View Poll Results: Is this fair and legal?

Voters
266. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    50 18.80%
  • No

    216 81.20%
Page 13 of 15 FirstFirst ...
3
11
12
13
14
15
LastLast
  1. #241
    Quote Originally Posted by FusedMass View Post
    There's nothing wrong with HuffPost. You make it sound like they point false information. You can Google this information and check to see it's accurate. Just because you don't like their liberal appeal doesn't mean they're intentionally misleading on topics for no reason.

    Since you asked

    http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/201...ng-monitoring/

    http://www.copyrightinformation.org/alerts- It explains the program in detail CAS Copyright Alert System

    http://torrentfreak.com/verizon-will...irates-121115/ -Admitting reducing speeds for people who pirate stuff. Among other things.

    http://torrentfreak.com/att-starts-s...sites-121012/- By a torrent freak shares a leaked memo
    Huffington Post is to Dem's what Fox is to the Repub's. It's so obviously one-sided as to be questionable.

    And I don't see a problem here. Don't pirate (which you shouldn't be doing anyway) and you won't have a problem.

  2. #242
    Elemental Lord Masark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    8,958
    Quote Originally Posted by Rukentuts View Post
    A lot of the time the publisher and / or band are the ones uploading it...
    So? The record labels don't care what the band thinks.

    http://www.metalinjection.net/its-ju...rish-fans-sued

  3. #243
    Quote Originally Posted by Masark View Post
    So? The record labels don't care what the band thinks.

    http://www.metalinjection.net/its-ju...rish-fans-sued

    He was pointing out that by listening to (and in my opinion, recording) music from YouTube, you are listening to a legal distribution source, when it's uploaded by the copyright holder.
    Last edited by Tinykong; 2012-11-26 at 08:44 PM.

  4. #244
    Well that sucks, apperently filthy rich corporatists don't have enough money yet.

  5. #245
    Titan Kangodo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    13,072
    Quote Originally Posted by Twotonsteak View Post
    And I don't see a problem here. Don't pirate (which you shouldn't be doing anyway) and you won't have a problem.
    The problem is that if it's illegal, it is up to the government to punish you.
    Not some wannabe vigilante disguised as an ISP that 'convicts' people without a trial.

  6. #246
    Warchief Knight Gil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Somewhere
    Posts
    2,229
    Quote Originally Posted by Skavau View Post
    I am sorry but it is archaic and technologically outdated. It is free or extremely cheap to promote and mass produce your stuff now. The internet allows for anything to be shared with triviality. In terms of music, the only reason that there is such a huge gap between 'mainstream' artists who are commercially successfull and thus rich and underground artists is because of the construct set up by the record labels and general populace apathy and/or ignorance.
    Not true. Who has the task to make populace less apathetic or ignorant towards a certain kind of music? Companies, cultural programmers, etc. You can't expect people to just go look for underground artists when they have spent their entire lives listening to mainstream music. Tastes are supposed to, and can be, educated. And it isn't artists' task to educate people in order to like their music. It's cultural programmers' task. Artists can't strive without companies, just like companies can't strive without artists. You would never ever hear about bands like The Beatles or Queen if they didn't have good companies / managers covering their backs

    I would imagine any feelings that could be used would be no more than indifferent. If your band makes a CD chances are I am not going to be a paying customer. The bottom line is if i then pirate your band's cd there is a zero sum equation at work here. You never had access to my money. When i pirate your cd you STILL have no access to my money. The status hasn't changed. you might be butthurt INTELLECTUALLY but the reality is I've done nothing to change the status of our relationship.
    Your argument is terrible, and so fucking infantile...So if I go to a shop and steal a TV, it's fine because if I didn't take it for free, I wouldn't have bought it anyway? What fucking nonsense. In the case you talked about, I would still be the owner of that CD, and if I don't want you to listen to my music without paying, I should have every right to do so. My stuff, my rules.

