AGS Steam Games

Forums → WEPR → P2P not to blame!

57 14937
AnaLoGMunKy
offline
AnaLoGMunKy
1,573 posts
Blacksmith

Just read an article that states

[url=http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/p2p_not_to_blame_for_content_industry_failures_says_eu.php/url]

Im all for free P2P sharing to a point. If a new filmaker comes along with his product, he should be able to make a living from it if people want to see it and deem it worthy of attention. I do not, however, endorse giving george lucas and co my hard earned money for an average piece o crud like Indy and the kingdom of the crystal pile of poo. Sure the special effects were shiney... but FX does not make a good movie.

At every turn we are threatened with the law, warned of viruses (when its the film companies etc that actually release the fakes onto torrent sites) and guilt tripped about the destruction of the industry.

Im worried about our diminishing rights, internet nutrality, restricted content and the lies that get spewed about internet speeds, with which we are all being conned by the communications industry on.

One example of the way we are mislead about DL speeds is this:

Im on a 10Mb connection... and I get a usual 100KB a sec DL speed, or about 250-500KBsec if its a good night. The Highest Iv ever had is 1.1MB a sec... and this was only once... so really Im paying every month for a service I got on ONE particular DL. Not even for a day. It was a 150 meg file for 3 mins... £26 a month for 3 mins of 10Mb service???

Does anyone else see this as misleading or are you happy to be told you pay for a higher speed than you actually get becausebservers, other people, not being close to the exchange etc. slows your connection.

So overall what are your views on P2P sharing, and the restriction of content on the internet?

  • 57 Replies
HiddenDistance
offline
HiddenDistance
1,310 posts
Peasant

This is what Im talking about. You may have been talking to darkroot in the last post, but you still pull a snide tone when saying this stuff. Dont insult my intelligence because I believe in a different way of life from you. I certainly dont believe money is the be all and end all of life.


I'm not insulting your intelligence because you believe in a different way of life - I'm insulting your intelligence because you don't seem to understand the current way of life, and therefore, your criticisms of it are inherently flawed - something you also don't acknowledge.

Can you not see the problem with a few people earning all of the money. Can you really blame people when half the world has a terrible school system which is bias to their country and religion. Teach people to be thick and buy into a system. This is no conspiracy crap, its real. Using subliminal tricks and smells and pictures to get people to lead the lives they want. Is that choice?


Your complaint may have to do with the current state of the world's economy, but again, painfully, has nothing to do with P2P file sharing. If you want to rant about how a handful of people in the world have all the money - make a thread about that instead.

it's not my responsibility - it's theirs, it's yours, it's all of ours.


And thats a contradiction.


No, it isn't. If you had read the entire section and not quoted one tiny line for the purposes of taking me out of context, you would understand that the responsibility I am talking about lies in the hands of the individual.

Therefore, someone else's buying habits are not my responsibility, however it is theirs, and yours are your own, and my buying habits are my own responsibility. There is no contradiction there. I'll put the thematic wrap-up of that paragraph in bold here for emphasis:

People are responsible for their own actions - no exceptions.

P2P doesnt really affect buyer choice. People WILL and ARE buying regardless of P2P and piracy!


It affects some buyer choice - in that, there are several groups we can throw 'consumers' into.

1. There are people who will never buy your IP, at any time, and will only pirate it. If they were unable to pirate it, they won't purchase it.

2. There are people who may be inclined to buy your IP, but instead pirate it because of ease of access or would rather get it for free. Without access to it through piracy, they would purchase it.

3. There are people who do buy your IP.

With P2P, the second group who make up the potential consumers may be more inclined to get a product for free then pay for it, but in absence of a means to get it for free, will wind up purchasing it. There's no reason to pander to the first group, or the third group. It's the people inbetween that allows piracy and P2P file sharing to damage the income of a company, musician, artist, etc.
AnaLoGMunKy
offline
AnaLoGMunKy
1,573 posts
Blacksmith

http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/12/most-pirated-movie-makes-heaps-money

I'm insulting your intelligence because you don't seem to understand the current way of life


you dont know me... and yet you say this... your intelligence xept to push an insult is starting to come into question now. I DO believe in a different way of life, why should it be what your view of "the current way we live" is? You seem to have NO concept of other ways to live.

it's not my responsibility - it's theirs, it's yours, it's all of ours.


