Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
The Internet Networking Your Rights Online

The Pirates Will Always Win, Says UK ISP 241

Posted by Soulskill
from the except-in-pittsburgh dept.
TheEvilOverlord writes "The head of UK ISP TalkTalk, Charles Dunstone, has made the comment ahead of the communications minister's Digital Britain report that illegal downloading cannot be stopped. He said 'If you try speed humps or disconnections for peer-to-peer, people will simply either disguise their traffic or share the content another way. It is a game of Tom and Jerry and you will never catch the mouse. The mouse always wins in this battle and we need to be careful that politicians do not get talked into putting legislation in place that, in the end, ends up looking stupid.' Instead he advocates allowing users 'to get content easily and cheaply.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

The Pirates Will Always Win, Says UK ISP

Comments Filter:
  • by Simon (S2) (600188) on Saturday June 06, 2009 @07:21AM (#28231889) Homepage

    It is really refreshing to see someone, sometimes, who understands the situation and puts it down this clear in an unbiased manner.

    we need to be careful that politicians do not get talked into putting legislation in place that, in the end, ends up looking stupid.

    or even worse, introduces new problems without solving the intended ones.

    • by psnyder (1326089) on Saturday June 06, 2009 @08:14AM (#28232163)

      we need to be careful that politicians do not get talked into putting legislation in place that, in the end, ends up looking stupid.

      or even worse, introduces new problems without solving the intended ones.

      Charles Dunstone's wording is better when talking to politicians.
      Politicians know that new problems will always arise, so it's not much of a deterrent. But they do NOT want to look stupid.

    • by janwedekind (778872) on Saturday June 06, 2009 @08:20AM (#28232193) Homepage

      You can't stop copyright infringement but you can inhibit free culture.

    • by joaobranco (55662) on Saturday June 06, 2009 @08:46AM (#28232391)

      we need to be careful that politicians do not get talked into putting legislation in place that, in the end, ends up looking stupid.

      or even worse, introduces new problems without solving the intended ones.

      Trouble is, some of the new problems it introduces (namely overbearing policing of actions online, bordering on a police state) are not usually seen as problems by the politicians (at least those in power or which hope to achieve it soon), but rather goals that they date not describe publicly...

    • by McGiraf (196030)

      Hardly "unbiased" it's and ISP, how can they sell their high speed if you have the choice of
      1) paying the same price as the store for you download

      or

      2)go to prison for "illegal" downloading?

      for 1) you pay your ISP on top of the "content" and you will not get 10 movies or what ever a month, too expensive.

      and 2) not many people want to go in prison

      so without "illegal" downloading and cheaper price for download than physical goods you do not need high bandwidth. You go to a ISP that offer 256k "basic DSL" and p

    • by Yvanhoe (564877)
      The problem is that he will be considered biased : ISPs are known to be on the side of "pirates" by politicians. They even make profit from them !
    • It's easy for a business to "understand the situation" when understanding involves arguing against any legislation that increases your costs or decreases your profits. They're just protecting the bottom line, nothing to see here.
  • Of course... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by XPeter (1429763) * on Saturday June 06, 2009 @07:25AM (#28231909) Homepage

    As long as there is internet, there will be piracy. Plain n' simple.

    • Re:Of course... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Lillesvin (797939) on Saturday June 06, 2009 @07:39AM (#28231975) Homepage

      I'm inclined to correct that, because long before the internet there was piracy too. I remember copying the new Guns n' Roses album (Use your Illusion I) and lots of other stuff to tape. Yeah, that was 1991 - internet did technically exist, but let's be realistic, it wasn't a common thing to see in a house hold.

      So how about we say, "as long as art exists, there will be piracy"?

