What is Digg?123 Comments
- artfiend77, on 11/04/2009, -1/+78I'd love to give the MPAA 3 strikes...to the head.
- shutaro, on 11/04/2009, -2/+71***** THE MPAA!!!
- ElSnuggles, on 11/04/2009, -2/+50How is the ACCUSATION of infringement a basis for punishment? Where is the blankety-blannk due process?
I am perfectly OK with punishing people who are found guilty of a crime (which copyright infringement isn't) and am totally fine with someone being owing damage for infringing on copyright they are found to be doing (though not fine with the eternal copyrights that we have now), but how the heck would this ever be constitutional?
Then again, if it ever comes to pass, I will personally be submitting (through a dummy corporation) every MPAA and RIAA board member repeatedly as copyright infringers. - AngryDeuce, on 11/04/2009, -1/+44And I'd like congress to encourage the MPAA to stop suing file sharer's for totally ridiculous amounts of money in damages.
Let's see if either actually happens... - andrewh7, on 11/05/2009, -1/+29Encouraging a private company to single-handedly interpret and monitor adherence to law, enforce the law, and distribute punishment for violating the law without the government or courts having any involvement? What could go wrong? What the hell is due process anyway? Who needs it?
- Hardataq, on 11/05/2009, -2/+28Dear MPAA, RIAA, and the US Government:
Please keep your filthy ***** hands off of the internet. Thanks.
-Everyone - WoollyMittens, on 11/05/2009, -0/+26No, it means three accusations. They don't actually have to prove anything.
- redskyformiles, on 11/05/2009, -1/+26In Communist Russia movie watches you.
- stompk291, on 11/04/2009, -1/+25and of course to the MPAA 3 strikes means "3 movies downloaded"
- Iceman21, on 11/05/2009, -1/+23MPAA can ***** off, i will not pay for any kind of restrictions on my internet service and the isp's know this will ***** up the business they have, and the business of thousands of companies that rely on the internet.
- Iceman21, on 11/05/2009, -0/+22Die in a fire troll.
- elliotys, on 11/05/2009, -2/+21I would like the MPAA to start producing quality over quantity.
- dvsbastard, on 11/05/2009, -1/+20Hey Galt... You just copied my exact comment! Consider that your first strike (who the ***** needs evidence right?!)
Two more strikes to go and you're out! (And digg will be a better place...) - Ninh, on 11/04/2009, -2/+20I'd like congress to encourage the MPAA to develop a business model for the digital age by putting a 25% surtax on income derived from physical media.
- Chaserloser, on 11/05/2009, -1/+19In other news, 25 millions people are disconnect from internet result of these 3 strikes are affecting economy.
- active1x0, on 11/05/2009, -0/+16This would violate the 14th Amendment's Due Process clause, IF Internet Service Providers weren't private companies. Since they are, they can deny service to any customer for any reason. Kind of raises interesting questions as to whether or not broadband can be defined as a public utility - and if it isn't, that it maybe should be.
I'm a capitalism-loving government-hating American, but the sheer number of methods private ISPs are finding to screw customers is kind of testing my tolerance for *****. When will we get past this phase in our country, and just be able to buy broadband cheaply with no strings attached? When will ISPs realize they can make a fortune just by making broadband faster, cheaper, and more accessible? When???
Stop ***** with my Internet, goddammet. Seriously, I'm sick of this *****. - WoollyMittens, on 11/05/2009, -2/+15Corporatism is getting scary.
- Iceman21, on 11/05/2009, -0/+12Testicles, not head, pain is the preference.
- Sux4Bux, on 11/05/2009, -2/+13And I'd like to encourage Congress to ban MPAA as a lobbying group and remove laws that protect their content.
- LeroyJenkems, on 11/05/2009, -0/+11ISPs don't want to kick their most valuable customers off their service. They want to charge them more for all hitting the bandwidth cap so often.
