http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/02/16/1540232/librarynu-and-ifileit-shut-down
Library.nu and Ifile.it Shut Down
Posted by
timothy on Thursday February 16, @10:54AM
from the no-books-for-you dept.
Ralph Spoilsport writes
"A coalition of 17 publishing companies has shut down library.nu and ifile.it, charging them with pirating ebooks. This comes less than a month after megaupload was shut down, and SOPA was stopped. If the busting of cyberlockers continues at this pace and online library sharing dismantled, this under-reported story may well be the tip of a very big iceberg — one quite beyond the P&L sheets of publishers and striking at basic human rights as outlined in the contradictions of the UN Charter. Is this a big deal — a grim coalition of corporate power? Or just mopping up some scurvy old pirates? Or somewhere in between?" Adds new submitter roaryk,
"According to the complaint, the sites offered users access to 400,000 e-books and made more than $11 million in revenue in the process. The admins, Fidel Nunez and Irina Ivanova, have been tracked down using their PayPal donation account, which was not anonymous. Despite the claims of the industry the site admins say they were barely able to cover the server costs with the revenue."
http://torrentfreak.com/book-publishers-shut-down-library-nu-and-ifile-it-120215/ The place where breaking news, BitTorrent and copyright collide
Book Publishers 'Shut Down' Library.nu and iFile-it
Ernesto
February 15, 2012
The book download portal Library.nu and cyberlocker
ifile.it appear to have 'shut down' voluntarily after a coalition of book publishers managed to get an injunction against the two sites. According to the complaint, the sites offered users access to 400,000 e-books and made more than $11 million in revenue in the process.
libraryDuring the past week users of the popular book downloading portal Library.nu started to notice that the site no longer carried links to files.
Today delivered another surprise when the site suddenly began redirecting to Google books.
Initially it was unclear what motivated the site's owners to take these drastic actions, but a statement by a coalition of the world's largest book publishers including Cambridge University Press, Harper Collins, Elsevier and John Wiley & Sons, seems to have cleared up the mystery.
The publishers obtained an injunction against Library.nu and the cyberlocker
ifile.it from the regional court in Munich. They claimed that both sites were operating an unauthorized "internet library" that made available more than 400,000 high-quality e-books. In addition, the publishers said the sites made $11 million in revenue.
The court agreed with the publishers and the owners of the sites were served with an order to halt their infringing activities.
As a result, both sites have voluntarily pulled their services offline. Library.nu now redirects to Google books and
ifile.it has put up a message stating "no upload servers currently available."
However, this doesn't mean that the picture painted by the book publishers is accurate. TorrentFreak spoke to the owner of
ifile.it who told us that they can barely cover the server costs with the revenue they make.
"The site only had premium accounts since November 2011. It was free since 2006 and still is free for those who want to use it for free," the owner told us.
The legal team of the publishers estimated the revenue based on page impressions as well as estimated income from premium accounts, but this figure is laughable according to the
ifile.it owner, which makes sense considering the site's modest size.
The owner further said they always try cooperate with publishers and that the site is still fully operational for registered users.
Responding to the news, the book publishers declared victory.
"This action reflects our commitment to protecting secure, safe, and legitimate use of the Internet," said Stephen M. Smith, President and CEO of John Wiley & Sons.
"It is also evidence of the growing strength of the international community of content creators and providers taking all available legal measures against large illegal platforms," he added.
Jens Bammel of the International Publishers Association, the umbrella organization responsible for tracking down the owners of the two sites, described the file-sharing sites as criminal outfits.
"The global publishing industry has once again shown that it can and will stand up against large-scale organised copyright crime," Bammel says commenting on the news.
"We will not tolerate free-loaders who make unearned profits by depriving authors and publishers of their due compensation. This is an important step towards more transparent, honest, and fair trade of digital content on the Internet," he added.
Despite the preliminary success, there are no guarantees that both sites will remain inactive.
ifile.it, for example, is still working as usual for registered users.
Update: response added from the
ifile.it owner, who noted that they only shut down anonymous uploads.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/15/librarynu-book-downloading-injunction_n_1280383.html?ref=books Andrew Losowsky
Books Editor, The Huffington Post
Library.nu, Book Downloading Site, Targeted In Injunctions Requested By 17 Publishers
Posted: 2/15/12 | Updated: 2/16/12
Ebook Downloads
Ebooks, Ereaders, Association Of American Publishers, Fidel Nunez, Irina Ivanova, Online Piracy, Ursula Feindor-Schmidt, Aap, Copyright Theft, Ebook Piracy, Ifile, Ifile.It, Library.Nu, Books News
A large coalition of publishing firms and related trade organizations has taken legal action against what the Association of American Publishers in Washington, D.C., described on Wednesday as "one of the largest pirate web-based businesses in the world."
At the request of 17 publishing companies in the United States, the United Kingdom and Germany, including HarperCollins, Oxford University Press and Macmillan, a Munich judge on Monday granted injunctions against illegal posting or sharing of online book files by two websites. Library.nu is alleged to have posted links to hundreds of thousands of illegal PDF copies of books since December 2010, Ed McCoyd, an attorney for the Association of American Publishers, told The Huffington Post. The majority of these uploads allegedly went through the website iFile.it, he said.
The coordinated legal action came after seven months of private investigation and was led by a German publishing association, Börsenverein des Deutschen Buchhandels, and the International Publishers Association.
The Munich court served Library.nu and iFile.it 17 separate injunctions, representing 10 book titles from each of the publishers. One of the injunctions, which The Huffington Post viewed in a translation from the original German, states that every Web link -- either on iFile.it or Library.nu -- leading to an illegal online copy of one of the named books would result in a fine of 250,000 euros or as much as six months in jail.
By Wednesday evening, iFile.it still listed PDFs of various popular works, though whether these works were named in any of the injunctions could not be verified. An iFile.it representative told The Huffington Post Wednesday that it is working hard to take down any potentially copyright-infringing files.
The joint action by the publishers is unusual. "We don't coordinate litigation against piracy sites as our normal course of action," McCoyd said. Instead publishers typically send what is called a "takedown notice" via lawyers and order a website company to take down copyrighted material, he said.
These two websites stood out, however. Rather than merely hosting a handful of book files, they were allegedly hosting and providing links to illegal PDF files of more than 400,000 books, including works by Salman Rushdie and Jonathan Franzen as well as many expensive textbooks.
The publishers and publishing associations hired Lausen Rechtsanwalte, a Germany law firm that specializes in tracking down and prosecuting copyright infringement, to find the parties responsible for the alleged book piracy. Since virtually all the files listed on Library.nu seemed to be hosted by iFile.it, the lawyers tried to find a connection between Library.nu and iFile.it, which is owned by DF Hosting based in Galway, Ireland, Ursula Feindor-Schmidt, a partner at Lausen Rechtsanwalte, said by phone from Germany.
But tracking down the ownership of Library.nu posed a challenge, according to Feindor-Schmidt. Library.nu appeared to be hosted in Ukraine but its Web address was registered on the small Pacific island of Niue, she said.
A representative from iFile.it who responded to an email request for comment (but wished not to be named) told The Huffington Post on Wednesday that Library.nu "has nothing to do with us."
But the lawyers acting for the ad-hoc publishing coalition think otherwise. "We thought they would be connected because of how the sites are constructed," Feindor-Schmidt said. "The registered addresses for the owners of both sites were also based in Ireland."
The owners of Library.nu had allegedly supplied false names and addresses when they had registered its Web domain name, according to Feindor-Schmidt. So the lawyers worked with the Irish National Federation Against Copyright Theft to hire private investigators to track down possible connections between the websites.
Then investigators found what they think was the real address for Library.nu, Feindor-Schmidt said. "We thought that it was strange that they were sitting around the corner in Galway from the owners of iFile.it," she said. "But we still couldn't prove a link."
In the end, a breakthrough came not from private investigators -- but from the Donate button on Library.nu, she said. "Users could give donations [to Library.nu] via PayPal in return for access to more files," Feindor-Schmidt said. "You then got an email stating that 'admin@library.nu has received your donation.' But then you got a real receipt from PayPal, stating the real name of the owner of the account. We received two different receipts with two real names."
The names on the receipts were Fidel Nunez and Irina Ivanova, Feindor-Schmidt said. The names correspond with those of the owners and directors of iFile.it, according to documents filed with the Irish Companies Registration Office. A judge accepted that a link had been proved between the sites and proceeded to grant joint injunctions, Feindor-Schmidt said.
On Wednesday, with the website Library.nu shut down, many Internet users were registering their disappointment on Reddit's online forums. Library.nu now redirects its visitors to Google Books. For its part, iFile.it was no longer allowing unregistered users to upload files on Wednesday.
As eReaders such as the Amazon Kindle and Barnes & Noble's Nook become more popular, online ebook piracy may continue to plague the industry. "Over the last two years, [ebook piracy] has grown tremendously," Feindor-Schmidt said.
"As a group, [publishers] want to show other sites that, where you have such a clear copyright infringement, it can't be accepted by the rights owners," she said.
http://www.theverge.com/2012/2/16/2802060/library-nu-ifile-it-ebook-piracy-site-shut-down Ebook download site
library.nu shut down by coalition of international publishers
By
Adi Robertson on February 16, 2012 09:47 am
In the wake of Megaupload's shutdown, anti-piracy groups are pushing through action against other sites that host or link to pirated works. Ebook link site library.nu is the latest to go dark after being served a cease-and-desist order by a group of over a dozen publishers, including Oxford University Press and Elsevier. The group alleged that the site contained links to 400,000 pirated ebooks, which were hosted on cyberlocker ifile.it, and that the two sites had generated 8 million euros ($10.4 million US) in advertising, though it's not clear whether that's an annual number or a total over library.nu's roughly five-year tenure. Unlike library.nu, ifile.it is still operational, but has disabled anonymous uploading and removed ebook files associated with library.nu.
Besides being probably the biggest dedicated ebook download site, library.nu was notable for linking to a large number of academic texts, explaining the prominence of educational publishers like Elsevier in the alliance. The effort was coordinated by the German Publishers and Booksellers Association and the International Publishers Association, which say this move shows that international publishing "continues to stand up against organized copyright crime." Unlike with Megaupload, no domains were seized, and it appears that no criminal charges will be filed. Instead, library.nu's status page displays a brief message: "rip lnu."
There are
38 Comments.
Add yours. katapilla says: The site was great at how they structure their search engine, even better than amazon. However, one single site can not be responsible for all the losses. All the books were downloaded from other sites first, then uploaded by users to library.nu.
If one is 'resourceful', s/he can find any book from Google search, regardless if library.nu is in existence or not.
~Katapilla (facebook.com/djkatapilla)
Posted on
Feb 16, 2012 | 7:06 PM EST
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/15/librarynu-book-downloading-injunction_n_1280383.html?ref=books kutcher balzov
0 Fans
4 minutes ago (12:47 PM)
It's good to see people standing up for their civil rights against the unproductive Socialists who survive by theft, parasitism, and strongarm tactics.
photo
GlassMask
Comedian/Curmudgeon
183 Fans
2 hours ago (10:59 AM)
Some people will not pay for content, and will find a way to get it for free. Others will pay for what they get. Most folks are probably somewhere in between; they'll pay a reasonable amount for new material if it's easily available, but probably won't buy a dvd if they already own a VHS tape; same with vinyl/CD. They won't pay for something 50 years old, which really should be public domain. They won't consider themselves criminals if they have no access to purchase something which is readily available on the net: foreign tv, films, music, etc.
And of course, people are very good at rationalizing a little immoral or illegal behavior to get something they really, really want. The ones who claim they would never do it are the ones who do it most frequently...
photo
Day Milovich
0 Fans
14 hours ago (10:30 PM)
i thing piracy is an inherent side of the net. it is difficult to scrutinize the traffic, data route, etc. otherwise, people digitize and upload everything to the cloud: music, book, photo, and video. digital data forensics and cybercrime urgently become a to-do list. every publisher, music store, photographer, and video artist, must be protected and must protect themselves from piracy.
photo
French Toast
Eat me.
395 Fans
22 hours ago ( 2:42 PM)
Has it ever occurred to these companies to make their content more available in those countries at prices people there can afford?
Do not get me wrong, I agree with the shut down on purely legal terms. I am just saying, where there is an immense market for that sort of thing there is an immense missed opportunity. They ought to be creating online libraries with small subscription fees a la Netflix, particularly for lesser rich countries.
But hey. Whatever floats their boat.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
NHBill
496 Fans
23 hours ago ( 1:32 PM)
There are torrent files with 10,000 ebooks in them at less than 4 gigs.
As with movies, tv shows and music ebooks are available online almost instantly.
Often before they are available in stores.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
caland
SOCIALISM IS AWESOME
131 Fans
12:27 PM on 02/16/2012
Knowledge should be free. They have no right to the content of thier books. They're only selling the medium on which it is published. Evolve with the times or go the way of the Dodo.
photo
Chao Liao
31 Fans
23 hours ago ( 1:54 PM)
Knowledge is free. But should we pay for teachers or schools base on your comments?
Crash2Parties
33 Fans
9 hours ago ( 3:44 AM)
I believe Brand's statement was something like, "Information wants to be free".
An author's productivity, however, results in a creative work. Should that author be compensated for her or his work or do you profess that everyone should work for free if they in any way create knowledge? Should the only authors be those who can afford to do so full time without pay? You see, at one time all great works were created by either someone wealthy or someone with a wealthy benefactor (or a true peasant-artist in the best romantic sense). Do we really want to return to that kind of control of the message presented in literature and the arts?
Chequered72
0 Fans
6 hours ago ( 6:42 AM)
This is not an issue of authors being compensated at all or not, the publishers' efforts at presenting it as one notwithstanding. Of course cries of "creators are not getting paid!" are far more likely to resound with an uninformed public than "middlemen are not getting paid!" - and let us not even get started on the very doubtful notion that a book downloaded for free is a lost sale. The stark truth, of which most members of the public seem still not to be aware, is that authors of academic works (the most relevant here, since
library.nu was a huge source of those and the injunction was filed by a coalition of largely academic publishers) receive little (and I mean ludicrously little) or no compensation from publishers as a matter of course. One can neither obtain nor keep an academic job without getting published, so individual academics have no choice but to accept this extraordinary state of affairs. Whether a student in Bangladesh or Paraquay downloads and studies an academic work or not has absolutely no bearing on its author's finances, but I suspect the author would rather as many people as possible read the work than not.
Zainka
0 Fans
1 minute ago (12:49 PM)
Well, I did not notice that the Works of, say:
- Aristotle, St Augustin, Leibniz, Descartes, Kant & a Few Others...
- Bach, Vivaldi, Mozart & Co.
- Adam Smith, Turgot, Cantillon & Else
- Shakespeare, Molière, Swift and a few others...
were of less intellectual value than their corporate owned 21th century copies:
JK Rawling, Lady Gaga...
And as any Early Modern History readers know, there was massive pirates editions/translations at the time (publishers were already complaining that they were dying because of it !) which helped lower cost & accelerate diffusion of ideas ! So, in fact so called piracy was a big part of the Lumières...
I did not notice than in Russia where every recent books is readily put freely on the Internet, publishers did disappear and people stopped to read : in fact, people in Moscow metro read a lot more & more difficult books - not Harry Potter or Twilight - than citizens of the 'corporate' paradise of America or Germany (poor Kant's land which, once, had the best University system of the World and, now, has this kind of justice)
And finally, do not forget that all the 'copyright' & so called 'intellectual property' pyramid was built on a 'physical' scarcity world. It has no sense in a world of 0 cost digital exact copies !
RIP Library.nu
klumikluma
0 Fans
11:04 AM on 02/16/2012
As long as those publishers will still be "reacting" rather than "acting" (ebooks have been around for quite some time already...), I don't see how they will change the situation. Dozens of similar sites still exist, dozens will be created -more cautiously maybe- and not to mention that torrents are still booming.
I know LNU offered all sorts of books and I don't pretend there is one single fit-them-all solution to be fair with everyone but considering academic books I think the actual legal system is absurd and perverse. I mean, as a European scholar in a transdisciplinary field of human sciences (geopolitics) I need to go through more than a hundred books or articles every time I write a paper. So far I don't have to pay when I publish articles (unlike in hard sciences) but with some editors I do if I want to publish a book on my research. In my field and at my level (phd) publishing is just a way to make myself a name and a reputation to make a career (either academic or in consultancy) and definitively not to make money. I even consider that a free book/article is more likely to be read and quoted and hence give a better recognition to its author. (ctnd)
klumikluma
0 Fans
11:14 AM on 02/16/2012
(ctnd) But if I had to purchase all the documents that are not available at my library, it would cost me a few thousands dollars every time I write a paper. And what for? For most books it is just an hour reading through it using key-words to look for what I need, sometimes just a few pages…
Now if instead of clinging on to what they probably consider their vested rights and profits on knowledge those 17 publishers would sit together around a table and decide to create a common website (like ebrary but much larger) where you pay for what you use, for instance on a pro rata tempore basis with different tariffs according to the degree of specialization and newness, then maybe I would use this service instead. Till then I will keep expanding my private library without shedding a tear for their loss.
freeknowledge9999
0 Fans
10:07 AM on 02/16/2012
Thank god there is still librarypir
ate.me photo
China Rules
6 Fans
10:41 AM on 02/16/2012
Yes, they are much better anyways.
photo
Aleksandar Ivanovski
0 Fans
17 hours ago ( 7:26 PM)
such as?
photo
Aleksandar Ivanovski
0 Fans
17 hours ago ( 7:28 PM)
any others?
photo
Sean Hobbins
7 Fans
10:00 AM on 02/16/2012
This issue, more than any other piracy issue, really strikes at the heart for me. How are online book torrenting sites any different than a municipal library? They represent a more beautiful concept than any brick and mortar library in my opinion because they provide international access to vast libraries with out late fees, high volume physical media, and no worry that books will be checked out already. Free access to literature is something that I have seen as a cornerstone to this society and as long as these sites aren't selling the books then I see nothing wrong with their existence.
klumikluma
0 Fans
11:13 AM on 02/16/2012
Agreed. And I doubt that many persons have ever shared as much valuable knowledge for free!
So rip lnu indeed & many thanks to you Fidel Nunez and Irina Ivanova!
photo
GentleGim
26 Fans
24 hours ago (12:51 PM)
Libraries BUY the books they lend. The more copies they want to lend, the more they buy. They don't turn around and PUBLISH the book. Why would any serious person EVER spend their life to write a book if their was no chance they would be able to eat or feed their family. Why would a company hire editors and fact checkers and rent a building and go into business if, having spent all that money, someone else could just steal the work and profit having risked no time and no capital to create it.
The answer: NO ONE WOULD. Allowing online theft means that in the long run there will be NO PROFESSIONAL WRITERS. NO NEW KNOWLEDGE.
The internet doesn't change the reason for copyright law anymore than movable type did, "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries" - The US Constitution.
morganlefey1485
0 Fans
23 hours ago ( 1:42 PM)
I agree with you wholeheartedly, GentleGim. Thank you for your comments!
photo
Sean Hobbins
7 Fans
21 hours ago ( 3:23 PM)
Someone had to buy the book to scan it. That's economic activity.
There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All
There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All
There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All
photo
Sean Hobbins
7 Fans
09:43 AM on 02/16/2012
How is morality of using this site different than that of going to the local municipal library? This site, and others like it, takes that concept and turns it into something far more beautiful because this is an international library with no late fees, an enormous selection, and the book you want is always on the shelf. As long as no one is selling the ebooks or printing them out for a profit. then I see absolutely no moral qualms with this practice.
I do think that many publishers should reevaluate their morals, especially in regards to textbooks. Why are you releasing an 8th edition of that [insert subject] textbook when the 7th came out only 2 years ago? Did knowledge advance that much in 5 years? Or are you just gouging students for more and more money?
photo
GentleGim
26 Fans
24 hours ago (12:59 PM)
The sites make huge profits. They sell ads, they sell upgraded memberships. Of course they create nothing. They steal all the goods they are selling and rip off the people who actually make this world a better place.
And your argument about textbook editions is ridiculous. The student who bought the 7th edition is hardly likely to be studying the same material when the 8th comes out. But if there is new information, how is it immoral to spend the money it takes to keep the books up to date.
photo
Sean Hobbins
7 Fans
21 hours ago ( 3:30 PM)
I'd like to see numbers on there revenue. I have a feeling that there weren't any huge profits.
You didn't understand my point about textbooks. Textbooks are enormously expensive and priced out of reach of most students without the aid of loans or parents. Publishers consistently release new editions that just shuffle around the content to destroy the used (and more affordable) book market. They assign outrageous prices to books and control the market. Business built on the backs of people trying to better themselves and society.
There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All
photo
Ximing Li
0 Fans
19 hours ago ( 6:13 PM)
For a student like me, I only need to may $14 to get a membership to read over hundreds and hundreds of books. But I spend $60 for a hard copy book. What is more economic for me? Sharing is a trend. It's less energy costed. Personally I feel like this is kind of like a thermodynamics law. Ebooks will definitely occupy. No one can stop it.
There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All
There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All
smith7809
0 Fans
16 hours ago ( 8:48 PM)
Publishers are keen to kill off the second hand books market. Lecturers who receive and recommend free textbooks are complicit. I taught physics for 1 semester casually in Canada, and even then received two huge books direct from publishers whom I never contacted.
There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All
abrarkmc
0 Fans
09:11 AM on 02/16/2012
its a very disappointing for students of PHD and MS like me that they will no more access to Library.nu, because this was the only source to get required books immediately. i as the student living in 3ed world country pakistan am facing problem in getting even hard copies due to nonavailability of books at Ms and PHD level on shops because university libraries dont have a large number of books. Hard copies are unfordable due to thigh prices in pakistan. their must be any solution for online reading.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Earl
Praying for the evolution of the human species.
