Closing torrent trackers
---Mayamenstate
What is the difference between people who have bought a license of the content, for example, a movie, and downloaded it on a torrent tracker, making available, so for download to millions of people, from the broadcasters who have bought exactly the same license the film and showed it on television to millions of people?
Really do not understand? License type different kakbe and value, respectively,... what, You really think that TV companies for RUB 500 DVD disc bought in the air?)
UNATCO
most annoying when you buy a license.. is that it is more than bugs in the Repack...
since when crackers remove bugs in games? OO
school savvy peck suggests that is not expensive In 6 years the increase in the price of bread was about 60%. Just because there is a possibility to cheat mad the interest of profit, it produces nothing. Swells the money supply faster than increases in production, per unit of commodity money is worth less and less, the commodity becomes more expensive. Wage growth is traditionally"nousevat, and mainly in those industries where real thing produce. There is not only Gabe's companions, mainly the banking system kozlit people, but who put the hand, not only hand. In some places the increase is less noticeable due to our narrow-eyed brothers that can slyapat a piece of metal from so shitty komplektuhi how paid. Due to this, creating the appearance of stability. Only the appearance, the overall quality falls rapid Jack)))
SteveG8
I am the pirate. I don't have your product. I don't want to buy it because not sure of the quality/there is no money to buy - that is, I download it.
Confusing, you're not a pirate. You're just a resident that found free and free took the product. From the point of view of common sense you clean and not a criminal. From the perspective of the flawed attempts of greedy capitalism, the tentacles of which climb in the Internet environment, you are certainly a criminal, but depends on the state (there are laws about it or not). Common sense is not dependent on the laws of the States of the world, and therefore always was and will be more important. Actually, that's what I use in the discussion.. Yes =]
It's funny, when the sovereign people speak about pirates, as if this is a major problem and very serious ) Even funnier to see the term pirate, which applies to all swing without the consent of certain holders of rights. That is, there is a banal ignorance, and the media is visible. No matter how the story on the Russian news about the topic of piracy, so immediately see ignorance. Leading convey the idea to the viewer, assuming the viewer cattle that gobble any nonsense. It's like in the movies that look up mathematics, physics, etc.) Some of the scenes that are perceived normal for most of the population, for the professionals just cut the ears or an eyesore, as they say. They see all the lameness of the plot or scene. So here! Someone in the topic about the download who for a long time sitting on the trackers, he immediately sees all the ignorance on the part of those who relishes news of another win over the pirates =]
About the theft - it has been said. It is not. There is simply no point. On the Internet there is no such thing as to steal = to assign someone else, with the loss of stolen from the author. The author of nothing is lost, and technically nothing disappears - it is copied many times. Attempt to make a profit for every copy of this is greed, hate. Want to make money out of thin air.
requiemmm
Bought reserve including the land of Rus. Local, not necessarily even Russian, the rich uncle buying up thousands of hectares and.. do nothing with them. And don't give anybody anything to do there. Normally, right? One of the problems of Russia, which we need to talk, especially in the Russian media.. but not saying...
The decision on life blocking popular torrent tracker , which the court ruled on the claim of publishing house "Eksmo" on 9 November (at the beginning of December, the court issued a second decision about the eternal lock on the combined claim of "Eksmo" and the Russian subsidiary of Warner Music Russia JSC "SBA Production". — RBC).
PFF,just someone else got so hot from uplyvshy profit, and from the fact that somewhere someone downloaded their book without their permission.
Mayamenstate
I don't care how much these movie studios, they sell their content to broadcasters. They violate my individual rights
burn on. the Studio made the film - it's her property. that it wants, then it does. you still have to ask: who is selling and who is not))
Just when I watched this movie on TV, why do I need to buy him a CD?
you make someone to buy it?
And I can't, again show.
You again someone makes?
PS and do you think only one way. Now imagine yourself the author of the film. Did you take it off, it's your property. You can dispose of it as your heart desires. You can even give it as a gift. But, you naturally want to get as many bapok. What do you do first? Sell it to the documentary in cinemas. Then, after about half a year (normally not earlier, to lure people into a movie) you release it on disks. Sell CDs. Then, even a year or two, you sell it to television. In the end, you sold three times. And nobody's rights are violated you don't, because it's your movie and sell it as you want.
