the way i see it is p2p and bt is fine. its just like listning to the radio. the only difference is u get to select what u want to hear, when u want to hear it. now if someone is burning and selling for profit then thats not right. besides if u like it u will buy it so u can have a goood copy anyway. i know i do. it doesnt make any sense to have a $3,000 entertainment system and play sub par media on it.one day they will get smart and figure this out--if the cable & satallite companies would offer a service where people could select what they listned to or watched anytime they wanted, and record and play as they liked, it would put an end to all of this. if they charged a low fee like $20-50 a month with no restictions. there would be sooo many people who would suscribe, that the sheer magnitude of poeple paying this small amount, there would be enough money for everyone. and the consumer would be happy too. the only exception would be new music releases. give them a few months to re-coup some money. movies would re-coup at the theater, then be offered. could u imagine over a billion+ people paying $35 a month, thats alot of cash. the only part of this that may be false is when i said one day they would get smart. this is my opinion on the subject. maybe one day ill run for president. naaa i dont think so, i would have to strangle too many people.

---

Quote:

---

Reverse ISP and email lookups

---

*cough* privacy laws *cough*...

Quote:

---

When you play a pirated file your info will be shipped to the RIAA and you will be prosecuted simple as that

---

How will that work? How can the RIAA get to my iPod, or my archos PMP, or my psp, or my phone?? Just disconnect from the internet! LOL

---

Some good points at least that is a step in the right direction.

Thanks for your post gamename!

---

Pleasure's all mine :-)

---

.

---

Quote:

---

I cannot divulge in this forum HOW they will do it. The most important thing to realize is that they can and will do it to prosecute anyone who is blatently harvesting illegal files.

---

Of course you cannot say it - there is nothing to say! Come on now, If there was some sort of new plot, we would know.

And a new law will have to be passed first for you to be able to invade people's privacy like looking at email and spying on people's activities. Those types of laws will never be passed - can you imagine the outrage if people like yourselves were allowed to look at people's emails?

Let's start talking some sense here.....

---

the spying thing wont work. someone will come out with software to defeat it. the only way to do it is to offer a cheap way to have ur music and movies. if the price is right , the quality is good, and there are no restrictions, it will work.

---

I agree witcha, gamename. But at the moment, that service is not available.

So maybe our friend here from the RIAA may want to take that into consideration..

---

@lethal..ur right and it probably will never happen. i wish i had the cash to start something like that, i would have more money than bill gates, in no time at all.

---

.

---

Quote:

---

The only reason I decided to comment on this matter is because I feel that people should have a choice.

---

Is sharing (or stealing, as you call it) music and movies not a choice? Lots of people who download music for free do so because they simply can't afford to pay $20 for a piece of round plastic with one good song on it. I honestly can't find the music I like on the 'legit' sites, and even if I could, I wouldn't want a file infected with DRM on my computer. It seems to me you should be complaining to the recording industry - they're the ones limiting people's choices; copyright infringers, and even pirates have nothing to do with this narrow-sightedness.

It's good that even though we have a gross clash in opinions, we can still agree to disagree. Good luck in trying to stop piracy (I mean that genuinely, not sarcastically) - even though I don't believe in what you are doing =)

[edit] Great comment, nonoitall. I feel what you are saying 100%

---

Well,

IF choice is the problem then maybe we all should complain to the recording industry and have them put higher quality and better selections of music and movies available as their top priority.

Maybe then we could all agree on this.

<i>Unfortunately if no one does anything to stop this blatent piracy, software and movie prices will go through the roof, and drive software prices up beyond the price that anyone can afford! </i>

most economists who study this say the opposite.

Unfortunately, I don't think software piracy can be stopped.

But all I know is that if I was offered my type of music at a flat (monthly) rate, with no restrictions and encoded using the LAME encoder, i'm sold.

@ S2K - wrong coding.

[ i ]S2K[ / i ]

but without the gaps, so you get

S2K

---

WOW! thats got to be a first, comparing file sharing to drugs and terrorism.

---

Quote:

---

Well,

IF choice is the problem then maybe we all should complain to the recording industry and have them put higher quality and better selections of music and movies available as their top priority.

Maybe then we could all agree on this.

---

Absolutely :) - and have them get rid of DRM while they're at it.

I Agree that DRM is a violation of a person's rights and liberties to be able to legitimately hear the music they want before they decide if they wish to purchase it.

Read on:

DRM
(synonyms: Digital Rights Management)
DRM stands for Digital Rights Management and it is now (spring 2002) the hot topic among content owners and technology companies alike.

DRM doesn't mean just basic copy-protection of digital content (like ebooks, MP3s or DivX videos), but it basically means full protection for digital content, ranging from delivery to end user's ways to use the content.

If we speak about music DRM, companies wish to develop a product which would allow record labels to sell copy-protected audio tracks over the Internet, so that only the buyer could be allowed to listen the tracks. This is technically difficult, because traditionally, national laws require content owners like record labels, to grant "fair use" rights for products consumers buy. This means that user has to be allowed to make personal copies of the purchased music, in order to use the music in car, in portable digital audio player, in his/her laptop computer, etc.

