US ISPs become 'copyright cops' starting July 12

[pcgame]

......

[pcgame]

......

[satchelmcqueen]

bump. yep, the riaa has bought the isp as their very own police.

[kcchiefs6465]

Not as computer saavy as some so I suppose I'll ask. Won't the standard ISP blocker/hider still work? I have had Trident lurking around my computer for a few years now. Peerblock works wonders.

[easycougar]

Not as computer saavy as some so I suppose I'll ask. Won't the standard ISP blocker/hider still work? I have had Trident lurking around my computer for a few years now. Peerblock works wonders.

Since your ISP is the one providing your public IP address and doing your routing to the internet, they can identify your destination addresses (websites) regardless of whatever port blocking software you have on your machine.

Huge KC Chiefs fan here btw :)

[HOLLYWOOD]

Check your routers for IPs with traceroute, to see if you have these clowns tracking you .

hXXps://www.markmonitor.com/services/antipiracy.php


MarkMonitor Sets New Standard in Brand Protection with Site ... in taking down fraudulent sites by working with more than 4200 ISPs and 1200...MarkMonitor has listed DtecNet as one of its partners for some time now ... While DtecNet monitored P2P networks, blogs, Usenet and streaming services, MarkMonitor .... “In the coming weeks, we look forward to working with Chairman

[DamianTV]

Corporate Cops.

This is what happens when you privatize your Police Force.

[DerailingDaTrain]

I laughed when I saw this because of how stupid they are. It won't work lol

[Warrior_of_Freedom]

I laughed when I saw this because of how stupid they are. It won't work lol
Yeah, unless they want to lose money.

Protip: This is why people stop buying your shitty music. I haven't bought a CD in 8 years, or even downloaded music. It's all shit!

[The Gold Standard]

Corporate Cops.

This is what happens when you privatize your Police Force.

What exactly is privatized about companies doing the government's bidding?

[TheGrinch]

What exactly is privatized about companies doing the government's bidding?
Doing the government's bidding? Quite the opposite that they're self-regulating....

The issue with things like SOPA is that it doesn't require due process and provides a precedent for them to shut down other "threats"... If you don't want that, then the first necessary step is to not give them the ammo of using "piracy" to do so... I mean, I'm not really sure how people can be for piracy and be in favor of a free market... How would you like it if you spent thousands to millions just for people to rip off your work for free?

So if they want to eliminate piracy, that's well within the media companies' interests to do so, and actually gives us more ammo to tell the government to f' off with regard to controlling the internet.

Now the media company's handing over data to the government would be where they're doing their bidding... Measures liek this actually help forego them haveing to do the government's bidding to prevent it.

[ZENemy]

Wow, soon we will have to live in CLEAR houses with no front door to make sure we are not letting our family members listen to our CD's...

Gotta install sound proof stuff in all rooms so nobody can hear or watch a movie they did not buy!

[jbauer]

Can't you just sign up for an VPN connection through hidemyass.com or other? Each time they do this some kid in their moms basment comes up with a solution. This time will be no different.

[TheGrinch]

Wow, soon we will have to live in CLEAR houses with no front door to make sure we are not letting our family members listen to our CD's...

Gotta install sound proof stuff in all rooms so nobody can hear or watch a movie they did not buy!
Surely you can realize the difference between the government doing something like that, and companies protecting their products from being given away for free... I'd suspect that if you were in the entertainment business, that you would not be happy to have to go out of business because some people decided that they could just pass around and even sell themselves products you spent thousands if not millions to produce.

A free market also implies protection from having your property stolen and exploited for someone else's gain.

Further, we should all be happy when companies self-regulate themselves rather than give the government more unnecessary power for them to use as precedents to seize more power.

[ZENemy]

Surely you can realize the difference between the government doing something like that, and companies protecting their products from being given away for free... I'd suspect that if you were in the entertainment business, that you would not be happy to have to go out of business because some people decided that they could just pass around and even sell themselves products you spent thousands if not millions to produce.

A free market also implies protection from having your property stolen and exploited for someone else's gain.

Further, we should all be happy when companies self-regulate themselves rather than give the government more unnecessary power for them to use as precedents to seize more power.

Sure I can realize the difference. I dont share movies, I dont buy movies or go and see the movies. I do work in IT, I know what they are doing to get this data and how they are getting this data.

[torchbearer]

btguard.com
it works. offers full vpn service.

[dannno]

Ok, so if you live in a house with 5 roommates who all share the same internet connection, and your name is on the account, you now have to "police" all of your roommate's internet usage otherwise your service gets hit with the warning in your name.

Now, I recall ISPs sending out these warnings as early as 2004. That is 8 fucking years ago.

How close do all the warnings have to be together?

[HOLLYWOOD]

Wow, soon we will have to live in CLEAR houses with no front door to make sure we are not letting our family members listen to our CD's...

