Source: CNet News. June 30th. Check it out Here.
A week after U.S. Vice President Joe Biden Warned that the government would start cracking down on illegal file sharing, the feds swooped in and seized assets belonging to operators of accused movie-pirating sites.
The government on Wednesday also took control of at least seven of the sites in question: Movies-Links.tv, Now-Movies.com, TVShack.net, Filespump.com, Planetmoviez.com, ZML.com, ThePirateCity.org, Ninjavideo.net, and NinjaThis.net. More than a dozen bank, investment, and advertising accounts were seized, and authorities served search warrants on residences in several different states.
Authorities are searching for operators of the sites as part of an ongoing criminal investigation, according to Virginia Kice, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The crimes that the operators are accused of committing weren't clear, but some of the sites are accused of distributing film copies prior to their theatrical release.
As of 3 p.m. PDT, some of the sites were still operating, but government officials said they anticipated the sites would come under government control within hours.
The investigation involved multiple law enforcement groups, including the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York and ICE, a unit of the Department of Homeland Security.
Last week, Biden and Victoria Espinel, the U.S. intellectual property enforcement coordinator, told reporters that they wanted to send a message to counterfeiters and pirates that this administration was intent on protecting the nation's intellectual property. Espinel directed a statement at those people who trafficked in phony goods or unauthorized music and movies: "We have committed to putting you out of business."
ICE and the Department of Justice both suggested Wednesday that these types of seizures and investigations are just the beginning.
More to come
That's right boys and girls, the Federal Government is now shutting down websites and Law Firms owned by corporate movie makers are Suing Private Citizens who are using Peer to Peer programs like LimeWire and uTorrent. That's right, they're even shutting down Peer to Peer programs and Suing every day "Joe Blow" users who have downloaded Movies, Games, and MP3's. If you'd like the proof of this happening right now, there's some mess going on about the movie "Hurt Locker" which some guy shared on LimeWire. Now the makers of the movie are Suing the distributers such as the makers of LimeWire and even going as far as to file suite against 5,000 yet un-named people. Don't think they are, that they can't? They ARE!!! Here's Proof!!! The Government themselves have started shutting down domains and are petitioning ISP's for their users names and home addresses so that other law firms can also file suite against home users just for "watching" something online without even having downloaded it to their computer. Seen this picture anywhere lately?
Source: CNet News. June 11th. Check it out Here.
In Arizona, a law firm called White Berberian recently began advertising on its site that it will defend those accused of illegal file sharing by Dunlap Grubb & Weaver. That is the firm, which also goes by the name U.S. Copyright Group, that is filing lawsuits on behalf of filmmakers who claim their movies were pirated by thousands of peer-to-peer users.
In addition to the Oscar-winning film "The Hurt Locker," Dunlap Grubb represents about a dozen movies, including "Far Cry" and "Call of the Wild 3D." The law firm has said that it will sue more than 50,000 alleged file sharers.
So far, it appears thousands of people have received settlement offers from Dunlap Grubb and many are confused about their rights. Typically, people learn about being accused of violating copyright law from their Internet service providers, which inform them that they have received a subpoena to turn over their identity to Dunlap Grubb.
The law firm usually follows up with a form letter informing the accused that someone using their Internet protocol address was illegally sharing one of the films. Dunlap Grubb then tells the accused file sharer that they can settle the case for $1,500 if they move quickly. If they wait, the firm will charge them $2,500 and if they decide to fight it out in court, Dunlap Grubb can ask for up to $150,000
That's right, another 500,000 people are going to be sued. That's Half A Million People!!! Not rich people. Not Hard Core pirates. Not the people who ripped the movie and put it up on the Internet. Normal users or even parents who's kids installed LimeWire and the parents didn't even know what it was, much less that it was technically being used for something "Illegal". LimeWire is just the start too. Now that the Government is in on the action you can bet that all these other Peer to Peer services will be next, and that includes torrents.
It's odd though as I didn't think "Peer to Peer" programs had "Servers" that could be shut down that would stop a program from working but apparently they do. Some how they can shut down programs like LimeWire and uTorrent as well as sue the people who made it and are using it. ISP's are willingly handing over records of everything your IP downloads and every website you visit. Chances are if you even go to what will soon be a "black listed" site your name will go onto a "watch-list" or you'll soon be getting a statement from your ISP quickly followed by a court notice that you are being sued.
YouTube was granted a "Exception" because it actively takes pirated and copyrighted materials down and because it has plenty of content that is "User Made" and not copyrighted. Check out this article on CNet News about the differences between YouTube and LimeWire and how exactly one can be shut down and not the other.
