On January 23 2012 07:58 Malkavian183 wrote: As an answer to OP, i don't think Pirate Bay will go down as it is not hosted in USA. If i remember right it is stated in either Netherlands or Sweden so it should remain unaffected by SOPA. At least for now.
I think megaupload was hosted in new zeland? I'm not sure if any site is safe from their current rampage.
On January 23 2012 07:04 sc4k wrote: I have to say, there is being a lot of fuss made about SOPA and PIPA because of free speech, but I think 99% of the opposition is people who download files/ stream files for the purpose of evading copyright and avoiding having to pay. So much moral highgrounding but when it comes down to it people just want to keep their free lunch.
Not only is that not true, but it is an irresponsible thing to say.
Well look I think piracy is an interesting and useful market force. Personally I think entertainment is overpriced. Music albums should be £1-2, movies should be £2-3. If that were the case piracy would be massively diminished and have served its use which is driving down the price of the products.
But I don't like all this masquerading as a battle about free speech, it's a battle to keep pirating and pirate streaming.
Yeah but the bill could potentially be used for much more than simply stopping torrent sites and such. Even if it wouldn't be used for shutting down youtube or whatever it technically could be used for it. Do you really want to have those kinds of laws? It's not really fair to paint it as a pro-piracy against anti-piracy argument as that is disengenious. Any law where you have nothing more than the lawmakers words for that it wouldn't be misused is a bad law.
I really, seriously doubt it. What possible things could they take down which weren't connected with piracy, without there being a public outcry and some serious pressure that would be about a million times the pressure there is now??
On January 23 2012 07:58 Malkavian183 wrote: As an answer to OP, i don't think Pirate Bay will go down as it is not hosted in USA. If i remember right it is stated in either Netherlands or Sweden so it should remain unaffected by SOPA. At least for now.
I think megaupload was hosted in new zeland? I'm not sure if any site is safe from their current rampage.
you guys realize there was pirating way before file sharing sites? and it was a reasonably fast download too? the net isnt dying. when a site goes down like 10 more take its place trying to capitalize on the lost traffic.
On January 23 2012 08:03 Corrosive wrote: you guys realize there was pirating way before file sharing sites? and it was a reasonably fast download too? the net isnt dying. when a site goes down like 10 more take its place trying to capitalize on the lost traffic.
Yep.
From Napster to Kazaa to IRC (still there) to supernova to 100000 other sites.
The Pirate Bay example is not really a good one, they don't host the files. Stuff will just move. And that's exactly the reason why this is just not going to take piracy out of the picture. It can be made less convenient, but people who want it can always get it somewhere. The real way to combat this would be for the major content producers to make getting (and actually owning, none of this renting sillyness) access to their stuff legally convenient, to coincide with making pirated content harder (but again, not impossible) to find. But they keep wanting their cake and eat it too. Maybe next decade right?
On January 23 2012 08:00 sc4k wrote: I really, seriously doubt it. What possible things could they take down which weren't connected with piracy, without there being a public outcry and some serious pressure that would be about a million times the pressure there is now??
This is actually a favorite tactic of Scientology to name but one. You don't like something about you on the net, you claim intellectual property and have it taken down. You really don't see what could go wrong there?
On January 23 2012 08:00 sc4k wrote: I really, seriously doubt it. What possible things could they take down which weren't connected with piracy, without there being a public outcry and some serious pressure that would be about a million times the pressure there is now??
This is actually a favorite tactic of Scientology to name but one. You don't like something about you on the net, you claim intellectual property and have it taken down. You really don't see what could go wrong there?
Honestly I really don't see...please give me an example? Scientology would what, claim intellectual property over TL and get it shut down? Over Amazon? Over Steam? Over google news?
I suspect the megaload bust fired a very clear warning shot to all the file sharing services. Filesonic most likely took down their services temporary just to cover all their bases. This is becoming a significant inconvenience though.
Hopefully mediafire stays alive: it has been my file hosting service of choice and losing MF is going to cause me a *LOT* of headache.
What will become of all the megaupload and filesonic subscribers?
On January 23 2012 08:09 schimmetje wrote: The Pirate Bay example is not really a good one, they don't host the files. Stuff will just move. And that's exactly the reason why this is just not going to take piracy out of the picture. It can be made less convenient, but people who want it can always get it somewhere. The real way to combat this would be for the major content producers to make getting (and actually owning, none of this renting sillyness) access to their stuff legally convenient, to coincide with making pirated content harder (but again, not impossible) to find. But they keep wanting their cake and eat it too. Maybe next decade right?
On January 23 2012 08:00 sc4k wrote: I really, seriously doubt it. What possible things could they take down which weren't connected with piracy, without there being a public outcry and some serious pressure that would be about a million times the pressure there is now??
This is actually a favorite tactic of Scientology to name but one. You don't like something about you on the net, you claim intellectual property and have it taken down. You really don't see what could go wrong there?
I think the main reason for piracy is because: 1) It's easier and quicker to access than the real thing 2) It's not region locked 3) It's not DRM restricted
And all these things are the fault of the studios and their distributors.
The government should not help people who refuse to help themselves.
