# Bye, bye Pirate Bay



## Daryl (May 1, 2012)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-17894176


It took a court order, but at least the ISPs seem to be playing ball now. It seems the only one who doesn't want to comply is BT. I'm about to ring them and tell them that I'm not going to pay my next bill, because using the phone is a Human Right. :lol: 

D


----------



## Ed (May 1, 2012)

Yea, that will work:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... sfeed=true

Reminds me of when they shut down tv-links, within a few days a new one popped up and still exists just with a slightly different web address. Shutting down piratebay will just make a lot of problems for the ISPs and therefore for us, the customers and will have no affect on piracy at all and thats assuming no one sets up a mirror of piratebay on some other address.


----------



## Daryl (May 1, 2012)

Ed @ Tue May 01 said:


> Yea, that will work:
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... sfeed=true
> 
> Reminds me of when they shut down tv-links, within a few days a new one popped up and still exists just with a slightly different web address. Shutting down piratebay will just make a lot of problems for the ISPs and therefore for us, the customers and will have no affect on piracy at all and thats assuming no one sets up a mirror of piratebay on some other address.


So ban the new one that pops up. Really the whole problem is not the people who know how to get round these things, it's the people who think it's fine just to download stuff, instead of paying. If they have to make an effort to get the stuff, and most of the people concerned are pretty thick, then it will be easier for them to do without, or even to pay for it. :shock: 

The argument that it won't stop people is a stupid one, because one could say the same thing about having locks on your front door. It is possible to get in, but there is a fine line between making it less easy, and causing problems for the legitimate user. As long as the balance is right, there is no problem.

The other thing is that it shouldn't have taken a court order to make ISPs do anything. More and more draconian laws are being suggested, because big companies are too greedy to do anything about it themselves. So they have no-one to blame but themselves when they have litigation taken against them.

D


----------



## Ed (May 1, 2012)

You arent thinking, you cant just ban the new one, because a new one will pop up again and thats just assuming you're talking about an exact copy of the previous site. Did you read the article? It creates costs for ISP, which means it creats costs for us. Your example of leaving your front door unlocked is not not comparable. Leaving your door locked really would be pointless if to unlock it just meant pushing on it a little harder. How will this ban help stop piracy? It wont, there's a hundred other sites out there with the same torrents on it.


----------



## wst3 (May 1, 2012)

this latest move won't stop piracy today - but doing nothing won't stop it ever.


----------



## guydoingmusic (May 1, 2012)

Daryl @ Tue May 01 said:


> Ed @ Tue May 01 said:
> 
> 
> > Yea, that will work:
> ...



While I try not to argue or disagree too much on here... I have to ask, Do you actually know people that download stuff for free? The reason I ask is this...

I know people who do this, and NEVER pay for anything - music, software, etc. They will just live without whatever it is they want until they can get it for free. This ban will not stop guys like that. It upsets me like everyone else here, since I pay for everything I use. They have a lot of the same software I have, none of which they paid for, and they are charging people for their music/studio/production.

A great example was when I bought Symphobia. I needed something else at the time in addition to Symphobia and I couldn't afford both. One of these "cracked addicts" approached with me letting him use my copy of Symphobia and he would give me the cracked version of what I needed. I mean really? So shutting down Piratebay will stop this? 

Love,
Brad


----------



## Daryl (May 1, 2012)

Ed @ Tue May 01 said:


> You arent thinking, you cant just ban the new one, because a new one will pop up again and thats just assuming you're talking about an exact copy of the previous site. Did you read the article? It creates costs for ISP, which means it creats costs for us. Your example of leaving your front door unlocked is not not comparable. Leaving your door locked really would be pointless if to unlock it just meant pushing on it a little harder. How will this ban help stop piracy? It wont, there's a hundred other sites out there with the same torrents on it.


Of course you can ban it. If another one pops up, bad that as well. So it creates costs for the ISP. Why should I care? Not doing anything against piracy creates costs for me. :roll: 

It is obvious to me that if it stops some people downloading illegally, then it is not pointless. Whilst we're at it, we should stop Google and the other search engines linking to these sites as well. 

D


----------



## Daryl (May 1, 2012)

wst3 @ Tue May 01 said:


> this latest move won't stop piracy today - but doing nothing won't stop it ever.


Exactly. We have to try and be seen to be trying. Once we stop, the battle is lost and my income disappears for ever.

D


----------



## Daryl (May 1, 2012)

guydoingmusic @ Tue May 01 said:


> While I try not to argue or disagree too much on here... I have to ask, Do you actually know people that download stuff for free? The reason I ask is this...
> 
> I know people who do this, and NEVER pay for anything - music, software, etc. They will just live without whatever it is they want until they can get it for free. This ban will not stop guys like that. It upsets me like everyone else here, since I pay for everything I use. They have a lot of the same software I have, none of which they paid for, and they are charging people for their music/studio/production.


However, if they couldn't get the software so easily, they wouldn't be able to offer the same services as you do more cheaply.

D


----------



## guydoingmusic (May 1, 2012)

No... they charge around the same thing I charge. I think anyways. Maybe I don't charge enough...


----------



## Daryl (May 1, 2012)

guydoingmusic @ Tue May 01 said:


> No... they charge around the same thing I charge. I think anyways. Maybe I don't charge enough...


So you're the clear winner then. Better equipment at no extra charge. Hurrah...!

D


----------



## Mike Greene (May 1, 2012)

Ed @ Tue May 01 said:


> It wont, there's a hundred other sites out there with the same torrents on it.


Granted, there are the hardcore guys that are going to figure out alternative methods no matter what gets shut down. And most people who use Pirate Bay are going to figure there might be alternatives. But not all of them.

For the less savvy crowd, navigating the waters of torrent sites isn't as easy as some might think. And it's filled with scams. I did some Google searches for torrent sites before Realivox came out so that I could have a basic understanding of what to look out for. The first thing I learned was this ain't as easy as I thought it would be. You have to download special exe apps and figure out which sites can be trusted and all this other stuff.

Which sites can be trusted, you ask? Well, to my surprise, Realivox was *already* available on a few torrent sites, even though it wasn't even released. Hmmm, that's interesting (read: impossible,) so I tried to download it so I could see what exactly they actually had. Lo and behold, I was brought to a page where I needed to pay $5.99 and *then* I could download Realivox. _"Oh yeah, we definitely have Realivox . . . all you need to do is pay us and then you can have it too! Yep!"_ I found around a dozen sites just like that. All promising all sorts of cool stuff that no other torrent sites had . . . after I pay them.

I even paid for a few "memberships." (Believe me, I hated lining these guys' pockets, but I really needed to know what to look out for.) Amazingly, even on the "VIP" sites, I was suprised at how ignorant many of the _members_ are! They were asking questions that even little ol' _me_ had already figured out.

The bottom line is that I spent *hours* just learning the basics of torrent sites. For the Cheeto fingered guy in his mom's basement, this is no big deal. He's already mastered this stuff. But there's a significal part of the population who aren't going to bother. Some guy at work told Janie she could get Word for free on Pirate Bay. So she did. But now she's gonna start investigating alternatives? Especially when she kinda knows it's wrong anyway?

Which brings up another reason why this is significant. With sites like Pirate Bay so openly defying the law with no apparent consequence, it's no wonder that so many kids really don't see a problem with piracy. It's become the equivalent of tearing off mattress tags. Technically illegal, but _"it must be okay, because nobody stops it."_

People *do* want to do right. Even pirates feel the need to come up with justifications for themselves. ("Try before you buy," etc.) So for governments to take a few steps to say, _"Yes, this really is wrong and we need to stop it"_ is a step in the right direction. There will always be those who see "piracy" as glamorous and their way of courageously rebelling against the "greedy corporations" between rounds of World of Warcraft and masturbating to porn. But for most people, just being reminded that it really isn't okay will make a difference.


----------



## Ed (May 1, 2012)

Mike Im afraid you're being naive if you think not everyone will figure out how to find another website. If you can figure out how to use torrents and how to navigate a site like piratebay you're going to be savy enough to open google and type "torrent search" into it. If even 1% decide to suddenly give up and buy everything they had been downloading previously, would that actually be worth it? The publicity of this story is going to send a whole heap more traffic to these websites now so I'll bet even more will start using torrents, so really what will have been gained?

This isnt like SOPA, in that a pointless law will destroy the internet. It is a pointless law that will create costs for ISPs that will end up being put onto their customers and in the end won't work in any way shape or form. 

Also, people like Daryl seem unable to tell the difference betwen pointing out why these laws are ineffetual, pointless and even counter productive and defending piracy itself but there we are.


----------



## Ed (May 1, 2012)

Daryl @ Tue May 01 said:


> Of course you can ban it. If another one pops up, bad that as well. So it creates costs for the ISP. Why should I care? Not doing anything against piracy creates costs for me. :roll:



And there's the real point isnt it, your own personal issue is clouding your judgement and you are suppoorting whatever nonsense pointless idea anyone comes up with to try and attack internet piracy without actually caring whether it will work at all or whether it could even be counter productive.

I see you didnt reply to my response about your compairson to locking your doors. I know why, because you can't. I wouldnt bother locking my doors if someone merely had to push a little harder or turn the handle one more time to get in.



> It is obvious to me that if it stops some people downloading illegally, then it is not pointless. Whilst we're at it, we should stop Google and the other search engines linking to these sites as well.



Since it won't stop anyone, it is pointless. Typing in google "torrent search" is not difficult.


----------



## Lex (May 1, 2012)

So this has nothing to do with ongoing plan of introducing internet censorship, invasion of your privacy and more control? This is all about pop stars not having enough money? Really?

lex


----------



## Mike Greene (May 1, 2012)

Ed @ Tue May 01 said:


> If you can figure out how to use torrents and how to navigate a site like piratebay you're going to be savy enough to open google and type "torrent search" into it.


You clearly didn't read my whole post, so I'm not going to argue with you.


----------



## choc0thrax (May 1, 2012)

Mike Greene @ Tue May 01 said:


> The bottom line is that I spent *hours* just learning the basics of torrent sites.



Nanna, is that you? Good to see they're finally letting you have some internet time.


----------



## Ed (May 1, 2012)

Mike Greene @ Tue May 01 said:


> Ed @ Tue May 01 said:
> 
> 
> > If you can figure out how to use torrents and how to navigate a site like piratebay you're going to be savy enough to open google and type "torrent search" into it.
> ...



I did, whch part is relevant?

Is it the part about you taking a long time to work out how torrent sites work? The entre point you seem to be making there is only relevant if this law was about torrents themselves, but it isnt it is about banning a single popular website. If someone has already figured out how to use piratebay then they can easily figure out how to use another torrent search engine. If someone new wants to learn then they will have the same trouble they had before. 

Is it the part about how the government need to officially say this is wrong? Fine okay, but that doesnt mean we have to support whatever ridiculous ineffectual law they can come up with in that name.


----------



## guydoingmusic (May 1, 2012)

Daryl @ Tue May 01 said:


> guydoingmusic @ Tue May 01 said:
> 
> 
> > No... they charge around the same thing I charge. I think anyways. Maybe I don't charge enough...
> ...



It was a joke....was trying to let you know that I wasn't being hostile towards you. I just disagree with your stance. 

Furthermore, no one is talking about the people who actually "crack" the software and upload it to these torrent sites. Those are the people who are responsible. The torrent site is just a means by which they transfer. It used to be FTP sites and you could only access it with a password and invitation. They also used ICQ chat very heavily and again you had to know someone to get in to those rooms. I know from friends who were involved.


----------



## Daryl (May 1, 2012)

Mike Greene @ Tue May 01 said:


> People *do* want to do right. Even pirates feel the need to come up with justifications for themselves. ("Try before you buy," etc.) So for governments to take a few steps to say, _"Yes, this really is wrong and we need to stop it"_ is a step in the right direction. There will always be those who see "piracy" as glamorous and their way of courageously rebelling against the "greedy corporations" between rounds of World of Warcraft and masturbating to porn. But for most people, just being reminded that it really isn't okay will make a difference.


I think I agree with everything you said, Mike.

D


----------



## Mike Greene (May 1, 2012)

choc0thrax @ Tue May 01 said:


> Mike Greene @ Tue May 01 said:
> 
> 
> > The bottom line is that I spent *hours* just learning the basics of torrent sites.
> ...


 :mrgreen: 

It really did, though. Granted, I was looking for stuff a little beyond the basics, but unless I was visiting the wrong sites, you don't just hit search and start downloading. Several products were indeed available on free sites, yet their sizes (in gigabytes) were all wrong. Which tells me there's a lot of weird stuff going on.

It seemed that all of them required you to "join," even if for free. Yes, it's easy, but doesn't everybody get a little nervous any time they're filling out membership information for some site they barely know? For proof of that, check out how many "visitors" we have here compared to registered members. And this site is legit!

Then you have to download some exe program, since these are P2P sites. (Cut me a little slack if my terminology is wrong.) And it's not like there's a tutorial for any of this right there on the first page.

Both those steps made me nervous. I made a dummy email address (okay, so I already have one) for the membership(s) because I never trust what these companies might do with my email address. Then I definitely had to hesitate a minute before downloading some exe program from a site I don't know.

But I did. And I discovered . . . they don't all work with each other! Some sites insist on this one, other sites insist on that one. There are countless "Yahoo Answers" topics where this stuff gets discussed, which tells me I ain't the only one who found this process something less than seamless.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (May 1, 2012)

guydoingmusic @ Tue May 01 said:


> So shutting down Piratebay will stop this?



No but you are either part of the solution or part of the problem and Piratebay was a BIG part of the problem.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (May 1, 2012)

I can get you guys Realivox 2 for 8.99. See here: http://tinyurl.com/5jg2


----------



## Lex (May 1, 2012)

EastWest Lurker @ Tue May 01 said:


> guydoingmusic @ Tue May 01 said:
> 
> 
> > So shutting down Piratebay will stop this?
> ...



Great to see "either you are with us or you are against us" mentality is alive and well.

Could you enlighten us less informed why specifically Piratebay is such big problem?

alex


----------



## EastWest Lurker (May 1, 2012)

Lex @ Tue May 01 said:


> EastWest Lurker @ Tue May 01 said:
> 
> 
> > guydoingmusic @ Tue May 01 said:
> ...



Really, you have to ask? Because helping to distribute cracked software is illegal and morally wrong and unless I am the one greatly ill informed they were a big practitioner of it?


----------



## Lex (May 1, 2012)

EastWest Lurker @ Tue May 01 said:


> Lex @ Tue May 01 said:
> 
> 
> > EastWest Lurker @ Tue May 01 said:
> ...