Gotta install sound proof stuff in all rooms so nobody can hear or watch a movie they did not buy!Backscatter Z now installed in trucks(used around Washington DC metro testing) and then on helicopters/planes above... only a matter of time when it's on the 30,000 drones flying over the US.

[soulcyon]

Time to start boycotting ISPs

*gnoz*

[pcgame]

........

[silverhandorder]

Best thing that could have happened to us honestly. If it is a private effort that means they were not strong enough to force the cops to do it. I would much rather fight with private corps with limited resources and sword of profits hanging over them.

What type of tracking is available to them? Is there any way to counter it?

[silverhandorder]

Surely you can realize the difference between the government doing something like that, and companies protecting their products from being given away for free... I'd suspect that if you were in the entertainment business, that you would not be happy to have to go out of business because some people decided that they could just pass around and even sell themselves products you spent thousands if not millions to produce.

A free market also implies protection from having your property stolen and exploited for someone else's gain.

Further, we should all be happy when companies self-regulate themselves rather than give the government more unnecessary power for them to use as precedents to seize more power.

I don't care about people trying to make a business on a faulty model. Sure a mafia boss would also be upset if all of a sudden cops showed up and shut down his business. Should we feel bad for him or care about him?

IP is not property.

[Stallheim]

Is there a broadband alternative or a good workaround?
Please point me to a source if you would rather.
-Ethan

[ZENemy]

https://btguard.com/

Read up on the VPN option. This is a pretty viable solution.

[TheGrinch]

I don't care about people trying to make a business on a faulty model. Sure a mafia boss would also be upset if all of a sudden cops showed up and shut down his business. Should we feel bad for him or care about him?

IP is not property.
The bolded jsut makes an argument why those pirating other's work should accept the consequences for trying to use someone else's intellectual property for their own gain.

You have a choice not to associate with an ISP if they're going to far, but I don't understand the argument that just because the internet's ability to share information has made their business "faulty" through no fault of their own, that it somehow makes it right to rip the works that others might have devoted all of their time and resources into. Intellectual property is still property.

If I make a movie to sell even just to break even, I do not deserve for you to feel it's your right to take it for free and take money out of my pocket.

Further, as is argued here all the time, businesses have the right to protect themselves. It's when they use the government to grant them special priveledges that they're going to far. They have every right to self-regulate and ensure that they're not supporting piracy that could stand to bankrupt the entertainment they provide.

[silverhandorder]

The bolded jsut makes an argument why those pirating other's work should accept the consequences for trying to use someone else's intellectual property for their own gain.

You have a choice not to associate with an ISP if they're going to far, but I don't understand the argument that just because the internet's ability to share information has made their business "faulty" through no fault of their own, that it somehow makes it right to rip the works that others might have devoted all of their time and resources into. Intellectual property is still property.

If I make a movie to sell even just to break even, I do not deserve for you to feel it's your right to take it for free and take money out of my pocket.

Further, as is argued here all the time, businesses have the right to protect themselves. It's when they use the government to grant them special priveledges that they're going to far. They have every right to self-regulate and ensure that they're not supporting piracy that could stand to bankrupt the entertainment they provide.

Let's say your business was in trading secrets. And all of a sudden people found out where you get your secrets. So instead of going to you they now go and get the secrets them selves. Are you entitled to compensation?

How about the dudes that used to bring ice to your home? Are they entitled to work protection? After all just because fridges were invented why should they be out of work? Internet lowered the cost of copying IP to zero. IP holders are not happy and want to artificially raise the cost so they keep getting income. Sorry but that is mafia model.

[Lishy]

I'm not a "pirate", but this sounds messed up. They better not shut down sites like mediafire, cuz' I need those things for my own purposes!

Although I highly doubt they will go after things worth actually downloading (Doujin music, visual novels, Touhou, etc...). Rather I believe they will just prevent downloads to a bunch of shit we don't give a shit about (Justin Bieber, Twilight, etc...)

Although I really hope textbook downloads remain. Some university books are worth $600 dollars! I don't care what anyone says! Those arrogant, monopolizing bastards DESERVE every pirate of their books they get, because with the internet, knowledge is meant to be shared, not sold! No shitty piece of paper should be worth so much money, and I welcome textbook piracy both for the sake of students everywhere, and the freedom of knowledge!

The same people who charge us these insane prices for textbooks have the nerve to complain to the government how students cannot afford higher eduction!? Well, guess what? Fuck you! Just give me my degree!

[jbauer]

How dare you try and steal a $600 book that your teacher says you don't need on the first day of class after you were required to buy it. (but the school gets a kickback for using them as a provider)

[ProIndividual]

Corporate Cops.

This is what happens when you privatize your Police Force.

