POPCORN TIME > Torrents made simple as Netflix?! (2 Viewers)

[Cliff Clavin]

Not sure about people getting sued, but my ISP threatened to cancel my service back in Nov and it was enough for me to stop using bitorrent.

Dear Comcast High-Speed Internet Subscriber:


Comcast has received a notification by a copyright owner, or its authorized agent, reporting an alleged infringement of one or more copyrighted works made on or over Comcast's High-Speed Internet service (the 'Service'). The copyright owner has identified the Internet Protocol ('IP') address associated with your Service account at the time as the source of the infringing works. The works identified by the copyright owner in its notification are listed below. Comcast reminds you that use of the Service (or any part of the Service) in any manner that constitutes an infringement of any copyrighted work is a violation of Comcast's Acceptable Use Policy and may result in the suspension or termination of your Service account.

Close your account and take your business somewhere else

 

[tonydead]

Just curious

When is it not stealing. I assume when it comes out on netflix or cable and you subscribe to those. Or when you own the DVD

So, lets say I buy the Frozen DVD (which I have), but dont have it on me and my kids want to watch it. Is it stealing if I watch it on the site previously mentioned (not torrent, web based)

So many gray areas in the world of digital stuff it's ridiculous.

I think the hard core types will say it's always illegal to download no matter what.

There should just be a torrent "library" (with porn, tv, comic books, software and everything) and I'll pay a subscription or something

There were for free, but, most of the large private sites (those that required a password or an invitation code) have been run off by the man. Most of the ones in existence now are public and the MPAA and RIAA can log on and watch which IP addresses are downloading or sharing their movies or music. They then notify the IP service provider which in turn is obligated to send you a letter that they've received notice that you may be downloading illegal content. The work around is subscribing to a VPN for a monthly fee (less than $10)that hides your IP from them. Or you can move behind the curtain to newsgroups.

Not sure about people getting sued, but my ISP threatened to cancel my service back in Nov and it was enough for me to stop using bitorrent.

Dear Comcast High-Speed Internet Subscriber:


Comcast has received a notification by a copyright owner, or its authorized agent, reporting an alleged infringement of one or more copyrighted works made on or over Comcast's High-Speed Internet service (the 'Service'). The copyright owner has identified the Internet Protocol ('IP') address associated with your Service account at the time as the source of the infringing works. The works identified by the copyright owner in its notification are listed below. Comcast reminds you that use of the Service (or any part of the Service) in any manner that constitutes an infringement of any copyrighted work is a violation of Comcast's Acceptable Use Policy and may result in the suspension or termination of your Service account.

But, you don't have to worry about a letter or two from you IP service, because they work for you and want your money. It's just signaling a time to move to an alternative.

 

[Sinn Fein]

how does that site not get shut down?

looks like it is in asia - If they can't find a plane they were tracking, they probably can't find some hole-in-the-wall place streaming pirated movies/tv shows.

 

[NewlyRetired]

As others have mentioned peerblock is pretty much useless.

If you want privacy for any reason, get a VPN, and don't use the free ones as they basically suck.

The VPN I have been using costs a little over $3 per month and has been flawless. It works on both my desktop and my ipad. I have been using it for over a year now.

who do you use, what does it do for you, and how do you know it has been flawless?

It is very simple to test your vpn to make sure your IP is correctly hidden.

Explain this to me as if I am shuke, plz.

http://whatismyipaddress.com/

 

[Dentist]

Who still torrents?

At this stage in the torrenting game, you are just asking to be sued if you are still torrenting without hiding behind a VPN. I think its careless and the risk is not worth the reward imo, when you have many other options available out there at minimal incremental cost (like a VPN, newsgroups, or the legal streaming options).

mquinnjr, Wingnut, et al - I would highly advise you look into using newsgroups instead or at least a VPN (if you haven't already). They will cost you $100/yr or less, but will be well worth it for the lack of worry, faster speeds (for newsgroups) and much lower downside risk.

Do people actually get sued still? From what I've read, that mass suits are getting thrown out and becoming harder and harder to file.

Has anyone in Canada ever been sued for torrents/illegal downloads?