Could be that you are...software was never and never will be the official motivation for moves like this, it is the entertainment industry, and more importantly Piratebay is one of the hundreds of active torrent linking sites, so why only Piratebay?

alex


----------



## EastWest Lurker (May 1, 2012)

Lex @ Tue May 01 said:


> EastWest Lurker @ Tue May 01 said:
> 
> 
> > Lex @ Tue May 01 said:
> ...



Didn't say only Piratebay. One less is good, 2 less is better, 100 less is even better. I don't care about their "motivation" or the motivation for shutting them down, helping to distribute cracked software is wrong and if you do not know that, your moral compass is askew.


----------



## Daryl (May 1, 2012)

Lex @ Tue May 01 said:


> Could be that you are...software was never and never will be the official motivation for moves like this, it is the entertainment industry, and more importantly Piratebay is one of the hundreds of active torrent linking sites, so why only Piratebay?
> 
> alex


Even if it was just the entertainment industry, why does that make a difference to you? Don't you think that your income should be protected?

D


----------



## uselessmind (May 1, 2012)

Mike Greene @ Tue May 01 said:


> ... so openly defying the law with no apparent consequence, it's no wonder that so many kids really don't see a problem with piracy.


Sure, why would they see a problem?
What are these Kids doing here that much older people didn't teach them?

They are breaking the law and get away with it.
Happened long before PirateBay in politics and big business.

They are financially harming other people to get an advantage.
Happened long before PirateBay in politics and big business.

Torrent sites sure make it easier for young people to be little dirtbags, but everyone has to start somewhere.
Thankfully some people get their morals from somewhere else.


----------



## Andrew Aversa (May 1, 2012)

I actually agree with uselessmind on that one. It is really, really hard for anyone young not to be incredibly disillusioned with government, politics, corporations, business, etc. Seeing the little guy get screwed over so many times on so many levels (from layoffs, tax breaks for the rich, foreclosures, to student loan rates, difficulty in getting a job, etc.) helps SOME people justify piracy, because (to them) it's like giving a finger to 'the system'.


----------



## Ed (May 1, 2012)

Daryl @ Tue May 01 said:


> Even if it was just the entertainment industry, why does that make a difference to you? Don't you think that your income should be protected?
> 
> D



You never like to deal with any specific questions on this subject do you? Its all emotional arguments, isnt it?

Would you lock your doors if someone merely had to jiggle the handle to get in? Hey, you came up with this analogy not me.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (May 1, 2012)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but haven't we discussed this a million times already? And don't we always agree to disagree? I'm just wondering what this thread is going to accomplish.


----------



## NYC Composer (May 1, 2012)

I have to wonder why some are so against taking a stand regarding the reprehensible and morally bankrupt act of intellectual property theft. The point is not whether taking a stand is as effectual as one would hope-the point is that it's making a statement that it's NOT okay. I have to believe those who don't get this are in favor of the "free distribution" of intellectual content whether or not the creator of that content agrees to said "free distribution", which is also known as "theft".


----------



## choc0thrax (May 1, 2012)

Mike Greene @ Tue May 01 said:


> choc0thrax @ Tue May 01 said:
> 
> 
> > Mike Greene @ Tue May 01 said:
> ...



I dunno, sounds like you're making it sound harder than it is. 8) 

I mean how long does it take to download Utorrent once you get to their site? Maybe 15 - 20 seconds? ARGHGHHHHHHH!!! The humanity!

Not sure what you mean by not working with each other. what's not working with each other?


----------



## guydoingmusic (May 1, 2012)

NYC Composer @ Tue May 01 said:


> I have to wonder why some are so against taking a stand regarding the reprehensible and morally bankrupt act of intellectual property theft. The point is not whether taking a stand is as effectual as one would hope-the point is that it's making a statement that it's NOT okay. I have to believe those who don't get this are in favor of the "free distribution" of intellectual content whether or not the creator of that content agrees to said "free distribution", which is also known as "theft".



I'm not saying don't take a stand against it. Quite the opposite. I was addressing the fact that people will find a way to steal things if they want to, regardless of some torrent sites being shut down.

I feel this is the proper way to deal with this Piracy thing! http://youtu.be/tsXKAtpLm4I


----------



## Mike Greene (May 1, 2012)

choc0thrax @ Tue May 01 said:


> I dunno, sounds like you're making it sound harder than it is. 8)
> 
> I mean how long does it take to download Utorrent once you get to their site? Maybe 15 - 20 seconds? ARGHGHHHHHHH!!! The humanity!
> 
> Not sure what you mean by not working with each other. what's not working with each other?


No, I'm making it sound like the way it really happened. If you already know where to go and what to download, then _of course_ it's quick and easy. My point was that a not-insignificant part of the population (me, for instance) is going to stumble a few times along the way.

A mistake people on forums often make in discussions like these is in assuming everyone else is like them and is at their computer skill level.


----------



## Lex (May 2, 2012)

So...the older crowd...in the past.. 

You never ever went to a friend and recorded a few songs on tape from his LP collection?

You never recorded a songs from radio to tape?

You never ever borrowed these tapes to a friend? Gave them to a girl?

You never borrowed a VHS/DVD/BR to a friend?

....and if you did, considering you were sharing and not gaining profit were you a Pirate?

*There should be more efficient ways to stop software piracy*, blocking websites will do nothing to pirates but it will be introduction to internet censorship and that worries me much more then file sharing.

alex


----------



## NYC Composer (May 2, 2012)

"File sharing". Uh huh. Yeah, don't worry too much about that.

Keep the Internet free!! (and all software, movies and music as well)


----------



## Daryl (May 2, 2012)

Lex @ Wed May 02 said:


> So...the older crowd...in the past..
> 
> You never ever went to a friend and recorded a few songs on tape from his LP collection?
> 
> ...


I certainly did record music illegally in the past. At the time I was under 30, much like many of the people who are against taking action over file sharing, and I didn't really understand what I was doing, or even think about whether or not it was wrong. The difference now would be that everyone knows it is illegal, so I doubt that I'd do it now, if I had my time again.

Of course for people of the under 30 generation have never known a time in their adult life where file sharing wasn't rampant, so it is a different situation than when I was that age. However, most younger adults have the same failing, regardless of generation; they feel that they are entitled, despite not having proved themselves in any way, and don't understand why older people should be richer than they are. This will change with age, but it's no good trying to explain, because at that age I thought the same way. :wink: 

Regarding Internet censorship, we already have that. There is censorship in all aspects of our life, and in a civilized society that's the way it should be. The discussion is just about how much there should be. What I do think is that if people are worried about the Internet being censored, then they need to operate some sort of self regulation. If people don't, they only have themselves to blame if there is more censorship than they would like.

Just one question; what are those "more efficient" ways of stopping piracy that you allude to?

D


----------



## Lex (May 2, 2012)

Daryl @ Wed May 02 said:


> Lex @ Wed May 02 said:
> 
> 
> > So...the older crowd...in the past..
> ...



Right...so you were just young and misinformed. =)

And who decides what should be censored in the future? Will we have a referendum or a public vote on it, or it will be up to few individuals in some special comity? And this is all I'm trying to say...why Piratebay, why didn't they block all the torrent sites at once since they are all illegal? How come you don't understand that this is as atrocious as if all of a sudden government decided that some child pornography on internet is ok and some isn't...if this was the case would you still all say "oh well you got to start somewhere..." It's legal or it isn't, if it's gray area we need to change laws so that it isn't gray anymore, but certainly not leave it in the hands of few to decide whats good for us and what isn't based on their own agendas.

As for software...watermarking proved to be way more efficient then chasing torrents..

And I'm wondering...if this is the sentiment, why not shut down YouTube? I mean it is much bigger filth pool of copyright violation then Piratebay will ever be...

alex


----------



## Daryl (May 2, 2012)

Lex @ Wed May 02 said:


> Right...so you were just young and misinformed. =)


I don't think I was misinformed, I was uninformed.



Lex @ Wed May 02 said:


> And who decides what should be censored in the future? Will we have a referendum or a public vote on it, or it will be up to few individuals in some special comity? And this is all I'm trying to say...why Piratebay, why didn't they block all the torrent sites at once since they are all illegal? How come you don't understand that this is as atrocious as if all of a sudden government decided that some child pornography on internet is ok and some isn't...if this was the case would you still all say "oh well you got to start somewhere..." It's legal or it isn't, if it's gray area we need to change laws so that it isn't gray anymore, but certainly not leave it in the hands of few to decide whats good for us and what isn't based on their own agendas.
> 
> As for software...watermarking proved to be way more efficient then chasing torrents..
> 
> ...


However, the extension of your argument is that removing some child pornography is not better than removing none of it. I disagree with that. I also think that the legality is clear. It's not someone just deciding on a whim. The whim, if there was any, would be that some illegal activities seem to be escaping. However, again by your argument you seem to be saying that all the pirates should escape, or none of them. I disagree with that. It is just not practical in either the short or long term to stamp out all crime, but that shouldn't stop the police from trying, for example.

D


----------



## Lex (May 2, 2012)

Daryl @ Wed May 02 said:


> Lex @ Wed May 02 said:
> 
> 
> > Right...so you were just young and misinformed. =)
> ...



Obviously you understand this better then I do, so please explain to me why just Piratebay? What prevented them to block more torrent sites this time?

alex


----------



## Daryl (May 2, 2012)

Alex, I have no more information than you do about all of this. Chances are that there are legal channels that have to be gone through. However, I still believe that banning one is better than banning none.

D


----------



## Lex (May 2, 2012)

Daryl @ Wed May 02 said:


> Alex, I have no more information than you do about all of this. Chances are that there are legal channels that have to be gone through. However, I still believe that banning one is better than banning none.
> 
> D



Yeah but now you get me why I appear paranoid. The same court could have ordered blocking of many torrent sites, they are all the same, they are all hosted outside UK, they are all gray legal....blocking this one doesn't do a damn thing for us artists but it does introduces subjective and selective internet censorship in the UK.

But anyhow...I can see I'm alone on this one here..

alex


----------



## Ed (May 2, 2012)

I agree about the censorship problem and it does pose a problem for that too. 

I just am stuck on this pointless ban that literally will do nothing about pirates. Developers like Mike need to get these guys with watermarking, because no one will want to put your product up for download if they know they can get tracked and prosecuted. If it was industrywide and everyone made a big deal of it and the consequences, thats going to make someone think about not doing it. If you think you're going to instead get these guys by trying to close every single torrent site you're living in a dream world. 

As Lex says this doesnt ban all torrent sites, just one, which will probably pop up with a mirror anyway. The only way to stop pirates is to close the internet completely.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (May 2, 2012)

As Daryl said, I cannot see why it is not simply common sense that if you eliminate _some_ it is better than eliminating _none_, even if you cannot eliminate them _all_.

Imagine the police saying, "We will not jail any rapists because we cannot jail them all". 

And make no mistake about it: these guys ARE intellectual rapists.


----------



## Ed (May 2, 2012)

EastWest Lurker @ Wed May 02 said:


> As Daryl said, I cannot see why it is not simply common sense that if you eliminate _some_ it is better than eliminating _none_, even if you cannot eliminate them _all_.
> 
> Imagine the police saying, "We will not jail any rapists because we cannot jail them all".
> 
> And make no mistake about it: these guys ARE intellectual rapists.



Except that is a completely simplistic and childlike way of looking at it. 

Daryl gave an example on the previous page about locking your doors, again its too simplistic to compare to this because it is NOT like locking your doors. Its like locking ONE door and someone just turning the handle twice in order to get into your house and that locking the door itself would cost a whole heap of time and money to do. Or, its like spending a lot of effort locking one door when they can use a hundred other doors to get into your house just as easily.

You give the example of jailing rapists. Again, it is not this simplistic. To make this anything like this situation it would be more like spending a lot of time and money again to jail a rapist in order for him to just get free again and he isnt in custody at any point.

Daryl has also showed that he doesnt care about these intellectual arguments, he cares about his emotional hatred of those he sees as stealing his money. I get that, but this ban wont help him and it wont even help the people it was designed to help which is the big film and music corporations.


----------



## choc0thrax (May 2, 2012)

Mike Greene @ Tue May 01 said:


> A mistake people on forums often make in discussions like these is in assuming everyone else is like them and is at their computer skill level.



Forrrgiivveeeee me for assuming a website moderator who`s created a sample library might know something bout dem compooter machine doohickies. o 

Now, if you`ll excuse me, I have to finish programming 50 thousand sample libraries before lunch.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (May 2, 2012)

Ed @ Wed May 02 said:


> EastWest Lurker @ Wed May 02 said:
> 
> 
> > As Daryl said, I cannot see why it is not simply common sense that if you eliminate _some_ it is better than eliminating _none_, even if you cannot eliminate them _all_.
> ...



Right and of course stealing from the big film and music corporations is morally superior to stealing from an individual because they are evil, right?

Sophistry, pure and simple.


----------



## Lex (May 2, 2012)

EastWest Lurker @ Wed May 02 said:


> As Daryl said, I cannot see why it is not simply common sense that if you eliminate _some_ it is better than eliminating _none_, even if you cannot eliminate them _all_.
> 
> Imagine the police saying, "We will not jail any rapists because we cannot jail them all".
> 
> And make no mistake about it: these guys ARE intellectual rapists.



Which guys? You obviously don't understand the issue. Piratebay is not cracking software, ripping music or movies. Piratebay is not hosting any of these files.
People who crack and distribute will be completely unaffected by this action. People who host the stolen files will be completely unaffected by this action. Torrent files themselves will be completely unaffected by this action and continue to be available on many other torrent LINKING files. 

So they didn't eliminate a damn thing, all they did was introduce unprecedented internet censorship while making you feel all fuzzy and warm inside cause you swallowed the story how they scored one for the team and this action will open new jobs, while our work is still being massively shared as always.

alex


----------



## Ed (May 2, 2012)

EastWest Lurker @ Wed May 02 said:


> Right and of course stealing from the big film and music corporations is morally superior to stealing from an individual because they are evil, right?
> 
> Sophistry, pure and simple.



You know Jay, I always have to wonder if your amazing ability to pretend I said or implied something I never did is intentional or not.

Please for once pay attention. I am saying that Daryl is arguing from an emotional standpoint not a intellectual one based off this hatred of those he percieces as stealing his money. This ban of piratebay will not help him, but it was never designed to help him, it was designed to help the big film and music companies not the little guy like Daryl. The point that you apparently missed is that it wont _even _help them. It helps no one. It will however create costs for the ISPs which in turn will create costs for their customers - US. And people like Daryl support it because of their emotional hated towards pirates, even if it makes no sense at all.

