The Pirate Bay could be blocked in the UK: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology...-uk-high-court
Should sites like that be blocked? Surely it'll be possible for piraters to get around with any blockage through some sort of proxy anyway?
Should ISPs be forced to block The Pirate Bay?
The Pirate Bay could be blocked in the UK: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology...-uk-high-court
Should sites like that be blocked? Surely it'll be possible for piraters to get around with any blockage through some sort of proxy anyway?
They're going to block the pirate bay? Where will I get my torrents then?
Oh yeah, any one of a dozen other sites.
Carry on. The pirate bay should totally be blocked. Goddamn infringers.
The light that once I thought compassion still casting shadows in your action
The words you shared were cold transactions that bring me to curse what you've done
When you're up there absorbed in greatness with such success you've grown complacent
I hope you scorch your many faces when you fly too close to the sun
One of our ISPs, Elisa, was ordered by a court to block TPB. All media comment sections were flooded with instructions for Elisa customers to get around the ban. I think one of them involved using Google Translate or something. The court order is a joke and will not deter anyone with more than 2 minutes of spare time and a desire to watch Gregory House on the US schedule.
I mean, if you want a nice sentimental point, sure, you can dish out rulings like these. Will they have an impact on anything? I am more than a little skeptical.
Is this enough to convince you that this is an incredibly good idea?
In the future, the Berlin wall will be a mile high, and made of steel. You too will be made to crawl, to lick children's blood from jackboots. There will be no creativity, only productivity. Instead of love there will be fear and distrust, instead of surrender there will be submission. Contact will be replaced with isolation, and joy with shame. Hope will cease to exist as a concept. The Earth will be covered with steel and concrete. There will be an electronic policeman in every head. Your children will be born in chains, live only to serve, and die in anguish and ignorance.
The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference.
That's what I expect to happen.Originally Posted by Nessus
The block is pointless. You can download the site and its links in a 90mb file now. The Pirate Bay dropped torrent links a few weeks ago, they use magnet links now (a lot less information to store on their end). The best is yet to come however, Tribler is a semi-new program that completely removes any need for a central server, the only way to kill it is to kill the internet.
nice read: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/201...tories+2%29%29
Last edited by Ominous Gamer; 02-21-2012 at 10:17 PM.
"In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."
Sounds like a return to previous P2P networks which were very easy to track who was downloading.
"In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."
Absolutely. It's horrible that cops and copyright holders are forced to do their fucking jobs by the current system. Also, blocking bittorrent sites will be a useless debacle that will be another demonstration of the good-for-nothing experiments that Leviathan government and current [copyright] law are. And God knows, it's been like 2 weeks since the last good one of those.
Past history indicates that the absolute worst outcome for the government and big media will be if this ban actually accomplishes anything. Like how they eliminated music piracy by stamping out Napster. Or knocked everyone off Limewire and ended P2P piracy forever. Or, before that, how they stamped out the IRC (dal.net/ef.net) scene and piracy exploded onto the web.
I'd frankly love for them to crack down real hard on internet piracy and try to stamp out online privacy (a bit disappointed SOPA and PIPA didn't pass) because all they'll accomplish is in driving everyone off the public web and onto the anything-still-goes alternatives out there, and spur innovation in that area. Try tracking down evil infringers over i2p and freenet and ToR and like that there, hah.
Basically that whole "way to dig yourself into a deeper hole, dumbasses" thing.
Right, well bittorrent was never designed to use for illegal file-sharing. The guy who coded it (an out of work programmer invented it on his own) remarked in an interview that it's so trivial to track people on bittorrent that only a moron would use it for anything illegal anyway... that was right as it was exploding big as a method of copyright infringement.
"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
-- Thomas Jefferson: American Founding Father, clairvoyant and seditious traitor.
Sure make it more difficult but really the best way to crack down is to punish criminally those who are the end users of pirated content. At the same time go after folks like little Kimmy (err big) and make an example out of em.
Eh, I am still wondering how users of pirated content are breaking any law.
Take this example and wrap your brain around it Lewky; an artist (big name, worldfamous) does a gig for some charity in a park. Nobody pays for the pleasure of seeing her. Some people whip out their fancy smart phones and film the show. Then some of them show their clips to friends and family, others put it online and some money is made through advertising when people click on the link. Which laws were broken Lewk? Who are the guilty people here?
Hint; don't even try to go down the road that ends in a 1st amendment violation, it would be a waste of your bandwidth.
Congratulations America
Copyright laws were broken. The guilty people are those who recorded without consent and those who put it online and those who download it.
Something doesn't have to be charged for, in order for copyright to apply.
Really Randblade? Ever heard of the freedom of gathering of information? Are you seriously saying people who film the show and show it to their friends are breaking the law? You realise you just declared the entire profession of television journalism an illegal act?
Hint for you; it's not illegal to film it and to show it. Commercial TV channels can even make money by placing ads around it. Legally.
Congratulations America
So any channel can show anything they want?
Hint for you: Commercial (and non-commercial) channels pay for the right to broadcast copyrighted acts.
I thought this was funny: http://www.dailytech.com/Major+Recor...ticle20632.htm
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
No, actually it is. And people have lost big court cases (on this side of the pond, anyway) for trying to freely rebroadcast a free performance, which goes to show more about how good-for-nothing our legal system is than what "ought" to be.
"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
-- Thomas Jefferson: American Founding Father, clairvoyant and seditious traitor.
Actually its good for what it should be. There's a world of difference between a one-off performance and a recording.
Switch it to be paid for. If I go to the cinema/theatre then I don't automatically get a DVD of the performance at the end. I have in fact bought many movies on DVD/Bluray which I'd seen first at the cinema.
No there isn't.
