|
|
|
P2P users are nothing but common criminals!!!
|
|
|
loaded
Moderator
|
20. June 2003 @ 15:45 |
Link to this message
|
|
Sarcasm lads, sarcasm.
Irony, if you prefer.
Paul.
I'm back...
...can't you smell the fear?
|
|
Advertisement
|
 |
|
|
|
theos
Junior Member
|
20. June 2003 @ 16:15 |
Link to this message
|
|
gluon, I wonder if you have downloaded any of piledrives music? That would be ironic.
BTW, I haven't used P2P in a long time, It seems like a waste to me. I buy the music and rent the DVD's. I buy the software, so to answer you question about what I do with P2P, I downloaded PORN. Not copyrighted, just amature porn. I could have found it on the net, but is was faster using Kazaa.
As for mdownloading music, never wanted to. I have a very nice collection of CD's and I buy them used from the warehouse for and average of $5.00 each.
I can't find any "real" amature porn in the stores, so I downloaded it from Kazaa
I had to many problems with Kazaa, so I just removed it.
Does that answer your question ?
|
|
nightfly
Junior Member
|
22. June 2003 @ 07:59 |
Link to this message
|
|
Took a long time to do this; I own 1262 purchased CD's. Total is 15444 songs. Of these, I liked 4062, and probably play about half of those in any given year. So the music industry owes me for 11082 songs that are crap. When they get around to giving me a refund for all the crap I had to buy, then I'll get around to paying for the stuff I download. Same with software; I have several boxes of 'shelfware'; stuff that doesn't do what is advertised on the box, is so buggy that it simply doesn't work without causing frequent crashes with associated costly downtime, or even worse either installs itself to run on startup (and won't run any other way) or interferes with other programs. When the number of programs that I download that work exceeds the number of boxes of crap then I will again start purchasing software, but it doesn't look like that will happen any time soon.
|
|
gluon
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
22. June 2003 @ 08:50 |
Link to this message
|
|
I agree with almost everything you say. I also buy loads of CDs and sometimes buy stuff I really wish I hadn?t. You know, you hear a couple of tracks on the radio that are great and they turn out to be the only two tracks on the album you can listen to and even they?re not as good as they sounded the first time you heard them. I live in the UK so I can pay £15 or £16 for a CD (25$ plus). Ouch! Some other places in Europe are even worse. Software is way more expensive here as well.
But! Wouldn?t your argument apply equally well to going in to a Virgin store and stuffing a couple of CDs down the front of your trousers? Maybe a couple of PlayStation games as well if your trousers are baggy enough? A pair of Levi?s costs £45 here. For every pair I buy your argument would allow me to nick another two. Theft is theft. Thieves ?R? Us.
Let the bonton roulay...
|
Staff Member
|
22. June 2003 @ 18:56 |
Link to this message
|
|
nightfly, you made some good points yes!! very interesting read! I too have a huge cd collection, nothing like yours but still pretty big!! And i agree that the number of songs that i dont listen to is way bigger than the number i do! Still though, cant really just claim a good track for everyone that sucked!! thats like going into a shop, buying something to eat, coming back and saying half of it wasnt as good as the rest and ask for half of another one!
