BitTorrent & FileSharing : Which side are you ??
The Pirate Bay, Mininova, IsoHunt. The list of such torrent sites is endless. The music and film industry call them a breeding ground for piracy. The software industry hates them. They've been raided by the police and have lawsuits pending against them. They got shut down but they came back on. Although hated by the industry, they still have a religious fan base. People who believe file sharing is or in fact should be something completely legal. Their closure has launched movements and debates at an enormous scale. Its time to have your say. FileSharing: A boon or bane?
Sharing is good.
Sharing things is a noble act. So why is it condemned when it comes to software, movies and music.
Sharing is what we teach our children when they fight for a toy or recognition.
Sharing is good because I can find people how appreciate the same values than I do.
Sharing is indeed a noble act, but only when the items you are sharing belong to you, and you have the right to share them.
Surely it is more noble to teach our children the value of intellectual property rather than to simply take what they like.That is more like stealing and not sharing
Its effect on the industry is over hyped.
Most people who visit such sites to download movies say that they would still go to the movies. They only download it to for a preview. Therefore the losses claimed by the industry are an over exaggeration.
The article "The Internet Debacle" by Janis Ian offers an alternative viewpoint to the industries claims. Which doesn't mean that she endorses filesharing.
CD sales are up by 12 % a year and growing what is that problem. Some people dont buy Cds becuase they are not worth the money they are asking for. Take 50 Cent album Curtis. I like to own albums it works out cheaper. However Im not paying £20 for 1 great song. filesharing is like so the way to solve your needs it completely is marvelous
Sharing is neccessary for progress.
Sharing is neccessary for progress. Progress is neccessary to avoid a deadlock.
Absolutely not. Sharing is not necessary for progress, protection of intellectual property rights is. If an inventor or company cannot make money from an idea, why should they bother investing their time and energy in developing and improving it.
Filesharing helps to promote artists.
Filesharing is a modern version of word of mouth. An unknown band without a record contract or airtime on the radio can promote itself by uploading music.
Filesharing keeps older movies and albums accessible.
The not-for-profit approach of file-sharing provides the diskspace and bandwidth to access material that doesn't earn its shelf space in stores anymore.
Filesharing suppresses artificial scarcity.
Monopolies (software) introduce artificial scarcity through intellectual property rights to increase monetary benefits. File sharing can reduce the monopolists command of the market.
Software monopolists cannot command the market for long as there are open source software products available in the market which are as effective or even better than proprietery software
Filesharing furthers cultural exchange.
Local and regional music scenes are accessible through filesharing in places where the music is not available in retail stores or on air.
Where movies in their original language are not available filesharing can step up to the plate.
Sharing alleviates the effects of low income.
For underpriviledged citizens it is essential to have access to the same media than everybody else. Otherwise the tendency to be left behind is increasing.
Sharing media in general and sharing electronic media files in particular ensures that more people have access to it.
If you can't afford to buy a CD you still have the same right to listen to it. This cannot be compared to physical commodities because digital piracy does not prevent others from also downloading it.
"Piracy is killing incomes of so many people" - whose exactly?
"If you can’t afford to buy a CD you still have the same right to listen to it". This is more like saying that if I cannot afford to buy a luxury car, I still have the right to ride it. The essential rights which we should have are all described in our constitutions. You don't have to pay to enjoy your freedom of speech but by no means do you have the right to enjoy content created by somebody else without giving monetary assistance. Its the law of nature. Nobody makes things to be distributed freely. Everyone's gotta earn to survive. Piracy is killing incomes of so many people
The Bittorrent protocol is effective.
To distribute a file among 100 recipients it is more efficient to use a peer to peer protocol than a server to client protocol. While servers need to provide a 100Mbit/s pipe for download, peers only need to provide a fraction of that bandwidth because peers can download from each other.
The effectiveness of the bittorrent protocol is not being doubted at all. The protocol should not be used to distribute copyrighted material.
Saying Stealing Media is like saying im gonna steal your joke
Stealing media is like stealing a joke from someone who made it up. If I go to someone and say a joke that joke must have originated from somewhere. I am not going to search for the person it originated and ask permission to be tell it
With music people say pirates steal what is essentially their work. If I were to go back to my analogy of stealing a joke then sue the pants off me Ive told thousands of jokes to my friends which I have heard on the radio. Heard On Youtube Heard On Facebook.
Sometime when Ive told a joke I got from a person, it gets passed on so often and to so many people that I heard the joke I told.
Again radio TV imagine how much work goes into being able to brodcast the media to people just becuase some thinks of a quick 4 liner doesnt mean its worthless. If some one TV wanted to use the same joke theyd have to pay for it.
Stealing media is definately not like stealing a joke. One needs to understand that a lot of effort goes into production of music and films. Making a feature film or a music album is not the same as saying three or four witty lines picked up from facebook or some place else. Its a full process that costs money unlike telling a joke.
The Big Companies Make Far Too Much Money Anyway
All these compnanies that produce software/music/movies make far too much money anyway when they sell thier products for the ridiculous prices they sell them for. The prices they are demanding are sky high. The industry has failed to find an effective solution to piracy, therefore they curse the protocol
the prices are not "sky-high" as you suggest. Whil you say the make far too much money, please look into finances and the spreadsheets of the companies. much of it is operating costs. they also have to pay for promotions, tours, and the artists themsevlves.
Liberation of creative works
I speak as a guitarist, songwriter and author when I say this, and any worthy artist would like nothing better than for their product to be available unconditionally to anyone who wanted it. Its the middleman - the record companies, the publishers, the distributors, the film studios, the cinema companies - its the middleman who steal, by blackmail, by the threat of eternal obscurity, and they jealously guard their plunder, as demonstrated in this draft. Internet pirate groups such as the Pirate Bay are the heirs of Robin Hood, liberating art from its copyright prison and delivering it to the people for whom it was intended.
It is not stealing!
The essence of theft is that you have to take something away from someone else. All you are doing in file sharing is making a copy - you are creating something new not taking something away from anyone else. Say what you want but please, please, please stop pretending it is theft. It is copyright infringement which is totally different.
It is stealing
Hard work and effort of musicians and of those who make video games is being undermined by this sort of behaviour. Would you walk into a record shop and simply take CDs without paying? No, because it's theft. This is simply that.
If it was brand new, I wouldn't. But if it was never going to be released in the UK, never going to be released at all, twenty years out of print or a remix composed by some guy who doesn't expect to make a profit, I would.
Some files are not what their titles suggest. Many can contain viruses or be something completely different, and you won't know until you've downloaded it and opened the file.
The bittorrent community cleans itself. The users leave comments about a bad torrent or a fake upload. A user downloading from torrent sites should read the comments properly before downloading. Also sites like mininova.org mark bad torrents, so that the user is aware. Therefore falling prey to viruses is the foolishness of the user and not a flaw in the protocol.
Pornography....free and accessible to youths
All sorts of pornography can be transfered by such means. Young people can get easy access to it on these file-sharing networks. Pornography is a contentious subject and should be regulated through sites that require payment, thus preventing children or teenagers from accessing them. The problem with existing torrent sites is not that they provide access to pornography but that they force it on the user - in many cases, it appears in the form of adverts on the sides of pages.
To curb pornography among underage children, one needs to exercise better parental control, as even a google search will bring up a lot of pornographic material. Bittorrent is thus not the only source for pornography.
The problem of unsolicited pornography in adverts on torrent sites would be solved by the decriminalisation of filesharing, followed by the creation of a central torrent index financed by general progressive taxation which could therefore be free of any advertising at all.
What do you think?