351–360 of 786 posts
Another interesting one is to hit the "My Contributions" button on Wikipedia when you're not logged in. This will show you anonymous edits that have come from your IP address. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MyContributions There are a lot of weird people who share my IP address editing a lot of weird stuff!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Depends, was it a paid internship?
what does that have to do with anything. If the opportunity was good enough for you to take the internship, then they were good enough for you not to risk it by torrenting on their material. He likely got sacked mid summer. He now can't even have that internship on his resume. So much wasted time, so mindless.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am unsure when you grew up, but for many of us who grew up in the 90s and 00s, this is exactly the mindset we have. I used to be able to take a movie I had and lend it to a friend, the same with music. The movement away from physical copies took this away from many of us, so we tried to take it back in kind -- piracy is what they called that behavior. I understand it might not seem right to you, but in all the soci…
> The movement away from physical copies I just don't understand this argument, physical copies of virtually any type of media absolutely still exist. If you want to own even Netflix shows on disc, you can do that pretty cheaply. I'd you want to get Blu Ray discs delivered to you by mail for a subscription fee, you can probably do that (although this is slightly more geographically restricted). This argument is simpl…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> in countries where IP address = person that rents it. Does that actually exist today? At least IPv4 addresses I would expect to increasingly mean nothing, as address exhaustion drives more people behind CGNAT.
Even with dynamic IPs (Not NAT in this case) it's not a problem as ISPs in most countries have to keep a record who used the IP at which point in time.
This part is outright creepy: > We cooperate with Right Holders, Law Offices, Internet Service Providers, Advertising Agencies and National Police. We provide information about sharing/downloading content via Bittorrent Network all over the world. It's one thing to collect this as some sort of research, but another to feed MAFIAA [1] with this data to make their job easier. The fact that they process the data without…
I'm struggling to understand what's creepy about this. If seeing your entire download history on that website was shocking, that's really more a measure of how much you know you've been breaking the law than anything else: there is no PII anywhere in what this service does, it just retains information about which IP (which on its own doesn't identify anyone in the slightest) was seen connected to which torrent payloa…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I worked at a place where, one morning, the guy in the next office over got swarmed by company security and the police. He was trafficking in child porn on the company network. He was a super smart, super dumb guy who lost everything over it, his wife, custody of his kids, friends and a very high-paying career. His car sat in the company garage for weeks.
I worked on a secure project a very long time ago. A very smart guy (he was working on the operating system for a military avionics computer) printed out some child porn photos on a company color printer. (This was long enough ago that good quality color printers were very expensive, not like now when you can buy a color printer for less than $100.) He got walked out. I don't know what other consequences he suffered.…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Canada currently uses a "notice and notice regime" [0], meaning the rights holder notifies the ISP, who turns around and forwards the notice to the infringing customer, but does not give the rights holder the account information, nor do they take any punitive action towards the customer. However, the ISP must retain historical data on these notices, so if in the future the laws change, rights holders could in theory…
>if in the future the laws change Almost no legal system works this way. You can't suddenly be found guilty of violating a law that didn't exist.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem here is not recognizing that the piracy was actually the problem. In what way was it forgivable? Because everybody does it, that makes it okie dokie? Because you don't have a Netflix account? If everyone treated piracy as theft (it is) then no one would have to waste their time investigating it because the collective will would exist to prevent it.
Piracy is copyright infringement. There's no reason to call it theft. They are both bad for society, they are both illegal, but they are distinct.