|
|
nightfly
Junior Member
|
23. June 2003 @ 06:22 |
Link to this message
|
Why can't I claim a good track for every one that sucks? If you get bread that turns out to be moldy inside, you should be able to get a new 'good' loaf. And that's what happens with most CD's and often sofware as well; the outside looks good, but much of the inside is rotten. Only once you buy it and open it, your stuck with it according to the 'licensing aggreement'. Not so with the moldy bread. But basically I have to guess that either you don't mind having the powers that be rip you off on a regular basis just because they can, or you have so much money (or don't earn your own) and so don't mind having it wasted. The RIAA has admitted to price and market fixing; only we don't get our money back. 50 years ago you could walk into a store and purchase a single which was indentical to what you heard on the radio. With the invention of the LP, that changed. If you wanted to purchase the song you heard on the radio, you had to buy a whole lot of stuff you never heard as well at ten times the cost. That's what caused all the problems. The recording industry found a way to increase their sales by 'holding the hits' as hostage. Now they're paying for it. It's only sad that the artists have to lose revenue as well, but very little of each CD sold goes to the artists anyway, and I guess that now they'll just have to make money the old fashioned way, they'll have to perform 'live'; much the way most of us have to show up for work every day to get paid. Funny, that's how it used to be before recorded music existed. Young artists are already doing that, so their lives won't change much. The older ones will have to come out of their mansions and start 'working' again to collect their paychecks. Next, for the past 40 years no I couldn't claim a good song for every one that sucked, so I got 'taken' by the recording industry. But I already own pretty much everything I want to hear. Yeah, I am lazy, and downloaded lots of stuff instead of ripping them from the cd's myself. But when the RIAA comes knocking on my door they won't find but a few songs that I don't own the originals of, either in cd form or lp (if I get the RIAA letter from my ISP $150 will buy the CD's to cover me). The kids today are now 'taking' the recording industry and you know what, I just can't feel sorry for the RIAA. They've been taking advantage of the artists and the consumers for a long time. Artists can now get their own web site and create their own CD's, with elaborate inserts, Cd extras accessible on computer or whatever to make the package appealing enough and then sell them directly. Eventually that's what it will come down to. And the RIAA will slowly cease to exist as the bands find ways to get a bigger piece of the pie by marketing their own material or they can continue to be foolish and let others make a profit on their work. But the value level will have to go up. One or two songs will no longer sell a CD. And hey, that's the way it should be. As far as software, I now download a copy to try it and see if it works. If it's from a company that has screwed me in the past(hmmmm, maybe one that has put out crappy operating systems that dominate the market???), I keep the new program as 'compensation' for the crap they already charged me for. If it's a new company that creates a great product that works, I buy it (think of those like DVD2ONE) because I want to keep that company in business. On the flip side, there are those like easy cd creator 5 that was suppossed to work on windows 2k according to the box, which locked up upon installation, installed itself to run at startup, and interferes with other programs even when it's not running(I guess the companies just figure they can force the public to pay for being beta testers). Now, unless I want to sue the company for damages then I'm out of luck (as are most people, because we don't have the money to have attorneys on retainer). So that company 'owes' me one in my mind. And my mind is the one that counts here. Basically, if you screw your customers, you can't really expect them to just sit back and take it forever. Eventually it's going to bite you in the butt, and that's what's happening. People are just fed up with getting taken by the corporations. It's all about the money; if you make people feel that they're not getting what they paid for, they feel cheated, and want retribution. I won't gain anything by seeing the recording industry giants fall, but it'll feel good to see it happen. I do encourage kids to get all the music they can for free, because the recording companies cheated me for so long.
|
|
Piledrive
Newbie
|
23. June 2003 @ 11:25 |
Link to this message
|
I understand everyone's point on here but it seems to only focus on the RIAA and what they have done. Very little of you are understanding the musicians point of view here. I am assuming that is because most of you are not musicians. By taking food off the table of the RIAA you are also taking food off the table from the source of your enjoyment.
It is true that alot of albums nowadays have only one or 2 good songs and thats a shame. Alot of that has to do with not only the musician but also alot of it has to do with the record comapany and the producer. But either way that should not give you the right to justify downloading the entire album. Do you watch a movie and return it because you dind't like frames 567 through 939? Do you then take it back to the movie rental store and say I want my money back? Oh yeah and please give me a free copy of frames 1 through 566 and frames 940 through 10,956. No you don't
Here is the solution. Buy the cd, listen to it and find out which songs you like. Then return it, go over to Apple's imusic and download the songs you do like for $1 apiece. This way the artist still gets his cut the label get's their share and you aren't paying for packaging, or shipping costs. Shound fair? I think so.
iMusic is the best thing to happen to music in a long time and definitely beneficial to all involved. If you have a vehicle that provides music to people on a pay per song basis then you give them an option to buy what they like and not force feed them crap.