Not sure if anyone has been sued yet. But I believe Voltage has won a court order to force Teksavvy to reveal the IP addresses of some of its users, presumably to go after individuals who torrented their movies during a specified time period (largely Hurt Locker). From what I understand, however, in that same court order, the Courts ruled that any "demand letters" (essentially lawsuit letters) by Voltage would have to be vetted by the Courts before they can be sent to the individual users. Also, I believe there is a cap on damages on these kinds of lawsuits of $5,000/IP or something like that. IMO, both the "vetting" step and the $5K cap are major inhibitors to IP trolls and major studios to pursue significant lawsuits in Canda. Nonetheless, I still would prefer to stay completely clean, if I have options to do it for less than $100/year.

Note that all of this is information just my gleaning from news articles and internet forums and I don't have any first hand knowledge of this, nor have I read any of the judgements.

That is the same stuff I've heard of. Nothing to worry about IMO. For the one in a million chance to get hit with a $5K fine, I'll risk it.

ETA: Does unblock-us work as a VPN for torrents?

I don't know. but honestly why bother with torrents? Newsgroups are encrypted, safer, and much much faster than torrents while giving you access to pretty much the same content. Also, you are only downloading and not uploading with newsgroups, so if the legal landscape changes dramatically, your potential liabilities are still very minimal (not sure what the statute of limitations are for this kind of infringement). Well worth it for $100/yr.

i've never heard of these newsgroups, what are they?

 

[hxperson]

Who still torrents?

At this stage in the torrenting game, you are just asking to be sued if you are still torrenting without hiding behind a VPN. I think its careless and the risk is not worth the reward imo, when you have many other options available out there at minimal incremental cost (like a VPN, newsgroups, or the legal streaming options).

mquinnjr, Wingnut, et al - I would highly advise you look into using newsgroups instead or at least a VPN (if you haven't already). They will cost you $100/yr or less, but will be well worth it for the lack of worry, faster speeds (for newsgroups) and much lower downside risk.

Do people actually get sued still? From what I've read, that mass suits are getting thrown out and becoming harder and harder to file.

Has anyone in Canada ever been sued for torrents/illegal downloads?

Not sure if anyone has been sued yet. But I believe Voltage has won a court order to force Teksavvy to reveal the IP addresses of some of its users, presumably to go after individuals who torrented their movies during a specified time period (largely Hurt Locker). From what I understand, however, in that same court order, the Courts ruled that any "demand letters" (essentially lawsuit letters) by Voltage would have to be vetted by the Courts before they can be sent to the individual users. Also, I believe there is a cap on damages on these kinds of lawsuits of $5,000/IP or something like that. IMO, both the "vetting" step and the $5K cap are major inhibitors to IP trolls and major studios to pursue significant lawsuits in Canda. Nonetheless, I still would prefer to stay completely clean, if I have options to do it for less than $100/year.

Note that all of this is information just my gleaning from news articles and internet forums and I don't have any first hand knowledge of this, nor have I read any of the judgements.

That is the same stuff I've heard of. Nothing to worry about IMO. For the one in a million chance to get hit with a $5K fine, I'll risk it.

ETA: Does unblock-us work as a VPN for torrents?

I don't know. but honestly why bother with torrents? Newsgroups are encrypted, safer, and much much faster than torrents while giving you access to pretty much the same content. Also, you are only downloading and not uploading with newsgroups, so if the legal landscape changes dramatically, your potential liabilities are still very minimal (not sure what the statute of limitations are for this kind of infringement). Well worth it for $100/yr.

Torrents are so quick and easy that I've never bothered to look for an alternative.

I really only use them for TV; I prefer to go rent a Blu-Ray for the once a month I watch a movie. Never does it take more than 5 minutes for an episode and I've never heard of a lawsuit for a tv shows.

I hear you, and tend to agree. But I just feel that 0 risk is >>>>>>>>a little bit of risk. To get that assurance for $100/year - its practically free.

I don't have enough faith in the resolve of our HS internet providers, the continued apathy of the content producers, and the current pro-consumer stance of our governments, to believe that the status quo in piracy litigation is a long term state.

 

[Dentist]

Not sure about people getting sued, but my ISP threatened to cancel my service back in Nov and it was enough for me to stop using bitorrent.

Dear Comcast High-Speed Internet Subscriber:


Comcast has received a notification by a copyright owner, or its authorized agent, reporting an alleged infringement of one or more copyrighted works made on or over Comcast's High-Speed Internet service (the 'Service'). The copyright owner has identified the Internet Protocol ('IP') address associated with your Service account at the time as the source of the infringing works. The works identified by the copyright owner in its notification are listed below. Comcast reminds you that use of the Service (or any part of the Service) in any manner that constitutes an infringement of any copyrighted work is a violation of Comcast's Acceptable Use Policy and may result in the suspension or termination of your Service account.

