Devastating internet censorship plan (new SOPA) to be put in practice starting July!

American ISPs to launch massive copyright spying scheme on July 1 | The Raw Story

RIAA chief: ISPs to start policing copyright by July 1 | Media Maverick - CNET News

ISPs in the USA to start monitoring customers’ downloads starting July 1, 2012 | dotTech

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/07/graduated-response-deal-what-if-users-had-been

I just saw those articles in a post. I was shocked to say the least, and decided to post this on several forums I frequent so the word can be spread.

In summary, all major American ISP’s are implementing a system to spy on their users in order to police copyright infringement. There was no legal debate let alone any discussion with the users, and this decision was simply taken and will be applied starting 1 or 12 July. Users considered to be infringing copyright will be punished in several ways… such as their internet being cut off, selective websites being censored, their bandwidth being lowered, and if the offense is repeated users will be constrained to go to special copyright lessons to be allowed on the internet again.

I believe that this is the worst attack initiated against internet users in the US, worse than what SOPA and ACTA were meant to be. If what’s said about this initiative is true, something worse than SOPA is already being put in practice starting next week. It’s clear that the government and / or Hollywood have started another backroom deal, this time asking ISP’s to pretend they’ve taken the decision on their own so they could censor the internet without any debate in the house or senate (which as proven by SOPA would not pass).

I couldn’t begin describing how horrible and surreal this is after what I read. It will be used to cut users off the internet, and even worse to purposely humiliate them in spite (copyright lessons required to access the internet, and lowered data transfer rates as punishment). It will also be used to spy on any website you access, and for the first time in the history of America you will be completely watched by your ISP. They might even be able to read private emails you send / receive. Those are unspeakable practices which could only be imagined in countries like Libia or North Korea.

I don’t believe I need to point out that users will not be punished for real copyright infringements only, but false negatives will exist and be heavily abused. Technically, if your ISP believes you are stupid for accessing a website they don’t like (which they can now spy on) they may easily invent a claim and cut you off the internet without being questioned by anyone. This will obviously be used for censorship on political subjects and worse too.

Every internet user needs to act urgently, more than they have for SOPA / PIPA last winter. If this decision is not undone, I’m even expecting riots to take place. I’m also hoping that major websites like Google or Wikipedia will do another blackout in awareness to this. At this point I strongly support a criminal investigation to see who’s behind those unprecedented attacks on internet users, and believe someone needs to be sentenced to prison for both this and what happened with SOPA.

The only thing I ask of everyone is to please re-post this and spread awareness immediately! We need everyone to know about this fast, so we can have time to protest and / or sign petitions against it. Lets hope this can be stopped before the unthinkable happens, otherwise there will no longer be internet for most of us.

There are other important things I would like to point out about this, which I didn’t fully get to last night. Those are points that I believe everyone should carefully look into and inform others about.

This will allow your ISP to spy on everything you do. If they spy your data they will be able to read your emails, IM’s, how many times you called your boss a moron, how many times you sex RP’d online… everything. Theoretically, they can even spy on what you discuss with your co-workers, and secretly share private information with the competitor of the company you work for. Or if you access a porn website, they could tell everyone about it and the things you look at (even your parents or husband / wife). Next, if you access a website about something your admin dislikes, they can easily invent false claims against you to bully you. Imagine being cut off the internet because you are gay or accessed 4chan. Or going to school one day to find out the head teacher mysteriously knows you’re gay or something you only said privately, then everyone finds out and you get bullied. Also, what do you think will happen to people who post bad things about America’s leadership, the US army, uncover war crimes or government abuses, and that sort of thing… especially with the NDAA being around?

If anyone thinks this won’t happen because “they will be nice people and will only use this to catch thieves”, you are more than naive. No, it WILL be used for this and much worse if it happens. I don’t even need to point out what power hungry and control hungry characters are behind this.

But even if (just for the sake of pretending) this will only be used against pirates. Those pirates might have an online job, not to mention friends they talk with and other activities (unrelated to piracy). Cutting anyone off the internet at this day could cost many their jobs, and some even their lives. And then… being humiliated in spite by being sent to classes about copyright and scolded like a 2 year old by some internet provider? This by itself is a hateful practice, which as a mentality was used by communist and nazi regimes to show their power. Those who spoke against the regime but didn’t pose a big threat weren’t killed, but instead beaten in public and left without food and water for days, to show an example to those who disobeyed. At a different scale, this is the same mentality being put in practice here with those “lessons”, against people who might have done as little as downloading a song. We live in a mad world.