Also both you and Daryl have tried to give analogies to this issue (rape, locking your doors), do you actually have a valid one or can you accept that you can't?


----------



## EastWest Lurker (May 2, 2012)

Ed @ Wed May 02 said:


> EastWest Lurker @ Wed May 02 said:
> 
> 
> > Right and of course stealing from the big film and music corporations is morally superior to stealing from an individual because they are evil, right?
> ...



Ah but it WILL help him, and all of us in the long run even if only a little because it discourages others and makes it just a little harder to steal. A small step in the right direction is always a good thing even when it is not a total solution.

And here, you will love this: let's do it because it is the right thing to do. 

And I do pay attention but the lack of clarity in your posts leads me and others astray sometimes.


----------



## Ed (May 2, 2012)

EastWest Lurker @ Wed May 02 said:


> Ah but it WILL help him, and all of us in the long run even if only a little because it discourages others and makes it just a little harder to steal. A small step in the right direction is always a good thing even when it is not a total solution.



Jay you act like someone who has never used the internet before. _"http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_cZC67wXUTs (The internet is a series of tubes)"_ Do you actually have any idea how torrent sites work? Because apparently you dont. 

Piratebay is just a search engine for other torrents, the data for these torrents is on peoples computers that get shared among the downloaders. How will it make it "harder to steal" by banning piratebay? Do you think it is difficult to type "torrent search" into google? The same torrents will be available on different search engines and the fact that its just a search engine means it doesnt require a huge server in order to make such a website which means you can have hundreds of them all over the place.

--- Watermarking discourages people from uploading copyrighted content. Why? If it can be traced to the original uploader/cracker the more copies = more risk to them 

--- Closing MegaUpload did discourage other torrent sites to an extent, in that a big torrent site BTJunkie voluntarily shut down.

--- Banning piratebay discourages *absolutely *no one and I challenge you to give me a single real world example of *how *it would do that 



> And here, you will love this: let's do it because it is the right thing to do.



Is it the right thing to do if it will achieve absolutely nothing and if anything make us pay more money for internet services? I say no, its just stupid.



> And I do pay attention but the lack of clarity in your posts leads me and others astray sometimes.



No you don't, I literally didnt even imply what you said I said and you ignored everything else in my post which would have made what I said make sense if you bothered to read it all in context. All you do is read my posts looking for some phrase that jumps out so you can argue against something I didnt say because it makes it easier than dealing with that I actually said. 

Feel free to prove me wrong for a change by addressing my challenge above. Show me an example of how banning piratebay will make it harder to download torrents or in any way slow or reduce piracy or serve as a deterrent? If you can't then you join Daryl on the side of emotions not facts


----------



## EastWest Lurker (May 2, 2012)

Ed, I literally cannot think of anything to write now that would not be insulting to you and I do not wish to do that. "Proving you wrong" will not dissuade those who think as you do nor will failing to do so make those like Daryl who understand the real world implications correctly change their minds.

So I will simply say, "I guess you are right after all, Ed", leave the discussion, and thank whatever deity may exist that most working composers do not share your views.


----------



## Ed (May 2, 2012)

See you always do this Jay, when it finially gets the point where you actually have to pony up some facts you walk away. I dont mind if someone has a different opinion to me, but when you're saying Im wrong with no facts at all I tend to get a bit narked.
If you have a real point then you should be able to actually answer this question.

*Show me an example of how banning piratebay will make it harder to download torrents or in any way slow or reduce piracy or serve as a deterrent?*

This is the heart of the issue here, if you have a vaid point this is where it will be found. Why is this an unfair question?


----------



## NYC Composer (May 2, 2012)

Ed @ Wed May 02 said:


> See you always do this Jay, when it finially gets the point where you actually have to pony up some facts you walk away.
> If you have a real point then you should be able to actually answer this question.
> 
> *Show me an example of how banning piratebay will make it harder to download torrents or in any way slow or reduce piracy or serve as a deterrent?*
> ...



I'll make one. The more torrent sites/torrent link sites are closed down, the more lawsuits that are pressed (see Mike and Mike), the more it looks like there could eventually be some legal (gasp!) CONSEQUENCES to "file sharing", the more often a few people are scared by it, have to take more care, the more it injects a note of doubt that maybe the Wild Wild West known as the Internet DOES have a sheriff or two.

I wish the RIAA had/would press more suits. I wish the major movie studios would. I'd like to see some parents fined per illegal download. Things would never change radically of course, but the idea that there are consequences would act as a tiny deterrent, and maybe that could be built on.

"You can't stop it so why bother trying" is never an acceptable premise for trying to right wrongs. If it's a war of attrition and all you can affect is a small portion of it, at least you stood up for the right thing and tried to effect change.


----------



## Ed (May 2, 2012)

Sorry Larry, but you must not know how torrent sites work. You cant stop it, because they are so easy to make. Stop one? 2 more will pop up. Stop them? More will pop up. The ONLY way to get rid of them is severely restrict the internet where every site is effectively banned and only unbanned when it is authorised to be and then auto-monitored for any possible violation of copyright law.

That is not something I think you actually want. 

As I said prosecuting and closing MegaUpload did demonstrably have some effect in that BtJunkie voluntarily shut down. Watermarking will have a demonstrable effect but ONLY if people know about it and the consequences of sharing/cracking the copyrighted material. Remember, this isnt even piratebay getting closed down, this isnt getting anyone in trouble, this is just making the site inaccessable to people like the UK. You ban 5 more, ok, so people will just go to the hundred other out there that will exist if they do that. 

Im not arguing against all ways to combat piracy, just STUPID ones.


----------



## choc0thrax (May 2, 2012)

How come they still haven't cracked down on Hotmail or Gmail? I've shared so many files that way over the years. I submit all my work by attaching files to emails and stuff.


----------



## Ed (May 2, 2012)

Here's a good response to this:
http://musicindustryblog.wordpress.com/ ... d-carrots/



> The Pirate Bay has had the unusual effect of creating a centralization of activity for decentralized file sharing. As networks went decentralized to evade enforcement, the Pirate Bay pulled the Torrent diaspora together to create a nice big juicy target for media companies. Removing the Pirate Bay from the UK web will have a significant impact on file sharing, *at least in the short term.* There are only a handful of other public sites that index torrent files and have a working tracker, though there is a longer list of sites that have indices but not trackers. * If the music industry acts quickly and puts something new and compelling in place to capture the demand of frustrated Pirate Bay users then there is a strong chance that a host of new digital music customers can be won. But that means a new generation of product. The 99 cent download and 9.99 subscription have proven patently uninteresting to the majority of digital music consumers (by which I mean people who listen to music digitally and / or access it digitally*).



The bolded part is important. 

The music and film industry need to actually work with the internet (Netflicks, Lovefilm, itunes) rather than against it. The days of people buying all their music and film they consume on cd or VHS/DVD is gone. Unless they actually try and work with it, piracy will keep eating up their sales. Places like Netflicks show that people will pay for the films they watch, if they are given an easy accessable way to do that that is even easier than downloading content


----------



## wst3 (May 2, 2012)

Ed @ Wed May 02 said:


> *Show me an example of how banning piratebay will make it harder to download torrents or in any way slow or reduce piracy or serve as a deterrent?*



Ed, I do understand your point, but I think it may be the wrong side of the question.

Banning Piratebay does not stop torrents from flowing. That is a fact.

Banning Piratebay does accomplish several things:
1) it shows that someone is doing something, and as has been argued already, I believe doing something is better than doing nothing.
2) it makes it a little more difficult to find the torrents. This is key... and while it has been a while since I was directly involved with IT security, when I was it was a demonstrated fact that the majority (pretty hefty majority) of pirates and hackers were what we referred to (in a very derogatory fashion) as "script kiddies". These folks were NOT sophisticated enough to find cracks, or perform the cracks themselves. They were kids playing around because some other kid told them how. If we remove some of the more blatantly obvious search engines we make it more difficult for some. When you use any search engine to look for illegally shared movies, music, software, or sample libraries you open yourself up to being hacked yourself. That's a danger that the unsophisticated user can't comprehend. Too bad too... that would be a deterrent!
3) it is the right thing to do. Adding those rules to a modern firewall is not rocket science. Heck, I can create such a rule in IPTables in minutes. And I'm no guru! More to the point it demonstrates that it is OK to do the right thing. Hopefully others will follow suit.

The problems with this plan, and they too are numerous:
1) the internet is global, banning a site in one country just scratches the surface
2) this sort of rule does endanger free speech, it is censorship, and that is ALWAYS a bad thing. But even in the US free speech is not absolute, we do place limits, and this particular limit needs to be crafted by folks who understand both the law and technology, and who have a reasonable grasp of society - good luck finding them!
3) it may be mis-used to add costs to services. That would stink, but given the greedy nature of many business people it is not only possible, but quite likely.
4) and of course your point - it will not solve the problem completely. I think that's a bad argument, but it is your right to express that opinion.

I wish the search engines would do this sort of thing voluntarily... but that greed thing pretty much eliminates that option. There is too much money to be made selling advertising.

And there are too many people that believe they have a right to own any software, music, or movie they want, whether or not they can afford it... or choose to pay for it.

This is a case of "lesser of two evils" - smaller concerns (many of our friends here) can not survive if they can not sell their work. That includes sample library and software developer and composers. The larger concerns (the big media houses - whom we often label as evil) can probably survive, though their shareholders won't be happy about it.

On the other hand, the internet has demonstrated that when used for good instead of evil it can in fact foster great changes. And even silly ones.

For all of these reasons I support, albeit hesitantly, the shuttering of Piratebay in England. It is not the answer, but it is a step in the right direction.


----------



## Ed (May 2, 2012)

Thanks for a more logical thought our response Bill, but if I replied I would only be restating everything I have already said in this thread. But I appreciate the courtesy.


----------



## Lex (May 2, 2012)

Ed @ Wed May 02 said:


> Im not arguing against all ways to combat piracy, just STUPID ones.



I'm not even arguing against stupid ones...just against oppressive censorship..
For me this is NOT at all about pro/anti piracy (I make 100% of my income from music of course I'm against piracy) it's about the fact that bunch of private companies were ordered to block a web site for* "actively encouraging copyright violations"*....not hosting, not stealing, not copying...but *ENCOURAGING*....so if this actually passes, where does it stop? 

alex


----------



## Lex (May 2, 2012)

Ed @ Wed May 02 said:


> The music and film industry need to actually work with the internet (Netflicks, Lovefilm, itunes) rather than against it. The days of people buying all their music and film they consume on cd or VHS/DVD is gone. Unless they actually try and work with it, piracy will keep eating up their sales. Places like Netflicks show that people will pay for the films they watch, if they are given an easy accessable way to do that that is even easier than downloading content



Well said Ed...this nails it and is the only solution.

alex


----------



## NYC Composer (May 2, 2012)

Ed @ Wed May 02 said:


> Sorry Larry, but you must not know how torrent sites work. You cant stop it, because they are so easy to make. Stop one? 2 more will pop up. Stop them? More will pop up. The ONLY way to get rid of them is severely restrict the internet where every site is effectively banned and only unbanned when it is authorised to be and then auto-monitored for any possible violation of copyright law.
> 
> That is not something I think you actually want.
> 
> ...



Sorry Ed, but you must not know how computer forensics work. Did you know that with enough effort, pretty much all torrent sites can be traced to the source? Did you know that prosecutions could then ensue?

Not know how torrent sites work? How can ANYONE not know anymore. I work within a beehive of studios in which the average age of the musicians is about 25. All of them have most of the software I have and a lot more. I'm the chump who pays for all of mine, but I watch their searches and what they do. It's galling to say "I just got Ozone and it's a little fiddly to use" and they say "oh I got that few months ago" (i.e., cracked). I deplore it and try to gently say what they're doing isn't ethical, and they tell me just what you do-eh, you can't stop it, ship's already sailed, we're too poor to buy the stuff, etc etc. 

Cultural norms that are simply wrong shouldn't be accepted out of hand.
Yes, you plug a leak and three spring up, but at least it's an attempt. I'd be in favor of more prosecutions and more draconian methods.

Oh, re Netflix and iTunes? They've been up for years now, and the majority of content distribution is still "file sharing". Hmm.

Where does it all end? Did you see a few members of Anonymous have been tracked down recently? We could argue who's a black hat/white hat hacker all day, but the guys who got into Sony's system and screwed with 30 million users personal info doesn't sound like white hat to me. Hacking into defense systems? PBS?? there is a lot more serious cybercrime than file sharing, obviously. The days when we can pass all this off as childish pranks is probably over.

How about Chinese copyright infringement? Re-sellers have been stealing copyrights, trademarks, there have been patent infringements all over. It's apparently hard to stop. Should we/the Chinese government shrug and give up?

But then, you may not know much about international commerce or varying cultural norms as they apply to the "borrowing" of intellectual property.


----------



## Mike Greene (May 2, 2012)

choc0thrax @ Wed May 02 said:


> Mike Greene @ Tue May 01 said:
> 
> 
> > A mistake people on forums often make in discussions like these is in assuming everyone else is like them and is at their computer skill level.
> ...


~sigh~

I'm not saying I don't know anything about computers. I'm saying I don't (or rather, didn't until I went through this little experiment last fall) know anything about _torrents._

I'm guessing you still don't believe me, though, so I'm going to detail exactly what I did and you can decide for yourself whether this was a reasonable approach for a guy in my shoes.

*Step 1 -* I typed "torrent realivox" (without quotes) into the Google search box. That's reasonable, right?

*Step 2 -* - Try this for yourself and you'll see that on the first page, 6 of the 10 listings claimed to have it, ready for me to download. Interesting. I did some clicking and started to learn that a lot of these sites are scams. They may indeed have torrents, but they'll tell me anything to get money from me first. FWIW, if you type in "torrent lass" or "torrent 'hollywood strings'" you'll get the same scam sites.

*Step 3 -* - I spent a few bucks and learned that the scam sites basically promise, but don't deliver. (No surprise there, but I did want to see for sure, in case there was some security breach at N.I. or something.)

*Step 4 -* - I wanted to test how torrent sites would work for products that actually *are* cracked and supposedly available. I discovered (remember, this was all new to me) that I don't simply start downloading a nice easy link. Instead I had to install an app on my computer that not only allows me to download from other people's computers, but allows them to download from mine. (!) I'm not sure how comfortable I am with that. Can I trust the site that's giving me the app? Is this how people's email accounts get hacked? Is this really such a good idea?