Web copyright: YouTube up, Lime Wire down. Source: CNet News. June 30th
This is only the beginning everyone. The sh!ts hitting the fan and the common people are about to feel the pinch of the Heavy Hand of Corporate Government.
Even this is only true to a "point". I've personally seen lots of cases in court where the original person or persons pressing the "charges" dropped the charges Entirely, But, the State still picked up the charges and charged the person Anyway!!! Why? So they could tie that person up in the "Legal System" and make money off them for a long time to come. Technically ANY of those 50,000 to 500,000 people who are going to be sued could ALSO face criminal charges because downloading something online is considered Stealing, which is a crime.
As for my personal stance on "Piracy", I think it's Stealing, and stealing is Wrong no matter which way you look at it. I'm not going to be a hypocrite and say I NEVER downloaded anything I shouldn't have though. In the past when I was younger and far more stupid and immature then I am now I downloaded a few games. I've even had pirated games and movies given to me by friends (which is how I played my first Stardock game GalCiv 1).
Do I download illegal stuff now? No. Even when I did back when I was still a "kid" I can count all the illegal things I've ever downloaded on One Hand, which is something I doubt many other people who have downloaded something illegally can honestly say.
Basically, I can't think of anything that can only be viewed only one or two ways. There is colour in the world, which is why we don't see in black and white. So why do we try to shoehorn everything into black and white, good or evil, heroes or villians? The world is just way too complex for that sort of reasoning to work. There are spectra for practically everything. (Spectrum plural, nothing to do with spectres. )
(Although Elemental is an exception. Good and evil work quite well in fantasy games. I just don't think that they exist as binary "one or the other" in life. )
Best regards,Steven.
Yeah, they should be demanding China stop ripping off our patent's and intellectual property or else!
oh wait, then who will buy our crap national debt bonds and treasuries....
Gee...I download countless piles of illegal content.....just to verify it is illegal.
Then I go hunt down the prick/s who posted it and get it removed.
If everyone did it once...a day...bit like an apple a day.....things would look rosier....
If the US Government does the same fine job as they do with caring for the elderly, creating jobs for the unemployed, caring for the sick, cleaning up the environment, feeding the hungry and housing the homeless, I'd say those Pirates have little or nothing to worry about.
Even if they only did it once a day you should grab your Bat and open up a can of Jafonator Ass Whoppin on 'em anyway, just because you know you'd like to.
LoL so true. Then again, they don't Make Money off all those other things. Those things actually HELP People and Cost the Gov money so they do as shitty a job as they can On Purpose. When it comes to prosecuting people and raping them for Tons of Money they spend the BIG Bucks if they have too. It's not like it's hurting Their Salaries.
Sadly, governments are as useless as tits on a bull when it comes to an act of provision.... not so when they see a buck to be made. Bastards are highly efficient at extracting other peoples funds, incompetent when it comes to fair and proper distribution of revenues.
In fact, that's probably one of the reasons piracy/theft exists.... there is no redistribution of wealth, and when a small minority controls a huge majority of the wealth, the impoverished majority find ways to make their lot just that littte bit better.
And the bit about movie makers and music producers losing money over piracy, not so according to an article I read a years or so ago. A public relations/accounting firm conducted a year-long survey and concluded that the majority of illegal downloaders of music and or movies did not have the financial resources to purchase them anyway, and therefore industry claims that it had lost money due to file sharing were incorrect, if not downright lies.
Do I condone stealing? No, certainly not, but at the same time I cannot condone the rich and powerful using their wealth and power to influence government... to use their wealth and power to engineer ways to extract even more ill-gotten gain via dubious means. Often it is little more than graft and corruption dressed up to appear as being above board by even more dubious lawyers.
If a Pirate downloads a Good Game he'll either like it and probably buy it so they can play multiplayer or they'll tell people it's a Good Game in which case those people will go out and buy it. The Company may or may not have lost one sale to the original pirate who broke the copy protection, but even that act in its-self generates further sales most of the time.
it has been proven that this formula
1 pirated copy = 1 copy unsold
is not true. The real formula is
1 pirated copy = many copies sold.
This has been done after comparing the sale of a book which was available for free online and sold in print.
Recently, I have released a board game in electronic format (print and play). and I asked my self, it my game would be distributed freely online, would I do something?
The answer is no. Because it is some sort of indirect advertisement. If my game is beign pirated, it is because people loves it. I have more chances that people leave good comments on my game and that other people buys it.
