Illegal downloaders to lose net connection

[llwyd]

question:

if you own a dvd, say a film, and then download an illigal copy of it on your pc (because your too lazy to go get the disk ) would that be illigal?

because its technically just a copy of what you have, and have paid for...

i've downloaded lots of...stuff...before, but in 99.9% of cases, its stuff i own, like i download a whole album, just because i dont wanna scratch my actual disk...

I think in that case, the downloading is illegal but having it on your computer isn't. Pretty hazy subject.

You would still get in trouble with your ISP though, they dont know if you own it or not.

 

[Toxcity]

I have another great way of looking at it... well basically if I film has been on TV.. it has been free to air.

Meaning I could have recorded it.. so I see every movie that has been on TV(terrestrial) legal to download.

I cannot see why not. So I have a harddisk full of old movies that have been at some point in time on the BBC or the other free to air channels.

See where I am coming from?

I think it is a good way at looking at the downloading of films.

 

[Azza]

Just incase no one has seen...

Net firms reject monitoring role

UK net firms are resisting government suggestions that they should do more to monitor what customers do online.

The industry association for net providers said legal and technical barriers prohibit them from being anything other than a "mere conduit".

 

[Hatman]

I guess to enforce this rule they would have to define what is illegal lol.. imo its basically how the uploaded file was obtained...I cant see how this would exempt say me buying a DVD at a shop OR stole it and uploading it and a mate downloading it. Is that illegal for both?

Or is it if I bought it from a shop or stole it what comes into play?

Touchy topic..

 

[realitybytes]

A little twist in the tale for ya`ll.

The cracking community are against torrents and p2p.

lol

That is just not true. Perhaps a small group might not support the use of it with their particular releases but the majority of the community does not feel that way. Gone are the days of limited groups and channels to obtain such things.

I think in that case, the downloading is illegal but having it on your computer isn't. Pretty hazy subject.

You would still get in trouble with your ISP though, they dont know if you own it or not.

Downloading would be illegal, and modifying the original copy you own in anyway is also illegal. So in essence if you convert it form one format to another breaks your eula. Chances of being charged of any crime is minimul but the fact is it is still illegal.

I have another great way of looking at it... well basically if I film has been on TV.. it has been free to air.

Meaning I could have recorded it.. so I see every movie that has been on TV(terrestrial) legal to download.

I cannot see why not. So I have a harddisk full of old movies that have been at some point in time on the BBC or the other free to air channels.

See where I am coming from?

I think it is a good way at looking at the downloading of films.

Spin it anyway you wish the fact still remains BBC paid for the broadcasting rights, that does not then allow somebody else to distribute it over another medium.

Just incase no one has seen...

Net firms reject monitoring role

Of course they will never back such drastic measures else they will lose a huge amount of customers, and find it hard to sell us all increased bandwidth execpt to maybe power users.

The true talking points around this have to be about the innocent subscribers whos connections have been compromised, and those with children who may have no clue about computers but their children install some p2p software non the wiser. Do we hold responsible the parents in that case? Or make criminals out of children? Or the subscriber of a line who doesnt know how to secure their wifi connection?

It has recently been published by Ricochet Infinity that the piracy of its games is "huge" however they also published that the impact on sales is "not so much". The majority of people who download illegally do so with no intention of purchasing the material, if it wasnt available to download for free they would simply find something else that is free. Note i said majority if anybody does download and later purchases dont take offence, as there are some.

At this stage though there really is nothing to worry about it is only at discussion stage where all sides put forward their case/concerns, I cannot see such measures being implemented especially with credible organisations already oposing it however something will come form this as ISPs will not be allowed to overlook all the illegal activity that goes on for much longer. As previously said though measures will be impleneted by the p2p communities that will get round it.

