site Search:


 
   
story category
Who Knew? 99% Of Available BitTorrent Files Violate Copyright
Does anybody think blocking BitTorrent will stop piracy?
by Karl Bode Tuesday 02-Feb-2010 tags: legal · Fileswapping · business · Op/Ed
Tipped by S_engineer See Profile
Princeton Professor Ed Felten over at the Freedom To Tinker blog explores a survey his students recently completed on BitTorrent file availability that found, not surprisingly, that a significant majority of the content available violates copyrights. Again, this is what's available, not necessarily what's being actively downloaded, the survey taking a random, 1021-file sample of files available via the trackerless variant of BitTorrent, using the Mainline DHT. Of that data, just ten of the files, or approximately 1% were likely to be non-infringing:

Overall, we classified ten of the 1021 files, or approximately 1%, as likely non-infringing, This result should be interpreted with caution, as we may have missed some non-infringing files, and our sample is of files available, not files actually downloaded. Still, the result suggests strongly that copyright infringement is widespread among BitTorrent users.

Raise your hand if you're surprised? Of course the fact that a lot of pirated content is available via BitTorrent isn't surprising, and while some are using the study to support the view that clearly no good can come of BitTorrent, others are debating the study's methodology. Mike Masnick over at Techdirt however, thinks the study just shows how much better a job the entertainment industry could do at delivering what consumers want:

I don't think anyone has ever denied that a ton of infringing content is shared on BitTorrent -- and, as some have rightly suggested part of the problem is that those who provide the content haven't done a good job making alternatives available, and that drives people to these potentially illegal options. But what I don't get is the claim by industry lobbyists and lawyers that this somehow proves that BitTorrent needs to be stopped/fixed/held back/filtered/whatever. I read into it exactly the opposite. It shows what a piss poor job so much of the industry has done figuring out how to embrace the obvious demand that's out there, and how to leverage that smartly.

Blocking BitTorrent simply drives those consumers to distribution platforms that are harder to track. Again, if the entertainment industry wants to compete with piracy, they need to offer cheap, easy, and elegant alternatives.

view: topics flat text 
Post a:
hemzer

join:2009-10-29

Cheap?

You said it "Cheap" now we as people cant step on their monopoly controlled profits can we?

With invention of file sharing what has happened is it has helped people to band together and work out the correct market price of the materiel. This could not have happened if not for file sharing.

Now inst it nice the true market value of the copyrighted materiel is being derived by the market(people) force and not by the RIAA or some other crap named industry controller that dictates how much we (people) should pay for it?

Goober
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
kudos:4

Re: Cheap?

said by hemzer:

You said it "Cheap" now we as people cant step on their monopoly controlled profits can we?

With invention of file sharing what has happened is it has helped people to band together and work out the correct market price of the materiel. This could not have happened if not for file sharing.

Now inst it nice the true market value of the copyrighted materiel is being derived by the market(people) force and not by the RIAA or some other crap named industry controller that dictates how much we (people) should pay for it?
Glad you feel that way. At least the piraters can feel better assigning a value of zero to games, applications, etc., where developers have worked hard to create great products.
NeoandGeo

join:2003-05-10
Harrison, TN

Re: Cheap?

May be hard work, but if they don't like offering a fair value, then I don't feel sorry for them when their IP isn't sold.

Goober
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
kudos:4

Re: Cheap?

It's a catch 22 situation. People like you who encourage piracy cause an increase in price and that increase in price causes more piracy.

In reality, the market should determine pricing through legal competition. I make product A and sell it for X dollars. Company B then comes along and design a better product and sells it for X-y dollars. Company A then has to either drop prices or make a better product. That's how it should work.
NeoandGeo

join:2003-05-10
Harrison, TN

Re: Cheap?

And I wish it did. I've always said it, but goods that aren't actual physical products virtually all need to be half of their selling price.

Goober
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
kudos:4

Re: Cheap?

said by NeoandGeo:

And I wish it did. I've always said it, but goods that aren't actual physical products virtually all need to be half of their selling price.
I don't disagree. But, I disagree with the illegal workarounds or silly justifications for infringement.

en102
Canadian, eh?

join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA

Re: Cheap?

While I'm not into piracy, the argument of no piracy would lower the price.

The cable industry used to say this - 'stop piracy' its costing us. They pretty much mandate digital boxes, and most new TVs no longer support CATV, killing that argument, and yet TV prices are now going higher at a faster rate - even with competition.
--
Canada = Hollywood North

Goober
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
kudos:4

Re: Cheap?

