| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 120244 | 2011-08-31 09:50:00 | Copyright Letters | Twelvevolts (5457) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 1227808 | 2011-09-02 06:07:00 | It didnt take long after all but whoever came up with that scanner should be ashamed to put their name to it. Its garbage !! I think its just picking items at random. It pulled up about a 10th of my music. Other video files were mostly .wma files from games (not video at all) and the Other Files Found were mostly installed .exe files, .bmp images, and installed .dll files. How or why anyone would want to believe that is beyond me :horrified |
Iantech (16386) | ||
| 1227809 | 2011-09-02 06:13:00 | "This program lists multimedia files within size parameters that indicate that they could be movies, television shows or songs. It does not distinguish between legally and illegally obtained content. It is up to the user to make this determination." The information generated by DFC is made available ONLY to the program’s user and is NOT transmitted or reported to DtecNet, the MPAA or any other body. 1) You could also look at it from the other point of view ... i.e. someone that is totally computer illiterate, takes the scan results as gospel and starts deleting files that are required by the OS, Office or similar. I think it's quite unrealistic of the "powers that be" to expect everyone to know whether each and every file on their computer is legitimate or not. While this may sound "out there" ... just look at how many people got scammed, and possibly still are, with the Microsoft call center scenario. 2) So they say. And you only have to have a look at some of the results of scans people on the forum have done to see that the multimedia and "parameters" are way off the mark. And I am aware that in law, ignorance is no defence. |
SP8's (9836) | ||
| 1227810 | 2011-09-02 06:31:00 | 1) You could also look at it from the other point of view ... i.e. someone that is totally computer illiterate, takes the scan results as gospel and starts deleting files that are required by the OS, Office or similar. I think it's quite unrealistic of the "powers that be" to expect everyone to know whether each and every file on their computer is legitimate or not. While this may sound "out there" ... just look at how many people got scammed, and possibly still are, with the Microsoft call center scenario. 2) So they say. And you only have to have a look at some of the results of scans people on the forum have done to see that the multimedia and "parameters" are way off the mark. And I am aware that in law, ignorance is no defence. Point taken SP8's I am not saying it is a good program, just that people here seem to think it is supposed to pick up illegal downloads only and seem surprised when it shows all their legal video and music files. |
Safari (3993) | ||
| 1227811 | 2011-09-02 07:05:00 | How about this scenario... Most torrents contain an info file of some sort, which is just the 'gang' that uploaded the file having a boast about their deed. When you start a torrent you can select which files to download (assuming they weren't all zipped into a single file). Now suppose I were to only D/L the info file, and seed that info file... over and over until I'd uploaded 1GB of copies of this 22 byte info file. As far as the studios whould know, they would likely believe I'd been U/L and D/L their media, when in fact I'd only been sharing a file which was complete garbage. Could they prove otherwise? If they are merely going off basic IP info at the Tracker, then no they will jump to the wrong conclusion. Might even be a way to have some fun with them. As for the bullsh!t line that file sharing reduces the affordability of greater innovation, I will counter with the opposite agruement... that their excessive profits are what are discouraging them from making the innovative changes that would see their products made legally and affordably available online. It is only once they are truely feeling the pain that they will make the changes that are needed, instead of continuing to flog their old outdated business modes. |
Paul.Cov (425) | ||
| 1227812 | 2011-09-02 07:13:00 | Definately voting in LABOUR this time around. You are aware that Labour initially supported this law? |
ubergeek85 (131) | ||
| 1227813 | 2011-09-02 08:03:00 | How about this scenario... Most torrents contain an info file of some sort, which is just the 'gang' that uploaded the file having a boast about their deed. When you start a torrent you can select which files to download (assuming they weren't all zipped into a single file). Now suppose I were to only D/L the info file, and seed that info file... over and over until I'd uploaded 1GB of copies of this 22 byte info file. As far as the studios whould know, they would likely believe I'd been U/L and D/L their media, when in fact I'd only been sharing a file which was complete garbage. Could they prove otherwise? If they are merely going off basic IP info at the Tracker, then no they will jump to the wrong conclusion. Might even be a way to have some fun with them. As for the bullsh!t line that file sharing reduces the affordability of greater innovation, I will counter with the opposite agruement... that their excessive profits are what are discouraging them from making the innovative changes that would see their products made legally and affordably available online. It is only once they are truely feeling the pain that they will make the changes that are needed, instead of continuing to flog their old outdated business modes. If one looked in-depth to the situation they could see that even though you uploaded a ton of data you only ever had 0.1% or so of the total torrent's data. From this they could gather that you were never actually in possession of the entire lot but I don't think it would be possible to determine conclusively exactly which part you actually had. (For example, deleting and re-downloading from you several times would only result in them getting the info file, which would suggest that's all you had, but doing this would be time consuming and they'd rather just send you a notice for having anything to do with the torrent at all) In any case, they're all a bunch of hypocrites, as evidenced by this interesting read: torrentfreak.com Apple doesn't seem too clean either: torrentfreak.com Perhaps their Internet connections should have been disconnected? I wonder what they would think if that happened! |
Agent_24 (57) | ||
| 1227814 | 2011-09-03 07:53:00 | Twelvevolts....where are you? Should someone bake a cake with a file in it? |
martynz (5445) | ||
| 1227815 | 2011-09-03 08:29:00 | :lol: I have doubts it would be a copyright infringement though, seems a bit rich that they'd make you ring them... perhaps something more like there was a need for maintenance or upgrade in his area or at his house and his Internet would be down for a while while they did work? Maybe we'll find out soon.... |
Agent_24 (57) | ||
| 1227816 | 2011-09-03 09:22:00 | and maybe we wont ... they may have just taken him out the back and ... :horrified | SP8's (9836) | ||
| 1227817 | 2011-09-03 12:29:00 | So let me see if ive got this right... -Copyright holders can request ISPs investigate, but it costs them $200+ each time -If the ISP finds you guilty, they have to send two seperate infringement notices before you can possibly get fined -The tribunal operates on a "guilty till proven innocent" basis Im going to guess the inbuilt encryption options for programs like utorrent are useless? |
Question (15792) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 | |||||