 

[Kerotan]

I think most people only download films or TV shows that are hard to get hold of without paying extortionate amounts. For example I was a big fan of LOST and then Rupert Murdoch has to go and buy it after 2 seasons, to try and force people who are fans of the show to take out a contract with Sky for ~£30 a month, even if that one show is all they wanted to watch. If you were to go out and buy a season of Lost on DVD it would probably cost you about £35 from an e-tailer, and for that you would get all the episodes, as well as bonus content. Looking at an original season which iirc had 24 episodes, that works out at around £1.45 an episode, hardly a premium price to pay. Now buying the show on DVD is all well and good, but that means you have to wait until the entire series has been shown to get it, and if you want to discuss it with your mates then you can't because you won't have watched it and it would spoil it for you. So, you decide to get Sky, because you really want to watch the show as it comes out and assuming that's all you watch on your Sky (Okay, a little unrealistic but just for comparison) you now find yourself paying £7.50 per episode! I strongly disagree with Sky's policy of allowing a show to be aired on Terrestrial/Freeview and then buying it up after 2 seasons, it might make good business sense but it's immoral! I for one enjoy knowing that thanks to the internet I don't have to give any money to someone who doesn't need it whatsoever and can still watch the shows that I like! I don't download music because I can, just sometimes I will download a particular song, sort of as a trial: If I like the artist I'll go out and buy their album and if I don't, the song gets deleted off my HDD. This is why I like internet radio, you can choose the genre that you like, as a way of finding new artists, and it's not illegal, so most of the time I just listen to that, it still uses up a lot of bandwidth but none of the songs end up on your HDD so your ISP can't complain about that.

 

[Toxcity]

Pretty good point Kerotan,

As siad earlier the BBC I-Player uses P2P.. looks like we are all going to lose our interwebz.

 

[ionicle]

if this does come in, i think i will be going the same way as llwyd, and starting my own isp, screw this, its just not fair.

 

[Toxcity]

Won't they brake the law doing this anywho?

I mean privacy... ?

 

[Rastalovich]

That is just not true. Perhaps a small group might not support the use of it with their particular releases but the majority of the community does not feel that way. Gone are the days of limited groups and channels to obtain such things.

Myth were against it.

RELOADED are.*

ViTALiTY are.*

Razor (1911) are.*

SKIDROW could care less afaik.

Fairlight don`t like it. (groups like fcku fairlight are those kicked out of fairlight)

The only incline I`ve got of embracing it are the likes of PROCYON who are pretty much ccd cloners.

They prefer keeping things priv8 and don`t care that every1 in the world gets these things.

* - particularly h8 it cos when they screw things up, the world has the screw-up and it`s a bad reflection on them. (and these screw up quite a bit). They dawned the mass of "Nuked" titles out there.

Without the p2p, the screw ups just disappear. And 1 title eventually gets to the public domain - and actually worked 100%. But since people can`t keep things to themselves....

Another valid thing for them is that people who work in shops clone CD/DVDs and p2p them at around the same point the groups get to work on them. So they`re not seen as being "quick".

 

[Pseudonym]

You've pretty much got no privacy as it is. We lost most of it in the name of anti-terrorism.

Saying that, i doubt this will go through, it's just more "tough on crime" bollox.

 

[realitybytes]

Myth were against it.

RELOADED are.*

ViTALiTY are.*

Razor (1911) are.*

SKIDROW could care less afaik.

Fairlight don`t like it. (groups like fcku fairlight are those kicked out of fairlight)

The only incline I`ve got of embracing it are the likes of PROCYON who are pretty much ccd cloners.

They prefer keeping things priv8 and don`t care that every1 in the world gets these things.

* - particularly h8 it cos when they screw things up, the world has the screw-up and it`s a bad reflection on them. (and these screw up quite a bit). They dawned the mass of "Nuked" titles out there.

Without the p2p, the screw ups just disappear. And 1 title eventually gets to the public domain - and actually worked 100%. But since people can`t keep things to themselves....

Another valid thing for them is that people who work in shops clone CD/DVDs and p2p them at around the same point the groups get to work on them. So they`re not seen as being "quick".

Not wanting to derail the topic but the problems with certain networks doos not mean they are actually against it so really what you should have said is fractions of the cracking community do not like certain things with some of the p2p networks. As they rely on p2p networks for the disribution of their works be it closed communities, irc, binaries, torrents etc. The releases are put in to public domain by most of the groups in the first place knowing that they will feed from distro to the other platforms, but then I guess you knew this already with your insight to the groups!