Actually privatizing the police would be good, because we could choose which comapnies to get service from. If one service provider is too strict, no one will go to them. Unfortunately, w/o private law (a maintained monopoly on law), the companies bascially have a statist gun to their head as to how strict they have to be. If law and police were private, then people could sign up for law providers and service providers, and the service providers would only have to jive with your specific, alreay agreed to, contractual dispute resolution and law providing agreement.

This isn't a case of privatizing police. This is a case of the police holding a gun to the heads or companies to make them do their job for them at their own expense.

[heavenlyboy34]

Corporate Cops.

This is what happens when you quasi-privatize your Police Force.
fixed.

[heavenlyboy34]

I'm not a "pirate", but this sounds messed up. They better not shut down sites like mediafire, cuz' I need those things for my own purposes!

Although I highly doubt they will go after things worth actually downloading (Doujin music, visual novels, Touhou, etc...). Rather I believe they will just prevent downloads to a bunch of shit we don't give a shit about (Justin Bieber, Twilight, etc...)

Although I really hope textbook downloads remain. Some university books are worth $600 dollars! I don't care what anyone says! Those arrogant, monopolizing bastards DESERVE every pirate of their books they get, because with the internet, knowledge is meant to be shared, not sold! No shitty piece of paper should be worth so much money, and I welcome textbook piracy both for the sake of students everywhere, and the freedom of knowledge!

The same people who charge us these insane prices for textbooks have the nerve to complain to the government how students cannot afford higher eduction!? Well, guess what? Fuck you! Just give me my degree!
Indeed. This kind of backward thinking is one reason brick and mortar colleges will be dead in a generation or 2.

[TheGrinch]

This is a case of the police holding a gun to the heads or companies to make them do their job for them at their own expense.
Umm, no this is not the case of police forcing them to do anything... Where does it even imply that?

This is case of companies policing themselves by eliminating piracy that doesn't stand in their interests (they are in the media and entertainment delivery business afterall). So these companies deciding to self-regulate rather than the government forcing them to is exactly what you will see in a free-market...

Things like SOPA and the like is what you're talking about, whereas measures like this (should be) the alternative. It's the free-market that wants piracy gone, and that's why they're taking measures here, rather than giving the feds more reason to take control of it...

If this meant that there was no need or desire for SOPA, I'd be 100% in favor of them protecting their interests and us being allowed to volluntarily decide if we want to do business with those ISPs or not... But of course neither of us is naive enough to think that this will curtail things like SOPA or whatever it is now. Even if it did, they'd still use "cyber-threats" to gain control :rolleyes:

[heavenlyboy34]

Umm, no this is not the case of police forcing them to do anything... Where does it even imply that?

This is case of companies policing themselves by eliminating piracy that doesn't stand in their interests (they are in the media and entertainment delivery business afterall). So these companies deciding to self-regulate rather than the government forcing them to is exactly what you will see in a free-market...

Things like SOPA and the like is what you're talking about, whereas measures like this (should be) the alternative. It's the free-market that wants piracy gone, and that's why they're taking measures here, rather than giving the feds more reason to take control of it...

If this meant that there was no need or desire for SOPA, I'd be 100% in favor of them protecting their interests and us being allowed to volluntarily decide if we want to do business with those ISPs or not... But of course neither of us is naive enough to think that this will curtail things like SOPA or whatever it is now. Even if it did, they'd still use "cyber-threats" to gain control :rolleyes:
No. People who believe their content is being "pirated" (:rolleyes: cry me a river) should learn methods of copy-proofing rather than cry to ISPs to use force against others.

[TheGrinch]

No. People who believe their content is being "pirated" (:rolleyes: cry me a river) should learn methods of copy-proofing rather than cry to ISPs to use force against others.
Cry me a river? Look, copyright infriengement doesn't just affect the big businesses you and I don't care about (though it doesn't make their right not have their work stolen any less of a right). It can affect everyone from an individual to small business to big business and it's employees if their work is stolen and reproduced and they don't get any sort of compensation, and can even lose money then, for producing it...

Also, because of technology it is becoming increasingly difficult to stop piracy. Hell, all you need is a good ripping program or a camera and $10 for a movie stub to do so... And becuase no business is in business to give things away for free as they lose money, then you have 2 choices. Either the free-market can work to protect it's intellectual property, or they're going to continue to ask the government to get involved.

Regardless, stealing other people's work, particularly for profit is wrong. It has nothing to do with how you feel about the individuals being stolen from. They're making money legitimately and I don't know how you cna side with people stealing others work over a market having to get (and no, there is no force here. it's a volluntary assocaition to combat piracy for both of their interests) someone to stop from stealing their property.