Thats not a misquote. Its a bad way to write what you were trying to say. You make a contradiction by saying its not my responsibility, then saying its all of ours. I guess you will not be chosen to write a historical quote anytime soon.

You also have no concept of "we are all one"... otherwise you would see that your ACTIONS are your own responsibility, but what you do CAN and DOES affect others around you... I dont want to live in a world of people who only care for themselves. Are you that person, or are you just saying this to absolve a debate to me about personal responsibility. You seem like a person who will say what they can to appear intelligent, good luck with that.

And as the link at the top shows, they will still make their money. I dont come into any of the groups, because I would purchased if I could, but cannot afford to. Do you have any idea what its like to be poor, because it seems like you dont.
HiddenDistance
offline
HiddenDistance
1,310 posts
Peasant

you dont know me... and yet you say this...


I know what you've posted in this thread about how the system currently works, and seeing that you didn't understand why farmers or people working in food services industry get *something* for their valuable *food* product, instead of being forced to give it away because there's apparently enough to feed everyone according to you, yes - I said that. If there's some other you that I'm supposed to know because they make more intelligent posts, maybe you should let him come out and play.

intelligence xept to push an insult is starting to come into question now.


Whether or not I choose to insult I person I don't particularly like has nothing to do with my intelligence, it has to do with whether or not I choose to be a jerk to people I dislike.

I DO believe in a different way of life, why should it be what your view of "the current way we live" is? You seem to have NO concept of other ways to live.


You believe in another way of life. That's great. Currently, we're stuck with this one, and you don't seem to have an understanding of it. Makes it difficult to take you seriously at all about rules and laws that we abide by in the current system and why they're in place.

Thats not a misquote. Its a bad way to write what you were trying to say. You make a contradiction by saying its not my responsibility, then saying its all of ours. I guess you will not be chosen to write a historical quote anytime soon.


Way to try to make it look like you're the one taking the moral high road by saying I'm unintelligent to insult you and then return insults back. As for it being a bad way to write what I was saying? Yeah, a lot of the time I write how I speak in conversation; it doesn't always work out fo the best. I don't give a tinker's dam if I get quoted historically, that's not something in which I hold value.

You also have no concept of "we are all one"


That would be because we're not. There are billions of people in this world who couldn't care any less about me. There are also people in this world, like you - that I have no interest in helping or being nice to. As for your actions having an effect on others, it's certainly true, but doesn't apply in this discussion in the same way. Just because a company publishes music or movies, or makes jeans, or cologne, or fancy cars; does not mean that you are forced to buy them. Your delusion that we all *have* to buy things because we're somehow slaves to crappy and lame marketing campaigns is way out there.

You seem like a person who will say what they can to appear intelligent, good luck with that.


And another insult. Guess you're not very smart either according to your own standards, right?

And as the link at the top shows, they will still make their money. I dont come into any of the groups, because I would purchased if I could, but cannot afford to. Do you have any idea what its like to be poor, because it seems like you dont.


Just because they still "make their money" does not mean that P2P file sharing and piracy is somehow okay. It's still a breach of IP laws, and you're still getting something for nothing.

Do I know what it's like to be poor? I have a good education and a decent job - what do you think? I'd wager you don't know either though; in my books someone that is 'oor' is trying to have something to eat every day, not someone who spends luxury time on a computer, with internet access, posting garbage on a flash games forum.
AnaLoGMunKy
offline
AnaLoGMunKy
1,573 posts
Blacksmith

You really dont have a clue do you. You have absolutly no idea whats out there other than your way of life and the stuff you are spoon fed in school. Its pretty obvious from the way you say things. In fact, I love the way you say Im delusional because I say we are all one, and because I believe in a different way of life but we are "stuck with this one".

I know what you've posted in this thread about how the system currently works, and seeing that you didn't understand why farmers or people working in food services industry get *something* for their valuable *food* product, instead of being forced to give it away because there's apparently enough to feed everyone according to you


Please show how I dont understand how the food industry works. I understand how a money based society works. It doesnt change at all regardless of what you sell. Its about making money. Its really quite simple. We have enuf food to feed the world and you worry about a farmer making his "worth" from the food he grows. Your priority is based upon a money making society. Of course if we just accepted we are "stuck with this one" then progress and prosperity would never happen. I can dream of things being better.