Plus I go back to my original statement whereby you have listed limited cracking groups who focus on one particular industry, those days are gone there are plenty of lone crackers and different industry focussed groups, who are just happy to show of their talents (cough if thats what it is).

I guess I will just leave it at that as it isnt really the issue of this topic. It was only your original sweaping statement tarnished a whole community which comprises of much more than the view you stated.

 

[tork]

it,a a 50/50 as to wether it be fair i do download load but not to much but loads of people d/l all the time which afects are web browser speeds so they should be some kind of control over it

 

[Rastalovich]

Not wanting to derail the topic but the problems with certain networks doos not mean they are actually against it so really what you should have said is fractions of the cracking community do not like certain things with some of the p2p networks. As they rely on p2p networks for the disribution of their works be it closed communities, irc, binaries, torrents etc. The releases are put in to public domain by most of the groups in the first place knowing that they will feed from distro to the other platforms, but then I guess you knew this already with your insight to the groups!

Plus I go back to my original statement whereby you have listed limited cracking groups who focus on one particular industry, those days are gone there are plenty of lone crackers and different industry focussed groups, who are just happy to show of their talents (cough if thats what it is).

I guess I will just leave it at that as it isnt really the issue of this topic. It was only your original sweaping statement tarnished a whole community which comprises of much more than the view you stated.

I could make the list bigger, the bigger list are peoples not in the public arena. The names I listed are most commonly known. They will even at point put their dispizal of p2p in their .nfos, which are uploaded seperately on the net. (u can google them I believe)

Cracking groups don`t release their stuff to the public. They have no requirement to release stuff. They aren`t interested in the world getting the stuff they do. There are only a limited number of groups out there. There may well be the odd kid-joe who copies something in his bedroom and p2p`s it, but they are by no means part of this community - they may wannabe.

There is a talent there. Particularly when it`s something that`s done well.

There are different tiers in operation here. The cracking group side of things get things trickle down to the next level, where there can be mass distribution and fellows that will, e.g. copy a Razor crack and rename it. In the most case there is something like a week in between these 2 phases, there are often titles that are NEVER released to the public. This often happens when a new protection system is broken, and a competition ensues.

The challenge is to crack it, have the cracking community know they`ve cracked it, and how good it may`ve been compare to perhaps another groups version - not to distribute it. This they have not interest in. Never have had interest in tbh.

Don`t do p2p, don`t do newsgroups, don`t do ftp (not public ones anyway, similarly irc), don`t do websites - some still won`t do Vista-only stuff.

And to add to that. They, at this level, support the concept of orginal software

 

[realitybytes]

You are talking about the past. Things have moved on alot since then, releases dont take 2 weeks anymore to become mainstream they are mass distributed within hours. In some cases even before cinemas viewing and shops stocking software/games.

Dont let the haze around the community dilude the reality of what it represents and how it operates it is like a smoke screen that will blind site you.

Am not trying to convince you of anything, seems you are dead set in your mind frame look beyond it and it might become apparent. Break it down in to its simplest parts and forget the speculation.

Am out this time anyway going round in circles too much reply if you want but am finished.

 

[Rastalovich]

You are talking about the past. Things have moved on alot since then, releases dont take 2 weeks anymore to become mainstream they are mass distributed within hours. In some cases even before cinemas viewing and shops stocking software/games.

Dont let the haze around the community dilude the reality of what it represents and how it operates it is like a smoke screen that will blind site you.

Am not trying to convince you of anything, seems you are dead set in your mind frame look beyond it and it might become apparent. Break it down in to its simplest parts and forget the speculation.

Am out this time anyway going round in circles too much reply if you want but am finished.

There is a fine line to walk, but there is no haze or smoke going on here.

I`m simply telling u how it is, without speculation.

You are talking about, imo, the layer below cracking. Film distribution has nothing to do with the scene, cams and the like are a complete different scene, as are apps and to be fair full movie releases and music. I will submit tho that by the time it gets to the p2p level, films, apps are in similar or the same places. Maybe this is where u experience it.

Even with the different scenes tho, there are versions of movies that are in their community that u will not see and will not be release to p2p until some regular person does it. StarWars was a good example, the p2p version was "vaseline" smudged, the community one was pure.