I think I rather have more fame than more money. If I have more fame, there is more chance that if my next game is submitted to publisher, it might be accepted. Or I have more chance to be able to republish my game as a real game rather than print and play or even approach a company to make a video game out of it.
I would only interfere if somebody else is selling my game. That is completely wrong since he is making money over my work.
That's fine. It's your choice how you want to handle your property rights.
Others [most others - the vast majority, in fact] will not agree.
What you need to do [and pirates are those who do not] is you must respect others' determinations of how their IP is to be handled/protected.
Just thought i would link a article related to everything that's been discussed. It's to do with the 'Humble indie bundle' charity thing that did a while ago and the piracy related to ithttp://kotaku.com/5533615/another-view-of-video-game-piracyI agree that pirating isn't a good thing, but what always bothers me is the way the big corperations go about trying to get rid of it. By having the horrible drm, massive prices, and by lieing about piracy statistics(or choosing to remain ignorant of any real study to better push their view foward), it gives pirates a moral reason to do it (whether it is right or wrong). I know Jafo thinks 'sticking it to the man' is a really stupid excuse, but that being said, stardock has a much different way of making sure their games are liked, both in gameplay as well as drm.With that bundle....alot of people pirated the game, but alot of people bought it as well, and paid quiet fairly for it, resulting in ~150K for each of the dev's in the bundle, as well as 350K in charity donationsIt kindof sucks, it sit here agreeing that pirating is wrong, but i know i fall into the group of people that will do nothing about it because i see the corperations as the bigger criminals, probably for the fact that the majority of their customers (mum's and dad's who never research anything they buy their kids) will always blindly buy the product, therefore keeping them in business. If big business's actually went about things in a different way, didn't try and hamper the enjoyment of their customers (not potential 'pirating' customers), didn't charge huge amounts for said enjoyment, and when they took someone to court, didn't hit them for hundreds of thousands of percent profits on what they would have made of that copy and any possibly shared while downloading, then maybe the youth of today might be better able to relate to the big companies and respect them enough to respect their IP.
That was actually....very well said. I'm sure there are a lot of people out there that feel that exact same way.
Also, just like you, I respect Stardock by buying their games because their games are Good and they Don't Use invasive DRM. Those are really the only two things a company needs to do if they want my business.
first and foremost I was going to avoid posting on this issue because there are so many permutations of why some one may feel the way they do... cultural, social, ethical (or lack there of), political and for that matter religious.. with all the possible combination in between, that can cause one's beliefs to fall on one side or the other on this matter...
that said
one could also argue that if there was no pirating there would be no reason for a individual, company or corporation to have to take these measures in order to protect their assets..
broken down to its least common denominator, if i did not take what i did not make, grow, or otherwise create .. then there is no reason for you to seek recompense for real or alleged violation of the rights you might feel you have to what you make, grow, or otherwise create...
personally i feel some measures taken to "protect" some one's IP from pirating have been extreme but it seems asking folks nicely to pay for what they pirated does not as a whole do any good..
these are just my thoughts on the matter..
We are discussing black-white (not race, spectums of color at opposite ends with opposite views. There is enough misinterpretation here to start a holy war already) when really the world is a spectrum. Punishments should fit crimes. In general, murder is wrong. So if an abused woman kills her abuser, should she get the same punishment as the serial killer? While that is an extreme, there is a difference between someone banging out DVDs for sale for a couple bucks each and someone who buys it. Do we punish the person who buys illegal drugs in small amounts the same as the dealer? No.
In short, sorry for the reference, it is all that comes to mind at the moment.
If someone strikes you on the cheek, you should turn the other cheek
or
An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth
Both are written in the same book and the Golden Rule wasn't invented in that book either.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Golden_Rule
But then, perhaps Frogboy could pitch in here, why does Stardock:
1) Not put these silly and expensive copyright protections on their products, then charge the paying customers for it?
2) Do not stop discussion on piracy like many do ?
3) Do not stop discussion of competing products, like Civ V and Steam vs Impulse? In fact, they promote other products they enjoy!
Exactly, I think Stardock is proof that you don't have to get heavy-handed with whoever you feel like, and fill games with invasive DRM, to do well. When it comes down to it, money on its own doesn't bring you long-lived satisfaction (which is why people with bucketloads keep trying to get even more bucketloads, and like to sacrifice everything else to do that), but doing something well and creating something beautiful does. If you can create something wonderful and still make enough money to pay the bills etc. (like Stardock) you will be respected and valued a lot more.
