torrentfreak.com — The Regional Court in Hamburg, Germany, has ruled that file-hosting service Rapidshare must proactively filter certain content. Music industry outfit GEMA asked the court to ban Rapidshare from making 5,000 tracks from its catalogue available on the Internet. The court obliged and fined Rapidshare $34 million.
Jun 24, 2009 View in Crawl 4
travelsonicJun 24, 2009
Wow, take the balls out of your mouth, Galt.I am not a Ron Paul supporter and see the problematics that are occurring with corporate control of our government.
Closed AccountJun 24, 2009
megaupload? mediashare?There are a million others but I'm willing to bet they'll follow suit with what RS does to avoid a lawsuit.
swoopdogJun 24, 2009
YEAH GET RID OF RAPIDSHARE THERE IS ABOUT A BAJILLION MORE SERVICES JUST LIKE THIS ONE IS THERE?!<a class="user" href="http://www.freefilehosts.com/">http://www.freefilehosts.com/</a>OH WAIT HERE'S SOME NOW!
zeroJun 25, 2009
It's a BS fine but I never liked using rapidshare. The downloads were too slow and the timeout between files was too long. If I wanted to pay for the file I would just buy it from the store not give it to a site that is hosting a pirated copy of it.
xeroxenithJun 25, 2009
MU are based in China. They're good for now.
greatbigjerkJun 25, 2009
So you sent out the notices because you were just annoyed, not because the pirated downloads actually affected sales? Well, if you were annoyed enough to spend four hours sending e-mails, I guess I can't fault you other than the fact that you shouldn't let stuff like that get to you considering how trivial it is.Also correlation != causation, so you can't really say that taking down the pirated files affected traffic unless you factor everything that was happening during that time frame.