762 Fans
08:35 AM on 02/16/2012
The solution is to make e-books easy to find and cheap to buy.
rolandtherat
0 Fans
09:03 AM on 02/16/2012
Agreed.
FloodHK
0 Fans
14 hours ago (10:40 PM)
Absolutely. But not only that but also getting rid of DRM. When I think back to music, I only started buying muaic when there finally becamse DRM-free option.
rolandtherat
0 Fans
08:01 AM on 02/16/2012
As a dyslexic student
library.nu allowed me to read books outloud using a PDF electronic reading programme. Without it I really struggle to understand concepts and my marks really suffer. My university library and the national library in my area has very few ebooks, I cannot rely on journals for the entire so
library.nu was a life line. Google books are not in PDF format so now I am stuck. If a viable, low cost legal alternative was avaliable then low income students and dyslexic wouldn't be pushed to use these websites.
photo
Dogontired
108 Fans
11:40 AM on 02/16/2012
Libraries, espically academic libraries, are moving more & more to digital publications because with limited budgets this is a better option for them, no storage costs. This trend will continue.
smith7809
0 Fans
07:56 AM on 02/16/2012
The great thing is, some of the publishers involved in this injunction make vast profits publishing research articles for which they pay the authors - not one penny.
Wiley - you owe me for 3 articles.
CASnyder
61 Fans
07:54 AM on 02/16/2012
I have downloaded free .pdfs of classic books that have expired copyrights and are in the public domain. Volunteers scan and post the books for free. I imagine these sites work the same, except people are posting books with copyrights that are still in effect. Stupid move people!
Traveller123
0 Fans
07:36 AM on 02/16/2012
What about this website ??? What it does is similar to what
library.nu did. All it does is take content that others have created.
photo
GentleGim
26 Fans
01:02 PM on 02/16/2012
Content that is donated is not stolen.
Don Carlo
51 Fans
05:54 AM on 02/16/2012
Shut down these sites and close all the libraries. The people are becoming more interested and educated, which leads to opposition of the puppet masters. Next step, shut down the internet and control the programming of television, and all other media.
Welcome to the 1984 and Big Brother. Maybe more people should read Orwell's book, or see the movie to get an inkling of what total control can look like.
Porcelus
0 Fans
05:08 AM on 02/16/2012
I'm a PhD student from an East-European country who largely depended on the books available on
library.nu. Not because I don't recognize the copyrights, but because I simply can't afford to order all of the books I'm interested in. My thesis deals with contemporary social practices and our libraries receive only few of the works I need in order for my research to be any good. These policies and measures discriminate against all of us who wish to have equal access to knowledge and to contribute with our own well-researched works, but have incomparably less money than the Western countries citizens do, where research activity is paid with more than 200 euros (this is what I get for being an assistant researcher) and the libraries are always updated. If I could buy them, I would, I always prefer reading a hardcopy instead of a pdf. But I can't buy them all. And how can one hope for a fair global dialogue in the academia when the access to it is clearly restricted?
photo
budanatr
US Expat in EU
721 Fans
05:21 AM on 02/16/2012
Join a newsgroup.
abandofoutsiders
24 Fans
06:56 AM on 02/16/2012
There is an inherit danger when knowledge interfere with copyrights specially in the case of science, technology, or more dramatically when it interferes with medicine. Who would have thought that copyrights laws would eventually be on the opposite side of knowledge and development?
There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All
zen19
0 Fans
04:56 AM on 02/16/2012
Library nu helped thousands of college students who can not afford to spend 500 bucks each semester to get good grades. Maybe the actions of Kindle users who download books from librarynu can be called illegal. But for students like us who simply would not imagine buying these books if there were no alternatives, banning this site has done not a pennies worth of good to the publishing companies. Just a personal perspective.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Turtle Heart
53 Fans
03:34 AM on 02/16/2012
This is the new "whack-a-mole", as it is impossible to stop. It is almost laughable really. There are an unlimited number of file sharing sites all over the world. Other than causing some trouble for a few individuals, I am not sure what these publishers hope to accomplish. One can also observe online that when so-called content owners take actions like this, even more sites spring up to replace them. I am not sure what the answer is, but actions like this accomplish nothing. We all live in a strange new world where anything that can be presented in a digital format is going to be shared. It cannot be stopped.
photo
Dogontired
108 Fans
07:48 AM on 02/16/2012
I'm also not sure what the answer is, but presently the copyrights have to be defended because without demonstrating a reasonable effort the author runs the risk of completely loosing copyright. So whatever that answer is, it'll have to include modernization of copyright around the world to better address the issues of digital publishing. Hopefully online open trends will also help, where research grants include additional funding for publishing costs so the author is compensated for their work and the publication becomes available free.
photo
eric14
885 Fans
08:07 AM on 02/16/2012
Exactly. And the first stage of managing this new world is acknowledging where we are.
Wookiee1972
93 Fans
17 hours ago ( 9:34 PM)
How are people going to get paid for their work in this new world?
There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All
Komalesha Hs
1 Fans
02:47 AM on 02/16/2012
unfortunate that such a useful and academically philanthropic site had to face this legal bull; but, i'm sure at the end
library.nu will stand to vindicate whatever it's doing; liberating the reader from the dirty commercial clutches of these cash-rich publishers
photo
GentleGim
26 Fans
03:56 AM on 02/16/2012
What are you talking about?! "This legal bull" is called copyright law. It's been in on the books in every civilized country since the 1700s. It's enshrined in such fringe documents as the United States Constitution. Libraries are useful and academically philanthropic.... they also PAY for books which they only lend. These crooks are illegally publishing 400,000 different books from 17 different publishers in violation of US and International law. And in case you haven't noticed, those "cash-rich publishers" have been filing for chapter 11 right and left... not to mention all the bookstores closing. What about the author who spends a decade slaving over a single novel, only to see some foreign website steal the profits. Don't you expect to get paid for the work you do?
photo
lonesometx
Don't detain me, bro
174 Fans
04:14 AM on 02/16/2012
Not after I'm dead. Nor will my family get paid for my work after I'm dead.
I'm an engineer. My work is as much intellectual property as any author's, actor's or musician's.
Why would you expect their families to get paid and not mine?
There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All
aarskever
1 Fans
05:13 AM on 02/16/2012
Misdirection. It was meant to promote the useful arts, and even in un-dynamic times like the 18th century, when distribution still took time and advertising wasn't as omnipresent as it is now, 14 years was considered enough to balance out the loss of free access to the materials by society during that period. Nowadays it's a century or more, with most of the copyright period occurring after the death of the author. Yes, "copyright law" has existed for a while, but its current rentier capitalist formulation is luckily still fairly young.
Secondly, most of the academic publishers these days are hedge-fund owned, and deliver ever crappier service for ever higher prices; they are in no way comparable to trade publishers, which operate in a very different way and field.
There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
AcaciaJ
10 Fans
02:11 AM on 02/16/2012
Can't you already read books for free at this one place...what is it called? Oh yeah, a library.
aarskever
1 Fans
03:35 AM on 02/16/2012
Witty, but you should probably know that many of the users came from SE Asia, India, Iran and different African countries.. They don't have those books there (and many libraries here did not have the books lnu had either).
photo
Dogontired
108 Fans
08:03 AM on 02/16/2012
Systems exist, such as the HINARI Program that make publications available to such places at no cost as long a local libraries sign up. Access through such programs is growing with digital publishing. The solution is to better support such organizations as well as libraries. As well as supporting research funding that provides for publication so it's available free. The solution is not to support piracy and robbing authors.
There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Marc Driftmeyer
Mechanical Engineer and Computer Scientist
218 Fans
04:14 AM on 02/16/2012
Been to many libraries of late? Outside of major universities in the US and abroad, libraries are a complete joke as nearly all of their funding has been cut for the past 40 years and counting.
If you don't keep the libraries funded you cannot get collections and you sure won't get technical publications.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
KIVPossum
Moldova Marsupial
2389 Fans
04:23 AM on 02/16/2012
Most libraries now are pirmarlily interested in music and videos.
Irene Fisher
4 Fans
10:17 AM on 02/16/2012
Way too true!! I have an e-reader and tried to download a magazine the other day and couldn't...so where do I go to find a copy? THE LIBRARY, so we still need them and need to support them!!
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/02/16/1540232/librarynu-and-ifileit-shut-down 326 of 326 comments
I propose an end to book sharing as well! (Score:5, Funny)
by jesseck (942036) on Thursday February 16, @11:00AM (#39060893)
I've heard of these buildings, many even publicly sponsored, where books are shared, and one does not need to pay the publisher for the privilege of reading their work. I propose these houses of corruption be banned, so they stop stealing from the coffers of the rich!
Reply to This Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I propose an end to book sharing as well! (Score:3, Funny)
by ScentCone (795499) on Thursday February 16, @11:06AM (#39061015)
Does it actually hurt, physically, to make such a bad analogy? Is it sort of like passing a kidney stone?
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I propose an end to book sharing as well! (Score:3)
by jesseck (942036) on Thursday February 16, @11:32AM (#39061511)
Bad analogy? It was, I admit it. What is happening today is a precursor to the end of the current library model, though. We already see this with the ebook market- publishers need to decide if their works can be lent or not on Barnes & Noble (I own a Nook, so that's what I'm familiar with). Many books cannot be lent.
Other media companies (movies, music, and gaming is starting as well) are doing their best to eliminate the second-hand markets, and to end sharing of the media with others. Academic book publishers do this by making a new edition every year or two, many times with few changes, so that the used textbook's lifespan is short. "Traditional" book publishers are / will be looking for a way to monetize their product's lifespan as well- whether it is a licensing fee libraries pay for each book checked out or higher costs for books that libraries purchase.
My initial post may have been a bad analogy, but only time will tell. The safe bet is the publishers will find a way to remain profitable, and communities like mine will continue to reduce the number of libraries and associated services.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I propose an end to book sharing as well! (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @11:09AM (#39061081)
Does it actually hurt, physically, to make such a bad analogy? Is it sort of like passing a kidney stone?
Is it genuinely that bad an analogy or was this just your best chance to strike and attempt some smartassery? Libraries mean you need never compensate an author for his work, which is quite a lot like
library.nu if we're being logical.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I propose an end to book sharing as well! (Score:2)
by ScentCone (795499) on Thursday February 16, @11:12AM (#39061129)
Libraries mean you need never compensate an author for his work
Why is that - because the libraries have ripped off the copies they keep on their shelves? Do they have an inside contact at the publisher who sneaks them out in a backpack during lunch?
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I propose an end to book sharing as well! (Score:2)
by ClintJCL (264898) <clintjcl+slashdot.gmail@com> on Thursday February 16, @11:15AM (#39061185) Homepage Journal
A great deal of library books are donated, used books.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I propose an end to book sharing as well! (Score:2)
by bws111 (1216812) on Thursday February 16, @11:16AM (#39061225)
Which were still paid for by the original owner. And most donated books are not put into circulation, they are sold to raise money to buy the books they want.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I propose an end to book sharing as well! (Score:2)
by ClintJCL (264898) <clintjcl+slashdot.gmail@com> on Thursday February 16, @11:21AM (#39061329) Homepage Journal
Wasn't the original ebook (that was copied) paid for to? I'm assuming someone didn't buy the book and type it all up (oh wait, this would require having bought the real thing, nevermind). How does one get the book without it being bought in the first place? These aren't leaks, are they? Someone had to buy it first, right? Just like at the library?
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I propose an end to book sharing as well! (Score:3)
by bws111 (1216812) on Thursday February 16, @11:29AM (#39061469)
Uh, OK. You may not be aware of this, but when a person donates a book, he no longer has the book! Weird, huh? Furthermore, if someone else already has the book you want, you either wait, or the library must obtain ANOTHER paid-for copy of the book. And if the library in the next town over also wants the book, it has to get its own paid-for copy.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I propose an end to book sharing as well! (Score:2)
by CanHasDIY (1672858) on Thursday February 16, @11:36AM (#39061577)
Uh, OK. You may not be aware of this, but when a person donates a book, he no longer has the book!
You sure about that? [
instructables.com]
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I propose an end to book sharing as well! (Score:2)
by ClintJCL (264898) <clintjcl+slashdot.gmail@com> on Thursday February 16, @11:36AM (#39061583) Homepage Journal
What is your point? All you've stated is that electronic books are different than physical books. Pretty sure both of us -- and everyone reading the article and our comments -- already knew this.
(Parody: When the author sells an ebook online, he still has it, even though he sold it! Weird, huh?)
I'm still not seeing a difference here:
Library gets a copy of a physical book (originally paid for by whoever bought it first) and loans it out as many times as it wants, forever.
Electronic library gets a copy of an electronic book (originally paid for by whoever bought it first) and loans it out as many times as it wants, forever.
In both situations, someone who really wants a paid-for copy for themselves can pay for it themselves; someone who really wants to just borrow one can borrow and return/delete it; someone who really just wants to steal one can steal it with great ease (I probably have an unreturned library book somewhere.)
Main difference I'm seeing is that one kills trees and burns gasoline.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I propose an end to book sharing as well! (Score:2)
by petermgreen (876956) <plugwash@p10link . n et> on Thursday February 16, @12:10PM (#39062077) Homepage
A physical library never* copies the book. If one copy is donated the library owns one copy and can only loan it to one person at a time. If a user steals the book the library no longer has it and must obtain another copy before they can lend it out again. A user could copy the book themselves but doing so is generally a PITA so few people do unless they are really desperate to have a copy of an out of print book. One copy made and sold by the publisher equals one copy in circulation.
An electronic "library" must copy the book to even be able to operate. It therefore becomes FAR harder to enforce that the number of copies in circulation is the same as the number of copies made/authorised by the publisher.
I don't know if the site in this article even had the pretense of operating like a library or if they just let users download whatever they want.
* at least not for current in-print books, I beleive there may be exceptions in some cases/countries for rare books.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I propose an end to book sharing as well! (Score:1)
by bws111 (1216812) on Thursday February 16, @11:58AM (#39061939)
Are you talking about legitimate libraries lending ebooks (which you just claimed to not know existed), or pirate sites such as being discussed here?
Legitimate libraries only lend out the number of copies of ebooks they have purchased, and at least try to ensure that 'returned' copies are no longer available to the previous borrower. Pirate sites 'lend out' an unlimited number of copies.
With physical books (and legitimate e-lending), the minimum number of purchased books == maximum number of simultaneous borrowers, and the maximum number of borrowers == the number of purchased books.
With pirate sites, the minimum number of purchased books is 1, and the maximum number of simultaneous borrows is infinite.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I propose an end to book sharing as well! (Score:2)
by ClintJCL (264898) <clintjcl+slashdot.gmail@com> on Thursday February 16, @12:11PM (#39062087) Homepage Journal
Both of them are the same to me, in that both make an assumption that you, in the privacy of your own home, don't find a way to copy it. All DRM is defeatable, and all books are photocopyable (I have several of those).
One uses less resources/energy/environmental impact, one doesn't. Guess which one our taxes fund, and which ones our taxes (now, apparently) work against?
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I propose an end to book sharing as well! (Score:2)
by ClintJCL (264898) <clintjcl+slashdot.gmail@com> on Thursday February 16, @12:21PM (#39062227) Homepage Journal
I still see no difference; both sites start with a paid version (even if you OCR a physical book into a pirated e-book, it was still bought originally; otherwise you paid for the ebook format, and it was still bought originally). Once a person has it in their own home, nothing can stop them from pirating it, regardless of the format (OCR/Xerox/photograph/scan/DRM-break). I see almost no difference other than ease of access, which doesn't change a damn thing philosophically (IMO). That a book can be copied is a function of the new electronic information age, and I see that as no excuse to shut down free literature under the presumption that everyone reading something wants a copy. I have photocopied books at home, yet we still fund the libraries with our tax dollars, despite how much gas and paper we'd save if all our books were electronic. So the same thing comes along electronically, and, uh, my tax dollars go to stop it instead. Just great.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I propose an end to book sharing as well! (Score:2)
by ClintJCL (264898) <clintjcl+slashdot.gmail@com> on Thursday February 16, @12:22PM (#39062243) Homepage Journal
s/That a book can be copied/That an e-book can be copied/
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I propose an end to book sharing as well! (Score:3)
by Bobakitoo (1814374) on Thursday February 16, @01:07PM (#39062919)
You may not be aware of this, but when a person donates a book, he no longer has the book!
There is only one copy of the book. The internet is the computer, the local disk is only a cache for optimisation purpose. The same way that all your so called 'legit' files have copy all over the disk, ram and cpu. Essentially, the book is multiplexed and no user are accessing the same byte at the same time (not guaranteed but simultaneous access is very unlikely).
Why users sharing a computer system should not be able to access the same data? Why peoples in the same room should not share a book?
Yeah, computer allow to do amazing things that are not possible with paper. It's called progress, and you can't do shit about it.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I propose an end to book sharing as well! (Score:2)
by jank1887 (815982) on Thursday February 16, @11:53AM (#39061859)
I'm not donating a photocopy of my book to the library. I'm giving the actual legally purchased book to them. At that point they can lend it as they please, or sell it to make money to buy in-demand books.
the original ebook was (likely) paid for. however, it was copied to the library. Maybe the original owner deleted the copy, maybe not. no way to know or prove. And short of mailing them the harddrive or flashdrive with the ebook, no way to transfer without doing it via copying. That's just how digital computers work. sure, you may set up a lending site that imposes some strange way of verifying deletion, but that's just a lame attempt at deflection. it's still 'copy then delete' which unfortunately started with un-permitted 'copy'.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I propose an end to book sharing as well! (Score:2)
by ClintJCL (264898) <clintjcl+slashdot.gmail@com> on Thursday February 16, @12:01PM (#39061993) Homepage Journal
Indeed. We have moved to the next paradigm, and the vultures want to make sure that we are not permitted to move forward by imposing their old-world rules that needn't apply in the new-world. While they may have their points, they want to change the paradigm into one where we are surveilled in order to make sure we comply with their best interests. Generally speaking, the right of privacy lets us commit crimes in the privacy of our own homes. So given someone who wants to steal the book either way - what's better for mankind? Having him waste energy resources photocopying a book (something i've done on several occasions) that he drove his gasoline-powered car to obtain, once someone killed a tree to create it? Or having him make a copy? The paradigm shift of moving to the electronic world has its implications, and the response is mostly a one of corporations trying to increase their influence. I mean, all those RIAA lawsuits, that money went to the artists, right?
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I propose an end to book sharing as well! (Score:2)
by HappyHead (11389) on Thursday February 16, @11:24AM (#39061353)
And yet publishers still complain about used book stores, and accuse them of being thieves. I have also seen complaints from big publishers (and one really stupid author) about their books being found in public libraries depriving them of income.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I propose an end to book sharing as well! (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @01:12PM (#39062997)
And yet publishers still complain about used book stores, and accuse them of being thieves. I have also seen complaints from big publishers (and one really stupid author) about their books being found in public libraries depriving them of income.
Is there any reason you're sparing them the ridicule they deserve by not naming names? Name names man (or woman)!
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I propose an end to book sharing as well! (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @11:55PM (#39070745)
in the case of that one stupid author, their book being in a public library probably did deprive them of income, cause that copy in the library let anyone who cared discover that the author was an idiot before they accidentally paid money for it.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I propose an end to book sharing as well! (Score:2)
by AF_Cheddar_Head (1186601) on Thursday February 16, @11:59AM (#39061969)
In the US yes, not so much in Third World countries. Been to many places that there is a local building with a couple shelves of well worn donated paperbooks to serve as a local library. The locals read the books and make sure they get returned. Honduras comes to mind.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Public lending right (Score:5, Interesting)
by langelgjm (860756) on Thursday February 16, @11:07AM (#39061035) Journal
Actually, in many countries authors are already compensated for the lending of their books in public libraries by a public lending right [
wikipedia.org]. Although not in the U.S... I suspect if publishers tried to pull that here, they'd get some seriously negative PR.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Public lending right (Score:2)
by Chowderbags (847952) on Thursday February 16, @12:40PM (#39062481)
Publishers don't need to implement that. They just need to support/bribe politicians into shrinking library budgets until libraries aren't able to be effectively run anymore.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I propose an end to book sharing as well! (Score:4, Funny)
by robthebloke (1308483) on Thursday February 16, @11:58AM (#39061957)
I propose these houses of corruption be banned
In the UK, those houses of corruption are in the process of being closed down. As our fearless leaders will no doubt inform you, 'Big Society' demands 'Big Spaces', and some of our biggest spaces are filled to the brim with stupidly big books. As part of on-going austerity measures, and in the name of weaning the UK off fossil fuels, those big books will be reused as part of a new initiative to create a carbon neutral winter fuel allowance for the elderly [
metro.co.uk]. Once cleared of the big books, the expectation is that Tesco and Sainsburies will become the custodians of those big spaces. Without big tins of baked beans on big shelves in big spaces, big society could never claim to be full of beans. It is a perfectly simple idea, and yet there are still people who are protesting all of this! Why can't they understand the flawless logic in this argument?
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I propose an end to book sharing as well! (Score:2)
by AmiMoJo (196126) <mojo@[ ]
ld3.net ['wor' in gap]> on Friday February 17, @11:08AM (#39075201) Homepage
This is basic Tory policy. Anything the government does is a lost business opportunity for someone, so shut down or privatise as much of it as possible. Don't worry, this gives people more choice, they can pay for a private subscription library (which will naturally be better run and better value than a public one) or watch TV. Or maybe run their own Big Society library in their spare time, because we all have hours and hours a week to dedicate to libraries and learning the skills to run them so I'm sure there will be plenty of volunteers.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I propose an end to book sharing as well! (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @11:04AM (#39060983)
I've heard that these places actually PAY for EVERY COPY of the books they have.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I propose an end to book sharing as well! (Score:3)
by sgt scrub (869860) <{moc.oohay} {ta} {muitnias}> on Thursday February 16, @11:18AM (#39061273)
I hear most are donated by people who have read them. Do they not realize the economic devistation they are causing the public!?!