      • Re:Of course... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Ginger Unicorn (952287) on Saturday June 06, 2009 @07:59AM (#28232063)

        back then piracy was what people did when they made hundreds of dupes and sold them on a market stall. taping an album off your friend was just taping an album off your friend.

        half of my dad's music collection was lp's and recorded tapes, half were dupes an blank tapes. the same went for everyone i knew. there was never even the inkling that there was something wrong with this.

        now all of a sudden anyone who obtains dupes for free is a vicious evil greedy selfish thieving pirate and deserves to be financially ruined and/or imprisoned.

        fucking absurd.

      • Re:Of course... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) on Saturday June 06, 2009 @08:08AM (#28232121)

        So how about we say, "as long as art exists, there will be piracy"?

        No. Not at all.
        You can't pirate something which is freely given.

        As long as copyright exists, there will be piracy.

        If and when society discards the crutch of copyright in favor of modern means of funding creative endeavours, piracy will end.

        Getting rid of copyright is the only way to end piracy.

        • Re:Of course... (Score:5, Insightful)

          by impaledsunset (1337701) on Saturday June 06, 2009 @08:31AM (#28232279)

          And making killing people legal is the only way to end murder....

          Current copyright law is FUBAR, which doesn't mean we should get rid of copyright completely. Even a sane version of copyright will still be infrinded just as any other law out there, which doesn't mean that one shouldn't exist. Sane copyright laws should exist, however they should be beneficial to art and culture, not to the RIAA's pockets, and shouldn't thread down on almost everybody's and their wishes.

          Currently many people want and have the opportunity to remix and share art, so they will do it. On the other hand, current copyright laws make almost everything you can do with a work illegal. It's simply inconsistent with reality.

          P.S. What's this piracy are you all talking about? Why would you bring sea-robbers in a discussion about copyright?

          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            by Bert64 (520050)

            More sane copyright laws would massively reduce the level of infringement that occurs... If you make media easier and cheaper to obtain, while removing nasties such as DRM then people will have far less reason to infringe.

            People do it because it's easier, substantially cheaper and often yields a superior and more usable product.

          • Your new "more sane" system will eventually end up being abused as much as the current system is. Yes, really... Name a single system existing today that isn't being abused in some way.

            I think the world is fucked up today not because of the law but because of the people's attitude towards the law. When there's something wrong, people demand a new law to fix it, and expect that the existence of the new rule will magically make the problem disappear.
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        Works of art were copied long before your tape recorder existed. Hell, they were copied long before the printing press. I would guess that monks were copying lots of literary works by hand without any permission.

        • by PRMan (959735)
          And if they hadn't, we wouldn't have ANY ancient works today. Everything we have of the ancient world are several generations away from the originals.
      • by Bert64 (520050)

        Anywhere that mass duplicated media is sold for far less than it costs people to duplicate their own, there will be "copyright infringement"...

        CDs were not commonly copied when computers didn't have enough disk space to store them, processing power to compress (mp3) them, and writable CDs cost as much as pre pressed ones containing music. Instead, people made lower quality copies onto audio cassette.

        If you want to stop copyright infringement, make the originals better value for money such that it isn't viab

      • Re:Of course... (Score:4, Interesting)

        by msouth (10321) on Saturday June 06, 2009 @09:02AM (#28232525) Homepage Journal

        but you were copying to crap cassette tapes. You didn't have digital audio tape. Why not? Cuz the RIAA won that one.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Audio_Tape [wikipedia.org]

        As long as the technology was localized, where they could attack a single format, target manufacturers, etc, they could keep it under their thumb. Things are, I think, fundamentally different now that digital copying and digital redistribution is ubiquitous.

        You weren't making anything like the quality of copy that is possible now, and you had no way to anonymously dump a million crappy cassettes for other people to pick up, either.

        Although technically you might have called what you were doing piracy, I think the Internet has fundamentally changed the game. He might have needed to say "piracy at this scale" vs. just piracy, but functionally it's just a minor quibble.

        • Well of course it has fundamentally changed the game. Let's not forget that recording a radio/tv show onto tape (casette/video) -is- still perfectly legal. You -can- still borrow your neighbor's DVD, play it back, and record it to tape legally.