Alongside the practical consequences, this is also an insult to all internet users. We are being qualified as thieves automatically, and investigated prematurely to make sure we aren’t stealing. Using the internet will now be a suspicion of theft by itself… also known as being accused of a crime before you even commit it. In any normal world, people would be outraged at such a slap in the face. It’s the same as installing cameras in everyone’s homes, watching them when they eat / go pee / have sex / etc. just to be sure they aren’t raising cannabis in their house. Christ… not even Gaddafi or Kim Jong Il dared to do this.

As for hoping that some ISP’s will stay free, no. This is simply a new attempt to pass a law worse than SOPA. Currently, they paid or constrained ISP’s to pretend they’ve taken the decision on their own. After people would have cooled down and enough accepted this practice, they would also pass a law to make the whole thing obligatory. It’s basically doing it before it’s legal, so people get used to it first and they can later legalize it more easily. That’s why everyone needs to act urgently.

One thing’s for sure: They are up-front trying to make America a dictatorship, and I’m not talking just about this event (the NDAA is another thing). Many laws worthy of the worst dictatorships are being forcefully pushed in the US. The world has a very important choice to take in the next years, and if the wrong one is taken expect us to return to a medieval terror-based leadership. This isn’t a theory or exaggeration, it’s happening under our eyes.

Once again, please post about this everywhere you can and spread the word. Make a topic on all forums you visit (if there isn’t one already), post it on your Facebook / Twitter, and if you own a blog publish an article. We should also contact every news TV station or website and pressure them to speak about it. Please make people aware of the things I wrote in this post also (feel free to re-post all of it) so they can better see what we’re dealing with (as many still think it would only stop piracy and it’s ok). We have a disaster beyond words in front of us, if everything we read about this is true.

On Sun, 24 Jun 2012 11:26:02 +0000, MirceaKitsune wrote:

> This will allow your ISP to spy on everything you do.

Not the stuff that’s encrypted via https, unless they also have the
private key for the certificate.

Jim


Jim Henderson
openSUSE Forums Administrator
Forum Use Terms & Conditions at http://tinyurl.com/openSUSE-T-C

I have some good news everyone. It seems the project was delayed until past this July. There’s no specific date as to when they wish to implement it, although evil corporations and ISP’s are still hoping this year.

http://torrentfreak.com/us-six-strikes-anti-piracy-scheme-delayed-120518/

That likely means they are scared, and have taken notice people are revolted. This is our chance to react and give them a good scare. What I hope will happen is people establishing a date when they can go to their ISP and protest… maybe knock at their door and have a nice heated discussion (I don’t wish to imagine a worse scenario yet).

If such happens the project will certainly be killed, and we would further send a message to those who wish to crush the internet so they understand once and for all we’ll never accept it in any form. Including those who support CISPA, who they hopefully understand will also not pass for the sake of both sides and everyone else.

And yes, encryption helps. But not everyone uses it all the time. For instance, if I send a PM to someone on a forum (which is http:// and not https://) who and how would bother to encrypt it? It’s still both wrong and hopefully illegal to spy on unencrypted data. But yes, if something horrible happens encryption is indeed the way, so I agree.

On 06/26/2012 01:26 PM, MirceaKitsune wrote:
> and we would
> further send a message to those who wish to crush the internet so they
> understand once and for all we’ll never accept it in any form.

as far as i can see the intent is to require internet users to follow
local and international copyright law…

but, you seem to assume that stopping folks from stealing the work of
others will “crush the internet”…i don’t think so…


dd

There are many reasons why this would harm both pirates and normal users. First of all, I don’t want to be spied on, especially if it’s sniffing my connection (or even otherwise). Once you can spy on people the slightest in a legal way, the system will be abused to spy on even more and eventually play the role of a private police. Second, any such an initiative strikes and addresses the internet and its structures. It’s a step toward corporations and SOPA / ACTA supporters moving in on us, and they would be encouraged to work on even greater censorship plans. They need to understand the internet itself is free and cannot be touched or restricted, and if there’s a problem they need to deal with it in other ways. I also don’t want whole websites going down (or friends I talk to disappearing) because someone downloaded a song from their machine and network… and there are probably other huge issues with this.

Also, among those pirates, there are also ok people who do nothing than to download an album or movie every few months. They might have a job online, emails they have to read, friends, and other things. If they wanna attack pirates, by all means attack those who sell stuff for money. But not nice users who just listen to a song or see a movie, or share some stuff on DC++ or seed who knows what torrent.

Then as discussed here, encryption will make it easy to bypass this, and in practice it will not do much at all. So why still bother and make us afraid to use the internet, instead of trying to find gentle and ok ways to deal with their problem of losing money from people sharing stuff? Must every single idea of fighting piracy involve harassing normal users or taking down websites?

