Options
Piracy Laws. Are you ready? April 14th (Merged)
![[Deleted User]](https://wf.vanillicon.com/v2/f1bd97ace713e63abb545293ca7a2495.svg)
[Deleted User]
Posts: 5,565 Forum Member
✭
Just a heads up.
The new piracy laws are expected to be passed next wednesday 14th april.
The onus is on the user to make sure your connection is secure because if someone uses your wifi connection to download stuff its the owner of the connection who is responsible.
"experts" are suggesting many will need new routers for better security.
Article here: http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/technology/article7086250.ece
Note:Apparently the french laws are proving not to be very effective with piracy having increased since it was introduced. What a surprise!
The new piracy laws are expected to be passed next wednesday 14th april.
The onus is on the user to make sure your connection is secure because if someone uses your wifi connection to download stuff its the owner of the connection who is responsible.
"experts" are suggesting many will need new routers for better security.
Article here: http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/technology/article7086250.ece
Note:Apparently the french laws are proving not to be very effective with piracy having increased since it was introduced. What a surprise!
0
Comments
It will probably be innocent people who are affected by any anti-piracy laws the most because the people in charge of them couldn't organize a piss up in a brewery.
We also have music beamed at us 24/7 via radio, for free.
It's like putting two trays of cakes out and saying you can't eat that tray but you can eat that try, without really pointing very clearly.
There is as much chance of that as Mandelson voting Tory.
Which shouldn't be a surprise to anyone.
Quite. Why is torrenting a movie that's been on telly any different from recording it when it's on?
I download a lot of stuff. I also BUY a lot of stuff. It would have been supremely ironic if I'd been busted for downloading the last Mastodon album, for example, considering that at the time I'd just spent fifty quid ordering a limited edition of it which I was still waiting for.
Flawed logic from the start.
Basically, it's no different at all - but the law is the law, apparently - contradictions, and sometimes senseless.
It just gets on my tits, really. I don't watch telly, so I don't see when movies are on. But I do pay my license, because I own one (and because I think the BBC is a wonderful thing). But I'm breaking the law by downloading last week's True Blood or whatever, while someone who records it at the time isn't.
A failed business model trying to prevent itself from the expense of innovating and getting with the new decade, plenty of ways for people to do what they have already been doing, in time as these measures kick in more user friendly applications will be created thus negating the whole premise of the legislation.
Despite all this, year on year the music industry has continued to grow, blockbuster films still draw record breaking audiences, TV shows - good ones - still get good ratings. The evidence to back up the need for this does not stand up when examined.
Though this is only part of the Digital economy bill, this bill has been rushed through to avoid being kicked to touch after the election, it has not been risk assessed properly and grants massive powers to the secretary of state for business, this bill has not been debated enough to warrant it passing.
Will be interesting to see how things play out.
Exactly. It wasn't David Geffen who just stopped me in the street to ask for 50p, was it?
Aside from which, people of my age have probably already paid twice for half of their record collection- once on vinyl, once on CD.
This doesn't make much difference, the ISP will keep track of who leased an IP address and when
1. recording it from TV is just "downloading" it, for your own personal use. Nothing is (normally) uploaded for others.
2. TV companies pay copyright fees for their movie; torrent uploaders don't.
3. Torrent downloading is uploading too (in most cases) and it's the uploaders (you!) they really want. Torrent downloaders are (mostly) also illegal uploaders and the entire torrent system depends on it.
Exactly. All this bill does is restrict our freedoms. It's a bloody farce but there are plenty of ways and means around it. All the bill will do, is encourage more people to download illegally and boycott actually buying material.
Lord Mandy is simply in the pockets of the fat cats, and no doubt profitting quite handsomly from this whole charade. The man should be lynched and kicked into obscurity, the vile slug on Britain that he is. This bill gives him so much power, from a position that the public can't even remove him from.
I hope the country starts downloading illegally en mass. Will the government disconnect the entire country? No doubt sending the UK so far back, we will become an insignifcant spec on the radar.
That's the thing. Right now, it's only really illegal to upload and 'seed' movies, music etc. This bill will allow them to penalise anyone they see fit, even if it wasn't even them doing it. It's finally going to happen however. Big business is finally going to be running Britain.
I think this is the best way of doing it without getting caught...
So you are a leecher then?
Closed torrents sites soon send you on your way.
Bit selfish, though, innit?
The more people do that the slower downloads become or fizzle out, that's why some decent torrent sites have a 1:1 ratio rule or 72 hour seed.
Even if you don't seed, aren't you still uploading though at the same time you're downloading.
But the first rule is not too talk about it
Yeah, you're still a peer.