I got 2-3 of those letters from comcast about 3-4 years ago when I was making some torrenting errors downloading Wii games.

Here's what I learned:

1) they are not going to cancel your service

2) they don't care about what you download, just don't upload or seed... if you D/L and run, they don't care so much

Don't download "overnight" or when you aren't available to keep somewhat of an eye on it.

If you download something, make sure to stop the torrent as quickly as you can after it finishes.

Try to avoid the absolute "hottest" content... the DVD that just came out this week.. the TV show from last night.. the movie that is still in the theater..

That's what they are watching and keeping track of.

You'll never get a letter from you ISP if you go to download WIzard of Oz or Die Hard or Back to the Future because they don't care about the money making potential of those products anymore.

Just as you'll never get a letter for downloading a book, magazine, comic book, etc. because that industry doesn't get up in arms like the music, tv, or movie industry does.

 

[tonydead]

i've never heard of these newsgroups, what are they?

start by googling 'lifehacker' and also include one or some of the following: vpn, newsgroup, usenet

If you want a teaser of what's available go to binsearch dot com and search for a movie or something

 

[NewlyRetired]

Who still torrents?

At this stage in the torrenting game, you are just asking to be sued if you are still torrenting without hiding behind a VPN. I think its careless and the risk is not worth the reward imo, when you have many other options available out there at minimal incremental cost (like a VPN, newsgroups, or the legal streaming options).

mquinnjr, Wingnut, et al - I would highly advise you look into using newsgroups instead or at least a VPN (if you haven't already). They will cost you $100/yr or less, but will be well worth it for the lack of worry, faster speeds (for newsgroups) and much lower downside risk.

Do people actually get sued still? From what I've read, that mass suits are getting thrown out and becoming harder and harder to file.

Has anyone in Canada ever been sued for torrents/illegal downloads?

Not sure if anyone has been sued yet. But I believe Voltage has won a court order to force Teksavvy to reveal the IP addresses of some of its users, presumably to go after individuals who torrented their movies during a specified time period (largely Hurt Locker). From what I understand, however, in that same court order, the Courts ruled that any "demand letters" (essentially lawsuit letters) by Voltage would have to be vetted by the Courts before they can be sent to the individual users. Also, I believe there is a cap on damages on these kinds of lawsuits of $5,000/IP or something like that. IMO, both the "vetting" step and the $5K cap are major inhibitors to IP trolls and major studios to pursue significant lawsuits in Canda. Nonetheless, I still would prefer to stay completely clean, if I have options to do it for less than $100/year. Note that all of this is information just my gleaning from news articles and internet forums and I don't have any first hand knowledge of this, nor have I read any of the judgements.

That is the same stuff I've heard of. Nothing to worry about IMO. For the one in a million chance to get hit with a $5K fine, I'll risk it.

ETA: Does unblock-us work as a VPN for torrents?

I don't know. but honestly why bother with torrents? Newsgroups are encrypted, safer, and much much faster than torrents while giving you access to pretty much the same content. Also, you are only downloading and not uploading with newsgroups, so if the legal landscape changes dramatically, your potential liabilities are still very minimal (not sure what the statute of limitations are for this kind of infringement). Well worth it for $100/yr.

Torrents are so quick and easy that I've never bothered to look for an alternative.

I really only use them for TV; I prefer to go rent a Blu-Ray for the once a month I watch a movie. Never does it take more than 5 minutes for an episode and I've never heard of a lawsuit for a tv shows.

I hear you, and tend to agree. But I just feel that 0 risk is >>>>>>>>a little bit of risk. To get that assurance for $100/year - its practically free.I don't have enough faith in the resolve of our HS internet providers, the continued apathy of the content producers, and the current pro-consumer stance of our governments, to believe that the status quo in piracy litigation is a long term state.

I agree with your last paragraph 100%. Demonoid got taken down. If KAT and TBP go down as well, that would put a large dent in torrenting.

But for your first paragraph I also think I have zero risk with a good vpn and that only costs $40 per year.

How is the download speed of the Newsgroups in relation to a good torrent download?

 

[AcerFC]

there is so much in this thread I do not understand

 

[Sinn Fein]

there is so much in this thread I do not understand

 

[tonydead]

Not sure about people getting sued, but my ISP threatened to cancel my service back in Nov and it was enough for me to stop using bitorrent.