          However, I have a sneaking suspicion (or call it insight from history) that if that were the -only- available method (lossy transfer, can only transfer slightly above real-time or else the recording gets too distorted for the tape technology, etc.), casual piracy wo

      • by jonbryce (703250)

        Or, as long as copyright exists, there will be piracy.

      • by mspohr (589790)
        When I was in high school (1965... I'm really old) I bought a reel to reel tape recorder (Sony) and made copies of my friends records (old vinyl 12 LP records). This was considered 'fair use' then and it probably would be now, also. The Internet just expands my network of friends willing to share their records.

        The record industry needs to get a better business model. They could have been making lots of money from Internet distribution if they hadn't adopted the 'kill the Internet' strategy. By coming u

    • I'm not so certain...

      At some point, as with Prohibition in the States, the law may cave to reality at some point and we'll give up on the concept of owning strings of 1s and 0s.

      Some other mechanism for paying creators will have to emerge - I think it'll end up being patrons for most things and live performances for others (like band tours and book readings), with a smattering of physical merchandise related to the original content.

      Some things may end up being free, done as labours of love. It's not like th

      • We're not doomed (Score:5, Insightful)

        by arctanx (1187415) on Saturday June 06, 2009 @07:55AM (#28232045)

        You speak as though the industry of buying and selling recordings of music legitimately is bound to die. That's not the case at all -- it's just that consumer expectations are changing. Once, we bought our music on cassettes or CDs. These days people want digital recordings from the 'net, and they want them now and reasonably priced. Standard formats too, good quality and no DRM, depending on how tech-savvy the buyer is.

        Look at Magnatune, which lets you easily sample music before you buy it and download it in the format you like, with a significant amount of what you pay going to the artist. Look at Rhapsody, which lets you stream whatever you like from their huge library for a pretty low monthly fee. These are the sorts of services which the industry needs to embrace.

        Frankly, torrent-hunting is a lot bigger waste of time than effectively buying it if it's available through either of those services (though sadly Rhapsody is not available in Australia). The pirates have to work in the dark to an extent so the legitimate industry has a much better chance to make it easy for people to buy their goods. Make it work, make it good value, and the money will come.

  • I believe the industry knows that you cannot stop 100% of software piracy. I don't think that's their goal.

    I remember back in 2000 when I went to my dentist. He sat me down and started making the usual small-talk, asked me where I worked, what I was majoring in in college, etc. When I told him I was a comp sci major, he brought up Napster. My dentist was using Napster. He went on and on about how computer illiterate he was, but he had no problems using Napster, and how he was finding songs on there from back when he was a kid, how he could find anything he wanted, and how simple it was to get whatever song he wanted...

    I believe the industry is just trying to make sure my dentist doesn't start downloading songs again.

    • Well, the British, for one, can always send Lemming of the BDA to check on their naughty dentists.
      • Lemming, Lemming, Lemming of the BDA!
        Lemming, Lemming, Lemming of the BD- Lemming of the BD- Lemming of the BDA~!

    • by Krneki (1192201)
      Unless they offer a better service then Napster, your dentist will keep using it. Besides a dentist might not be good with computers, but he ain't a stupid person.

      It was clear from the start of the Internet that free sharing can't be stopped. They need to accept it and move forward.
      • tell the dentist about spotify and whatever the one is that lets you pay a quid to download an mp3
        • by Tony Hoyle (11698)

          Spotify is free.. in a way, better than napster was, except you don't keep the music. In an age of ubuquitous internet access keeping and storing music doesn't make a whole lot of sense anyway.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Jah-Wren Ryel (80510)

      I believe the industry is just trying to make sure my dentist doesn't start downloading songs again.

      That's what they like to think. But knowledge of how to use the latest piracy tools is just as unstoppable as the piracy itself. It is a variation on the same phenomenon that results in virus-construction-kits and script-kiddies.