*Step 5 -* - I searched the web to see if this is, indeed, really such a good idea. Are these torrent downloading apps (there's more than one, at least in name) malware? And which one should I use? Do this search yourself. You'll see that there's wildly conflicting advice about what to do.

*Step 6 -* - I conclude that downloading this stuff is not as easy, at least for a novice like me, as some people think it is. Had Pirate Bay been my first stop (it doesn't appear on the first page of any of the searches I did,) then indeed, it would have been lots easier. But that's the thing - until you know what to look for, you don't . . . well, you don't know what to look for.

My point in this long explanation is even for someone somewhat computer savvy, a few obstacles *can* make torrenting a frustrating endeavor. Shutting down Pirate Bay *of course* won't stop piracy. But it does create an obstacle. Not everybody spends the amount of time plopped in front of their computer that the warez crowd does. So if Pirate Bay is gone, not everybody automatically knows what their number two choice should be. Yes they can Google, but go back to my Step 1 and see one possible result of how that works out.

Pirate Bay is *really* well designed and friendly. That's not always the case with other sites. Given that _"to steal, or not to steal"_ is going to be a borderline decision with some people, dealing with hassles similar to what I went through could be just enough to convince them to just buy instead.


----------



## Ed (May 2, 2012)

NYC Composer @ Wed May 02 said:


> Sorry Ed, but you must not know how computer forensics work. Did you know that with enough effort, pretty much all torrent sites can be traced to the source? Did you know that prosecutions could then ensue?



Oh really? So watermarking IS pointless, is it? If you can find the original uploader of any torrent, then what is the point of watermarking? 



> Oh, re Netflix and iTunes? They've been up for years now, and the majority of content distribution is still "file sharing". Hmm.



Not "hmm", because the ultimate reason you'd want to combat piracy is to turn people that would have downloaded something for free into a paying customer. There will ALWAYS be filesharing so long as the internet isn't completely closed off. This has been said plenty of times before of course but the fact that there is filesharing doesnt mean that all those downloads could have or would have ever paid for that software, music, film etc. Some people will want to download stuff if its available, just because they can, even if they don't need it, just because they are curious, and some will always download for free no matter what. These are not the people that matter to that ultimate goal.

The music and film industry report plenty of loses blamed in filesharing, but how much of those loses are real? I know I've pointed out before that the cost of cinema and cinema snacks has gotten really silly must also be part of the cause and the rapidly falling cost and increasing quality of home cinema systems is another. But relevantly to this subject, it must also be factored in that the internet itself is a technology that meant we didnt require us to physically go buy expensive cds and DVDs anymore. Even if you entirely remove piracy from the equation there would still have had huge "loses" because business' like itunes and Netflicks and other on demand services are the way of the future and were inevitable. Its much easier to blame piracy than to realise much of their loses has to do with their antiquated business model that can't compete with the technology coming in.

Torrents are complicated when you dont know anything about it and as Mike describes there are sites that are just scammers or just trying to get ad revenue. Many will give up if they cant get to it, but if they have no alternative (like Netflicks) they are more than likely to keep trying to figure it out until they do, but as I said, that still doesnt mean they would have ever paid for it. 

So the majority of content may be file sharing, but what does that prove and what can we learn from it? What percentage of those people would have bought it anyway? What percentage of those people don't even really need the thing they downloaded? What percentage of those people would ever pay for anything so long as they can find it somewhere to download for free? These are questions that really do matter if your ultimate goal is to get people paying for things they once downloaded for free. What we do know is that a large percentage of people will indeed pay for the content they download so long as they are given an alternative. If Netflicks and Lovefilm didnt exist you really think all those people would go to Amazon.com and buy all their DVD's on there or drive to Blockbuster and rent a DVD? You think if itunes didnt exist or other online music stores that all those people would rush out and buy the music on cd? People like ease of use and are willing to pay for it, if they dont get that, they will invest some time to figuring out how to get it easily, the pirates provide that service.

But the other big problem in this debate is that very often people talk about morality and ethics while at the same time trying to make intellectual arguments. You can talk all day about how piracy is wrong and bad and unfair, but you need to look at the facts and actually work out how to deal with it and for that you're going to have to check your emotions at the door or you're likely to make really bad judgements rather than rational ones.



> . Should we/the Chinese government shrug and give up?



Since I have said repeatedly that I am not against all efforts to stop piracy, just stupid ones, no obviously not.


----------



## NYC Composer (May 2, 2012)

Watermarking , by your standards, may indeed be "pointless" because all it does is make it easier and more specific to track down illegal downloaders-on the other hand, if there are 120,000 of them, how are you going to handle it legally? You're going to have to go after them on a case by case basis-which is exactly what you have to do with torrent sites, albeit more expensively because of the forensics. The thing that makes watermarking somewhat easier is that it identifies the perpetrator, so no need to go after them forensically (or at least that's how I understand it.

I totally disagree that the ethical/moral argument needs to be let go. On the contrary, I think it needs to be made over and over again. I gave my (now 22 year old) kid free access to my iTunes account, with reasonable limits. I asked him not to pirate, I explained why. I'm sure he did some anyway, as parental rebellion is part of being a teen, but I set him up with a model. Influential people need to speak up. Smoking is bad for your health. Stealing copyrights is wrong. That sort of thing. Not all battles are simple matters of practicality.

Ed, let's boil it down. You seem to buy a fair amount of software here. You interact with small developers all the time. They are upfront that they lose a tremendous amount of sales as a result of piracy. That can't sit well with you. Wouldn't you rather be part of the solution or at least take a stand for these guys rather than throw up your hands and say it's all impossible? Why don't you give us your views re/ going forward to protect both 'net openness and content creators?


----------



## Ed (May 2, 2012)

NYC Composer @ Wed May 02 said:


> Ed, let's boil it down. You seem to buy a fair amount of software here. You interact with small developers all the time. They are upfront that they lose a tremendous amount of sales as a result of piracy. That can't sit well with you. Wouldn't you rather be part of the solution or at least take a stand for these guys* rather than throw up your hands and say it's all impossible?* Why don't you give us your views re/ going forward to protect both 'net openness and content creators?



How can you possibly sit there and ask me this after everything I've said in this thread and even said again in the previous post to you? I dont know what I need to do, make it bold? huge text? Maybe make it dance around my post in an animated gif? :lol: 

I think we have come to the end of the road here, apparently you're unable to understand me. Its a good discussion to have, and I do have ideas, but we all have to be on the same page and you keep thinking I believe or am saying something I am not means there's a fundamental communication problem.


----------



## NYC Composer (May 2, 2012)

It's so much easier for you to revert to the amusing notion that your intellectual superiority makes you indecipherable to mere mortals, rather than to calmly and rationally lay out your ideas for practical solutions. All your previous posts included were some philosophical meanderings.

I asked you politely (something you seem incapable of) to coalesce what I'd hoped to be some helpful new ideas into a concise framework. Apparently you're incapable. Cheers.


----------



## choc0thrax (May 2, 2012)

Mike Greene @ Wed May 02 said:


> choc0thrax @ Wed May 02 said:
> 
> 
> > Mike Greene @ Tue May 01 said:
> ...




Okay, I think I believe you. It seems there are many ways to go about getting torrents. I guess I assumed everyone just used places like Torrentz dot eu which brings up a list of torrent sites to choose from. 

And I think pirating software is a bit different than say music or movies. With software there does seem to be some risk of viruses. 

What I don't like about shutting down torrent sites is it makes it harder to get files that don't hurt anyone financially. I pay a big TV bill each month so I can get tons of movie channels and HBO etc. and let's say my DVR records the newest Game of Thrones but because I'm also recording tons of daily show/colbert it overwrites my GoT. Shit! I'm screwed. Who knows what those goddamned Lannisters are up to this week... But with torrents there's a solution! In 2 minutes you can download the latest episode. And it doesn't cost anyone anything. I've paid my money to HBO...


----------



## Ed (May 2, 2012)

NYC Composer @ Wed May 02 said:


> It's so much easier for you to revert to the amusing notion that your intellectual superiority makes you indecipherable to mere mortals, rather than to calmly and rationally lay out your ideas for practical solutions. All your previous posts included were some philosophical meanderings.
> 
> I asked you politely (something you seem incapable of) to coalesce what I'd hoped to be some helpful new ideas into a concise framework. Apparently you're incapable. Cheers.



You keep "politely" asking me something I keep answering as if somehow my answer will be different from the last time, while at the same time implying I believe something or am arguing something I specifically tell you I am not every single time I answer you.

Your question in the previous message was ...



> Should we/the Chinese government shrug and give up?



I answered this, as I have many times before. I thought it would be clear after that, but no, you ask me again...



> Wouldn't you rather be part of the solution or at least take a stand for these guys rather than throw up your hands and say it's all impossible?



You ask the question as if I havent been clear about my position and as if I am saying they they should just give up, that you can't do anything and its all impossible, things I believe I have actually argued the opposite of in the very post you replied to.

What *is *impossible is thinking you can get rid of piracy completely without totally shutting down everything about the internet that makes it good, but that is obviously not the same thing as working towards helping developers like Mike get more customers to buy their stuff or to dissuade those who would upload/crack their material to get shared in the first place. There will always be those that pirate things, means of pirating will always exist. Pointing that out does not mean that I am saying its impossible to get people to pay for something they would have once downloaded for free.

My posts were not at all "philosophical meandering" i wonder what definition of philosophical you are using. Once again you show you have not actually been reading them. I was asking about facts about how exactly is this going to help stop piracy, that is not philosophy. My recent long post to you was literally talking about business, as far away from philosophy as you can get. People like Jay and Daryl have argued entirely from emotion and much of your argument is about morality rather than facts and business in so far as what "should be" rather than how things actually are. 

I really dont think Im that difficult to understand, especially when I specifically say one thing over and over and somehow people like you manage to read the exact opposite.


----------



## Mike Greene (May 2, 2012)

choc0thrax @ Wed May 02 said:


> I pay a big TV bill each month so I can get tons of movie channels and HBO etc. and let's say my DVR records the newest Game of Thrones but because I'm also recording tons of daily show/colbert it overwrites my GoT. [email protected]#t! I'm screwed. Who knows what those goddamned Lannisters are up to this week... But with torrents there's a solution! In 2 minutes you can download the latest episode. And it doesn't cost anyone anything. I've paid my money to HBO...


The shoe must be on the other foot now, because doesn't everyone know about HBO Go? http://www.hbogo.com/ It's free if you're an HBO subscriber, so you can watch all shows, any time, Thrones included. They advertise this at the end of every episode.

Point taken, though. I'm sure there are legit (justifiable, at least) uses for torrents.

But . . . those legit uses are a pretty tiny minority. And given that HBO *has* addressed the problem for why someone might need an optional source, it's not like they're the bad guy in this. So it's sad that even though they've made this effort, non-subscribers can (and will) still download their shows for free anyway.


----------



## NYC Composer (May 2, 2012)

:::yawns, waits patiently for Ed's 5 point plan to control piracy:::


----------



## Ed (May 2, 2012)

This is why I wont bother with you, specifically, Larry. I am perfectly willing to have a conversation with you, but when I specifically show you how you have repeatedly misrepresented me or failed to understand my basic position over and over you still cant admit you have done this and that you havent been reading my posts properly.

There's no point talking to someone who for whatever reason cant understand simple basic statements. If you cant understand the simple things that I am saying, why would I want to waste time thinking you'll understand anything more complicated?

If you're ready to admit the questions in your previous posts were asking things I already clarified then maybe we can talk about it, until then, I really dont see the point having to start off replying to every post by you by saying you havent understood what Im talking about and then try and explain myself for yet another time.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (May 2, 2012)

Ed @ Wed May 02 said:


> This is why I wont bother with you, specifically, Larry. I am perfectly willing to have a conversation with you, but when I specifically show you how you have repeatedly misrepresented me or failed to understand my basic position over and over you still cant admit you have done this.
> 
> There's no point talking to someone who for whatever reason cant understand simple basic statements. If you cant understand the simple things that I am saying, why would I want to waste time thinking you'll understand anything more complicated?
> 
> If you're ready to admit the questions in your previous posts were asking things I already clarified then maybe we can talk about it, until then, I really dont see the point having to start off replying to every post by you by saying you havent understood what Im talking about and then try and explain myself for yet another time.



So let's recap shall we?

I either intentionally or unintentionally don't get what you are saying and only argue from emotion.

Daryl doesn't get what you are saying and only argues from emotion.

Larry doesn't get what you are saying and only argues morality.

Mike doesn't get what you are saying and only argues morality.

_Some_ people at that point might start to question how well they communicate, but I am confident you will not be plagued by any such self re-examination, Ed.


----------



## NYC Composer (May 2, 2012)

Ed @ Wed May 02 said:


> This is why I wont bother with you, specifically, Larry. I am perfectly willing to have a conversation with you, but when I specifically show you how you have repeatedly misrepresented me or failed to understand my basic position over and over you still cant admit you have done this and that you havent been reading my posts properly.
> 
> There's no point talking to someone who for whatever reason cant understand simple basic statements. If you cant understand the simple things that I am saying, why would I want to waste time thinking you'll understand anything more complicated?
> 
> If you're ready to admit the questions in your previous posts were asking things I already clarified then maybe we can talk about it, until then, I really dont see the point having to start off replying to every post by you by saying you havent understood what Im talking about and then try and explain myself for yet another time.



(laughing)

Far as I can see, Ed ( and yes, I read every post) you derided every posters contribution, along with deriding the poster himself. Making things personal seems to be your stock in trade. Apparently you're the only smart guy in the room.

Most of your posts were about why things that were suggested wouldn't work. When I ask you what you would do to improve things, you really have no answer except for the few things you touched on in earlier posts, obvious matters like watermarking for what good that will do, examining the monetization models out there to beg people to pay for things, etc etc. No original thoughts, no gems, and a lot of negativity about values oriented/ethical models, which you obviously don't care much about.

I think homelessness, poverty and the horrendous lack of gun control in specific situations in America are ethical/moral issues. I work against them with my dollars, my votes and my time. In a much smaller sense, I feel that intellectual property theft has become a cultural trend that is in and of itself ethically challenged as well. I speak about it. I try to influence thinking in my small sphere.

It's obvious that your concern is much more weighted towards fear of 'net censorship. That's fine. However, you might consider that telling people they are stupid because they disagree with you is a doubtful enterprise from any standpoint. Perhaps you need to find a forum with a higher intellectual standard? Somewhere where people can more easily grasp the deep workings of your mind? Or, at the very least, somewhere you can be agreed with in an admiring, almost worshipful way  

Cheers!