I've read alot of things on here but they all seem to cover up the fact that when you download something for free without the permission of the creator then it is stealing. Plain and simple.
|
Staff Member
|
23. June 2003 @ 11:37 |
Link to this message
|
|
|
|
Piledrive
Newbie
|
23. June 2003 @ 12:13 |
Link to this message
|
|
then those are artists that are missing out on a very big opportunity and are limiting their audience.
Kazaa, Napster and P2P suck and so do the people that use it!!!!!
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 23. June 2003 @ 12:14
|
Staff Member
|
23. June 2003 @ 12:16 |
Link to this message
|
|
Ye they are but what they are worried about is the number of album sales since artists nowadays are kinda judged by how many they sell. They are afraid singles downloads will make that number drop dramatically however, apparently, with singal sales, profits would be pretty much the same!
|
|
gluon
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
23. June 2003 @ 13:02 |
Link to this message
|
There is probably a bigger problem with software. Downloaded MP3s are not the same as owning the CD but downloaded software usually is. I hear and agree with what has been said about over priced and under performing software. But once you know how to rip off Microsoft, who might well deserve it, you also know how to rip off Lavasoft, who definitely don?t. It?s just human nature not to pay for something if you don?t have to so you end up paying for none of it because you don?t have to. A couple of quick searches on eMule will show anyone that it is as easy to find product from the likes of Lavasoft or other small software houses as Microsoft and the other giants. I buy loads of CDs but don?t remember the last time I actually paid for a piece of software. A somewhat shameful admission but I?m not the only one. If there are only a few people doing this it?s not a major problem but there are lots of us now and lots more in the very near future. I can understand the theory behind downloading a warez piece of software to check it out before buying it but does anyone really go out and buy the official issue afterwards however much they like it? It seems unlikely to me but maybe I?m just a lot more tight fisted than the rest of you. Peer to peer seems to be unstoppable. How can the software industry possibly live with this? They have to be able to make some money. There are places in the world that don?t get own language software because it isn?t worth doing the translation work when hardly anybody buys the official product. Admittedly this is an extreme example and caused by large scale piracy and not peer to peer sharing but peer to peer is spreading and becoming bigger all the time and having an increasing effect.
Just to touch briefly on the music though, nightfly said ?I guess that now they'll just have to make money the old fashioned way, they'll have to perform 'live'?. I love live music. Nothing better. But I live in the UK and listen mostly to American artists. Live for my favourite artists is few and far between and horrendously bloody expensive. I need the artists I like to carry on making CDs as well as giving live performances. The few times I saw, for instance, the Grateful Dead are really precious to me but I couldn?t live without the albums and CDs. iMusic and iTunes are good ideas but cutting the price of the CDs in half would be a better one. I would definitely buy more. A visit to a record store usually finds me struggling to work out which CDs I?m going to put back as I always want loads more than I can afford.
I?m glad we don?t get all this hassle from the RIAA in Europe. Does it only happen if you?re downloading the latest blockbuster movie or top ten CD or do they get as moody about people downloading less popular/current stuff? I know it?s not the RIAA but does anyone write nasty letters about downloaded software? Can a snotty note from Bill?s lawyers turn up in your inbox? I don?t even know who is responsible for this sort of thing in the UK. I think it might be FACT for CDs and FAST for software and the DTI are in there somewhere but I?ve never heard of them harassing individuals. Or not yet anyway.
|
|
Piledrive
Newbie
|
25. June 2003 @ 11:19 |
Link to this message
|
Kazaa, Napster and P2P suck and so do the people that use it!!!!!
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 25. June 2003 @ 11:20
|
Staff Member
|
25. June 2003 @ 19:23 |
Link to this message
|
So it begins, the RIAA against literally millions of people. I dont care because i dont share music so this means absolutely nothing to me, only the fact that the RIAA are making a big mistake. What are they going to do when people completely boycott purchasing cd's?, because lets not forget one kid who gets sued has a larger family of people who will immediately hate the RIAA whether the kid broke the law or not! I will continue to buy the music until the day i see a kid somewhere get sued like this, then im finished with it, i wont even download it, i just wont bother, ill watch all the music channels on sky! and I recommend everybody else stop buying music when that happens too because they only way to protect your privacy on the net is bring to their knees those who threaten it!!