      They can only go so far to make piracy harder. What they can do without practical limit is to make alternatives to piracy easier. If typing a song name into google gets you 10 different places you can legitimately download it in various ways for various payments (outright purcha

    • by Yacoby (1295064) on Saturday June 06, 2009 @08:02AM (#28232081)

      he had no problems using Napster, and how he was finding songs on there from back when he was a kid, how he could find anything he wanted, and how simple it was to get whatever song he wanted...

      I believe the industry is just trying to make sure my dentist doesn't start downloading songs again.

      Then the solution is not to sue the dentist, but to give him options to get the music he wants cheaply and easily. By cheaply, I don't mean the current prices that they are ripping me off with. 12p a track sounds reasonable. 10p to the artist, 1p to the publisher, and 1p to the distributer.
      When they try and sell me a digital album for £8 - £10, I just give up. Do they think I am made of money? Why should I pay a large amount of money for something that costs them nothing to reproduce?

      One big issue the industry will hit is that when people my age (late teens) get to the point when we are the dentist, we won't have any problem pirating things. We won't have any problems with computer illiteracy. We will know where to find the programs that encrypt the traffic. If we don't, we just ask a friend who does.

      • by hitmark (640295)

        Meh, its more like 1p to the artist 10p to the label and 1p to the distributor (to the latter if often rolled into the label).

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by david.given (6740)

      Napster was awesome, and I regret its passing. There is nothing like it today.

      The great thing about Napster was that it let me find new music that I liked. I'd see a reference to a song in, say, a book; I'd search for it on Napster, download the track, and play it; and then, if I liked it, I could go back to the same place and see what else the guy had. I discovered They Might Be Giants that way; I downloaded Rock To Wind A String Around from a recommendation, then went back and dug out more of their trac

      • by 4D6963 (933028)

        I was going to offer a rebuttal with examples of how you're wrong, but actually you're right, back then you'd just easily search for a song, download it, it would instantly start (can't say the same for BitTorrent or eMule), using a mere 33.6 K modem with a 20 hours/month connection you still could get quite a lot, and you could go to chatrooms, actually make new friends and even see what they had. And if you downloaded porn, you'd even get the person you were downloading from telling you to get your hands

    • by swilver (617741)

      I believe the industry knows that you cannot stop 100% of software piracy. I don't think that's their goal.

      I wouldn't be so sure :) In fact, I think that's exactly their goal and the only thing stopping them from going for it is that it would likely result in copyright law being abolished or at the very least thoroughly re-examined. They'll push it as far as they can, and they'll only stop pushing when it starts to hurt their bottom line.

    • I believe the industry knows that you cannot stop 100% of software piracy. I don't think that's their goal.

      Its also not the governments goal. Their goal is to use this as an excuse to get citizen support of reduction of our rights.

  • by jonaskoelker (922170) <jonaskoelker&gnu,org> on Saturday June 06, 2009 @07:41AM (#28231991) Homepage

    Here's a few snippets from the article, selected to show how TalkTalk gets it:

    TalkTalk has always maintained the defence that it is merely a broadband pipe and not an online policeman for the content industry. Dunstone said any technical measures to try and clamp down on sharers of copyrighted material would soon be bypassed by pirates.

    "If people want to share content they will find another way to do it," [...] This idea that it is all peer to peer and somehow the ISPs can just stop it is very naive."

    TalkTalk is testing BT's new fibre-optic super-fast broadband network in north London [...] Dunstone [of TalkTalk] reckons super-fast broadband â" offering speeds of up to 40Mb a second â" will be more expensive than current-generation broadband but less than the sort of £39.99-a-month prices being asked for basic broadband a few years ago.

    Fast cheap internets, "we can't stop the pirates"...

    Exchange your currency into British pounds and vote with it.

    (I'm not paid to say that)

    • by S77IM (1371931)

      Can anyone convince these TalkTalk guys to start a branch of their business in Austin, Texas? I know a number of current Time Warner Cable subscribers who would be eager to switch.

        -- 77IM

      • by jonbryce (703250)

        They may be the 2nd largest ISP in the country, mainly by buying up everyone else - OneTel, AOL, Tiscali etc, but I don't think they are particularly good as an ISP.

