sometimes the lack of information is intentional by the distributor/creator to confuse the public into buying their product. such as when you encounter the bundling of music tracks where there may be one or two good ones and the rest are not. I'd rather spend $2 to buy the tracks instead of $15 for the CD, or movie trailers that have all the good parts and one is sadly dissapointed when you go to see the movie.

consumer protection is sadly lacking or with insufficient teeth to provide the consumer with a recourse when encountering fraudulent business activities that are intended to take advantage of the buyer. the saying is "buyer beware" not the other way around and there is a reason for this. PT Barnum said it best, "...there's one born every second." (or something like that)

example: free roof estimates. roofing companies around here will give a free roof estimate but will charge you $100+ to come out and do it.

my point is that while I do not condone the pirating of software for the sake of getting something for nothing there is an element of getting even that has an appeal.

Technically that's true, yes. I never claimed it was magic . What it does is store it in cache memory as it streams the video, but f you refresh a page everything you watched is gone. I know this because it's how Netflix works and Fancast and YouTube and all those video streaming sites. The only thing I'm worried about is the poor people who will be prosecuted just because they went to those sites. If they decide to go after the people who watched illegal movies on sites like Novamov or DivXDen how are they going to know who went there on purpose to watch something illegally and who went there by accident because they were redirected from a pop-up or another website?

I've got Netflix so I don't have to resort to watching crappy cams of things. I either watch my movies there or I go to the movies when something comes out I want to see. I watch almost all my TV shows on sites like Fancast and Hulu so I can watch them at My schedule and not have to be awake and in front of the TV at a certain time to catch the latest episode of my favorite shows. Still though, I've watched things on Novamov that have been uploaded there legally, like documentaries. How will prosecutors know for certain that I went there and watched something legal or illegal?

Instead of going after the individual people who visit certain IP's or Domains they should go after the sites themselves. The problem I see is that the bulk of these sites aren't in the U.S. They're in Europe and China and other places half way around the globe. It's easier for the U.S. Gov to either go after it's own people or to just block all U.S. ISP's from providing access to the offending IP's. China already does this. The Chinese Gov controls the flow of information in and out of China on the internet. China how-ever doesn't give a rat's ass about American copyrights. If you go to China's equivalent of YouTube it's slap FULL of American copyrighted material. Movies, TV Shows, Music Videos and Concerts, you name it. If it's ever been put on Video in the U.S. or by a U.S. company you'll be able to find it hosted on a Chinese website. I'm not exaggerating there in the slightest. I know certain sites (which I will not post here) in China that a person can go to and watch ANY Episode of Star Trek....and I mean ANY EPISODE, from the Original Star Trek to the final Episode of Enterprise. If the U.S. Government wants to stop people from watching stuff for free on these sites they need to petition the Governments of countries these sites are in to shut them down, Not file legal action and levy heavy fines on it's own citizens.

 

Indeed. I don't really go to the WC site. I make all my posts here on the Elemental forums. That's why I didn't know I was "Promoted" or what it meant. Sometimes I get messages from things on the WC site and I'm like "uuhhh, what?" and then I realized everything was networked.

It doesn't matter what the US Government wants, the copyright holders are responsible for pursuing infringement through the legal channels made available to them... and if they happen to fail in China, it's because your government also would have failed.  As you stated, China doesn't give a rat's ass, so it matters not who approaches there to cease and desist.

What's more, why should wealthy movie and music moguls be able to offload the onus of copyright infringement pursuit to government, AKA, the taxpayer?  The RIAA spent close to 70 million in legal costs and recouped just 1.3 million in settlements...  now is that what US taxpayers want their government to be spending THEIR money on, for little or no return?

I know if it was me, that I'd rather keep MY hard earned in my own pocket... not funding government to give obscenely wealthy media entrepreneurs a free hand up.

That's even more pathetic an excuse than crying poor.

Pathetic isn't really strong enough....but it'll do.

Damn straight and no sh!t there, brother. Amen. A-fk'n-men!!!