Frogboy, what do you have to say about the points made in the above Blaze of Glory post?
Stardock won't stop discussion on Piracy as it [piracy] is an issue endemic with their Industry.
If you are in the business of Game/Software production/promotion/distribution then piracy is a day-to-day issue.
The only time there will be a problem with "discussion" is when it becomes actual PROMOTION of the act. Eg. people who use Stardock's sites to [attempt to] distribute warez [anyone's, not just Stardock's products] they are "shown the door" with a zero-tolerance policy.
Debating the issue is [usually] healthy, and if just one person can be convinced that it is actually indefensibly wrong to participate in piracy then it's worth the effort...
BTW....please don't take my comments as a response from Brad/Frogboy. He is entirely adept at getting his specific point across without anyone else's help. {AND he types a heck of a lot faster than I do]
First let me say I am nott for Pirating!But it does/can have it's advantages/Disadvantages for the corporations.What gets me is corporations thinks it's not ok for the common man to Pirate there stuff..but ok if they see Land they want, and hundreds if not thousands of family's who, Owen the land with their homes on it.they get to come in and take it (granted they pay) but the home/land owner has NO choice if they want to sale or not..all because the corporation puts it up as Progress.. Bull shit I say, find land with no homes on it..The Kansas Speedway was done like that... that too is Pirating!!! (Granted the corporations. may not be the Film, Games, Etc.) but none the less BIG BULLY wants what it wants... and F the common man....
I don't think it is wrong for a site to host the links to a torrent any more then
1 car manufactures put cup holders in cars .......... it is illegal to drive and drink NOT just alcohol
2 Bumper sticker manufactures .......... it is illegal to have bumper sticker(s) on your car it distracts the driving behind you.
3 Tobacco outlets that sale Bongs, rolling papers, Glass Pipes, Metal Pipes, Blunt roll papers. it is illegal to smoke pot and we all know pipe tobacco smokers don't smoke with those ......... and roll your own Tobacco has papers with them I know I have like 500 books cause you get more paper then you need...
4 drive through windows ..... cause it distracts your driving
5 Bars .......... it is illegal to drink and drive....
@ post #116...
Tell ya wot DC, I found it hard to make head or tail of what you wrote/said... but I'm convinced your self-medication is better than mine,
Yup, that's what you get from using babelfish...
@ post 117
it can't be better then yours, I get my medication from you
guess that just show you, You can"t trust a Pirate
"That's fine. It's your choice how you want to handle your property rights." One of the thing people confuse in copyright is the notion of intellectual property versus the concept of duplication/publication rights. Pirates does not steal intellectual property, they steal duplication rights. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This essue is very touchy. In world in the world of lbraries eventually we will have replication rights problem as the technology advance. For example, once all the books will all be electronically distributed and read on kindle and Ipad, there will not be any need to keep track of check in or check out. Every body will have access to how many copies they want. Some e-book publishers are charging for each copy read, or are selling you the book if it has checked out at least twice. The problem is that you cannot prevent multiple people from reading the same book. (which is how library works right now) and distance does not matter since we are currently making interlibrary loans of books and serials. Right now, the law prevent us from distributing PDF articles to the client. They force us to print acticles before giving it to the client which is not very environmental friendly. There is also the situation where my national library have access to all the book published in it's country and to many databases of e-book and informations. This mean that I have access to all this information for free. The only restriction right now is that books needs to be checked in and out. But this restriction will get thinner as technology advance and eventually everybody will have access to everything published in their country. It's then just a matter of time before national libraries from different countries makes reciprocal agreement and that eventually everybody in the world will have access to the same information. At that point, everything published will be free. So the economics behind and the copyright laws will have to be changed.
"That's fine. It's your choice how you want to handle your property rights."
One of the thing people confuse in copyright is the notion of intellectual property versus the concept of duplication/publication rights.
Pirates does not steal intellectual property, they steal duplication rights.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This essue is very touchy. In world in the world of lbraries eventually we will have replication rights problem as the technology advance. For example, once all the books will all be electronically distributed and read on kindle and Ipad, there will not be any need to keep track of check in or check out. Every body will have access to how many copies they want. Some e-book publishers are charging for each copy read, or are selling you the book if it has checked out at least twice.
The problem is that you cannot prevent multiple people from reading the same book. (which is how library works right now) and distance does not matter since we are currently making interlibrary loans of books and serials. Right now, the law prevent us from distributing PDF articles to the client. They force us to print acticles before giving it to the client which is not very environmental friendly.
