DC++ the truth

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Warwick, Nov 28, 2003.

  1. Warwick

    Warwick Guest

    Warwick, Nov 28, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Warwick

    Steven H Guest

    Steven H, Nov 28, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Sue the ARIA and RIAA for all the pregnant teenagers!

    On Fri, 28 Nov 2003 14:45:54 +1300, Warwick wrote:
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?thesection=technology&thesubsection=&storyID=3536469
    > I wish this had gone to court myself, no way the RIAA would win.
    >
    > Since you can send copyrighted or objectionable material via email or
    > instant messenger or IRC, then the ISP's are now responsible for
    > monitoring all thier clients usage of these programs to keep themselves
    > safe from prosecution?


    Ok. If the ARIA, the RIAA and the NZ equvalent are going to sue ISPs for
    what their customers use there internet connections for, then lets sue the
    ARIA, RIAA etc for support for all the children conceived by teenagers
    listening to the record companies artists sexually suggestive music and
    music vidios.

    P2P is a valid methord of digital content redistribution
    http://www.openp2p.com/
     
    David Mohring, Nov 28, 2003
    #3
  4. Warwick

    steve Guest

    Warwick allegedly said:

    >

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?thesection=technology&thesubsection=&storyID=3536469
    >
    >
    > I wish this had gone to court myself, no way the RIAA would win.
    >
    > Since you can send copyrighted or objectionable material via email or
    > instant messenger or IRC, then the ISP's are now responsible for
    > monitoring all thier clients usage of these programs to keep
    > themselves safe from prosecution?
    >
    > Bullshit.


    Agreed.

    --
    Best Regards,
    Steve Withers
    defenestrate: The act of throwing Windows out the window and replacing it on
    your PC with some other operating system.
     
    steve, Nov 28, 2003
    #4
  5. Warwick

    steve Guest

    Re: Sue the ARIA and RIAA for all the pregnant teenagers!

    David Mohring allegedly said:

    > P2P is a valid methord of digital content redistribution
    > http://www.openp2p.com/


    Agreed. If you fire up Kazaa lite and search on "documentary", you get all
    sorts of things that have nothing to do with pirated music or movies.

    I have a few files up there that I have composed and share.

    This sets an intersting precedent.

    If the network operators are responsible for how their networks are used
    for.........where does that leave gun and military equipment manufacturers?

    --
    Best Regards,
    Steve Withers
    defenestrate: The act of throwing Windows out the window and replacing it on
    your PC with some other operating system.
     
    steve, Nov 28, 2003
    #5
  6. Warwick

    T.N.O. Guest

    Steven H wrote:
    >>I wish this had gone to court myself, no way the RIAA would win.


    > how so...


    much the same way that it went in the US I'd imagine.
     
    T.N.O., Nov 28, 2003
    #6
  7. Warwick

    Warwick Guest

    On Fri, 28 Nov 2003 14:52:35 +1300, Steven H <>
    wrote:

    >In article <>,
    > says...
    >> http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?thesection=technology&thesubsection=&storyID=3536469
    >>
    >>
    >> I wish this had gone to court myself, no way the RIAA would win.

    >
    >how so...


    How so as follows.

    Prosecutions against Grokster, Kazaa and morpheus failed because it
    was proven that these applications have legitimate uses. The precedent
    used was when the RIA failed in a lawsuit to prevent Sony selling
    video recorders. Same thing, threat of piracy vs legitimate usage.

    So having failed in an attempt to outlaw the software, the ISP's are
    being targetted instead. Adapting Steves analogy below, the software
    is akin to the manufacturers of firearms, the ISP's akin to the
    retailers of firearms. If you are retailing firearms do you have a
    duty to follow every purchaser around to make sure they do not use the
    weapon illegally?

    Bear in mind the traffic is not even being routed through the hosted
    server, there is not even the capability of the ISP to monitor the
    activity unless it got actively involved in the fileshare process as a
    user - like the recent investigation into trafficing of objectionable
    material cases recently discussed in another thread. Note in those
    situations it is the end users being prosecuted, the ISP's are not at
    threat.

    cheers
    Warwick
     
    Warwick, Nov 28, 2003
    #7
  8. Warwick

    Steven H Guest

    In article <bq6b2p$1vctvp$-berlin.de>,
    says...
    > Steven H wrote:
    > >>I wish this had gone to court myself, no way the RIAA would win.

    >
    > > how so...

    >
    > much the same way that it went in the US I'd imagine.


    how many ISP's in the US actively supported p2p - even provided servers
    and bandwidth for it?

    orcon were providing a p2p service - yes they had no control what was
    done (claiming stupidity is no legeal defence) - now they dont provide
    this service - why - because they knew the legealaty was dubious at
    best.

    --
    ===================================================
    Steven H
     
    Steven H, Nov 28, 2003
    #8
  9. Warwick

    Steven H Guest

    In article <>,
    says...
    > On Fri, 28 Nov 2003 14:52:35 +1300, Steven H <>
    > wrote:


    > >> I wish this had gone to court myself, no way the RIAA would win.

    > >
    > >how so...

    >
    > How so as follows.
    >
    > Prosecutions against Grokster, Kazaa and morpheus failed because it
    > was proven that these applications have legitimate uses. The precedent
    > used was when the RIA failed in a lawsuit to prevent Sony selling
    > video recorders. Same thing, threat of piracy vs legitimate usage.


    please tell me the staticticts of video recorders that were used for
    piracy vs legimate uses

    my bet is that the legeal use far out weighs illegeal use

    next please tell me the stacticts of people using p2p.net.nz who
    actively searched and downloaded pirated materal - vs legimate users who
    just shared materals that they owned the copywrite to.

    please dont try to baffle me with bullshit - i sat in p2p with the
    search spy open and watched hundreds of people search for Office 2003 -
    dont try and tell me ALL of thoes people had a licence for it!

    > So having failed in an attempt to outlaw the software, the ISP's are
    > being targetted instead.


    how so - orcon was PROVIDING A P2P SERVER - no shit there going to be
    targeted.

    > Bear in mind the traffic is not even being routed through the hosted
    > server,


    ok so say if some sick bastard was to set up a p2p system for his kiddy
    porn friends - is he liable?

    he doesnt know who shares what, hes just providing the service.

    hiding behind stupidity doesnt work!

    orcon set up a p2p system for individuals to share files. orcon knew
    that this service could be used for dubious uses - and it was.

    i say orcon knew becuase i dont think seeby is that fucking stupid.


    --
    ===================================================
    Steven H
     
    Steven H, Nov 28, 2003
    #9
  10. Warwick

    T.N.O. Guest

    Steven H wrote:
    > how many ISP's in the US actively supported p2p - even provided servers
    > and bandwidth for it?


    Activly support it, none at a guess.
    provided servers and/or bandwidth? many...paid for, but still.

    > orcon were providing a p2p service - yes they had no control what was
    > done (claiming stupidity is no legeal defence) - now they dont provide
    > this service - why - because they knew the legealaty was dubious at
    > best.


    yep, but they haven't done anything illegal... the users of said service
    may have, but Orcon themselves have not.

    I can sell you a crowbar, what you do with it is your business, not
    mine, if you choose to break into a house with it, I would doubt that
    this could be my fault in any way.
     
    T.N.O., Nov 28, 2003
    #10
  11. Warwick

    T.N.O. Guest

    Steven H wrote:
    > ok so say if some sick bastard was to set up a p2p system for his kiddy
    > porn friends - is he liable?
    > he doesnt know who shares what, hes just providing the service.
    > hiding behind stupidity doesnt work!


    not quite along those lines, but some guy was sharing a heap of text
    files filled with email address's... so, I asked him to remove them, and
    voila, they were gone.
     
    T.N.O., Nov 28, 2003
    #11
  12. Warwick

    Dogg Guest

    On Fri, 28 Nov 2003 16:04:38 +1300, Steven H <>
    wrote:


    >please tell me the staticticts of video recorders that were used for
    >piracy vs legimate uses
    >
    >my bet is that the legeal use far out weighs illegeal use
    >
    >next please tell me the stacticts of people using p2p.net.nz who
    >actively searched and downloaded pirated materal - vs legimate users who
    >just shared materals that they owned the copywrite to.
    >
    >please dont try to baffle me with bullshit - i sat in p2p with the
    >search spy open and watched hundreds of people search for Office 2003 -
    >dont try and tell me ALL of thoes people had a licence for it!
    >
    >> So having failed in an attempt to outlaw the software, the ISP's are
    >> being targetted instead.