And now look the part of the viewer. In the first case, the viewer can pay aftoru through movie tickets. In the second the viewer pays the author by buying the disc. And in the third embodiment, the viewer pays-per-view channel, or purchase products that shown in the advertisement (in this case the money goes in the following chain: the audience - the advertiser(e.g. Coca-Cola) - TV company - film Studio). In any case, the viewer pays the owner of the film is always that when going to the movies, if you purchase a disk that when watching on TV. How to pay - the viewer is free to decide for himself. He does not pay only in one case - when downloading a torrent. Here it differs from piracy of shows on TV.
Mayamenstate
The only sane man among a pack of scalelet.
Why do you vinrar cracked, dear, use 7zip.
Mayamenstate
The information for each movie on the disc it says that You bought it for personal use and do not have the right to publicly display
This rule is a direct violation of my rights to freedom of information exchange and donation. Briefly and clearly ))
I know the topic of the so-called terms, for example, when we talk about programs. Any author may prescribe any conditions and in our world it is customary (unfortunately) that if you do not agree, you can not do anything but to abandon the product. That moment is wrong. In my opinion, the terms cannot be arbitrary, they must obey to common sense and to consider our rights, especially the right to freedom of information exchange. Especially if for the goods paid to the author, then let it rest: what I do with the product, which has now become mine, it's my business. I'll show everyone I'll make copies and hand out for free, I want to - will not do. The ban on such actions are a violation of my rights. Rights that are not spelled out in the laws of the States of the world, no, this is a universal law, deliberate and reasoned common sense and justice.
As you can see, in his reasoning, I assume not from written laws in the world. You can write anything, and sometimes it's very useful to find out the reasons for creating new laws and amendments to old all sorts of deputies. I'm sure if you can find a lot of things curious =]
I don't care how much these movie studios, they sell their content to broadcasters. They violate my individual rights for the purchase of a license disk with this film.
So you're on the side of common sense and fairness? And it is not entirely clear )
Just when I watched this movie on TV, why do I need to buy him a CD?
Independence from the TV. Elementary ) So you can watch it again or show someone at any moment. And Yes: it is not their business (copyrighters), who you movie show.
Of course, you can't. Did pay the road - people stopped them go. Same thing here - people simply won't buy all this.
Well, something like that. If you have the opportunity not to pay, and will not. People just pretend: someone that is more profitable! That is: we have two routes, one shorter and pay, the other long and free. Then everyone counts, how exactly will you save, if you drive on the free road. Gasoline and time are deciding factors. That is, the fare makes no sense to put too great: the charge is higher, the less people will use this road. The fee should be within the bounds of common sense. Elementary =]
meagarry
think only in one direction. Now imagine yourself the author of the film. Did you take it off...
For some reason I thought that the suggestion to imagine yourself not just the author of the film, and all copyright with the typical thinking kopiaste )) to the profit, pirates and TP. If I imagine myself as the author of the film, but will not represent a typical all copyright (important), then my opinion will not change: who bought the product that makes the product he wants, except for the sale, so how to make money on someone else's work is the true piracy, fraud, lies, and injustice.
As a principled idealist and truth-seeker, I can't accept such a business..) That is, I'm against pirates, but only the real, not mythical, when pirates call everyone who shakes free. We are not pirates, we are users that use the inviolable right to free exchange of information.
How to pay - the viewer is free to decide for himself. He does not pay only in one case - when downloading a torrent. Here it differs from piracy of shows on TV.
Like I said, it's not piracy. Piracy is called only the ignorant that do not understand the subject matter. Pirate loot brews on someone else's work, but I shake free. The difference would be large )
A. Soldier of Light
who bought the product that makes the product he wants, except for the sale, so how to make money on someone else's work is the true piracy, fraud, lies, and injustice.
Are you familiar with the concept of intellectual property? Now, buying your product, you buy the wrapper (disk, view a movie, a set of game files) with a certain content - but you're not buying the content. Because the content is just the intellectual property of the author. Therefore you may not copy, distribute, and so that you do not belong. And the world without the protection of intellectual property rights is doomed. I hope you understand why...
Pirate loot brews on someone else's work, but I shake free. The difference would be large )
we must live according to the law, and not on concepts. for the law of one, but the concepts are different.
meagarry
The CAPITALIST world without the protection of intellectual property rights is doomed.
meagarry
As you rightly said, the concept of capitalism. I am not assuming someone else's property, don't give her your own and even resell ) Therefore, int.the property is not disturbed. Screening of another person generally in no way should worry anyone, I bought the product, it just do not his damn business.
And the world without the protection of intellectual property rights is doomed. I hope you understand why...
No, don't get it. Justify =]
we must live by law, not by the rules
1. Live the way you want - your way is your way, you have the right choice.
2. The term to live by the rules for some reason, tightly associated with the criminal world, so too wide.
3. Morality, common sense and justice has been and will always be above and over all laws, written by man.
Swells the money supply faster than increases in production, per unit of commodity money is worth less and less, the commodity becomes more expensive. Wage growth is traditionally"nousevat, and mainly in those industries where real thing produce.
as for me in isolation the price of bread remains roughly correlate to certain purchasing power. of course there are some crisis processes before the balance is restored. here's an example I pitch remember that the bread was worth about 7 rubles and my parents were hardly more than 30K saving after monetary reform. then bread cost 10-12 rubles cash peck weight has already exceeded this cost and further more if conductive peck bread costs about 30 rubles and the money is not going to say much but the fact that the purchasing power on this product has increased several times over roughly 20 years.
the same process applies to all goods. the only difference is that the commodities prices are more frozen and therefore grow's slowly relative to other goods.
and here is a little different. neuspevaju the poor pitch of the population lagging behind the more affluent one exponential. thus there is a social russlana actually more expensive there and the quality of life by and large not life itself. then there is an ordinary inflation process. in fact, this happens all over the world.
regarding the right to free exchange of information, it is everywhere the idea is broken. and there was never a free exchange of information. for example, always had some sort of classified information, etc
and actually regarding the development of the legal framework and its development here the question is very complicated. I even your school pekalongan can't cover the horizons of this issue.
if we talk about the movie. the movie can be copied from one media to another and convert from one format to another for personal use.
and here arises what is personal use. literally personal use is a kind of my exclusive right assigned to my personality. everything is simple and clear. but let's say I bought my Sony baby cartoon. how to be here? personal use quietly stretched on the amount of family use because family, by definition, Russia is the couple like a microscopic budget structures there are in the family communism everything is shared. those I can watch wife and child. you can then stretch in two branches in the direction of relatives and friends.
it seems there is nothing so special if I have for example DVD movie and I another looked. and if five? ten?. if I have to face beech 3000 friends and I decided to show this movie. it's still quite the level of certain people
and finally I put my purchased movie potentially unlimited number of people, those there for 3миллиардов for example on the right for my personal use. the fact turns out like this. someone has invested a certain amount of money. sold it to the individual at a price of a million times less let one person on the planet and in fact everything. it turns out the need for following directions. not to make the movie more expensive than its actual price for a single lucksinger there are let's say 1000. for $ 1000 I sales the webcam can't buy. to deal with the content protection system on some technical level, and whether a legal. and this Kincade natural there are their rights that require protection such as the fact that the protection of wages.
I think it is common sense if I just worked a shift, I expect there at the end of month salary and there I suppose it did not pay and in fact I will need the same three solutions even often the two. either do not work or require some kind of legal justice.
where is the boundary of common sense?
so the question is repetitively.
MunchkiN 616
for example, always had some sort of classified information, etc
Yes, it was, is and will be, unfortunately. Can't understand how the authorities, especially the people's power (so to speak) can keep secrets from their own people? The possibility to classify information allows you to wreak havoc with the authorities or the security services of the state. Especially hate when you find something interesting (Moon, Mars.. the corruption in the secret service or the military) and kept secret from the people. It is wrong. It is also wrong to punish someone who got access to such info and leaked it to the media, that is told to all. The truth should not be punished.
if I worked a shift, I expect there at the end of month salary and there I suppose it did not pay and in fact I will need the same three solutions even often the two. either do not work or require some kind of legal justice.
where is the boundary of common sense?
Well obviously, you did the work for the month not free, but for the money that you guarantee. And where will they get the money - not your problem, their problem 8) on the other hand, the Internet is the reality: you made a copy of the movie in two clicks, it's a lot of work? No. You have to pay? Two clicks and a minute of waiting? )) That's it. The Internet is a fundamentally different situation.
About the show kintz 3 billion people I will say this: the online reality undermines the foundations of capitalism and monetary relations. For to support the principles of capitalism on the Internet, it is necessary to violate the rights of users to freedom of information exchange, there is no compromise =] on the Internet he is )
To meet kopirastov rights and the rights of users, alas, have basically give up on capitalism, and the mechanisms that work in the real world. They are unable to work properly in a virtual environment, I just can't and point. Need completely new mechanisms, but they need to develop. But it's much easier to bribe MPs stupid (ignorant that the Internet is not Peljesac), to force them to make new laws or amendments, rather than to seek new solutions for the virtual environment...
A. Soldier of Light
money as guaranteed guaranteed and in case of all copyright ownership. not guaranteed, only the super success and super profit.
there are investor - he seeks to make a profit. profit = same + addition. and then you can talk about the rights of the investor.
and regarding the freedom of information
there are actually all simple and dull. almost every person takes care of and protects the scope of their benefits. in this case, the formed sphere of uncompensated consumption of media content. if people were not biased and is not associated with this area, he probably did not consider this space from the standpoint of personal gain and would fit with a certain egalitarian logic of the system.
and then for the actual freedom of information, I mean that there shouldn't be censorship and what is forbidden knowledge and propaganda. those you will find recipes of drugs weapons some exercises completely unlimited and legal. only when the satisfaction of that moment we can talk about the satisfaction of essentially public information and therefore go to the level above the sphere of consumption of fans of a freebie.
and actually there are works where the actual fact less work than working at the bottom of the production system of the enterprise and the salary of the first with less actual work per hour is much higher. so it's absolutely not any indicator of ease of manufacture something airy.
A. Soldier of Light
As you rightly said, the concept of capitalism
All developed countries have - capitalism. Our country is also capitalist, well at least close to that and is committed. At this stage of development of society is the most progressive system, so don't know where you found the contradiction?
Screening of another person generally in no way should worry anyone, I bought the product, it just do not his damn business.
Can show, to put on the torrent, copy it, go live - no. Well, there is everything on the disk even say you could do with film. There is even to argue about.
No, don't get it. Justify =]
OK. in a nutshell. If the rough, the conditions of the world economy in order to buy something, you have something to sell (goods, work, services, labor, knowledge). An intellectual work is intellectual property. Thus, if you do not protect intellectual property rights(i.e., to devalue it), the value of intellectual work will become equal to 0. Goodbye development and creation of technology.
Morality, common sense and justice has been and will always be above and over all laws, written by man.
Everyone has their own morality, their common sense and their own justice. Someone thinks he's doing the sensible, while driving drunk. And someone thinks it's fair to kill her abuser... And someone who absolutely does not consider it immoral to run around naked... so little more examples. And if things start to not care about the laws and to live according to your morality, common sense and justice, there will be chaos. So it's you by...
The main buyers of content are the users of the trackers. Proof — Western European scientists.
What is the reason?
NTV. TNT, ORT, Russia(as their feces come any), Dontsova, agasyan or whatever it is, makes films colocalization quality, brands our, pardon the insult to the musicians, and musicians - all people who have a profit with the hits, listening, sales, your good.
I'm not gonna Lie I read only comenteaza but what are you doing I just answer .
While we in Russia people power will be considered as Now an Example of a MOE is first detained wages now in General, all under the same Brush fire .
This is an indication that the Authorities do not care you're here to work for peanuts and shut up and it will Fire is that Capitalism is not like It is rather Some kind of Perverted Communism or feudalism soon and That's when We have the Power , the Employer will pay and treat Their Citizens Employees on a Human then it Would not make Sense to Close the Trackers as Eliminated the wild gap between the Rich and the Poor what no one in authority is not Among Users does not talk about the problem in This Context for the Russian game is ottolina in order to Rest for a couple hours Came with 2 jobs and no extra money to Buy this game the Most for 2 Grand !
Some here are talking about free exchange of information and common sense, and I also wanted to speak on this subject. If all allow, as here expressed, the free flow of information (i.e., unchecked and with impunity, sound clips), people will stop buying content. Why buy when you can download for free? Did not seem contrary to common sense. If no one will buy the content, then content producers will lose profits and make it stop (here I mean quality time-consuming content, music, movies, AAA games and not stream minecraft and fritupleynaya indigone). Why make work for which you don't get paid? This is in my opinion the same is not contrary to common sense (if wrong, correct, justify). There will be no games, no movies, no music, no Sanikidze for 4K. But it will be a free exchange. Only share will be nothing. Well, in addition to news, blogs and kopipastny duck photos from Facebook.
However, there is another side to the coin. What about those who earn little and cannot afford to buy paid content? For these people the torrents needed. But if people want to obtain content for free, he must face some difficulties (bugs, poor quality ekranki, late release of crack), which would encourage him to purchase a license of the content. Who doesn't want to bother with the solution of these difficulties - buys who can't buy the shakes and tolerate some inconvenience. It is in my opinion the best model of content distribution.