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I propose an end to book sharing as well! (Score:2)
by bws111 (1216812) on Thursday February 16, @11:22AM (#39061337)
Even a donated book was paid for by the original owner. And most donated books don't go into circulation, they get sold to raise cash to buy books.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I propose an end to book sharing as well! (Score:2)
by ThePhilips (752041) on Thursday February 16, @12:25PM (#39062275) Homepage Journal
Even a donated book was paid for by the original owner.
Every "illegal" e-book was also paid for by the original owner (and later digitized).
And most donated books don't go into circulation, they get sold to raise cash to buy books.
That, last I heard publishers talk, is even more evil than the piracy.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I propose an end to book sharing as well! (Score:2)
by fafaforza (248976) on Thursday February 16, @03:12PM (#39064931)
I'd bet that every eBook that someone might give to someone else cost them twice what a library paid for the physical book.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I propose an end to book sharing as well! (Score:2)
by bws111 (1216812) on Thursday February 16, @03:36PM (#39065241)
If each purchaser of an ebook gave no more than one copy to one other person, and none of the recipients of the books gave any copies to anyone else, then you would have a point. So tell me, is that really what you believe happens on these file sharing sites? All the books uploaded are paid for copies, and only one person can download any given uploaded book? If so, you are incredibly naive.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I propose an end to book sharing as well! (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @11:07AM (#39061041)
In EU a law is being introduced that forces libraries to pay royalties to the authors. They will get paid twice - first when the book is bought by the library, second each time a book is borrowed.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I propose an end to book sharing as well! (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @11:38AM (#39061615)
It already works this way in the UK, and has for a long time, and it's a very good thing. The authors cut of a book sale is usually quite low (once they have paid for their advance), and the amount they are paid as a PLR (Public Lending Right) fee is tiny, fractions of a penny per book each time it is borrowed. As each book borrowed is potentially a book that the reader no longer needs to buy, it seems only fair that the author should get some recompense, even if that is only a few hundred pounds a year if their book has been read many tens (possibly hundreds) of thousands of times.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I propose an end to book sharing as well! (Score:2)
by forkfail (228161) on Thursday February 16, @11:49AM (#39061813)
Unfortunately, in the eBook world, publishers are basically saying that an instance of an eBook needs to be replaced every year (26 lends at two weeks per lend):
http://www.libraryjournal.com/lj/home/889452-264/harpercollins_caps_loans_on_ebook.html.csp [
libraryjournal.com]
That's a lot more than a few pennies per lend, to say the least.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I propose an end to book sharing as well! (Score:4, Insightful)
by martin-boundary (547041) on Thursday February 16, @10:13PM (#39070009)
How is this fair? You're basically arguing that because the publishers don't compensate authors enough, the taxpayer should do it (via libraries) instead? If we're going to put authors on welfare, then let's do it properly. Have the government pay them a living wage, and let's cut out the publishers altogether. And let's stop with all that prohibited copying nonsense.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I propose an end to book sharing as well! (Score:2)
by cpt kangarooski (3773) on Thursday February 16, @10:51PM (#39070307) Homepage
The authors cut of a book sale is usually quite low (once they have paid for their advance)
That's between them and their publisher. The author is free to hold out for a higher royalty (whether from one publisher or another), or to self-publish. I don't see why it is any concern of the public whether the author gets a good deal or not.
As each book borrowed is potentially a book that the reader no longer needs to buy, it seems only fair that the author should get some recompense
I don't think it's fair. If the author can't make a living from sales of his book, even taking into account that some people won't read it, or will resell it, or borrow it, etc., he should try something else, e.g. raising the price to something he can live with, getting a larger share of the sales, writing something more popular so as to get more sales, or only writing as a hobby and not relying on it for an income. In the US, authors do not get a payment from libraries when books are borrowed, but we seem to have a successful literary industry, so I don't think that those payments are really necessary. Literature in the UK would probably not be harmed if you got rid of it, and it would free up some of the budget of the libraries to buy more books.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I propose an end to book sharing as well! (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @11:30AM (#39061479)
And burn their contents, so they may not be resold over and over again.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Modded FUNNY??? WHAT THE FUCK (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @12:41PM (#39062507)
Library means Joe Random can read up, marinate in culture.
E-books mean Joe Random can peruse pure digital media.
Internet means Joe Random can communicate at a distance.
These three simple concepts, incredibly powerful on their own, can be combined. Imagine a global filesystem, a Global Digital Library, where 'lending' is essentially a cached copy of a document. Lending numbers are just statistics (xyfscachestat). Prevent Libraries evolving into Digital Age, and you condemn the whole Institution of Library. This has potential ramifications surpassing any genocide or dark age that Humankind has seen so far. PRAY TELL WHAT IS FUNNY ABOUT IT?
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I propose an end to book sharing as well! (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @01:04PM (#39062873)
Why mod parent funny, it's sad beyond misery.
Library means Joe Random can read up, marinate in culture.
E-books mean Joe Random can peruse pure digital media.
Internet means Joe Random can communicate at a distance.
These three simple concepts, incredibly powerful on their own, can be combined. Imagine a global filesystem, a Global Digital Library, where 'lending' is essentially a cached copy of a document. Lending numbers are just statistics (xyfscachestat). Prevent Libraries evolving in Digital Era, and essentially you condemn the whole Institution of Library.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Funny? (Score:2)
by DarthVain (724186) on Thursday February 16, @01:32PM (#39063335)
From what I understand this was exactly the case back in the day. Corporations tried to lobby and to make them illegal. The US basically decided that libraries were in the peoples best interest so they lost. Too bad government doesn't seem too awfully concerned about that anymore.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I propose an end to book sharing as well! (Score:2)
by schwep (173358) on Thursday February 16, @06:08PM (#39067423)
End information sharing! Everything must be self taught, or you must pay for the knowledge each time you think about it.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
sooner or later (Score:4, Interesting)
by Moheeheeko (1682914) on Thursday February 16, @11:00AM (#39060897)
Seem like a matter of time before others join in on all the "fun". Encyclopedia Britannica sues to have Wikipedia taken down could be a future headline IMO.
Reply to This Flag as Inappropriate
Re:sooner or later (Score:2)
by ScentCone (795499) on Thursday February 16, @11:08AM (#39061055)
Encyclopedia Britannica sues to have Wikipedia taken down could be a future headline IMO.
So, your opinion is based on ... a complete misunderstanding of the case at hand, of Wikipedia, and of the Britannica? The Trifecta Of Not Getting It! Congratulations.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:sooner or later (Score:1)
by Harry Nelson (2575925) on Thursday February 16, @11:02AM (#39060941)
Wikipedia doesn't put works done by Encyclopedia Britannica on their site. It's completely different than having a site that allows you to download pirated ebooks.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Actually WP does use material from Brittanica (Score:2)
by langelgjm (860756) on Thursday February 16, @11:09AM (#39061069) Journal
Actually, Wikipedia does use material from Britannica. [
wikipedia.org] It's just material from out-of-copyright versions of Britannica.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Britannica 11th ed. Re:sooner or later (Score:1)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @11:09AM (#39061063)
There might still be some text from Eleventh edition (1910-1911) in there; as that is in the public domain.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Distributing someone else's work is NOT a right (Score:4, Insightful)
by cornicefire (610241) on Thursday February 16, @11:05AM (#39060995)
Unless you have permission. It's called freedom of speech. It's for expressing your opinions. It's for communicating your thoughts. It's not for sitting on your rear end and downloading some movie without paying for it. Calling downloading a "human right" is an insult to Martin Luther King, Peter Zenger, and everyone else who fought for our right to express ourselves.
Reply to This Flag as Inappropriate
Library.nu was for book piracy, not films (Score:3)
by langelgjm (860756) on Thursday February 16, @11:13AM (#39061137) Journal
It's not for sitting on your rear end and downloading some movie without paying for it. Calling downloading a "human right" is an insult to Martin Luther King, Peter Zenger, and everyone else who fought for our right to express ourselves.
Considering that
library.nu was a site for book piracy, I think your comment is a bit misguided. Frankly, I suspect Martin Luther King would probably have been okay with someone downloading "Why We Can't Wait" from
library.nu.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Library.nu was for book piracy, not films (Score:2)
by Deep Esophagus (686515) on Thursday February 16, @11:40AM (#39061669)
King might be OK with that, but his estate... not [
ajc.com] so [
slashdot.org] much [
nytimes.com]
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Library.nu was for book piracy, not films (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @11:43AM (#39061701)
It's not for sitting on your rear end and downloading some movie without paying for it. Calling downloading a "human right" is an insult to Martin Luther King, Peter Zenger, and everyone else who fought for our right to express ourselves.
Considering that
library.nu was a site for book piracy, I think your comment is a bit misguided. Frankly, I suspect Martin Luther King would probably have been okay with someone downloading "Why We Can't Wait" from
library.nu.
Ah, bliss. This is the same style of bullshit argument I generally hear from the pro-give-me-everything-I-want-for-free-because-I-want-it crowd. Find one minuscule, entirely irrelevant flaw in a given statement and assume that completely destroys the opposing argument. Such as:
"It's for expressing your opinions. It's for communicating your thoughts. It's not for sitting on your rear end and downloading some movie without paying for it." "Yeah, but TECHNICALLY, these were books. You never said anything about books. ZOMG UR ARGUMENT COMPLETELY VOIDZ0RZ!!!1!"
"Don't go around pirating copyrighted material. There's nothing that says you're entitled to obtain it by completely redefining the terms on-the-fly like that just so you can rationalize getting it for free." "Yeah, but TECHNICALLY, I only recognize one singular exact definition of 'pirate' and 'piracy'. Since I refuse to accept language changing and evolving for any use besides my own and nobody's come up with a single word for this which I accept ("copyright infringement" is TWO words, dumbass), I willingly have ultimately no clue what you're talking about, so what I'm doing is legal. ZOMG UR ARGUMENT COMPLETELY VOIDZ0RZ!!!1!"
"If you REALLY want to send a message to the RIAA/MPAA, just stop buying their stuff. Stop downloading it, stop sharing it, stop discussing it, stop bragging about it to your friends, stop all of that. Buy stuff from people who AREN'T assholes about it and help build up the independent market and break the big label/studio stranglehold, rather than give them more legal ammunition with which they can attack us." "Yeah, but TECHNICALLY, I really really really REALLY want RIAA/MPAA stuff, and since my social development and sense of responsibility stopped COLD around the time I was seven or so thanks to my hippy parents giving me whatever I wanted if I cried loud enough, I feel I'm entitled to everything I want for free. ZOMG UR ARGUMENT COMPLETELY VOIDZ0RZ!!!1!"
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Library.nu was for book piracy, not films (Score:2)
by langelgjm (860756) on Thursday February 16, @11:53AM (#39061877) Journal
Next time don't post as AC and I might be willing to have a reasonable discussion with you.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Library.nu was for book piracy, not films (Score:2)
by QuasiSteve (2042606) on Thursday February 16, @03:00PM (#39064771)
Seriously off-topic post follows...
Next time don't post as AC and I might be willing to have a reasonable discussion with you.
I'm not that AC - but I once was an AC, had a whole discussion with somebody, until they said they were done talking to an AC and that I should just register, it was easy, etc.
So I did, and I replied again.
Never a reply back from him... her... it.
I will never know because although his post didn't read Anonymous Coward, he was practically just as anonymous as I was; the only benefit to having a completely fictitious username available to you is to see what else they may have said in the past, on different subjects - but as it's simple to register for multiple accounts, even that is, to an extent, pointless.
So why does the person posting as AC matter?
( The post of the AC in question was confusing, though. I'm not sure they read your post correctly. )
On the other hand, I guess I have that person ( kheldan ) to thank for lower post-repeat delays.. who knew anons had to wait hours while anon-registerds can post every 5 minutes or so based on various post metrics?
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Library.nu was for book piracy, not films (Score:2)
by langelgjm (860756) on Thursday February 16, @03:28PM (#39065099) Journal
In my mind, a person posting as AC is not interested in having a discussion, for at least two reasons. First, there is no way to keep track of what is actually their contribution, versus the contribution of some other AC. Second, a person who is registered has a simple method to check for responses to their comments (e.g., I get e-mails alerting me to replies to my comments), so I feel they are more likely to see my response and respond in turn. An AC has to manually check a thread for responses.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Library.nu was for book piracy, not films (Score:2)
by QuasiSteve (2042606) on Thursday February 16, @04:48PM (#39066399)
Fair enough, especially the identification part; although that applies more to their (or is it?) reply to your reply.. than to your reply. But yes, in a back-and-forth, it does become a necessity to prevent others from impersonating.
And hey, thanks for responding :D
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Distributing someone else's work is NOT a right (Score:2)
by Nadaka (224565) on Thursday February 16, @11:13AM (#39061143)
Distributing your own creative works IS a right, and it is being infringed upon by removing the medium of sharing in order to fight piracy.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Distributing someone else's work is NOT a right (Score:2)
by Pembers (250842) on Thursday February 16, @11:37AM (#39061599) Homepage
If you've written a book and want to give it away, perhaps you shouldn't distribute it (only) via a site that's used mainly for hosting or linking to pirated books. There are plenty of "show off your writing" sites that you could post it to, or you could spend a few dollars for your own hosting.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Distributing someone else's work is NOT a right (Score:2)
by ThePhilips (752041) on Thursday February 16, @12:54PM (#39062709) Homepage Journal
Have seen few years ago a review of such sites by an author. The picture is not as rosy as you paint it. IIRC in the end, yes it is easier and cheaper to host it yourself. What is still not that simple for the most non-IT-savvy people.
Also, in some countries, with strong book "piracy" background (e.g. ex-USSR) many authors publish their books themselves on such local "illegal"/"semi-legal" sites. Culture preservation sentiment is very strong and litigation is a risk of angering the readers. IOW, the practice is uncommon, but not unheard of.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Distributing someone else's work is NOT a right (Score:2)
by ClintJCL (264898) <clintjcl+slashdot.gmail@com> on Thursday February 16, @11:13AM (#39061159) Homepage Journal
Do you have a reading comprehension defect? This site is for books. Why can I go to a library and get a book, but not download one? I have to burn gas and kill trees to read for free?
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Distributing someone else's work is NOT a right (Score:2)
by bws111 (1216812) on Thursday February 16, @11:19AM (#39061281)
What backwater do you live in? Most libraries will let you borrow ebooks.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Distributing someone else's work is NOT a right (Score:2)
by ClintJCL (264898) <clintjcl+slashdot.gmail@com> on Thursday February 16, @11:23AM (#39061339) Homepage Journal
Inside the Washington, DC beltway. Why would I know libraries let you borrow ebooks? I've not stepped in one since I found out I could get the same content without leaving my house. Similar to a record store.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Distributing someone else's work is NOT a right (Score:2)
by Col. Klink (retired) (11632) on Thursday February 16, @11:52AM (#39061855)
What makes you think you need to leave the house to borrow ebooks from the library (other than once every three years to renew your library card):
http://overdrive.dclibrary.org/ [
dclibrary.org]
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Distributing someone else's work is NOT a right (Score:2)
by ClintJCL (264898) <clintjcl+slashdot.gmail@com> on Thursday February 16, @11:57AM (#39061925) Homepage Journal
Hahaha, ok! Still though - fuel and energy is spent. That was my true point, personal-gas-expenditures aside :) Hats off to you tho :)
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Distributing someone else's work is NOT a right (Score:2)
by Bobakitoo (1814374) on Thursday February 16, @01:16PM (#39063075)
What backwater do you live in? Most libraries will let you borrow ebooks.
The Internet is the library. It is the greatest library of all time and we are allowing it to be burnt down.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Distributing someone else's work is NOT a right (Score:2)
by Pionar (620916) on Thursday February 16, @11:26AM (#39061413)
And what makes you think free access to books is a right?
Freedom of speech doesn't include freedom to free (as in beer) access to someone's writings.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Distributing someone else's work is NOT a right (Score:2)
by ClintJCL (264898) <clintjcl+slashdot.gmail@com> on Thursday February 16, @11:33AM (#39061525) Homepage Journal
I refer you to the original comment I made, which you did not answer. If you can answer that question, then I will proceed to the next step of the discussion. Why can I go to a library and get a book, but not download one? (And actually, where I live, everyone does have a right to a library card, which gives them free access to books. And don't say the taxes pay it, because you don't have to be a taxpaying citizen to get a library card, just a citizen, period.)
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Distributing someone else's work is NOT a right (Score:2)
by langelgjm (860756) on Thursday February 16, @11:51AM (#39061831) Journal
You're absolutely correct on a legal level, no one can argue with that.
However, I think a lot of us pose the question the opposite way: what makes you think government-backed enforcement of monopoly is a right? The only reason it's a legal right is because of accidents of history and law... Unless you're taking a Rick Santorum-style approach where you generally think that US law was handed down by God almighty.
When you look beyond mere existing law and ask about fundamental human rights, there is a pretty hard-to-navigate conflict between the feeling that someone should be rewarded for their valuable effort, and the feeling that knowledge should flow as freely as possible.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Distributing someone else's work is NOT a right (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @11:23AM (#39061343)
The physical book was paid for.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Distributing someone else's work is NOT a right (Score:2)
by ClintJCL (264898) <clintjcl+slashdot.gmail@com> on Thursday February 16, @11:40AM (#39061651) Homepage Journal
The original downloaded ebook was paid for.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Distributing someone else's work is NOT a right (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @12:20PM (#39062209)
Libraries PAY for those books. And then repay to buy a new copy when the previous one becomes too beaten up to continue lending. Libraries also PAY for licenses of ebooks that they lend out and you CAN download. This was an instance of someone using the word library in their url but just lending out stuff they didn't buy or license.
The libraries are not under attack here. The act of lending ebooks is not under attack here. A specific site that was pirating material is under attack.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Distributing someone else's work is NOT a right (Score:2)
by rubycodez (864176) on Thursday February 16, @11:48AM (#39061797)
actually, only because of copyright law of a particular country or group of countries can I not distribute someone else's work. what if the United States falls? what if the UK does? then there is no restriction whatsoever. You seem to think that a bunch of (corrupt, power and money grubbing) guys can write something on paper (a law), and it is some universal god-empowered scripture. news for you, this business of "copyright" and "piracy" is totally an artificial construct of some nations.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Distributing someone else's work is NOT a right (Score:2)
by forkfail (228161) on Thursday February 16, @11:51AM (#39061837)
The logical conclusion of your premise, though, is that knowledge is a privilege.
The media (scroll, book, eBook) doesn't matter; what does matter is whether or not those who cannot afford huge fees to read are allowed access to books - or not.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Distributing someone else's work is NOT a right (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @11:08AM (#39061047)
Think for a moment...if we appoint adjudicators of what content is and isn't free speech, we've already lost it.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Distributing someone else's work is NOT a right (Score:5, Insightful)
by Baloroth (2370816) on Thursday February 16, @11:13AM (#39061149)
Think for a moment...if we appoint adjudicators of what content is and isn't free speech, we've already lost it.
Have you heard of the "courts?" They've been doing exactly that for hundreds of years. CP, for example, is not free speech. Saying a politician murdered a prostitute? Not free speech. Saying you think a politician's opinion is wrong and stupid and you would like to see him die? 100% protected free speech (yes, even the "want to see him die" part, so long as you don't encourage someone to kill him or say you are going to do it yourself).
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Distributing someone else's work is NOT a right (Score:3)
by dkleinsc (563838) on Thursday February 16, @11:28AM (#39061455)
Saying a politician murdered a prostitute? Not free speech.
Sort of. It's a civil matter of defamation, not a criminal charge, assuming that you believed that statement to be untrue.
It is, however, perfectly legal to broadcast something like "This network has found no evidence that Senator Jones killed a prostitute." even if the effect of saying such things is for most people to think that Jones killed a prostitute but was careful to hide all the evidence.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Distributing someone else's work is NOT a right (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @11:19AM (#39061283)
Congress shall make no law
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Distributing someone else's work is NOT a right (Score:2)
by Fned (43219) on Thursday February 16, @12:39PM (#39062469) Journal
CP, for example, is not free speech.
...unless it's entirely fictional.
Saying a politician murdered a prostitute? Not free speech.
...unless he or she did murder a prostitute.
Saying you think a politician's opinion is wrong and stupid and you would like to see him die? 100% protected free speech (yes, even the "want to see him die" part, so long as you don't encourage someone to kill him or say you are going to do it yourself).
This is correct.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Distributing someone else's work is NOT a right (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @04:47PM (#39066385)
...unless it's entirely fictional.
Wrong. Even that will get you arrested nowadays.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Distributing someone else's work is NOT a right (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @04:15PM (#39065909)
You'd be safer with just "wanting him to die".
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Distributing someone else's work is NOT a right (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @07:57PM (#39068731)
that last part is wildly inaccurate. you can say you are going to kill them, so long as you don't take any steps towards making that happen...
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Distributing someone else's work is NOT a right (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @11:29AM (#39061475)
Run into the nearest theater and yell FIRE!!!
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Distributing someone else's work is NOT a right (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @11:14AM (#39061171)
you can express yourself, and someone can read what you've written, but by god that person better not share what you've written with anyone else or we will send the swat teams after them.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Distributing someone else's work is NOT a right (Score:2)
by spire3661 (1038968) on Thursday February 16, @12:27PM (#39062301) Journal
To me, the attempt to digitally lock text files is an affront to human rights. Im sorry you cant see this. Technology > copyright.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Distributing someone else's work is NOT a right (Score:2)
by Fned (43219) on Thursday February 16, @12:36PM (#39062421) Journal
Yes, it is. That's why the need to ask permission is an exceptional privelege granted by government for a specific, societally-beneficial purpose.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Distributing someone else's work is NOT a right (Score:2)
by misexistentialist (1537887) on Thursday February 16, @12:50PM (#39062647)
"Downloading" is just the transfer of information, which is speech in its purist form. Requiring "permission" for all transfers of information is censorship in its purest form. King and Zenger may be giants, but they are beneath our feet: we are past a minister's or a newspaper publisher's right to talk to the masses, it's now about the individuals' rights exercised simultaneously, ubiquitously, infinitely.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Distributing someone else's work is NOT a right (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @01:04PM (#39062849)
You cannot distribute work. What you can distribute is information.
Yes, it may have been that someone did some work in order to come up with that information. But IP is based on the notion that this somehow links that person (or whoever they sell the IP to) with that information forever (or at least for some arbitrary period of time dictated by IP legislation). There is absolutely no philosophical or economic justification for this idea.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Distributing someone else's work is NOT a right (Score:2)
by chrb (1083577) on Thursday February 16, @01:13PM (#39063035)
Perhaps you have not fully considered what your words actually mean. Think: what exactly is distribution of a work, in terms of "rights"? It is not an act in itself, it is a subset of a much larger behavior; it is an act of communication. And the right to communicate in privacy with another human being is widely recognised: Communication is recognised as an essential human need and, therefore, as a basic human right. [
wikipedia.org]
Here is the important thing to understand: when it comes to communicating through a modern, digital system, with privacy (encryption) there is no difference to an outside observer between two adults swapping love letters, and two adults swapping copyrighted works of art. It is just data. And hence, although you may not literally have the right to distribute someone elses work, you do have the right to communicate in privacy with another human being, and in practice you can use that medium of communication for whatever you want - even if you want to distribute copyrighted works of art. And that is the reason why file sharing is ultimately unstoppable in a democratic society. If people want to send each other songs and movies, and they have the right to communicate in private, then there is no way to stop them from doing it.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Distributing someone else's work is NOT a right (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @01:58PM (#39063817)
Well, then I guess all privacy laws should be abandoned also, right? I mean, if someone from your doctor's office wants to discuss your medical records with the local TV reporter who the fuck are we to try to stop that communication? By your wonderful logic, a democratic society should have no expectation of privacy at all.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Distributing someone else's work is NOT a right (Score:2)
by chrb (1083577) on Thursday February 16, @03:48PM (#39065433)
if someone from your doctor's office wants to discuss your medical records with the local TV reporter who the fuck are we to try to stop that communication
Sure, you can try, but you won't succeed. If your doctor, or someone employed by your doctor, really wants to leak your medical records then there is very little that you can do about it. No organisation in a free society has ever eliminated leakers and whistleblowers.
By your wonderful logic, a democratic society should have no expectation of privacy at all.
The only reason we have an expectation of privacy with respect to medical records is because people don't habitually communicate them to others. This is the opposite situation to the content industry; it is estimated that around 75% of people pirate music and video. If 75% of the doctors in a democratic society were leaking patient's medical records, then, regardless of the moral aspect, we wouldn't have an expectation of privacy. The reason the vast majority of medical records are safe isn't due to technical countermeasures, or the diligence of our police and legal system - it is because, apart from maybe a few celebrities, there is no widespread demand for medical records.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Distributing someone else's work is NOT a right (Score:2)
by cpt kangarooski (3773) on Thursday February 16, @11:02PM (#39070391) Homepage
Distributing someone else's work is NOT a right[.] Unless you have permission.
Sure it is.
I can print up a bunch of copies of Shakespeare's 'Romeo and Juliet,' go down to the street corner, and start passing them out to anyone who wants one, all without getting any permission from anyone at all. If the police tried to stop me, I could go to court, assert my right of free speech, and win handily, because the government (here at least) recognizes my preexisting right to do this, and protects it.
Freedom of speech not only includes communicating your own speech, but also repeating the speech of others verbatim.
Copyright is an infringement of the freedom of speech, as it grants to private parties (and, in a way, to the government), the power to censor other people when they use the speech of others (under certain conditions, in certain ways, etc.). It's clear therefore that copyright is inherently a bad thing. However, it may nevertheless be tolerable if it produces an even greater benefit for the public that suffers the injury of that censorship.
Still, we should never forget that copyright is a very risky, very dubious practice. We should always be highly skeptical of any infringement on free speech, no matter how lofty the goal of the infringement is claimed to be. We should carefully measure the benefits and harms of copyright, in terms of both its scope and duration, to make sure that we not only have a system that produces a net public benefit (copyright with less public benefit than public harm should be abolished or reformed immediately, of course), but the greatest net public benefit possible. And even then, it is perfectly legitimate to call for the abolition of copyright.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Distributing someone else's work is NOT a right (Score:2)
by SilentMobius (10171) on Friday February 17, @07:04AM (#39072615)
Actually it is not just a right it's a natural law. Anything that is broadcast with the potential to be heard and/or seen is automatically in the public domain. That is the default! Some governments specifically added the grant of a limited monopoly on distribution of a work (copyright) "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts" because the default was thought to not encourage progress sufficiently, this would not be needed without the recognition that the default is the public domain.
Now your legal or moral obligation to obey that grant is a highly relative issue, and as should be discussed, but the right to transfer knowledge and experience you have received is almost as basic as it comes, even if that happens to be a reproduction a performance.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
I borrowed a newspaper today (Score:5, Insightful)
by captainpanic (1173915) on Thursday February 16, @11:05AM (#39060999)
I borrowed a newspaper today. I didn't pay for it, but I still read it.
Also, I have 3 books at home which aren't mine (borrowed, not stolen).
Basically, that's at least 30 euro of lost revenue for the industry.
Yet I don't feel guilty...
Reply to This Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I borrowed a newspaper today (Score:5, Funny)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @11:07AM (#39061031)
I borrowed a newspaper today. I didn't pay for it, but I still read it.
Also, I have 3 books at home which aren't mine (borrowed, not stolen).
Basically, that's at least 30 euro of lost revenue for the industry.
Yet I don't feel guilty...
30? More like 3 million. Thats how piracy works, haven't you been paying attention?
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I borrowed a newspaper today (Score:-1, Troll)
by ScentCone (795499) on Thursday February 16, @11:11AM (#39061099)
I have 3 books at home which aren't mine
And did you scan them, run them through OCR, and then make some money off of "sharing" them with millions of your closest personal friends? No?
So, your point is that you have no sense of what the discussion is actually about, right? Right.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I borrowed a newspaper today (Score:3)
by captainpanic (1173915) on Thursday February 16, @11:26AM (#39061399)
And did you scan them, run them through OCR, and then make some money off of "sharing" them with millions of your closest personal friends? No?
I read them, and I "paid" by giving some books to my friends in return. So yeah, it's actually quite an organization we've set up here. And it's decentralized p2p too. :-)
But if you imagine that millions of people are all doing this, you can get an idea of the huge damage to the industry. I'm only a small player. There are people who own and read way more books than I do.
So, your point is that you have no sense of what the discussion is actually about, right? Right.
Don't mock my comment. I know what I am talking about. We're talking about billions of euros/dollars... stolen from the industry by book-sharing people. And they've been at it for centuries!
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I borrowed a newspaper today (Score:2)
by oPless (63249) on Thursday February 16, @11:37AM (#39061595) Journal
[Snip]There are people who own and read way more books than I do.
So, your point is that you have no sense of what the discussion is actually about, right? Right.
Don't mock my comment. I know what I am talking about. We're talking about billions of euros/dollars... stolen from the industry by book-sharing people. And they've been at it for centuries!
Oh Wait, there's those things called Libraries! Burn them down immediately!
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I borrowed a newspaper today (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @11:48AM (#39061803)
"Oh Wait, there's those things called Libraries! Burn them down immediately!"
Talk to anyone that has a clue that works in libraries - Academic or Public - this is in progress.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I borrowed a newspaper today (Score:2)
by AF_Cheddar_Head (1186601) on Thursday February 16, @12:12PM (#39062113)
The big publisher's would if they could.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I borrowed a newspaper today (Score:2)
by jank1887 (815982) on Thursday February 16, @12:00PM (#39061975)
I read them, and I "paid" by giving some books to my friends in return.
I'm missing the part where you made a copy of them. Hence violating copyright and artificially increasing supply thereby diluting demand. Hence violating legal copyright. Lending is just fine. They sold one book to be read, and it is read one person at a time. It is not reproduced and read by multiple people at the same time in different locations. Copyright is about artificially maintaining scarcity. you did nothing to decrease scarcity.
So, your comparison is off.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I borrowed a newspaper today (Score:2)
by Vegemeister (1259976) on Thursday February 16, @12:14PM (#39062135)
Artificially increasing supply? The supply of information is, by default, practically unlimited. Anything else is an artificial restriction.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I borrowed a newspaper today (Score:2)
by Fned (43219) on Thursday February 16, @01:03PM (#39062839) Journal
Copyright is about artificially maintaining scarcity.
See, that's the problem. Artifically maintaning scarcity of a digital file can only be done by breaking the computer it's on. Because digital files are inherently non-scarce.
So: Copyright or computers? You are making this choice, right now, through your actions.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I borrowed a newspaper today (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @01:03PM (#39062845)
I'm pretty sure you can "dilute demand" for a book just by letting people read it, without actually making a copy. I doubt anywhere near as many people buy a book they already read opposed to a book they haven't.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I borrowed a newspaper today (Score:2)
by AmiMoJo (196126) <mojo@[ ]
ld3.net ['wor' in gap]> on Friday February 17, @11:36AM (#39075559) Homepage
We're talking about billions of euros/dollars... stolen from the industry by book-sharing people. And they've been at it for centuries!
It is only stolen if you consider them to have a right to it in the first place. If you by a chair the person who made it no longer has any claim over it. It is yours, you can do what you like, sell it, give it away, lend it, whatever. Books are no different.
What screwed everything up is the invention of an easy way to reproduce books. Similar to how the printing press did, only at much lower cost and available to everyone. Fortunately authors have been able to make plenty of money despite the fact that libraries and friends have been giving free access to books, or that second hand book shops have been profiting without giving them a penny, so it seems unlikely that things will change that much for the majority. The publishers might have a problem if they don't sort themselves out, but only because authors don't need them as much any more thanks to distribution being essentially free, or at least available on a per-copy-downloaded basis rather than a pay-upfront-to-print-X-thousand-copies basis.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I borrowed a newspaper today (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @12:02PM (#39061995)
So what you're saying is that you lack the ability to process historical context, and relate things that are in front of you to things that are further away, yet (to the rest of the world) obviously connected. Don't worry, there is still hope for you to be a profitable (yet not really productive) member of society. The people who have most often been sued or blackmailed by being threatened with lawsuits for "sharing" are the ones who received copies of those works, not the distributors.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I borrowed a newspaper today (Score:2)
by spire3661 (1038968) on Thursday February 16, @12:31PM (#39062367) Journal
I dont think you understand the media's endgame here. The goal is to make sure they get paid for every human mind that gets touched by their works, period.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I borrowed a newspaper today (Score:2)
by Requiem18th (742389) on Thursday February 16, @02:35PM (#39064365)
Actually they are working on getting paid by every mind that didn't touch other people's works too:
http://bethestory.com/2005/11/21/storyline-patents [
bethestory.com]
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I borrowed a newspaper today (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @11:23AM (#39061351)
Newspapers don't make their money off people buying a copy of the paper, they make it off advertising. The more people that read it the better.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I borrowed a newspaper today (Score:2)
by AF_Cheddar_Head (1186601) on Thursday February 16, @12:13PM (#39062129)
Used to be that way. Not so much anymore that's why the daily paper is $1 and so thin a lot less advertising.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I borrowed a newspaper today (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @11:25AM (#39061383)
Passing a single physical copy of something from one person to another is rather different to duplicating it indefinitely and then potentially millions of people having simultaneous access to it.
It's a difficult concept to grasp I know.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Its about more than piracy (Score:2)
by sl4shd0rk (755837) on Thursday February 16, @11:14AM (#39061163)
I cant help but wonder how much money the people behind ACTA/SOPA/PIPPA/MAFIAA are spending to get these sites taken down. Its got to cost some pretty big bucks to collaborate it all across nations and political boundaries. What's the payout for them?
Reply to This Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Its about more than piracy (Score:2)
by jesseck (942036) on Thursday February 16, @11:35AM (#39061563)
What's the payout for them?
Our freedoms
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Its about more than piracy (Score:2)
by lymond01 (314120) on Thursday February 16, @11:42AM (#39061691)
What's the payout for them?
I would assume donations from the concerned parties.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Its about more than piracy (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @11:32AM (#39061509)
You are assuming those organizations are paying and not the (mostly innocent) taxpayers in those nations.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Its about more than piracy (Score:2)
by forkfail (228161) on Thursday February 16, @01:30PM (#39063293)
The payout is supposed to be a complete monopoly on all content of all types.
If you want to read/watch/listen to/experience anything, you've got to pay the owner for it.
That is what the whole "Ownership Society" touted by the previous administration really is about. Or to put it another way, the few owning the rest - the owned.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Its about more than piracy (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @11:19PM (#39070519)
I dunno.
Believe or not, I've actually bought books I've downloaded from Library.nu. Yup, quite a few. Not as many as I've freeloaded, because I'd have to be rich. But Amazon can sure as fuck thank
Library.nu.It just allowed me to choose the best books. And, hey, get real, I would never buy the ammount of books I downloaded. I don't have the money or the space. Neither does my University have the fat research grants Ivy League schools get. So what exactly is their loss, when book sales have been going up? Library.nu, as books were passed from coleague to coleague, in my opinion:
1) increased author's visibility
2) increased a book's visibility
it's word of mouth gone exponential.
Besides, publishers just let fine books go out of print... Is it fair to complain that someone scanned them and released a djvu file? What exactly is the problem of taking a book on, say, Go (game), published in 1974, scanning it and putting it on the internet? You're just making knowledge available...The publisher didn't seem to care. In this day and age, do publisher's really expect us to head to a library??? Where??? In Japan??? Should I take a trip to New York, just to go to a library??? Get serious.
These publishers are seriously delusional. And, hey, if they're fucking book didn't cost $60 in PDF form (what's their printing cost???), maybe I would make it my habit of downloading 20 books a month, legally (paying).
On a more serious note, Library.nu was a blessing for all those, such as me, living far from the American or European research institution that have the money to stuff their libraries. And - I'm being honest here - I've also donated books to my Uni's library *because* I got to know the books from lnu.
So let them close Library.nu...Another one will surface...They can play that cat and mouse game for as long as they want. Unless they face the reality of Digital, they will always lose. You can't beat the hivemind. Everytime they act like assholes, the people's resistance just gets stronger, just like what happened with digital music. If they lower their prices, then it might be more of a hassle for me to go freeload-hunting then just got to Springer, Oxford, etc, to pay for a book. And I still think scanning out-of-print books is not only fair, but a humane necessity.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Why is it... (Score:2)
by qzjul (944600) on Thursday February 16, @11:18AM (#39061261) Homepage
Why is it that I never hear about these places until they close?
Reply to This Flag as Inappropriate
Farenheight 451 (Score:2)
by tekrat (242117) on Thursday February 16, @11:24AM (#39061359) Homepage Journal
Bradbury was right on target.
But the firemen don't need to burn paper books, they just need to wipe your kindle (of 1984, if I recall (in great irony)), close down the websites and prevent your iPad from accessing anything outside the walled garden.
How long before Publishers and the RIAA are hunting down camps of vagrants, people who recite to others "I am The Grapes of Wrath" or "I am The Beatles" ?
We are headed for some dark times. They didn't have to burn our books. Instead, they gave us electronic toys, and we burned the books for them.... And they control the electronic toys. So now we are screwed.
Reply to This Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Farenheight 451 (Score:1)
by afaiktoit (831835) on Thursday February 16, @11:38AM (#39061621)
http://www.schoollibraryjournal.com/article/CA6450954.html [
schoollibraryjournal.com] "The author, interviewed last week by the L.A. Weekly, says the novel is actually about how television destroys interest in reading literature."
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Farenheight 451 (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @05:51PM (#39067205)
Posting anon because I've already moderated here.
That's what the author says it's about. Why is he the only one who gets to decide? I've read it, and a lot of other people have read it. Why can't we each come to our own conclusions about what it's about?
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Farenheight 451 (Score:1)
by afaiktoit (831835) on Thursday February 16, @06:00PM (#39067333)
I guess instead of going on a tinfoil hat rant you could just bust the drm on any books you buy and burn them to a cd. problem solved.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Farenheight 451 (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @02:03PM (#39063893)
You made me cry :(
But, truthfully, I agree with you.
For myself, I have given up... I do not buy new media anymore. I have, for the past 3 years, bought 99% of my books, movies, cds, and video games used. The 1% is mostly the kids using birthday money and/or gifts where I don't have any real control (it's their money, I can only explain, can't force it on them).
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Just more proof... (Score:3)
by ZorinLynx (31751) on Thursday February 16, @11:25AM (#39061389) Homepage
This is just further proof that existing IP laws are sufficient and we don't NEED draconian measures like SOPA or ACTA to stop piracy.
The laws are there. They can be enforced without censorship and stepping all over peoples' rights.
Reply to This Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Just more proof... (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @11:44AM (#39061729)
Actually this is more proof that our IP laws are absolutely corrupt and one sided. That there is VERY little judicial oversight and that the power is flowing only one way. It is not serving the interests of the public, it is not fostering small business creation or innovation, it is giving corporations the power they need to squash any and all competition and cement their place in the business hierarchy. AWESOME!
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Just more proof... (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 17, @03:15AM (#39071689)
They can be enforced without censorship and stepping all over peoples' rights.
No, this means corrupt government agencies ALREADY enforce copyright with censorship and stepping all over peoples' rights because this is exactly what many were afraid of would come from SOPA. US MAFIA shutting down international sites at their own whim with a "shoot first, worry about due process ... never" attitude.
If anything, this proves we need fewer, less corrupt copyright laws.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Enter the Readeasy. (Score:2)
by forkfail (228161) on Thursday February 16, @11:33AM (#39061541)
Overlapping circles of people who share books.
The thing about forcing certain goods and services into the area outside the law is that if enough people want those goods and services, it becomes socially acceptable to ignore the law. This both weakens the law in general (and thus the fabric of a government of laws) while at the same time turning the law into a tool of oppression for those in power.
It happened during prohibition. It happened during the war on drugs. And now it's going to happen in this war on piracy.
Reply to This Flag as Inappropriate
Money doesn't add up (Score:2)
by shuz (706678) on Thursday February 16, @11:35AM (#39061557) Homepage Journal
Making up educated numbers here but you should be able to push a metric shit ton of traffic for 11 million annually.
~40k per month for an OC3 line 155Mbps.
I'll give you a million for your storage solution.
About 1.2mil for ~2000 or so CPU's and a terabyte of active memory worth of servers.
Figure 100k a sysadmin. Would be a good idea to not have a admin to cpu ratio higher than 1:250 so that nearly a million there
You need cooling and a place to house the servers. I'll give you another million.
Oh networking, ya that is another cool million. Oh you are going with Cisco? maybe a bit more.
I feel that I am really stretching it here but I don't see how hosting costs for a pretty big operation even come close to 11 million. Now the expensive parts are support and app dev but I don't see how a hosting service would need to change or create a complex app. I keep on forgetting "administrative costs" aka a couple people skimming the cream off the top for relatively little effort aka executive management. That is most likely where the other 4 mil went. Hey CEO's have to eat too you know!
Reply to This Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Money doesn't add up (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @11:48AM (#39061801)
You forgot the part where they bought the relevant services/products through each other and applied a massive markup. With the right accounting, you can define any revenue stream as just barely breaking even.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Library analogy (Score:2)
by ClintJCL (264898) <clintjcl+slashdot.gmail@com> on Thursday February 16, @11:38AM (#39061619) Homepage Journal
Library gets a copy of a physical book (originally paid for by whoever bought it first) and loans it out as many times as it wants, forever.
Electronic library gets a copy of an electronic book (originally paid for by whoever bought it first) and loans it out as many times as it wants, forever.
In both situations, someone who really wants a paid-for copy for themselves can pay for it themselves; someone who really wants to just borrow one can borrow and return/delete it; someone who really just wants to steal one can steal it with great ease (I probably have an unreturned library book somewhere.)
Main difference I'm seeing is that one kills trees and burns gasoline.
Reply to This Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Library analogy (Score:2)
by westlake (615356) on Thursday February 16, @11:52AM (#39061857)
Library gets a copy of a physical book (originally paid for by whoever bought it first) and loans it out as many times as it wants, forever.
The physical book is not forever.
Not with the kind of punishment it takes in a public library.
That implies purchase of custom bindings or multiple copies of books in heavy circulation.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Library analogy (Score:2)
by ClintJCL (264898) <clintjcl+slashdot.gmail@com> on Thursday February 16, @12:03PM (#39062007) Homepage Journal
Digital files aren't forever either. (If they are, someone please send me those files I lost in the 90s.) That implies purchase of additional storage, or multiple backups of files in heavy circulation (I have my music on 3 harddrives because I lost it all before). Stuff that's posted on bittorrent often isn't available a few years later because nobody else is in there sharing it. Stuff goes away either way. But again, one burns trees and energy, and the other.... much less so.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Library analogy (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @11:34PM (#39070615)
The Kindle book is not forever...