Dear Comcast High-Speed Internet Subscriber:


Comcast has received a notification by a copyright owner, or its authorized agent, reporting an alleged infringement of one or more copyrighted works made on or over Comcast's High-Speed Internet service (the 'Service'). The copyright owner has identified the Internet Protocol ('IP') address associated with your Service account at the time as the source of the infringing works. The works identified by the copyright owner in its notification are listed below. Comcast reminds you that use of the Service (or any part of the Service) in any manner that constitutes an infringement of any copyrighted work is a violation of Comcast's Acceptable Use Policy and may result in the suspension or termination of your Service account.

I got 2-3 of those letters from comcast about 3-4 years ago when I was making some torrenting errors downloading Wii games.

Here's what I learned:

1) they are not going to cancel your service

2) they don't care about what you download, just don't upload or seed... if you D/L and run, they don't care so much

Don't download "overnight" or when you aren't available to keep somewhat of an eye on it.

If you download something, make sure to stop the torrent as quickly as you can after it finishes.

Try to avoid the absolute "hottest" content... the DVD that just came out this week.. the TV show from last night.. the movie that is still in the theater..

That's what they are watching and keeping track of.

You'll never get a letter from you ISP if you go to download WIzard of Oz or Die Hard or Back to the Future because they don't care about the money making potential of those products anymore.

Just as you'll never get a letter for downloading a book, magazine, comic book, etc. because that industry doesn't get up in arms like the music, tv, or movie industry does.

You can also set your torrent client to it's slowest upload speed. I haven't found one that will upload zero, but, utorrent can be set so slow that it's almost nothing by the time you have your file. They MPAA and RIAA are just doing the same thing you are in order to see your IP address, so, they only see your IP if you upload to them.

 

[hxperson]

Who still torrents?

At this stage in the torrenting game, you are just asking to be sued if you are still torrenting without hiding behind a VPN. I think its careless and the risk is not worth the reward imo, when you have many other options available out there at minimal incremental cost (like a VPN, newsgroups, or the legal streaming options).

mquinnjr, Wingnut, et al - I would highly advise you look into using newsgroups instead or at least a VPN (if you haven't already). They will cost you $100/yr or less, but will be well worth it for the lack of worry, faster speeds (for newsgroups) and much lower downside risk.

Do people actually get sued still? From what I've read, that mass suits are getting thrown out and becoming harder and harder to file.

Has anyone in Canada ever been sued for torrents/illegal downloads?

Not sure if anyone has been sued yet. But I believe Voltage has won a court order to force Teksavvy to reveal the IP addresses of some of its users, presumably to go after individuals who torrented their movies during a specified time period (largely Hurt Locker). From what I understand, however, in that same court order, the Courts ruled that any "demand letters" (essentially lawsuit letters) by Voltage would have to be vetted by the Courts before they can be sent to the individual users. Also, I believe there is a cap on damages on these kinds of lawsuits of $5,000/IP or something like that. IMO, both the "vetting" step and the $5K cap are major inhibitors to IP trolls and major studios to pursue significant lawsuits in Canda. Nonetheless, I still would prefer to stay completely clean, if I have options to do it for less than $100/year. Note that all of this is information just my gleaning from news articles and internet forums and I don't have any first hand knowledge of this, nor have I read any of the judgements.

That is the same stuff I've heard of. Nothing to worry about IMO. For the one in a million chance to get hit with a $5K fine, I'll risk it.

ETA: Does unblock-us work as a VPN for torrents?

I don't know. but honestly why bother with torrents? Newsgroups are encrypted, safer, and much much faster than torrents while giving you access to pretty much the same content. Also, you are only downloading and not uploading with newsgroups, so if the legal landscape changes dramatically, your potential liabilities are still very minimal (not sure what the statute of limitations are for this kind of infringement). Well worth it for $100/yr.

Torrents are so quick and easy that I've never bothered to look for an alternative.

I really only use them for TV; I prefer to go rent a Blu-Ray for the once a month I watch a movie. Never does it take more than 5 minutes for an episode and I've never heard of a lawsuit for a tv shows.

I hear you, and tend to agree. But I just feel that 0 risk is >>>>>>>>a little bit of risk. To get that assurance for $100/year - its practically free.I don't have enough faith in the resolve of our HS internet providers, the continued apathy of the content producers, and the current pro-consumer stance of our governments, to believe that the status quo in piracy litigation is a long term state.

I agree with your last paragraph 100%. Demonoid got taken down. If KAT and TBP go down as well, that would put a large dent in torrenting.