  7. #247
    If an ISP did this to me, or even threatened to, I'd get a new ISP.

    Problem solved.

  8. #248
    Banned This name sucks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    A basement in Canada
    Posts
    2,725
    Quote Originally Posted by nightshark View Post
    If an ISP did this to me, or even threatened to, I'd get a new ISP.

    Problem solved.
    Except in canada and the US its usually a monopoly.

  9. #249
    Pandaren Monk Iamanerd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    1,760
    Well if you're dumb enough to get caught then it sucks to be you. Also these companies won't do much because the second people start giving them bad rep they will back off as it's bad for business. Also I love my ISP as they don't like reporting people or taking measures against them.
    Intel I5-2500k @4.8Ghz| Noctua NH-U9B | Asus P67 Deluxe | 16GB G.SKILL Ares 2133Mhz
    Samsung 840 EVO 500GB/1TB | 512GB MX100 | 1TB WD Black x2 | 2TB WD Black |3TB WD Green NAS x2
    MSI GTX 980 Gaming 4G | SeasonicX 650 | NXZT H440 | Asus PB278Q | Razor Naga Molten Edition | CM Quick Fire Rapid TK
    Asus Xonar Essense STX | Presonus E5 x2 | Takstar HiFi 2050's

  10. #250
    Epic! Skavau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    England, United Kingdom
    Posts
    1,703
    Quote Originally Posted by Knight Gil View Post
    Not true. Who has the task to make populace less apathetic or ignorant towards a certain kind of music? Companies, cultural programmers, etc. You can't expect people to just go look for underground artists when they have spent their entire lives listening to mainstream music.
    My point is that they don't. The mainstream record labels do not. They don't sign up talented artists but ones that are the most appealling for the masses. Most people don't have the drive, energy or interest to scour the internet for new music. They accept whatever is popular (i.e: played to them from the radio or television shows). This ultimately results in what can only be objectively labelled as poor mass-produced and watered down accessible music dominating the airwaves. Though of course, as I said earlier this is starting to decline with the onset of the internet making independent and unknown music a mere google away. This alone is what is really cutting into the industry's profits as their market can hardly be described as mass piracy advocates or abusers.

    Tastes are supposed to, and can be, educated. And it isn't artists' task to educate people in order to like their music.
    I never said it was the artists task. Or even the record labels. Or even a "cultural programmer". It's no-one's task. It is a cultural problem (if you view it that way). The same is true of movies and television shows (thought not quite the same way). I was just saying that companies created that climate to happen.

    It's cultural programmers' task. Artists can't strive without companies, just like companies can't strive without artists. You would never ever hear about bands like The Beatles or Queen if they didn't have good companies / managers covering their backs
    No, but that is because they existed in a time prior to the internet where resources for music were physical.
    Last edited by Skavau; 2012-11-27 at 03:56 AM.

  11. #251
    Quote Originally Posted by nightshark View Post
    If an ISP did this to me, or even threatened to, I'd get a new ISP.

    Problem solved.
    Lol, goodluck finding one that doesn't follow that rule. Will be really easy finding another ISP, especially since in most cities there are only a couple such companies or, more probable, a monopoly of one.

    In my country, one of the major cable TV providers decided out of the blue to remove the Discovery channels from the service. They didn't notify the clients in any way prior to doing this, inspite of the clients having specific contracts which include these channels. Before that, they also removed a country-local TV network because that TV station was against the current president and the TV cable company's owner happened to be a fan of the president. What, the customers don't like it ?! They're free cancel their subscruption...oh wait, there is no other TV cable provider in most areas of the country. Tough luck, people. Gotta love Capitalism.