Paper, however, well...history shows how long printed texts last...
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Library analogy (Score:2)
by b0bby (201198) on Thursday February 16, @11:59AM (#39061963) Homepage
Electronic Library (like Overdrive) uses DRM to ensure that only one copy of a purchased book is available for use at any given time, making it analogous to the physical library.
These sites seem like they were more like a library which would photocopy you a book anytime you wanted, not making you wait for the original purchased book to be returned first.
I won't buy files with DRM, but I'm actually ok with using my library's Overdrive system since it's pretty much the digital equivalent of the usual library service.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Library analogy (Score:2)
by ClintJCL (264898) <clintjcl+slashdot.gmail@com> on Thursday February 16, @12:09PM (#39062067) Homepage Journal
I'm ok with it too, but there's nothing stopping anybody from photocopying a whole book from the library, so someone sufficiently motivated is going to do it either way. (Indeed, I got my father to do this for me several times - wasting federal taxpayer money, oil/gas, and trees.)
Mankind has to accept that we're in an electronic age, and certain things are easier.
We wouldn't accept having the police follow us into our own home to make sure we don't photocopy a book after lending it from the library; so the library stands in assumption that you don't do anything illegal. But when this is done online, the assumption is that it's all illegal, so the [online] library gets shut down. Congratulations, back to photocopiers and OCR. The tide will only ever be slowed, not stopped.
As stated in my original post, whoever wants to pay/borrow/steal can do it either way. One wastes more energy and resources, so I view that one as worse.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Library analogy (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @01:13PM (#39063017)
"Electronic library gets a copy of an electronic book (originally paid for by whoever bought it first) and loans it out as many times as it wants, forever. "
This isn't necessarily the case with actual ebook library distribution models. Here's an instance where a publisher capped checkouts:
HarperCollins eBook policy irks libraries
http://www.torontosun.com/news/canada/2011/03/04/17500386.html Content IP owners will press the modern system to extract leverage they may not have had under the old system, or to preserve their position in the old system.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
They're thiefs.... sorry (Score:5, Insightful)
by Temujin_12 (832986) on Thursday February 16, @11:43AM (#39061711)
If you copy media you purchased, you're smart.
If you copy media you didn't purchase, you're cheap.
If you copy media you didn't purchase AND you make a profit off of it, you're a thief.
We do have to be careful that this doesn't turn into a slippery slope but, c'mon, making a profit off of other artists material which you don't have the rights to is just good old fashioned stealing no matter how you slice it.
Reply to This Flag as Inappropriate
Re:They're thiefs.... sorry (Score:2, Funny)
by Vegemeister (1259976) on Thursday February 16, @12:17PM (#39062171)
just good old fashioned stealing no matter how you slice it.
Please, regale us with your common sense folk wisdom.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:They're thiefs.... sorry (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @01:20PM (#39063141)
Please, save us from your lameness.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:They're thiefs.... sorry (Score:1)
by misexistentialist (1537887) on Thursday February 16, @12:27PM (#39062305)
Pretty much all piracy starts with someone buying a copy so even your simplistic formula doesn't work. Artists are only guaranteed to profit from one sale. Do it for the pussy, bros, and STFU.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:They're thiefs.... sorry (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @12:38PM (#39062453)
But it is ok if your an established player and it is just a peon. The duality of the thought process for most of these businesses is what makes most people against the way that copyright is being used. It is ok for the media moguls to stomp the rights of anyone they choose until it is them being affected by the copying.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:They're thiefs.... sorry copyright infringers (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @12:45PM (#39062563)
It's copyright infringement you insensitive clod.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:They're thiefs.... sorry (Score:2)
by Fned (43219) on Thursday February 16, @01:10PM (#39062971) Journal
making a profit off of other artists material which you don't have the rights to is just good old fashioned stealing no matter how you slice it.
It's not that old fashioned... that's how most publishers made their money prior to copyright.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:They're thiefs.... sorry (Score:2)
by chrb (1083577) on Thursday February 16, @01:22PM (#39063169)
If you copy media you didn't purchase AND you make a profit off of it, you're a thief.
No, you're still just a copyright infringer. Nobody is being deprived of their property.
thief: "A person who steals another person's property, esp. by stealth and without using force or violence."
steal: "Take (another person's property) without permission or legal right and without intending to return it"
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:They're thiefs.... sorry (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @01:37PM (#39063415)
If you have sex after paying for a nice meal for a beautiful woman, you're smart.
If you have sex with someone who's desperate, you're cheap.
If you have sex with someone and get paid for it, you're a rapist.
See, I can type nonsense too.
Stealing is depriving someone else of something. It always has been, in principle and in law. Copyright infringement is not theft, though the lobbyists are trying very hard to make everyone think otherwise.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:They're thiefs.... sorry (Score:2)
by Brannoncyll (894648) on Thursday February 16, @01:39PM (#39063461)
If you copy media you didn't purchase AND you make a profit off of it, you're a thief.
If you copy media and sell it you are not a thief as nothing has been taken. There is already a perfectly good way to describe these people: copyright infringer. The media cartels have been trying to rebrand copyright infringers as thieves because everyone knows stealing is wrong. However as far as the law goes, there is certainly a difference (cf the section on "Theft" on the wikipedia page [
wikipedia.org]).
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:They're thiefs.... sorry (Score:2)
by GreatBunzinni (642500) on Thursday February 16, @03:34PM (#39065217)
If you copy media you didn't purchase AND you make a profit off of it, you're a thief.
No, you are a copyright infringer. Stealing is based on the subtraction of property, and you don't subtract anything by copying something.
To put it in perspective, some people took video cameras to cinemas to record movies, and then sell the video recording of the movie for some change. Others took photografs of every page in a book, and sold copies of their photos. Do you believe that recording something with your video camera or taking photographs corresponds to stealing? Of course not.
So, don't be an idiot. Copyright infringement is copyright infringement. It isn't stealing, no matter how you try to distort it.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:They're thiefs.... sorry (Score:2)
by cheekyjohnson (1873388) on Thursday February 16, @04:02PM (#39065709)
If you copy media you didn't purchase, you're cheap.
If you copy media you didn't purchase AND you make a profit off of it, you're a thief.
Sorry, but I don't see that much of a difference between these two. What makes the latter theft while the former is not?
I see even pirates claim this, and I just don't understand it.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:They're thiefs.... sorry (Score:2)
by bky1701 (979071) on Thursday February 16, @05:04PM (#39066609) Homepage
Sorry, no. You have to actually remove someone's property - take, not deprive of possible gain, not even profit, but remove and gain the same amount - to classify it as "theft." Otherwise, we have a term for that: piracy. Please stop butchering the English Language to suit your political ends. Just because you might apply it more narrowly than the **IA doesn't make you any less despicable for attempting.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:They're thiefs.... sorry (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @07:56PM (#39068709)
bla bla artists bla bla
Let me guess... you actually think academic and technical books are written by "artists". Cool. Either that, or you have no idea what
library.nu was and didn't even bother to read the summary.
*yawn* try again...
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:They're thiefs.... sorry (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @09:07PM (#39069487)
I admit that I used Library.nu
As an engineering student I've never found a better source for classics on any subject in science. Yes I go to a university, but access is nowhere near what
library.nu had.
While this may be anecdotal, I actually purchased many, if not all, of the books that I found useful because ebooks just aren't the same as having a physical copy to browse. In that sense publishers actually made money from me where I would otherwise be hesitant to buy 100+ dollar books.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:They're thiefs.... sorry (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @10:31PM (#39070127)
If you stand outside a restaurant and enjoy the smell of cooked food, you are also a thief.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Oh great... (Score:2)
by aaaaaaargh! (1150173) on Thursday February 16, @11:44AM (#39061719)
These were absolutely essential for my scientific work, because I'm living in a very poor country and (if at all) academic publishers only allow authors to put papers and book drafts on their web page that cannot be used for quoting.
Now I'm really, really getting angry! As if Springer books priced at $150 or even $240 plus months of complicated ordering by the university to our library weren't already painful enough.
Thanks a lot, all you IP-property assholes. Eat shit and die!!!
(And yes, I have also published books including typesetting them in their entirety in LaTeX because the publisher was too lazy/saves costs/rips off academics. And no, I haven't seen a dime for any of this work...)
Reply to This Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Oh great... (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @12:11PM (#39062101)
What is the problem with latex? Around here the only people who complain about latex usually are the ones writing stuff in pirated copies of word, and even those are starting to change their mind
I use latex when I need and I don't trade it for anything, the handling of references, indexes and bibliography is very good. Honestly when you do an academic publication you do not need a fancy desktop publishing package, you need to present facts in a readable manner.
You can complain about the pricing of Springer, Elsevier and all, but complaining about latex?
Latex does what it does very well.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Pirating File Sharing vs File Sharing sites (Score:2)
by aktiveradio (851043) on Thursday February 16, @11:54AM (#39061893) Homepage
There is a big difference between file sharing sites that are making money off file sharing services used primarily to share copyrighted materials and other file sharing sites like
box.com, Dropbox, Skyfile.co, DropIr and SugarSync. There is a place for file sharing sites and Affilate programs seem to be the key indicator of a legitimate business site or a pirate haven. All these legitimate file sharing sites have a good system for dealing with copyright content that ends up on their sites, the pirate sites do not take it down because they are making money off it. So we don't need SOPA or PIPA they system works today, pirating sites are taken down seems like every week.
Reply to This Flag as Inappropriate
MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:1, Insightful)
by Harry Nelson (2575925) on Thursday February 16, @10:55AM (#39060825)
It's been a month now and literally every upload site has either closed down or shut down their affiliate programs that offered money for uploaders. Those who uploaded pirated material to gain money are devastated on forums and cannot find any good upload site anymore. This was highly successful bust against piracy, and rightly so.
Reply to This Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:5, Insightful)
by what2123 (1116571) on Thursday February 16, @11:01AM (#39060933)
If you honestly believe what you are saying and/or are not a troll you need to get off the MegaMediaNewsSteam. I haven't heard anyone I know that still downloads their wares and were actually affected by MegaUpload going bunk. The best thing about the "pirates" is that they are extremely resourceful and have many, many different outlets to get their files. If you ask me, MegaUpload was probably the worst tool to use for this anyway. There are many more ways to get files and are just as effective. Hell, IRC was and still is better that MU.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:5, Insightful)
by Harry Nelson (2575925) on Thursday February 16, @11:06AM (#39061011)
MegaUpload and similar sites were used by general population, and outright made money from copyright theft. It was very similar to selling warez on streets, they just tried to hide it behind "clever" subscription models and affiliate programs. Yes, serious pirates will always be able to get their files, but when the circle is small enough companies don't care. They care about what most of population does, and they can easily make it harder and inconvenient enough for general population.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:5, Insightful)
by KiloByte (825081) on Thursday February 16, @11:51AM (#39061833)
There are very few cases of copyright theft: when media cartels deny an artist the right to use their own work, even if there is no contract between the artist and the cartel. The rest which you seem to be talking about is copyright infrigement.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @12:11PM (#39062093)
There are NO cases of copyright theft, since such a thing is impossible.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @12:36PM (#39062419)
Bullshit!
I bet the Zetas are more pleasant to work with.
http://www.reddit.com/r/SOPA/comments/pq8ra/this_is_why_i_oppose_the_mpaa/ "Instead of the letter recognizing our valiant efforts as students that I expected, I found myself on the tail end of a phone call that changed my life. I was contacted directly by the lead of the studio's legal team, who explained my situation to me very clearly. He told me that I was technically in my legal right to use Isaac Asimov's material. However, if I chose to proceed, they would file multiple lawsuits totaling over 2 million dollars against me. In the end, I might win, but it would take hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees just to fight it, but would cost them nothing more than the salaries they already pay their lawyers. It would be 10 years before any type of verdict could be levied, and by then it wouldn't matter what the outcome was, since their film would be long since released."
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:1)
by dead_cthulhu (1928542) on Thursday February 16, @01:56PM (#39063795)
Well, the Zetas only kill you.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:4, Informative)
by chrb (1083577) on Thursday February 16, @12:58PM (#39062769)
they can easily make it harder and inconvenient enough for general population.
No, they can't. There is a fundamental contradiction that people like you don't understand: you can't have a population that has free, open access to digital communications, and at the same time restrict what data they are communicating to each other. Every single time the various agencies get together and close down one site, there are a dozen more that spring up to take its place. We have seen this pattern time and time again, every single warez group that has ever been closed down has been trumpeted as a "huge success against piracy", and yet here we are, in 2012, and piracy is everywhere. Remember DrinkOrDie? [
wikipedia.org] Operation Buccaneer [
wikipedia.org] - one of the largest, most expensive global anti-piracy enforcement actions in history, and yet here we are a decade later and piracy is as big as it ever was. And so it will be with MegaUpload.
but when the circle is small enough companies don't care.
You seem to have forgotten that PirateBay is still running... and if that ever goes down, there will be another ten to take its place. This battle is not winnable while it is still legal to own PCs and develop software. There will always be another Usenet, another BitTorrent, another Kazaa, and another PirateBay.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:5, Insightful)
by mcgrew (92797) * on Thursday February 16, @01:04PM (#39062871) Journal
Infringing copyright isn't theft. Copyright theft is when a record company takes the rights to their musicians' work. If I held a gun to your head and made you sign your copyrights over, that too would be copyright theft.
The publishing industries should stop listening to the advertiser's mantra "sell the sizzle, not the steak" and try to understand what the phrase means. You can't sell me a sizzle, but the sizzle might help you sell me a steak.
What's the difference between downloading a CD's worth of songs and checking the CD out from the library? It has dozens of movies, hundreds of CDs and thousands of books -- all free.
Since the invention of moveable type, the content sold the book. The music sold the record. Plays, concerts, and movies were the only exceptions. Study after study shows that music pirates spend more money on music than non-pirates. Attack piracy and you attack your best customers. I can think of little more foolish.
However, I agree that those making money from piracy or counterfeiting are in fact stealing. In that case, something is indeed lost.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:2)
by cheekyjohnson (1873388) on Thursday February 16, @03:11PM (#39064909)
However, I agree that those making money from piracy or counterfeiting are in fact stealing. In that case, something is indeed lost.
What would that be? I don't see anything that was lost that anyone originally had.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @03:17PM (#39065007)
Time and money spent creating the original work
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:2)
by cheekyjohnson (1873388) on Thursday February 16, @03:33PM (#39065185)
The pirate can't steal that. The time and money spent creating the original work is already gone. And it was the artist's own choice, at that. The pirate had nothing to do with that decision.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:2)
by devent (1627873) on Thursday February 16, @04:01PM (#39065683) Homepage
> However, I agree that those making money from piracy or counterfeiting are in fact stealing. In that case, something is indeed lost.
What exactly is lost? They are making the content available for a reasonable price. For example, in the Philippines you can buy DVDs with 25 films on it, for like 2Euro. I buy that and can enjoy the films that I never heart of or films that I would never see or buy. That is good for the film-makers because now they have a new fan. So for the next film maybe I go to the cinema or buy the DVD (the legal one) or tell my friends about it.
So, I ask you again, what is lost? Is it not so, that something was gained and not lost? Piracy is free advertisement. If you want customers, make it easy to buy your stuff and enjoy the free advertisement that piracy will give you.
Now, if you do plagiarizing, then I agree that something is lost and it's moral wrong to do it.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:2)
by mcgrew (92797) * on Friday February 17, @09:14AM (#39073639) Journal
So, I ask you again, what is lost?
The media would have you believe that if I download a file for free, it's a lost sale. But it's not -- as you say, it's free advertising. However, if you BUY that file, the money you spent on that file should have gone to one entity and instead went to another.
Say you cleaned your mom's kitchen; even if you would have done it for free, would it be right for her to pay your sister for it? You did the work, she got the money.
If there's money changing hands on a work that's still under copyright, the artist should at least get a cut.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:1)
by chekkerness (2430014) on Thursday February 16, @04:08PM (#39065779)
However, I agree that those making money from piracy or counterfeiting are in fact stealing. In that case, something is indeed lost.
And that would be? You can't correctly answer the question because nothing has been stolen.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @11:28AM (#39061457)
The level of this discussion is seriously concerning...
MegaUpload & ebooks have nothing to do with each other besides being copyrighted ok?
Publishers, while evil in their own right, are nothing like the MPAA/RIAA monkeys.
Now, thinking real hard... how's
library.nu different from my local public library?
Furthermore, one of the biggest arguments for music/movie piracy has been cut out the middle man (RIAA) (ex. the artist goes touring to make money and we're all the better for it), if all publishing material is free, what can the publishers do?
It's a tough situation, and it stems from the same business model as the music/movie people, perhaps we should let the government publish our media? ;)
At the very least it would give them something better to do than unconstitutional tracking of US citizens.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @11:32AM (#39061513)
devil's advocate line of thinking, as i haven't really thought all the way through this...
public library still has limited supply.
public library still has limited borrowing period.
did
library.nu restrict the number of copies lent out and/or length of term?
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:1)
by Saintwolf (1224524) on Thursday February 16, @11:53AM (#39061863)
They don't have to restrict it, that's the great thing about being digital. If all library books were digital, I wouldn't have to wait a few weeks for some guy to return it just so I can have the limited opportunity to read it.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:2)
by webmosher (322834) <
webmosher@nOSpAM.gmail.com> on Thursday February 16, @12:04PM (#39062027) Homepage
Many libraries do have ebook lending programs. They have a set number of licensed copies they can "lend". You must wait for people to "return" the ebook before you can get a copy. Yes... you have to wait. The main advantage I see is that I never have to pay overdue fees to the library since my book just expires when its "returned".
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:1)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @12:29PM (#39062339)
Do they really build in artificial inefficiency by pretending that something that doesn't actually exist as an object has a physical form? I would think librarians would be more sensible.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:3)
by Loosifur (954968) on Thursday February 16, @01:00PM (#39062789)
Yes. Otherwise, there would be no possible way publishers would allow libraries to lend digital copies. Think about it: reverse the earlier question. What's the difference between a library that "lends" infinite, permanent digital copies of books for free to anyone with a login, and a pirate site? A library that can distribute ebooks with no limitations whatsoever is no different than a pirate site, essentially, and renders the idea of copyright moot. If you think that the very idea of copyright is in and of itself immoral or unethical, then that's probably fine with you, but even if you think authors should produce work without copyright in the hope and expectation of what would amount to donations from motivated readers, putting libraries in a position to distribute along such a model would just make it that much less likely that the original author would ever see a dime from readers.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:2)
by Requiem18th (742389) on Thursday February 16, @02:16PM (#39064089)
Actually there is no need to introduce artificial scarcity, the scarcity here is the writer's time. Writers should be paid for writing rather than having readers tracked for charging. The analogy is having restrictions on sitting in chairs unless we pay a per/minute sitting fee, plus of course having a policemen in everyhome to ensure there is no uncontrolled sitting..
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:2)
by Loosifur (954968) on Thursday February 16, @02:52PM (#39064629)
I disagree. The assumption is that each writer's time is of equal worth, and that the use of that time results in a product of equal value. If I spend an hour writing a postmodern analysis of the film Real Steel, and you spend an hour writing the Great American Novel that everyone loves, the thing you produced with that hour is more valuable than the thing I produced with that hour, making your hour worth more. If writing were like tightening nuts on bolts, then sure, all writers' time would be about equal. But, the only way you can really determine the value is by the interest audiences have in reading it.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @12:59PM (#39062787)
until a truly fair by-use pay system exists, i don't see how else we could expect to distribute published works effectively in the long term. if authors aren't being paid, will they still research and write?
if an artificial inefficiency sets up a stream of demand, requiring more 'copies' to be paid for, isn't that better for everyone involved? if you can wait your turn, you get it for free, if you need it sooner, you pay for it?
makes sense to me, on a small scale...still trying to figure out why we can't justify paying for content on *some* level.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Libraries (Score:2)
by Phrogman (80473) on Thursday February 16, @04:22PM (#39066023) Homepage
Its not the Libraries, its the publishers who are unwilling to license the libraries to distribute e-books without these limitations. As well, the Library can only distribute a book so many times before they have to buy it again.
Publishers already hate libraries for the most part because they limit their profits (all those readers reading books they didn't buy) apparently. This ignores the fact that no one is going to choose to buy all the books they get from the library instead if the library was shut down; they'd just read a lot less.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:0, Redundant)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @11:37AM (#39061601)
MegaUpload and similar sites were used by general population, and outright made money from copyright theft. It was very similar to selling warez on streets, they just tried to hide it behind "clever" subscription models and affiliate programs. Yes, serious pirates will always be able to get their files, but when the circle is small enough companies don't care. They care about what most of population does, and they can easily make it harder and inconvenient enough for general population.
You have no idea what you are talking about. We make money showing ads that non-premium members see on the "landing pages" for file downloads. Good job spouting your uninformed bullshit though. You should look at
http://sibsoft.net/xfilesharing.html - that's the script 99% of us use to setup and operate file sharing sites. The ads-on-landing-pages model is already there, just plug, play, and profit.
PS: die in a fire
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @11:58AM (#39061945)
Yes, and you got page views from people downloading files. File downloads were fed by affiliate programs, which rewarded people for uploading files, the vast majority of which were pirated. You should go die in a fire if you think that business model was legitimate.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:3)
by cheekyjohnson (1873388) on Thursday February 16, @03:08PM (#39064865)
I guess no website can have advertisements because of the piracy boogeyman. Someone, somewhere might be copying something! We should waste extreme amounts of taxpayer dollars trying to stop what amounts to jaywalkers.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
You're not going to white-collar resort prison (Score:-1)
by glrotate (300695) on Thursday February 16, @12:18PM (#39062189) Homepage
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8PuUU6IWps Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:0, Informative)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @11:15AM (#39061193)
It was very similar to selling warez on streets,.