----------



## Ed (May 2, 2012)

Just give me one good reason Larry why you asked me this:



> Wouldn't you rather be part of the solution or at least take a stand for these guys rather than throw up your hands and say it's all impossible?



Even after I had already said things like:

_"Watermarking will have a demonstrable effect but ONLY if people know about it and the consequences of sharing/cracking the copyrighted material.... .... Developers like Mike need to get these guys with watermarking, because no one will want to put your product up for download if they know they can get tracked and prosecuted. If it was industrywide and everyone made a big deal of it and the consequences, thats going to make someone think about not doing it. .... Im not arguing against all ways to combat piracy, just STUPID ones .... ._

And answered your other question you should have already known the answer to in the previous reply, which was... 



> Should we/the Chinese government shrug and give up?"



My response was _"Since I have said repeatedly that I am not against all efforts to stop piracy, just stupid ones, no obviously not."_

Since you then asked me yet again something I have already been abundently clear about, after having to say the same thing over and over, only for you to yet again tell me I'm saying the opposite of what I am saying, yes I'm going to get a bit pissed off with you. Disagree I was clear? In what way was I vague? Do you finially understand my position yet or are you going to ask me the same thing if we were to keep talking about this? If you really cant understand this single simple point then no, I really cant be bothered to talk about this subject with you when I keep having to restate the same thing in different ways.


Btw @Jay, I dont think I said Daryl doesnt get what Im saying and I dont think I ever said Mike only argues from emotion. I wonder if you'll ever learn the difference between what you'd like me to be saying and what I'm actually saying. You'd think by now you'd know how different it is.

Incidently I'd love for you to tell me one good reason why you responded to me like this:



> Right and of course stealing from the big film and music corporations is morally superior to stealing from an individual because they are evil, right?
> 
> Sophistry, pure and simple.



Exactly how did you manage to glean any implication in my post I was saying that its okay to steal from the big music and film industry? When I clarified anyway, where did you apologise for your reaction?

But I already know you'll not answer either of these challenges from past behavior from both of you, though I'm always open to being surpised. I wonder what amazing strawman you'll come up with next.


----------



## Lex (May 2, 2012)

NYC Composer @ Wed May 02 said:


> Ed @ Wed May 02 said:
> 
> 
> > This is why I wont bother with you, specifically, Larry. I am perfectly willing to have a conversation with you, but when I specifically show you how you have repeatedly misrepresented me or failed to understand my basic position over and over you still cant admit you have done this and that you havent been reading my posts properly.
> ...



What watermarking does for software is easily gets you to the real source of the problem, the person who deliberately made/cracked first copy and started sharing it.


alex


----------



## uselessmind (May 2, 2012)

EastWest Lurker @ Wed May 02 said:


> As Daryl said, I cannot see why it is not simply common sense that if you eliminate _some_ it is better than eliminating _none_, even if you cannot eliminate them _all_.
> 
> Imagine the police saying, "We will not jail any rapists because we cannot jail them all".
> 
> And make no mistake about it: these guys ARE intellectual rapists.



I can tell you this:
If there is a problem (especially if it affects me) i want it solved .
I don't want resources wasted to pretend that something is being done .
If crimes are committed people can be brought to justice. And i am all for getting the ones the law can get, even if it won't be all of the criminals.
But the "out of sight, out of mind" approach is usually not useful when it comes to crime.

And since you brought up the police...

Imagine a group of thugs beat up a bloke in a mall.
Upset person calls the police.
Police to Thugs : _"You guys can't do that here !"_
Thugs: _"Of course, we'll leave right away."_
Upset person: _"Why do you simply send them away, they should be arrested. Now they will just continue to beat up that guy in that dark alley over there."_
Police to upset person:_"I can not understand why you don't agree with our action. At least we did something. Why do you support violence against innocent people ?!? "_


----------



## Lex (May 2, 2012)

Mike Greene @ Wed May 02 said:


> But . . . those legit uses are a pretty tiny minority.



Get your facts checked...about 70% of linked content on Piratebay is legitimate free stuff.

alex


----------



## Mike Greene (May 2, 2012)

Lex @ Wed May 02 said:


> Mike Greene @ Wed May 02 said:
> 
> 
> > But . . . those legit uses are a pretty tiny minority.
> ...


~sigh~ This is getting soooooo tedious.

Sure, 70% of "linked content" might be legit. But you're not seriously going to try and tell me that people log on to Pirate bay so they can download free Bozo and the Bonertones songs, are you?


----------



## Ed (May 2, 2012)

@uselessmind. 

Exactly :D


----------



## Lex (May 2, 2012)

And if we talk software piracy and small developers, who are getting hit HARDEST by piracy, I just did a quick fact check on Piratebay...

There's literally nothing sample related on piratebay...One copy of Stormdrum, and old QL RA...Cinesamples Piano...and 2 copies of some Garritan thing....some of them look like dead links, and I don't even know if the rest works since I didnt download. That's it..

So...we all know that as Larry said kids are stealing left and right, and most of them have ,well everything...they obviously didn't get it from Piratebay...they probably got it like they always do through private forums,chat rooms, etc...

So what exactly did this censorship do exactly for those who are hit hardest by piracy? Boost their moral?

You might think I'm insane...but this move was not about piracy at all, it was about introduction of internet censorship...

alex


----------



## NYC Composer (May 2, 2012)

Oh Edward, Edward-you are so deeply misunderstood. :roll: 

But heck-as long as you're going to keep railing about how no one understands you, and continue to spew negativity and cherrypick, I'll ask again- what do you propose in a positive way, other than watermarking and begging people to pay, to help guys like Mike?


----------



## NYC Composer (May 2, 2012)

Lex @ Wed May 02 said:


> And if we talk software piracy and small developers, who are getting hit HARDEST by piracy, I just did a quick fact check on Piratebay...
> 
> There's literally nothing sample related on piratebay...One copy of Stormdrum, and old QL RA...Cinesamples Piano...and 2 copies of some Garritan thing....some of them look like dead links, and I don't even know if the rest works since I didnt download. That's it..
> 
> ...



All the guys I know get their stuff two ways-from a torrent site, or from someone who GOT it from a torrent site.

And btw-did you need me to tell you that kids are stealing left and right? This was news to you?

Btw#2-were you a big Piratebay user?


----------



## Lex (May 2, 2012)

Mike Greene @ Wed May 02 said:


> Lex @ Wed May 02 said:
> 
> 
> > Mike Greene @ Wed May 02 said:
> ...



Yeah they do...a lot of free music there. I'm telling you you are being pooled.
And when your Realivox gets cracked it will never be on Piratebay, it will be on some private forum and from there it will spread everywhere faster then bird flue, and government wont do anything about it cause they'r too busy making deals with big movie and music studios, and you won't be able to do anything about it UNLESS you used watermark cause then at least you can sue the crap out of the assshole who cracked it and started distributing it, if your business can afford that kind of legal procedure.

So you want solution? Why not give free watermarking technology licences to every small software developer. Why not make specialized legal body that will help small developers with lawsuits at rates they can afford? 

But hey, censoring internet is a step in right direction, right? I'm sure your business will benefit from it cause now you can watch your stuff being pirated while knowing that they "did the right thing".

alex


----------



## Ed (May 2, 2012)

Lex @ Wed May 02 said:


> So you want solution? Why not give free watermarking technology licences to every small software developer. Why not make specialized legal body that will help small developers with lawsuits at rates they can afford?



And the biggest thing, make people afraid to copy/crack it. If they know they can crack anonymously then they have no reason to fear. A big loud deal should be made about how its EASY to track someone and the watermark virtually impossible to remove. That CineSamples thing was big, but if it wasnt for this forum and maybe one thread that has now disappeared, how many people really know about it? Industry developers? What good does that do? They have to fear being caught even if you know you cant sue everyone who does it, so what about a blacklisting website which will put someone on if it is found they have been uploading software to be copied. That way they wont be able to buy any more from any developer. Again, this can work well too, but only if its well known and a big deal is made about it everywhere. It will require lots of collaboration, but it can work, to some degree.


----------



## Niah (May 2, 2012)

Morality is ambiguous.

Law on the other hand not so much.

btw: What's an "intellectual rapist"? Sounds like a great name for a grindcore band.


----------



## Lex (May 2, 2012)

NYC Composer @ Wed May 02 said:


> Lex @ Wed May 02 said:
> 
> 
> > And if we talk software piracy and small developers, who are getting hit HARDEST by piracy, I just did a quick fact check on Piratebay...
> ...



Dear Larry,

No I am not a Piratebay user....and I am not in UK so fortunately I can still access uncensored internet , browse around, get my facts checked and form my own opinion.

I work like a fukin horse all year long like most of you, and still can only dream to afford to have 10% of what your average warez kid has on their hard drive.

And if you are suggesting that I'm using pirated software or support piracy, screw you very much sir.

alex


----------



## EastWest Lurker (May 2, 2012)

Niah @ Wed May 02 said:


> Morality is ambiguous.
> 
> Law on the other hand not so much.
> 
> btw: What's an "intellectual rapist"? Sounds like a great name for a grindcore band.



LOL! By that I mean someone who takes another's intellectual property without their consent.

And morality is ambiguous mostly to amoral people. People have enough of an innate sense of right and wrong if they have been raised by good parents to know that stealing, which is what software piracy is, is wrong.


----------



## Ed (May 2, 2012)

NYC Composer @ Wed May 02 said:


> Oh Edward, Edward-you are so deeply misunderstood. :roll:
> 
> But heck-as long as you're going to keep railing about how no one understands you, and continue to spew negativity and cherrypick, I'll ask again- what do you propose in a positive way, other than watermarking and begging people to pay, to help guys like Mike?



As I figured you would not explain why you would have to ask me that question you asked on the other page.

I was trying to have a perfectly civil conversation with you I wrote a long post and instead you ignore it all and ask me something I had literally clarified for the nth time in my previous post to you where you asked me a question that shows you think Im saying the opposite of what I am actually saying. I answered that question, then you ask it straight back again as if I hadn't. 

I don't see the point discussing anything else with you personally on this topic if you cannot A. Acknowlegde that you asked a question I had already answered several times even in the post you had replied to and B. Actually give me a reason to think you understand me enough now not to have to ask me the same question again and so I know that when I say something else you're not going to somehow read the opposite of what I said again. 

If you cant do that we dont have much more to say to each other on this.


----------



## choc0thrax (May 2, 2012)

Mike Greene @ Wed May 02 said:


> choc0thrax @ Wed May 02 said:
> 
> 
> > I pay a big TV bill each month so I can get tons of movie channels and HBO etc. and let's say my DVR records the newest Game of Thrones but because I'm also recording tons of daily show/colbert it overwrites my GoT. [email protected]#t! I'm screwed. Who knows what those goddamned Lannisters are up to this week... But with torrents there's a solution! In 2 minutes you can download the latest episode. And it doesn't cost anyone anything. I've paid my money to HBO...
> ...



I actually found out about HBOgo a while ago when some moron on a forum posted a huge spoiler from the final season 1 GoT episode before it even aired because HBOgo has like episodes in advance or something idiotic like that...

But as with most legal video on the internet I am served with this:

To access HBO GO℠, you must reside within the fifty states of the United States of America.
If you reside in this area and are still experiencing difficulties, please contact your television provider.

Yes, I could just turn on my HotSpot Shield and fool the site into thinking I'm from the U.S.(I do it with HULU a lot) but that damn thing makes my internet slow and has ads.


----------



## Mike Greene (May 2, 2012)

Okay, you got me on that one. 8) 

Idiotic on HBO on both counts, by the way. I don't know why the heck they post episodes in advance. Well, actually I do know why, but it still pisses me off.

And why limit to the 50 states? Don't they know Canada is just another part of the U.S.? The part that has health care?


----------



## Niah (May 2, 2012)

EastWest Lurker @ Wed May 02 said:


> Niah @ Wed May 02 said:
> 
> 
> > Morality is ambiguous.
> ...



"Right", "Wrong", "good parents" ... I find these terms all ambiguous and I don't particularly consider that there is an innate sense of right and wrong as you describe. I believe people for a lack of a better term are "Tabula Rasa" who then are shaped and molded by a series of variables. 

For instance I consider that the killing of another human being no matter who he is or has done is morally wrong, others though support the death penalty and would argue that some people not only deserved to die but it was the right thing to do to kill them. And that's just fine what is moral to some might be immoral to others and vice versa.
Now the problem I have with bringing morality into the discussion is that I don't always see a direct connection between the Law and morality. For instance if someone steals medicine or something like food because they can't afford it I have to acknowledge that even though these people are committing a crime they are not committing an immoral act in my view.

When people talk about piracy they almost always refer to internet piracy, but there was piracy before and there's also piracy after. I go to a lot of marketplaces here and the countries I visit in search of rare and beat up musical instruments, you can always find illegal material being sold there, dvds, games, fake brands of clothing, etc. You would think that these marketplaces would end with the rise of the internet but you would be wrong and they are more packed then ever. With the current economic crisis more and more people resort to them because they lost most of their income due to rampant unemployment. It is for sure illegal distribution and the participants either it be the sellers or the buyers are indulging in illegal activity but I would be hard pressed to call it morally wrong since it is the result of social and economic variables.

I think piracy will exist always in some shape or another even if it becomes impossible to do so through the use of the internet. I honestly don't see things improving in terms of the global economy and that means a huge impact in the quality of the work that artists of varies fields can accomplish and an impact on the consumer base.

We can of course reach out to the consumers that still have "buying power" not with a preachy and moralistic approach but inform them the impacts of piracy on their favorite artists. Most people know by now that is illegal yes but not a lot know the inner workings and how much it costs to make an album for example. Most of the music industry is wrapped in mystery imho. 

To finish off the mentality of "evil corporations" will persist the more young people finish their degrees and find themselves unemployed or working precarious jobs. If this continues no one will be able to tell them what is "right" or "wrong" anymore.


----------



## snowleopard (May 2, 2012)




----------



## NYC Composer (May 2, 2012)

Ed @ Wed May 02 said:


> NYC Composer @ Wed May 02 said:
> 
> 
> > Oh Edward, Edward-you are so deeply misunderstood. :roll:
> ...



Oh, I'll be sure to follow your exact rules on this, Ed. Just give me a few days to analyze your profundity, as lesser minds must strive harder, you know.


----------



## NYC Composer (May 2, 2012)

Lex @ Wed May 02 said:


> NYC Composer @ Wed May 02 said:
> 
> 
> > Lex @ Wed May 02 said:
> ...