On 06/26/2012 02:26 PM, MirceaKitsune wrote:
>
>
> There are many reasons why this would harm both pirates and normal
> users. First of all, I don’t want to be spied on, especially if it’s
> sniffing my connection (or even otherwise). Once you can spy on people
> the slightest in a legal way, the system will be abused to spy on even
> more and eventually play the role of a private police.

you say it “will” be abused and you may be right…but, just like all
the police monitoring so much stuff going on on the street in the UK, i
guess that most enforcers with access to the “sniffing” will be doing
a LOT more public good, than private harm…

> Second, any such
> an initiative strikes and addresses the internet and its structures.
> It’s a step toward corporations and SOPA / ACTA supporters moving in on
> us, and they would be encouraged to work on even greater censorship
> plans. They need to understand the internet itself is free and cannot be
> touched or restricted,

how do you figure “the internet is free and cannot be touched or restricted”

it is not “free” to me, and never has been…i’ve been paying an ISP
since 1995, every month…

and, it is not “free” for anyone to do anything illegal…not now, and
never has been…

and, if you think it can’t be restricted you need to look at all of
countries who absolutely DO restrict access, censor words, etc etc etc…

> and if there’s a problem they need to deal with
> it in other ways.

in what ways other than finding and prosecuting the thieves might you
“deal with” the pirates?

> I also don’t want whole websites going down (or
> friends I talk to disappearing) because someone downloaded a song from
> their machine and network…

if i loan my (legal) pistol to a person who then uses it in a crime, do
you think i’m not gonna be in trouble?

it that person steals my pistol because i have not followed the law
requiring me to secure it, then . . .

so, suggest to your friends to secure their internet capable devices…

> and there are probably other huge issues
> with this.
>
> Also, among those pirates, there are also ok people who do nothing than
> to download an album or movie every few months.

oh! do they also walk into a music shop and stuff a CD in their pants
every few months? or, walk out the door with a movie DVD, or game??

are those folks “ok people”?

do you think that theft via a digital device is less a crime than waking
into a store ??

> They might have a job
> online, emails they have to read, friends, and other things. If they
> wanna attack pirates, by all means attack those who sell stuff for
> money. But not nice users who just listen to a song or see a movie, or
> share some stuff on DC++ or seed who knows what torrent.

if that person with a job online and friends and emails walked into
your home and stole a movie, album or game or two every few
months–would that be ok with you?

> Then as discussed here, encryption will make it easy to bypass this,
> and in practice it will not do much at all. So why still bother and make
> us afraid to use the internet, instead of trying to find gentle and ok
> ways to deal with their problem of losing money from people sharing
> stuff?

what is your gentle suggestion?

> Must every single idea of fighting piracy involve harassing
> normal users or taking down websites?

how many non-thieve’s web sites have been shut down?

yes, i feel somewhat harassed because of the actions against all the
pirates…but, that problem is not caused by the police, but by the
actions of the thieves themselves!


dd

About being spied on already: We already know governments do that, and it happens since the internet existed (not sure if ISP’s themselves are allowed to peak and do so themselves). But that’s only behind the curtains and it happens at high level… if someone would find out they would be in big trouble. If however it would become a legal thing, that would be very bad and highly easy to abuse, and people could get in trouble with their ISP for almost anything (even the ISP having a bad day and thinking someone’s stupid because they access some weird web page). If ISP’s had the right to legally look at everything you browse, it would get to that, and it would be a disaster. In this case I heard they might only be allowed to look at torrent trackers.

The internet was never fully free, I agree. But I hope it will at least stay as free as it is now, without additional dangers coming to it. My fear is that if additional laws are added, those companies will start moving in on us and taking it further (eg: taking it as an encouragement to retry SOPA). Imagine what would happen if companies could influence internet access so easily… eventually they would forbid Creative Commons music and open source software to further encourage us to buy their products. Thank god that will never happen, unless the world hits rock bottom at its hardest and it’s official the world is dead.

As for stealing or not stealing… well like I said on another thread, I believe there’s a huge difference between copying data and stealing a physical object. Mainly in the fact that for “normal stealing”, you also rid the victim of the object you take. When you copy something, you don’t rid anyone of the item. So the only issue is “would have the person copying the file bought it were he not able to copy it”? And that’s something that cannot be known unless you tap into the person’s mind, which is impossible. Due to this and other facts, I think this is rather a gray area. I’m not saying it’s fully ok, but it’s also not by far the equivalent of shoplifting and robbery.

My gentle suggestion… I don’t have a one myself, otherwise someone would have solved this quickly. What I meant is that there have to be other things that can be attempted as alternatives to bringing down servers or users. DRM for instance is something I highly dislike, but which content creators have the right to use on their products. There are also music platforms (I think the iPod is like that) which require you to buy music, and there’s no workaround to that. You also go to concerts and cinemas… you pay for the ticket there. So one idea is to encourage people to buy things by creating, instead of doing it by destroying. Do note that in this I also include what I remember and experienced with SOPA last winter… this initiative isn’t quite as bad by itself at least, but it links to that indirectly.