Also, wanna know the truth??http://www.boycott-riaa.com
If you are afraid of this threat then find your way to peerguardian which already blocks a lot of ip's from the RIAA - http://www.methlabs.org
Also remember to update your list of ip's daily in the database of ip's on that website! Dont let them take your privacy away from you, what you do is your business!__
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 26. June 2003 @ 09:18
|
|
Piledrive
Newbie
|
25. June 2003 @ 19:42 |
Link to this message
|
|
What you do is NOT your business when your business is ripping off people!!!!!
Kazaa, Napster and P2P suck and so do the people that use it!!!!!
|
Staff Member
|
25. June 2003 @ 19:44 |
Link to this message
|
They dont know if someone is doing it or not, but they will check what they are downloading, voilating their privacy rights! And yes that includes me, i dont share ANY music whatsoever, yet i see the RIAA listed as blocked on my peerguardian everyday! Sometimes even when im not on a p2p network!
|
|
gluon
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
26. June 2003 @ 02:39 |
Link to this message
|
How can you guys see this as a violation of your right to privacy? The article clearly says ?Our evidence-collecting process involves nothing more than reviewing and downloading files that members of peer-to-peer networks choose to make available to all the other users on their networks. As the court noted in the Verizon ruling, ?If an individual subscriber opens his computer to permit others, through peer-to-peer file sharing, to download materials from that computer, it is hard to understand just what privacy expectation he or she has after essentially opening the computer to the world.??
I thought at first that this would be like Microsoft?s attack on spammers. You know, prosecute 15 and hope the rest fall into line. They won?t of course. But this is much better thought through than that as they are talking about lots and lots of prosecutions. The article says ?RIAA expects to use the data it collects as the basis for filing what could ultimately be thousands of lawsuits charging individual peer-to-peer music distributors with copyright infringement.? Thousands. This is going to be very interesting. And I?ll bet that over the next few days the amount of copyrighted music on offer will drop drastically. I have always had some older and more difficult to obtain music in my shared files but it?s all stripped out now.
The ?BOYCOTT-RIAA.com? site sums up the weakness of the pirate position nicely. The comments in particular are very revealing. The same weak and pathetic justifications for stealing that have been used in this thread.
Also, it?s very easy to sit there and say RIAA bastards, RIAA this and RIAA that but the article includes quotes from a whole raft of musicians, producers and others in the business and they all call it theft and stealing. Forget the RIAA for a moment and address the concerns of the musicians. How can you argue with statements like the one from the Dixie Chicks, ?Respect the artists you love by not stealing their music. You're in control. Support music, don't steal it.?
See you in court pirates.
Let the bonton roulay...
|
Staff Member
|
26. June 2003 @ 09:17 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
How can you guys see this as a violation of your right to privacy?
Every day i see connection forcefully closed on xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx - RIAA
of course the x's are an ip address. Now if i'm not sharing any music at all, what right do they have to even try any type of connection to my computer? And i'm no pirate, lets not forget, YOU are the openly admitting pirate. Very ironic that you could try call others pirates! And no, you wont see me in court because i dont share music! I'll see you in court instead!
|
|
gluon
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
26. June 2003 @ 09:31 |
Link to this message
|
|
It?s not ironic that as you say to me ?YOU are the openly admitting pirate?. It?s absolutely f**king amazing. The majority of you are in denial with a significant minority who are out and out liars. Peer to peer users who don?t share copyright material! Come on now. What?s next? Bears that don?t shit in the woods?
I admit that I have both downloaded and uploaded copyright material. Hardly any music now but a fair bit of it in the past. I was already having trouble with my conscience and the Gillian Welch song I mentioned earlier was the final push that stopped me downloading music. Well almost stopped me anyway as I still occasionally weaken and download a song I?ve heard on the radio when I know I don?t want the album. I believe that far from excluding me from this discussion this enables to speak with more authority. I?ve been doing this for a long time and I know what I?m talking about.