Apples to oranges.

The cable business and the software/content business are completely different animals. You can't compare the two effectively.

digitalfreak
Premium
join:2005-12-09
Blacklick, OH
said by en102:

While I'm not into piracy, the argument of no piracy would lower the price.

The cable industry used to say this - 'stop piracy' its costing us. They pretty much mandate digital boxes, and most new TVs no longer support CATV, killing that argument, and yet TV prices are now going higher at a faster rate - even with competition.
Console gaming could be used as an example. While games for consoles have been pirated, I'd have to imagine that number is very small compared to the number of consoles overall. Games are still $59.99...

Blaming piracy for high prices is pure bullsh!t.

elitenick

@ssphonesdirect.com

Re: Cheap?

While I agree with what you're saying, I think the way you're getting there is wrong.

Recently: »www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/11/12/cnet···dex.html

1 Millions xbox's in 1 wave? Ouch.. that's a lot.

Gbcue
Almost P.E.
Premium
join:2001-09-30
Santa Rosa, CA
kudos:8
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse

1 edit
said by en102:

While I'm not into piracy, the argument of no piracy would lower the price.

The cable industry used to say this - 'stop piracy' its costing us. They pretty much mandate digital boxes, and most new TVs no longer support CATV, killing that argument, and yet TV prices are now going higher at a faster rate - even with competition.
Now they just make up their money by overcharging for DVRs and cable boxes. No piracy != lower prices. It means higher prices, now that they're a monopoly, or there's collusion (sounds like the RIAA and MPAA).
--
My Blog 2.0

Da Geek Kid

join:2003-10-11
NexusOne
kudos:1
Ok So Assume Piracy, prior to the price point and jack up 500% Net so the Shareholders would buy in. Don't forget the product the bug ridden.
NeoandGeo

join:2003-05-10
Harrison, TN

Re: Cheap?

Missing a second comma, and a couple words? I don't understand your post.

Da Geek Kid

join:2003-10-11
NexusOne
kudos:1

Re: Cheap?

meant it for Goober.. who thinks everygame is ought to worth 50USD+ 19.95 sub/mth business plan...

Goober
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
kudos:4

2 edits

Re: Cheap?

said by Da Geek Kid:

meant it for Goober.. who thinks everygame is ought to worth 50USD+ 19.95 sub/mth business plan...
Wrong. I disagree with that pricing and don't buy into it. Ask my kids . . .

And that's how it should work in reality.

BTW: I also don't understand your grammar.

Pirate515
Premium
join:2001-01-22
Brooklyn, NY
On top of that, I think another thing that kills game sales is DRM and copy protection that is being used on media that games are sold on. Some of it is so outright draconian (StarForce anyone) that people would rather download a bootleg with all the cr@p stripped down then pay for a legit version and put up with all the "security" checks and constantly having to prove that they have in fact paid for it. Seems like with many games legit users are being punished for doing the right thing instead of being rewarded as they should be.
--
Ask me no questions, and I'll tell you no lies...
A MESSAGE to the RIAA and the MPAA: You shouldn't wound what you can't kill...
NeoandGeo

join:2003-05-10
Harrison, TN

Re: Cheap?

Not to mention the ones they believe they are inconveniencing are the ones playing before release.

Goober
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
kudos:4
said by Pirate515:

On top of that, I think another thing that kills game sales is DRM and copy protection that is being used on media that games are sold on. Some of it is so outright draconian (StarForce anyone) that people would rather download a bootleg with all the cr@p stripped down then pay for a legit version and put up with all the "security" checks and constantly having to prove that they have in fact paid for it. Seems like with many games legit users are being punished for doing the right thing instead of being rewarded as they should be.
You just made my point. In a society without blatant and clear IP infringement, there would be no need for that kind of draconian DRM.
NeoandGeo

join:2003-05-10
Harrison, TN

Re: Cheap?

Is that why it is still used, although the only person it inconveniences is the paying customer?

Goober
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
kudos:4

Re: Cheap?

said by NeoandGeo:

Is that why it is still used, although the only person it inconveniences is the paying customer?
I personally think so. It's a clearly non-working miguided attempt by the industry to protect its IP.

I'd be interested in knowing how Turbotax has done. There was a period of a year or two a few years back where TT tried the DRM route and ticked off a lot of paying customers. They dropped the DRM. I'd like to know what impact that had on their sales.

