51–60 of 88 posts
While that's a neat tech toy I don't think the browser is a good platform for a torrent client. A significant drawback is that you'll have to keep a tab open for seeding. And no DHT support either. BT clients are best operated in a daemon-like fashion with access to system facilities such as inotify, udp and tcp sockets alike and as something that does not compete for CPU time/garbage collection/file descriptors/etc.…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, I thought it was extremely obvious that BitTorrent by itself is perfectly legal, and that it is of course not banned in Germany. Of course you only get an "Abmahnung" if you use it for copyright violations. But that is by far the largest use case. It can hardly be ignored that most people, especially "non-technical" ones, associate BitTorrent only with illegally downloading media. What I wanted to say, is that…
As I said on another comment to you, you better include "public" somehow in your rhetoric. The probability of getting into trouble when downloading popular episodes via private bittorrent trackers or on I2P is ~0, not that I would do or advocate such thing.
My point was basically, the old approach of Joe Average Pirate of 1) installing µTorrent and 2) googling for "Big Bang Theory S05E01 torrent" is as good as dead.
You're right I was a bit sloppy, but that's moot now since I can't edit my post anymore and will probably continue to be downvoted until the text is completely invisible :-(
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't have a scanner ready, but it was a pretty standard letter. If you search for "Abmahnung Waldorf Frommer" you should find some cover letters (in German). Waldorf Frommer is one law firm that is well known for sending those letters. It was basically one page explaining that one violated copyright, giving the file name, the date, and the IP address; then a few pages detailing the appropriate laws, explaining how…
Wow. I would have never ever paid. But I can see why such a strategy would work on their part. I wonder how many of those letters they send out and how many people stand up to them in court and what the outcome is of those cases.
Recently, someone argued that their router had a known vulnerability, and the rights holders couldn't prove that their WiFi was not hacked, and that they downloaded the files themselves, so they were acquitted. (http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/Filesharing-Klage-weg...)
In my case, there were two factors that made me pay: First, they were in the right. As annoying as it might be, and whatever my positions on "intellectual property" are, it's hard to argue against that. Secondly, the cable connection belonged to a friend, and I didn't want to expose that person to a couple years of legal uncertainty.
If a cease-and-desist letter is unjustified, or in a grey area, I would definitely stand up against it, because I believe I'd have a good chance in court.
While that's a neat tech toy I don't think the browser is a good platform for a torrent client. A significant drawback is that you'll have to keep a tab open for seeding. And no DHT support either. BT clients are best operated in a daemon-like fashion with access to system facilities such as inotify, udp and tcp sockets alike and as something that does not compete for CPU time/garbage collection/file descriptors/etc.…
Perhaps you're describing a Browser Extension?
I don't see the advantage of "do it in the browser" here.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Perhaps you're describing a Browser Extension?
What would be the benefit of a native code extension over using a standalone application with some URL handler / file type integration? I don't see the advantage of "do it in the browser" here.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Perhaps you're describing a Browser Extension?
What would be the benefit of a native code extension over using a standalone application with some URL handler / file type integration? I don't see the advantage of "do it in the browser" here.
Two advantages of "do it in the browser" are, in theory it would run on every platform that browser is installed on with no additional run-time required (like Python or Java), and two, it could run on Chromebooks. Say, in Incognito mode.
This is REVOLUTIONARY
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wow. I would have never ever paid. But I can see why such a strategy would work on their part. I wonder how many of those letters they send out and how many people stand up to them in court and what the outcome is of those cases.
Yeah, the recommendation of many lawyers is not to pay or sign. Rather, you get a lawyer, and sign a "modified" cease-and-desist letter in which you 1) admit to no guilt and 2) don't agree to pay anything. By law, you have to react to their letter in some way. If you don't pay, there is a 50/50 chance that they'll let it be, or that they'll take it to court. I'm not really sure how your chances are in court. Recently…
Sounds like the perfect legal defense that an IP address does not identify you.
Does it mean we can finally have web-based popcorn time? This is REVOLUTIONARY