    • by Marcika (1003625)

      TalkTalk is testing BT's new fibre-optic super-fast broadband network in north London [...] Dunstone [of TalkTalk] reckons super-fast broadband â" offering speeds of up to 40Mb a second â" will be more expensive than current-generation broadband but less than the sort of £39.99-a-month prices being asked for basic broadband a few years ago.

      Fast cheap internets, "we can't stop the pirates"...

      Exchange your currency into British pounds and vote with it.

      (I'm not paid to say that)

      You wouldn't be all that enthusiastic if you actually had ISP service from TalkTalk... (Like I have.)

      They are 40x oversubscribed and proud of it - so my 8Mbit line only gets more than 500kbit between 2am and 4am.

      Their support is notoriously bad - I had to talk to them about 12 times for half an hour each to get 110 quid back that they overbilled when I moved house.

      They use the Internet Watch Foundation secret censorship list (Slashdot reported).

      They suck as bad as any ISP, their only redeeming feature is

    • by Tony Hoyle (11698)

      FTTC is being tested by BT Wholesale, and later in the year there will be lots of ISPs providing it - many of them *much* better than TalkTalk.

      What they forget to mention is that 40mb download (definately achievable if you're near enough your cabinet, as it's VDSL), but only a 2mb upload. With that level of disparity I wonder if the ACK packets will saturate the upstream before you hit 40mb anyway.

      Also, they won't be increasing the monthly caps, so if you do stream that fast you're going to get burned anyw

  • Amazon! (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Rick Richardson (87058) on Saturday June 06, 2009 @07:44AM (#28232001) Homepage

    Amazon has 89 cent downloads. And .99 to 3.99 albums (one per day). Pirates should check out Amazon!!!

    Here is what I've gotten (albums for less than $3.99) in 6 months:

    $ ls -d */* |cat
    Aerosmith/Big Ones
    Alanis Morissette/Flavors Of Entanglement
    Amy Grant/Heart In Motion
    Bob Marley/Live At The Lyceum
    Bon Jovi/Cross Road
    Boston/Boston
    Butch Walker/Sycamore Meadows
    Cary Brothers/Who You Are
    Creedence Clearwater Revival/Chronicle_ 20 Greatest Hits
    Creed/Greatest Hits
    David Bowie/Heroes
    Eagles/One Of These Nights
    Elvis Costello/My Aim Is True
    Forgive Durden/Forgive Durden Presents Razia's Shadow_ A Musical
    Heart/Make Me
    Inxs/Kick
    Jack's Mannequin/The Glass Passenger (Amazon Exclusive)
    Jackson Browne/The Pretender
    James Morrison/Songs For You, Truths For Me
    Jimi Hendrix/Electric Ladyland
    Joan Jett & The Blackhearts/I Love Rock N' Roll
    Joe Bonamassa/The Ballad Of John Henry
    Joshua Radin/Simple Times
    Kate Voegele/A Fine Mess
    Katy Perry/One Of The Boys
    Led Zeppelin/Led Zeppelin
    Madonna/Like A Virgin
    MC5/Kick Out The Jams
    Metric/Fantasies
    Mieka Pauley/Elijah Drop Your Gun
    Neil Diamond/Sweet Caroline
    No Doubt/The Singles Collection
    Pink Floyd/Animals
    Prince/Purple Rain [Explicit]
    Queen/News Of The World
    Robin Trower/Bridge Of Sighs
    Rod Stewart/The Definitive Rod Stewart
    Seether/Finding Beauty In Negative Spaces Spaces (Bonus Track Version) - [Explicit]
    Seth Walker/Leap Of Faith
    Shiny Toy Guns/Major Tom
    Soundgarden/Superunknown
    The Apples In Stereo/New Magnetic Wonder
    The Band/Greatest Hits
    The Benjy Davis Project/Dust
    The Go-Go's/Beauty And The Beat
    The Pussycat Dolls/Doll Domination
    The Weepies/Hideaway
    The White Tie Affair/Walk This Way
    The Who/Who Are You
    U2/No Line On The Horizon
    Van Halen/Van Halen
    Van Halen/Van Halen II
    Various Artists/Motown Number 1's Vol. 2
    Whitesnake/Whitesnake
    Yes/The Yes Album

    • Here is what I've gotten (albums for less than $3.99) in 6 months:

      Is this lossless encoding of 16-bit stereo 44.1KHz?
      If not, then I still prefer a FLAC torrent.