Gbcue
Almost P.E.
Premium
join:2001-09-30
Santa Rosa, CA
kudos:8
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse

Re: Cheap?

said by Goober:

said by NeoandGeo:

Is that why it is still used, although the only person it inconveniences is the paying customer?
I personally think so. It's a clearly non-working miguided attempt by the industry to protect its IP.

I'd be interested in knowing how Turbotax has done. There was a period of a year or two a few years back where TT tried the DRM route and ticked off a lot of paying customers. They dropped the DRM. I'd like to know what impact that had on their sales.
I still buy it every year. I would never download a copy from the internet knowing what might get programmed into it from a bootleg copy.

Those years with TurboTax, they tried a CD key and copy protection. Everybody basically rebelled.
--
My Blog 2.0
InfinityDev

join:2005-06-30
USA

human

"a society without blatant and clear IP infringement"?

I hope you're not implying one particular country or society steals. Humans commit all the crimes of selfishness they want when there are no repercussions. They do so even more when their peers actively reward the behavior.

Goober
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
kudos:4

Re: human

said by InfinityDev:

"a society without blatant and clear IP infringement"?

I hope you're not implying one particular country or society steals. Humans commit all the crimes of selfishness they want when there are no repercussions. They do so even more when their peers actively reward the behavior.
Nope. I don't even know which country is the worst infringer of IP rights anymore. I will venture a guess based on my past experiences in trademarks and patents that the vast majority of IP infringement is in China and India.

anon123

@mistry.McMaster.CA

approval from:
NeoandGeo See Profile

I make product A and sell it for X dollars. Company B...oh wait...I am also company B...

Gbcue
Almost P.E.
Premium
join:2001-09-30
Santa Rosa, CA
kudos:8
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
said by Goober:

In reality, the market should determine pricing through legal competition. I make product A and sell it for X dollars. Company B then comes along and design a better product and sells it for X-y dollars. Company A then has to either drop prices or make a better product. That's how it should work.
When all companies are in collusion, that doesn't bode well for competition.
--
My Blog 2.0
Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO
No maybe they just need to find a new business model.

I play a free to play game (2moons). You can play that entire game and accomplish every single thing the game has to offer without ever paying a dime for the game.

However, they have a smart business plan by also offering things for sale in a D-Shop that help you along your way. Many of the things are just a matter of convenience like autopots for health and mana. Through that I have paid more than $1000 to play that game in the last year and will probably pay close to that over this coming year to continue playing it.

I can't tell you in my 20 year game playing experience that I have ever invested more then $60 in a single game until playing this one. Even in the early Doom2 and DukeNukem days and paying Kali, DWANGO, and whatever gaming service didnt come close.

Goober
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
kudos:4

Re: Cheap?

I don't think so. A business should be able conduct its business as it sees fit (all within the law, etc.) without the fear of a bunch of rip-off artists messing with the business model.
Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

Re: Cheap?

LOL! Well a business that doesn't adapt to it's consumers doesn't deserve to stay in business (and won't given enough time).

You are not a very wise individual for saying anything else.

Goober
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
kudos:4

Re: Cheap?

Thanks for teaching me how business works. lol.

I didn't say anything else, BTW. It's your inability to comprehend what you read that's preventing you from understanding my point. But, keep at it and you may get it some day.
Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

Re: Cheap?

I comprehended you perfectly fine, you obviously do not comprehend me.

You clearly stated a business should be able to do what they want within the law without fear of people stealing it. I very much agree with you.

However, it is clear that what they are currently doing is not going over so well with those same people they want as consumers. Those "consumers" have a work around so now it is up to the business to adapt to win those consumers back. Whether you, I, or the companies agree or like it does not matter. The point of it is simply that the onus is on them to make the consumers see the value in what they want to sell and for the price they want to sell it at. And if they can't do that, regardless of the reason, then they should go bankrupt and no longer be in business.

Goober
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
kudos:4

Re: Cheap?

You still don't understand.

Pirates will be pirates, they won't be payers. WTF world do you live in?

robrecord

@sky.com

Re: Cheap?

I disagree. I pirate some things and pay for other things, depending on how I feel about them. I know many others who do the same. We enjoy the freedom to try, and support the industries too.

Besides, art driven by profit is the worst kind of art - I don't support that.

jhboricua
ExMod 2000-01
join:2000-06-06
Minneapolis, MN
said by Goober:

I don't think so. A business should be able conduct its business as it sees fit (all within the law, etc.) without the fear of a bunch of rip-off artists messing with the business model.
And when those same businesses keep resorting to corrupting lawmakers into passing draconian laws that were drafted by their lobbyists in closed meeting rooms with our elected officials, which penalizes consumers by eroding their fair usage rights, they deserve all they get in return from the rebelling public.

