVD, VHS, CD or even a downloaded purchase, then I don't think that gives you a right to turn around and share or redistribute a PRODUCT that was DISTRIBUTED to you, for a price, to others either for free or for money. (Even as a DJ, I had to pay ASCAP and BMI when I used music I purchased because of the royalties that are attached to that purchased medium)
By the way, it's hard to debate over something that doesn't exist, nor most likely never will. As much as I enjoy Star Trek, I doubt we'll ever see them like as on TV. (Besides, they only existed in a PURE socialist society which really changes everything we're talking about now)
*Edit: to be honest, I will admit to something. I DO agree that the music industry does need to evolve and change. I do agree that they're going to have to learn to live on, maybe, 10 million a year instead of 100 million a year. If it were me, yes, music would be freely sharable. Maybe that would be after 1 year of the initial release. Until that time, no sharing.. give the artist a chance to make some money. Also, they can make their money in concert tours and other B2B use, such as artist selling the rights for, say AT&T, to use the music in advertising, etc. (This is where the pay reduction comes to play)
The industry CAN change.. people can encourage change. However, I'm a law abiding person that doesn't believe that anarchy is the way to change.
A simple way to address this.. change the copy right law so that items become public domain MUCH sooner. I guess I'm saying that while I think 65MPH is too slow for the freeways, I'm not going to drive 80MPH until the government figures out that the system really can handle it and should change it. | |
| | | | | | | | | | elios
join:2005-11-15
Springfield, MO | Re: TV Shows the most downloaded torrents btw the speedlimit thing is great analogy in the pirates favor
theres a video some were some of some guys in Atlanta going dead on the speed limit in all 4 lanes and had traffic backed up for miles | |
|
|
4 edits | Then how would users distribute their own content that they created directly if they so wanted to? What if they don't want to give up their intellectual property rights to a no name content distribution company?
One thing about what intellectual property is control of how the original creator wants his/her creations distributed to the world, and of course be compensated for their works if they so desire. It should be the choice of how the original author or creator distributes their works. It should not be up to the content companies unless the original creator chooses to give that control to said companies.
Sounds like to you only companies, not independent minded people, should distribute content and that is why you attack tracker sites such as Mininova because it provides a choice for the original creator to distribute their works as they see fit. Thus denying content companies the potential profit from the works of others.
Now granted I am sure Mininova probably needs to put forth an effort to clean up their trackers. Even I see content for the most part I would question the legality on but compared to the Pirate Bay, Mininova is a saint. Mininova works with content publishers to distrubute their works and they offer a service to remove torrents from their website if the copyright holder of the content requests so. The Pirate bay doesn't have that. | |
| | | | | Re: TV Shows the most downloaded torrents Its really not fair to the artists to download thier product for free - we all know that. But as long as it is so easy to get we will continue to do it. If I was an up and coming artist I would release my product on cassette tape or vhs.
Funny thing though, I did see an ide cassette drive - unreal right?
--
»www.devicemanager.net | |
| | | | | | Re: TV Shows the most downloaded torrents Yeah I see those on occasion.
But hey if you really want to be anal about controlling the distrubution of your own works put it on a 8 track or Betamax.
--
True Happiness Must Come From Within | |
| | | | | | | Re: TV Shows the most downloaded torrents I hear ya, its just that the industry had more contol back then. Heck they could choose to drop a single on mp3if they wanted. But it is way to far gone now. They would have to come up with a format that the msft's couldn't get their hands on and it would be cracked in 2 hours. I guess it is just where the industry is heading.
--
»www.devicemanager.net | |
|
| |
|