On 06/26/2012 05:56 PM, MirceaKitsune wrote:
> I believe there’s a huge difference between copying data and stealing a
> physical object. Mainly in the fact that for “normal stealing”, you also
> rid the victim of the object you take. When you copy something, you
> don’t rid anyone of the item.

but, you do deprive the copyright holder the payment they would have
received had the item (even just digits via the net) not been stolen…

> So the only issue is “would have the
> person copying the file bought it were he not able to copy it”?

no, you phrase it incorrectly–should be:

would the owner of the work given a digital copy of it freely to the
thief had s/he been asked?

many do…but, if the torrent user does not ask permission, it is theft
of another’s work if s/he would have purchased it or not.

> I think this is rather a gray area.

it is not gray to me or copyright attorneys, or judges . . .

the people it is most gray to are the pirates…

> I’m not saying it’s fully ok, but it’s also not by
> far the equivalent of shoplifting and robbery.

i see no difference at all in the theft of copyrighted works in KMart,
WalMart or via the net…

it is kinda like moving digits from someone’s bank account to your’s
without their permission…is that “not by far the equivalent of” bank
robbery?


dd

On Tue, 26 Jun 2012 17:13:17 +0000, dd wrote:

>> So the only issue is “would have the person copying the file bought it
>> were he not able to copy it”?
>
> no, you phrase it incorrectly–should be:
>
> would the owner of the work given a digital copy of it freely to the
> thief had s/he been asked?
>
> many do…but, if the torrent user does not ask permission, it is theft
> of another’s work if s/he would have purchased it or not.

Not saying this as a justification (since I’m a copyright holder myself
and I expect people to respect my copyrights as much as any other
copyright holder would), but studies do show that /most/ people who
download stuff illegally wouldn’t have paid for it in any case - some
because they simply don’t have the money, others because they downloaded
it out of curiosity - and some even download in advance of a purchase
because the options to “try before you buy” are limited or nonexistent.

A few years ago, I saw a presentation given by the general counsel of the
RIAA (in the context of protecting intellectual property at a testing
conference I was attending), and one of the things that he raised that I
hadn’t considered was that the purpose of the “making available” argument
wasn’t so much about the Jammie Thomas’ of the world, but rather the
availability of copyrighted content to actual “pirates” who produce
counterfeit DVDs/CDs and sell them on the streets in places like China
and NYC.

One of the goals by shutting down the distribution network for ISO images
and content is to make it more difficult for counterfeiters (who actually
do sell their goods for a significant profit) to profit.

Those who use bittorrent and the like to download “the occasional movie
and/or CD” help actual criminals in their money-making enterprises.

And that actually /does/ take money out of the pockets of artists who
have worked hard to earn their cut of the sales.

But it’s something to think about the next time “you” (not “you”
personally, “you” generically) download that hot new album in protest of
RIAA not paying the artists what you think is a fair price. You’re
helping enable counterfeiters who pay the artists $0 to make their profit.

Jim

Jim Henderson
openSUSE Forums Administrator
Forum Use Terms & Conditions at http://tinyurl.com/openSUSE-T-C

On 2012-06-26 19:50, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Jun 2012 17:13:17 +0000, dd wrote:

>> many do…but, if the torrent user does not ask permission, it is theft
>> of another’s work if s/he would have purchased it or not.
>
> Not saying this as a justification (since I’m a copyright holder myself
> and I expect people to respect my copyrights as much as any other
> copyright holder would), but studies do show that /most/ people who
> download stuff illegally wouldn’t have paid for it in any case - some
> because they simply don’t have the money, others because they downloaded
> it out of curiosity - and some even download in advance of a purchase
> because the options to “try before you buy” are limited or nonexistent.

This is true for many people. Most people I know do not buy movies (for
instance) because they think they are too expensive, so if they can they
just copy then, and if they can not they will not buy it either…

It is my personal belief that people would buy those same dvds if they were
cheaper. I would certainly be very happy to buy several films or serials I
like if they were cheaper, even if they had to be at lower resolution and
image quality. But they don’t do those offers.

For instance, I bought an electronic book reader and I buy books for it
because they are cheaper than paper. But I can not pay hundreds of dollars
to get, say, the Star Trek Enterprise entire collection.

> A few years ago, I saw a presentation given by the general counsel of the
> RIAA (in the context of protecting intellectual property at a testing
> conference I was attending), and one of the things that he raised that I
> hadn’t considered was that the purpose of the “making available” argument
> wasn’t so much about the Jammie Thomas’ of the world, but rather the
> availability of copyrighted content to actual “pirates” who produce
> counterfeit DVDs/CDs and sell them on the streets in places like China
> and NYC.
>
> One of the goals by shutting down the distribution network for ISO images
> and content is to make it more difficult for counterfeiters (who actually
> do sell their goods for a significant profit) to profit.
>
> Those who use bittorrent and the like to download “the occasional movie
> and/or CD” help actual criminals in their money-making enterprises.