There is a major flaw in the RIAA?s sales lost to peer to peer file sharing claim though. Here in the UK we can borrow CDs from public libraries. Can you do this elsewhere in the world? Of course this enables you to make a proper copy of the disk, none of this rough sounding MP3 nonsense, and a scanned copy of the bits of the cover you want and only costs a quid. I admit to making a number of copies this way in the past although I don?t do it at all now. I do still copy stuff I?ve bought for friends and willingly accept copies of things they have bought. This doesn?t seem so bad somehow as I or someone I know has paid through the nose for the CD. Both of these activities have reduced my CD buying more than any MP3 downloading. I only play MP3s in the car anyway as they just don?t sound good enough to play at home. There is no way anyone can split sales lost to this sort of copying from sales lost to peer to peer. Even if they stop all peer to peer the other stuff will carry on. The growth in peer to peer has happened at the same time as a much wider ownership of CDR drives but the two things are not necessarily connected. Which has caused the music industry the most damage is at least arguable and more probably just impossible to say but they definitely won?t get all lost sales back just by stamping on peer to peer as it?s only a part the problem.
But it?s still see you in court pirates. It will be interesting to see what the judge makes of your justifications and bullshit denials. I?d guess it?ll be big fines all round, lads.
|
Staff Member
|
26. June 2003 @ 10:05 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
But it?s still see you in court pirates. It will be interesting to see what the judge makes of your justifications and bullshit denials. I?d guess it?ll be big fines all round, lads.
Who are you to come on to this forum and say other people are pirates when you are the one who openly admitted downloading stuff? I dont pirate material ass and if you saw my LEGIT cd collection you would appologise! Do you need a pic or it? Should i take pictures of everything and send you my hard drive to shut you up? And no i dont use peer 2 peer much and only in the first place studied them for a school project on piracy, learned how they work and posted about them, and no it didnt involve downloading pirated material except perhaps music before i buy it which now can be done with many pay services! Respect other users and dont be making false accusations! I could go mad here and have a huge go at you right now but i aint gonna stoop to your level, and before u say you are doing npthing wrong, you are talking to approx 50,000 afterdawn users calling them thieves when you dont know one thing about any of them, only what you do. So NO you wont see me in court!
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 26. June 2003 @ 10:06
|
|
gluon
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
26. June 2003 @ 10:49 |
Link to this message
|
|
No, Dela, you're wrong. I don't only know what I do. I have a long and extensive experience of peer to peer file sharing and I know what is being shared out there. As do you if you'd only admit it. As does everyone else reading this thread. And it's almost entirely copyright material. It was on Napster and AudioGalaxy and it is on eMule, WinMX and all the others now. Save the bullshit for someone who might believe it.
Let the bonton roulay...
|
Staff Member
|
26. June 2003 @ 10:55 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
No, Dela, you're wrong. I don't only know what I do. I have a long and extensive experience of peer to peer file sharing and I know what is being shared out there. As do you if you'd only admit it. As does everyone else reading this thread. And it's almost entirely copyright material. It was on Napster and AudioGalaxy and it is on eMule, WinMX and all the others now. Save the bullshit for someone who might believe it.
It aint bullshit, you just cant stand the fact that you are wrong and i dont pirate stuff! Yopur accusations of me, someone you dont know are completely wrong! I'm dead to you man, have a nice time in court!
|
|
gluon
Suspended due to non-functional email address
|
26. June 2003 @ 11:06 |
Link to this message
|
|
I don?t care what you do. Mostly I?ve not been talking to you personally. That's just the way you choose to take it. There are something like 5 million peer to peer users online at any given moment. There are maybe as many as 100 million registered users. Nearly all of them are sharing copyright material. But it?s not a problem because Dela doesn?t do it. And if Dela is to be believed neither do the other 50,000 afterdawn users. This is impossible to take seriously. It?s complete nonsense.
