111–120 of 221 posts
This.
Good luck with that. More probably, when the "younger demographics" grow older and get more voting power, they will likely vote /against/ such corporate tyranny. This means that the music industry has some 20 or so more years of prosperity, at most.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The same can be said for any merchant: selling the work of others without creating anything yourself. If this makes you scream, you should be very angry at supermarkets.
Expanding on that idea, our entire economy is based off of people profiting from the works of others. Sales places like Wal-Mart profit off of the products produced by factories (assume for a moment that Wal-Mart doesn't own these factories). These factories profit by producing things invented by people who most likely don't take any part in the ownership of the factory. The difference between these types of people (…
Are we trying to emulate China or Iran? Obviously a block like this for any tech-savvy person is absolutely meaningless.
Would it be ok to stop a newspaper printing and qr-links to copyrighted material illegally? Is it all right to cencor child pornography on the internet? If it's ok to cencor one illegal thing, why not another?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't. When I google for torrents I usually get a bunch of garbage / ad spam sites which don't actually have the content... so I don't google for torrents. Besides, if they block pirate bay, it's only a matter of time before most other popular torrent sites are also blocked. Sure mirrors will pop up, but they won't show up on the first page of a google search's results, at least for a while. VPN is the way to go.
Instead of googling: "content name" + torrent.... ..try this: "content name" + magnet. http://www.lifehacker.com.au/2011/12/from-the-tips-box-the-g... This will return more spam-riddled results over time as magnet links grow in popularity (if more sites follow TPB and go magnet-only), but it'll do for now.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Copyright infringement should and must be illegal but it also must be put into perspective. Using copyright infringement to justify censorship, deportation of citizens, multi-million-dollar fines and lifetime prison sentences - that's a symptom of a broken judicial system and governments with bad priorities / corruption. Downloading films + music for personal use? Should get warnings and eventually a small fine if th…
Every argument against copyright infringement assumes there is some evil destitute world on the other side of having it in place. We have never in the modern age in any modern first world country ever had an extended time WITHOUT copyright to see what would happen. Everyone just assumes every artist, developer, and investor would disappear overnight and everyone would turn to stone as content is freely distributed. O…
Not everything has to be 'for the greater good' or for the 'long term benefit of the new age economy' or whatever in order for people to support it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Although they are technically a non-profit, the people that run it are probably getting nice salaries off of the hard work of others.
The same can be said for any merchant: selling the work of others without creating anything yourself. If this makes you scream, you should be very angry at supermarkets.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> No, it doesn't. TPB doesn't provide any content at all. Not only that, but it also provides links to non-copyright infringing material. Eg: Some of Nine Inch Nails recent releases have been legally made available over bittorrent in 24/96 high quality. And my drug dealer gave $50 to a pregnant woman so that she could get a taxi to the hospital. If you want to argue why this ruling is wrong you should address the iss…
The issue is not with censorship, it's with what they are censoring. Very few people here would take issue with this court order if it was about a site that exclusively hosted child porn. Therefore yes, the context of "is what TBP does illegal?" To extend your (frankly poor) metaphor, he wouldn't be a drug dealer if all he did was hold up a sign pointing you towards your nearest drug dealers and he never actually gav…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> No, it doesn't. TPB doesn't provide any content at all. Not only that, but it also provides links to non-copyright infringing material. Eg: Some of Nine Inch Nails recent releases have been legally made available over bittorrent in 24/96 high quality. And my drug dealer gave $50 to a pregnant woman so that she could get a taxi to the hospital. If you want to argue why this ruling is wrong you should address the iss…
The issue is not with censorship, it's with what they are censoring. Very few people here would take issue with this court order if it was about a site that exclusively hosted child porn. Therefore yes, the context of "is what TBP does illegal?" To extend your (frankly poor) metaphor, he wouldn't be a drug dealer if all he did was hold up a sign pointing you towards your nearest drug dealers and he never actually gav…
18 USC § 2 - PRINCIPALS
(a) Whoever commits an offense against the United States
or aids, abets, counsels, commands, induces or procures
its commission, is punishable as a principal.
(b) Whoever willfully causes an act to be done which if
directly performed by him or another would be an offense
against the United States, is punishable as a principal.
Does anyone know when this comes into effect? Also, does it only affect the ISP's mentioned in the article or ALL ISP's? Guess i'll just have to use a TPB mirror from now on then...
Five ISPs - Sky, Everything Everywhere, TalkTalk, O2 and Virgin Media. Sixth ISP, British Telecom, has requested a few more weeks to further consider its position and the claimant, BPI has agreed. However, since these ISP, in particular Virgin Media, cover by far the largest broadband users in the UK, for most intents and purposes this affects the whole UK.
It will cover the majority of non-piratebay users. The piratebay users will just switch to one of the ISPs that is not one of those five.
The ruling is mostly full of shit: Sites like The Pirate Bay destroy jobs in the UK and undermine investment in new British artists I'd like to see evidence to back this up, innocent until proven guilty and all. The Pirate Bay infringes copyright on a massive scale No, it doesn't. TPB doesn't provide any content at all. Not only that, but it also provides links to non-copyright infringing material. Eg: Some of Nine I…
FTA: "Sites like The Pirate Bay destroy jobs in the UK and undermine investment in new British artists," the British Phonographic Industry (BPI) said.
That's the BPI's comment on the ruling, not the ruling itself.
This [1] is the original opinion in the case, to which this ruling refers, and which will take some time to read. It shouldn't be necessary to remind folks that the UK doesn't have a constitutional guarantee of free speech like the US constitution odes, and commercial speech is thus subject to regulation. Kudos to ZDnet [2][3] for including a link to the court's opinion in their story; any media site that reports on a court case without linking to or identifying it by name is likely not worth your time.
1. http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2012/268.html
2. http://www.zdnet.co.uk/blogs/tech-tech-boom-10017860/uk-isps...
3. http://www.zdnet.co.uk/news/intellectual-property/2012/02/21...