291–300 of 327 posts
Sadly, existing then shutting down so fast will only hurt the whole reason they set out. Lawyers and middle men are licking their chops and toasting champagne and caviar dreams at the idea of such fast work on their part. It did prove once again that demand for easy services is desired but lots of that were also because it was free.
http://torrentfreak.com/popcorn-time-shuts-down-then-gets-re...
edit Link to new github repo for YIFY:
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is it surprising that an appication used to stream torrents, is primarily used for piracy? No, no it's not, and this is why I'm scratching my head. They knew from day one, before they wrote a single line of code that the application would be used for pirating movies. For this reason, I assumed they had a plan, because surely no sane development team would put forth the time to setup this project, and then act surpris…
I'm not sure surprised is the word I'd use to describe their sentiment. I'd guess rather that they originally planned to back down at the first sign of legal threats. Popcorn Time has been circulated as an experiment, not a business, and in that sense it was a success. Also, the code isn't going anywhere, so it's not as if all this work was for nothing.
Did anyone believe that Popcorn Time was going to end any other way than this? Either they were going to be shut down by their own choice, or their hand would be forced by outside litigation. Just because something is legal doesn't mean companies won't spend millions of dollars to make your life miserable because of what you built.
As I was arguing with rayiner on another thread, this is a prime example of what is wrong with the legal industry in the United States especially: shit is so complex that litigation is expensive, so people with more money than you can sue you into oblivion even if the law is on your side. Another way of looking at it is that, as things stand now, the legal system is just another weapon the rich and influential can us…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah stolen! I had a copy of Ghostbusters at home on my shelf and it disappeared yesterday. I suspect a criminal using popcorntime must be responsible.
Yes, because words are only allowed to have a single meaning. Using the word 'steal' to refer to piracy to bypass payment to the rights holder has been happening since at least the mid 80s(NYT reference from 1986: http://www.nytimes.com/1986/09/28/nyregion/cable-tv-operator... )
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20131130/15263725410/surpri...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
LOL. And then if you're Hulu, start cramming ads back into paying users' faces. I miss the days when people threw sledghammers into giant TV screens to free us from this hell. Or was that a movie?
This will sound like I'm playing devil's advocate, but it's a serious question. Hulu Plus theoretically works an awful lot like a DVR from your cable/satellite company (we'll come back to the "theoretically" in a moment): watch new shows the day after they aired, as many as you want. Plus a lot of back catalog stuff, plus weird independent stuff that they bring in. Not for cable or satellite prices of $100+ a month (…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You'll spend more time watching the locked content before the show for most DVDs than it takes to download.
Challenge accepted. Will try to find a DVD with some of that stuff tomorrow (it's 3:18am, parents would not appreciate). Edit: Does searching a dvd count as time spent before being able to watch the movie? Since you can't, ahem, copy dvds to your NAS (they're encrypted with CSS to prevent yarr pirates y'know).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As I was arguing with rayiner on another thread, this is a prime example of what is wrong with the legal industry in the United States especially: shit is so complex that litigation is expensive, so people with more money than you can sue you into oblivion even if the law is on your side. Another way of looking at it is that, as things stand now, the legal system is just another weapon the rich and influential can us…
Perhaps the plaintiff should be required to contribute all the legal fees for the defendant (up to a maximum). If the defendant loses the lawsuit, he must pay the plaintiff back for his own legal fees in addition to the damages that he must pay.
Did anyone believe that Popcorn Time was going to end any other way than this? Either they were going to be shut down by their own choice, or their hand would be forced by outside litigation. Just because something is legal doesn't mean companies won't spend millions of dollars to make your life miserable because of what you built.
The fact that this is still legal is largely historical accident, and is bound to be overturned by one lawsuit or another, or Congressional loophole closing. It's still morally a crime.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As I was arguing with rayiner on another thread, this is a prime example of what is wrong with the legal industry in the United States especially: shit is so complex that litigation is expensive, so people with more money than you can sue you into oblivion even if the law is on your side. Another way of looking at it is that, as things stand now, the legal system is just another weapon the rich and influential can us…
Or what about if you treated all law practice as a public service making all lawyers civil servants? The government would pay for the lawyers on both sides, but you wouldn't be able to buy access to a better lawyer. You'd have the problem of excessive lawsuits, but you can counter that with forcing the losing party to pay a big fine that covers the cost of the lawyers. You would also have the problem of how to assign…