    >
    >how so - orcon was PROVIDING A P2P SERVER - no shit there going to be
    >targeted.
    >
    >> Bear in mind the traffic is not even being routed through the hosted
    >> server,

    >
    >ok so say if some sick bastard was to set up a p2p system for his kiddy
    >porn friends - is he liable?
    >
    >he doesnt know who shares what, hes just providing the service.
    >
    >hiding behind stupidity doesnt work!
    >
    >orcon set up a p2p system for individuals to share files. orcon knew
    >that this service could be used for dubious uses - and it was.
    >
    >i say orcon knew becuase i dont think seeby is that fucking stupid.


    Come on Steven, at least make some vague attempt and spelling and
    grammar! Woger could have posted a more comprehensible post!
     
    Dogg, Nov 28, 2003
    #12
  13. Warwick

    Warwick Guest

    On Fri, 28 Nov 2003 16:04:38 +1300, Steven H <>
    wrote:

    >In article <>,
    > says...
    >> On Fri, 28 Nov 2003 14:52:35 +1300, Steven H <>
    >> wrote:

    >
    >
    >please tell me the staticticts of video recorders that were used for
    >piracy vs legimate uses
    >
    >my bet is that the legeal use far out weighs illegeal use
    >
    >next please tell me the stacticts of people using p2p.net.nz who
    >actively searched and downloaded pirated materal - vs legimate users who
    >just shared materals that they owned the copywrite to.
    >


    Perhaps you have missed the point, the legitimate use only has to
    exist, statistics are unimportant. If there is a legitimate use for
    the product you are allowed to make it. And if that is the case then
    you can host it as well.

    >please dont try to baffle me with bullshit - i sat in p2p with the
    >search spy open and watched hundreds of people search for Office 2003 -
    >dont try and tell me ALL of thoes people had a licence for it!
    >

    I am not trying to baffle anyone, I don't know how you could think I
    was.

    >how so - orcon was PROVIDING A P2P SERVER - no shit there going to be
    >targeted.
    >


    They were hosting one, the server 'belongs' to noone, it is a vehicle
    for setting up a community, not dissimilair to this usenet group.
    If anyone owns it, it is the community using it.

    >ok so say if some sick bastard was to set up a p2p system for his kiddy
    >porn friends - is he liable?
    >

    There is afaik, no p2p system that is specific to either file type or
    content. The hypothetical example you suggest is not applicable to the
    current situation.

    >hiding behind stupidity doesnt work!
    >
    >orcon set up a p2p system for individuals to share files. orcon knew
    >that this service could be used for dubious uses - and it was.
    >
    >i say orcon knew becuase i dont think seeby is that fucking stupid.


    Agreed he is not, he has a commercial imperative, he provided the
    hosting for free, as a community service. It did consume bandwidth,
    and then opened them to risk of prosecution as well. Closing the
    service until the the legal issues are resolved is very sensible.

    My only regret is that these services may be closed down without the
    RIAA's assertions being tested in court. That would be a shame, and a
    loss to the user communities of dc++ (a community I count myself a
    member of).

    best
    Warwick
     
    Warwick, Nov 28, 2003
    #13
  14. Warwick

    Steven H Guest

    In article <bq6ei6$1vg38c$-berlin.de>,
    says...
    > Steven H wrote:
    > > how many ISP's in the US actively supported p2p - even provided servers
    > > and bandwidth for it?

    >
    > Activly support it, none at a guess.
    > provided servers and/or bandwidth? many...paid for, but still.


    as i understand it, freely providing server space (somewhere to put the
    box), bandwidth and staff to plug the bugger in is in fact "actively
    supporting" - if orcon charged fees then it would be a diffrent story
    all together.

    even if the people that maintained it were not employees of orcon - it
    was orcon that freely provided bandwidth and the knowledge to plug it in
    to their network.

    > > orcon were providing a p2p service - yes they had no control what was
    > > done (claiming stupidity is no legeal defence) - now they dont provide
    > > this service - why - because they knew the legealaty was dubious at
    > > best.

    >
    > yep, but they haven't done anything illegal... the users of said service
    > may have, but Orcon themselves have not.


    what they have done is set up a service knowing that would attract a
    certan type of individual.

    > I can sell you a crowbar, what you do with it is your business, not
    > mine, if you choose to break into a house with it, I would doubt that
    > this could be my fault in any way.


    yes but what happens if i sell you a gun knowing that it was going to be
    used for malicious pourposes.

    as i said before - seeby isnt stupid, and that is what you would have to
    be in order to "claim stupidity" which isnt a legeal defence btw.

    what they done was very borderline - but with enough highly paid lawyers
    seeby (who owned the p2p.net.nz address) and orcon (who provided the
    faciliatys) would be in some serious shit.