Well Alex, you responded to me first by saying that "we all know that as Larry said kids are stealing left and right, and most of them have ,well everything". Yes Alex, the kids around me in New York seem to, and I've seen them do it and grumbled at the theft and questionable ethics that allow them to have better collections of software than I do though I pay for all of mine. Your remark about that looks disparaging-I have no idea why you would frame it that way.

Second, you seemed to know the ins and outs of Piratebay pretty well. Although I didn't accuse you, I admit to being curious why you would be so well informed. If you tell me you didn't use it and don't pirate software, I say good for you sir, that's good to hear, and as such, I can see why the question might offend you. For that I apologize.

As a side note, what you quoted as being up there didn't seem like "nothing" to me. Was it Cinesamples' Piano in Blue product? They are rightfully proud of it, and I'm a proud owner of it.


----------



## Lex (May 3, 2012)

NYC Composer @ Thu May 03 said:


> Well Alex, you responded to me first by saying that "we all know that as Larry said kids are stealing left and right, and most of them have ,well everything". Yes Alex, the kids around me in New York seem to, and I've seen them do it and grumbled at the theft and questionable ethics that allow them to have better collections of software than I do though I pay for all of mine. Your remark about that looks disparaging-I have no idea why you would frame it that way.
> 
> Second, you seemed to know the ins and outs of Piratebay pretty well. Although I didn't accuse you, I admit to being curious why you would be so well informed. If you tell me you didn't use it and don't pirate software, I say good for you sir, that's good to hear, and as such, I can see why the question might offend you. For that I apologize.
> 
> As a side note, what you quoted as being up there didn't seem like "nothing" to me. Was it Cinesamples' Piano in Blue product? They are rightfully proud of it, and I'm a proud owner of it.



Disparaging? Maybe it's my English, or just the way you imagine the tone of my sentences, cause disparaging is not what I was going for.

I don't know the ins and outs of Piratebay, compared to a regular 16 year old I know a little bit and Jay, Mike and you know nothing about it.

Yes I try to be well informed about topics that interest me and that I discuss with other people, I'm weird like that. The other option would be to just swallow and not question "Piratebay is the enemy!" and "feel victorious cause we ripped a new one to the enemy!"....which would make me a moron.

When I say there is "nothing" I mean there is nothing compare to the fact that somewhere out there there is everything, cracked, sorted and ready for grabbing...I don't have the time to search, but be sure there is some dark little forum out there with controlled access where all the music software torrents are. 

My point, it sure isn't Piratebay.

And thank you Larry, apology accepted. 

alex


----------



## NYC Composer (May 3, 2012)

Thanks for explaining, Alex. I understand you better now.


----------



## MaestroRage (May 3, 2012)

I just wanted to say, despite it getting quite heated in here I very much enjoyed reading and digesting points from both sides. It's very hard for me to know where I stand on the scale but I wanted to point out a link.

Blocking the site did not seem to work.

12 million new users to Piratebay since the block was announced

They are actively teaching users how to bypass the block when it does show up. The way they speak of themselves they have successfully become heroes in a world of harsh censorship.


----------



## Ed (May 3, 2012)

NYC Composer @ Wed May 02 said:


> Oh, I'll be sure to follow your exact rules on this, Ed. Just give me a few days to analyze your profundity, as lesser minds must strive harder, you know.



I tell you what, when you figure out why its bad to keep telling someone they're saying the opposite of what they're saying let me know.


----------



## noiseboyuk (May 3, 2012)

Jeepers. Not read much of this thread, but - jeepers.

Anyway, Ed made a good point that people need to know about successful watermarking cases. One thought - on the install screens, along with the warning, put the name and $$$ amount of successful prosecution for those apprehended via the method. That's a pretty targeted warning.


----------



## Ed (May 3, 2012)

noiseboyuk @ Thu May 03 said:


> Anyway, Ed made a good point that people need to know about successful watermarking cases. One thought - on the install screens, along with the warning, put the name and $$$ amount of successful prosecution for those apprehended via the method. That's a pretty targeted warning.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1SXsCkKuvOU (&quot;If you buy this library or close this installer now, that'll be the end of it. We will not look for you, we will not pursue you. But if you don't, we will look for you, we will find you, and we will kill you.&quot;)

:lol:


----------



## guydoingmusic (May 3, 2012)

Ed @ Thu May 03 said:


> noiseboyuk @ Thu May 03 said:
> 
> 
> > Anyway, Ed made a good point that people need to know about successful watermarking cases. One thought - on the install screens, along with the warning, put the name and $$$ amount of successful prosecution for those apprehended via the method. That's a pretty targeted warning.
> ...



Ed, refer to my post on the bottom of page 1.


----------



## Mike Greene (May 3, 2012)

noiseboyuk @ Thu May 03 said:


> Anyway, Ed made a good point that people need to know about successful watermarking cases. One thought - on the install screens, along with the warning, put the name and $$$ amount of successful prosecution for those apprehended via the method. That's a pretty targeted warning.


There seems to be a general feeling that watermarking is "the answer." That's a mistake.

Yes, it's useful, and yes, I do it. (AFAIK, I'm even the only developer who also watermarks the sample monolith files. And I place the purchaser's name right on the main screen, so they *know* it's watermarked.) But . . . 

I'm not aware of any "successful" victories in this. Court victories, yes, but in the Cinesamples case, they have yet to collect a penny. Plus they have incurred not-insignificant legal expenses. And worst of all, Cinebrass is forever on Torrent sites. No court victory can put that genie back into the bottle.

That's not what I call success. A deterrent, possibly, but all it takes is one moron who either thinks he's outsmarted the developer and disabled the watermarks, or thinks he can't be prosecuted, or wants to be the martyr/hero, or is just plain ignorant.

Again, I do watermark and I think (knock on wood) it's a large part of what's kept me off the torrents so far. But *no* developer believes that watermarking is the full answer, because we all know we're just one moron away from it all falling apart.


----------



## germancomponist (May 3, 2012)

Mike,

isn`t it very easy for the pirates to delete all this watermarks?


----------



## Ed (May 3, 2012)

@Mike:

As far as I can see watermarking essentially ONLY works as a deterrent. 

Everyone knows you do not have the money to sue everyone. That costs a lot of time and money, especailly if those people are in a different country to you. So if 10 people buy then share your library, even if you know who they are, how will you sue them all?

Right now watermarking is not really being used properly IMO, in that it is not being advertised. Where, as Guy suggested, are the big warning screens on the installation programs or on the website itself when you go to purchase something? Why isnt there a big news report, youtube videos, entire pages on developers websites making it obvious that there is watermarking in their libraries and that its easy to find out who originally shared the library if people do it? So the more copies that are made then the more likely it is you're going to be caught. Instead, there's usually a footnote in the description or small section in the FAQ. I'm not quite sure what the logic is for not doing this and keeping it all quiet and secret.

If someone in Iceland buys a library, (if necessary) cracks it and uploads it to a file sharing website/torrent and you find it, what will you do now? Start legal proceedings? What if some other guy also does it in China or something? Now what? The main thing is making them not want to do it in the first place or making it require a lot more fraudulent activities of creating fake personas, both because they can get globally and publically blacklisted in the community for doing so (no expensive court proceedings required) and that its easy to find out who they are because of this technology. 

It might not be the full answer, in fact I dont think there is an "answer" merely methods with which to deal with it that are better and worse than each other, but I do think this particular method could be used much more effectively than it is right now.

I also dont believe, if done right, that it would be possible to delete all watermarks. You could even have several different methods, some being fake ones that are more easily spotted and removed in order to cover up the other methods that are more hidden. If its practically possible to do, then the technology should still be improved. There will be a point where it just becomes way too impractical to do for it to be worth it to anyone, especially not for smaller libraries like yours.
*
EDIT:*
There's also another idea I think would work well. If you yourself upload your own software/libraries to file sharing websites/torrents but you do so where they are missing key componants missing samples, scripts that don't work properly etc. And you do this in various ways so they are all broken in some way that makes them just too messed up to use, if you "saturate the market" as it were with broken and poor copies of your own product, people that download it may get frustrated and buy it because they are essentially unusable or too annoying to use, or they will give up on finding one that works and they will have failed to get a copy of your product. Win win, right?


----------



## germancomponist (May 3, 2012)

Ed @ Thu May 03 said:


> *
> EDIT:*
> There's also another idea I think would work well. If you yourself upload your own software/libraries to file sharing websites/torrents but you do so where they are missing key componants missing samples, scripts that don't work properly etc. And you do this in various ways so they are all broken in some way that makes them just too messed up to use, if you "saturate the market" as it were with broken and poor copies of your own product, people that download it may get frustrated and buy it because they are essentially unusable or too annoying to use, or they will give up on finding one that works and they will have failed to get a copy of your product. Win win, right?



An interesting thought.

Some years ago me and a dev were thinking the same thought, and I suggested to install a virus on that files....., but he didn`t want to do this.... .


----------



## Scrianinoff (May 3, 2012)

Some artists did this already, some film studios too. The Result: file sharing sites introduced a rating feature for downloaders to rate the 'quality' of the download.


----------



## germancomponist (May 3, 2012)

Scrianinoff @ Thu May 03 said:


> Some artists did this already, some film studios too. The Result: file sharing sites introduced a rating feature for downloaders to rate the 'quality' of the download.



Do you know about the discussion about copyright in Germany at these days, the war between the GEMA and youtune?

Maybe the governments could do a same deal, to let the sharing sites pay, if they share copyed libraries, music, e.t.c.?


----------



## Ed (May 3, 2012)

Gunther, a virus is a little problem legally, I wouldn't do it. I also think its stupid because it will be obvious its a virus as most people will have a virus checker that wil pick it up before it even installs and if there's some kind of comment section people will immediatly say its a virus and no one will download it and move to the next one. 

Scrianinoff, you're right, but my idea is to subtly break the copies/cracks so that people are unsure whether it really works properly or not. My idea also is introducing several different copies that are all broken in different ways, to "saturate the market" with broken versions. If people try several of them and none of them work, that will disuade people from bothering after a while. I also think this method could actually boost sales because people will be able to play it and then like it, but be unable to use it properly becuase of how broken it is and so might go ahead and buy it. Remember your ultimate goal should be to turn someone into a paying customer.


----------



## germancomponist (May 3, 2012)

Ed @ Thu May 03 said:


> .... but my idea is to subtly break the copies/cracks so that people are unsure whether it really works properly or not. My idea also is introducing several different copies that are all broken in different ways, to "saturate the market" with broken versions. If people try several of them and none of them work, that will disuade people from bothering after a while. I also think this method could actually boost sales because people will be able to play it and then like it, but be unable to use it properly becuase of how broken it is and so might go ahead and buy it. Remember you ultimate goal should be to turn someone into a paying customer.



Ed, we ended up with this idea, and it works better than enything els, I think. o-[][]-o


----------



## Scrianinoff (May 3, 2012)

This is an example of what I was referring to: 

"To counter illegal Internet downloads of the album's songs both before and after the album's release, Madonna's associates created a number of false song files of similar length and size. Some of these files delivered a brief message from Madonna saying "What the fuck do you think you're doing?" followed by minutes of silence.[12] Madonna's website hacker add a message appearing on the Main Page, saying "This is what the fuck I think I'm doing..." followed by download links for each of the album's songs.[12][13] The website was closed after the attack for about 15 hours" From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Life

Ed: Yes, I see the subtlety of your idea. There might be something to it. Ultimately, all efforts in fighting piracy, is not to eradicate piracy, but to keep the law abiding citizen exactly like that, to keep the honest people honest as they say. If you'd ask me, I think to be able to stand a chance in fighting piracy we need to fire on all cylinders, there is no singular magical solution, no fix all, no panacea. Your idea, though, could be a piece of the puzzle.

Then again, it would need to be executed carefully, otherwise hackers could for example combine a working version from several broken versions. Don't think the massive effort involved would be a deterrent. Not at all. Just find the bragging on Internet how for the Cubase 5 'release' the hackers spent close to 1000 hours writing a eLicenser emulator kernel driver. Yes, they were really proud. And because of their actions, and those of all the users of that 'release', I probably paid more for _my_ Cubase license. On top of that, if I forget my eLicenser USB dongle, I am in trouble, the downloaders are not. Nice hey?


----------



## Scrianinoff (May 3, 2012)

I remember how they bragged about another thing. After spending a few hundred hours of trying to disable the eLicenser checks throughout the code of Cubase, they realized that it was unfeasible, it would take too much time, thousands of hours with a high chance of missing some. The other thing they realized is how inefficient the code was due to all the eLicenser checks and hacker directed obfuscation techniques employed. Perhaps this is the reason why so many people find Reaper more efficient.


----------



## Ed (May 3, 2012)

We basically agree, thoough I do want to say thats a really terrible idea from Madonna. For a start, it wasn't subtlety broken it was obvious and secondly it was obvious it was created by them and so pissed off a bunch of hackers and so Madonnas website gets hacked. To make it comparable it should be like having a film uploaded which has annoying jumps a 1/4 way in or the sound suddenly drops out for no reason, random bursts of white noise that gets worse and it gets so bad they'll have to switch off. If someone still wants to watch a crappy copy thats fine, but at least its not exactly the same as the bought version. But thats different because its easier to copy films and music and there will be more of them.


----------



## Mike Greene (May 3, 2012)

germancomponist @ Thu May 03 said:


> Mike,
> 
> isn`t it very easy for the pirates to delete all this watermarks?


No, because they have to delete *all* of them.

With Realivox, there's an area on the lower right of the main screen that says, "Licensed to: Bozo McClown." That line wouldn't be too hard for a serious cracker to defeat, but it's just the first "watermark." And in truth, as the only _visible_ watermark, it's intended as more of an alert than as an actual identifier. Basically a way for me to say, _"Uhhh, yeah, this is watermarked. So do you really trust your loser friends with this?"_

But that's just the beginning. I won't even say how many places I hid little codes or markers or shifts, or even the methodology. Although I will say this: there's even a way to implement it so that having two copies and doing a bit-by-bit comparison won't defeat it, either. And as I mentioned, I also found a way to do this with the sample monoliths, including the bigger challenge of efficiently _distributing_ these customized monoliths.

And no two developers are going to use the same methods. So there's no guidebook for someone wanting to try to delete all the marks. The fact that they can't be *sure* they got them all is a deterrent in itself.

With that said, my fear is not that my watermarks might get scrubbed, but rather the moron factor. On "sharing" sites, I've seen guys post some ridiculous ideas of how they're *sure* they can defeat watermarks. (Asking someone _else_ to do it and assume all the risk, of course.) So just like with all those YouTube videos where a guy blows himself up because a "friend" assured him that dynamite is safe as long as it's upside down or really old or the yellow kind, I fear someone actually believing they've scrubbed the watermarks and then uploading their magnificent triumph. The fact that they're an idiot and I can bust them doesn't matter. The damage is already done.