Jafinator...be nice

well, when you get ripped off, getting even is a thought that most of us will entertain and most of us will discard but there are those...

and Jafo, you've never wanted to get even for any reason, at any time in your life.

Getting even, yes.

You do realise you don't 'get ripped off' by record companies/whatever if you simply do NOT buy their products?

It's quite possible people are being 'ripped off' paying too much for a Ferrari....afterall it's 'just' a car.

I know....I'll steal one instead.  THAT will teach them.

Nothing is actually a 'rip-off'. It has a price.  If however it is exorbitant aka out of your price range....you simply don't buy it.

Why do people think that the Music Industry [for example] has a sole reason for existence and that is to piss off Joe Public...to the point where they will steal their product?

Is it that since the dawn of the recording industry the only functional means of reproduction meant bunching music into albums?

There were singles [but damn...they had 2 sides....golly] EPs...shit....4 songs.

Now there is a medium improvement...downloads.....which means individual tracks....so....score a plus for the consumer.....

There WAS NO WAY similar 100 years ago.

The recording industry is catching up with the kiddies on the net....it's STILL a young entity, you know....it takes time to get these 'bastard corporations' to change their thinking too....they're too busy fucking the little man, apparently.

What amazes me is the animosity shown by the criminals [sorry....liberationistic free-thinking pirates] towards the industry.

Before the advent of the Net their job [giving it to the man] was just too bloody hard for them they had to run home to their mums and cry.

But what a saviour the net is.  Any knuckle-dragger with half a brain can google 'torrent' and get something for nothing.

It's fantastic.

Brilliant.

People should die...willingly to defend our rights to access warez so easily.

I propose....all those people....

....over there.....-------------------------------------->

Not me.  I just want my shit for nix.

Jafo, thank you for acknowledging that you are human after all.

I don't disagree with what has been said regarding piracy as a bad thing. I only wanted to point out that some people may pirate to get even and that consumer protection sucks.

you assume that people who pirate are stupid and lacking a fully functional brain, or that is your opinion of them, when actually they could be very smart people who just don't get it. what were those file sharing programs that came out sometime ago that initially got the music industry so upset, I'm pretty sure those programs were written by some pretty smart people.

 

Just wanted to state something about the DRM that E.A and Ubisoft use.

 

It is catching on alot of companies are trying to use it. Unfortunately this backfired on them cause all of the torrenting sites and pirates have cracks so they can play without hassle whereas poorsaps like me whom bought the game legit *like settlers 7* have to deal with ridiculous protection systems.

 

combine that with the even more extreme security system that E.A is discussing using to stop pirates and its really getting out of hand *the more extreme system being a modificiation of tages i believe that will shut down P.C's that are attempting to play a cracked exe* somesuch its all quite ridiculous.

Let's all point our finger at the corporation's/people wanting to protect their IP instead of the real problem that forces the copyright holder to implement such drastic measures with DRM and lawsuits to protect their stuff.. 

Seems easier to blame the Corporation than pirate root cause.

But in all fairness, without the advent of the Net, the IP rights holders wouldn't be able to catch those violating the IP rights -- In order to nail those giving it to the man, the industries are utilizing crawlers and fingering through the "pirates" hard drive, in essence "breaking and entering."  Before the advent of the Net, people trying to give it to the man had to sit around with their boom box queued up to the radio station waiting to hit the "record" button in order to get their free music, and it was just too bloody hard for the industry to FIND those bloody mix tape-makin' thieves.

That is an odd statement from someone who is using a corporate logo for their member image, I know the color is different but I believe you would still need permission from the  owner to use it. If you are the owner then I apologize for pointing that out! 

Nah, he wouldn't do that... he couldn't.  Dang!!!!  There go all my mental images of a blue-helmeted caricature with 'tude.

