71–80 of 509 posts
This title is misleading: > The Protecting Lawful Streaming Act would apply only to commercial, for-profit streaming piracy services. The law will not sweep in normal practices by online service providers, good faith business disputes, noncommercial activities, or in any way impact individuals who access pirated streams or unwittingly stream unauthorized copies of copyrighted works. Individuals who might use pirate s…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
part of my job is to monitor tor and find people from using it, easier than you'd think.. so i wouldn't bankshot on that alone
what is your job?
Due to the nature of what Tor is and provides it’s unfortunately somewhat expected that bad behaviors happen significantly more from Tor exits than from users on an IP address from residential providers like Comcast.
Good thing there is TOR.
This should be fun for a service like Twitch. What happens when a streamer on their platform starts playing a game with a copywritten song playing on the game's radio or background? Many times the streamers themselves are not aware that this is a crime.
Someone spins up a Twitch clone in a more friendly jurisdiction.
Is this just lip service to entertainment industry lobbying? I mean how will this be enforced? Most torrent sites are based overseas, people can just use VPN to torrent. Even if they ban the DNS record, you can get the IP address, from a reddit forum or something. If ISP's start to ban I.P.'s then the internet is truly broken at that point. Doesn't seem practical.
> Under current law, only violations of the reproduction and distribution rights of copyright owners can be charged as felonies, while criminal infringement via streaming (or “publicly performing”) can only be charged as a misdemeanor. This is known as the streaming loophole – and it is particularly harmful to the U.S. economy because streaming has become the most common form of criminal copyright infringement.
This has nothing to do with torrents which would already be covered under the existing law. My understanding is that neither apply to non-commercial activities which instead fall under civil law.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
part of my job is to monitor tor and find people from using it, easier than you'd think.. so i wouldn't bankshot on that alone
Can you please get a different job?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
part of my job is to monitor tor and find people from using it, easier than you'd think.. so i wouldn't bankshot on that alone
I wouldn't think it'd be hard to find people using TOR, it's the stuff you're doing while you're on TOR that should be more difficult to track.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a common misconception that piracy is a loss of business. It's nothing more than an overestimation in profits. How can companies say they lose profit when the only realistic way I see for that is someone getting a refund and spending it on a competitor?
It may not be everyone, but there are a number of pirates who would buy a subscription to a legal streaming service if illegal streaming was not as easily available.
"Last year, one study reported that digital video piracy costs the U.S. economy $29.2 billion a year." Well, I'd say that it in fact saves $30 billion a year. People can use it to buy more important stuff - such as food.
It's a common misconception that piracy is a loss of business. It's nothing more than an overestimation in profits. How can companies say they lose profit when the only realistic way I see for that is someone getting a refund and spending it on a competitor?