Regarding posting countless flawed copies, besides the difficulty in getting bad torrents to spread, the bigger problem is that it's a hell of a lot of work. All these little things that people say we should do always _sound_ like they won't take all that much time, but they invariably do. I'm a little one man shop, doing this on the side. Heck, I haven't even had time to finish that walkthrough video people keep asking for. Adding torrent spam to the list, when I really should be finishing the drum library, and the men singers, and making those phone calls for composing gigs, is a tough one.


----------



## germancomponist (May 3, 2012)

I see you, Mike.

Let us hope that asap a way better copy protect system will be born!


----------



## Scrianinoff (May 3, 2012)

germancomponist @ Thu 03 May said:


> I see you, Mike.
> 
> Let us hope that asap a way better copy protect system will be born!



VSL and EW seem to be doing quite well in staying absent from the file sharing lists. For now, dongles appear to be the strongest weapon.


----------



## synthetic (May 3, 2012)

The whole argument that "there will always be pirates so why bother" is such crap. Like saying "people have killed each other since the beginning of time, so why bother stopping them." Downloaders know it's wrong, they know it's taking money out of developer's pockets, and it's fixable. We just need Google and other sites that make money from piracy to stop linking to it. Even a DCMA takedown doesn't work on Google, because they list the original, unaltered link in the DCMA notice!


----------



## germancomponist (May 3, 2012)

synthetic @ Thu May 03 said:


> ... We just need Google and other sites that make money from piracy to stop linking to it. Even a DCMA takedown doesn't work on Google, because they list the original, unaltered link in the DCMA notice!



What I said in an earlier post here. Look what the german GEMA did with youtube.... .


----------



## NYC Composer (May 3, 2012)

noiseboyuk @ Thu May 03 said:


> Jeepers. Not read much of this thread, but - jeepers.
> 
> Anyway, Ed made a good point that people need to know about successful watermarking cases. One thought - on the install screens, along with the warning, put the name and $$$ amount of successful prosecution for those apprehended via the method. That's a pretty targeted warning.



Not to put too fine a point on it, Guy, but when the scorecard reads :

1. Successful cases pursued against pirates, 1: Money recovered-pending
2. Successful downloads of said product: 125,000 and counting...

...I don't think miscreants will cower. Mind you, I'm still if favor of the idea; as Snow Leopard so pictorially illustrated, any finger in the dike, but it's a long long road from here to there.


----------



## mk282 (May 4, 2012)

Lex @ 2.5.2012 said:


> And if we talk software piracy and small developers, who are getting hit HARDEST by piracy, I just did a quick fact check on Piratebay...
> 
> There's literally nothing sample related on piratebay...One copy of Stormdrum, and old QL RA...Cinesamples Piano...and 2 copies of some Garritan thing....some of them look like dead links, and I don't even know if the rest works since I didnt download. That's it..



That's why you have audio-specific torrent trackers, not PirateBay, you know. :D


----------



## noiseboyuk (May 4, 2012)

I've a lot of sympathy with Synthetic's approach. Google made $2.89bn in the last quarter. I think they should have a large and proactive department purely dedicated to piracy. Now this usually produces howls of "you'll never eradicate it, it'll just make it worse". What I mean is to get rid of all the low hanging fruit.

I just typed in "(name of big Kontakt library I'm calling Morphobia) download" into Google. This is normal legitimate legal search - I want to buy the download version of Morphobia. Morphobia's developer - SampleProject - comes up #4 in the search listings. 1, 2 and 3 are all rips. Even worse, they make related search suggestions, and there are 5 - Morphobia 2 download, Morphobia serial, Morphobia crack, Morphobia samples, Morphobia 2 hotfile. That, I suggest, is insane and unjustifiable.

Warming to my theme, I then typed "porn" into Google. It returned some unsurprising results. What, however, it did NOT do is to suggest "paedo porn, bestiality, necrophilia". Dammit, I'll have to manually search for those on my own. Oh, the EFFORT.

Here's the point - Google has made a policy decision not to suggest search criteria on pornography, for a good reason. It's one thing for a 14 year old to search for porn looking for the good wholesome old fashioned sort enjoyed by 14 year olds down the years, but quite another to suggest stuff that is far, far worse. So if that logic is good for porn, why isn't it good for piracy?

There should NEVER be suggested / related searches of software which add the word "crack / serial / hack" etc. That should be the easiest fix of all. It's the equivalenet of someone coming up to a person browsing laptops in PC World and saying "I've got some nicked ones round the back, come with me". The customer did not ask for this, and let's assume he / she has honest intent. But to put temptation in their face is nuts.

Then there's the 2nd issue of page ranking or censoring pirated sites. Given how mind-buggeringly clever Google are, it can't be beyond the wit of them to develop algorithms that knock back or elimainate pirate sites. They already de-rank (is that a word?) the sites that are nothing but links and no content, it's a similar principle - marginalise the sites that are not legitimate commercial concerns. At the very least, the legal stuff should be top of a basic legal search.

Would that eliminate piracy? Of course not. It would still be rife. But you've got rid of the low hanging fruit. You've got to stop throwing piracy in the faces of EVERYONE who is searching for a product, including legit customers. At the very least - you have to go looking for it specifically.

How much difference would that make? I don't know, honestly don't. But I'd be amazed if it didn't significantly reduce its prevelance - and it is so, so easy to do. Google's inaction (and other major search engines) suggests to me that they make money out of piracy via their ads, and that is morally unjustifiable.



NYC Composer @ Fri May 04 said:


> 1. Successful cases pursued against pirates, 1: Money recovered-pending
> 2. Successful downloads of said product: 125,000 and counting...
> 
> ...I don't think miscreants will cower. Mind you, I'm still if favor of the idea; as Snow Leopard so pictorially illustrated, any finger in the dike, but it's a long long road from here to there.



Well... obviously I'd advise that isn't the best wording!

Thing is, man arrested and fined $200k by a US court is a good headline on an install. The number of downloads isn't so relevant here, because the whole point of watermarking is to catch the person at ground zero, not the thousands that will come afterwards. Those few are your target audience.


----------



## Daryl (May 4, 2012)

Guy, I agree with what you say, particularly about Google, and the main search engines. To me it is no good them throwing up their hands and saying that it is nothing t do with them. They are pointing people to places where they can get stolen goods. If you or I stood on a street corner handing out flyers telling people where they could get their hands on some hooky TVs, we would be arrested. This is why I said (many posts ago) that if the private sector took some responsibility for helping to reduce illegal activity, it would be a step in the right direction, and govenments would be less likely to legislate. After all, if someone tried to encroach on Google's Intellectual Property, they'd come down on them like a ton of bricks. :lol: 

D


----------



## EastWest Lurker (May 4, 2012)

Daryl @ Fri May 04 said:


> Guy, I agree with what you say, particularly about Google, and the main search engines. To me it is no good them throwing up their hands and saying that it is nothing t do with them. They are pointing people to places where they can get stolen goods. If you or I stood on a street corner handing out flyers telling people where they could get their hands on some hooky TVs, we would be arrested. This is why I said (many posts ago) that if the private sector took some responsibility for helping to reduce illegal activity, it would be a step in the right direction, and govenments would be less likely to legislate. After all, if someone tried to encroach on Google's Intellectual Property, they'd come down on them like a ton of bricks. :lol:
> 
> D



Yep.


----------



## NYC Composer (May 4, 2012)

As I said, Guy, I still agree. It's all just sort of disheartening.

@Daryl-I'm sure Google retains quite a bit of intellectual content, but their business model has really been pretty new era in that it gives away so much (think Google Docs, Android, Google Mapsm, etc etc.) and generally monetizes it through advertising rather than the sale of content.


----------



## Daryl (May 4, 2012)

NYC Composer @ Fri May 04 said:


> As I said, Guy, I still agree. It's all just sort of disheartening.
> 
> @Daryl-I'm sure Google retains quite a bit of intellectual content, but their business model has really been pretty new era in that it gives away so much (think Google Docs, Android, Google Mapsm, etc etc.) and generally monetizes it through advertising rather than the sale of content.


Choosing what to give away yourself and having something stolen are two different things. I would also think that if any of the IP that Google has given away was to be reverse engineered and then sold as part of a competing product, they would have something to say about it.

D


----------



## NYC Composer (May 4, 2012)

Daryl @ Fri May 04 said:


> NYC Composer @ Fri May 04 said:
> 
> 
> > As I said, Guy, I still agree. It's all just sort of disheartening.
> ...



No argument, just the comment.


----------



## Mike Greene (May 4, 2012)

Great post, Guy.

There's one snag with Google doing this on their own, though. If they, and only they, eliminate the obvious torrent sites from their searches, then they will start to lose market share to the search engines that _do_ include them. All the kids will will say, _"Dude, use Bing instead of Google, because Bing gives the sites where you can get stuff for free!"_

I suspect that Google wouldn't mind making their searches more ethical. As Guy explained, it's certainly cheap and easy to do. But from a competitive standpoint, it's a bad business move. This is why we need specific laws on this. That makes the playing field level, so that when a company does the right thing, it's doesn't wind up hurting them.

There are all sorts of parallels for this, where laws are required to keep the playing field level for companies who do the right thing. For example, I think we can all agree that it's a good thing that cars are vastly cleaner than they were 40 years ago. We have triple the cars here in L.A. that we did back then, yet the air is actually cleaner.

But that isn't because car manufacturers *voluntarily* added smog pumps and catalytic converters. That would have been competitive suicide, because smog equipment makes the car more expensive. Plus the car will have slightly less power. Sure, the granola crowd would make the sacrifice, but car companies make their money selling to the masses. Even in 2012, give Joe Sixpack a choice between a new car of today, or that identical car for a thousand dollars less with all smog equipment removed, which do you think he'll choose?

So the only way to get manufacturers to make the cars cleaner was to mandate it by law. Since all companies had to do it, the playing field remains level. Car companies don't get hurt for doing what they should.

I think that's the only way to get Google, Bing, Yahoo, etc. to do this. The public interest is often at odds with self interest, so that's where government needs to step in.


----------



## noiseboyuk (May 4, 2012)

Laws would be good - the problem there (echoing the google vs the rest problem) is international law.

My main point really is that even if others don't follow suit and the cool kids all go to bing (just typing that sentence sounds so improbable), it will still help. I think the lowest hanging fruit is stop targeting the law abiding. Creating laws to stop everything somehow is way up near the top of the tree. Pressure brought to bear on Google - and Yahoo / Bing etc is the easiest way forward I'd have thought.


----------



## synthetic (May 4, 2012)

And yet when the government does try to step in, the internet goes nuts.


----------



## RiffWraith (May 4, 2012)

noiseboyuk @ Fri May 04 said:


> I've a lot of sympathy with Synthetic's approach. Google made $2.89bn in the last quarter. ....._snipped for space_.



Some excellent points there regarding google's ability to filter child porn, and not pirated sw. Not that those two things are on the same level, but good point nonetheless.

I have just emailed google's legal dept with my phone number. The email was not specific, just a general "illegal search and results" inquiry.

Let's see if they get back to me.

Cheers.


----------



## José Herring (May 4, 2012)

My opinion has always been that it's a conflict of the original design and intention of the internet vs. commerce. The two clash.

For those of us that are old enough to remember, the seeds of the internet started forming back in the early 1980's. Back then it was tooted as a medium for free exchange of information that anybody with a modem will be able to access. In my youthful naivete, I thought that in the future (now) this would mean that all libraries would be online and that all computer programs would be posted on line for people to dl, ect.... Remember back then most programs were free and came on little floppy disk or were rather cheap.

Flashforward to today and the original internet still exist. There's GNU sites, there's plenty of online encyclopedias, news, wiki, free search engines ect.... A lot of the architects of the internet still believe in its original purpose. Google may be worth billions, but in all honesty they provide a service to the public that's free for us to use paid for by sponsors. That's what the internet was suppose to be.

Now there was the other side of computing. The Bill Gates ect... coming up at the same time. But remember that Gates was one of the last people to hop on board the internet. He was in no way a developer of any of the internet tech and didn't understand it initially. But, there were plenty of people that saw the potential of the internet and started selling stuff on it. Thus around the year 2000 the internet radically changed and became an open market for the sale of goods and services.

Now those two aspects of the internet are radically at war.

Guy mentioned Google, but what I think he perhaps doesn't know is that Google 7 years ago didn't sensor much of anything. You could type in porn and very easily run up against more unscrupulous sites. They were court ordered about 5 years ago to provide the government information, IP address ect.. of people suspected of doing illegal searches and downloads related to child porn and they fought it in court and lost. So in order to avoid having to turn over names on a regular basis they made the decision to start censoring their searches.

My guess is that the same will happen for piracy. Some big ass lawsuit will come their way and they'll change their attitude, but it will be fully against their will as they are fully in line with open access to all digital info good and bad.

As far as people doing business on the net, which is just about everybody these days, I'm more on the side of its incumbent upon the individual to make sure their stuff doesn't get stolen rather than having to pass laws prohibiting certain behavior. Passing laws hurts everybody.


----------



## wst3 (May 4, 2012)

A very interesting observation Jose. I'm not about to admit that I used to use Tymenet and Telenet to access the internet through the Whole Earth Lectronic Link, nah, let's just say I read about it in a history book!

The Internet has been around since the late 1960s, at which time access was tightly controlled, and limited to the government and universities.

In the mid 1970s the Internet left US soil and connected to universities in the UK. It spread quite quickly after that. I recall one story (may even be true) about the Queen of England sending an email in 1977 (I think.)

At about the same time Compuserve (not the BBS), Telenet and Tymenet were all building these X.25 based networks that would compete with, and lose to the TCP/IP model.

In the early 1980s access rules were loosened, and commercial organizations could use it to access the Usenet newsgroups, and to trade emails (anyone here remember "bang" addressing?)

In 1984 the number of hosts on the internet broke the 1000 mark, and the idea for DNS was born.

It wasn't until 1991 that the idea for a hyper-text based web of hosts was introduced. Prior to that Hyper-text was mostly limited to Apple computers. And access to the internet required some knowledge of Telnet and FTP.

The first browser, Mosaic, arrived around this time, if you were on Windows 3.1 you had to compile it, and install a winsock layer... it was not an easy task!

It was around 1994 that commercial use of the internet was finally allowed, and things have not been the same since.

There is a natural conflict between the free exchange of ideas (the original purpose of both the internet and the world wide web) and commercial use. It exists at many layers.

It will forever make protection of intellectual property a challenge.