[silverhandorder]

Cry me a river? Look, copyright infriengement doesn't just affect the big businesses you and I don't care about (though it doesn't make their right not have their work stolen any less of a right). It can affect everyone from an individual to small business to big business and it's employees if their work is stolen and reproduced and they don't get any sort of compensation, and can even lose money then, for producing it...

Also, because of technology it is becoming increasingly difficult to stop piracy. Hell, all you need is a good ripping program or a camera and $10 for a movie stub to do so... And becuase no business is in business to give things away for free as they lose money, then you have 2 choices. Either the free-market can work to protect it's intellectual property, or they're going to continue to ask the government to get involved.

Regardless, stealing other people's work, particularly for profit is wrong. It has nothing to do with how you feel about the individuals being stolen from. They're making money legitimately and I don't know how you cna side with people stealing others work over a market having to get (and no, there is no force here. it's a volluntary assocaition to combat piracy for both of their interests) someone to stop from stealing their property.

You don't have a right to a wage(work). You have a right to property. IP is not property.

[Mini-Me]

The bolded jsut makes an argument why those pirating other's work should accept the consequences for trying to use someone else's intellectual property for their own gain.

You have a choice not to associate with an ISP if they're going to far, but I don't understand the argument that just because the internet's ability to share information has made their business "faulty" through no fault of their own, that it somehow makes it right to rip the works that others might have devoted all of their time and resources into. Intellectual property is still property.

If I make a movie to sell even just to break even, I do not deserve for you to feel it's your right to take it for free and take money out of my pocket.

Further, as is argued here all the time, businesses have the right to protect themselves. It's when they use the government to grant them special priveledges that they're going to far. They have every right to self-regulate and ensure that they're not supporting piracy that could stand to bankrupt the entertainment they provide.

Whether or not you believe in copyrights/patents, please don't use the phrase "intellectual property." It's a propaganda term coined in the 20th century by the copyright lobby to conflate patents, copyrights, and trademarks in the court of public opinion and treat each of them like any of the others at the most convenient possible times. In reality, the three concepts each have their own distinct history and purpose.

Patents are not property, and neither are copyrights: They are limited-time government-granted monopolies intended to promote progress in the arts and sciences by artificially and coercively maintaining profit motive for easily replicated works. However, they are not property or an individualist construct; they're a collectivist construct, and they're not natural to the market but alien to it. The difficulty of enforcing them (and the typical drive to create a police state to do so) should be your first hint.

Physical property is property, and "intellectual property" ironically infringes upon people's right to do what they want with their physical property, for the benefit of the "greater good." Copyrights and patents function by coercively protecting a monopoly supplier and maintaining their desired cost-based price levels (Marxist labor theory of value) through artificial scarcity, but that's not how the market works...in a free market, competition/imitation/reproduction/etc. is intrinsic, and buyers determine the legitimate value of any good or service without respect to initial production cost. techdirt (http://www.techdirt.com/blog/?tag=fixed+cost) has (http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20061026/102329.shtml) great (http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070118/013310/infinity-is-your-friend-economics.shtml) articles (http://www.techdirt.com/blog/casestudies/articles/20120210/02273417726/how-being-more-open-human-awesome-can-save-anyone-worried-about-making-money-entertainment.shtml) on this (http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070503/012939/grand-unified-theory-economics-free.shtml) subject (http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080306/003240458/if-intellectual-property-is-neither-intellectual-property-what-is-it.shtml). You can believe in the virtues of copyrights and patents if you want, and I agree that very limited-time copyrights and patents have their benefits in the utilitarian sense...but they're ultimately unnecessary IMO, and unlimited "intellectual property" is absolutely destructive to freedom, market size and profitability (ironically), and even art and science (by hampering derivative works and risking destruction of culture...do you know how many thousands of old films cannot be legally archived in a secure/multiple-copy manner before the media decays, because the copyright holders are nowhere to be found?). I'm not really here to make the argument against limited-time copyrights/patents (there is one, and it's been the subject of more than one libertarian book), but at least don't swallow and peddle the copyright lobby's bullshit rhetoric.

Trademarks are a little more interesting in the property sense, because others using them can constitute fraud or plagiarism...but in the general case, no, "intellectual property" doesn't exist as anything other than a government construct.

[torchbearer]

https://btguard.com/

Read up on the VPN option. This is a pretty viable solution.

sign up here and no worries.
been using their service for a year now and am very happy.

[paulbot24]

I'm not a "pirate", but this sounds messed up. They better not shut down sites like mediafire, cuz' I need those things for my own purposes!

Although I highly doubt they will go after things worth actually downloading (Doujin music, visual novels, Touhou, etc...). Rather I believe they will just prevent downloads to a bunch of shit we don't give a shit about (Justin Bieber, Twilight, etc...)

