Reply With Quote
I would say they should rename it the butthurt locker, but I can't really blame them.
http://gizmodo.com/5542549/hurt-lock...n-bittorrenter
Interesting stuff. The company that produced the movie wants to sue thousands of people who torrented the movie.
What do yall think about this?
I would say they should rename it the butthurt locker, but I can't really blame them.
I rented it. It was pretty good. They have all the right to go after the people that downloaded illegally. Now if they actually get them all,that's another story.
Torrents are a thing of the past and should only be used if you can't find an old movie.
So what's the new thing?
Direct download servers.
Educate us
actually downloading from servers is a thing of the past and torrents are the newest thing, not the other way around. thing is, there are more services these days that allow you to upload files and thus you can download from them unlike the days where you'd have to buy server space to host a file.
I just hate torrents and always stick with direct download servers. MU, RS, DP, HF, MS. I pay for megaupload, but it's well worth the money.
I think they are well within their right. Downloading a movie without paying for it is essentially stealing intellectual property. I have nothing against torrenting movies, but don't start crying foul play when the owner decides to make you pay for it. Having said that, I also think it is incredibly bad publicity and costly as .
so you pay for pirated ? hahaha! you're stealing from yourself.
by the way... all those servers have you tracked just like every other service so don't go downloading the butthurt locker any time soon.
I know they're tracked. And yeah, I pay for MU. No different than paying for those private torrent sites. Although I wouldn't mind paying for private torrent sites. I just hate slow torrent places like Piratebay, where you have 200 leeches and 1 seeder. with MU, I get over 1 MBPS. The best I had with torrents was 300 KBPS.
I never saw it or downloaded it, but the whole premise of going after these people brings up some issues.
1. Poor publicity
2. A point made elsewhere was the fact that if you went into a store and physically stole this movie, you wouldn't be hit with some exorbitant fine or gone after by the FBI. Of course, by downloading you are seeding to others which does make physically stealing less detrimental, but the problem remains that these two process are prosecuted on two different sides of the pendulum.
The people who downloaded it should sue Voltage Pictures for their 2 hours of their life back. What a piece of that movie was.
Word! I didn't even finish watching it, pffft.
who gives a .
I would be kind of worried about MU, say they get some kind of court order to give up info. Then they have a history of what you downloaded. I know the torrents are the same way but in your case the chance of saying someone stole my wifi goes out the widow because it shows you log in and downloaded.
That would be my worry, Same thing with demonoid you have to log on to download unlike piratbay.
LOL @ "stealing"
Duplicating something is far different from stealing it. The very idea of being able to own information is absurd anyways. I'd download it out of spite but it isn't worth the space or bandwidth.
And yeah, I wouldn't touch stuff like mega upload and demonoid. You know one day a court order is going to come down. Pure decentralization is the way of the future for file sharing. Direct downloading leaves a trail.
The best solution would be to just live in a country that doesn't bend over every time the recording and movie industry demands it. Those en ies have more rights than their consumers.
I ask this as an honest question (that you probably do know the answer to)... has anyone ever really been gone after by the music industry or otherwise for downloading? I've only ever heard of the uploaders being hit. Is this the first time anyone has gone after a downloader?... and maybe there isn't the legal precedence as of yet to support the producers case?
When I was getting stuff online years ago, I always made sure to download and never have anything available for uploading because that's all "they" cared about at the time - but I don't keep up with it enough anymore.
LOL @ you thinking you aren't "stealing"
I'm as big a ing pirate as anyone. And there's no way it isn't stealing. If I ever get caught, I can say I had a good run.
if you go to a restaurant and their is hair in your food or its under cooked, etc or BAD - would pay for it? i would say no!
if you go to a bad moive do you get your money back? or the time you wasted? i would say no as well
so if people want to steal it and not pay for garbage than i say let them.
its their fault for making bad crap.
If you were using bit torrent, you were sharing the minute you got one byte of a file from someone. Since no one gets an entire file from one person, if the RIAA/MPAA had caught you, I don't think they would have been moved by either "I didn't know I was sharing while downloading!" or "well, it couldn't have been very much!" You were a leeching for nothing.
That's precisely why I've never used bittorrent when it caught on... I wouldn't do any downloading at all that required uploading. Back in the older napster/edonkey/kazaa days (~10 years ago), I had it set up so as soon as a file was downloaded, it dumped into a folder that wasn't shared/available.If you were using bit torrent, you were sharing the minute you got one byte of a file from someone. Since no one gets an entire file from one person, if the RIAA/MPAA had caught you, I don't think they would have been moved by either "I didn't know I was sharing while downloading!" or "well, it couldn't have been very much!" You were a leeching for nothing.
So I assume that does kinda answer my question about going after the uploader only (since all torrent users, I think, technically have whatever available for upload as they download)... that totally skipped my mind while reading the story.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