"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
-- Thomas Jefferson: American Founding Father, clairvoyant and seditious traitor.
There's a huge difference, the recording is much more useful
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Yes there is.
Have already demonstrated why so if you have nothing further to add ...
I think the larger question here is if copyright laws, in this strict sense, need to evolve. Its already been proven with studies that piracy doesn't impact music or movie sales, hell some courts have even ruled as such. The way its being approach now, giving so much weight and say to dying groups like the MPAA and RIAA and how they are able to write, lobby and influence the laws around this, it smells more like fear of new technology and business models than anything else.
"In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."
However OG I do wonder if the actions of RIAA etc intimidate many small fry potential pirates away and they end up paying? Yes the figures quoted by RIAA etc equivalating all piracy to lost sales is garbage ... But if the opposite happened and RIAA essentailly said "we can't stop piracy so won't even try" then might not everyone switch to pirating?
The more inconvenient piracy is, the simpler and cheaper 0.69 becomes on iTunes.
Just a thought.
Furthermore the talk of "old business models" worked back when I was downloading from Kazaa at uni a decade ago, when legal downloads didn't happen and they were still trying to just sell CDs at record shops, Woolworths etc. Woolworths closed down 3 years ago in large part due to the loss of CD sales, record shops have almost all closed down, CD sales are history. The charts I listen to if driving on a Sunday is exclusively downloaded music, from the likes of iTunes that sell music at about a quarter of the price an equivalent CD was a decade ago. No, I think thats a rather unfair complaint.
From the POV of most artists and labels I would say the business model hasn't changed very much at all (although there are some innovators out there).
Re. inconvenience, well, sure that has some merit. Why not. After all, the more inconvenient legal products are (eg. DRM on games etc) the more attractive piracy becomes.
Of course another way would be to just offer better value
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
The price of a single has come down more than 75% in 10 years.
Do you really think there are hordes out there put off by paying 0.69 for their favourite song? Or whatever it is where you live. What do you think would be more reasonable?
Anywhere that I could find those cases? Very often people get convicted because they charge for viewing or the copies they make. Those two would constitute breaches of copyright.
Congratulations America
No I don't think the intimidation angle works, because a vast majority of music/movie pirates don't follow or don't understand the legal cases or whats happening in the background. They see a site closed down and they move to something else. Thank the streisand effect. There hasn't been a case yet of closing a major piracy site (or service) paired with an increase in sales. In recent months its even gotten worse, when megaupload got shut down, piracy didn't drop at all, it simply moved and made data communications more expensive across the board.
If the RIAA was able to embrace file sharing as it is, I have no doubt they could monetize it in some fashion. Why risk piratebay and its sex ads and garbage files when you could get the torrents from a trusted source. Why would this be any different than how shows have embraced steaming from their own sites?
itunes isn't convenient for everyone. It requires plastic payments, and not all music fans have access to that. Especially underage fans. Why risk lunch money on a band/song/album you haven't heard and don't know its worth it? Thats the business model I'm talking about. The pay now, experience later idea. Pirates don't have that problem and, as its been shown before, pirates spend more on the industry than nonpirates do.
Even at 69 cents, you are still competing with free. and if free is easier to get, free is going to win. This is when the better value argument comes into play, and bands have taken all kinds of different avenues to make purchasing a physical (and to a lower level a digital) copy worth more than stopping at a free download.
perfect timing on finding this: http://paperlions.com/free-album This is what the RIAA/MPAA are fighting against. Artists having a voice, being able to go directly to their fans without a middleman.
Last edited by Ominous Gamer; 02-24-2012 at 05:50 PM.
"In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."
Wow I was thinking things like a cloud locker for music, permanent ownership of music, ability to stream to any device, unlimited access for a monthly fee, better songs, awesome matching technology like Pandora, better split between labels and artists, that sorta thing
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
You really haven't. You stated it, gave a really poor analogy that's not actually analogous... which made me snicker and assume you're something of a Luddite when it comes to technology, but that doesn't so much qualify as "demonstrated" to my mind.
I'm not aware of like a database or list of such cases, though maybe someone like the EFF would good for that. I was thinking more along the lines of those Euro sites that caught in the crosshairs of "Operation In Our Sites" for making live sports feeds (commercials and all) available online, and a few cases over here where NFL and MLB went after people for broadcasting sports games at social events (parties or business functions with no attendance fee, but 100+ attendees). Just because it's spewed out for no cost doesn't mean you can legally rebroadcast or record it, no matter how fucking stupid and backwards that is.
Plus, Apple's shit and evil as hell to boot. That doesn't help.
Right, and that's what I think the entertainment industry is really trying to fight off - the idea that they might have to operate like every other fucking industry and provide a product that's worth what they charge. If I'm unsatisfied with any physical product, I can return it for my money back. Imagine if big media had to play by those rules too... good for us, but very bad for lots of them who couldn't rely on shoving out crapware and awful movies or music and then hiding behind their "no refunds because of copying" crap they've been using as a crutch for decades.
"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
-- Thomas Jefferson: American Founding Father, clairvoyant and seditious traitor.
Yeah, it's funny how people are willing to pay for quality and ease. By the way, the other day I bought 'Social Network' on iTunes for €5,99. It took more than 2 hours and 2 attempts to download the damn thing. That's easily 3 times longer than files of an equal size over torrents using the same set-up.
Congratulations America
Yeah, you'd almost think there was a business model in there somewhere, if only someone could find a way to make the concept simple enough for executives and politicians and other mentally challenged folks to understand.
The not-so-secret truth about piracy being that piracy is so successfully because it delivers a better product and a better experience than the legal option you have to pay for, and it's the better product more than the cost savings that makes it so popular.
"I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them."
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
-- Thomas Jefferson: American Founding Father, clairvoyant and seditious traitor.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