Thing is, a lot of pirates are from impoverished countries, and they do what they do as a so-called free service to their countrymen who can not afford a lot.  Yeah, I read it in an web interview with a Malaysian pirate that was on a site I got linked to from one of those legal file sharing sites like majorgeeks, filehippo, etc. Basically, he said that he didn't do it for money or fame, just to distribute a bit of "something nice" to those less fortunate in the world. 

I don't know there's such a thing as doing the wrong thing for the right reason, but that's how he saw it, bringing the joy of music to the $2.95 mp3 players of those who otherwise couldn't afford to buy the player AND music to go on it.  Sure, he can afford to be generous with somebody else's intellectual property, but in a society where government and law enforcement is as corrupt as can be, and stealing is an every day occurrence just to survive, pilfering a little music is hardly a crime... and there is no blood, no starvation as a result, so to them it is victimless, with the copyright holder a whole world away.  Yeah, we know it is wrong, but in such societies, with different cultures and values, it's a little hard to judge them for something almost as natural to them as breathing.

And of course, not all pirates reside in impoverished, third-world countries... and it is these "smart ones" the entertainment industry should be after.  These are the serious pirates who do profit from their illicit trade... and the ones costing the music and movie industries money by way of counterfeit CD;s/DVD's, because punters are buying these instead of the genuine articles. The same can't be said of illegal file downloads, however, that monies are being lost, because the majority of downloaders  state they would never have purchased the item(s) anyway.  

It stands to reason, then, from an economic viewpoint, that the media moguls should be hunting these professional pirates with the technology to make authentic looking copies, instead of the little or no consequence bit players with very little or no impact on actual profits.  So why is it, then, they can spend millions upon millions chasing piddling bit players for very little return while more professional operations seem (going by the news) to go untouched.  It make no fucking economic sense to me at all... and now the bastards want to rope in government into the ill-conceived plan as well, gimme a break.

Great point, Starkers!  I've been educating myself about IP ever since these discussions lately in the forums.  What we, in the richer nations view as stealing, in poorer countries is actually accessing culture.  Lets set aside our ideas about morality for IP owners for a minute and take a look at the issue globally.  Do large, multinational corporations have an ulterior motive to keeping knowledge and culture protected, in their control, in essence access to a way of life dolled out to only those who have the capital with which to purchase it?  With most of our goods being created by third world countries, is there a benefit for large corporations to keep their workers culture ignorant?

What about things like the IP stranglehold Monsanto now has on soybean seed?  I just finished washing Food, Inc. on Netflix and quite frankly, I'm frightened to my core!  That campy, old '70s movie Soylent Green, isn't so far off...when you look at the way the food industry treats not only it's product, but it's workers, Soylent Green (90% of what's sitting on the grocery shelves) IS PEOPLE!  If Monsanto has patented food--and has total control on what we consume, what we eat, the things we need to live--then they control us!  They're certainly controlling the farmers who are trying to resist them (read up on the issue of GMO seed, and what happens to farmers who don't use GMO seeds -- contamination of their fields by their neighbor's seed, sends them into bankruptcy!)  Diversity has been all but destroyed when it comes to soybeans right now.  THAT could happen with everything, if the IP right's holders keep pushing in the direction they're going. 

No single individual has the sort of power to take on large, multinational corporate powers, because single individuals have lives to life outside of the issue, and large corporations do not.  This issue is not just about ownership, it's about sustainability, it's about control, it's about variety and diversity.  Once the strongest, most powerful corporations ("neither body to jail nor soul to damn - Lord Edward Thurlow) control all intellectual property, they control US! 

There has to be a happy medium somewhere, or we're all just slaves.

Actually, yes, let's all blame the companies.... because DRM and other forms of protection had their origins long before software piracy became the significant problem it is today.  Microsoft and other software developers were implementing forms of DRM years ago, to stop one copy of a software package being installed on a second PC... NO, they wanted to sell one person two or more licenses, because heaven forbid he/she would actually own a copy, much less have it for greater convenience sake in two locations in the same household/office.