No, it wasn't.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @11:31AM (#39061495)
true it made a LOT more money ...
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @12:39PM (#39062461)
It was very similar to selling warez on streets, [...]
No. It was like renting church basement where peoples could come in and 'swap' floppy. OH THE HORROR! SERIOUS CRIME FTW!
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:2)
by HermMunster (972336) on Thursday February 16, @11:13PM (#39070469)
Total tool of the RIAA. There's no proof of anything being said. You guys modded them and insightful? Have you not even read the news about Megaupload.com in the months prior to this raid?
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:2)
by guruevi (827432) <evi.smokingcube@be> on Thursday February 16, @11:46AM (#39061779) Homepage
MegaUpload was (to me at least) more a place where documents and other things got put by whistleblowers. There was very few pirated content on MU, it wasn't the place to go for your latest movie or video game.
Shutting down MU did more damage to whistleblowers, the Anon community and similar groups than to pirates. There was also a host of information on there that has now simply disappeared and needs to be re-uploaded elsewhere.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:2)
by Mister Whirly (964219) on Thursday February 16, @01:02PM (#39062827) Homepage
"very few pirated content on MU" - does not seem accurate to me. There may have been some "non-pirated" content, but "pirated" stuff far outweighed the non. Every one of my non-technical friends knew about Megaupload and has used it to download movies/music/applications. These are the people who have no idea what Bittorrent or USENET are. I personally downloaded a lot of music from MU becasue the filesize isn't too big and the speeds were generally decent. And as far as movies go, you are dead wrong. There were tons of recent movies available on Megaupload. You just needed to find the search engine front-ends that would find the copyrighted material on MU. They didn't want to make it too easy...
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:2)
by poity (465672) on Thursday February 16, @02:23PM (#39064203)
...more a place where documents and other things got put by whistleblowers. There was very few pirated content on MU, it wasn't the place to go for your latest movie or video game.
http://www.google.com/search?q=link:%22megaupload.com%2F%3Fd%22 [
google.com]
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:4, Insightful)
by hairyfeet (841228) <bassbeast1968.gmail@com> on Thursday February 16, @12:54PM (#39062707) Journal
Yep as someone that services and builds PCs 6 days a week I can tell you for home users the most popular is.....drumroll....plain old P2P. That's right, your fasttracks, your Gnucleus, although BT has gained some simply because of the high profile of TPB and the clients that are simple enough your grandma could use them. Next round i predict semi anon software that your grandma can run where they mix in some plausible deniability using encrypted cache stores just to make it extra painful for the *.A.As and may i say i hope it hurts.
Those bastards screw the artists, see meatloaf going bankrupt fighting the record companies for nearly 20 years because they had the brass balls to claim bat out of hell 1 never made a dime. Yeah the album that set a record for longest run on the top 200 never made a dime, and if you tickle my balls they play jingle bells. hell look at Cheap trick having to sue right now because the record company refuses to give them a cent of digital downloads because those didn't exist in the 70s therefor the record companies say tough shit. Pretty much ALL the major artists of the 70s aren't seeing a dime on iTunes, the record companies pocket every cent.
So until We, The People as well as the artists are given a seat at the bargaining table as a musician please rob these fuckers blind. Living a stone's throw from Memphis I've seen many a kid sign the record contracts with stars in their eyes only to get robbed blind by the record companies who take everything and use Hollywood accounting to give the kid a bill even if the album sells a million and they recorded it themselves. Honestly the fucking mob are more honest than those bastards and this whole thing is NOT about piracy, its about control and making sure they can continue to rob the artists. Hell artists got a bigger cut in the 1950s as a percentage than now, and thanks to "forever minus a single day" copyrights they can continue to rob the artist even after they are dead. But now they are scared, the combo of digital recording and the tubes mean new artists can just sign profit sharing deals with promotion companies and bypass the system, and thanks to digital they can't keep selling you the White Album like they did with album to 8 track to cassette to CD, this frightens them. Good DIAF you back stabbing leeches.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:2)
by theArtificial (613980) on Thursday February 16, @02:07PM (#39063939)
Next round i predict semi anon software that your grandma can run where they mix in some plausible deniability using encrypted cache stores just to make it extra painful for the *.A.As and may i say i hope it hurts.
Share [
wikipedia.org] uses encryption to hide the identity of who is transferring or what they are transferring. It is non-centralized so it cannot be easily shut down and it supports multiple source "swarm" downloading. All files are transferred encrypted so they must be decrypted upon download completion. In the meantime they are stored in encrypted form in a "Cache" folder. This folder is also used to allow recently downloaded files to be shared among the network based on priorities.
WinNY [
wikipedia.org] is another app older app like WinMX.
There apps use strings to populate the menus and dialog text so they can be localized. I had an interest in this years ago, and simply put, it comes down to convenience and affluence. BTW Steam sale today, $2.49 for Magicka...
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:1, Interesting)
by kiwimate (458274) on Thursday February 16, @12:08PM (#39062063) Journal
best thing about the "pirates" is that they are extremely resourceful and have many, many different outlets to get their files.
Also the worst thing. Someone has a sense of entitlement - "I don't want to pay for this, so instead of doing without or being responsible I'll just take it" - and so they make more and more run-arounds just so they can get their stuff for free.
Utterly predictable response - media gets very heavy and starts going after everything.
Net result for me, an innocent bystander who doesn't pirate stuff, because, you know, it's wrong - the internet gets more rules and becomes less useful.
So thanks a lot, pirates. (And I don't care if you call yourself a pirate, or insist it's copyright infringement, or whatever. That's all semantic nonsense. It's still wrong, it's still illegal, and it's still immoral. So stop arguing over what label you want to be applied to you.) You're ruining the internet for me.
What on earth do you expect the reactions of the media giants to be? Just roll over, shrug their shoulders, and say "oh well"? All the moaning about SOPA and whatever else - you brought it on yourselves and you deserve it, but you also brought it on everyone else. So thanks a lot. Jerks.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:5, Informative)
by Qzukk (229616) on Thursday February 16, @12:22PM (#39062231) Journal
Just roll over, shrug their shoulders, and say "oh well"?
No, Mr. Media Giant, I expect you to die.</Goldfinger>
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
"Where is Goldfinger?" "Playing his golden harp." (Score:1)
by westlake (615356) on Thursday February 16, @01:45PM (#39063565)
No, Mr. Media Giant, I expect you to die.
You do know how the story ends, Boris? [
jamesbondwiki.com]
The geek can't put together a more or less coherent argument without drawing on the pop cultural cliches of the mega media product. But somehow expects the mega media giants themselves to disappear.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:5, Insightful)
by CastrTroy (595695) on Thursday February 16, @12:29PM (#39062331) Homepage
This
I really don't like copyright infringers. They give the rest of the internet users a bad name. I've downloaded share of illegal content but I've since stopped doing it for the exact reasons you point out. If I don't think something is worth the price the copyright owner is asking, I just simply don't watch/listen/read it. There's enough other media on the internet for free, or with price and terms that I do agree with that I don't need to pirate stuff if I feel it isn't worth the price. Sure I may not get to see all the new movies, but I really don't feel like I'm missing much.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @03:27PM (#39065091)
Some people don't have 200$ lying around to spend on a single book. Yet, unless we don't read that book we won't have any chance in developing a marketable skill. If we believe that people should not have access to works of art without unless they pay for them, we must also accept that poor people should be subjected to a vicious cycle of poverty and lack of education.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @05:06PM (#39066637)
I'm happy for you that you have the ability to discern if something is worth its price before watching/listening/reading it. Sadly, most of us do not have this ability, and few modern ways of watching/listening/reading offer a return policy.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:1)
by pantaril (1624521) on Friday February 17, @07:47AM (#39072813)
I really don't like copyright infringers. They give the rest of the internet users a bad name.
What about copyright infringers who pirate stuff which can't be bought legaly? Do you dislike them too?
Remember, only tiny fraction of world intelectual property, which was ever created and published, can be bought today. Many publishers and distributors loose interest in their own goods after few years when it doesn't make enough sales. Those goods are usualy lost from public due to copyright.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:5, Interesting)
by hairyfeet (841228) <bassbeast1968.gmail@com> on Thursday February 16, @01:22PM (#39063165) Journal
Noooo...they should embrace the valve model and realize while you will NEVER get rid of piracy you CAN turn a hell of a lot of those pirates into customers by embracing the big three concept, which is make it simple, make it easy, make it cheap. I knew a LOT of game pirates, yet almost none of them actually pirate games anymore...why? because of Steam, Steam makes it simple as "push button to get game" and makes it easy with instant patching and matchmaking, and more importantly they make it cheap with constant promos and sales to entice those that wouldn't pay full price.
You could do the same with TV and movies VERY easily, there is no damned reason why i shouldn't be able to buy an AVI of any episode of any show for say 25c. that roughly figures up to about what you'd pay for a box set on Amazon and if you showed the episode free in the clear in the first place you sure as hell aren't gonna affect piracy by giving me an AVI that would actually play on my dad's media tank. Same thing for movies, why should I be able to buy that 4 year old movie out of the Walmart bargain bin for $4 but a digital copy costs something like $20 and is DRMed out the ass? if its on DVD you sure as hell aren't affecting piracy by selling me an AVI because the pirates will have uploaded it years ago.
This is no different than how the RIAA kept shooting themselves in the face screaming " Music downloads will kill music!" and now are setting record profits thanks to iTunes. In fact as valve showed when they mad over 1700% PROFITS by selling L4D at $1.99 if the RIAA would lower that MP3 down to say a quarter a song they would be raking in truckloads of money and wiping out the pirates. So my friend this has NOTHING to do with pirates, it has to do with control and the ability to sell an infinite resource as a scare commodity and therefor charge assraping prices. go DIAF media companies, we won't miss you.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:3)
by QuasiSteve (2042606) on Thursday February 16, @02:42PM (#39064471)
there is no damned reason why i shouldn't be able to buy an AVI of any episode of any show for say 25c. that roughly figures up to about what you'd pay for a box set on Amazon
What box set is that?
Game of Thrones, Season 1
Episodes: 10
DVD: $34.99 or $3.50/episode
Blu-Ray: $44.99 or $4.50/episode
Chuck, Season 5
Episodes: 13
DVD: $29.99 or $2.31/episode
Blu-Ray: $39.99 or $3.08/episode ...perhaps some older material and bigger box sets...
Star Trek TNG, all episodes (cheapest I could find at Amazon.com)
Episodes: 178
DVD: $229.99 or $1.29episode
StarGate SG-1, all episodes (only seem to sell 1 these days)
Episodes: 214 (might actually only be 213 in the box set, I believe the pilot episode is left out of some versions)
DVD: $146.69 or $0.69/episode
$0.25/episode is nowhere near the price levels at Amazon that I've seen.
( Not a commentary on your argument. )
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:2)
by barc0001 (173002) on Thursday February 16, @05:28PM (#39066953)
How about this counter? I pay ~$40 a month for my cable TV portion of the TV/internet bill. Everything you list with the exception of Game of Thrones has passed over my coax cable in the last 7 years, so in a manner of speaking I've already paid for access to it once. I see the economics as $40/month is what I am willing to pay for my television needs. I watch maybe 1-2 hours of TV a day, if that, but for round numbers let's pick 2 hours a day. For a TV show to appeal to me economically, it has to be cheaper than 66 cents per hour, because that's what it "costs" me currently based on my usage. That's why I will NEVER pay $2 for a 22 minute TV episode on iTunes. Never. Won't pay $3 for a 44 minute episode either. Prices have to come down for these kinds of shows before it makes financial sense. Everyone and their dog seems to be getting a PVR these days, which makes access to these shows even easier at the consumer's convenience, which makes the prospect of paying $2-3 an episode even less likely for a lot of people.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:2)
by synthespian (563437) on Friday February 17, @12:16AM (#39070871)
Here's my commentary to your numbers:
because "push" media is dead, I get to choose, and I choose I want Game of Thrones, Chuck, Star Trek and Star Gate all in the same month. "I want it all, and I want it now!" In the past, I used to have to stuff the piggy bank with coins. But before, I had to think real hard about what I wanted to buy, and THEN begin the process of saving. This isn't so anymore. As the machines allow for ever more room & speed for obtaining and keeping content, the process of merchandise-selection has been turned upside down.
With the explosion of content , which is only going to get bigger & faster, as digital media makers & outlets grow bigger in numbers & smaller in size, you can't expect media consumers NOT to overload their "shopping cart". Rather, they will load it with everything they can find and only select what they like later , and not BEFORE, in a "thoughtful" consumer manner, in a piggy bank savings way. They're gonna load it and shake it, and the best will survive by the process of the digital word-of-mouth sieve (ALL medias, not just social medias - they're all interlocked). Not only that, "niche" content gets to be eternal too, and "niche" content has no place in the current media-empires' spreadsheets.
This now only applies to cultural goods, but pretty soon we will witness physical goods being pirated (or transmitted) digitally, only to be made physical with 3D printers. Maybe farther along this trend we'll see circuit printers, food printers and cloth-cutting robots. With future tools being able to manufacture everything we could wish for - clothing, electronics, food and cultural goods, etc what is it exactly the corporation-moguls expect us to buy from them? In the past, we used to trade food recipes on Usenet. In the future, I might just download the CAD-like specs of your trademark hamburger, only to see it materialize in my digital-to-physical brand new kitchenware.
Your numbers do not add up to this new way of fast-consumption of content. You're talking old money. I'm talking new money - if it is money at all.
PS: In the 26th century, nobody works for money - everybody knows that. ;-)
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 17, @09:13AM (#39073621)
All those prices mean absolutely nothing since the product can be copied indefinitely, virtually for free. Valve has proven that if you cut the price of digitally distribuable by 75%, the revenues increases by 1,470 $.
The MAFIAA is just too dumb to adapt to this new model.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:2)
by kalirion (728907) on Thursday February 16, @01:43PM (#39063547)
Noooo...they should embrace the valve model and realize while you will NEVER get rid of piracy you CAN turn a hell of a lot of those pirates into customers by embracing the big three concept, which is make it simple, make it easy, make it cheap.
Yes, I hear it does work quite well [
g4tv.com].
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:2)
by tunapez (1161697) on Thursday February 16, @04:12PM (#39065859)
Damn, if enough people mod you up will it eventually go to 6? I'd try it but I am spent on points right now.
...except for the 25cents example, because they are intrinsically greedy I'd guess multi-$ per episode, perhaps cheaper by the set.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @01:21PM (#39063157)
All the moaning about SOPA and whatever else - you brought it on yourselves and you deserve it, but you also brought it on everyone else.
Had you bothered to even read SOPA or PIPA, you would have realized how stupid that comment really is. It was about control, censorship, and narrowing the dissemination of knowledge. Piracy was the easy scapegoat as it is a thorn in their sides.
'It' was coming the whole time, nobody 'brought it on' other than big money and the politicians they paid for....but I don't hear you bitching about the corruption that allows this all to go down....nope, just the usual "if you have nothing to hide...." argument, which I personally think any American should be slapped across their face for even uttering. I'm fairly sure that the thousands of men who gave their lives to protect freedom over the decades would agree.
I personally do not support the 'model' that piracy claims to be, the force in opposition to the usual overpriced crap. The same crap the media hounds both seek to restrict and charge through the nose for because they are scared now that they have no control over dissemination.
Their biggest secret, untold fears?
That they aren't worth the money they claim they are, and that we( the general public) are slowly figuring this out, and this will affect their bottom line negatively, which was coming all along.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:2)
by mcgrew (92797) * on Thursday February 16, @01:26PM (#39063215) Journal
Someone has a sense of entitlement - "I don't want to pay for this, so instead of doing without or being responsible I'll just take it" - and so they make more and more run-arounds just so they can get their stuff for free.
If that's the pirates' mind set, then why do all the studies show that music pirates spend more money on music than non-pirates? No, the pirates didn't bring SOPA and the other evils, YOU, the publishers, did.
What on earth do you expect the reactions of the media giants to be?
I always expected them to not be learning-disabled but my expectations were incorrect. It's simple: give the content away, sell the container like it's been done for hundreds of years. I've been reading since 1958 and never had to pay to read before. I paid when I wanted and could afford to, by going to the bookstore instead of the library.
The war on piracy is nothing but incredibly stupid greed. "Hey, look, we can sell an ebook or record for the same price we're selling it now and not have printing, shipping, and distribution costs! Now all we have to do is make people stop doing it for free."
Illegal? Yes. Immoral? No. The only immoral actors here are the publishers themselves.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:2)
by synthespian (563437) on Friday February 17, @12:21AM (#39070913)
I don't thhink you necessarily have to sell the "container". You could, for instance, like Netflix, sell me "easyness" - the quality of making it easy and cheap to deliver me content. Think, hmmm, gasoline or canned peaches. That too, has been that way for eons.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @01:44PM (#39063559)
Blame your authoritarian government, not "pirates".
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
You're wrong (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @02:27PM (#39064255)
Sorry,
Had to butt in, but you are wrong. Lets look at it from another perspective:
Little teenage Johnny wants to have a good life, is a good person, and likes little teenage Suzy down the street. Both Suzy and Johnny are surrounded by commercials telling them if they don't listen to this, don't watch this, don't buy this, don't like this, don't eat this, don't smell this way, etc, that they will be unsuccessful sinners who end up in hell frying while everyone else will have good productive happy lives with 2.4 kids, a house, and go to heaven....
Oh wait, sorry, wrong problem, this is all Johnny and Suzy's problem since they volunteered to be plastered with advertisements, endorsements, and every other foul marketing gimmick these same "media" companies put out there for FREE. This is ethical, moral, legal and good, but Johnny or Suzy following the impulses forced on them (with limited resources at best to meet said impulses) is BAD!! Yes, definitely Johnny and Suzy's problem 100%, no fault of anyone else that they are impressionable and trillions of dollars have been spent finding ways to implant these desires into their heads....
Now, I do not steal media (movies, cds, etc). But I am the person they hate, I will NOT buy media new, I buy it used since I don't agree with them, I also wait so that I don't have to buy duds! Do you know the easiest way to find duds? Count the number the commercials that come out or talk about the product a few days before the product comes out; the higher the number I have ALWAYS found the worse the movie/book, but what is really funny is how many "friends" will tell me how great it was! But mention that movie or book to them a year or two later and they get a stunned look on their face trying to remember it and or say how bad it was... They, the media companies, consider this Good!
So, if they (copyright interests, large media) want me to feel sorry for them, then they need to clean up their act first; and until then, I will do everything I can to consume media without giving them a penny (and looking at the number of used bookstores, used movie shops, etc starting in my neck of the woods I can guess that my attitude is similar to a lot of other people)... Of course, the media companies just want to change the definition of Pirate so that I'm one too.... how convenient for them; so again, I'm not going to feel sorry for them at ALL and if they do make buying used items illegal then I will have to consider that an attack on society and will counter it appropriately. -- I think a lot of people have already hit this point but I'm pretty mellow.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Mod parent up (Score:1)
by Phrogman (80473) on Thursday February 16, @04:36PM (#39066209) Homepage
Given the amount of advertising money spent on making people want to own certain products, it shouldn't be a surprise that some people want to own them but can't afford them (because the price is too high) and as a result seek other means to obtain them (be it buying used, borrowing it from the library, or downloading it). The media companies create the desire, then do not offer an affordable option for satisfying that desire.
Lower the price and they can make money off of volume of sales - and with digital media the cost to them is negligible.
Netflix is the direction they need to take IMHO: $8/mo and enough content to make it worthwhile. iTunes is obviously doing well too, although I no longer listen to music so I haven't spent any money there.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Mod parent up (Score:2)
by synthespian (563437) on Friday February 17, @12:33AM (#39070979)
Not always do they make money lowering prices. In the case of, say, automobiles or first-class airplane tickets, you actually make more money increasing the price. In fact, if you make sufficiently expensive cars, you get to make fewer cars, provided you have targeted the right consumer base. Most car manufacturers AFAIK make money with their high end products. The very cheap models are just for creating brand loyalty (i.e., your first car).
The thing with music and digital media is that the product is selected in an entirely different way. If cars were mp3, not even Saudi princes would have enough garage space to store them all. But, with current hardware and telecom technology, it's cheap to store, fast to download tons of stuff. The reason you have to make it cheap is because you are in fact nearing optimum cost (for consumers): zero.
It's gotta be sort of like shopping "green": the consumer has got to feel some sort of advantage, even if indirect, in giving away 0.99 cents - it's to support the band, for instance. Crowdfunding might change some dynamics in the middle-man game record labels play.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:2)
by Fallingcow (213461) on Thursday February 16, @03:07PM (#39064855) Homepage
It's still wrong
Sometimes.
it's still illegal
More often than not, yes.
and it's still immoral.
Sometimes.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:1)
by cheekyjohnson (1873388) on Thursday February 16, @03:14PM (#39064963)
it's wrong
I'd say that's subjective unless you can prove to me that absolute morals exist.
Net result for me, an innocent bystander who doesn't pirate stuff, because, you know, it's wrong - the internet gets more rules and becomes less useful.
So thanks a lot, pirates.
I'd say the people who actually write those draconian laws are mostly at fault. Would you say, "Thanks, murderers!" if the government decided to imprison everyone so that they could get rid of murderers? I'd say the ones who write and try to pass the draconian laws are the ones who are most at fault.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @03:59PM (#39065615)
Absolute morals do exist: pinch a newly-born baby and it will cry. All babies agree: pinching is wrong! I don't know whether absolute morals also apply to copyright monopolies, but don't pretend that all morals are subjective.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:2)
by cheekyjohnson (1873388) on Thursday February 16, @04:11PM (#39065847)
I don't care what babies agree on (not that them crying means they think it's wrong, they're probably not thinking anything), and I don't see how it proves that absolute morals exist.