    --
    ===================================================
    Steven H
     
    Steven H, Nov 28, 2003
    #14
  15. Warwick

    T.N.O. Guest

    Steven H wrote:
    > as i understand it, freely providing server space (somewhere to put the
    > box), bandwidth and staff to plug the bugger in is in fact "actively
    > supporting" - if orcon charged fees then it would be a diffrent story
    > all together.


    At a guess they are still providing a similar service... recoil.net.nz
    seems to be attached to them as well, or is hosted by them at least, and
    recoil are listed in Orcons game servers... last time I checked,
    dc.recoil.net.nz worked.

    >>yep, but they haven't done anything illegal... the users of said service
    >>may have, but Orcon themselves have not.


    > what they have done is set up a service knowing that would attract a
    > certan type of individual.


    You mean like the way that peadofiles(cant spell) cut out the pics of
    little kids from the warehouse/farmers catlog, and probably have a good
    old wank... the catalogs have a legitimate purpose, but are also used
    for other things...

    >>I can sell you a crowbar, what you do with it is your business, not
    >>mine, if you choose to break into a house with it, I would doubt that
    >>this could be my fault in any way.


    > yes but what happens if i sell you a gun knowing that it was going to be
    > used for malicious pourposes.
    > as i said before - seeby isnt stupid, and that is what you would have to
    > be in order to "claim stupidity" which isnt a legeal defence btw.


    But any thing *can* be used for malicious purposes, it isn't up to the
    service provider police it.

    > what they done was very borderline - but with enough highly paid lawyers
    > seeby (who owned the p2p.net.nz address) and orcon (who provided the
    > faciliatys) would be in some serious shit.


    or, they would get away with it(heh, makes them sound guilty) as sharman
    networks has.
     
    T.N.O., Nov 28, 2003
    #15
  16. Warwick

    Steven H Guest

    In article <bq6hcp$1urp8j$-berlin.de>,
    says...
    > Steven H wrote:
    > > as i understand it, freely providing server space (somewhere to put the
    > > box), bandwidth and staff to plug the bugger in is in fact "actively
    > > supporting" - if orcon charged fees then it would be a diffrent story
    > > all together.

    >
    > At a guess they are still providing a similar service... recoil.net.nz
    > seems to be attached to them as well, or is hosted by them at least, and
    > recoil are listed in Orcons game servers... last time I checked,
    > dc.recoil.net.nz worked.
    >
    > >>yep, but they haven't done anything illegal... the users of said service
    > >>may have, but Orcon themselves have not.

    >
    > > what they have done is set up a service knowing that would attract a
    > > certan type of individual.

    >
    > You mean like the way that peadofiles(cant spell) cut out the pics of
    > little kids from the warehouse/farmers catlog, and probably have a good
    > old wank... the catalogs have a legitimate purpose, but are also used
    > for other things...


    good point

    granted p2p does have other uses (that are legeal) - but you have to
    renember that p2p's "common use" is for swapping of pirated materal.
    that is typically what goes on in a public p2p network.

    burying your head into the sand and saying - i cant see the piracy
    because iam dumb, thick & stupid wont work.

    > >>I can sell you a crowbar, what you do with it is your business, not
    > >>mine, if you choose to break into a house with it, I would doubt that
    > >>this could be my fault in any way.

    >
    > > yes but what happens if i sell you a gun knowing that it was going to be
    > > used for malicious pourposes.
    > > as i said before - seeby isnt stupid, and that is what you would have to
    > > be in order to "claim stupidity" which isnt a legeal defence btw.

    >
    > But any thing *can* be used for malicious purposes, it isn't up to the
    > service provider police it.


    what is the intended purpose of a gun?

    in this current enviroment - what is the intended purpose of a p2p
    network - why to millions flood to dc, Ares <insert your p2p program
    here>.

    yes all these things are legeal because of what they "could do" but are
    more often used for what they "are designed to do". and in the case of
    p2p it is designed to allow people to simply search for and download
    software, music, pictures - without adhersion to any legeal statutes.

    > > what they done was very borderline - but with enough highly paid lawyers
    > > seeby (who owned the p2p.net.nz address) and orcon (who provided the
    > > faciliatys) would be in some serious shit.