No, I don’t think so. The people that make those copies for selling don’t
have a problem buying a copy to rip it off, the price is a trifle on their
margins. I don’t know how they do it now, but before the DVD code (libdcss)
was broken, these people made copies of dvds and sold them, pressing them
if need be. They had the hardware for it. The industry claims that dcss was
used for these illegal copies, but it is not true: copies were made long
before it was invented.

These people will make counterfeit copies by any means they need to. If the
copies they want are not in internet they will buy a copy or shoplift it.
There is nothing to stop them that way.

The way to stop them is good police work.


Cheers / Saludos,

Carlos E. R.
(from 11.4 x86_64 “Celadon” at Telcontar)

Am 26.06.2012 22:23, schrieb Carlos E. R.:
> No, I don’t think so. The people that make those copies for selling don’t
> have a problem buying a copy to rip it off, the price is a trifle on their
> margins.
I think that is completely correct, if you want to sell enough of that
illegal copies you can even use a very expensive method like scanning
the DVD surface with a very high resolution scanner create a glass
master and instead of burning you “press” the copies from that, even the
thousands of dollars that cost will be peanuts compared to the money
they make.
But that comment is a bit of side tracking now from my side.

My main concern with the control by ISPs is, to what degree is that
control acceptable compared to what you want to get as a result.
Millions consume illegal drugs, is that enough of a justification that
anyone has the right to go into my home and check it if I do it as well
or to control my snail mail if I deal with it?
The answer in any democratic country is - NO. Not without a sufficient
reasoning why they want to check me as an individual, not without a
judge taking a decision based on facts.
The same rights do apply to online behavior. To put a general absolute
control on everyone is not acceptable in any other area of life, it
means simply making everybody by definition an usual suspect.
Why should that be acceptable in the internet? Because more money is
involved? That was never an acceptable argument to reduce human or civil
rights.


PC: oS 12.1 x86_64 | i7-2600@3.40GHz | 16GB | KDE 4.8.4 | GeForce GT 420
ThinkPad E320: oS 12.1 x86_64 | i3@2.30GHz | 8GB | KDE 4.8.4 | HD 3000
eCAFE 800: oS 12.1 i586 | AMD Geode LX 800@500MHz | 512MB | KDE 3.5.10

On Tue, 26 Jun 2012 20:23:06 +0000, Carlos E. R. wrote:

> This is true for many people. Most people I know do not buy movies (for
> instance) because they think they are too expensive, so if they can they
> just copy then, and if they can not they will not buy it either…

Actually, I don’t tend to buy movies myself. Most of what I want to
watch is either available streaming on Netflix or via DVD/Blu-Ray through
Netflix. I also now have an Amazon Prime account, and that has a
selection of some things as well. So does Playstation Network (though I
haven’t used that yet for anything other than trailers).

For music, we have a subscriptions slacker.com, pandora, and Hearts of
Space. That covers most of what I want to listen to, and the rest is
already in my CD collection.

> It is my personal belief that people would buy those same dvds if they
> were cheaper. I would certainly be very happy to buy several films or
> serials I like if they were cheaper, even if they had to be at lower
> resolution and image quality. But they don’t do those offers.

I do think there’s an element of price/value as well. I buy CDs on
occasion when there’s something worth actually owning. But I dislike
most modern music (or what passes for music these days).

> For instance, I bought an electronic book reader and I buy books for it
> because they are cheaper than paper. But I can not pay hundreds of
> dollars to get, say, the Star Trek Enterprise entire collection.

I’ve been following the suit about price fixing on ebooks. I’ve been
extremely disappointed that eBook prices tend to fall nearer the cost of
a hardcover book (esp. if no paperback edition is available). I had been
starting to read Lee Child’s books on my Nook, but the prices went up
after I finished the first one, to a point where I’m not willing to spend
the money on them. So I’ve just stopped reading them after the first
book, even though I quite liked the first book.

>> Those who use bittorrent and the like to download “the occasional movie
>> and/or CD” help actual criminals in their money-making enterprises.
>
> No, I don’t think so. The people that make those copies for selling
> don’t have a problem buying a copy to rip it off, the price is a trifle
> on their margins. I don’t know how they do it now, but before the DVD
> code (libdcss)

I should’ve been clearer - that’s the RIAA argument. I don’t necessarily
agree with them on it, but of course you didn’t have anyone in the room
ask questions about it (nobody wanted to paint a bullseye on their chest,
apparently).

