Downloading copyrighted material... be afraid

Discover Your Odds of Getting into Medical School
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
M

macsta

Full Member
10+ Year Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2011
Messages
471
Reaction score
0
Members don't see this ad.
I just saw this on Attack of the Show. They are starting to crackdown on illegal downloads. Start downloading your MCAT books and school **** now before they put this system in place. Darn you Digital Millennium Copyright Act!!!!!!

"If a copyright owner complains to an ISP—presumably, based on sniffing out IP addresses through BitTorrent—that service provider sends an online alert such as an e-mail to the subscriber. The alert explains how to secure a wireless network, how to avoid copyright violations in the future and how to lawfully obtain content in the future.

A second alert may follow if illicit file-sharing persists, or the ISP may move on to the next alert.

With the third alert, there will be some kind of mechanism—like a pop-up notice or landing page—to ensure that the subscriber received the message.

Another alert. Same drill as the last one.

On the fifth alert, the ISP may take action, such as temporarily reducing connection speeds or requiring the user to review and respond to educational information on copyright. The ISP may also skip the mitigation measures and just issue another alert.

By the sixth alert, all participating ISPs will either throttle the user or require educational measures. The entertainment industry doesn't expect that many people will persist with copyright violations at this point."


Read more: http://techland.time.com/2011/07/08/six-strikes-anti-piracy-measures/#ixzz1RrzG1PBM
 
Companies like Paramount and Warner Brothers already do this with many popular movies. Although your ISP typically sends you more of a "Stop now, or we're cutting off your internet" email, without all the warnings.

I wouldn't worry about Kaplan and similar companies spending money and resources doing this though..
 
Sean1218 said:
Companies like Paramount and Warner Brothers already do this with many popular movies. Although your ISP typically sends you more of a "Stop now, or we're cutting off your internet" email, without all the warnings.
Click to expand...

What ISP do you have? I need to add them to my list of ISPs to never use, ever.
 
macsta said:
I just saw this on Attack of the Show. They are starting to crackdown on illegal downloads. Start downloading your MCAT books and school **** now before they put this system in place. Darn you Digital Millennium Copyright Act!!!!!!

"If a copyright owner complains to an ISP—presumably, based on sniffing out IP addresses through BitTorrent—that service provider sends an online alert such as an e-mail to the subscriber. The alert explains how to secure a wireless network, how to avoid copyright violations in the future and how to lawfully obtain content in the future.

A second alert may follow if illicit file-sharing persists, or the ISP may move on to the next alert.

With the third alert, there will be some kind of mechanism—like a pop-up notice or landing page—to ensure that the subscriber received the message.

Another alert. Same drill as the last one.

On the fifth alert, the ISP may take action, such as temporarily reducing connection speeds or requiring the user to review and respond to educational information on copyright. The ISP may also skip the mitigation measures and just issue another alert.

By the sixth alert, all participating ISPs will either throttle the user or require educational measures. The entertainment industry doesn't expect that many people will persist with copyright violations at this point."


Read more: http://techland.time.com/2011/07/08/six-strikes-anti-piracy-measures/#ixzz1RrzG1PBM
Click to expand...

First bold - They haven't started cracking down...they've been doing that forever. My internet got shutdown in 2004 for kazaa'ing Team America. Also got a warning from my ISP in college for torrenting Gran Torino in 2009.

Second bold - it seems to only apply to torrents or from centralized programs (kazaa, limewire, utorrent, etc.) from what I understand. That's why I only download from sites like megaupload, fileserve, hotfile, library.nu etc now...and then quickly move the file out of my designated download folder. Both times I got caught torrenting/kazaa'ing was because I was lazy and left the file in the download folder and let it seed 👎
 
haha this is nothing new...and SIX warnings?? Why do we have to be afraid if on the SIXTH warning, they *might* threaten us with some educational measures? 😛
 
Use Tor, the world's #1 anonymizing system. And 100% free, 99.9% simple to use. No one will ever find out who you are, not even the Chinese government. This excludes our own CIA boys of course, because they're the ones who set up the whole thing

http://www.torproject.org/
 
Yeah sorry man but this isn't new news. I got tagged by the ISP (Comcast) at my school a couple years ago for movies. Started using PeerBlock after that but really the trick is to not download anything too new. They only really seem to track movies (which is basically the only thing being tracked now after the RIAA said they weren't following up on any lawsuits anymore) that are really new/pre-release.
 
1. Get behind 7 proxies
2. Download as many torrents as you want
3. ???
4. Profit!

Problem, ISP?
 
calvnandhobbs68 said:
Yeah sorry man but this isn't new news. I got tagged by the ISP (Comcast) at my school a couple years ago for movies. Started using PeerBlock after that but really the trick is to not download anything too new. They only really seem to track movies (which is basically the only thing being tracked now after the RIAA said they weren't following up on any lawsuits anymore) that are really new/pre-release.
Click to expand...

This.

Stop downloading movies that were just released to theaters or DVD. They only have so many resources, so most gets thrown at people pirating current media.
 
MSU2009 said:
This.

Stop downloading movies that were just released to theaters or DVD. They only have so many resources, so most gets thrown at people pirating current media.
Click to expand...

Comcast (voluntarily) sent me stern emails telling me to delete the HD movies I had downloaded off Vuze. However, now they are legally obligated to do so. I was just thinking that this might be the start of some tougher regulations.

flatearth22 said:
That's why I only download from sites like megaupload, fileserve, hotfile, library.nu etc now...and then quickly move the file out of my designated download folder. Both times I got caught torrenting/kazaa'ing was because I was lazy and left the file in the download folder and let it seed 👎
Click to expand...

I use megaupload, fileserve... for smaller files. However, HD movies are 4GB+. Bittorents are MUCH faster.
 
NickNaylor said:
How about just pay for things? 😕
Click to expand...

I actually do pay for things that are worth it. New bands, good movies, and useful textbooks. That being said, I'm not going to shell out 150 bucks for a "new edition" of a textbook because my prof is in bed with textbook publishers.
 
macsta said:
I actually do pay for things that are worth it. New bands, good movies, and useful textbooks. That being said, I'm not going to shell out 150 bucks for a "new edition" of a textbook because my prof is in bed with textbook publishers.
Click to expand...

Rationalize theft however you must.
 
macsta said:
Comcast (voluntarily) sent me stern emails telling me to delete the HD movies I had downloaded off Vuze. However, now they are legally obligated to do so. I was just thinking that this might be the start of some tougher regulations.



I use megaupload, fileserve... for smaller files. However, HD movies are 4GB+. Bittorents are MUCH faster.
Click to expand...


Yeah....never been a fan of downloading HD movies. Give me a regular or even cam version that's 1/10 of the size.
 
macsta said:
I actually do pay for things that are worth it. New bands, good movies, and useful textbooks. That being said, I'm not going to shell out 150 bucks for a "new edition" of a textbook because my prof is in bed with textbook publishers.
Click to expand...

How/where do you search for a freely downloadable textbook?
 
NickNaylor said:
Ah, of course. I forgot that we all think things should be free and it's our right to steal them as long as we don't make our living off of them.
Click to expand...

Kind of like how many people view medical care?

That makes me sad thinking about it.
 
NickNaylor said:
Rationalize theft however you must.
Click to expand...

Okay. Theft, traditionally, was stealing so that you take something and somebody else loses something. In piracy, you're gaining something at the cost to noone (except the people who made whatever you're pirating, in which case this is the "morally gray" zone... but musicians/actors have been at the bottom of the socioeconomic ladder for quite some time until the advent modern media. For them to accept technology (like modern media) that turns them into millionaires and reject technology that takes any money away from them is selfish and unrealistic.)
 
The use of the word "theft" to describe copyright infringement has no historical or moral basis. It is a propaganda move by intellectual property rights holders.

That doesn't make copyright infringement right, mind you, but it is not theft to download a book or movie.


Copyright does not protect a natural right like private property. It creates an important additional incentive to create original content. Intellectual property rights are a pragmatic measure, and nothing more.
 
Gnomes said:
The use of the word "theft" to describe copyright infringement has no historical or moral basis. It is a propaganda move by intellectual property rights holders.

That doesn't make copyright infringement right, mind you, but it is not theft to download a book or movie.


Copyright does not protect a natural right like private property. It creates an important additional incentive to create original content. Intellectual property rights are a pragmatic measure, and nothing more.
Click to expand...


This.

lol at equating torrenting movies to stealing a pair of shoes
 
daymann said:
Okay. Theft, traditionally, was stealing so that you take something and somebody else loses something. In piracy, you're gaining something at the cost to noone (except the people who made whatever you're pirating, in which case this is the "morally gray" zone... but musicians/actors have been at the bottom of the socioeconomic ladder for quite some time until the advent modern media. For them to accept technology (like modern media) that turns them into millionaires and reject technology that takes any money away from them is selfish and unrealistic.)
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I understand: how is taking away the source of income - movie/music sales - for entire industries which employ MANY people, the majority of whom aren't the super rich artists, not theft?