I've never really understood why someone would go to the lengths necessary to write something like emacs and then distribute it for free, but I am grateful that they do!


----------



## José Herring (May 4, 2012)

Very Insightful post.

To pick up where you left off.

We we're going to bring down the Man with the Internet. Making use of computer programs that were freely distributed so that the common man can have power. 

Me and my friends were trying to be hackers back in the early days on our Commodore 64's and our 5k modems. Back then in the '80's it's like you said, universities were online but so were government agencies and you could just freely roam around in their databases because there was no protection. Of course there wasn't any real data either and I at least learned that I had neither the talent nor the patience to do any of that stuff, or very little desire either. So we gave up early on.

The Internet in my high school days was the great equalizer between us little kids and the big bad world! Plus we could play on line roll playing games too. All text. No graphics. But, fun.

I'm just glad that the early part of the internet took route before it became all commercial. To a large extent I do all my study scores, theoretical music studies, and listening on line without having to pay. Without it, I wouldn't be progressing as fast as I could be any other way. I learn a tremendous amount and I'm glad that the original vision of the internet is still alive. 

I'll take the pirates as long as the internet stays free and open.

And, for the record, I don't use any pirated software or dl any music on line at all with out paying. I haven't for years. I've paid for everything that I use. And, I do feel sorry for the devs that get hit with Piracy. Its a shame that some people just can't handle freedom ethically. But, I don't think we should punish those who can handle it by restricting it. Lex is correct, "anti-piracy" laws are just another way for the government to control the free flow of information, because the last thing they want is for information that they don't control to be out there. They wouldn't want us to stop being liberals or conservatives and actually, you know... start thinking for ourselves. Just think of the pandemonium if that were to happen!


----------



## Reegs (May 4, 2012)

To the devs with pirated libs out there, out of curiosity do you guys occasionally download the torrents to look for the watermarks or an indication of its source? 

Does that count as pirating your own stuff, or simply reclaiming a copy of it?


----------



## NYC Composer (May 4, 2012)

josejherring @ Fri May 04 said:


> I'll take the pirates as long as the internet stays free and open.



Jose, just out of curiosity, if you found the free flow of information on the Internet costing you 50% of your income, would you be as sanguine about it? How about 30%? I'm not putting a spin on it, maybe you feel strongly enough about the issue to say 'yeah, it would be worth it to me"-I'm asking without spin.

I'm not married to any particular train of thought here, I simply see it as a very knotty problem. I'm not a fan of censorship,hell, I'm a card carrying ACLU nutbag. I'm also not a fan of the theft of intellectual property. At present I don't see good ways for these issues to ever resolve completely-I think it's going to be a matter of compromise and building blocks. International cooperation would help a lot, but of course that's true for so many things and is easier said than done.

An extreme example of the free flow of information, obviously, but-would anyone really want U.S. nuclear codes released, or the names and descriptions of covert operatives working in anti-terror initiatives? Freedom ain't never free, and everyone has a line they draw somewhere, whether it's child porn or whatever. I admire some of what Julian Assange does. I also think some of what he does may get people killed or destroy diplomatic initiatives that could be vital.

Long winded, but my point is that none of this will ever by cut and dried.


----------



## wst3 (May 4, 2012)

NYC Composer @ Fri May 04 said:


> <snip>
> 
> Long winded, but my point is that none of this will ever by cut and dried.



Pretty short really, and concise, and you hit the core of the problem in that last sentence... it is many shades of gray.

I don't want censorship, or any loophole that would provide the government with a way to censor anything on the internet. But then I don't want people trading kiddie-porn or stolen movies, music, and software. How I resolve that one in my own mind... I have no idea!


----------



## Niah (May 4, 2012)

wst3 @ Fri May 04 said:


> NYC Composer @ Fri May 04 said:
> 
> 
> > <snip>
> ...



Okey sorry to get a little sidetracked here but I have to say something about this. I don't understand this about drawing the line when it comes to child pornography and that somehow censorship is a way to stop it. I think it is precisely because of the free trade nature of the internet that it has been possible to identify organizations and individuals that are involved in child pornography. It is this free trade of child pornography material that is used as evidence by authorities to act and prosecute these same organizations and individuals. Awhile ago some so called anonymous group launched some kind of a an operation to shutdown child pornography sites, that is clearly an act of censorship and what it does is nothing but remove data that can be very helpful to authorities and driving this material further into the underground where it can be harder to find it or it may even drive it outside of the internet.


----------



## wst3 (May 5, 2012)

Wow - that is a very interesting take on the child pornography issue... and I'm not trying to be funny or antagonistic!

Yet another case of 'pick your poison' - do we let the people that abuse children trade on the internet in the hopes of catching them, or do we try to stop their ability to trade - which they did long before the WWW, and will continue to do if they get shut out of that avenue?

My vote is heavily influenced by the fact that I have kids, and I know two survivors of child sexual abuse (probably know more actually, but two have confided in me.) Yeah, I say hang them before the commit the crime - but that is a purely emotional reaction, and it goes against the very core of the US 'justice' system, and it is, of course, impossible, we do not yet know what lurks in the minds of men, and really, I hope we never get that capability.

So you aren't side-tracking the conversation at all... muddying the waters a bit with a legitimate point maybe<G>!


----------



## noiseboyuk (May 5, 2012)

A different sidetrack. Does anyone have any insight into software that uses no copy protection at all? Tonehammer, I believe, never used to use any. Reaper is another. Question is - does this affect their legit sales?


----------



## EastWest Lurker (May 5, 2012)

In between letting the internet have a totally Wild West philosophy and not allowing people to yell "fire" in a crowded theater is a reasonable and responsible compromise to be carved out by people of good will and common sense.

Liberty is not license.


----------



## Ed (May 5, 2012)

Guy, 

TH did have a few products with CP. What I find interesting as an observation is that while 8dio/SoundIron have many products with no CP protection at all that I can see (or virtually none), if you check PB there aren't any search results for any of these company names at all, yet there are various results for other libraries with CP. Not sure what it means, but still.


----------



## José Herring (May 5, 2012)

NYC Composer @ Fri May 04 said:


> josejherring @ Fri May 04 said:
> 
> 
> > I'll take the pirates as long as the internet stays free and open.
> ...



The short answer is that thieves should be stopped. Theft is a crime and there are already laws on the books covering theft. But, it seems to me that lawmakers have very little interest in stopping these crimes, yet they use the crimes as a justification to further regulate and clamp down on the internet. It seems to me that what governments are really afraid of isn't piracy, but the free flow of information between citizens of the world.


----------



## wst3 (May 5, 2012)

josejherring @ Sat May 05 said:


> The short answer is that thieves should be stopped. Theft is a crime and there are already laws on the books covering theft. But, it seems to me that lawmakers have very little interest in stopping these crimes, yet they use the crimes as a justification to further regulate and clamp down on the internet. It seems to me that what governments are really afraid of isn't piracy, but the free flow of information between citizens of the world.



Another reasonable, and I believe accurate, assessment of the situation.

Enforcing existing laws is always better than creating new ones!

Every once in a while a situation crops up that requires new laws. Is this one? I honestly do not know!


----------



## Wes Antczak (May 5, 2012)

I thought that TH and now Soundiron and 8DIO libraries were watermarked.


----------



## Ed (May 5, 2012)

Yes, but i wouldnt define that as copy protection.


----------



## Wes Antczak (May 5, 2012)

Sure, there isn't something in place that would keep you from making physical copies, but if the libraries are watermarked with your name and possibly other information, I think that in the overall context of this discussion it _is_ copy protection. I think that is also implied by the companies like Spitfire, etc. that also use watermarking as well.



Ed @ Sat May 05 said:


> Yes, but i wouldnt define that as copy protection.


----------



## Ed (May 5, 2012)

Sure and Ive talked about Watermarking previously in this thread, Im just referring to libraries that actually are required to be cracked first before use. I just find it interesting that PB doesnt seem to have libraries that have virtually no CP yet does have some that require programming a hack first. What does it mean? No idea and not sure what conclusion we can make about it would be.


----------



## Udo (May 5, 2012)

Ed @ Sun May 06 said:


> ... I just find it interesting that PB doesnt seem to have libraries that have virtually no CP yet does have some that require a programming a hack first. What does it mean? No idea and not sure what conclusion we can make about it would be.


Hacking is just considered a game/"sport"/challenge by many of the people who do the actual hacking and I think many are not serious users of most (if any) of the products they crack.


----------



## lee (May 5, 2012)

I´ve been wondering if it´s possible to find some kind of statistics of what software/sample libs has been cracked most/least? Would be interesting to study what the reason behind could be, if there are actually some clever moves that other developers could learn from, trying to minimize the pirating.

Or perhaps, some are just lucky/unlucky?

I can imagine the "need" for certain products from the warez-users has an influence on what products get most attention from the crackers, but maybe that´s not the only thing making some products more likely to engage many hours of the crackers.

/Johnny


----------



## NYC Composer (May 5, 2012)

I think a major problem arises when you have a talented hacker who's also a musician or hobbyist-musician.The guy is then challenged on the hacking front and when he's cracked the product, he gets to use it and share it with whoever.


----------



## Udo (May 6, 2012)

NYC Composer @ Sun May 06 said:


> I think a major problem arises when you have a talented hacker who's also a musician or hobbyist-musician.The guy is then challenged on the hacking front and when he's cracked the product, he gets to use it and share it with whoever.


Yes, of course, but I was responding to Ed's query about the apparent contradiction of why there are so many copy protected products available on pirate sites that had a hack applied (to remove CP) and very few that did not require a hack at all.


----------



## noiseboyuk (May 6, 2012)

Ed @ Sat May 05 said:


> Guy,
> 
> TH did have a few products with CP. What I find interesting as an observation is that while 8dio/SoundIron have many products with no CP protection at all that I can see (or virtually none), if you check PB there aren't any search results for any of these company names at all, yet there are various results for other libraries with CP. Not sure what it means, but still.



Yeah, interesting. Not sure either. I don't want to be too naive - I just wonder what Reaper's experience is. No CP, no watermarking, two tier licenses.... do people on any level respect this and are honest? Would love to know.


----------



## Daryl (May 6, 2012)

noiseboyuk @ Sun May 06 said:


> Ed @ Sat May 05 said:
> 
> 
> > Guy,
> ...


Reaper is irrelevant. You just download it and never buy a licence. Easy. :wink: 

D


----------



## noiseboyuk (May 6, 2012)

Daryl @ Sun May 06 said:


> Reaper is irrelevant. You just download it and never buy a licence. Easy. :wink:



Sure... so how are they still in business?


----------



## Daryl (May 6, 2012)

noiseboyuk @ Sun May 06 said:


> Daryl @ Sun May 06 said:
> 
> 
> > Reaper is irrelevant. You just download it and never buy a licence. Easy. :wink:
> ...


Oooo. Don't get me started. Just look up the history of Justin, the owner, and all will be clear. 

D


----------



## noiseboyuk (May 6, 2012)

Daryl @ Sun May 06 said:


> noiseboyuk @ Sun May 06 said:
> 
> 
> > Daryl @ Sun May 06 said:
> ...



So ok - but how is Cockos doing business-wise now, is the question? Does their model work?


----------



## Daryl (May 6, 2012)

noiseboyuk @ Sun May 06 said:


> Daryl @ Sun May 06 said:
> 
> 
> > noiseboyuk @ Sun May 06 said:
> ...


Justin can afford to spend all his time making no money, so it's not exactly a business model. You're assuming that there is profit made. We don't know that there is any profit. In fact in terms of time and premises alone, there could be a loss. That's why I say that the business model is irrelevant.

D


----------



## noiseboyuk (May 6, 2012)

Daryl @ Sun May 06 said:


> Justin can afford to spend all his time making no money, so it's not exactly a business model. You're assuming that there is profit made. We don't know that there is any profit. In fact in terms of time and premises alone, there could be a loss. That's why I say that the business model is irrelevant.
> 
> D



In which case, that answers my question - no assumptions made here, just seeing how it does - or doesn't work.

Clearly you know more about this guy than I do - so what's going on? I see he was involved in starting peer-to-peer. So he got rich from that? And now has Reaper almost as a hobby? Is there any record - or even a rough indication of number of registered users?

It's easy to jump to conclusions on one side or the other. Easy to assume that no-one pays, equally easy to assume that the model appears to be viable. I'd like to see a little more evidence one way or the other.


----------



## Daryl (May 6, 2012)

noiseboyuk @ Sun May 06 said:


> Daryl @ Sun May 06 said:
> 
> 
> > Justin can afford to spend all his time making no money, so it's not exactly a business model. You're assuming that there is profit made. We don't know that there is any profit. In fact in terms of time and premises alone, there could be a loss. That's why I say that the business model is irrelevant.
> ...


Good luck with that. I think it would be about the same as trying to prove that Apple makes money out of Logic. :wink: 

However you could easily do the sums. How many users would there need to be to support a company of a couple of people working full time. How much to charge for upgrades, assuming that everyone pays. I think that the initial sales would work out OK, but that there would be so sustainability, without truck loads of new users all the time.

D

D


----------



## NYC Composer (May 6, 2012)

Udo @ Sun May 06 said:


> NYC Composer @ Sun May 06 said:
> 
> 
> > I think a major problem arises when you have a talented hacker who's also a musician or hobbyist-musician.The guy is then challenged on the hacking front and when he's cracked the product, he gets to use it and share it with whoever.
> ...



And I was responding to lee's comment about the desire to crack a program, so there you are


----------



## mk282 (May 6, 2012)

noiseboyuk @ 6.5.2012 said:


> Daryl @ Sun May 06 said:
> 
> 
> > noiseboyuk @ Sun May 06 said:
> ...




By Justin's words, they're doing very well exactly because of their business model. Honest people buy it. Those that really like it, purchase the full price licence even if they are not doing anything commercial with Reaper.


----------



## NYC Composer (May 6, 2012)

mk282 @ Sun May 06 said:


> By Justin's words, they're doing very well exactly because of their business model. Honest people buy it. Those that really like it, purchase the full price licence even if they are not doing anything commercial with Reaper.



Really? What percentage of those who really like it pay for a professional license they don't have to pay for? I don't believe it to be very high, and if Justin says it is, I think he's being dishonest.


----------



## mk282 (May 8, 2012)

Seems like there's enough people who pay for any of the two licences to generate them steady income.

Justin is most definitely not a dishonest person, FYI. My comment about "those who like it pay for pro licence" was not from Justin's statement (and sorry if it got you confused), but a general occurence that happens from time to time and people who did it mention it on Reaper forums.


----------