If we could simply pay to download American TV shows, 1 hour after it airs in the US, and if it were as easy as torrenting, then piracy would drastically fall in Australia. And if what we bought weren't crippled with DRM, piracy wouldn't be so prevalent.
But the truth is in order to legally get American TV shows we have to wait 6 months or more from the US air date, long after all the internet discussions on forums or twitter or wherever have past, and the spoilers are all over the internet.
It is possible to torrent American TV shows 1 hour after it airs, anywhere in the whole world, without any DRM restrictions, it is simply a superior service in every measurable way. And I assume the same applies for legally access Japanese media from the US.
Media companies and the distributors have brought this on themselves by so fiercely holding on to their archaic business model of last century. They are out of touch, stuck in the past, uncreative, visionless, yet charge for a product that is worse, less timely, and harder to obtain than the free alternative.
Pirates do a far better job than these distribution companies and their not even paid for it.
On January 23 2012 08:09 schimmetje wrote: The Pirate Bay example is not really a good one, they don't host the files. Stuff will just move. And that's exactly the reason why this is just not going to take piracy out of the picture. It can be made less convenient, but people who want it can always get it somewhere. The real way to combat this would be for the major content producers to make getting (and actually owning, none of this renting sillyness) access to their stuff legally convenient, to coincide with making pirated content harder (but again, not impossible) to find. But they keep wanting their cake and eat it too. Maybe next decade right?
On January 23 2012 08:00 sc4k wrote: I really, seriously doubt it. What possible things could they take down which weren't connected with piracy, without there being a public outcry and some serious pressure that would be about a million times the pressure there is now??
This is actually a favorite tactic of Scientology to name but one. You don't like something about you on the net, you claim intellectual property and have it taken down. You really don't see what could go wrong there?
I think the main reason for piracy is because: 1) It's easier and quicker to access than the real thing 2) It's not region locked 3) It's not DRM restricted
And all these things are the fault of the studios and their distributors.
The government should not help people who refuse to help themselves.
If we could simply pay to download American TV shows, 1 hour after it airs in the US, and if it were as easy as torrenting, then piracy would drastically fall in Australia. And if what we bought weren't crippled with DRM, piracy wouldn't be so prevalent.
But the truth is in order to legally get American TV shows we have to wait 6 months or more from the US air date, long after all the internet discussions on forums or twitter or wherever have past, and the spoilers are all over the internet.
It is possible to torrent American TV shows 1 hour after it airs, anywhere in the whole world, without any DRM restrictions, it is simply a superior service in every measurable way. And I assume the same applies for legally access Japanese media from the US.
Media companies and the distributors have brought this on themselves by so fiercely holding on to their archaic business model of last century. They are out of touch, stuck in the past, uncreative, visionless, yet charge for a product that is worse, less timely, and harder to obtain than the free alternative.
Pirates do a far better job than these distribution companies and their not even paid for it.
Why don't these file sharing sites just put effort into taking copyrighted material from their website?
I mean come on, you could literally type in any movie, book, or television show into Mega Upload and clearly see something like "House MD season 4 download."
On January 23 2012 07:04 sc4k wrote: I have to say, there is being a lot of fuss made about SOPA and PIPA because of free speech, but I think 99% of the opposition is people who download files/ stream files for the purpose of evading copyright and avoiding having to pay. So much moral highgrounding but when it comes down to it people just want to keep their free lunch.
Not only is that not true, but it is an irresponsible thing to say.
^ This, one hundred percent.
You know on another note I've heard of bands who are okay with piracy of their music because it gives them free publicity...
Disturbed supports the piracy of their songs, because CD sales are only there for publishing companies. Bands do not make money from CD sales, they make it from the concerts, which people go to to experience it live, and is not hampered by piracy at all. In fact, ironically, piracy helps the band themselves more.
Also, I remember reading about this one...I think it was an author, who decided to 'leak' copies of his book so that it could be 'pirated', and found that his sales increased by almost (and I am remembering this from the article) 300% the week after he did that. Can somebody check on this? I can't remember the author.
This. The average record deal ends up in the band getting less than $1 per cd sale. big bands like metallica who have lots of leverage and are on big record labels that pay them tons of money, make about $1.25 per cd sale. pirating doesn't really hurt the bands much since they were already not making jack shit from cd sales.
On January 23 2012 08:09 schimmetje wrote: The Pirate Bay example is not really a good one, they don't host the files. Stuff will just move. And that's exactly the reason why this is just not going to take piracy out of the picture. It can be made less convenient, but people who want it can always get it somewhere. The real way to combat this would be for the major content producers to make getting (and actually owning, none of this renting sillyness) access to their stuff legally convenient, to coincide with making pirated content harder (but again, not impossible) to find. But they keep wanting their cake and eat it too. Maybe next decade right?
On January 23 2012 08:00 sc4k wrote: I really, seriously doubt it. What possible things could they take down which weren't connected with piracy, without there being a public outcry and some serious pressure that would be about a million times the pressure there is now??
This is actually a favorite tactic of Scientology to name but one. You don't like something about you on the net, you claim intellectual property and have it taken down. You really don't see what could go wrong there?