  12. #252
    Quote Originally Posted by Tinykong View Post
    He was pointing out that by listening to (and in my opinion, recording) music from YouTube, you are listening to a legal distribution source, when it's uploaded by the copyright holder.
    Virgin Media throttle in the UK and if you root around in the t's and c's they can tell exactly what you are doing. If mass p2p usage they'll know. If mass YouTube they know its legit. This is a slippery slope but something Hollywood has been pursuing for years. They cannot protect their own media from piracy so encourage (backhand) ISPs to stop it at source. The Internet is too big to police, to many users to monitor. If you come close to top 100 in p2p usage they might come after you but 9/10 you'll be behind a proxy and there is no evidence to suggest you are pirating just using lots. It's cat and mouse, cats getting meaner but still can't catch that mouse, but he's coming.
    WHEN I POST IN CAPS CURSE SPEAK FOR ALL PALADINS AND REFRAIN FROM PUNCTUATION EXCEPT AT THE END OF MY SENTENCE WHERE I USE EXTRA YOU CAN'T ARGUE WITH MY LOGIC!!!!!!!

  13. #253
    I don't think that it is either fair or legal. Internet activity is a form of communication. Private communication. And everyone is entitled to it. Just as the post office cannot open my letters so an internet provider should not have the right to monitor my internet activity. I cannot even fathom what kind of person would not understand such a simple concept as privacy. I don't care if some people are illegaly downloading content from the internet. Nothing, absolutely nothing, gives the right to an internet provider to invade my privacy.

    The only people who can take a look are the authorities, and even they should have to have an extremely important reason to do so, such as a valid suspicion of child pornography distribution.

    And there are no copyrights on the internet. The concept just doesn't exist in a digital world where everyone can have his own place to be. A movie can have all the copyright warnings its distributors want on the official content, but I doubt any pirate carries over those warnings to a pirated movie. And online copyright course?! Who gives the right to an american company to lecture me, a european, on what I can do with my internet activity? Give me a break. By that reasoning there should be a telephone conversation copyright course as well. And of course a letter-writing copyright course. We can't forget the way of communication that predates the previous two! And how awesome and rational it would be if someone was placed under arrest for writing the lyrics of a favourite song of his in a text message?! This is ridiculous. It doesn't stand to reasonable thinking. Not even a bit. That is why companies fight so hard to create such a concept. They have the money, the means, and the time. And they rely on people's inattentiveness and blind following to keep pushing for such things.

    If movie/music/whatever companies want to increase their sales, they can try to release products that are not shit to begin with. I know I would never pirate an album from my favourite music band unless I was completely broke, broke as in not have money to pay even basic bills. That is because I love their music. When a company floods a market with shitty musical albums they have it coming to them. Teach people to not care much about art, and they will act accordingly. They turned albums in streamlined products, and they are trying to sell them continuously and en masse, like laundry detergent, no wonder people choose the free method. Unless they stop trying to milk things and decide to focus on quality this will continue to happen. And by the way, piracy existed before the internet was widely available. People that used to pirate that way will go back to that, and the younger people will learn how to do so. So even this masterpiece of stupidity solves nothing. Giving true value to art will.
    Last edited by Drithien; 2012-11-27 at 07:34 AM.

  14. #254
    Titan PizzaSHARK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Oklahoma, USA
    Posts
    12,311
    Quote Originally Posted by Methanar View Post
    Except in canada and the US its usually a monopoly.
    Ding ding ding. We don't really get many choices here. Where I live, most of internet access comes from Cox. Some areas might be able to get AT&T's U-Verse (which is exactly what Cox provides, but more expensive.)

    In both cases, both companies are colossal corporations who don't really need to be worried about pissing people off because... lol, where else are they gonna go for broadband?
    http://steamcommunity.com/id/PizzaSHARK
    Quote Originally Posted by Ryan Cailan Ebonheart View Post
    The best you people can do is throw insults and lay your perspective on what a real adult is onto me but I will continue to reject them. And you will try and try again, force me into submission but I will continue to press on.
    MMOC IRC!

  15. #255
    Elemental Lord Masark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    8,958
    Quote Originally Posted by Methanar View Post
    Except in canada and the US its usually a monopoly.
    Or a duopoly, where both are part of this scheme.

