if the creative industries could find a way of charging you for "thinking" of their content, they would

luckily they are drug fuelled idiots, and spend the majority of their working day nose deep in Columbian marching powder so lack the ultimate drive -- unluckily, it is easier for them to let the US government do it via SOPA


but tbf Apple try quite hard

 

kim shmitz looks a **** btw

 

This video is really good and explains what is actually going on with PIPA/SOPA.

Why SOPA is Bad

 

The Americans are a bunch of f*cking tools these days. Their country's going to the dogs anyway (this is just another symptom of their disease), so f*ck them.

 

good link -- thanks :-)

 

Anyone watched any early Disney movies, all stolen ideas but because they were made in Hollywood who at the time weren't covered by copyright laws they were turned into one of the worlds biggest companys who now complain about people taking there ideas.

 

 

legend has it that Bill Gates wrote the early iterations of DOS on "stolen" university computing resource

 

I thought Gates just knicked the code off IBM ?

 

Was going to say I thought DOS was pinched by Gates.

Nice cars - house wasn't bad either. Oddly I've neve heard of megaupload.

 

If I did say that which I didn't why should I have to protect it any further than claiming copyright on it anyway?

The trouble with the Internet is it has produced a generation who think nothing of stealing someone else's hard work and convincing themselves they are not thieves (which they are) by saying things like 'well I wouldn't have bought t anyway'.

You seem to have this notion that it should be up to me to 'protect' all my content as otherwise it is my fault if it is stolen... that is exactly the mentality that has caused this problem and why things like SOPA are being proposed!

If someone steals something I have created it is them who are to blame, not me!

Finally for your information I have brought three DMCA cases against individuals all of whom stole my work via having access to the software from behind its protection... i.e. an inside job if you like, two of whom then put it on web forums for free distributon. It didn't work as I had protection in it to stop it being run on non registered machines, but it was the fact they thought it was perfectly OK to do this that boiled my p1ss! Two of them actually seemed put out that I should pursue them.... *****!!!!! The third never responded and nor did the server company on which the software was sitting.... short of spending a lot of money to pursue it further in the US I had to leave it there.... that is why SOPA is rearing its head.

As for protection put yourself in the shoes of someone like a photographer or videographer ... if it can be displayed on a screen it can be captured and there is no protection that can prevent that!

 

yes quite right Bioforger, although a little more complicated than that -- IBM had no operating system, Gates's triumph was to convince IBM to allow him (microsoft) rights over DOS (MS) -- remember PC-DOS, the IBM variant!!! went nowhere -- and IBM tried OS2 which dive bombed

anyway my point was -- to coin Mario Puzo's introduction to the Godfather

"behind every fortune is a crime"

some say Gates developed his skills on "stolen" computer time

 

What you describe is clearly a case of theft. But the act of copying something already in the public domain is not theft in itself, in my opinion. The internet has opened up a practical nightmare for the law. If a person will only hand over an intellectual design under agreement for the exchange of property - i.e. cash - and on the condition that the buyer doesn't pass it that content to others, then how do you go about enforcing this contract once the content is spreading into the hands of millions

 

That is an excellent link; thanks for sharing.......as long as you're not making money off it, obviously

 

Bloody phone and its inability to edit something posted prematurely.

Anyway, I was just going on to ask whether each and every person who subsequently copied it should be then considered as having committed theft, or whether that lies with the people who originally breached the conract by sharing content they purchased. Like I said, a practical nightmare.

 

The problem with SOPA/PIPA is that they don't go after me for posting that link. They go after Scoobynet for allowing me to post it. The problem with this is that I'm just one guy with little to gain/lose by posting it. Scoobynet on the other hand either:

a) get shut down
b) expend massive resources micro-managing and policing their site to ensure no users breach copyright in anyway.

At least, this is my understanding of things. The result is that Scoobynet et al become unsustainable. More importantly, they struggle to get off the ground as, at one time, Scoobynet was a small project with, presumably, little or no capital behind it. How could such a site ever get off the ground with such a massive burden from day 1?

 

spot on.

 

That's not a simple question to answer. In my eyes with my software I guess people could be 'forgiven' for downloading it as it wasn't obvious to them it was copyrighted when they did so.

However, if you see a copy of a current cinema release movie on a torrent site you would have to be monumentally stupid not to know it was subject to copyrght and in that case I think you're guilty of theft when you download it!

 

Filesonic taking the money and running now. No more uploads.

http://www.filesonic.com/

 

So by default is it now against the law to host files for sharing in case some are copyrighted ? Does this then extend to nightclubs becoming illegal becasue people may take drugs in them ? Sports car manufacturers being arrested for making cars that most people will use to break the speed limit ? SUrely google is now in the firing line seeing as how many people use it for searching for pornography that would be illegal in this country and many others ? If this is what the world is headed for it is time for people to stop complaining and do somthing about it.

 

Oh come on. Megaupload and Filesonic are used 99% of the time for piracy, why would anyone use a service so heavily funded by advertising for anything business like. Try Dropbox.

 

Spot on!

 

1. what is your basis for the 99% figure ? I have never used either but you are missing the point but I gues you are one of those who does not value your freedom ? Being an apple fan I suppose you are used to being told what to do

 

*geek mode on*
Actually PC-DOS is based on 86-DOS which Microsoft bought the rights to from Seatle Computer Products for $50k which Microsoft then licensed to IBM as PC-DOS. Bill didn't "steal" the OS from IBM since IBM had no OS to for it's PC. IBM initially went to Digital Research for their OS but there were disagreements between IBM and DR with regards to licensing, royalties and distribution rights. Microsoft retained the copyright when they sold PC-DOS to IBM and that allowed them to sell MS-DOS to all the IBM clone makers raking in squidillions of dollars and the rest as they say is history...*geek mode off*

 

While I agree that MU is used for illegal sharing, if SOPA/PIPA become law, then it is going to be a watershed moment in the life of the internet. Basically it will be fvcked.

I wonder if sites removed from the DNS lookup will be indexed by other sites & still continue to operate in other countries? I suppose the amount of control the US has over the net will make that a non issue.

Even if these laws are defeated I expect they will be revised & re-worded but expect bad things to happen soon.

 

I value my freedom, but don't see what closing down a site that absolutely could not run without hosting pirated files has to do with that. Perhaps if you knew something about these sites you'd be in a better place to comment.

My freedom has nothing to do with stealing.

 

SOPA and PIPA were never going to be passed. And blocking sites via DNS is a joke.

 

Definitely, but I don't think anything will get through in the states where the burden of proof is on the host to prove that there is nothing that infringes copyright on their site as a) It's unworkable/unenforceable b) It's against the rule of law

That won't stop them trying though - we need to remain on our toes!

 

But either way users are the ones distributing and recieving stolen content so users should be targeted. It may easier to go after the website owners but the users are stealing content not the websites themselves. You still have not explained why you think 99% of their content is pirated , do you have evidence for this ? Also given the amount of copyrighted content on youtube, and the amount of illegal **** accessed on google why are google not shut down ?

 

Have you ever tried to enforce a DMCA complaint against these thieving scum?