In a way, the argument does make a certain amount of sense, but does
ignore - as you point out - the obvious method of just buying a copy and
duplicating it. At the same time (from the mindset of someone doing that
kind of duplication/sale of counterfeit goods), why bother even buying it
when you can just download a perfectly good ISO?

> was broken, these people made copies of dvds and sold them, pressing
> them if need be. They had the hardware for it. The industry claims that
> dcss was used for these illegal copies, but it is not true: copies were
> made long before it was invented.

Yep.

They did show some photos of duplication facilities used for this kind of
counterfeiting, and that’s a much more significant cost outlay.

> These people will make counterfeit copies by any means they need to. If
> the copies they want are not in internet they will buy a copy or
> shoplift it. There is nothing to stop them that way.
>
> The way to stop them is good police work.

Yes. But choking off the supply can/could help, too.

Jim


Jim Henderson
openSUSE Forums Administrator
Forum Use Terms & Conditions at http://tinyurl.com/openSUSE-T-C

On Tue, 26 Jun 2012 20:42:34 +0000, Martin Helm wrote:

> My main concern with the control by ISPs is, to what degree is that
> control acceptable compared to what you want to get as a result.
> Millions consume illegal drugs, is that enough of a justification that
> anyone has the right to go into my home and check it if I do it as well
> or to control my snail mail if I deal with it?

And that I completely agree with. Just because it’s “easy” doesn’t mean
it should be implemented.

Jim


Jim Henderson
openSUSE Forums Administrator
Forum Use Terms & Conditions at http://tinyurl.com/openSUSE-T-C

FWIW, the law is active in New Zealand these days… three strikes and
your off to find a new ISP… I think they let a whole lot of them
expire awhile back so it sent the users back to square one of getting
notices from their ISP’s.


Cheers Malcolm °¿° (Linux Counter #276890)
SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 11 (x86_64) Kernel 3.0.34-0.7-default
up 1:57, 2 users, load average: 0.24, 0.27, 0.25
CPU Intel i5 CPU M520@2.40GHz | Intel Arrandale GPU

Some things I wanted to say from the last replies (I’m glad this discussion is active, though at the same time find the whole thing scary). I know there are strong views on both sides of the piracy debate, but it is a gray area. What’s known for sure is that it’s usually not a nice gesture to copy stuff… but beyond that it’s very interpretable, and each person usually picks their own side. My view is, you cannot ask companies to give things away for free, but at the same time you can’t treat people like robbers or actual criminals for downloading a song. I can’t say I see a clear common point here, and wish there was a way to make everyone happy (except the outright evil companies).

The fact that many people wouldn’t buy something if they couldn’t download it first is what I wanted to say. It’s perfectly my case as well. For the music and other things I download, I either can’t find a CD I can buy in my country, or I don’t have money and means to pay online. PayPal was introduced in my country just a few years ago, and till then (several years) there was virtually no way I could have bought anything. And now, due to a serious family issue, we barely have the money to survive properly… which means I shouldn’t be allowed to hear the latest songs of my favorite bands and the like.

Another important note: There were multiple cases in which I wanted to buy games I torrented, after I played and finished them. For some of them I’m still sorry I didn’t get to. I would have also not been trusting to buy those games if I haven’t played and finished them already, the pirate’s way. So I can confirm that sharing stuff actually promotes it, but that only applies to people with minimal common sense (let’s hope I’m one :slight_smile: ).

A second important note: Another reason I prefer cracked content is that when you use the original, you depend on online checks and keys to install them (like DRM). For instance, my main OS is cracked Windows 7 (dual-boot with OpenSuse, I wouldn’t be on this forum if it wasn’t :wink: ). I run it using a Windows loader, which emulates a BIOS that makes Windows think this is an OEM laptop (comes pre-installed with Windows). Now if someone gave me an original and fully legal Windows 7 DVD, I would only install it using the same loader. Why? Because using the Genuine activation thing, your computer depends on the Microsoft website, and theoretically they could shut your Windows functions down if a key check goes bad on their end. I’d be extremely paranoid to use an operating system like that. FYI, I do believe Microsoft deserves buying the Windows 7 OS, since it’s really good.

Oddly enough, I haven’t bought a music CD in ages (I don’t listen to too many bands so that’s why). But I wonder if for those, they come in mp3 or ogg format and if I can freely open them in any music player (including in-game ones), listen to them on any computer, copy them to an USB stick and that sort of thing. I imagine they’re probably restricted… so if anything, I’d only buy the DVD out of common sense, put it in the drawer because I don’t need it, then download the same album in free mp3 format to use that instead.

On Tue, 26 Jun 2012 21:00:53 +0000, malcolmlewis wrote:

> FWIW, the law is active in New Zealand these days… three strikes and
> your off to find a new ISP… I think they let a whole lot of them
> expire awhile back so it sent the users back to square one of getting
> notices from their ISP’s.