Gnomes: no you're not physically stealing anything via pirating, but you're depriving people of their incomes via sales of a product or providing a service, which is the end result of traditional theft. The two aren't distinguishable to the people that work in the industry. Why is it wrong to steal from a shop owner that makes his living from selling physical objects while it's acceptable to steal from an industry that thrives off of selling digital products? Even more, I'm assuming you would think stealing a physical painting from an artist's workshop would be wrong. What's the difference other than the format of the stolen good?
 
macsta said:
I just saw this on Attack of the Show. They are starting to crackdown on illegal downloads. Start downloading your MCAT books and school **** now before they put this system in place. Darn you Digital Millennium Copyright Act!!!!!!

"If a copyright owner complains to an ISP—presumably, based on sniffing out IP addresses through BitTorrent—that service provider sends an online alert such as an e-mail to the subscriber. The alert explains how to secure a wireless network, how to avoid copyright violations in the future and how to lawfully obtain content in the future.

A second alert may follow if illicit file-sharing persists, or the ISP may move on to the next alert.

With the third alert, there will be some kind of mechanism—like a pop-up notice or landing page—to ensure that the subscriber received the message.

Another alert. Same drill as the last one.

On the fifth alert, the ISP may take action, such as temporarily reducing connection speeds or requiring the user to review and respond to educational information on copyright. The ISP may also skip the mitigation measures and just issue another alert.

By the sixth alert, all participating ISPs will either throttle the user or require educational measures. The entertainment industry doesn't expect that many people will persist with copyright violations at this point."


Read more: http://techland.time.com/2011/07/08/six-strikes-anti-piracy-measures/#ixzz1RrzG1PBM
Click to expand...

Afraid of having slower speeds and face EDUCATION? Oh heavens to Betsy!
 
My friend downloaded Social Network, burned it to a DVD, and then I stole the DVD from his house... Is this theft?

Uh oh forgot to set proxies oh shi---
 
dbeast said:
My friend downloaded Social Network, burned it to a DVD, and then I stole the DVD from his house... Is this theft?

Uh oh forgot to set proxies oh shi---
Click to expand...

Reminds me of the drug dealer that called the police to report that his drugs had been stolen.
 
NickNaylor said:
Reminds me of the drug dealer that called the police to report that his drugs had been stolen.
Click to expand...

Ah, you heard about that one too... I really need to get my act together. :smack:
 
steel88 said:
Theft is taking the original. We are just copying things.
Click to expand...

But your actions have an absolutely positive harm on an industry that supports many, many people - you do realize that, right? For every file "copied," you're effectively stealing the selling price of that piece from a company. You're completely ignoring that aspect of the behavior.
 
steel88 said:
Theft is taking the original. We are just copying things.
Click to expand...
Doesn't necessarily make it right. Stealing a copy of an exam prior to taking one is bad, so is copying the answers off someone during the exam.

Don't try to justify your actions with nonsense.
 
NickNaylor said:
But your actions have an absolutely positive harm on an industry that supports many, many people - you do realize that, right? For every file "copied," you're effectively stealing the selling price of that piece from a company. You're completely ignoring that aspect of the behavior.
Click to expand...

You're implying that people who pirate would otherwise buy the material legitimately. def. not the case.
 
flatearth22 said:
You're implying that people who pirate would otherwise buy the material legitimately. def. not the case.
Click to expand...

Ah, I get it. So you can only pirate bad movies that you wouldn't rent or buy anyways. I've been hoping for a reason to see White Chicks! 😀😀😀😀
 
flatearth, I'm assuming you were responding to me. You do realize I can't read your posts, right?

Your point still doesn't legitimize pirating. You're basically saying that the guy who walks into the convenience store to steal a Twinkie wouldn't eat the Twinkie if he had to pay for it. What does that have to do with whether or not pirating/theft is right or wrong?
 
NickNaylor said:
For every file "copied," you're effectively stealing the selling price of that piece from a company.
Click to expand...

Without claiming that copyright infringement is a morally acceptable act under most circumstances, I disagree with you. People will take a lot more of something when it's free than when they have to pay for it. That's economics.

That's actually the key fallacy here. Speaking consequentially (not legally - in no case is it legally theft) your claim is only true if you would have bought it, and instead made an illegal copy.

