Forum Home
PC World Chat
Thread ID: 122906	2012-01-19 20:48:00	Megaupload gone	nedkelly (9059)	PC World Chat

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
1255110	2012-01-20 10:46:00	RIAA website, amongst others, has been down all day today. Still down at the time of writing. Good on them! MegaUpload is similar to Rapidshare / Hotfile / Whatever else in that they offer a 'premium' service where they give you a "full speed" service rather than what is either over-subscribed or throttled-back connections. I use megaupload quite often for legitimate purposes, I've got many difference Android ROMs from there, it's where people upload to rather than bearing the burden of hosting themselves. Just look at the likes of xda-developers and you'll see a *lot* of people do-so. It's not specifically MU's fault what the users put up there, they have their usual disclaimers about "It's not our stuff" but again (Back to whats been mentioned) SOPA and PIPA seek to make the website owner responsible for the content of all users. This is what would cause issues with the likes of Facebook, YouTube, Google, Reddit, pretty much everything under the sun that allows for discussions...	Chilling_Silence (9)
1255111	2012-01-20 18:03:00	No. Piracy is different to shoplifting because in the shoplifting scenario a physical product has been taken away from the store, which the store owner had already paid for and then lost. In the piracy case, a virtual copy of the product has been made, and the original has not been taken away from anyone. Hence "potential" loss of revenue. It is only loss of revenue for someone IF the person would otherwise have paid for the pirated item. (This is why some people dispute piracy as being theft at all - in fact in a similar vein you could say simply going to a library and reading a book could be considered theft because you didn't pay for the book but you received the information for free by reading it!) Then it comes down to a per-case basis. For example, if the person pirated the product because they could not afford the product, then they were never going to buy it anyway, so regardless if they pirated or not, the shop\copyright holder would never have received any money from them. I am not saying that piracy is excusable or should be legal. I am saying that in some cases, piracy is not actually going to make a difference to revenue, and in fact in some cases it may be beneficial (gives the product free advertising, and increased audience) For example, after borrowing certain CDs from the library, I went on to purchase the entire artist's works because I liked their music so much and felt they actually deserved my money. Had I pirated those first CDs instead, the outcome would have been the same. Ironically of course, the artist themselves would not have received much at all - the majority going to the record company! In my view the only time there is revenue actually lost is when someone who could have paid and would have paid if they couldn't have pirated the product didn't do so, and pirated instead and then never purchased the product later - BUT this is not the scenario for 100% of all "piracy incidents". Tell that to the person who wrote the song, or book or whatever. So they sell 1 copy, everyone else in the entire world steals it because it's data and therefore still exists. How long do you think they'd stay in that business? What a stupid argument. You steal a CD from a shop - there's still plenty of copies left on the shelf right? So according to your logic, that's OK. As for libraries - they paid for the book, they allow you to borrow it and return it - don't return it and you get charged for it. Idiot.	pctek (84)
1255112	2012-01-20 18:57:00	What amazed me was why these 4 guys (all Europeans) lived in NZ ? Boy that is a big mansion ! I note that the herald says that Kim Dotcom (dur) was not allowed to buy some thing a few years ago as the OIC felt that he was not a good character.	Digby (677)
1255113	2012-01-20 19:02:00	As regards piracy - a s a result of my 20 years in the computer sales industry I came to the conclusion that people will always try to get somethingr for nothing, even if it is cheap. And most people will take a pirated copy of something if it is cheaper than the real thing. I agree that piracy is wrong and bad fot the music and video industries. But people seem to have thougt that 'the war" was won in that you can now get music legally from Itunes. But what people forget is that you can only play the music on an itunes device. What if Apple stopped the service or closed down ? And the "music" you are buying is really only a crappy 192 bit rate file not the real FLAC thing.	Digby (677)
1255114	2012-01-20 19:11:00	Tell that to the person who wrote the song, or book or whatever . So they sell 1 copy, everyone else in the entire world steals it because it's data and therefore still exists . How long do you think they'd stay in that business? What a stupid argument . You steal a CD from a shop - there's still plenty of copies left on the shelf right? So according to your logic, that's OK . As for libraries - they paid for the book, they allow you to borrow it and return it - don't return it and you get charged for it . Idiot . Well said . :thumbs:	WalOne (4202)
1255115	2012-01-20 20:13:00	And the "music" you are buying is really only a crappy 192 bit rate file not the real FLAC thing. IIRC, it's 128kbps. That crap isn't worth listening to.	Cato (6936)
1255116	2012-01-20 20:24:00	That's a BS argument. You can listen to almost anything you want on youtube. Why download from MU or torrents if you can do that? Because of youtube's crappy audio compression. I'd rather listen to a nice uncompressed .flac to see if i like it before buying it.	goodiesguy (15316)
1255117	2012-01-20 20:32:00	Over here the book shelf is sagging with all the CD's I've bought in the last year or so, CD Wow got the price down from what used to be $35 bucks in the shop to $8 to $20 bucks (typically and that's the price delivered to your door). Now I know not everyone wants CD's - I just like the physical copy with the lyrics etc, it just not the same with only an Mp3 (I guess it goes back to the days wth records, and the great packaging they used to have). But if wasn't for YouTube and the like - I'd never hear most of the bands to like their music to buy the CD's. So go ahead music industry - shut the internet down and I can stop spending all this money and I'll get less grief at home for spending cash on your products. PS Not sure what these guys have done that Google doesn't do - they were just a bit more specialised as far as I can see.	Twelvevolts (5457)
1255118	2012-01-20 20:50:00	Because of youtube's crappy audio compression. I'd rather listen to a nice uncompressed .flac to see if i like it before buying it. Ha, nice if you to hit that up after my last post. But yeah, I have to vehemently disagree with that. For trial purposes even 96kbps would suffice. I don't see people, with our data caps in particular, wasting half a gigabyte of traffic to "try" music, which you would then delete, go to the shop and buy? I don't give a damn piracy, download (and/or upload) all you like, I just don't like hearing (reading, rather) this kind of bullshit. Stop assuming everyone is a naive 8 year old girl. Also, I have also NEVER heard of someone NOT buying a good album because of bad production quality.	Cato (6936)
1255119	2012-01-20 20:55:00	This is serious, its really going to affect the sales of Hard drives. The best hard drives to try music and movies on are 1.5 or 2Tb.	Digby (677)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16