Let the bonton roulay...
|
|
aqsg72
Account closed as per user's own request
|
26. June 2003 @ 11:09 |
Link to this message
|
gluon, who are you to say:
Quote:
The majority of you are in denial with a significant minority who are out and out liars.
You seem unable to accept the fact that you are the only one here who is a pirate! Just because you are a pirate doesn't mean anyone else is. You also believe you have a right to come off high and mighty just because you are the only one to admit it. It would seem it did not occurred to you that you are alone not just in admitting to piracy but actually being a pirate.
I believe it is you in denial since you are so unable to accept that no one else here is a pirate, and so you have no right to say otherwise.
So I guess we'll see you in court in the near future, gluon.
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 26. June 2003 @ 11:15
|
Staff Member
|
26. June 2003 @ 11:10 |
Link to this message
|
Quote:
I don?t care what you do. Mostly I?ve not been talking to you personally. That's just the way you choose to take it. There are something like 5 million peer to peer users online at any given moment. There are maybe as many as 100 million registered users. Nearly all of them are sharing copyright material. But it?s not a problem because Dela doesn?t do it. And if Dela is to be believed neither do the other 50,000 afterdawn users. This is impossible to take seriously. It?s complete nonsense.
Do you know the other 50,000 people at afterdawn?? No you dont! Read over your posts again man and you will see that you actually had a go at those users, which loaded was right in saying ironic!! So if you dont know them or what they do, dont assume what they do and then call them thieves! It is none of your business what they do!
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
DMW
Member
|
26. June 2003 @ 11:47 |
Link to this message
|
|
WOW, i have just read this post from beginning to end! It is by far the best post i have read in a long time. I have so much to say on the subject that by the time i finish one point i may forget another (not a thief, but memory like a goldfish!!) and that leads on to my first point, no not goldfish!! How can anyone come on here and automaticaly assume that ALL p2p users are thieves? Yes, i have downloaded MP3's B4 and No, i didnt delete them!! Yes i stole them and paid no royalties whatsoever!! This was in the days after Napster. When Napster was around i never saw the point in getting MP3s and having them on my PC, when my CDs and HI-FI did the job soooo much better, also i liked silly things like reading the insert while playing the tracks (which i stlil do). then it struck me, my cd colection wasnt going up anymore!!! Noooo my music mad friends would have more than me! and as a big music fan this would not do! I went through my MP3 directory which was not that big and found the songs i liked, i then bought the cd's that contained these tracks (albums, because i think singles with radio edit and dance mix versions are a bigger scam) and deleted the MP3 files, the rest went because i didnt like them anyhoo. That was my brief flirtation with downloading MP3 and not buying the albums over!! My time on p2p wasnt however. Me and a group of friends started playing on-line games in a big way. Popular games also had popular mods which were freely downloadable of the net. for beginners to go around getting mods(without calling me on the phone) it was easier for them to get them off my pc, enter DC++. i set up my hub and they could get them off me while i was at work. Centralisation of all popular files and utils, none of which had a price tag. Soooooo (draaws breath)i am pretty confident in saying i am not a thief!! No other files are shared by me and only my friends have access to my hub and i have told them not to share anyhting other than gaming utils. Saying p2p users are thieves is so much of a generalisation it is untrue, yes there are millions doing it, but not all. Percentages aside, it is not right to say ANYONE who uses it is a thief!! Also before i go (i'll be back though so rant away, how can a selfconfessed thief/pirate say anything without aiming it at himself? just doesnt make sense to me!! ok, one last thing, Dela isnt the first person i have seen that has blocked the RIAA connections without P2P open, how is that NOT an invasion of privacy?? they cant just try and gain access on the off chance!! No-one should have that much power! Do your investigations, prosecute away, lose more customers by doing so ie friends and family, but DONT try getting unauthorised access to peoples machines!!
(sorry for the long post, just felt like talking)
Ok flame away
oh yeah sorry for punctuation mistakes and bad paragraphs, my English skills suck!
This message has been edited since posting. Last time this message was edited on 26. June 2003 @ 11:53
|
|