Yeah, I’d heard NZ had enacted a three-strikes law. There was something
recent here in the US about how an IP address != a user (recent court
case), don’t recall the details offhand, though.

Jim


Jim Henderson
openSUSE Forums Administrator
Forum Use Terms & Conditions at http://tinyurl.com/openSUSE-T-C

On Tue, 26 Jun 2012 21:16:03 +0000, MirceaKitsune wrote:

> Some things I wanted to say from the last replies (I’m glad this
> discussion is active, though at the same time find the whole thing
> scary). I know there are strong views on both sides of the piracy
> debate, but it is a gray area. What’s known for sure is that it’s
> usually not a nice gesture to copy stuff… but beyond that it’s very
> interpretable, and each person usually picks their own side. My view is,
> you cannot ask companies to give things away for free, but at the same
> time you can’t treat people like robbers or actual criminals for
> downloading a song. I can’t say I see a clear common point here, and
> wish there was a way to make everyone happy (except the outright evil
> companies).

Well, the first point in the compromise is to recognize that not everyone
is “entitled” to listen to/watch/play the latest song/movie/game. That
sense of entitlement that some people tend to feel about listening to the
latest hits is a huge part of the problem.

There isn’t a grey area here. Either you legally own something or you
don’t. Either you’re legally licensed to use something or you’re not.

Some licenses require that you pay for the content. Other licenses don’t.

But ultimately, the creator gets the right to say how a consumer may
acquire the content. (Now there are limits to that as well, and in a
digital age, perhaps some of those limits are unreasonable - but they’re
in place and they are the law, so working to change the law is the
appropriate way to deal with it).

> The fact that many people wouldn’t buy something if they couldn’t
> download it first is what I wanted to say. It’s perfectly my case as
> well. For the music and other things I download, I either can’t find a
> CD I can buy in my country, or I don’t have money and means to pay
> online. PayPal was introduced in my country just a few years ago, and
> till then (several years) there was virtually no way I could have bought
> anything. And now, due to a serious family issue, we barely have the
> money to survive properly… which means I shouldn’t be allowed to hear
> the latest songs of my favorite bands and the like.

I’m sorry to hear about serious family issues. I myself have been out of
full-time work for nearly 14 months (I’ve been doing contract/consulting
work since last October). That doesn’t make it any more legal or
justifiable for me to download MP3s that I’m not licensed to listen to.
I instead opt to pay $10/month for a slacker.com subscription (along with
a few other subscription services I mentioned before) and that lets me
listen to what I want to. (Currently listening to Satriani’s Surfing
with the Alien
, which I actually do own on CD as well - one of the first
CDs I acquired).

> A second important note: Another reason I prefer cracked content is that
> when you use the original, you depend on online checks and keys to
> install them (like DRM). For instance, my main OS is cracked Windows 7
> (dual-boot with OpenSuse, I wouldn’t be on this forum if it wasn’t :wink: ).
> I run it using a Windows loader, which emulates a BIOS that makes
> Windows think this is an OEM laptop (comes pre-installed with Windows).
> Now if someone gave me an original and fully legal Windows 7 DVD, I
> would only install it using the same loader. Why? Because using the
> Genuine activation thing, your computer depends on the Microsoft
> website, and theoretically they could shut your Windows functions down
> if a key check goes bad on their end. I’d be extremely paranoid to use
> an operating system like that. FYI, I do believe Microsoft deserves
> buying the Windows 7 OS, since it’s really good.

I’ve had mixed feelings over the years about “cracking” stuff. On the
one hand, I understand the need to combat piracy. But I don’t think that
DRM works - there’s a much larger army of coders (many out of reach of
domestic laws) looking for ways to circumvent such copy protections.
Ultimately, copy protection/DRM inconveniences those who legally purchase/
pay for the content.

> Oddly enough, I haven’t bought a music CD in ages (I don’t listen to too
> many bands so that’s why). But I wonder if for those, they come in mp3
> or ogg format and if I can freely open them in any music player
> (including in-game ones), listen to them on any computer, copy them to
> an USB stick and that sort of thing. I imagine they’re probably
> restricted… so if anything, I’d only buy the DVD out of common sense,
> put it in the drawer because I don’t need it, then download the same
> album in free mp3 format to use that instead.

Indeed, a lot of my CDs are actually ripped to MP3 and that’s how I
usually listen to them. The physical media is in the next room, but it’s
not convenient.

But I still prefer physical media as well - hard drives go bad (I’ve lost
several over the years), and I don’t want to lose my only copy because
Amazon or whomever decides that once I download them they don’t need to
provide the MP3s any more - sorta like what happened with the copies of
1984 on the Kindle a couple years back (though that was actually a very
bad situation for all involved, because Amazon was selling something they
weren’t licensed to sell).