But for your first paragraph I also think I have zero risk with a good vpn and that only costs $40 per year.

How is the download speed of the Newsgroups in relation to a good torrent download?

Newsgroups are much faster for downloads than torrents, which is why I prefer them. The downside is that there is significantly less content on Usenet. However, I have been able to find everything that I want on it. I do agree that VPN's are pretty riskless as well (as long as your VPN is located outside of North America), and referenced that in an earlier post. What I like about Newsgroups the best is that the providers (i.e. Giganews) don't record or log any of your activities other than the total data transfer, and even if they did have some kind of log, all the files are heavily encrypted and you are only downloading and not uploading. Not sure you get the same protection with a VPN.

 

[NewlyRetired]

Newsgroups are much faster for downloads than torrents, which is why I prefer them. The downside is that there is significantly less content on Usenet. However, I have been able to find everything that I want on it. I do agree that VPN's are pretty riskless as well (as long as your VPN is located outside of North America), and referenced that in an earlier post. What I like about Newsgroups the best is that the providers (i.e. Giganews) don't record or log any of your activities other than the total data transfer, and even if they did have some kind of log, all the files are heavily encrypted and you are only downloading and not uploading. Not sure you get the same protection with a VPN.

thanks for the info!

For people shopping for a VPN, look for two items

1) no record keeping. This should be obvious but make sure any way

2) look for a kill switch feature*

*A kill switch is a feature that will detect if your VPN for any reason does down, and if it does, the software will immediately shut off your internet access on the computer it is running on. One of the big problems with the free VPN/s is that they go down a lot. Once they go down, your data just gets rerouted to another server and suddenly your hidden IP is now free and public. This is a problem if it happens in the middle of a download.

 

[Slapdash]

Popcorn Time: Aaaand It's gone.

 

[Slapdash]

Seems like we're forgetting the first rule of Usenet in here

 

[NewlyRetired]

Popcorn Time: Aaaand It's gone.

what happened to it?

The link in the first post still looks fine when I click on it.

 

[Slapdash]

Popcorn Time: Aaaand It's gone.

what happened to it?

The link in the first post still looks fine when I click on it.

Just read a post on TF indicating the link to download the tool has been taken down by Mega.

 

[NutterButter]

I use newsgroups for some stuff but for stuff like anything hbo, u have to get it right away before hbo asks them to remove it from their servers. In addition, newsgroups have a small subset of what torrents have; at least the stuff that's indexed.

As far as getting sued, I think the media companies worked at a deal with the isps to follow some 5 or 6 strike system where eventually you'd lose internet. Lawsuits were a money losing option

 

[[icon]]

how does that site not get shut down?

Because the US government's domain stops at our borders

 

[Slapdash]

how does that site not get shut down?

Because the US government's domain stops at our borders

In theory....

 

[Otis]

Just curious

When is it not stealing. I assume when it comes out on netflix or cable and you subscribe to those. Or when you own the DVD

So, lets say I buy the Frozen DVD (which I have), but dont have it on me and my kids want to watch it. Is it stealing if I watch it on the site previously mentioned (not torrent, web based)

Doesn't seem like stealing to me, whether it's legal or not.

If you've paid for it, seems like not stealing.

 

[Otis]

Just curious

When is it not stealing. I assume when it comes out on netflix or cable and you subscribe to those. Or when you own the DVD

So, lets say I buy the Frozen DVD (which I have), but dont have it on me and my kids want to watch it. Is it stealing if I watch it on the site previously mentioned (not torrent, web based)

So many gray areas in the world of digital stuff it's ridiculous.

Where's the grey area in illegally taking something you didn't pay for?

Those claiming it's a "cost of doing business" for the movie studios are right, but that doesn't seem to justify it anymore than Walmart having to absorb shrinkage losses from shoplifting as a cost of doing business.

 

[Wingnut]

mquinnjr, Wingnut, et al - I would highly advise you look into using newsgroups instead or at least a VPN (if you haven't already). They will cost you $100/yr or less, but will be well worth it for the lack of worry, faster speeds (for newsgroups) and much lower downside risk.

Thanks for the advice, but I don't worry, my speeds are fine, and I don't see any risk. If they were gonna come after me, I think they would have done it by now. Anyway I down download much these days, maybe a few movies per month. I'm a smart thief.

 

[Hawks64]

how does that site not get shut down?

Because the US government's domain stops at our borders

In theory....