    >
    > or, they would get away with it(heh, makes them sound guilty) as sharman
    > networks has.


    so we agree in the fact that what orcon done was steping over that line
    of being legeal.

    good debate - keep it up

    --
    ===================================================
    Steven H
     
    Steven H, Nov 28, 2003
    #16
  17. Warwick

    Mainlander Guest

    In article <>,
    says...
    > http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?thesection=technology&thesubsection=&storyID=3536469
    >
    >
    > I wish this had gone to court myself, no way the RIAA would win.
    >
    > Since you can send copyrighted or objectionable material via email or
    > instant messenger or IRC, then the ISP's are now responsible for
    > monitoring all thier clients usage of these programs to keep
    > themselves safe from prosecution?
    >
    > Bullshit.


    Sure, what we need are responsible users who aren't going to share
    illegal material.
     
    Mainlander, Nov 28, 2003
    #17
  18. Warwick

    Craig Shore Guest

    On Fri, 28 Nov 2003 16:38:55 +1300, Warwick <> wrote:


    >My only regret is that these services may be closed down without the
    >RIAA's assertions being tested in court. That would be a shame, and a
    >loss to the user communities of dc++ (a community I count myself a
    >member of).


    RIANZ, this is New Zealand, not America :)

    I think Orcon would have lost in court. It was being run by it's
    employees (not Seeby), and was being policed by them quite heavily.
    If they didn't like your nickname you were kicked out. They were also
    kicking for possible child porn sharing. This I would think would
    make them liable for any other content on there as they were not just
    a carrier, they had knowledge of what was being shared.
     
    Craig Shore, Nov 28, 2003
    #18
  19. Warwick

    Mainlander Guest

    Re: Sue the ARIA and RIAA for all the pregnant teenagers!

    In article <>,
    says...
    > On Fri, 28 Nov 2003 14:45:54 +1300, Warwick wrote:
    > http://www.nzherald.co.nz/storydisplay.cfm?thesection=technology&thesubsection=&storyID=3536469
    > > I wish this had gone to court myself, no way the RIAA would win.
    > >
    > > Since you can send copyrighted or objectionable material via email or
    > > instant messenger or IRC, then the ISP's are now responsible for
    > > monitoring all thier clients usage of these programs to keep themselves
    > > safe from prosecution?

    >
    > Ok. If the ARIA, the RIAA and the NZ equvalent are going to sue ISPs for
    > what their customers use there internet connections for, then lets sue the
    > ARIA, RIAA etc for support for all the children conceived by teenagers
    > listening to the record companies artists sexually suggestive music and
    > music vidios.
    >
    > P2P is a valid methord of digital content redistribution


    Provided you personally hold the copyright of material you make available
    to others.
     
    Mainlander, Nov 28, 2003
    #19
  20. Warwick

    Steven H Guest

    In article <bq6te9$sii$>, 0SPAM says...
    > What I hate is the way that the RIAA keep utilising industrial age
    > distribution techniques in the information age.
    >
    > Why do they get a digital medium (Most professional recordings are done
    > using pro tools or the like) and burn it to a plastic disk. This plastic
    > disk is then driven to the airport, placed on a boat/ plane and distributed
    > to record shops where it waits to be sold as an import!
    >
    > I have nothing against buying cds as I believe that artists should be
    > compensated for their talents. It just seems stupid to have to pay all the
    > middlemen in between when it would be cheaper and faster to be able to
    > download the album off the Internet and burn it myself probably saving a
    > good $20 off the cost of each CD.
    >
    > Give us the option and embrace a great way of distributing music.
    >
    > Cheers
    > Mark


    unfortunately that type of thinking is what we "enlightened" individuals
    call - Innovation.

    Innovation is just one of thoes things that lard arse multi-national
    corporations simply dont have.

    --
    ===================================================
    Steven H
     
    Steven H, Nov 28, 2003
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. MCSE World

    OT: The truth about Macintosh

    MCSE World, Sep 9, 2003, in forum: MCSE
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    524
    Maestro
    Sep 9, 2003
  2. SCO truth

    , Nov 29, 2004, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    605
    Thund3rstruck_n0i
    Nov 29, 2004
  3. Sash

    Truth about Norton Antivirus?

    Sash, Jan 14, 2005, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    32
    Views:
    2,778
    xNameless
    Jul 10, 2009
  4. nallspaid

    The Truth About Matrices , a Real Eye Opener !

    nallspaid, Mar 30, 2005, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    608
    °Mike°
    Mar 30, 2005
  5. srcbr

    A70 and CF X and USB speed - here the TRUTH!!!

    srcbr, Jan 29, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    403
    Paul L
    Jan 30, 2004
Loading...

Share This Page