I believe all morals are subjective. Are you going to offer actual evidence to the contrary, or just state your opinion?
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:2)
by Omestes (471991) <(moc.liamg) (ta) (setsemo)> on Thursday February 16, @09:59PM (#39069897) Homepage Journal
So thanks a lot, pirates. (And I don't care if you call yourself a pirate, or insist it's copyright infringement, or whatever. That's all semantic nonsense. It's still wrong, it's still illegal, and it's still immoral. So stop arguing over what label you want to be applied to you.)
That all might be. But its gotten to the point where I just don't care anymore.
Furthermore the argument has gotten old, its just another "black or white" bunch of shit on both sides. The anti crowd is generally a bunch of unthinking moralizers, where the pro crowd are just throwing up week post hoc justifications to cover the actions they already do.
I personally think some piracy might be wrong, but I also think some might be completely moral, even if both are illegal. I have nothing against pirating things to format switch, I'm not ever going to buy another damn Beetles track, I've already bought them 600000 times (LP, Tape, CD, and NOW digital...), so screw you. I have nothing against "pirating" things I bought that are intentionally (DRM) or unintentionally broken. I have nothing against pirating things to "try before I buy", especially since I'm no longer allowed to make returns on items I purchase.
I have nothing against pirating media produced by dead people, or people who will never see a dime of profit from it (Go pirate the Beetles or Louis Armstrong, or H.P Lovecraft, or T.S. Eliot, they don't care). Hell, I don't even have anything against piracy of media over a certain age (lets say 15 years). This one is the most important, since it touches the center of the issue. Copyright isn't a right to perpetual profit, it is carrot to keep producers producing, that is it. It balances short term incentives to creators with the public good. Well it did, and that is its stated goal in the Constitution, we've decided that we value profit over public good along time ago, and the corporations have done a very good job of convincing us that their best interests (perpetual profits and control) somehow align with ours. They also have somehow made us believe that this is all for the good of the creators, while they continue to screw them (too) over at every chance.
Hell, I still don't even understand why we decided the authors and musicians should have to have real jobs. How is that a bad thing?
Further, and this might be a bit extreme, I'm slowing gravitating towards the idea of piracy as civil disobedience. I thought this was stupid a couple years ago, but I'm beginning to see the merit, or at least the psychological merit. But then again, if I had three wishes I would destroy all the media middle men, and force creators to cope.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 17, @08:55AM (#39073361)
And the key thing that everybody seems to be missing: This is resulting in tons of works or stuff used to produce the works being lost because copyright has extended past the life of the media used to store them! They're basically ensuring that only pirates will have copyrighted works because the majority of works will no longer exist in a recoverable format by the time their copyright expires, allowing them to forcibly keep previous works from competing with new ones (which is as much what it's about as being able to 're-release' old works every dozen years or so in a new format with a slightly different length in order to obtain a new copyright, even though that ALSO breaks the spirit of copyright. (Just for clarification, adding, removing, or postprocessing a negligable amount of material in order to claim it's a newly derived creative work subject to it's own copyright.)
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:2)
by Omestes (471991) <(moc.liamg) (ta) (setsemo)> on Friday February 17, @11:55AM (#39075847) Homepage Journal
(which is as much what it's about as being able to 're-release' old works every dozen years or so in a new format with a slightly different length in order to obtain a new copyright, even though that ALSO breaks the spirit of copyright. (Just for clarification, adding, removing, or postprocessing a negligable amount of material in order to claim it's a newly derived creative work subject to it's own copyright.)
I actually would be fine with this, if copyright was sensible. The original work would lapse, and they could remaster it and claim a new copyright on the new version, this is fine since the new version would have to be significantly better than the old to actual profit from it since it competes with the old, free, public domain content. As it stands, though, this is just dumb and annoying.
Grrr... I wish big publishers, and their lobbies, would die.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @12:36PM (#39062431)
I hoop you go to jail for being a fucking thief.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:2)
by sgt scrub (869860) <{moc.oohay} {ta} {muitnias}> on Thursday February 16, @11:16AM (#39061215)
Do you have a link to someone complaining they are not getting paid for uploading?
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:2)
by Harry Nelson (2575925) on Thursday February 16, @11:28AM (#39061449)
http://www.wjunction.com/95-file-hosts-official-support [
wjunction.com]
http://www.wjunction.com/102-file-host-discussion [
wjunction.com]
Everyone is afraid of being scammed by new companies because there have been so many since the busts and after every other site shutdown. And just look at the forum in general - file uploading sites have official discussions and support persons, they're clearly seeing what kind of files people are uploading and on what kind of stuff the forum specializes in (file uploads, torrent seedboxes, remote desktops for quickly obtaining new warez releases and uploading them to file upload sites and spreading those links)
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:2)
by sgt scrub (869860) <{moc.oohay} {ta} {muitnias}> on Thursday February 16, @01:57PM (#39063799)
I thought you had posts of people complaining that
megaupload.com,
library.nu and
ifile.it were not paying them after they uploaded illegal content for other people to download.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:2)
by forkfail (228161) on Thursday February 16, @11:30AM (#39061489)
All you've done is make sure that the dark nets are... dark.
Just like the war on drugs has not had any perceptible impact on drug use, the war on piracy will simply make criminals out of people who want to read a book, but probably won't stop them from doing it.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:4, Insightful)
by Lunix Nutcase (1092239) on Thursday February 16, @11:44AM (#39061737)
It's not made anyone a criminal for "reading a book" this is a crackdown on a site flagrantly facilitating copyright infringement. Boohoo.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:2)
by synthespian (563437) on Friday February 17, @01:03AM (#39071169)
Sites that carry e-books have scanned material that is
1) decades out of print
2) the author is dead
3) the printing was never very big (2,000, 3,000 copies)
4) the book was never a commercial hit
5) the book is nowhere to be found in a 400 miles radius (say)
6) you can't even find used copies
7) the book was a fantastic book
Now, under those premises, what is so immoral about the human thirst for knowledge, when the only way to quench it, given the above, is through exchanging pirated material?
If that is a practice that damages society, then I say that to give hard-earned human knowledge away for insects to munch on, and for mold to grow on is a bigger crime!
If anything is immoral, given the above premises, then I say it is that under today's law the publisher can claim ownership rights to something he so blatantly neglects!
I don't know about the U.S. law, but I do know there are some currents of thought in Law that say (even for land) that if you have neglected something that has the potential to serve the public interest, and you have neglected it for too long, then no longer you get to claim ownership rights. If I'm not mistaken, in human history, that applied even to slaves or to wives...
Why not apply this to books?
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:2)
by 0100010001010011 (652467) on Thursday February 16, @12:09PM (#39062069)
Basically just a bunch of kids that try to profit off of people that actually did the leg work. I don't know of any release groups that ask for money. They do it for the challenge and to be first. I've not noticed a single hiccup in anything. From SickBeard to CouchPotato.
That of which we do not speak is still going strong. The people complaining about MU and everything else being shut down are the same type of people that have difficulty with torrents.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:1)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @11:05AM (#39061005)
It's been a month now and literally every upload site has either closed down or shut down their affiliate programs that offered money for uploaders. Those who uploaded pirated material to gain money are devastated on forums and cannot find any good upload site anymore. This was highly successful bust against piracy, and rightly so.
It doesn't change anything. People were sharing copyrighted works before the whole "cyber lockers" came online, and will continue to do so after cyber lockers are history. Really the only idiots to have suffered are those that uploaded pirate material for financial gain. Anyone that puts up a sharing system using a centralised infrastructure is a patented idiot.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:2)
by Nadaka (224565) on Thursday February 16, @11:09AM (#39061083)
The other people who have suffered are those idiots who used those cyberlocker services to store and share their own data that they had every right to do so with.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:2)
by Goaway (82658) on Thursday February 16, @11:17AM (#39061239) Homepage
You've gotta be pretty naïve to believe that MegaUpload was a respectable site that was going to stay around for a long time and that you could trust with your files.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:1)
by Harry Nelson (2575925) on Thursday February 16, @11:23AM (#39061347)
Especially since most of these sites deleted files that had no downloads during specific time frame, for example 60 days. They clearly were not meant for limited sharing of personal documents, they were looking for popular material, ie. warez.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @11:17AM (#39061229)
The other people who have suffered are those idiots who used those cyberlocker services to store and share their own data that they had every right to do so with.
Nope, all the people that put their data on a public cloud (ie an online space not controlled by the user) is a STUPID and deserves every harm possible.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @11:50AM (#39061825)
Is a stupid?
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:4, Informative)
by Bert64 (520050) <bert@@@slashdot...firenzee...com> on Thursday February 16, @11:18AM (#39061275) Homepage
The people who have suffered most is those who used these services for legitimate content, and there were quite considerable numbers of people who did so... Quite a few open source projects used such sites, for instance its not uncommon to have downloaded linux based firmware images for various devices including android phones from such sites.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:2)
by Pope (17780) on Thursday February 16, @01:49PM (#39063665) Homepage
Legit users can go move their files to another hosting services.
If, as some of the biggest whiners have complained, MU contained their only copy of a file, then I have zero sympathy for them.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:1)
by s0nicfreak (615390) on Thursday February 16, @05:23PM (#39066887) Journal
What about all the people that uploaded something and then died or left the internet? The world has lost a lot with the loss of megaupload. It's like the government burned down a library because it was discovered that the librarian stole a few books. Yes most of the books can be gotten at other libraries. Yes it was silly of us to not make a copy of the rare and last-copy-left books that were kept in that library. But the point is that the library should not have been burned, the offending books should have simply been removed and the other books released to be moved to another, law-abiding library.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
You can't cheat an honest man. (Score:2)
by westlake (615356) on Thursday February 16, @02:11PM (#39064005)
The people who have suffered most is those who used these services for legitimate content, and there were quite considerable numbers of people who did so...
You trusted your files to a 300 lb tub of lard who changed his name to Kim Dotcom?
You never asked how a dirt-cheap legitimate hosting service finances a life style that would have left Fat Elvis flat busted?
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:1)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @11:16AM (#39061203)
The big question I hoped would be answered within a few posts, is where's a good ebook site now that those two have vanished?
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:3)
by AF_Cheddar_Head (1186601) on Thursday February 16, @11:53AM (#39061861)
Check your local library's web site. Many public libraries now have the capability to check out e-books for up to three weeks. My local library has them in .mobi, .pdf and recently added Kindle formats.
Plus if you go into the library your friendly librarian might be able to recommend material you would never have thought to read. That's how I found "The Windup Girl"
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Library E-books (Score:1)
by obsess5 (719497) on Thursday February 16, @12:14PM (#39062151) Homepage
After I got an E-book reader several years ago, I went to my local library, got a new library card, and surfed over to the state of Maryland's E-book site (shared by all public library systems in the state). Slim pickings. Mostly recent fiction and self-help books - there weren't even subject categories for science and technology. Very disappointing.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Library E-books (Score:4, Informative)
by AF_Cheddar_Head (1186601) on Thursday February 16, @12:21PM (#39062223)
This has most likely changed in the last couple of years. The service a lot of libraries is known as OverDrive and it offers a lot of recent fiction. I usually download a couple of Dresden File books before going overseas.
Check that library again.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Library E-books (Score:2)
by Digicrat (973598) on Thursday February 16, @12:45PM (#39062561)
The selection of DRM-free books (and specifically Android-compatible audiobooks) is highly limited on OverDrive, but they otherwise have a reasonably large selection now.
While all of MD uses OverDrive though, the availability of books does vary based on county. You must register at your local library, and that gives you access only to those books licensed by that County's library system.
More importantly, the interface for actually sorting through the books on OverDrive is still horrible. In particular, it gets annoying when you browse through and find for example books 3 and 5 of some series (on different pages of results), but books 1 and 2 are not in the system. Or at least that's what I routinely find with the audiobooks (great for long drives), even when I include the Windows-only file formats.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Library E-books (Score:2)
by AF_Cheddar_Head (1186601) on Thursday February 16, @01:31PM (#39063303)
DRM on items I purchase ought be outlawed but for what Overdrive does with it, controlling of lending periods it does serve a purpose and makes some sense.
You are correct about the Overdrive interface, I cringe whenever looking for stuff. As to the missing books try making sure you are looking for all items in the system not just available items. Each library is limited to a certain number of copies of each title. Some other user might have book 1 or 2 checked out and you don't seem them because you are only looking at available items, Just a guess it has happened to me numerous times.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Library E-books (Score:2)
by poity (465672) on Thursday February 16, @02:33PM (#39064349)
There's a legitimate argument against DRM on things you've bought, but complaining about DRM on borrowed books from the library is stretching it.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Library E-books (Score:2)
by aslagle (441969) on Thursday February 16, @01:34PM (#39063363)
I hope you've finished Ghost Story then, because Penguin has removed all of their books from Overdrive:
http://www.kindleboards.com/index.php/topic,92091.75.html/ [
kindleboards.com]
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Library E-books (Score:2)
by AF_Cheddar_Head (1186601) on Thursday February 16, @02:11PM (#39064001)
Nooooo, don't tell me that. Ghost Story was good but I have a few others I haven't read.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Library E-books (Score:1)
by the_Bionic_lemming (446569) on Thursday February 16, @04:01PM (#39065667)
Nooooo, don't tell me that. Ghost Story was good but I have a few others I haven't read.
It's not hard to find copies of all of Butchers work, You just search for a couple of sentences from the book you want to read. Every once in awhile I get bored, do that, then compile the list of sites that illegally have the book and turn it over to the one of the mods so he can kick it up the line to get the books pulled from the intrawebz.
.
Altho I haven't done that lately, ever since the hand of mod stuff started floating around the boards gone downhill.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Library E-books (Score:2)
by AF_Cheddar_Head (1186601) on Thursday February 16, @04:22PM (#39066027)
Sorry, I refuse to pirate. DRM is evil but so is pirating. YMMV
Sharing a book means only one of us has access to the book at a time, BTW photocopying an entire book is pirating in my world. Sharing a digital copy of the same book means both have access ie copying.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Library E-books (Score:1)
by the_Bionic_lemming (446569) on Thursday February 16, @04:45PM (#39066331)
I have three copies each of the dresden books that I buy when they get released.
The "reading" book, the "book to store and never read", and the loaner book.
The only one that I have a single copy of is backup, since that was disproportionally expensive. I also had Jim sign Changes for my Mom and gave that to her for her birthday when it came out.
Good for you on not pirating - but I'm sure that if you locate copies, they won't mind if you take a peek when you turn the site link over.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Library E-books (Score:2)
by AF_Cheddar_Head (1186601) on Thursday February 16, @02:14PM (#39064059)
Looking at your link it appears to be the Kindle version not the Adobe version. Good for me as I use a Sony e-reader. Love it DOC and PDF files natively too. Do a lot of my Technical reading from PDFs supplied with the journals.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Library E-books (Score:2)
by aslagle (441969) on Thursday February 16, @02:37PM (#39064411)
At first it was just the kindle versions, but Penguin has now chosen (in the past week) to not send ebooks to Overdrive, in any format.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:2)
by synthespian (563437) on Friday February 17, @12:43AM (#39071055)
Sure. This week I'm gonna go to the friendly librarian and ask: "can you reccommend me nice books on Markov chains? And what would you reccommend on Sobolev spaces?" [
wikipedia.org]
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @11:35AM (#39061559)
The big question I hoped would be answered within a few posts, is where's a good ebook site now that those two have vanished?
Try emule or god forbid some torrent site.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @11:35AM (#39061561)
Yeah.. now I will have to go to the library every time I find a book I need. Thanks for slowing down my research.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:-1)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @10:58AM (#39060865)
Agreed. People who say that you "can't stop it so don't try" are completely wrong. You can stop most of piracy via crackdowns on the major outlets. Does it stop all of it? No, but it stops most of it. USENET will be next.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:4, Insightful)
by GameboyRMH (1153867) <gameboyrmh.gmail@com> on Thursday February 16, @12:20PM (#39062207) Journal
Most of it? It's a temporary dip. The pro-culture-theft crowd was saying the same thing when Napster was shut down, I'm sure the idea of average Joes using something as technically complicated as torrents seemed at least as ridiculous back then as the idea of average Joes running their torrents over untraceable, unstoppable darknets seems now.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:1)
by nhat11 (1608159) on Thursday February 16, @12:55PM (#39062723)
Eh the point of regulations is NOT to stop stuff like piracy, it's to slow it down to be managable. I mean theres people that steal and kill all the time. It's impossible to stop stealing and killing, but if you regulate and slow it down to a reasonable level, it is managable.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:3)
by Requiem18th (742389) on Thursday February 16, @01:54PM (#39063759)
Actually the purpose is to crush the competition, gain control on innovations and facilitate a police state. Reducing piracy is icing on the cake.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:2)
by cornicefire (610241) on Thursday February 16, @02:22PM (#39064169)
Innovation? That's always the claim but as far as I could tell, Megaupload was an FTP server and not a very stable one at that. That's 20+ year old technology.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:2)
by Requiem18th (742389) on Friday February 17, @11:59AM (#39075907)
Market innovation, Megaupload wasn't busted because of piracy, they were busted because they wanted to go legit by offering artists a distribution platform with 90% profit *for the artists*. Some sources:
http://techcrunch.com/2012/01/24/was-megaupload-targeted-because-of-its-upcoming-megabox-digital-jukebox-service/ [
techcrunch.com]
http://cgarmstrong.me/post/16405025252/megaupload [
cgarmstrong.me]
http://www.digitalmusicnews.com/permalink/2012/120123busta [
digitalmusicnews.com]
http://www.deltaworld.org/technology/Megaupload-had-planned-to-pay-artists-to-create-a-new-online-music-service/ [
deltaworld.org]
http://duckduckgo.com/?q=megaupload+artists+90%25&t=lm [
duckduckgo.com]
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:1)
by tehcyder (746570) on Friday February 17, @09:06AM (#39073529) Journal
facilitate a police state
you're a poet but you don't know it
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:2)
by GameboyRMH (1153867) <gameboyrmh.gmail@com> on Thursday February 16, @01:13PM (#39063031) Journal
Well they better enjoy it while they still have the ability to lay down speedbumps.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:2)
by cheekyjohnson (1873388) on Thursday February 16, @03:05PM (#39064821)
But it's not manageable. It's still not, and likely never will be. Anyone who isn't an idiot can find another website in five seconds flat.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:1)
by tehcyder (746570) on Friday February 17, @09:12AM (#39073605) Journal
If they arrest/fine/imprison enough people, one after the other, the allure of running an upload site is going to diminish greatly, especially if you're not even making much money off it in the first place.
I wonder how many slashdotters would be prepared to go to jail for the principle of being able to up/download copyright infringing files?
My guess would be: probably about the same number as would actually take up arms against the evil US government
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:2)
by Hatta (162192) on Thursday February 16, @04:43PM (#39066303) Journal
You can't slow it down that much. As long as the risk/benefit equation works out in favor of the pirate, piracy will be widespread. That is, as long as the expected payout is greater than the expected loss.
The expected loss is the risk of getting caught times the penalty. We already have enormous penalties, tens of thousands of dollars per song, which are arguably unconstitutionally excessive.
The only alternative is to increase the risk of getting caught. To do this, we'd have to prohibit general purpose computing. Only pre-approved applications would be allowed on pre-approved operating systems. Only approved crypto-systems with back doors for the government will be allowed.
Of course, general purpose computing is so important to our economy, that we'd be at a severe competetive disadvantage if we did that. So that's a non-starter. The only sensible thing to do is to understand that entertainment is a very small part of our economy, Google could easily buy the RIAA for instance. Even if you assume the worst case scenario, that piracy will totally destroy the entertainment industry, it doesn't make economic sense to fight it.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Taking the heat off torrents (Score:2)
by Pausanias (681077) <pausaniasx AT gmail DOT com> on Thursday February 16, @03:47PM (#39065417)
I love these sites like MegaUpload and whatever its next iteration will be. By illegally making copyrighted files available for direct download from a unique source, they are easy to prosecute, easy to take down, which gives copyright owners a sense of satisfaction, and because of this focuses attention away from bittorrent.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Taking the heat off torrents (Score:2)
by Hatta (162192) on Thursday February 16, @04:25PM (#39066053) Journal
Bittorrent is easily traceable. All you have to do is ask the tracker who is seeding and it will tell you. Torrents are easily prosecutable as well.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Taking the heat off torrents (Score:2)
by steve_bryan (2671) on Thursday February 16, @08:41PM (#39069249)
Have you heard of VPN? It is widely used by business and government so trying to prevent its use is very problematic. As long as there are locations on the net that are not 'owned' by the copyright cartel the darknet will continue to flourish. Ironically a side effect of this development is that all other internet activity of an individual using VPN becomes much less vulnerable to surveillance. Positive efforts to encourage people to safeguard privacy have been fairly ineffective but this sort of activity is doing that job rather well.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Taking the heat off torrents (Score:2)
by HermMunster (972336) on Thursday February 16, @11:11PM (#39070447)
So many fools. The owners of Megaupload.com were not making copyrighted material available. The users were. Megaupload.com provided adequate and tools and time for the alleged content owners to take down the alleged illegal content. They were going after Megaupload.com for a couple of reasons. Primarily they were going to be introducing a music sharing system for artists that was far greater than any provided by the music industry as it exists. As well, Megaupload.com sued some in the music industry for illegally taking down content with the tools that Megaupload.com provided them. Let's get real.