Whether or not I choose to insult I person I don't particularly like has nothing to do with my intelligence, it has to do with whether or not I choose to be a jerk to people I dislike.


It also has to do with having a valid debate. You however made the dislike as soon as you saw some posts, because my world view is a bit dreamy and idealistic. You insulted my intelligence, I did it back. Did you like it? No! In fact you disliked it so much you put lots of effort into calling me delusional and picking apart ME and not my OP.

Makes it difficult to take you seriously at all about rules and laws that we abide by in the current system and why they're in place.


Are we talking about "thou shalt not kill" or "thou shalt not download". Why should I sit and accept the rules because you agree with them. I think there is a better way for us to run our system. Do you? So far Im guessing your happy with the current status.

Your delusion that we all *have* to buy things because we're somehow slaves to crappy and lame marketing campaigns is way out there.


I never said that. Dont put words in my mouth, it lacks any real information in a debate. You are arguing, not debating on my topic.

As I have stated before, we ARE manipulated at every turn thru TV, advertising and news. How is this delusional to be angry at blatent manipulation. These marketing campaigns are far from lame. I wouldnt call million dollar advertising campaign a lame thing. And I have to be the hippy and say... WTF are they spending money that could help people in the world for on advertising.
Just so you understand me properly, I do actually know why they do this, its to make money.

It's still a breach of IP laws, and you're still getting something for nothing.


And the world is black and white. Take your IP laws and stick em. I only take something for nothing from people that can afford it. And If it really deserves my earnings, I save and buy it. I have all the QOTSA albums for that very reason.

Do I know what it's like to be poor? I have a good education and a decent job - what do you think? I'd wager you don't know either though; in my books someone that is 'oor' is trying to have something to eat every day, not someone who spends luxury time on a computer, with internet access, posting garbage on a flash games forum.


So because I come onto an internet forum and post my views for debate, that makes me well off. I have to admit Iv been worse, but to say I dont know. Well that just makes me plain angry. Im not against you because you have never known poverty, but to push it in the face of someone who has??? You just lost your wager.
HiddenDistance
offline
HiddenDistance
1,310 posts
Peasant

You know, you post a lot about how you're dreamy, and idealistic, but you haven't come up with a single thing to show how *you* could make a better system. That's where the dislike I was talking about comes from. You're another one of these armchair philosophers that's never going to lift a finger to make a difference in something you clearly seem to care about.

Just take a look even in this last post of yours:

I believe in a different way of life but we are "stuck with this one".


my world view is a bit dreamy and idealistic.


I think there is a better way for us to run our system.


Well, we're all waiting with bated breath just to hear your great ideas.

No! In fact you disliked it so much you put lots of effort into calling me delusional and picking apart ME and not my OP.


Right.. I can't stand being insulted by someone who's opinion I care nothing about it. I was just using it to insult you further - hoisted on your own petard, as it were.

I've already destroyed your OP - something which you stopped arguing *pages* ago. You're going on and on about your fix the world crap, and barely a word about P2P, piracy, and restriction of content over the internet.

I never said that. Dont put words in my mouth, it lacks any real information in a debate.


Oh really? You have a bad memory. In response to my post:

"No it isn't. I don't think I've been 'seduced' by a single piece of marketing in my entire teenage/adult life."

You said:

That, sir... is an outright lie. There is not one person, no matter how pure of thought or steadyness of direction, that can avoid the constant barrage of advertising, its also subliminal!. You cant escape, even when you turn of that tv is pumping messages into your brain.


So according to you, no one is capable of resisting the marketing machine, the "constant barrage of advertising" which you can't escape - which would mean that you just *have* to buy it. I'm not the one putting ridiculous words in your mouth; blame yourself.

And the world is black and white. Take your IP laws and stick em. I only take something for nothing from people that can afford it.