Yup, it's amazing the monster you create when your mind runs rampant thinking "what about me" and then put up all these walls to keep the bad element out.  You become a prisoner of your own making... just as some companies have become victims of their own making by putting up walls to drive an extra buck from the consumer.  How does that old saying go: "Invent a better lock, and they will invent a better lockpick"? 

And you know what???  The harder they force DRM down customers throats, the harder pirates will fight to crack it and distribute 'clean' copies.  Frankly, while I have no liking for thieves, counterfeiters or media pirates, I have absolutely no sympathy for the greed driven moguls, either.  Most need a serious rethink about their marketing and customer service/relations, but most won't do it because they're either too scared to drop a cent per item, or they've got their head so far up each others arses they can't see the light at the end of the tunnel.... and if that's the case they deserve to go under.

 

A matter of fact I did obtain the right permissions a few years ago, I had went as far as including the final image in an email.

Do I still have the email exchanges somewhere...maybe( I can't keep everything )...but I am not going to hunt them down and if Nvidia wanted me to take it down I would respect their decision!

You make some great points here, Karen, especially the one about the largest corporations controlling us through the products/media they sell.  We are a captive market/slaves to the corporations because all the hype and advertising tell us that these are all "must haves' in this consumerist society we live in... and you can't escape the hard-sell because advertising is everywhere you damn well look.  We are slaves to the corporations because even though the CEO's and wealthy shareholders make up less than 5% of the world's population, they control 95% of the worlds wealth and resources... an unhappy ratio that needs to change drastically if companies are ever to strike a happy accord with their customers. 

Besides, if companies hold all the wealth, and the public has little or no propensity to pay, the long list of have-nots grows and warehouses are stockpiled with goods they cannot sell.  Makes no sense to me... choking off the source of one's income/revenue.  Hehe, I remember seeing this news item on TV during the worldwide economic crisis, about a US company that had maintained exceptionally high prices on all its products... and now they can't give 'em away, because nobody has any money.  I laugh because their greed dictated high prices... and profits to the shareholders instead of plowing some back into the community (via decent wages/community works, etc), thus allowing the average joe to spend a buck on a non-essential once in a while.

As for the happy medium... only when greed is taken out of the corporation... and I mean not from its spelling.  And we could do without all the hard sell plastered on the back of every cab, bus and train... every vacant wall, billboard and sports arena... every 10 mins on TV and radio... every damned page on the freakin' internet.

However, it will snow black with pink polka dots snow before that happens... they'd like their 95% of the world's wealth to become 96%

Actually, there is such thing as a rip off... like when you know it costs a company only 10c to manufacture something, yet they sell it for something like $5.00 or more...  Yes, it is the consumer's prerogative to buy, or not, but when exorbitant prices are levied in essential items such as food and the like) one's prerogatives become fewer and fewer.

Oh, and it's NOT about sticking it to the man for me.  While some thoroughly deserve having it stuck to them, I am more concerned with fair play and honesty from our corporations... concepts which seem to have eluded some power players as they clawed and cheated their way to he top of the crap heap.  I remember the CEO of a company for which I worked in the 70's, saying: "I'd steal my mother's purse and sell it back to her empty if it meant I'd get ahead."... and a colleague who knew him pretty well saying: "Better believe it... he'd do it alright!"   Word had it around the company that he cashed in his grandmother's funeral fund, then left her body in a Port Morseby mortuary until the Papua New Guinea government gave her a pauper's funeral.  So no, given that and other experiences, I have little or no respect for corporate high flyers.

That's Corporation mentality -- there is no thought for long-term sustainable sales, because the goal isn't to sell -- the goal is to show a profit to the shareholders for the present fiscal period.



It's not just that they are telling us through advertising that we must have their product...they're using very sophisticated mind control techniques (like using sex in an ad) that work on the brains subliminal pathways, making us FEEL things that override what we think.  It's not as easy as just saying no!  Don't even get me started with the way they've exploited our children in these mind control games.  Advertising aimed at children should be illegal.

I honestly don't see the point in arguing piracy.  