It really irks me, because this fallacy is where the RIAA and other jack-booted thugs get their absurdly over-inflated figures for the cost of copyright infringement. The "sales figures" at a price of FREE are a lot different than at 99 cents a track (or twenty dollars an album, or whatever.)
 
Gnomes said:
No, people will take a lot more of something when it's free than when they have to pay for it - a very fundamental principle of economics!

That's actually the key fallacy here. Speaking consequentially (not legally - in no case is it legally theft) your claim is only true if you would have bought it, and instead made an illegal copy.

It really irks me, because this fallacy is where the RIAA and other jack-booted thugs get their absurdly over-inflated figures for the cost of copyright infringement. The "sales figures" at a price of FREE are a lot different than at 99 cents a track (or twenty dollars an album, or whatever.)
Click to expand...

...this is utterly stupid. If you were to apply this to the case of a physical object (say, the Twinkie I used in my above post), your argument would be absurd. Well no **** people would take a lot more of something if it's free. I'm sure people would be taking a lot more free cars if they could steal them off of dealer lots, too.

The real problem is that people don't have the ability to "copy" a physical object or service - be it a Twinkie, a car, a painting, health care, whatever - and so it makes sense that they should have to pay for it. Copying digital media, on the other hand, is extremely simple, so of course people attempt to rationalize doing so, even though it really is no different than theft with respect to the end result. I see you conveniently ignored my earlier post.
 
NickNaylor said:
flatearth, I'm assuming you were responding to me. You do realize I can't read your posts, right?

Your point still doesn't legitimize pirating. You're basically saying that the guy who walks into the convenience store to steal a Twinkie wouldn't eat the Twinkie if he had to pay for it. What does that have to do with whether or not pirating/theft is right or wrong?
Click to expand...

and yet you continue to respond to my posts :meanie:

and the twinkie example is faulty reasoning....the twinkie he stole could have been purchased by someone else. me pirating a movie doesn't prevent anyone else from paying to watch it.
 
NickNaylor, you can argue your point all you want, but it's still gonna happen so what's the point wasting time writing a big paragraph?
 
NickNaylor said:
But your actions have an absolutely positive harm on an industry that supports many, many people - you do realize that, right? For every file "copied," you're effectively stealing the selling price of that piece from a company. You're completely ignoring that aspect of the behavior.
Click to expand...

That's assuming we were gonna buy it if we didn't download it.

And sorry, the only reason I dance to Lady Gaga in my bathroom mirror is because it's free. I wouldn't pay for that junk, are you kidding me??
 
Gnomes said:
"If movies were physical objects, your argument would be absurd."

I agree. Keep in mind that, logically, if goats were made of plutonium, you would be a Martian.

Movies/songs/etc are not physical objects.
Click to expand...

Cool story, bro. Pointing out logical fallacies but not addressing the fundamental points I raised. I like your style.

calvnandhobbs68 said:
Yeah I don't even try to justify it.

In the words of Nike: Just do it.
Click to expand...

This is a man I respect. ****, at least he doesn't justify it.
 
flatearth22 said:
You're implying that people who pirate would otherwise buy the material legitimately. def. not the case.
Click to expand...

This. Ninety percent of the junk I download won't get watched or listened to more than once. If it's something I'll use regularly then I buy it but if I couldn't download then I'd still be broke.

The way I see it, they're making money because I wouldn't be throwing down twenties for movies I might like.
 
LargeFarva said:
This. Ninety percent of the junk I download won't get watched or listened to more than once. If it's something I'll use regularly then I buy it but if I couldn't download then I'd still be broke.

The way I see it, they're making money because I wouldn't be throwing down twenties for movies I might like.
Click to expand...

Horrible argument. You're implying that you wouldn't buy stuff you DID like because you would spend it on stuff you DIDN'T like. What would they care? They got your money anyway and would make the same money regardless.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

E
Afraid my secondaries "sound like" AI even though I did not use AI.
Replies
12
Views
1K
premedbarista
premedbarista
B
Can chaperoning be considered shadowing?
Replies
2
Views
111
Catalystik
Catalystik
M
Will I be ready?
Replies
5
Views
639
candbgirl
C
lucidheart
Could this be seen as voluntourism?
Replies
5
Views
781
chilly_md
chilly_md
SirHelpMe
Would this be disadvantaged?
Replies
9
Views
672
Stuaccount
S
Top