They have a much further reach that that

 

[comfortably numb]

Just curious

When is it not stealing. I assume when it comes out on netflix or cable and you subscribe to those. Or when you own the DVD

So, lets say I buy the Frozen DVD (which I have), but dont have it on me and my kids want to watch it. Is it stealing if I watch it on the site previously mentioned (not torrent, web based)

Doesn't seem like stealing to me, whether it's legal or not.

If you've paid for it, seems like not stealing.

Of course it is.

 

[tonydead]

Technically it's not theft, it's copyright infringement. Courts have made that distinction so your stealing and shoplifting comparisons don't hold up. Although the movie and music companies still try to.

 

[sdp1226]

Not sure about people getting sued, but my ISP threatened to cancel my service back in Nov and it was enough for me to stop using bitorrent.

Dear Comcast High-Speed Internet Subscriber:


Comcast has received a notification by a copyright owner, or its authorized agent, reporting an alleged infringement of one or more copyrighted works made on or over Comcast's High-Speed Internet service (the 'Service'). The copyright owner has identified the Internet Protocol ('IP') address associated with your Service account at the time as the source of the infringing works. The works identified by the copyright owner in its notification are listed below. Comcast reminds you that use of the Service (or any part of the Service) in any manner that constitutes an infringement of any copyrighted work is a violation of Comcast's Acceptable Use Policy and may result in the suspension or termination of your Service account.

I got 2-3 of those letters from comcast about 3-4 years ago when I was making some torrenting errors downloading Wii games.

Here's what I learned:

1) they are not going to cancel your service

2) they don't care about what you download, just don't upload or seed... if you D/L and run, they don't care so much

Don't download "overnight" or when you aren't available to keep somewhat of an eye on it.

If you download something, make sure to stop the torrent as quickly as you can after it finishes.

Try to avoid the absolute "hottest" content... the DVD that just came out this week.. the TV show from last night.. the movie that is still in the theater..

That's what they are watching and keeping track of.

You'll never get a letter from you ISP if you go to download WIzard of Oz or Die Hard or Back to the Future because they don't care about the money making potential of those products anymore.

Just as you'll never get a letter for downloading a book, magazine, comic book, etc. because that industry doesn't get up in arms like the music, tv, or movie industry does.

Studios will take a random sample of IP addresses that were sharing a specific file during a specific time and send out thousands of subpoenas to the ISPs who then send a notice to the subscribers. In the case of the Voltage Pictures case, they sent upwards of 25,000 for people who were sharing The Hurt Locker. The studio's legal team only has IP addresses though and not any further personal details on the subscribers. Your ISP should protect your privacy and not release your details but it depends on how hard the studio is pushing. Many people folded and settled for a few thousand dollars but most cases that held strong ended up getting thrown out. This process is a PIA for the studios and it creates bad publicity for them when go after their fans. Think Ulrich vs. Napster. Major studios probably wont bother going after you so it's the smaller (p0rn) studios that will try to put together a case.

 

[Wingnut]

Technically it's not theft, it's copyright infringement. Courts have made that distinction so your stealing and shoplifting comparisons don't hold up. Although the movie and music companies still try to.

Well there you have it folks. In the eyes of the courts, its not theft. All those that have been claiming its stealing, please stop cluttering up this thread any further. Thanks in advance.

 

[Hilts]

Not trying to be all high and mighty. The movie business is the business I'm in.

"Everybody's doing it."

"People steal from me so I'm going to get mine."

"Those big movie studios won't miss a few bucks."

"I wouldn't have paid anything to watch it anyway so they didn't lose any money on me."

"Movie tickets, popcorn and soda prices are crazy high so it serves them right."

"If they don't want me to steal it, stop me."

"If they didn't pay actors and actresses so much money, prices would be reasonable and I wouldn't have to steal it."

Whichever justification you want to make is fine. A thief is a thief; it doesn't matter if it's a dollar or a million dollars. It's a matter of character.

I'm not going to criticize you for drawing your moral line in the sand wherever it is you draw it. If you feel this is wrong that's fine. It may be wrong but it is not theft. When you steal something, that means the previous owner no longer has the item(s). That's not what happens with pirating.

Please. What if from the comfort of your home you steal copies of the plans and schematics for the next F-30 fighter jet with cloaking capability and Warp Drive? Then you make and sell these jets to Israel, Great Britain and Japan. USA Defense Contractor Co. still owns the plans and has them physically on their HD, so you didn't "really" steal anything, right?

