| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 121567 | 2011-11-01 01:50:00 | Breaking news - First Download INfringment Noitces Recieved | Digby (677) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 1241196 | 2011-11-01 21:36:00 | Yea they are punishing the wrong people. They should be going after the people that rip the songs and stick them on the internet in the first place. How do they know these people didn't download the music to see if they liked it first and then were going to go buy the CD? They sure as hell won't be buying it now. If Microsoft catch you using illegal software on your computer they don't fine you, they give you the option of buying a legal copy. However if they catch you loading illegal software on a computer and then selling it they will take you down, which is the correct way to go about it. |
CYaBro (73) | ||
| 1241197 | 2011-11-01 21:59:00 | If Microsoft catch you using illegal software on your computer they don't fine you, they give you the option of buying a legal copy. However if they catch you loading illegal software on a computer and then selling it they will take you down, which is the correct way to go about it. Although, WGA can and does detect legitimate versions as pirate, and causes big headaches. Although I agree, it's a much better way to go about it. |
Agent_24 (57) | ||
| 1241198 | 2011-11-01 22:11:00 | ... If Microsoft catch you using illegal software on your computer they don't fine you, they give you the option of buying a legal copy. However if they catch you loading illegal software on a computer and then selling it they will take you down, which is the correct way to go about it. This is a more sensible way, I think. |
bk T (215) | ||
| 1241199 | 2011-11-01 23:02:00 | Things are getting grim when M$ are held up as an example of "doing the right thing". :D However, for eye-popping, tune-stealing effrontery, this one takes the cake (www.bbc.co.uk), better get the "Host Busters" in ;) |
R2x1 (4628) | ||
| 1241200 | 2011-11-01 23:07:00 | A UK IT site( The Register) sums this up perfectly "NZ download notices expose appalling music tastes!" As Forrest Gump said "Stupid is as stupid does" | amyes5 (2773) | ||
| 1241201 | 2011-11-01 23:22:00 | Pretty much as expected that the music industry strikes first, still no sign of movie or TV studios as yet I see. Arguing which punishemnt is more sensible is little amusing, if you don't want to risk the punishment don't break the law. If you knowingly break it and get caught you don't really have much right to be upset. I'm no saint myself but I wouldn't feel justified complaining about it if I got caught breaking the law. If you disagree with it strongly there are legal ways to oppose the law after all and if you can't be bothered you have no right to complain. I know of a few people who intend to just carry on until they receive an infringement. At $25 for each notice they are unlikely to follow upon every case, the costs could be huge. If a few million people downloaded one song and most of them stopped after receiving the first notice the record company could not afford to pursue it . It seems more likely they will go after the worst offenders and maybe pick a few to make an example of in an effort to scare people out of piracy. That said I feel ISP's in future should be paying content providers a proportional amount of their revenue to cover downloading, they are after all charging us for everything we download legal or otherwise and could actually suffer if piracy stopped. I like the netflick model of paying a modest annual subscription and having access to whatever you want to watch at any time. Music, TV, and Movies could all function this way. |
dugimodo (138) | ||
| 1241202 | 2011-11-02 01:38:00 | Yeah I read that on Stuff. I want pix or a text copy of the new infringement notifications... anybody wanna take their chances and download some Rihanna songs? ;-) Done. Let's see what happens. |
xyz823 (13649) | ||
| 1241203 | 2011-11-02 02:49:00 | I like the netflick model of paying a modest annual subscription and having access to whatever you want to watch at any time. Music, TV, and Movies could all function this way. Thats a good Idea, but its also the problem. A good idea but its put into the "to hard and logical" basket. There was a article a while back on fair Go I think it was, before this new law came in and that question was asked, why isn't there a legal service in NZ like netflick-- the idiot couldn't answer it -- to hard. |
wainuitech (129) | ||
| 1241204 | 2011-11-02 02:59:00 | That said I feel ISP's in future should be paying content providers a proportional amount of their revenue to cover downloading, they are after all charging us for everything we download legal or otherwise and could actually suffer if piracy stopped. I like the netflick model of paying a modest annual subscription and having access to whatever you want to watch at any time. Music, TV, and Movies could all function this way. I disagree. Not everybody will take advantage of the availability of it, and there's no reason for people to say "It's probably going to happen, so tax us". That'd be like taxing everybody extra to cover the cost of healthcare to look after smokers, when not everybody smokes. Netflix, however, I wholeheartedly agree with! |
Chilling_Silence (9) | ||
| 1241205 | 2011-11-02 03:24:00 | The fact that someone bothered to pirate a Rhianna song is also beyond me :p 100,000 teenage girls can't be wrong ? |
Digby (677) | ||
| 1 2 3 | |||||