There is also the situation where my national library have access to all the book published in it's country and to many databases of e-book and informations. This mean that I have access to all this information for free. The only restriction right now is that books needs to be checked in and out. But this restriction will get thinner as technology advance and eventually everybody will have access to everything published in their country. It's then just a matter of time before national libraries from different countries makes reciprocal agreement and that eventually everybody in the world will have access to the same information. At that point, everything published will be free.
So the economics behind and the copyright laws will have to be changed.
Yes, what a laughable concept it is that corporations would ever deign to work for their customers. We should just shut up and cough money when they feel like it and not demand they follow any of our ethical standards.
I'm not sure if you realized what you're saying here, but it's depressing. It used to be that the public was absolutely up and arms when companies did something wrong, almost unfairly so. Now, there seems to be this army of people going around *laughing* at the idea the public should demand anything from the businesses that are supposed to serve them. After all, they are making money, they must be doing something right. Guess what: it may be their property but it's our society. It's important to me that giant corporations don't meddle in the lives of small people, important enough where I won't buy from them.
I'm fine with restricting the way people use their property. I don't care that the fireworks are theirs, or that they had the right to set them off when my house burned down, or what they'll reimburse me for. I didn't want them setting off rockets in the first place. Yes, corporations should work on the terms of their customers, of society, within the limits of fairness. Any other way is unacceptable. So far, it's my terms, but seeing how many people this could potentially affect it probably should be everyone else's terms.
I may be being too hard on you, especially if you're just thinking about the entertainment industry rather than our entire economy as a whole, in which case you've got a stronger case but it's still the same sorts of problems.
Right on, but with me it's more than meddling in peoples lives. Where ever possible, I won't do business with companies that use dodgy business practices and or near slave labour... or businesses that introduce DRM's and the like which interfere with the enjoyment of paying customers. Two companies that immediately come to mind are Sony and Apple.
Since the DRM debacle with Sony, I have refused to purchase any of their products and since I discovered Apple's products are made cheaply in China via almost slave labour, I've decided entirely against buying an Imac computer, something I had planned to do around mid-2011. I had wanted a Mac to see what all the fuss is about, but now I wouldn't download the OS illegally, even if I could... and not just because of the slave labour thing. I don't like smug, and Apple these days ios all about smug in its marketing/advertising.
There are other companies/businesses I refuse to business with on principle, but it's not enough, me on my own... we need others to take a stand also, to show the corporations that if we have to comply with the rules of society and common decency, then so do they. Shit, I'll even go out of my way to shop elsewhere when somebody has pissed me off enough
Here's one such example. The manager at my local Mitre 10 hardware store ripped me off for a meter of coaxial cable, and when I went back to complain/get what I paid for, he practically called me a liar, so I told him that he just made a huge mistake and that my family nor I would ever shop there again. Shoot, he even accused me of cutting off a meter the get and extra meter. Anyway, the upshot of it all was that neither I or any of my relatives ever went in there again... nor any of our friends... or their friends... or friends of friends, etc, etc In the end his business went guts up and was sold by receivers to another franchise. A bit extreme over 3 foot of cable? Nope, not at all! He was dishonest and the bastard needed shutting down.
"He was dishonest and the bastard needed shutting down."
Most of the time, you don't know what kind of people are working behind a business. It is easier to see in retail stores since they have a contact with the client.
So true, which is why I rarely deal with internet traders... no knowing/being able to see who is behind the business. There are a couple I trust, but I mostly go retail for all my purchases, for the reason you gave. There is the eye contact and body language to go by, and if there's any attitude you can usually detect it. Moreover, I like to see what I'm purchasing up close and personal... something else that can't be done on the net.
The other advantage to shopping retail is going back and ripping the sales clerk over the counter if he rips you off. Oh, did I mention that I have a real nasty streak when retailers, especially large ones try robbing me? Nah, I'm not normally violent, but I do so love to hurt businesses legally when they do wrong by me.
Let's just say that Cash Converters (anywhere) is one place I'll never step foot inside again. Long story short, one store franchisee ripped me off a few years ago for a video camera... sold mine illegally. so I went about dismantling him piece by piece, with the grand finale being a tri-state police raid that netted 6,7 mil in stolen property and the store owner in prison with several of his colleagues for many many years. Anyhow, my trust was broken and I'll never do business with that bunch of slimy Cash Converter mongrels again.
They are [correctly] called "Crime Converters".
The majority of the stock is of dubious origins at best.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