The argument that piracy IS the culprit behind price increases and draconian DRM schemes is old and fallacious. The ideal world of these companies would be to charge you for every single use of their song, game, content, etc...

As we move more and more into the digital age, it has become more and more evident that this is the business model they envision.

Copyright law has been twisted by these businesses granting them way too much power. It stifles creativity and competition and has thus completely lost its original focus.
--
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe." - Albert Einstein
Jose A. Hernandez * System Engineer * MPLS, Minnesota, USA *

Goober
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
kudos:4

Re: Cheap?

Personally, I prefer the legal route.

You can like the alternative. We all have our preferences.

approval from:
kneedeep See Profile

As a person who actually works for a living, and expects a paycheck for every hour of dedicated work I perform, I have to wonder what you believe is draconian about establishing and enforcing laws which attempt to guaranty that a person is paid for every hour that they work? Do you not expect to be paid for every effort you put forth to earn your money? Don't you believe that a person is entitled to be paid based on the quality and worth of their work? Don't you get pissed as hell when someone jacks your possessions that you worked for hours to buy? Wouldn't you scream to the Labor Relations Board if you worked for 40 hours one week and your employer just decided that he wasn't going to pay, just because he liked keeping that money rather than paying it to the rightful owner of that money?

The hours one sweats to labor at a job are completely noncorporeal, just like the billions of data bits that are transferred across the Internet. Yet, the bits that contain the information rushing your Direct Deposit wage transfers to your bank are supposed to be secured and surely deposited exactly as earned, but the bits that belong to a song writer, musician, publisher, author, producer, filmographer, game programmer, all are utterly worthless, a joke, something to be freely stolen? Where is their paycheck coming from, if not from those who are using and enjoying the products they produced as the result of their labor? At what point does the reality, that of the fun and games that are euphemistically called "music sharing", shamelessly and openly supported by the last two generations of ungrateful slackers begin to hit home, that it is outright theft, not rebellion or protest or "something cool to do because it doesn't hurt anyone"?

I personally have refused to buy a single music or video item which is downloadable via the Internet. I physically go to a music or retail store and pay to legally possess the physical disc and reward its creator for their efforts. Yes, it's inconvenient as hell, but a whole less inconvenient than dealing with (what should be) a guilty conscience for having stolen someones livelihood from them. I have a 10MB/sec broadband connection, but refuse to use it for IP delivery, for one reason: I believe in fairly compensating someone who has worked for me and has produced efforts or products that I have enjoyed. If a producer and a bunch of actors have made and published a movie that I like, I'm paying for it, dammit, because it's the right thing to do. They fully earned my money! The same thing goes for songs and games. They worked hard and deserved their pay for having earned my enjoyment of their product. Even if I have to save up for a month or two to afford it. And dammit, if you possess a product, be it a pair of shoes, a cell phone, a car, or a song or computer game, you are expected, no REQUIRED by law and the provisions of moral behavior, to pay for that product. If you do otherwise, you are simply a low-life, stinking, dirty, scum-sucking thief, not a laudable revolutionary. NO DOUBT. I'm old fashioned that way... you know, honor and integrity and justice and all of that all-American bull-$#1t that Americans used to believe in. Not all of the Obama-inspired free-loading utopianist crap that passes for the right "change" for our society today.

Anonymous_
Anonymous
Premium
join:2004-06-21
127.0.0.1
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Comcast
·Time Warner VOIP
·RoadRunner Cable
said by Skippy25:

No maybe they just need to find a new business model.

I play a free to play game (2moons). You can play that entire game and accomplish every single thing the game has to offer without ever paying a dime for the game.

However, they have a smart business plan by also offering things for sale in a D-Shop that help you along your way. Many of the things are just a matter of convenience like autopots for health and mana. Through that I have paid more than $1000 to play that game in the last year and will probably pay close to that over this coming year to continue playing it.

I can't tell you in my 20 year game playing experience that I have ever invested more then $60 in a single game until playing this one. Even in the early Doom2 and DukeNukem days and paying Kali, DWANGO, and whatever gaming service didnt come close.
wow if you pay a 1,000 to play one game you must have no life
--
"Roll Over, Get Tough"
has been changed to

"Get Greedy and have the Customer Bend Over"
hemzer

join:2009-10-29
My point is....there wouldn't be a need for pirating if the price was right. It wouldn't be a worth while effort to hack it.

Goober
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
kudos:4

Re: Cheap?

Disagree categorically.

ThrowDemsOut
If you can't convince 'em, confuse 'em
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Mullica Hill, NJ
kudos:4
said by hemzer:

You said it "Cheap" now we as people cant step on their monopoly controlled profits can we?
But "Cheap" will never be cheap enough when zero is the option available.

See 10 replies to this post
Cogdis

join:2007-03-26
Floral Park, NY
The **AA's missed their chance.
I honestly believe that if the industry came out with a napster-like program to download music 10 years ago (simple and cheap) then piracy wouldn't be nearly as rampant as it is today. Instead they chose to fight progress and make their solutions more complicated (DRM) while piracy just kept getting easier...

People just want to type in a song name and download it (that's why Itunes is still successful in spite of piracy and being late to the market).
amigo_boy

join:2005-07-22
Reviews:
·magicjack.com
said by hemzer:

With invention of file sharing what has happened is it has helped people to band together and work out the correct market price of the materiel.
Markets theory says prices are determined by willing buyers and sellers. A bunch of buyers sharing something for free (against the seller's wishes) isn't a market price.

People who argue for copyright violation seem to oscillate between how it's just a "market" like anything else, or it's not really property (and not really theft) because the Supreme Court emphasized the fact that intellectual property is treated differently (to accomplish the same goals as criminal law concerning physical property).

Mark

See 16 replies to this post
Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
Copyright as we suffer under it now is a crime against America and the rest of humanity in general.

we need total copyright reform, something that lets a creator get their due but not be locked down for a century.

my idea is hardlocked 15year copyrights from publish date. they would also only be transferable on death of the artist but the timer would not reset. they would also be non extendable and not transferable outside of a legal Will. in short they couldnt be sold around like currently.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports
andre2

join:2005-08-24
Brookline, MA

Re: Cheap?

said by Kearnstd:

my idea is hardlocked 15year copyrights from publish date. they would also only be transferable on death of the artist but the timer would not reset. they would also be non extendable and not transferable outside of a legal Will. in short they couldnt be sold around like currently.
I agree with this except that I don't see why they shouldn't be freely transferable, as long as the time period is fixed. Fifteen to twenty years makes sense based on the fact that it's a fraction of a lifetime, and that one can usually double one's money in less time than that by investing it. For any artist who's concerned about the future, that should be enough time - and if they don't care, then no amount of extra time will motivate them.

ThrowDemsOut
If you can't convince 'em, confuse 'em
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Mullica Hill, NJ
kudos:4
said by Kearnstd:

my idea is hardlocked 15year copyrights from publish date. they would also only be transferable on death of the artist but the timer would not reset. they would also be non extendable and not transferable outside of a legal Will. in short they couldn't be sold around like currently.
I agree with that. Though this would have nothing to do with pirating material, which is usually taken within months of publishing it. So while what you describe is a good idea, it will not lessen copyright infringement at all.

anno4areason

@cox.net

never

blocking BT to stop piracy ..... sure .... lolz ....

i still got my topsite axx .... wouldn't quite be a problem for me .. and u guys do have to realize there are rapidshare 0-day release sites .... i dont think anyone could ever stop piracy ... its foolish to think so
Mr Matt

join:2008-01-29
Eustis, FL
kudos:1
Reviews:
·CenturyLink
·Comcast
·Embarq Now Centu..
·Millenicom

I have a solution. Change the rules.

I do not condone piracy but right now the copyright law is so comprehensive that any use of copyrighted material, without permission of the copyright owner is considered piracy. Fair use is abhorred by copyright owners. The movie and music industry are closing the analog hole which allows consumers to record and retain performances under fair use. The solution is to change the law protecting copyright owners to one that is more balanced. Change the law to guarantee creators and performers a statutory share of profits of any use of their work. Limit the damages for the unauthorized sharing of any movie or sound performance that has been publicly broadcast to twice the retail price of the performance.

Copyright laws are one sided and have been written to protect the movie and music industries profits. Many corporations the parasites that they are, have no interest in balanced laws. Once a movie or song has been seen or heard it's value decreases. Most used cars have lower value than new cars. Any movie or song that has not been made available for purchased should also be considered fair game and be exempt from sanctions if copyright is violated until they are made available. Many shared performances are not available for purchase. How else can one get a copy of the performance then by other means.

BBBanditRuR
Dingbits

join:2009-06-02
Parachute, CO

Re: I have a solution. Change the rules.

Nor do I, but the companies need to adapt. Treat piracy like competition and make content available via popular methods (doesn't necessarily mean BT either, could just be plain old downloads that you have to pay for).

Da Geek Kid

join:2003-10-11
NexusOne
kudos:1

Low Quality downloads

I think that film industry can release the low quality low bit rate movies that just came out as free for the people to download or charge a .50 cent fee to watch. I think it is Fair. But than again I'd never pay .50 cent to watch AVATAR when watching on big screen just cannot compare...

jester121
Premium
join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL
Reviews:
·voip.ms

Boggle

Only on the BBR news page does 99% constitute just "a significant" majority. I suppose "damn near all" doesn't fit the fictitious template of wholesome p2p users dutifully downloading nightly Linux ISOs at night and being unfairly metered and capped by the evil ISPs.

Selenia
I love Debian
Premium
join:2006-09-22
Lanesboro, MA
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Verizon Online DSL
·AT&T Wireless Br..
·Verizon Wireless..

I am probably one of the few...

But I mostly use it for totally legit purposes these days. I would rather take an app for free that the open source community is giving their blessing to look at and modify the code than pirate something that just might be trojanized. I realize that this can pretty much be avoided in music and video with a little caution. However, there are many great artists offering their downloads for free to get some exposure and many TV shows have been streaming online for quite some time. Only thing I tend to really pirate is old out-of-print games. I run a torrent client a fair deal, but most the time it's helping the open source community distribute their work where distribution is permitted.
--
deltree /y C:\*.*

Belinrahs
I have an ego the size of a small planet
Premium
join:2007-09-07
Nashville, MI
Reviews:
·FreedomNet Wirel..
·Millenicom

1 edit

My view on the matter

As someone who doesn't consume much TV content and as such doesn't have any need to download pirated content, I can still definitely see the appeal of doing so. The studios have made it so complicated and ridiculous to simply get the content consumers will want to watch, while sources like The Pirate Bay use an intuitive, quick, and easy method to provide content.

Nowadays, whether something is legal or illegal concerns people a lot less. Think about all the things people do daily that are persay "illegal" but you rarely give a second thought to. In the future (and perhaps now), people will, and do, demand a little-to-no-work required method to get the content they want, and if Hollywood can't deliver, you can't deny which path many will take.
--
Sprint MBB thru Millenicom Unlimited service - Novatel Ovation U760 (with coffee-can antenna, thanks Jim_in_VA) connected to a CTR-350.
openbox9

join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
kudos:1

Re: My view on the matter

said by Belinrahs:

Nowadays, whether something is legal or illegal concerns people a lot less.
Sad. Doesn't say much for our decaying society.

John McClane
yippee ki yay
Premium
join:2005-03-19
Reviews:
·Comcast
·T-Mobile US
·AT&T U-Verse
·Vonage
said by Belinrahs:

Nowadays, whether something is legal or illegal concerns people a lot less.
people probably don't care because they don't trust the idiots that made the laws. just a thought.
--
sbcglobal.net speedtest result 11/11/09 - 5256kbps

DataRiker
Premium
join:2002-05-19
00000
Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable

Re: My view on the matter

said by John McClane:

said by Belinrahs:

Nowadays, whether something is legal or illegal concerns people a lot less.
people probably don't care because they don't trust the idiots that made the laws. just a thought.
Exactly. Finally somebody gets it. Personally I think the bank bailout was treason, but it was the "law".

Greg2600

join:2008-05-20
Belleville, NJ

Good for old stuff....

I've found BT good for really old stuff that is no available, such as old comic book scans, or TV shows or sports programs which are not available any other way.

Unfortunately, I am forced to use it for some current TV programs. I do not have a DVR, and don't want one. So if I miss a show, I have to go the BT route to watch it. Many networks either take forever or don't update their VOD at all. For instance, Legend of the Seeker on Hulu, they wait a full week before posting an episode! That's absurd. Hello BT.

MovieLover76

join:2009-09-11
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
·DIRECTV
·Optimum Online
·Cablevision

One problem with this study..

While I don't mean to argue the contention that the majority of bittorrent traffic is infringing, There is one problem with this statistic, it uses the trackerless DHT as the only source of it's bittorrent information, and who uses trackerless DHT by far the most? Groups looking to bypass the need for a central tracker that can be taken down, aka thepiratebay, and other sites like it, which also have the most copyright infringing torrents.

Trackers that contain only legitimate content tend to not rely on DHT as much since they have no reason to fear the tracker being taken down and a real tracker is faster than DHT.
jimbo2150

join:2004-05-10
Youngstown, OH

Re: One problem with this study..

said by MovieLover76:

While I don't mean to argue the contention that the majority of bittorrent traffic is infringing, There is one problem with this statistic, it uses the trackerless DHT as the only source of it's bittorrent information, and who uses trackerless DHT by far the most?
There are also other problems:
•How did they query DHT? I am not an expert but I dont really know how to query a DHT for a list of all torrents available... Is it even possible? I don't think you can verify that a DHT node is cut off in some way...
•Out of the possible MILLIONS of torrents out in the wild they *from what the article actually mentions* query one DHT node? One that could focus on a specific genre of torrent... why was the total number of torrents available not given? Only a ~1000 file sample was taken from what total? 2000? A million? A billion?

Where is the code / methodology / steps to reproduce? The article just shows results and very basic info about the study. How do others reproduce to verify? What methodology and steps used so others can analyze (and scrutinize) the what/when/how?

This does not seem very scientific at all...
--

- "Techie" Jim

sivran
Back to Opera again
Premium
join:2003-09-15
Arlington, TX
kudos:1

Re: TWO problems with this study..

A second problem is the extremely small sample size.
--
In dadkins' memory, Think outside the Fox...
caco
Premium
join:2005-03-10
Whittier, AK

I thought it was only linux distros.

That survey can not be true.;)
Sammer

join:2005-12-22
Canonsburg, PA

Re: I thought it was only linux distros.

Linux distros and other open source software is all I ever download with BitTorrent.

nirvansk815
Premium
join:2001-06-18
Rancho Cucamonga, CA
Reviews:
·Charter

1 edit

Wondering what the age distribution of BitTorrent Users is

Does anyone know the age distribution of BitTorrent Users? I wonder what % are people between 13-25. Of those, I wonder what % have jobs? Maybe others have a similar experiences but for me once I started making my own money I realized how much I didn't support pirating. My reasoning was simple: two wrongs don't make a right.
--
There's so much to be thankful for...How can anyone be sad?

John McClane
yippee ki yay
Premium
join:2005-03-19

I have..

a right to copy.

ReformCRTC
Support Your Independent ISP

join:2004-03-07
Canada

Re: I have..

And you'll have the pushback telling you: "Don't copy that floppy!"
niblifar

join:2004-02-12
Ohio

Hmmm

Sample size seems small.
--
Vita est bona.

meh37II

@verizon.net

Does anybody think blocking BitTorrent will stop piracy?

Better question: does anybody think stopping piracy will have any bottom-line effect on the "industry" (whichever "industry" you might be referring to)?

Billions (trillions?) of dollars are being spent to stop an activity that has no overall effect. There are two basic types of "pirates": those who weren't going to buy the item/product/whatever anyway and those who just want to try it out but will eventually buy it (for various reasons). Overall, "they" aren't losing much, if anything, to the effects piracy... except for former customers who won't have anything to do with them or their products anymore in the case of the RIAA labels and their ilk. Billions, even trillions, of dollars--including tax dollars--being thrown down a sink-hole... all to no good benefit.

Am I opposed to piracy? Absolutely. Do I think this campaign against piracy will benefit anyone (other than those selling anti-piracy "tools")? Not in any way whatsoever.

w0g
o.O

join:2001-08-30
Springfield, OR

Wait, what about the files that people have fair use rights

for? His conclusion doesn't take into account not only whether the files are really being downloaded, but if what percentage of the downloads are to those who have fair use rights to do so, ie those who already paid for the content in some way. I for example have went onto BitTorrent when CDs became scratched or I wanted an ISO with a slipstreamed Service Pack or patch, rather than make my own. Those are perfectly fair use. The only time I pirate anymore really is in cases such as Lady Gaga's latest album "Fame Monster" which was released in stores censored, with no option to buy the unedited version, so I swapped my rip with that of an unedited copy from BitTorrent. I also own several of the songs purchased legitimently through Zune though. Really, if I, a incarserated mental patient with no income can manage to be so legit, and utilize P2P and similar technologies only to excersise my fair use rights, can't and aren't others doing the same? I think the issue is moot and the industry doesn't have a valid argument or case against presumed "piracy."
ja2007123

join:2007-10-06

Re: Wait, what about the files that people have fair use rights

Hey, I think that could work. I can download all the movies and music I want and if the cops show up I can just tell them my physical copies were stolen or my buddy sold them on Ebay.
Great idea!!
MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
kudos:4
Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable
said by w0g:

for? His conclusion doesn't take into account not only whether the files are really being downloaded, but if what percentage of the downloads are to those who have fair use rights to do so, ie those who already paid for the content in some way.
you are Making Shit Up. The Fair Use doctrine doesn't say you can download pirated torrents as long as you've bought the CD or DVD. Not even close to that.