      For old time classics like these, a price of 0.49/track 1.99/album for lossless compression is about where the price needs to be to compete.

    • Re:Amazon! (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Crookdotter (1297179) on Saturday June 06, 2009 @08:16AM (#28232175)
      If I got that right, that's 54 albums, so in cost that's $215 you've spent right there. I bet I could have the majority of that on a torrent in a day or two, for nothing.

      What's the incentive for pirates to look at amazon?
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by mightyteegar (1516653)

        If I got that right, that's 54 albums, so in cost that's $215 you've spent right there. I bet I could have the majority of that on a torrent in a day or two, for nothing.

        What's the incentive for pirates to look at amazon?

        Of course you could find all those via torrents -- with no guarantees that an album in a discography won't be incomplete, there won't be any pops, skips or warps in the song files and that your download won't stop at 98% for eternity. Part of the reason I quit pirating is because, just like getting anything else on the black market, the quality often left a lot to be desired.

        Furthermore, Amazon has a massive catalog of great albums that aren't freely available as torrents. Some of them you'd be lucky even

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by PRMan (959735)
          Actually most Amazon songs are over 200kbps. I suspect that they are using something similar to the LAME alt present standard, which even people with much better hearing than I have can't hear the difference from the original.
    • Re:Amazon! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by adona1 (1078711) on Saturday June 06, 2009 @09:05AM (#28232557)
      Yes, pirates should check out Amazon. I've checked it out. However, because I don't live in America, they wouldn't let me give them my money. Credit card out, mp3s selected, and bam...sorry, you're in the wrong country (nothing stopping me buying the CD from Amazon though). And the record companies wonder why they're dying...
      • by Pecisk (688001)

        So bloody seconded. Wanted to start clean with buying newest Keane "Perfect Symmetry" which I love so much and after that wanted to get "Ode to Mr Smith". They don't even care to inform you before registering your credit card data that it is for US ONLY.

        Amazon, it is really Stupid, stupid, STUPID.

    • Re:Amazon! (Score:5, Funny)

      by caluml (551744) <slashdot@spCOWam ... minus herbivore> on Saturday June 06, 2009 @09:55AM (#28232985) Homepage
      What, exactly, are you thinking that | cat on the end is adding?
  • I agree with him but part of me thinks he's only saying that because Talk Talk is a cheap service and he'd easily change his mind if the government offered them a cheap or free solution to police their service.

    In the end I guess it doesn't matter as long as he's on the sensible side but it would be nice to know he'll stay on the sensible side.
    • part of me thinks he's only saying that because Talk Talk is a cheap service and he'd easily change his mind if the government offered them a cheap or free solution to police their service.

      And part of me thinks he's confident that if the government makes such an offer, he can show how it is an ineffective solution.

  • It's not true, the news media isn't vulnerable to piracy. Well, obviously their product is ad supported, but only some small minority of "pirates" blocks the ads. An easy solution is : (1) change internet radio consist of separate mixing instructions and content, so the original song is immediately available to users, but (2) include banner as in the ogg/mp3 comments and get player to attempt to induce purchases. But there are numerous other frameworks where users "usually pay".