 

[Ned Ryerson]

Just curious

When is it not stealing. I assume when it comes out on netflix or cable and you subscribe to those. Or when you own the DVD

So, lets say I buy the Frozen DVD (which I have), but dont have it on me and my kids want to watch it. Is it stealing if I watch it on the site previously mentioned (not torrent, web based)

Technically or legally?

It isn't stealing per se, because you don't possess the copyrighted work when it is streamed.

That said, I don't think you are morally justified in streaming the content simply because you bought a DVD. When you buy a DVD you are purchasing a limited license to view the content in the format provided. Nothing more. Going and watching a known pirated work that is CLEARLY an infringing copy is not saved by the fact that you happen to own a DVD.

 

[Otis]

Technically it's not theft, it's copyright infringement. Courts have made that distinction so your stealing and shoplifting comparisons don't hold up. Although the movie and music companies still try to.

It's your conscience.

 

[[icon]]

Technically it's not theft, it's copyright infringement. Courts have made that distinction so your stealing and shoplifting comparisons don't hold up. Although the movie and music companies still try to.

It's your conscience.

OTIS GIVES THE GREENLIGHT!!!

 

[tonydead]

Technically it's not theft, it's copyright infringement. Courts have made that distinction so your stealing and shoplifting comparisons don't hold up. Although the movie and music companies still try to.

It's your conscience.

It is different than you were arguing though. I mean you aren't stealing plasma tvs from Walmart, you are using the Walmart logo on your boy band's new t-shirts that you are never going to make any money off of.

 

[Otis]

Technically it's not theft, it's copyright infringement. Courts have made that distinction so your stealing and shoplifting comparisons don't hold up. Although the movie and music companies still try to.

It's your conscience.

It is different than you were arguing though. I mean you aren't stealing plasma tvs from Walmart, you are using the Walmart logo on your boy band's new t-shirts that you are never going to make any money off of.

Not sure how it's different. Someone is making music or a movie and charging money for it. Either I pay them money for it, or I decide to take it without their permission and without paying money for it. Not quite sure I understand what's a grey area here.

 

[Ned Ryerson]

Technically it's not theft, it's copyright infringement. Courts have made that distinction so your stealing and shoplifting comparisons don't hold up. Although the movie and music companies still try to.

It's your conscience.

It is different than you were arguing though. I mean you aren't stealing plasma tvs from Walmart, you are using the Walmart logo on your boy band's new t-shirts that you are never going to make any money off of.

Ok, so if you are making the argument then justify it.

Do you think it is morally superior to torrent a movie as opposed to stealing a DVD from a store, solely because the movie physically resides on a tangible item? Of would you torrent rather than steal a DVD because there is less risk of getting caught?

 

[Ned Ryerson]

Technically it's not theft, it's copyright infringement. Courts have made that distinction so your stealing and shoplifting comparisons don't hold up. Although the movie and music companies still try to.

It's your conscience.

It is different than you were arguing though. I mean you aren't stealing plasma tvs from Walmart, you are using the Walmart logo on your boy band's new t-shirts that you are never going to make any money off of.

Not sure how it's different. Someone is making music or a movie and charging money for it. Either I pay them money for it, or I decide to take it without their permission and without paying money for it. Not quite sure I understand what's a grey area here.

IP Lawyers be representin'!!

 

[tonydead]

Technically it's not theft, it's copyright infringement. Courts have made that distinction so your stealing and shoplifting comparisons don't hold up. Although the movie and music companies still try to.

It's your conscience.

It is different than you were arguing though. I mean you aren't stealing plasma tvs from Walmart, you are using the Walmart logo on your boy band's new t-shirts that you are never going to make any money off of.

Not sure how it's different. Someone is making music or a movie and charging money for it. Either I pay them money for it, or I decide to take it without their permission and without paying money for it. Not quite sure I understand what's a grey area here.

Dowling v. United States, 1985.

 

[Sinn Fein]

Isn't there already a thread about a bazillion pages long about the morality of torrents?

You know from back when Joe used to own the place?

 

[NutterButter]

Technically it's not theft, it's copyright infringement. Courts have made that distinction so your stealing and shoplifting comparisons don't hold up. Although the movie and music companies still try to.

It's your conscience.

Stop stealing from your company. Get back to work.

 

[tonydead]

Technically it's not theft, it's copyright infringement. Courts have made that distinction so your stealing and shoplifting comparisons don't hold up. Although the movie and music companies still try to.

It's your conscience.