Jim


Jim Henderson
openSUSE Forums Administrator
Forum Use Terms & Conditions at http://tinyurl.com/openSUSE-T-C

On 2012-06-26 22:46, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Jun 2012 20:23:06 +0000, Carlos E. R. wrote:

>> It is my personal belief that people would buy those same dvds if they
>> were cheaper. I would certainly be very happy to buy several films or
>> serials I like if they were cheaper, even if they had to be at lower
>> resolution and image quality. But they don’t do those offers.
>
> I do think there’s an element of price/value as well. I buy CDs on
> occasion when there’s something worth actually owning. But I dislike
> most modern music (or what passes for music these days).

Ah, well, my music choices I can buy cheap: Beethoven, Bach, Mozart… :slight_smile:

>> For instance, I bought an electronic book reader and I buy books for it
>> because they are cheaper than paper. But I can not pay hundreds of
>> dollars to get, say, the Star Trek Enterprise entire collection.
>
> I’ve been following the suit about price fixing on ebooks. I’ve been
> extremely disappointed that eBook prices tend to fall nearer the cost of
> a hardcover book (esp. if no paperback edition is available). I had been
> starting to read Lee Child’s books on my Nook, but the prices went up
> after I finished the first one, to a point where I’m not willing to spend
> the money on them. So I’ve just stopped reading them after the first
> book, even though I quite liked the first book.

Understandable. My case is different, because buying English language paper
books often means shipping them across the Atlantic. I can buy books
(used?) for less than a dollar, then pay 8 more for shipping to Spain. Thus
the price difference on electronics books is much more on my favour.

> In a way, the argument does make a certain amount of sense, but does
> ignore - as you point out - the obvious method of just buying a copy and
> duplicating it. At the same time (from the mindset of someone doing that
> kind of duplication/sale of counterfeit goods), why bother even buying it
> when you can just download a perfectly good ISO?

Well, to copy the graphics too :slight_smile:
Or to save time. Downloading an iso can take days if the sources are not
that fast.
Or to have control of the quality of the ripping they want, or the extras
to include.

Dunno, I have never downloaded an iso.

>> These people will make counterfeit copies by any means they need to. If
>> the copies they want are not in internet they will buy a copy or
>> shoplift it. There is nothing to stop them that way.
>>
>> The way to stop them is good police work.
>
> Yes. But choking off the supply can/could help, too.

It would not stop them for a second.


Cheers / Saludos,

Carlos E. R.
(from 11.4 x86_64 “Celadon” at Telcontar)

On Tue, 26 Jun 2012 22:23:06 +0000, Carlos E. R. wrote:

>> I do think there’s an element of price/value as well. I buy CDs on
>> occasion when there’s something worth actually owning. But I dislike
>> most modern music (or what passes for music these days).
>
> Ah, well, my music choices I can buy cheap: Beethoven, Bach, Mozart…
> :slight_smile:

Same here. :slight_smile:

> Understandable. My case is different, because buying English language
> paper books often means shipping them across the Atlantic. I can buy
> books (used?) for less than a dollar, then pay 8 more for shipping to
> Spain. Thus the price difference on electronics books is much more on my
> favour.

Very true. I wish Linux Format came in a digital subscription that
allowed access to the archives and DVD downloads, because it costs us (I
think) around $120/year for the hardcopy subscription. There are
electronic versions available through a few different places, but they
don’t include the access to anything other than the magazine itself (not
the DVD or archives).

>> In a way, the argument does make a certain amount of sense, but does
>> ignore - as you point out - the obvious method of just buying a copy
>> and duplicating it. At the same time (from the mindset of someone
>> doing that kind of duplication/sale of counterfeit goods), why bother
>> even buying it when you can just download a perfectly good ISO?
>
> Well, to copy the graphics too :slight_smile:

Well, those are generally not difficult to find, either.

> Or to save time. Downloading an iso can take days if the sources are not
> that fast.
> Or to have control of the quality of the ripping they want, or the
> extras to include.
>
> Dunno, I have never downloaded an iso.

Nor have I, though I hear “through the grapevine” that it’s not hard to
find the right quality and selection.

>>> These people will make counterfeit copies by any means they need to.
>>> If the copies they want are not in internet they will buy a copy or
>>> shoplift it. There is nothing to stop them that way.
>>>
>>> The way to stop them is good police work.
>>
>> Yes. But choking off the supply can/could help, too.
>
> It would not stop them for a second.

Slowing them down isn’t a bad thing, though. Nothing is 100% effective,
but that doesn’t mean that no measures should be taken, either.

Jim

Jim Henderson
openSUSE Forums Administrator
Forum Use Terms & Conditions at http://tinyurl.com/openSUSE-T-C