Megaupload.com is a failure (so far) in regards to defending itself in court over these charges. They have money they should have the best attorneys, and they should be promoting their lawsuit against those in the music industry. They should spend their money on attorneys and when they are found to be innocent, begin again and sue the shit out of the RIAA.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Taking the heat off torrents (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 17, @09:25AM (#39073783)
Did you even READ the grand jury indictment? According to the unspecified archive of emails they had access to, the MU principals were DIRECTLY involved in facilitating the piracy, and so sloppy about it they left an email trail dating back to 2006 indicating they were doing so. While I was reserving judgement until the facts were clear, this is about as damning of a case as the Hans Reiser murder trial, and seems pretty likely to be true.
Additionally who can feel sorry for a guy who makes all those millions, legally or illegally, then pisses all that money away on Mercedes (Seriously, like 20 of them? WTF). And a 'von Dutch' motorcycle?
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:3)
by GodInHell (258915) on Thursday February 16, @02:57PM (#39064719) Homepage
Disagree -- you can stop /paid for/ piracy. The free shit carries on unabated.
-GiH
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:1)
by aix tom (902140) on Thursday February 16, @07:24PM (#39068243)
Quite right. And once they have prosecuted and locked away or alienated anybody stupid enough to PAY for something, they will finally have saved their business model. Or something. ;-P
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:1)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @02:55PM (#39064685)
Trust me, when it comes down to ebooks, there's no way to stop it : It's very small, and contains an enormous amount of information for it's size.
And even if they find a way to block all sites, and DRM all pdf's , in the end, you could always scan a physical book and make a pdf from that.
Books have been copied since before the printing press was invented (by hand) , what makes anyone think they can stop it ?
There's also a very thin line when it comes to technical books : If I read a book on EJB 3.0 , and then write about it in a blog, I am putting contents of that book online. Is that a copyright violation ?
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @11:02AM (#39060943)
nonsense.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @11:53AM (#39061865)
Rightly so?
How does that state spooge taste, slave?
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @12:27PM (#39062311)
Successful against pirates maybe, utterly useless against piracy.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:2)
by Nyder (754090) on Thursday February 16, @12:29PM (#39062337) Homepage Journal
It's been a month now and literally every upload site has either closed down or shut down their affiliate programs that offered money for uploaders. Those who uploaded pirated material to gain money are devastated on forums and cannot find any good upload site anymore. This was highly successful bust against piracy, and rightly so.
I don't know about that. the amount of stuff released on sites i've been to hasn't slowed down. While a few of the sites have changed that stuff is uploaded to, there hasn't been that much change.
I don't know about if the uploaders are getting money or not, because I don't care. The movie and music industry built their empire on milking their talent for as much as they can, while giving them back very little. But even if the uploaders are NOT getting money for their uploads, they are still uploading it.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:MegaUpload bust was highly successful (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @12:45PM (#39062569)
Heavily pro-RIAA post within one minute of story showing up on slashdot.
Hmm... couldn't POSSIBLY be a shill attempting to steer the conversation.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Slashdot deletes posts (Score:-1, Offtopic)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @10:56AM (#39060835)
Slashdot used to have a no-deletion / no-censorship policy. They now delete posts. And no one gives a shit.
There is a "Flag" button, the FAQ has been modified to allow deletion. And if you look at the source of this very comment page, you'll see evidence that moderators have the ability to check-mark a number of posts and click the Delete link.
Sad. Slashdot was no longer slashdot after Taco left.
Reply to This Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Slashdot deletes posts (Score:5, Informative)
by ScentCone (795499) on Thursday February 16, @11:05AM (#39060997)
Pay for and run your own web site with an audience, traffic, and exposure (generally, and legally) like this, and see what you think about that subject. If nothing else, just being able to junk the spam is essential. That you think of this as censorship shows that you have no idea what the word means (and what the practice of actual censorship is). This isn't a publicly funded service, crap posts aren't deleted by the government, and dealing with what's posted here is no more censorship than is choosing which letters to the editor to include at the NYT web site.
Sad
Well, something is. Just not what you think.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Slashdot deletes posts (Score:2)
by AF_Cheddar_Head (1186601) on Thursday February 16, @11:56AM (#39061917)
I understand why Slashdot has started implemented the ability to delete posts and I agree they should have the capability.. Two ssues I see is if they now are looked at as a moderated site. Sometimes different legal rules apply to moderated vice unmoderated site. Also just hope they don't go overboard on the deleting.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Slashdot deletes posts (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @12:52PM (#39062673)
I've had several posts censored by slashdot already. They just end up gone. My opinions were pro freedom, much of slashdot seems pro government + corporate interests these days. If you go against the grain your voice is muted.
Look at the top post in this discussion. Its so deep inside "The Man's" rectum that he's coughing it up. The hackers are gone and the corporate shills and establishment types are "IN".
And before you cry that I just want something for nothing, I work in this industry and I know where the REAL theft is going on. The big boys will take and make your idea while giving you nothing. Then they go after grannies for $10 in DVDs like its some kind of armed robbery.
This is akin to stealing money from the vault with impunity and then prosecuting the bank customers for taking pens from the counter. On top of that the pens regenerate while the money does not.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Slashdot deletes posts (Score:1)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @11:19AM (#39061301)
Freedom doesn't die because people hate freedom. Freedom dies because people hate the work and nuisance that it brings. Freedom isn't for free.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Slashdot deletes posts (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @11:28AM (#39061453)
Freedom is hard, lets go shopping!
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Slashdot deletes posts (Score:1)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @12:27PM (#39062309)
Different AC here.
This isn't a publicly funded service, crap posts aren't deleted by the government, and dealing with what's posted here is no more censorship than is choosing which letters to the editor to include at the NYT web site.
Of course it's censorship (assuming it happens; I'm not taking the GP's word on that). If someone posts a comment and you delete it for whatever reason, you're censoring them, period. Censorship doesn't require government involvement.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Slashdot deletes posts (Score:2)
by ScentCone (795499) on Thursday February 16, @01:11PM (#39062985)
If someone posts a comment and you delete it for whatever reason, you're censoring them, period. Censorship doesn't require government involvement
In any meaningful use of the word, yes it does. Nobody is stopping you from saying what you want to say. But they may, on their own web site, decide it's a not a good fit for how they run the place. You are not censored. You are, though, subject to someone else's whims when you make free use of their stuff. The slashdot editors have absolutely no influence over your free speech - only over the content of their own web site. Just like you can and should have (if you want it) influence over your own, should you decide to set one up. At no point is your liberty threatened by having a web site owner run a web site according to their own editorial policies. Suggesting otherwise utterly trivializes real censorship - of which there are many and horrifying examples in the world.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Slashdot deletes posts (Score:2)
by lgw (121541) on Thursday February 16, @02:00PM (#39063855) Journal
I think you're just mistaken here. "Censorship" happens when anyone removes material that others would have had access to. Government censorship is a particularly pernicious kind of censorship, to be sure, but the phrase "government censorship" is not redundant.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Slashdot deletes posts (Score:2)
by ScentCone (795499) on Thursday February 16, @03:19PM (#39065015)
So would you consider the editorial process at a newspaper (say, the fact that a human being, with editorial authority, sits in between the web-based letter-to-the-editor form and the web-based display of letters-to-the-editor that the newspaper site's public visitors see) is censorship? Is deleting forum spam censorship?
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Slashdot deletes posts (Score:2)
by cheekyjohnson (1873388) on Thursday February 16, @03:28PM (#39065107)
So would you consider the editorial process at a newspaper (say, the fact that a human being, with editorial authority, sits in between the web-based letter-to-the-editor form and the web-based display of letters-to-the-editor that the newspaper site's public visitors see) is censorship?
Suppressing such information could be considered censorship (at least by me), even if certain people agree with it. Not all censorship must be deemed "evil" or other such things.
Is deleting forum spam censorship?
I think it is, yes. The fact that you or some others may agree with that censorship doesn't mean it's not censorship.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Slashdot deletes posts (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @04:53PM (#39066467)
In any meaningful use of the word, yes it does. Nobody is stopping you from saying what you want to say. But they may, on their own web site, decide it's a not a good fit for how they run the place. You are not censored. You are, though, subject to someone else's whims when you make free use of their stuff. The slashdot editors have absolutely no influence over your free speech - only over the content of their own web site. Just like you can and should have (if you want it) influence over your own, should you decide to set one up. At no point is your liberty threatened by having a web site owner run a web site according to their own editorial policies. Suggesting otherwise utterly trivializes real censorship - of which there are many and horrifying examples in the world.
What you're essentially saying is that "it's not censorship because it's limited to your own domain". That's wrong, because censorship doesn't require any particular broadness of scope any more than it requires that the censoring action be carried out by government agents.
It's censorship if a parent throws away his kids' Harry Potter books because he doesn't want them reading about that evil witchcraft stuff; the fact that he's perfectly within his rights as a parent to do this doesn't change that, nor does the fact that he's not going around confiscating everyone else's books.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Slashdot deletes posts (Score:3)
by MightyYar (622222) on Thursday February 16, @11:06AM (#39061021)
It's true - sure we no longer have to endure the GNAA posts, but there were only ever a few of those per story, and they never got modded up. Seems like a solution looking for a problem.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Slashdot deletes posts (Score:5, Insightful)
by Ihmhi (1206036) <
i_have_mental_health_issues@yahoo.com> on Thursday February 16, @11:25AM (#39061381)
The flag is so subtle that I hadn't even noticed it...
Wasn't there a big shitstorm over *one* post being deleted a few years back? I think it was due to a court order or something of the like... maybe about the HDCP keys or something? Bah.
I think the fact that posts *cannot* be deleted makes people consider what they are going to post a little more carefully. Aside from the usual spam and idiocy, I generally find the commentary here to be of a higher quality in general than places like Reddit or the comments section in other news sites. I feel that this is going to go into the shitter now.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
No, it was Scientologists (Score:5, Informative)
by langelgjm (860756) on Thursday February 16, @11:45AM (#39061749) Journal
It was a post containing text copyrighted by the Church of Scientology, and it happened in 2001. [
slashdot.org]
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:No, it was Scientologists (Score:2)
by Ihmhi (1206036) <
i_have_mental_health_issues@yahoo.com> on Thursday February 16, @11:29PM (#39070587)
Yes, this was the one I was thinking of.
To the other posters in sibling/child threads, thank you nevertheless for your efforts.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Slashdot deletes posts (Score:1)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @11:48AM (#39061795)
Scientologists Force Comment Off Slashdot [
slashdot.org]
Yes, that was a big deal. Yes, that story was posted by CmdrTaco. It is well worth reading, if just to see how far things have deteriorated here.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
just testing .. (Score:-1)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @12:20PM (#39062211)
WISE International Business Directory [
wikileaks.org]
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Slashdot deletes posts (Score:2)
by bky1701 (979071) on Thursday February 16, @05:10PM (#39066701) Homepage
Not only that, but I seem to have been blacklisted as a mod; probably for telling Bonch off or maybe foe'ing one of the editors. Excellent karma solid for several years, many up-modded posts, few down, yet no mod points in over 6 months. So much for moderation being what sets slashdot apart. It seems mods are getting solidly stupider, constantly modding up trolls for agreeing with them politically, and I don't doubt that more people have been blacklisted than me for saying the wrong thing. Just look at all the up-mods to idiots in this story... slashdot has really fallen.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Slashdot deletes posts (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @02:01PM (#39063869)
Actually, that particular story concerned Digg.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AACS_encryption_key_controversy Long story short: Somebody discovered one particular AACS key, and posted it to Digg. Digg deleted the post, out of legal reasons. Users found out about the deletion, and spammed Digg with it until Digg realized they couldn't win, and stopped deleting posts with the key.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Slashdot deletes posts (Score:3)
by GameboyRMH (1153867) <gameboyrmh.gmail@com> on Thursday February 16, @12:45PM (#39062575) Journal
I still see no evidence that posts are actually *deleted* when flagged. The FAQ seems to suggest that they are modded to -1:
How do I report abuse?
Below and to the right of each comment is a small "Anti" symbol; click on this, and (optionally) explain why you consider the comment abusive. (Slashdot discussions are and should be robust; only cry "Abuse!" for comments that are utterly without redeeming value -- spam, racist ranting, etc. For everything else, use the other moderation options.) Reported comments will be reviewed and moderated by the editors, if appropriate.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Slashdot deletes posts (Score:4, Informative)
by Soulskill (1459) Works for Slashdot on Thursday February 16, @02:29PM (#39064269) Homepage
When a comment is flagged, it gets sent to the editors to review on a case-by-case basis. We then pick from two options: ignore and downmod. Nothing gets deleted, and reporting a comment that is already at -1 won't do anything either way.
Plenty of people have tried to abuse it already, but because it's not automated, they're just wasting their time. Feel free to test it out if you'd like.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Slashdot deletes posts (Score:2)
by NeutronCowboy (896098) on Thursday February 16, @12:50PM (#39062639)
Eh? The flag button that lets you repost to various social networks? The FAQ has had the delete for a long time. And the source of the comment page shows no delete link and no check-mark to allow such. Besides, why the hell would it? The proper way to do this is to create specific pages for specific users, not to hide elements via javascript. If the ability to delete posts exists, you can't see it - or you can be sure it would already have been abused.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Re:Slashdot deletes posts (Score:2)
by NeutronCowboy (896098) on Thursday February 16, @12:52PM (#39062665)
Interesting. The flag button is actually clickable and leads to a report functionality.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
"barely able to cover the server costs" (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @11:02AM (#39060945)
Wait, so you mean I can be a legal pirate if I operate non-profit?
Uhh, I'll be right back, gotta make a few phone calls.
Reply to This Flag as Inappropriate
lib.ru? (Score:1)
by stanlyb (1839382) on Thursday February 16, @11:18AM (#39061271)
It is still online, and we are still happy to have it. You guys, i really wish you best luck shutting it down.
Reply to This Flag as Inappropriate
Re:
lib.ru? (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @11:53AM (#39061875)
Looks like some kind of alien gobbledygook. Is this a martian website?
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Cognitive dissonance (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @11:32AM (#39061521)
Paypal bad!
But ... we think Bitcoin is bad too!
Although Bitcoin would have saved these guys ...
Reply to This Flag as Inappropriate
good (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @11:35AM (#39061567)
data belongs to the people who created it. I'm all for DRM and these kinds of busts.
--
BMO
Reply to This Flag as Inappropriate
Re:good (Score:2)
by Requiem18th (742389) on Thursday February 16, @02:59PM (#39064743)
*sigh* I miss subtle trolls.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
The tip of a very big iceberg? (Score:1)
by microphage (2429016) on Thursday February 16, @12:14PM (#39062145)
I don't think so, piracy is piracy whether movies, books or software. It's not a big deal unless they go after sites like Project Gutenberg [
gutenberg.org].
Reply to This Flag as Inappropriate
Re:The tip of a very big iceberg? (Score:2)
by margeman2k3 (1933034) on Thursday February 16, @12:48PM (#39062615)
Considering how often they seem to be extending copyright, you can probably expect to see that in the next few years when we find ourselves dealing with perpetual copyrights.
Although, given that Congress can copyright works in the public domain [
arstechnica.com], we might not need to wait that long before things like Project Gutenberg become a thing of the past.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
I got good anti-bodies (Score:0)
by bigbangnet (1108411) on Thursday February 16, @12:26PM (#39062289)
I sniff my socks (remove corn if possible...with an industrial scrapper)regularly so I have enough antibodies to fight viruses. It worked since i was able to fight off the new string of malaria. :)
Reply to This Flag as Inappropriate
I said it when MegaUpload went down,... (Score:2)
by J'raxis (248192) on Thursday February 16, @12:35PM (#39062411) Homepage
...and I'll say it again: Why do these centralized, single-point-of-failure websites even exist? I thought people learned from Napster back in the early 2000s that decentralized, peer-to-peer was a lot more resilient? And as p2p networks have been disrupted by the cartels and governments, people have further moved to encrypted p2p networks and the so-called "dark web."
What you're seeing here is someone losing a battle because they went up against a modern military... using a longbow. Or maybe even just a sharpened stick. It's 2012, censorship tools and techniques have evolved significantly, as have anti-censorship countermeasures. These guys were stuck in 2001.
Hopefully all the copies of the content that
library.nu and
ifile.it amassed haven't been seized, and they or someone else can upload all this stuff to a safer place [
torproject.org]. :)
Reply to This Flag as Inappropriate
Re:I said it when MegaUpload went down,... (Score:2)
by Xest (935314) on Friday February 17, @06:50AM (#39072547)
Because it's pretty fucking funny watching the authorities try to play whackamole?
Part of the reason anti-piracy measures are failing are not simply about new technological tools outflanking the police, but also because as soon as you take your eye off the ball with one mechanism (i.e. P2P) then it'll pop straight back up.
They took down centralised stuff years ago and along came P2P, they focus on P2P and now centralised stuff returns. With the lack of focus on P2P sites and such lately I wouldn't be surprised to see it growing in popularity again.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Scribd (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @12:53PM (#39062693)
When is Scribd going to get busted? I've had enough of their warezed documents.
Reply to This Flag as Inappropriate
Article 27 of UDHR is just fine (Score:2)
by melikamp (631205) on Thursday February 16, @01:10PM (#39062973) Homepage Journal
(1) Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits.
(2) Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.
By (1), non-commercial exchange of ANY information that is artistic or scientific in nature is a human right. Lending a book to a friend is a selfless act of sharing, just like uploading files to consenting strangers via BT from your home Internet connection. By (2), authors should have legal means to enforce proper credits and to get compensated when their works are shared commercially. Note that only authors are eligible, so there is no mandate for a transferable copyright. There is no mandate for a corporate-controlled copyright, as these are Human rights. Actually, there is no mandate for any kind of copyright, for as long as there is some kind of scheme for reimbursing authors, their human rights are protected.
The only contradiction is between the current copyright law and the UDHR: non-commercial sharing is considered infringing in many jurisdictions, but the law itself infringes on our Human right 27.1. If I and some other dude agree to share files we already have, and without exchanging any money, then we are clearly "participating in the cultural life of the community", "enjoying the arts", and nothing else, and should be able to do so freely. But if one party makes money in this transaction, then the act of making money is neither "participating" nor "enjoying", and can (but does not have to) be regulated by a copyright law.
Reply to This Flag as Inappropriate
No sympathy. Some sites deserve to be shut down. (Score:2)
by grnbrg (140964) <
slashdot@Nospam.grnbrg.org> on Thursday February 16, @01:33PM (#39063343)
Yes, the media companies and publishers have draconian DRM policies, and charge far more than most people would consider reasonable for their content. They're going to have to change, or die. But just because they're stupid and evil doesn't make everything done with their stuff right.
Hosting a site that provides tools to strip that DRM off? I can see why the media companies don't like that, but tough shit for them.
Using tools to strip DRM from content you've paid for, for your own use? No problem. Sharing that content with a friend (ie: Someone you actually know!)? Grey, but I think it would actually benefit the media companies.
Running a site that provides DRM-stripped content for general download? Frankly, I don't see this as legit, but I'll accept that there are some arguments in favour of it. And I also feel that if most people are given a legal option at a reasonable value (in terms of price/DRM) they'll take that over a free, illegitimate site. (Hence the popularity of iTunes.)
But taking a DRM-stripped item that a publisher is selling for $X through legitimate channels, and selling it for $(X/10)? Screw 'em. Put them in jail, and then sue them for the gross income of their total sales.
grnbrg.
Reply to This Flag as Inappropriate
Re:No sympathy. Some sites deserve to be shut down (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @02:21PM (#39064159)
If only they had been selling it...
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Used Books (Score:2)
by DarthVain (724186) on Thursday February 16, @01:54PM (#39063767)
If industry had its way all used book sales would also be banned.
They might not go so far as to say "burn them", but "recycle" is a much nicer sounding word, but amounts to about the same thing.
Reply to This Flag as Inappropriate
what was all that soap for sopa then? (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @02:29PM (#39064291)
they can already effectively shut sites on demand. what more do they want? ... and dont answer: your soul...
Reply to This Flag as Inappropriate
"Server costs"... (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @04:52PM (#39066453)
Are not relevent when you make money off the site to pay for the site. There's no defense that they took in money due to the site being run. String em up.
Reply to This Flag as Inappropriate
Re:"Server costs"... (Score:1)
by s0nicfreak (615390) on Thursday February 16, @05:19PM (#39066835) Journal
It is actually relevant. Weither they made a profit or not and how much a profit they made will be a big deciding factor in the case. At least, that's how things worked when I was sued for copyright infringement.
Reply to This Parent Flag as Inappropriate
Thank heavens!! (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @04:55PM (#39066479)
I'm so glad they stopped those filthy, horrible pirates from spreading knowledge to the world for free. How dare they actually use this tool that we have to spread knowledge to every corner of the world for practically no cost?!?
Reply to This Flag as Inappropriate
Mirror? (Score:0)
by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 16, @05:22PM (#39066865)
..great analysis everyone but ANYONE HAS A MIRROR of the whole thing?Or at least a similar site?
Reply to This Flag as Inappropriate
Shitload of Astroturfing (Score:2)
by HermMunster (972336) on Thursday February 16, @11:15PM (#39070489)
Some organized campaign of astroturfing is taking place in this thread. You can see that when those attempting to clarify are modded down.
Reply to This Flag as Inappropriate
Scary things happening (Score:1)
by PaleRider1981 (2575775) on Friday February 17, @07:56AM (#39072855)
This is the really scary part:
"A coalition of 17 publishing companies has shut down
library.nu and
ifile.it"
seems like today we have government laws enforced by the police and the laws of publishers where they are the prosecutor, judge and the jury...
I taught they need SOPA for that, but obviously not...
