Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by arcticstoat, 22 Apr 2011.
In a similar vein, break 3 election pledges and you're stripped of office?
So are they going to block YouTube then?
Shouldn't the up-loaders be the ones targeted? They are the ones that bought the product, and therefore the ones to whom the copyright applies. They enter into a contract when they purchase the product. There is no contractual arrangement between downloaders and the creators/publishers.
Go a step further, how easy is to just Google something?
No router can currently Supply all this data anyway. Torrent files are downloaded in bits and I'd guess the heavy Downloaders all use private trackers of which theres about 1 million off at least or FTP severs which are ssl encrypted
Great so content providers don't provide access to content (Netflix/Voodoo IP subscription service equivalent in UK? - NO) and we have to pay more for our internet access so our ISP can do the content providers policing for them. All in the middle of the worst recession for decades... Someone's getting royally screwed here...
ouch.. I feel sorry for you Brits.. that's some terrible legislation I hope ya'll can fight it
Did no-one else read British Phonographic industry as British Pornographic Industry? No? Just me? Oh well..
This analysis speaks as if site blocking is almost fait accompli. For one thing it's not even remotely set in stone, and I'd be willing to bet that in the end some sort of half-measure like warning pages will be implemented. Outright blocking is too risky from the point of view that there are hordes of people out there just dying to make as much noise as possible about it. Outright censorship is too much of a political hot potato.
With this DEA I get a definite sense of "give the freetards enough rope and they'll hang themselves".
Very well put -- it is an excellent example of a special interest group wrapping the government around their little finger.
Yes, yes I did. I had just woke up at the time so thought nothing of it.
Pirates will always find a way.
I'll agree that in some cases, pirated copies are better, for reasons such as no encryption (eg Blu-ray). However, certaintly in the case of DVDs, watch them on VLC media player and you automatically skip all the adverts.
Yea, I know certain media players can - not really a fan of VLC, I'm a MPC kinda guy - but if im watching a film I want to watch in my living room normally, so i'll just run it in our dvd player.
It just annoys me to no end that people who buy things have to sit through this abuse. As an example, I bought GTA 4, did it run on my pc? No - conflict with IE9 of all things, the DRM wouldn't run it. I had to remove IE9 to get it to work. I read that someone else had the same issue, so decided to pirate it, and it worked fine.
I think Spock said it best: "the wallets of the corporations outweigh the rights of the people"
or something like that.
I borrowed a DVD off my mate the other day, then my other mate wanted to see it also, so i passed it on. Does this mean I can get sued now?
Don't worry, the MPAA already got your death sentence signed. No courts needed.
IMHO, people who download music, games or whatever who never are EVER going to buy it haven't cost the 'industry' anything.
You download the music they get nothing, you don;t download and don't buy the music they still get nothing.
I bet they gain more then they loose as some people have no intention of buying it at all, and those people who download might spread via word of mouth that what they downloaded was great to people who will probably buy the item...
If and when this becomes enforced, VPN services are going to soar in popularity, even if this includes paid/subscription services. People currently used to getting everything they want for free without any restrictions like DRM, bloatware etc. are going to be much more likely to pay $10/month for unlimited free content than pay for the content that can in many cases be worse than the free equivalent.
Separate names with a comma.