  • by pboechat (1568853) on Saturday June 06, 2009 @07:59AM (#28232065)
    Take that, ninjas!
  • by soporific16 (1166495) on Saturday June 06, 2009 @08:03AM (#28232091)
    they're still calling us pirates. I like to think of myself as someone who likes to walk around the tollbooths the entertainment industry puts in front of everything, not walk through them. Haven't they got enough money? How many copies of my favorite albums do i have to buy to replace the ones i lost, or had stolen or whatever? Because the tollbooth owners don't care about that sort of fairness, how can i be expected to WILLINGLY put up with the hassle of the tollbooth experience when i can just walk around? The ISP guy got it spot on in one regard -- the only way to combat the culture that has developed to avoid this hassle (ie filesharing) is to make stuff dirt cheap and mega accessible. But there's no or very little profit in that is there, and so here lies the contradiction of trying to own something in digital form and make "good healthy profits". Normally i would sarcastically say "good luck with that" but its simply not funny that while they're trying to make these healthy profits we have to put up with all the associated nastiness of their stand-over tactics and absurd propaganda... can we have the revolution now please?
    • The entertainment industry is notorious for creating an artificial scarcity. They squeeze the distribution pipe between the content creators and the customers. There's plenty of content, and the economics dictate that the price should drop. However, that prevents the media cartels from making "good healthy profits" (as defined by *them*.) Their solution isn't to flood the market with lots of content ... that would entail more work for them for the same return. They have chosen to choke-off the supply l
  • I live in an area where TalkTalk have an LLU, It may be worth switching to them in the near future.
  • The best the police can do is try and stay only a few steps away from the criminals, instead of miles. With computer crime FUGET ABOUT TIT!

    Copy protection doesn't work. Never has, never will.

    It used to take someone with GURU computer skills to be a pirate, now all it takes is a kid with access to the Internet.

    The problem is not piracy, it is the distribution and cost of media (content not storage).

    I would feel confident in saying that the majority of American homes have one, likely more, instances of pira

    • by swilver (617741)

      Though, if you could buy a new DVD movie for $1 then who would wait hours for a movie to download?

      Me. However, I would not be waiting on a download. It's called planning ahead. I dislike DVD's and CD's for other reasons:

      1) I find them to be archaic. Music CD's hold 75 minutes of music. They get repetitive quickly and I'd have to bring a bunch of them with me everywhere I go. The whole "Album" thing is so outdated and more of a "tradition" than a necessity these days. Instead I prefer to just put

  • by DragonTHC (208439) <Dragon&gamerslastwill,com> on Saturday June 06, 2009 @10:11AM (#28233179) Homepage Journal

    I have been screaming this line for years and years.

    It would appear, I'm a fucking visionary.

    Why do they put up so many barriers to buying their content?

    Make it cheaper, make it easier to find and access. If I could buy your content online in HD format for what I think it's worth, then I would buy it instead of download it. You think it's worth more than it is. You strictly control access to it. You claim that your business is suffering. Adapt to the damn market.

    And finally, make up your damn mind. Is it a product or a license? You can't have it both ways. If it's a product, I can understand that. Since downloads are not stealing and aren't a diminishment of your product, we can download anything we want.

    If it's a license, then I have a right to download the mp3s for all the vinyl and CDs that I own. I also have a right to download any movies I own on vhs (which is a lot.)

    If it's both, we can still download anything we want.

    Copyright law was intended to prevent counterfeiting. Piracy isn't counterfeiting. Downloading isn't piracy. Downloading isn't counterfeiting.

    The statutory damages were intended to prevent corporate counterfeiting. They were never intended to be applied to music fans.

  • Piracy is not what is stopping the music industry embracing online distribution. How could it possibly be worse than the existing position? What they are frightened of is their lack of control and competition. Piracy is making their existing business untenable, but competing with it will cause them all kinds of problems that they are used to having control over. What's Wall Mart going to do when the label is actively competing with it? What are their mega stars going to do when the labels no longer control

  • by kheldan (1460303) on Saturday June 06, 2009 @01:25PM (#28234799) Journal
    I've recited the mantra a million times: You can't stop the signal, Mal!

Algol-60 surely must be regarded as the most important programming language yet developed. -- T. Cheatham

Working...