And what about the artists that can't afford it? You said in your OP that it was great that a filmmaker makes a living off of their work, and then turn around and say it's okay to pirate the kingdom of the crystal skull, purely because you don't seem to like it very much. If P2P file sharing was legal and piracy was legal tomorrow, musicians, artists, filmmakers of all kinds would be seriously hurting because of it. The only reason why it's not *as* damaging is because only people on the fringe who are willing to break laws are the only ones doing it. Which speaks to the point - should it be legal, or should it remain illegal because it hurts buisnesses; and that's what they all are, be it small or large. So you go ahead and take whatever you want if it makes you feel like you're sticking it to the man or whatever hogwash you believe in; you clearly feel justified in being lazy and stealing from people who have worked on something - which by the sounds of it, you wouldn't know a thing about.

I'm done with your thread - you can't even keep yourself on topic. If you want to discuss this crap, make another thread and debate it with people that are interested - I came here to talk about P2P, internet file sharing, and content restriction; things you clearly know nothing about.
AnaLoGMunKy
offline
AnaLoGMunKy
1,573 posts
Blacksmith

I'm done with your thread - you can't even keep yourself on topic. If you want to discuss this crap, make another thread and debate it with people that are interested - I came here to talk about P2P, internet file sharing, and content restriction; things you clearly know nothing about.


Good, f**k off and argue with someone else then. I will stay on topic with everyone else who decides to talk about P2P and not go into personal issues to feel like they have some strength in a debate.
AnaLoGMunKy
offline
AnaLoGMunKy
1,573 posts
Blacksmith

Here is a quote from This article...

http://www.out-law.com/page-4204

"The music industry has been actively selling a big lie. That lie begins with the assertion that the peer-to-peer is a rogue industry. Well rogue industries don't form trade associations in Washington DC. Rogue industries don't create self-imposed codes of conduct. Rogue industries don't testify before Congress. Rogue industries don't work with the FBI and other law enforcement agencies to track down and prosecute paedophiles.

"We're not a rogue industry. Any suggestion to the contrary is a direct result of the cynical and egregious propaganda that the RIAA disseminates on a daily basis."

Rosso continued:

"The music industry is convinced that P2P technology is incompatible with what they do. [...] If the music industry had become early adopters and users of this technology, they wouldn't be having anywhere near the problems that they are experiencing today. There's just no doubt about that. But, instead, they want to blame file-sharing for all their problems when, in any fair and reasoned analysis, it only represents at worst a very small portion of these problems."


Here are a couple more articles that, if you have the tyme, are worth scrolling thru. Its not just dreamers that think P2P is not to blame for the entertainment industrys current landslide.

http://www.perceptric.com/blog/Cinema/_archives/2009/4/21/4159595.html

http://www.perceptric.com/blog/_archives/2009/8/4/4277060.html

Another quote from this site...

http://blogs.computerworld.com/riaa_capitol_vs_thomas_rasset_1_92_m_p2p_damages

Showing the lengths the industry will go to, to get back at P2P.

Look at the RIAA's 2001 marketing stats (last year I could find figures for new releases). On average each new CD title brought in about $500,000 in revenue. If you figure conservatively 8 songs per CD, that works out to $62,500 per song.

In other words, the jury awarded more averages damages per song than if she'd prevented all copies of the song from ever being sold.


Another article showing Obama's stance on P2P...

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10201831-38.html
Darkroot
offline
Darkroot
2,763 posts
Peasant

This has become a little to personal. Lets just focus on the argument and not make it personal.

First of all personally an a universal truth I believe all information should be assessable to anyone. I know this not to be feasible because people want power and money gives power. So they want to charge for the information.

Secondly there are really poor people but most people in your region have enough money for food and basic necessities. Your telling me that they poor people should just be happy with what they have while other people prance around to restaurants, movie theatres and others get enough money to make a pools filled with it.

Piracy only exists because people are unhappy. I'm not say piracy is wholly good or bad. But it was only created because the playing field was uneven.

waterfish333
offline
waterfish333
52 posts
Nomad

Just because you are not removing a physical object doesn't constitute it not being theft. Here's another scenario:

You walk into a completely empty, desolate hair salon. You get your hair cut and no customer comes in the entire time. When it comes time to pay (note: you got no styling products or anything put on your hair, just cut off) you run out the door without paying.

Most people would say "of course that's wrong, but it's different." Here's the most common arguments I've heard.
"Your stealing because she had to invest time and money into getting her license" Movie makers also invested time and money into making movies.

"You took her time" This is the most common one I've heard. Notice I said there were no other customers, so had I not have come in she wouldn't have made anything anyway, so I didn't take up time she could have been using productively anyway. The common counterpoint to my argument is the next one on the list.

"She had to put effort into cutting your hair, so you took up her energy" True, but actors, directors, cameramen, post-production editors, make-up crews, writers, (I can go on) all had to put effort into making the movie. If you download the movie without paying for it, your getting the fruit of their effort without compensating them for it.

Piracy is theft, it's just theft of a service rather than a good. The argument that piracy is not theft because it's making a copy is just people who pirate but want to keep a clean conscience.

AnaLoGMunKy
offline
AnaLoGMunKy
1,573 posts
Blacksmith

Why is streaming perfectly legal and not theft?

Darkroot
offline
Darkroot
2,763 posts
Peasant

Well streaming is technically illegal for the vendor but not for the viewer.

Armed_Blade
offline
Armed_Blade
1,482 posts
Shepherd

Well streaming is technically illegal for the vendor but not for the viewer.


Where did that come from? If I make a video of -- lets say an NBA game and I have written/legalized consent of the NBA to distribute such material for whatever purpose of making/not making money -- Why am I not allowed to do so?

Let me say this without an opinion if I can.
Downloading files is not illegal.
Every time you visit a webpage, you've downloaded files -- You dirty thief. [Not?]

P2P [Peer-To-Peer] means any type of file share where you, the peer, download bits of content, the copied and uploaded version of the file from another server. [Whether it be a computer or a big machine or whatever]

BitTorrent is some uber fast powertechnology that the world uses because its just that kick ass. If you have enough seeds [People with the copy distributing the content] and peers to help out [People downloading from the server + seeds, but also throw out what they have to you] Then you are, in essence, technically using the fastest file sharing mechanism on earth. [Excluding personal sharing servers from companies that boom at like 5MBPS-16MBPS]

(PS: I have a 768K modem but I've downloaded over 2mbps off the Vuze torrent client server when downloading one of their movies? Wtf?)

So -- Why is it illegal? Its not.
Problem is -- what you CHOSE to Download is Illegal.
Its Piracy, but thats Illegal, because it is copyright infringement. You do not have the owners consent to use it, therefore you can not download it, and technically its also illegal to seed what illegal material you have because you can't distribute it! If you look at mininova.com now, they were forced to wipe out all of their copyrighted movies because the dutch gov't attacked them. Switzerland's Pirate Bay and Btjunkie are under attack as it is!
I think Isohunt is dealing with the MPAA or whoever, too.

Mininova has like... 1000 things to download now, its practically useless. Everything that goes there has to be all free and legal and nasty

My own opinion is that you ARE ripping somebody off, but Copyright policies over the internet are too strict and infringement will and always will happen if a movie is going to party for the next 50 years under the owners power. Granted, Most of the time people usually download and nobody cares, but eventually someone will.
You should get caught if your downloading like 200 Gigs and leave your comp off for hours,

Then again, they didn't work hard for it at all. They're all millionaires, and the lame capitalization of their industry is an expense to those that wish they could leave the lifes of those that watch movies a ton -- and so, they bring it upon themselves to see some dude downloading 'Avatar 3.99 Gigs Ps3 H-D Blueray' and honestly wanting to sue them.

Its not really cool, and I feel that Copyright restrictions need to be changed because the Capitalist thumb of America is putting on more pressure than it should and is cutting off our right to the Intarwebz. I don't think its cool that I should be the problem because someone else is throwing out free stuff. Its not morally correct and I have barely done much of it myself [A bit a few years back when I thought it was legal ] but they should first get at the people uploading videos off of DVDrips and putting them up in the first place.
Darkroot
offline
Darkroot
2,763 posts
Peasant

I thought It was implied the vendor/download that was something had copyright against spreading without the authors consent.

chitown
offline
chitown
1,614 posts
Farmer

so then is P2P illegal?

Armed_Blade
offline
Armed_Blade
1,482 posts
Shepherd

P2P is not illegal, but what you do with it can be.

Like having a knife isn't illegal. It is if you use that knife to cut someones head off.

Having a P2P connection with others through a BitTorrent client is legal.
Having that connection and sharing/distributing files that aren't yours is illegal.

Showing 31-45 of 57