It is different than you were arguing though. I mean you aren't stealing plasma tvs from Walmart, you are using the Walmart logo on your boy band's new t-shirts that you are never going to make any money off of.

Ok, so if you are making the argument then justify it.

Do you think it is morally superior to torrent a movie as opposed to stealing a DVD from a store, solely because the movie physically resides on a tangible item? Of would you torrent rather than steal a DVD because there is less risk of getting caught?

I'm not making the argument, I'm just pointing out the flaw in his argument.

However, to your questions: I think by definition it is morally superior to both your points. People aren't victims of theft and people are rarely prosecuted for torrenting.

 

[Dentist]

Isn't there already a thread about a bazillion pages long about the morality of torrents?

You know from back when Joe used to own the place?

wait, joe sold?

 

[SHIZNITTTT]

What if I purchased a generic pair of shoes and drew Nike logo on them. Would that be stealing? Copy right infringement I guess? Who am I hurting?

 

[tonydead]

What if I purchased a generic pair of shoes and drew Nike logo on them. Would that be stealing? Copy right infringement I guess? Who am I hurting?

Actually I think logos are registered trade marks. Do you plan on opening up a shop online and selling these? If so, Nike might sue if you started cutting into their profits, otherwise neither of you are going to lose much sleep.

 

[Homer J Simpson]

Technically it's not theft, it's copyright infringement. Courts have made that distinction so your stealing and shoplifting comparisons don't hold up. Although the movie and music companies still try to.

It's your conscience.

My what?

 

[Otis]

Technically it's not theft, it's copyright infringement. Courts have made that distinction so your stealing and shoplifting comparisons don't hold up. Although the movie and music companies still try to.

It's your conscience.

It is different than you were arguing though. I mean you aren't stealing plasma tvs from Walmart, you are using the Walmart logo on your boy band's new t-shirts that you are never going to make any money off of.

Not sure how it's different. Someone is making music or a movie and charging money for it. Either I pay them money for it, or I decide to take it without their permission and without paying money for it. Not quite sure I understand what's a grey area here.

Dowling v. United States, 1985.

I'm gonna need a pin cite here.

 

[cstu]

I don't know. but honestly why bother with torrents? Newsgroups are encrypted, safer, and much much faster than torrents while giving you access to pretty much the same content. Also, you are only downloading and not uploading with newsgroups, so if the legal landscape changes dramatically, your potential liabilities are still very minimal (not sure what the statute of limitations are for this kind of infringement). Well worth it for $100/yr.

Newsgroups are great but I like the trustworthiness of a private site like TL (and pay for VIP so I don't have to upload). I generally use newsgroups for older shows that I can't find anywhere else.

 

[cstu]

Technically it's not theft, it's copyright infringement. Courts have made that distinction so your stealing and shoplifting comparisons don't hold up. Although the movie and music companies still try to.

It's your conscience.

My what?

You know that voice in your head that tells you not to hit on 14 year o....nm.

 

[cstu]

Just curious

When is it not stealing. I assume when it comes out on netflix or cable and you subscribe to those. Or when you own the DVD

So, lets say I buy the Frozen DVD (which I have), but dont have it on me and my kids want to watch it. Is it stealing if I watch it on the site previously mentioned (not torrent, web based)

So many gray areas in the world of digital stuff it's ridiculous.

Where's the grey area in illegally taking something you didn't pay for?

Those claiming it's a "cost of doing business" for the movie studios are right, but that doesn't seem to justify it anymore than Walmart having to absorb shrinkage losses from shoplifting as a cost of doing business.

What's their "cost of doing business"? "Potential lost sales" are not a cost.

 

[Ned Ryerson]

Technically it's not theft, it's copyright infringement. Courts have made that distinction so your stealing and shoplifting comparisons don't hold up. Although the movie and music companies still try to.

It's your conscience.

It is different than you were arguing though. I mean you aren't stealing plasma tvs from Walmart, you are using the Walmart logo on your boy band's new t-shirts that you are never going to make any money off of.

Ok, so if you are making the argument then justify it.

Do you think it is morally superior to torrent a movie as opposed to stealing a DVD from a store, solely because the movie physically resides on a tangible item? Of would you torrent rather than steal a DVD because there is less risk of getting caught?

I'm not making the argument, I'm just pointing out the flaw in his argument.

However, to your questions: I think by definition it is morally superior to both your points. People aren't victims of theft and people are rarely prosecuted for torrenting.

1) If someone robs my house blind, how am I not a victim?

2) How does failure to prosecute speak to morality?