 

There is a VERY visible line and a person decides on which side to stand.

 

Buy the product = Legal

Pirate the product = Illegal

 

You know which side you stand on.  you suffer whatever happens to you, because you take responsibility for you actions.  If you can't take responsibility for your actions, guess you will call anything against you unfair.  However, I guess you can always drink and drive and kill someone, but get out of jail in 3 years.  

Yeah, right.  Chicken and egg.

Before piracy was a significant problem guess what....it was already a problem.

That's it, the "let's get rich quick today, for tomorrow the peons have no money... we took it all off them already." mentality.  It makes better economic sense to maintain a viable market place through fair and consistent pricing, thus enabling a greater number of sales through increased propensity to pay, but alas, the corporations still charge the maximum they think the market can bear,  Trouble with that flawed mentality is that often the demographics used to project sales are artificially created by spin doctors and not all potential buyers fit into the estimated income brackets, so not all of them will be able to afford the products.... meaning some markets experience gluts while others are in shortage. 

Now I've seen first-hand what happens to such things as perishable food items when in glut, and it is/was not pretty.  I briefly worked for the largest supermarket chain in Australia... until I quit... told 'em to shove it up their arse over slimy business practices.  Anyway, to cut a short story long, because of gluts, over-ordering, etc, Woolworths throw away tons and tons of perfectly edible food every day.  It is perfectly good food that could be handed to charities struggling to run aged care homes, church groups trying to help the homeless and less fortunate... but no, Woolworths has no such charity within it, and that food is consigned to refuse disposal points.  Nope, if they CAN'T sell it, it is dumped.

There's no argument about the rights or wrongs of piracy here!  What is being debated, however, is whether the media barons have the right to enlist the government and its resources to pursue copyright infringements... AT TAXPAYERS EXPENSE.  Also being discussed is corporate greed, and whether corporations deserve any sympathy.  While some may argue yes, the evidence of slimy corporate behaviour would strongly suggest otherwise.

(and there's that effing Yankee spell checker again... telling me the correct English way to spell behaviour is incorrect) hehe

media barons....at Taxpayers' expense...corporate greed....slimy corporate....

You're not bitter, are you?  Some guy with a cigar and a Roller scared your mum when she was preggers with you?

Slimy Corporations and media barons pay taxes too.

They are entitled to see their taxes in use just as the noble true-blue fair-dinkum straight-as-a-church-pew little guy.

The loss of income to the slimy corporations means a reduction in taxes to the Govt...ergo the Govt has an interest in seeing piracy stopped/reduced too.

Govt has an interest in tobacco as well....a damn sight MORE unseemly interest....how much of it is TAX?

It [smoking] kills...it costs the community a shitload in medical.....the poor bastard [little guy] who smokes has to pay way too much to the corporate bastards...no wait...to the government.....

It's a tax that affects the poor, addicted smoker more than the wealthy whose budget can sustain/handle the price hikes.

Get 'em hooked...then tighten the screws.

It's probably just an accepted form of 'ethnic' cleansing....if the adiction doesn't kill 'em then poverty will...;p

I agree wholeheartedly... 200%   Yup, line up a few advertising execs against the wall for crimes against society, in particular little children, and let the firing squad do the rest.... they don't do it again.  I've always hated advertising with a passion (for mostly these reasons, and others), so yeah, let's use government to persecute and prosecute ad execs like file sharers... the only difference for ad-men being several years in a Guantanamo-like facility without trial... and the bullet.

As much as I'm curious as to your theory on the chicken or the egg, we're going to have to agree to disagree regarding the origins of piracy and the implementation of draconian DRM measures.  As I recall, and some time before the advent of the digital media explosion (MP3's WMA's and WMV's, etc), Bill Gates and other industry leaders were on TV talking up various IP protections to limit/control software licenses. 

And yes, pirates such as Blackbeard and Mad Dog Morgan were around prior to this, but I doubt very much that they'd have been remotely interested in pirating digital media/software.