So, somehow DRM system needs to know when the copying is allowed and when not -- users also have rights to make copies to their closest relatives, etc. So, normally this has been solved by allowing "hops" -- original file can be copied, but the copy of the original file cannot be copied any further. Obviously this also causes problems, if user accidentally deletes the original file, but still has the legal copy of the file :-)

All companies think the same about lawsuits, filesharing, and theft. They complain to the government about their profit margin being lower than what it was the year before. With there strong financial backing they have control of what is done in the country. The world eventually will be run by corporatations with the most cashflow to control the office of the government. Theft of some sort will continue forever given the fact that the rich get richer while the middle and lower class grow every year due to less income.
I always have this thought that eventually the world will become semi communist and all citizens will have to live by extreme limitations.

thats terrible. but ur probably right. ive seen things going in that direction myself. less pay and new laws, seems to be the way of the future. hopefully ill be dead and gone before it happens. lets face it, there are alot of people that wouldnt have access to music or movies if it wasnt for the internet. they just cant afford to buy cds and dvds. it takes everything they make to pay the bills. and there numbers grow every day.

---

Quote:

---

I cannot divulge in this forum HOW they will do it. The most important thing to realize is that they can and will do it to prosecute anyone who is blatently harvesting illegal files.

---

there is where anyone in the know would laugh. There is no technical issue to finding out persons harvesting "illegal files."

99% of the persons who have ever used the internet have most likly "harvested "illegal files" if by that you mean copyright material they have no rights to.

My guess is if you have been ion the internet a couple of years, Matt, you yourself have "blatetlny harvested" thousands of illegal files. Ive seen studies indicating that 75% of websites with ten pages or more contain copyright material without securing proper rigths, this includes fortune 500 companies and RIAA and MPAA members! Everyone visiting is hrvesting illegal files. Wow!!

Hey I have had people send me emails, people I know adn spammer with material that is often under copyright. I hav FTP'd what should be legitimate files which required in-depth investigation to find out turned out to be copyright.

POP3, HTTP, FTP, NNTP and P2P invariably all result in material getting onto your machine which may not have the proper rights.

The legal requirement would be a statement of volition and intent by the person being prosecuted or sued. That is why even with rock solid proof a person has downloaded a file (it is actually very easy to dprove this) no one has ever been prosecuted. It is NOT a technical issue, it is a legal issue; where prosecution relies on the person admitting theydid so with intent and foreknowledge that that file was under copyright.

Ah, but there is a way to find this information.

I cannot devulge it because I am aware of it even though I do not work for any organization.

I appreciate your post.

It is the next generation of prosecution for those that are doing wrong.

I am not on this forum for any reason but to inform people
about what my opinion of an issue is.

As far as copywritten materials go the copyright act of 1977 had a clause in it regarding "fair use" and it applies to those individual who use copywritten materials with permissions and use the materials for educational purposes, and other reasons (See link below) and do not wish to share them.

Am I going to prosecute you cause your VCR was on all night and made a copy of a copywritten movie? NO.

It is ok to copy a copy of a movie or even a DVD, as you are allowed 1 copy as a bkup. The problem lies if you copy that movie and package it and sell 2 or more copies on Ebay, that is blatant copyright infringement and making a profit from something that you clearly do not own.

Please read the law before you accuse me or anyone of things.

Here is the present laws on copyright fair use:

http://www.utsystem.edu/ogc/intellectualproperty/copypol2.htm

Play fair now! :)

Keep Smilin.

---

Ok I am going to give out all of my sympathy to those poor unfortunate folk who run both the movie and music industry.
It must be stressfull and heartbreaking knowing that your days are numbered.
Music is at the beginning of a new era that will exclude selling it on bits of plastic controlled by a handful of companies. I see the day when music will no longer be the cash cow it has been for the past 100 years. It will return to the hands of the true artists who will be more concerned in having their work heard and appreciated than making the big bucks. Those artists that have been locked out of the loop have a new tool. It is called the Net.
As for movies and probably TV new ideas are extremely rare. There is no need for millions of dollars of equipement to make a decent movie so the innovative movie maker will be able to bypass the studios altogether and in the near future show his product on the net.
Both musicians and movie makers along with a small and acceptable level of advertising will be able to cover the cost and provide a reasonable return.
This is the biggest fear the existing industry has. A Loosing control. All the suing, laws and protection will not halt the inevitable.
I just hoe I live long enough to see the day when WB, Sony studios are covered in cobwebs.

You are correct, it is unfortunate that the industry wants to get involved in such tactics of suing and other things. In the early days when high tech means didn't exist I am sure many people were doing the same thing, stealing and not getting caught.

I doubt if you will ever see the day where cobwebs cover the music industry....

As a musician 40 years and a composer of over 850 songs I have gotten upset that some of my songs were stolen and unfortunately for me I didn't have the money to fight it in court, I could not afford a decent atty. so I lost many a good tune.

Food for thought.

Thanks for you post.

Copyrightless in OH

---

The problem lies if you copy that movie and package it and sell 2 or more copies on Ebay,

Yes that is distribution, not downloading.

The problem with prosecuting and sueing for downloading is NOT technical, it never has been.

OPf the millions of persons who download material they have no rights to, or the uploader or publisher should not have uploaded, no downloader has been prosecuted or sued.

No one has been sued for downloading not becasue it is hard to find someone doig it, but because of issues with intent that are not going to change no matter what anyone does.

Frankly, I don't think Mattmin understand the law at all. Almost all of his statmeents show a lack of knowledge of the legal issues. Specifically he seems to be unfamiliar with case law in this field.

I love this statement of his:
It is ok to copy a copy of a movie or even a DVD, as you are allowed 1 copy as a bkup.

sorry Matt if you are in Ohio and doing this you are committing a federal crime acccording to the sources and groups whose ositions he supports.

Matt why are you recommending a federal crime?

:)

---