Although I really hope textbook downloads remain. Some university books are worth $600 dollars! I don't care what anyone says! Those arrogant, monopolizing bastards DESERVE every pirate of their books they get, because with the internet, knowledge is meant to be shared, not sold! No shitty piece of paper should be worth so much money, and I welcome textbook piracy both for the sake of students everywhere, and the freedom of knowledge!

The same people who charge us these insane prices for textbooks have the nerve to complain to the government how students cannot afford higher eduction!? Well, guess what? Fuck you! Just give me my degree!

I read this out loud to my wife who is finishing up her doctorate in Educational Leadership. She clapped her hands and said "bravo." The prices they get for the textbooks for her program are ridiculous!

[heavenlyboy34]

You don't have a right to a wage(work). You have a right to property. IP is not property.
This^^ the Grinch's arguments have no basis in objective reality or morality. They are also anti-economic (especially in regards to misunderstanding supply vs demand...ideas are super abundant and have zero value in the real world. We have hashed this out in another thread around here somewhere quite thoroughly.)

[TheGrinch]

This^^ the Grinch's arguments have no basis in objective reality or morality. They are also anti-economic (especially in regards to misunderstanding supply vs demand...ideas are super abundant and have zero value in the real world. We have hashed this out in another thread around here somewhere quite thoroughly.)
When I say "intellectual property" in this thread, I'm not referring about things that are a grey area at best like patents. I simply mean tangible media and the right to copyright it and say "no, I produced that, and I don't give you my permission to reuse/plagiarize it, particularly not for profit". I realize that things like patenting ideas and such can be anti-economic, but this is a different matter, and anti-economic in itself if people from other countries are ripping off our media here and selling them elsewhere. Also, giving it away is equally costful and equally anti-progress if no artists want to spend thousands to make a record, book, movie that gets spread for free.

So please don't make this argument mroe than it is, which is simply the right of those who produce media to not be plagiarized or have their work misrepresented and exploited by someone else.

Just as Mini-me said above, copyrights are really a different matter of essentially theft, misrepresentation, and exploitation of someone else's creative work, and thus, I do not know why I'd lump it in with a larger discussion about "intellectual property". It's copyrights that are in question here, and it's clear that those infringed upon and had money stolen out of their pockets are well within their right to self -regulate with other companies involved in facilitating it, if not even compensation with a lawsuit, or at very least an order to cease and desist.

Put simply, creative works are far different than ideas that can be easily duplicated and original, and as a videographer myself, I hope you can see the difference in expectations of protecting property that became mine when I made it.

[Mini-Me]

Just as Mini-me said above, copyrights are really a different matter of essentially theft, misrepresentation, and exploitation of someone else's creative work, and thus, I do not know why I'd lump it in with a larger discussion about "intellectual property". It's copyrights that are in question here, and it's clear that those infringed upon and had money stolen out of their pockets are well within their right to self -regulate with other companies involved in facilitating it, if not even compensation with a lawsuit, or at very least an order to cease and desist.

Whoooa. I'm glad you're agreeing to narrow the focus to copyrights from "intellectual property," but I think you might be misunderstanding/misrepresenting what I said a bit...quite a bit. ;)

[QWDC]

I think the final solution to the piracy problem this will be mandatory online activation for every single product, EVERY time you open said application. They already do that with some software I use for school. That way you can let them pirate the product if they want, but they can't use it. Or, by the time they crack so they can use it a new version will already be available.

[TheGrinch]

Whoooa. I'm glad you're agreeing to narrow the focus to copyrights from "intellectual property," but I think you might be misunderstanding/misrepresenting what I said a bit...quite a bit. ;)
I'm narrowing down the focus to copyrights because that is the only thing relevant to this thread: piracy of copyrights... My apologies for reducing "intellectual property" to that when it's clearly more complex (and I agree only making things worse), but no, I understand what you're saying, it's just not relevant to the discussion. Enforcement of copyrights (particularly if self-regulated and not forced by government) is what is relevant and justified here.

Yes, ideas are not original, but original works are, so like I said, it is irrelevant to try to treat the two as the same thing. Copyrights are the only thing relevant to piracy, thus it makes sense to leave it to a discussion of that.

[heavenlyboy34]

I'm narrowing down the focus to copyrights because that is the only thing relevant to this thread: piracy of copyrights... My apologies for reducing "intellectual property" to that when it's clearly more complex (and I agree only making things worse), but no, I understand what you're saying, it's just not relevant to the discussion. Enforcement of copyrights (particularly if self-regulated and not forced by government) is what is relevant and justified here.

Yes, ideas are not original, but original works are, so like I said, it is irrelevant to try to treat the two as the same thing. Copyrights are the only thing relevant to piracy, thus it makes sense to leave it to a discussion of that.
No work is truly "original". Every work you can name was created by arranging discoveries and ideas of millions of other people throughout history. An idea can only truly be "original" if a person grew up all alone and invented everything himself. Since no man is an island, this is clearly an impossibility. Take a piece of music for example. The 12 tones and their various ranges were first arranged purposefully well before written language or notation in song. Taken to its logical conclusion, the IP proponents would be paying royalties to the estates of millions of dead people every minute.

[Mini-Me]

I'm narrowing down the focus to copyrights because that is the only thing relevant to this thread: piracy of copyrights... My apologies for reducing "intellectual property" to that when it's clearly more complex (and I agree only making things worse), but no, I understand what you're saying, it's just not relevant to the discussion. Enforcement of copyrights (particularly if self-regulated and not forced by government) is what is relevant and justified here.

Yes, ideas are not original, but original works are, so like I said, it is irrelevant to try to treat the two as the same thing. Copyrights are the only thing relevant to piracy, thus it makes sense to leave it to a discussion of that.

The arguments I made above about "intellectual property" still apply to copyrights not being property as well though. I'm not sure if you'll ever be convinced that copyrights are not property, and that viewing them as such is counterproductive and antithetical to the free market (it took me a while, especially considering I'm a software engineer type), but I think you could benefit a lot from reading the techdirt articles I linked to, just so you have a fuller understanding of the arguments opposing yours.

[TheGrinch]

The arguments I made above still apply to copyrights as well though. I'm not sure if you'll ever be convinced that copyrights are counterproductive and antithetical to the free market (it took me a while, especially considering I'm a software engineer type), but I think you could benefit a lot from reading the techdirt articles I linked to, just so you have a full understanding of the arguments opposing yours.
Fair enough, I'll check them out when I have some time, but no, do not expect me to easily sway from the notion that the original works I produce are my own property, by virtue of the fact that me and my creative mind produced them. I'm entirely curious how forcing me to put my own works on par with free shareware is somehow good for the economy and not harmful... Considering hte arguments against force frequently used here, I find it highly ironic to force me to give away my creative works for free, potentially to the profit of others, just by virtue of producing them.

Methinks your confusing idealism (the wya things should be), with hte wya things are. If you allowed everything to be given away for free, then it's only exploitative others that will profit from it... And again, my works are my property jsut the same as a bench I might decide to build. Just because the pirating community isn't interested in exploiting and giving away my bench does not make my works any less of my property because they do.

[heavenlyboy34]

Fair enough, I'll check them out when I have some time, but no, do not expect me to easily sway from the notion that the original works I produce are my own property, by virtue of the fact that me and my creative mind produced them. I'm entirely curious how forcing me to put my own works on par with free shareware is somehow good for the economy and not harmful... Considering hte arguments against force frequently used here, I find it highly ironic to force me to give away my creative works for free, potentially to the profit of others, just by virtue of producing them.

Methinks your confusing idealism (the wya things should be), with hte wya things are. If you allowed everything to be given away for free, then it's only exploitative others that will profit from it... And again, my works are my property jsut the same as a bench I might decide to build. Just because the pirating community isn't interested in exploiting and giving away my bench does not make my works any less of my property because they do.
You're confused about the proposition. Noone is saying "give your stuff away". We're saying "don't prohibit people from using their property and minds as they wish".

You're confusing [state] idealism (the state should impose artificial scarcity to benefit "creators"-the way things "ought" to be) with economic reality (ideas are not scarce-IP is a fiction of, by, and for the state-its roots are primarily in British Mercantilism; the way things "are"). IOW, confusing is/ought.

[QueenB4Liberty]

I'm glad I don't download things illegally.

It sucks though. :(

[heavenlyboy34]

I'm glad I don't download things illegally.

It sucks though. :(
Ah, but if the entertainment industry had their way almost everything you download would be illegal. :(

[heavenlyboy34]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IeTybKL1pM4

[Ninja Homer]

I'm glad I don't download things illegally.

It sucks though. :(

Downloading copyrighted material is NOT illegal. Uploading it is illegal, and giving copies to others are illegal, but not receiving copies, although the RIAA and MPAA have done everything within their power to make you think it is.

The way copyright should be is that only the creator of the copyrighted material can use it for profit.

[QueenB4Liberty]

Downloading copyrighted material is NOT illegal. Uploading it is illegal, and giving copies to others are illegal, but not receiving copies, although the RIAA and MPAA have done everything within their power to make you think it is.

The way copyright should be is that only the creator of the copyrighted material can use it for profit.

So when I d/l it's fine, but if I turn around and upload it for it to be d/led then it's a crime? Or another form of sharing?

[TheGrinch]

You're confused about the proposition. Noone is saying "give your stuff away". We're saying "don't prohibit people from using their property and minds as they wish".

Isn't that how it is now? I can choose not to copyright my property and say "hey' sure you can use it". There are plenty of outlets where you can give your works away for free and allow the spread of information, but you as for 'prohibiting people from using my property and minds as they wish", to not do that spits in the face of it being my property. That means it's my choice (permission) if you can take it and plaster it all over the internet for free or worse for profit.

So yes, I can do whatever I want with my property and choose to share it with whom ever I choose. You do not have the same right to take, reproduce and even profit from the works that I created, my property.

Further, this attitude that you can take whatever copyrighted works for free and cost companies millions is only going to embolden them to pass the exact laws we don't want to see. I'd rather the market regulate itslef to eleiminate it, rather then them eliminate more of our fredoms. That's the reality we face if we allow them to use piracy as a precedent for control. If the market doesn't eliminate it, they will continue to lobby for the feds to take control. It's costing them MILLIONS that they've spent millions to produce, and again, it is their property, or further a service like any other that they do not give away for free. Just because people have the ability to steal it here, doesn't make it any more right, and yes, is completely anti-business to assume that their work and property are free for you to use without their permission.

[Ninja Homer]

So when I d/l it's fine, but if I turn around and upload it for it to be d/led then it's a crime? Or another form of sharing?

Correct. But keep in mind that if you get it via torrents or another file sharing protocol, then you are technically sharing it as you download it, so that's copyright infringement and illegal.

[Ninja Homer]

One thing the OP Fox News article doesn't mention is that this was coordinated and pushed forward by the Obama administration and the State Department after the failure of SOPA/PIPA and ACTA. They're basically doing an end-around, and laying down the framework to spy on your internet usage through ISP's. I don't know if any Federal incentives were offered to ISP's for doing this, but once the ability to spy on internet users is put in place, and people get used to it and accept it, it's a much smaller jump to legalize full-on spying.

This is how your freedom is being taken away, death by a thousand cuts. It doesn't matter how you feel about copyright infringement... you should be against this.

[kuckfeynes]

Meh, if anything seriously happens as a result of this, it will just drive the development of new encryption technologies and encourage more people to get involved in amateur penetration testing. Best way to create more of something is a black market, Pandora's box, cat out of the bag, etc, etc.

(Also, were the old days of exchanging private FTP logins with trusted parties really so bad?)

[TheGrinch]

One thing the OP Fox News article doesn't mention is that this was coordinated and pushed forward by the Obama administration and the State Department after the failure of SOPA/PIPA and ACTA. They're basically doing an end-around, and laying down the framework to spy on your internet usage through ISP's. I don't know if any Federal incentives were offered to ISP's for doing this, but once the ability to spy on internet users is put in place, and people get used to it and accept it, it's a much smaller jump to legalize full-on spying.

This is how your freedom is being taken away, death by a thousand cuts. It doesn't matter how you feel about copyright infringement... you should be against this.
In light of new information, fugg that! That has nothing to do with copyright infringement. Obviously they've been prepared to use both "piracy" and "cyber-threats" as a foothold to control the spread of info on the internet.

[LibForestPaul]

I don't care about people trying to make a business on a faulty model. Sure a mafia boss would also be upset if all of a sudden cops showed up and shut down his business. Should we feel bad for him or care about him?

IP is not property.

AND copyright laws are illegal, self evident

[heavenlyboy34]

Isn't that how it is now? I can choose not to copyright my property and say "hey' sure you can use it". There are plenty of outlets where you can give your works away for free and allow the spread of information, but you as for 'prohibiting people from using my property and minds as they wish", to not do that spits in the face of it being my property. That means it's my choice (permission) if you can take it and plaster it all over the internet for free or worse for profit. If you really don't want other people to use what you sell as they wish, don't sell it. Don't make it available for others to observe. You have no business telling people what they can/can't do with their property or their minds. You are advocating a tacit contract. If you know your contracts, these are virtually unenforceable.


So yes, I can do whatever I want with my property and choose to share it with whom ever I choose.
Yes, I cannot do anything with your real property. (IP IS NOT AND CANNOT BE REAL PROPERTY BY ITS VERY NATURE)

You do not have the same right to take, reproduce and even profit from the works that I created, my property.
If ideas were property, that would be correct. They are not-therefore you are incorrect


Further, this attitude that you can take whatever copyrighted works for free and cost companies millions is only going to embolden them to pass the exact laws we don't want to see.
It doesn't cost companies ANYTHING. The "profits" you speak of being "lost" exist on paper only. You're treating legal fiction as if it were fact.


I'd rather the market regulate itslef to eleiminate it, rather then them eliminate more of our fredoms.
The market would eliminate it. It never has and never will be a market phenomenon. It is not a "freedom", but an attempt to abridge freedom.


That's the reality we face if we allow them to use piracy as a precedent for control. If the market doesn't eliminate it, they will continue to lobby for the feds to take control. It's costing them MILLIONS that they've spent millions to produce, and again, it is their property, or further a service like any other that they do not give away for free. Just because people have the ability to steal it here, doesn't make it any more right, and yes, is completely anti-business to assume that their work and property are free for you to use without their permission.
Again, treating hypotheticals and legal fiction as if it were truth leads you to err (just as the mercantilists failed).

[cindy25]

live theaters tried to block the movie industry in the 20s
the movie industry tried to block radio and then tv
they all tried to block the VCR, which became the dvd player

technology always finds a way around it. and Hollywood in the end benefits.

[heavenlyboy34]

live theaters tried to block the movie industry in the 20s
the movie industry tried to block radio and then tv
they all tried to block the VCR, which became the dvd player

technology always finds a way around it. and Hollywood in the end benefits.
qft music industry, too. Grateful Dead and Allman Bros. Band became legendary in quite a large part because of bootlegs of their concerts.

[Muwahid]

qft music industry, too. Grateful Dead and Allman Bros. Band became legendary in quite a large part because of bootlegs of their concerts.

That's the ironic thing, pirating can make companies and musicians explode, a lot of people pirate games to test them, then buys them for the full features like online play, and the end result is positive for the publishers.

I can see how pirating would affect individuals though, but they're not the reason for this anyway the big companies are. I guess they look at how many pirated copies of their music/software there are and idiotically factor that into instant profits if they could magically stop pirating.

[heavenlyboy34]

That's the ironic thing, pirating can make companies and musicians explode, a lot of people pirate games to test them, then buys them for the full features like online play, and the end result is positive for the publishers.

I can see how pirating would affect individuals though, but they're not the reason for this anyway the big companies are. I guess they look at how many pirated copies of their music/software there are and idiotically factor that into instant profits if they could magically stop pirating.
If we're going to use the word "pirating" it should be in quotes IMO. "Pirating" implies a type of crime-and copying is not a crime (regardless of how much corporations and greedy "creators" want it to be).

[PaulStandsTall]

From the makers of ThePirateBay.org comes
https://www.ipredator.se/

15 euros = 3 months VPN service.

[CyberTootie]

Will it be as reliable as The Pirate Bay website itself? :p

[pcgame]

......

[Stallheim]

This is an outstanding summary.


Whether or not you believe in copyrights/patents, please don't use the phrase "intellectual property." It's a propaganda term coined in the 20th century by the copyright lobby to conflate patents, copyrights, and trademarks in the court of public opinion and treat each of them like any of the others at the most convenient possible times. In reality, the three concepts each have their own distinct history and purpose.

Patents are not property, and neither are copyrights: They are limited-time government-granted monopolies intended to promote progress in the arts and sciences by artificially and coercively maintaining profit motive for easily replicated works. However, they are not property or an individualist construct; they're a collectivist construct, and they're not natural to the market but alien to it. The difficulty of enforcing them (and the typical drive to create a police state to do so) should be your first hint.

Physical property is property, and "intellectual property" ironically infringes upon people's right to do what they want with their physical property, for the benefit of the "greater good." Copyrights and patents function by coercively protecting a monopoly supplier and maintaining their desired cost-based price levels (Marxist labor theory of value) through artificial scarcity, but that's not how the market works...in a free market, competition/imitation/reproduction/etc. is intrinsic, and buyers determine the legitimate value of any good or service without respect to initial production cost. techdirt (http://www.techdirt.com/blog/?tag=fixed+cost) has (http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20061026/102329.shtml) great (http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070118/013310/infinity-is-your-friend-economics.shtml) articles (http://www.techdirt.com/blog/casestudies/articles/20120210/02273417726/how-being-more-open-human-awesome-can-save-anyone-worried-about-making-money-entertainment.shtml) on this (http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070503/012939/grand-unified-theory-economics-free.shtml) subject (http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080306/003240458/if-intellectual-property-is-neither-intellectual-property-what-is-it.shtml). You can believe in the virtues of copyrights and patents if you want, and I agree that very limited-time copyrights and patents have their benefits in the utilitarian sense...but they're ultimately unnecessary IMO, and unlimited "intellectual property" is absolutely destructive to freedom, market size and profitability (ironically), and even art and science (by hampering derivative works and risking destruction of culture...do you know how many thousands of old films cannot be legally archived in a secure/multiple-copy manner before the media decays, because the copyright holders are nowhere to be found?). I'm not really here to make the argument against limited-time copyrights/patents (there is one, and it's been the subject of more than one libertarian book), but at least don't swallow and peddle the copyright lobby's bullshit rhetoric.

Trademarks are a little more interesting in the property sense, because others using them can constitute fraud or plagiarism...but in the general case, no, "intellectual property" doesn't exist as anything other than a government construct.

[pcgame]

........

[Jingles]

https://btguard.com/
https://www.torproject.org/

and proxies.

[pcgame]

......