I think the main reason for piracy is because: 1) It's easier and quicker to access than the real thing 2) It's not region locked 3) It's not DRM restricted
And all these things are the fault of the studios and their distributors.
The government should not help people who refuse to help themselves.
If we could simply pay to download American TV shows, 1 hour after it airs in the US, and if it were as easy as torrenting, then piracy would drastically fall in Australia. And if what we bought weren't crippled with DRM, piracy wouldn't be so prevalent.
But the truth is in order to legally get American TV shows we have to wait 6 months or more from the US air date, long after all the internet discussions on forums or twitter or wherever have past, and the spoilers are all over the internet.
It is possible to torrent American TV shows 1 hour after it airs, anywhere in the whole world, without any DRM restrictions, it is simply a superior service in every measurable way. And I assume the same applies for legally access Japanese media from the US.
Media companies and the distributors have brought this on themselves by so fiercely holding on to their archaic business model of last century. They are out of touch, stuck in the past, uncreative, visionless, yet charge for a product that is worse, less timely, and harder to obtain than the free alternative.
Pirates do a far better job than these distribution companies and their not even paid for it.
No the number 1 reason is because IT'S FREE
This is certainly true in part. But for a lot of people some things are also just nigh impossible to come by. "Then don't get it, because that's illegal", sure, that's an argument. But how is that a sane way to do business?
On January 23 2012 07:04 sc4k wrote: I have to say, there is being a lot of fuss made about SOPA and PIPA because of free speech, but I think 99% of the opposition is people who download files/ stream files for the purpose of evading copyright and avoiding having to pay. So much moral highgrounding but when it comes down to it people just want to keep their free lunch.
Not only is that not true, but it is an irresponsible thing to say.
^ This, one hundred percent.
You know on another note I've heard of bands who are okay with piracy of their music because it gives them free publicity...
Disturbed supports the piracy of their songs, because CD sales are only there for publishing companies. Bands do not make money from CD sales, they make it from the concerts, which people go to to experience it live, and is not hampered by piracy at all. In fact, ironically, piracy helps the band themselves more.
Also, I remember reading about this one...I think it was an author, who decided to 'leak' copies of his book so that it could be 'pirated', and found that his sales increased by almost (and I am remembering this from the article) 300% the week after he did that. Can somebody check on this? I can't remember the author.
That was Neil Gaiman.
Thank you kindly!
I'd prob have never bought any of his books without it being up on the internet first anyways...since I wouldn't really find out about them...
On January 23 2012 07:04 sc4k wrote: I have to say, there is being a lot of fuss made about SOPA and PIPA because of free speech, but I think 99% of the opposition is people who download files/ stream files for the purpose of evading copyright and avoiding having to pay. So much moral highgrounding but when it comes down to it people just want to keep their free lunch.
Horse shit, cyber lockers are a legit service, and I and a lot of others use them every day for legal purposes. Moving large files cannot be done any easier than online file sharing.
On January 23 2012 08:09 schimmetje wrote: The Pirate Bay example is not really a good one, they don't host the files. Stuff will just move. And that's exactly the reason why this is just not going to take piracy out of the picture. It can be made less convenient, but people who want it can always get it somewhere. The real way to combat this would be for the major content producers to make getting (and actually owning, none of this renting sillyness) access to their stuff legally convenient, to coincide with making pirated content harder (but again, not impossible) to find. But they keep wanting their cake and eat it too. Maybe next decade right?
On January 23 2012 08:00 sc4k wrote: I really, seriously doubt it. What possible things could they take down which weren't connected with piracy, without there being a public outcry and some serious pressure that would be about a million times the pressure there is now??
This is actually a favorite tactic of Scientology to name but one. You don't like something about you on the net, you claim intellectual property and have it taken down. You really don't see what could go wrong there?
I think the main reason for piracy is because: 1) It's easier and quicker to access than the real thing 2) It's not region locked 3) It's not DRM restricted
And all these things are the fault of the studios and their distributors.
The government should not help people who refuse to help themselves.
If we could simply pay to download American TV shows, 1 hour after it airs in the US, and if it were as easy as torrenting, then piracy would drastically fall in Australia. And if what we bought weren't crippled with DRM, piracy wouldn't be so prevalent.
But the truth is in order to legally get American TV shows we have to wait 6 months or more from the US air date, long after all the internet discussions on forums or twitter or wherever have past, and the spoilers are all over the internet.
It is possible to torrent American TV shows 1 hour after it airs, anywhere in the whole world, without any DRM restrictions, it is simply a superior service in every measurable way. And I assume the same applies for legally access Japanese media from the US.
Media companies and the distributors have brought this on themselves by so fiercely holding on to their archaic business model of last century. They are out of touch, stuck in the past, uncreative, visionless, yet charge for a product that is worse, less timely, and harder to obtain than the free alternative.
Pirates do a far better job than these distribution companies and their not even paid for it.
No the number 1 reason is because IT'S FREE
I know a lot of people who are willing to pay for the convenience of piracy.
Too bad the distributors aren't smart enough to do it.
And in fact, for some American TV shows, there is no legal way to obtain them in Australia.
EPT
