We should install cameras in everyone's computer rooms so that they won't download any copyrighted material. It's the only way to be sure.
Major ISPs rolling out Copyright Alert System 'in the coming weeks'
- Thread starter MThanded
- Start date
- Status
We should install cameras in everyone's computer rooms so that they won't download any copyrighted material. It's the only way to be sure.
nVidiot_Whore
Banned
No.. downloading a file is downloading a file.
However, for one person to download a file it may not be piracy.
For instance... I can log into my computer remotely and download a file without breaking any laws.. since I didn't give you permission to do so.. you can't.
In both cases, the file download would likely be done the same way.
At least the Supreme Court and local or federal statutes get to define crimes and not random internet poster who refuses to agree.
nVidiot_Whore
Banned
No.. they define federal criminal statutes..
The word "crime" is a generic term used for any violation of a law.
You are violating the law when you pirate something.
English language, use it.. if you want to keep pointing out the lack of a federal criminal statute in the United States of America for individual acts of piracy that aren't for profit be my guest.. I'll ignore it from now on and continue to properly use the English language.
The Abominable Snowman
Member
So Peerguardian: Still effective or no?
It never was, was it? I mean, getting a new block of IP's from which to jump onto torrent trackers can't be that hard.
I'm most likely late to the party but you got your mod status back? Good for you
The Abominable Snowman
Member
It was pretty effective, the lists it pulls from indeed include several firms dedicated to tracking online firesharing. That I can confirm.
Parking meter running out equals criminal. Good to know.
Angry Grimace
Two cannibals are eating a clown. One turns to the other and says "does something taste funny to you?"
illegal
It's better than nothing I guess, but it doesn't stop a company from, say, signing up for a VPN and then using the VPN connection to hop on torrents and gather IP addresses. It's not quite entirely placebo, but if it gives you a false sense of security, it could be a bad thing.
No, it was really a new age snake oil.
They can't though, that's the problem. Google is only coming in because they are enormous and able to throw a huge amount of cash at the issue. In most places, no small competitor can compete.
The only local ISP here is Google Fiber, but I can't get it yet ;_;
Should have streamed it. Your friend, that is. Unless he's a videophile, I guess.
I'm sorry but that's not how the ISP's in my country feel that they gain "integrity". Quite the opposite. I like it that way.
MWS Natural
Member
Everyone should have a quality VPN IP masking service anyways.
nVidiot_Whore
Banned
D
Deleted member 13876
Unconfirmed Member
Jesus christ, not this again.
Again? Even never even heard of this the first time.
Rubbish King
The gift that keeps on giving
US only?
legacyzero
Banned
Yay Charter.
User 73706
Banned
I'm gonna be nice with my Cox overseer. I'll just stick to what I usually do, and if he's cool with my internet activities, I'll give him some free porn to skim through here and there. Everybody wins!
Rubbish King
The gift that keeps on giving
.....but is it US only?!
POWERSPHERE
Member
Wow, I guess they renamed it enough to get it passed.
Agreed about streaming. I don't care if they target P2P, though.
nVidiot_Whore
Banned
It's a more defined and organised approach to what they have already been doing.
It involved the creation of educational material, software written to force the warnings to show up in your browser (after initial passive e-mail warnings), etc.
That's all this is.
This isn't a law.. this isn't SOPA/PIPA..
And it is the exact same thing this forum has probably discussed numerous times before.. because this also isn't "new news." This system was discussed over a year ago IIRC, they are just finally getting around to implementing it.
From June of 2011
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=436519
And you can see the same instant knee-jerk reaction and assumptions going on.. and of course yours truly having the same conversations, lol.
They may not be infringing any copyright law, but the files were uploaded in an illegal way. That's what I mean, that the owners are downloading the content from an unlicensed and unauthorized source. I thought that was kinda funny, but didn't know it was legal. Thanks for the clarification.
Yes, but that file isn't hosted in an illegal way, nor uploaded to the web against the maker's and property owner's (in this case, you) will. But I get what you're saying, and I said to FLEABttn, I'm fairly ignorant regarding copyright and piracy laws, so that's why I thought IP owners may become guilty of what they wanted to fight. Also, sorry to derail the thread this much.
so what happens if someone downloads a cd that was on itunes but was shared because it doesnt have any drm? the file(s) were originaly uploaded legally by apple, but are being shared via torrent? is apple now liable because they technically shared the files with someone who torrents? the original owner told apple it was fine to upload said cd, but now that version is being shared like someone recorded it off the radio.
....Wut?
If you buy a CD from itunes, that is legal. If you then share that music, that is not legal. Itunes is basically selling you a single license to use that music, that you aren't allowed to either transfer to someone else or reproduce.
Why stop there? We should be able to control everyone's computer camera and even their OS.
Rebel Leader
THE POWER OF BUTTERSCOTCH BOTTOMS
Renamed from what?
You should then be well aware that the ISP's also know this. This is not something they WANT to do, because it's not something their customers want them to do.
There is more than likely a legislative threat behind this compliance is my contention. That's the only way you get a company to act against their own interests like this, by doing this they can only lose customers not gain them.
Are you sure about that? I've been curious about this for a while, I imagine it might depend on the country.
Morally I would say that you should have the right to download an equal or lower quality version of what you already own, because it's merely a shortcut to obtaining a backup. If I own a CD I can rip it to mp3 format, so why should I be forbidden from getting the mp3s from the Internet? The end result is the same and the process doesn't hurt anyone.
Unknown Soldier
Member
Those Internet VPN services are about to get way more popular.
Wow. This is the most backward logic I've seen on this board in awhile.
Any news on this being implemented with Canadian ISPs soon? I've tried to curb my Father's ways, but he's still torrenting all the fucking time. :S
And the comment about Newsgroups/SSL, well it seems some newsgroup providers are also implementing their own copyprotection algorithms lately and complying with DMCA takedown notices.
And the comment about Newsgroups/SSL, well it seems some newsgroup providers are also implementing their own copyprotection algorithms lately and complying with DMCA takedown notices.
I'm pretty sure they all comply with takedown notices. I hadn't heard about active filtering though.
October 20, 2013
Official campaign launches to curb internet pornography usage, based on newly discovered data that concludes everyone is watching porn, even clergy.
outunderthestars
Banned
http://torrentfreak.com/six-strikes-independent-expert-is-riaas-former-lobbying-firm-121022/
Just in case anyone thought this was kosher.
Just in case anyone thought this was kosher.
- Status