  16. #256
    Quote Originally Posted by Masark View Post
    Or a duopoly, where both are part of this scheme.
    It's like this pretty much everywhere. One time, I wanted to switch my TV cable provider which is also my ISP. The guy from this new company I wanted to go to, said up front that they won't be "trespassing" on the other company's area. So yeah, you bet your ass companies divide their market if they can, so they don't go into actual competition. Such understandings are illegal, obviously, but good luck proving anything just because some guy told you on the phone.

  17. #257
    Herald of the Titans Tzalix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    2,586
    Fair? No. Legal? Yes.

    Fat white CEO's want to make more money, and the law does not prevent them from doing so. Nothing new, move along people.
    I really like christmas. It's sentimental, I know... But I just really like it.

  18. #258
    Quote Originally Posted by Twotonsteak View Post
    Huffington Post is to Dem's what Fox is to the Repub's. It's so obviously one-sided as to be questionable.

    And I don't see a problem here. Don't pirate (which you shouldn't be doing anyway) and you won't have a problem.
    To be fair. I think HuffPost is a great interactive online articles. It contains articles about just about everything. They don't make up they're own truths as Fox News goes out their way to make other person look bad. For example Obama was quoting John Mc Cain on something he said. Fox News only aired what Obama quoted. Not the words "I quote"

    They are worlds apart. HuffPost while it may enhance the liberal view and they're message may be Pro Left wing. I never known them to flat out make out twisted truths and lie about situations in the way Fox News has done. On topic I think it's very disturbing and a little scary that "Motion Picture of America" which is Hollywood and "Music People" have teamed up under the screen to go out of they're way to make sure you're not "stealing from the internet"

    Whenever you modify the internet. Even with the best intentions. It loses it's freedom. That's why the bills aimed at doing just that were overwhelmingly defeated. Even some corporations that supported the bill backed away after the public's anger. What's to say they don't create an internet group to monitar people on the internet.

  19. #259
    Merely a Setback Rukentuts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Mini Soda
    Posts
    25,950
    Quote Originally Posted by FusedMass View Post
    To be fair. I think HuffPost is a great interactive online articles. It contains articles about just about everything. They don't make up they're own truths as Fox News goes out their way to make other person look bad.
    Even as a liberal I can say Huffington Post is the liberal equivalent to Fox News.
    Quote Originally Posted by GreatOak View Post
    Hey, as a transabled, transethnic, non-binary, genderqueer, neo-communist, indoor-capable republican otherkin I am offended by your callous display of ignorance.
    Quote Originally Posted by Cybran View Post
    Both of those links don't provide any evidence. They make unsubstantiated statements

  20. #260
    Quote Originally Posted by Rukentuts View Post
    Even as a liberal I can say Huffington Post is the liberal equivalent to Fox News.
    I respectfully disagree. No doubt HuffPost has a Liberal Agenda or Pro Left Wing. The major differences from the two is that Fox News flats out lies and makes up information that is accepted as the normal. While HuffPost might be biased they don't flat out tell you lies.

    If you need more proof and you can Google this.

    People who watch no news, know more then people who watch Fox News

    http://www.inquisitr.com/241677/stud...o-news-at-all/

    To me at least they're is a major difference. One of them flat out makes up false information and other one tells the truth.

    “The largest effect is that of Fox News: all else being equal, someone who watched only Fox News would be expected to answer just 1.04 domestic questions correctly — a figure which is significantly worse than if they had reported watching no media at all. On the other hand, if they listened only to NPR, they would be expected to answer 1.51 questions correctly; viewers of Sunday morning talk shows fare similarly well. And people watching only The Daily Show with Jon Stewart could answer about 1.42 questions correctly.”
    Read more at http://www.inquisitr.com/241677/stud...VXYyZiRuK9P.99

    The daily show is a comedy news network and they are more honest then Fox News and they are Liberal leaning.
    Last edited by FusedMass; 2012-11-27 at 03:37 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •