Lords pass piracy bill

[Flare]

The problem here Mez is that there is no way to tell what the large downloads are, be it a zip full of ripped music, downloading a legit digitally distributed game (my steam directory is over 40 gigs alone), cracked games, fan subbed unregistered Anime (grey area) or cracked and registered Anime with dubs...

... most of the policy makers ideas of what constitutes fair usage and large downloads are what they themselves use the internet for... e-mails, browsing, VoIP or Video conferencing, streaming... the demographic profile of a typical gamer would fit a illegal file sharers profile as well.

How would they know that 8 gigs of data is a legit game/demo/beta or a cracked game, unless they inspect all the traffic... hello China, Britian will soon have need of your citizen control software.

I am fully against pirates, especially the ones who download and then sell copies of bootlegs, they are the worst of the worst.

[Mez]

Don't be stupid Mez, here's an example of what this bill encourages and protects.

http://www.spin.com/articles/trent-reznor-blasts-label

Your argument is completely and utterly flawed as soon as you call someone stupid for no reason other than they don't agreed with your view. This is the "Thinkers Topic", try doing that next time.

Also don't link to something that is THREE years old and in another country.

OT//

Flare - as much as I completely agree with what you say regarding the unfair aspects, if you can prove that you are using the internet responsibly then there isn't an issue.

Also judging by the reaction in this thread, the majority of proper gamers DO actually illegally file share!

[Flawless]

Your argument is completely and utterly flawed

How high is that horse of yours?

Three years or not, I used it as an example. You think that doesn't happen today?

Rather than eating it up and thinking its a benefit, why is this law a good thing? Copyright law is so huge, while this clearly is aimed at music, TV, and films it doesn't stopped it being applied in ridiculous circumstances. Breaking copyright isn't just torrenting.

Also,
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2010/uk ... 1#pb2-l1g3

If I'm reading that right, if someone hacks my WiFi, downloads and I get a strike against me it is still my problem? How is that fair? WiFi encryption is hardly a hard thing to break, anyone could do it with a bit of googling and I'm pretty sure average Joe has no idea what a MAC address is either.

then there's the next section, an ISP can give out my personal information from just seeing my IP downloading from a torrent.

Then there is all the court cases that will happen thanks to this and how hard it will be to enforce. People will move away from P2P transfers, then what... making a law to force ISP's to packet snoop everyone? This is a heavy handed approach that will do nothing but alienate internet users.

Then there's the lovely part that says I can be disconnected without fair trail, oh this is just brilliant. Opposing this must mean you are a file sharer right? I mean, if you've done nothing wrong you shouldn't care?

There was also some major crap about Orphan Work (material that a copyright owner cannot be found) but thankfully that was dropped.

Also judging by the reaction in this thread, the majority of proper gamers DO actually illegally file share!

Thats just stupid silly, this thread is hardly bases for proof that the majority all file share. Pirates are just another customer base most companies are unwilling to see as potential customers, perhaps if there wasn't a wild difference in prices around the globe, staggered release dates, and their utterly slow (or non-existant) uptake on using the internet as another medium to reach customers etc. people wouldn't feel that burn of being a bitch of companies who basically managed to get this bill made, and thanks to excellent timing through Parliament in under a month with no lengthy debate.

This does nothing to help the British public and yet it does everything to let companies continue to bugger us around.

[Mez]

Your argument is completely and utterly flawed

How high is that horse of yours?

I stopped reading after that. If we were in a room, I would have walked out. Come back when you can actually be mature without typing snide comments. I am not on a "high horse", I simply wish to have a conversation at a level where the children can't come to the table.

[Flawless]

Oh I'm sorry, I didn't realise you telling people to get off their "high horse" and acting holier than thou was OK, you tell me to act mature when you have done nothing but post in a condescending pretentious manner, lol.

[*sketch]

and don't forget; if ISPs are indeed forced to implement further "technical measures", think of the cost. The main reason ISPs are against the bill is because of the cost they will incur. And who will take the hit on that? Ah yes, the legitimate consumer. Broadband is already too expensive for the rubbish service we get.

[Haggus McGee]

Don't be ad hominem, about this guys.

Personally, I think the issue of piracy is going to be hard to conquer by legal means, and that piracy is a product of the failing capitalistic approach to sell media. By that I mean putting a price on, well, something that is difficult to objectively possess since it can just be made out of ones and zeros.
Capitalism is all about scarcity, meaning milk and eggs are cheap, whereas jewels are expensive, while they are useless. Copyright laws are sprawled all over our economies, with patents, trade secrets and other such 'intellectual property'. So must we force media to be scarce just so that we can profit from it? Why must we employ capitalism to music, films and games even though they have the potential to be limitless?
It's people in business of selling the media who would keep it scarce so they can value it like jewels.It not only applies to the media, but pharmeceuticals who have life saving concoctions that cry to the government to keep expanding copyright laws just so that they can keep their product expensive and profitable. And they pay lobbyists globally to ensure this message reaches governments.
The irony of the battle between advocates of abundance and advocates of scarcity is that both sides are right. It makes no sense to limit and control access now we have technologies to give all of these things to everyone. But it is also foolish to pretend we do not need incentives to help produce and publish them. We will all be better off with more, not fewer, professional careers available for media and technology producers. Not having to stick with a day job allows creative workers to be more creative and productive, for the benefit of all.
Crucially, though, if we really want to end scarcity, we will have to build institutions that promote knowledge-sharing, while at the same time ensuring that there are incentives for creative and technical minds to contribute.
Science, especially in universities, is an excellent model of this, a system made to promote the abundance of knowledge. As universities offer incentives in the form of tenure, promotion and prestige to researchers who can discover and share the information which their peers consider most valuable. The research is largely paid for by the general public's taxes, and the open access movement has ensured that they get access to such information if they want to.
Anyway, back to piracy, the music industry for example, is losing the battle to pirates and will soon have to find alternative ways of copyright, for example, the service of Napster, where a monthly flat fee of £5 grants access to their whole library of tracks, to stream to any PC when logged in, as well as giving 5 mp3 tracks to keep permanently. I subscribe and think it's great value - £1 for all the streaming.

I would like to see governments sit down with the whole media industry, and work out a deal that offers a complete, licensed digital library free to every citizen. It would cost taxpayers something, but less than they spend on all of it currently, buying sparce books, video games and CDs. It would also be good news for the publishers and producers, since they would receive most of the funds, and not fear piracy. Everybody wins.

But I fear this digital economy bill is a step in the wrong direction.

[Deadbolt]

It would also be good news for the publishers and producers, since they would receive most of the funds, and not fear piracy. Everybody wins.

This is EXACTLY the reason I try to buy all of my music at shows. The bands who make it get next to no money otherwise.

[Seany]

But can they still tell if you use a private tracker?

Yes private trackers don't have the large numbers public trackers have so they are less of a target, however private trackers are gaining alot of users, some of these users can work for copyright holders as most private trackers memberships are fairly easy to get hold of.

The best ones are very hard to get into (invite only usually) and a lot are stopping invites now.

Its a shame this passed though. As has already been said, it was in the interests of the right holders and them only.

Ok but if you're using a decent site (demonoid ftw) then there is a community. If a fake torrent is there then i'm pretty sure they would be called out nice and fast.

Besides The only things i download are TV programs and films that are hard to find. (For instance. I managed to get hold of all episodes of Reboot a while back. Relived some childhood memories and lolled like a mofo at the sillyness of it.)

If I truly love a film I will end up buying it. But i will still keep my copy rather than dig a CD out all the time.