Just because you are using it, and you think it's fair, doesn't mean it's Fair Use.

w0g
o.O

join:2001-08-30
Springfield, OR

3 edits
Under fair use you can have backup copies, kid. What's made up about that? You're also allowed the right to emulation when technologies become obsolute, and conversion to other formats.
MyDogHsFleas
Premium
join:2007-08-15
Austin, TX
kudos:4
Reviews:
·RoadRunner Cable

Re: Wait, what about the files that people have fair use rights

said by w0g:

Under fair use you can have backup copies, kid. What's made up about that? You're also allowed the right to emulation when technologies become obsolute, and conversion to other formats.
Where in the Fair Use doctrine does it say any of those things? You are making it up. Go read up on the doctrine and come back. Wikipedia's a good start.

Like I said... just because you use it, and you think it's fair, doesn't mean it's Fair Use.

In particular: no you are not allowed to make backup copies unless the license specifically says you can. (Generally software licenses allow this for a single backup. CD and DVD licenses do not.) By emulation do you mean playing the original media on a different device? That may or may not be allowed again depending on the particular license. Conversion to other formats... not in general. There is law around audio recordings that allows you to do some things, and there's the Betamax decision that allows some things with video tapes, but that is not Fair Use, it's a whole different set of laws/precedents.

All this said: if you make a backup copy, or rip a CD to MP3, for personal use, and don't give it away or post it on a network, will you get in trouble? Certainly not under any foreseeable circumstance. But that doesn't mean there is legal protection for these actions under the Fair Use doctrine.
NyNexit

join:2009-11-01
Huntington, NY
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS

the real world

Well we all knew this was true. The only solution is to make downloading bad copies of pirated movies and TV shows obsolete.
If the streaming catalog on Netflix\Cable wasn't crap, and you had instant access to hundreds of TV shows and movies for lets say $20 a month would you bother downloading?
*If legal downloads were cheap and plentiful and DRM free,pirating would decrease.
*Why can I rent a DVD at 7-11 for a dollar but a download via PSN or Itunes is $6.
*Note to movie/ TV industry* Some of us don't want to drive to a store and buy physical media anymore. Physical media is slowly becoming irrelevant.
my 2 cents.
AnonShawUser

join:2006-06-17
Calgary, AB

We need a real platform for delivering content

Coming from a pirate, who is also a gamer, one thing that is needed is a decent platform for it. Something system-agnostic. Don't tie the content to one system, one location, or even one specific format. And don't tie it to a single player, or even a single use.

Once upon a time, I was proud of the collection I had obtained without paying for. Now, I'm slowly working through that old collection, with a new one, which is actually paid for.

How did that happen? Steam. A semi-independent game delivery platform, which has made it easy to get the games (takes about the same amount of time ), can do decent work in promoting independent titles, and frequently has sales that are simply too good to pass up, if you have even a remote interest in what's being offered.

So, we need something like that for movies. Something where content can be put on sale instantly, where you don't have to deal with tons of extra crap, and where you can get all of the studios in one place, where everyone who's in it to make money, is doing so.

I'd even say that Valve should get Steam into the video business, to show them how it's done.

I now have over 100 games that I've paid for, that I can pretty much use as -I- want (I don't have any interest in sharing the games around wildly and selling them when I'm done), I can download them again in 2 or 3 years to play, I can play (most of) them offline, and in general, it just works for me. Much less hassle, and especially great when they have huge sales of blockbuster releases.

Really, isn't that exactly the kind of thing they want out of a platform? The ability to -convert- people who didn't pay, into willing purchasers?

clickwir

join:2001-06-21
Dickson City, PA

I doubt it

I doubt their numbers. Knowing how many torrents there are out there, searchable and not. I don't think they can really know how many of them ACTUALLY violate copyright without making sweeping assumptions.

screemname

@comcast.net

I guess..

If you pair this up with the study that shows most people that steal copyrighted material wouldn't pay for it at any price, you pretty much have a false asumption at the end there Karl.

Saturday, 11-Feb 22:20:11 Terms of Use & Privacy | feedback | contact | Hosting by nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo
over 12.5 years online! © 1999-2012 dslreports.com.