- tgc1, on 11/05/2009, -1/+11Total Encryption. Coming soon to an internet download session near you.
- zer0mass, on 11/05/2009, -0/+9And we can all create a second internet, with hookers and gambling. In fact, forget the internet part.
- 1234brandon, on 11/05/2009, -0/+9Yea because McCain would have been soooo much better.
/s - hymneforthedead, on 11/05/2009, -0/+9-sigh- I wish thats what she said.
- spookyttws, on 11/05/2009, -2/+10Yeah, because the reason we pirate movies is just because we don't understand it's illegal. Maybe permanently disconnecting us from one of the most widely used form of communication for downloading 3 movies is the right form of action. OR maybe the movie industry can simply understand that the old business model doesn't work anymore, and that they should start investing heavily in digital distribution models.
But if I'm going to be shut ot from the internet, my three movies are going to be Catwoman, Superbabies: Baby Geniuses 2 , and Glitter (and if I can sneak one by them, Boat Trip.) - blumarlin1, on 11/05/2009, -0/+8FTA: "The MPAA’s lobbying effort is in response to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, the $800 billion bailout package that included a $7 billion investment in broadband. The measure requires the FCC to recommend to Congress by February how best to revamp American broadband policy."
So the MPAA somehow thinks because $7 billion of US taxpayer money is going into broadband, they then have a right to try to filter those very taxpayers? Isn't that kinda like getting shot with the bullets you bought? - Dugglous, on 11/05/2009, -1/+9EAT A DICK MPAA!
- javaroast, on 11/05/2009, -0/+7Third strike galt. Your commenting privileges are here by revoked. Besides you have backwards the MPAA are the MOOCHERS.
- shinkou, on 11/05/2009, -1/+8I really have no idea how they're going appeal to all the ISPs around. "Hey! Forget your customers because I'm losing money"??? If I were one of those ISPs, I'd tell them to STFU.
- Chaserloser, on 11/05/2009, -0/+6I better go off to batting cage.
- forsight, on 11/05/2009, -2/+8Why don't we have the freedom as Americans (or where ever you are in the world) to use p2p? Thank goodness med students use p2p to gather and exchange journals, we need credible ppl to share the benefits of this amazing technology.
WE NEED TO STAND TOGETHER!!!
p.s. don't forget ur proxy :)
- Culyt, on 11/05/2009, -0/+6"MPAA Wants Congress to 'Encourage' encrypted, anonymous, darknets"
Need a MP3 P2P application based on Freenet style architecture, except rather than making in %100 anonymous (And extremely slow), make it anonymous enough that it's unlikely that the RIAA will be able to get the resources together to do anything.
Hook it into the MusicBrainz database. Make it aware of the concepts of Artists and Albums so you can just choose to download all the tracks from someone or in an album without searching for all the individual files. Give the option of encrypting the downloaded files right in the program
TeraByte harddrives cost around $80USD, it should be quite feasible for someone to give 30gb over to permanent cloud storage not to mention their own collections.
In Japan for example they have Winny, which is a cross between WinMX and Freenet.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winny
Obviously making it anonymous would sacrifice speed, but MP3s are small and the Internet is much faster now. It would probably be heaps faster than KaZaa for example. If its quicker than actually playing the track then your probably fine.
Later on things will be fast enough to do tv shows/movies in a similar system.
Ensure that development is open so it can never be shut down. Ensure there are plenty of disclaimers saying not to download copyrighted music. - bobburn1, on 11/05/2009, -2/+8***** the MPAA, of course.
- DaDrake, on 11/05/2009, -3/+8The simple fact is, piracy is easy, widespread, and causing a loss of revenue to the entertainment industry; more importantly, it is causing a loss of revenue to the government, which taxes every product produced by the entertainment industry. Thus an increased governmental role was bound to happen to protect people's work. For those who say these laws are unprecedented (or laughably, unconstitutional), laws have constantly being revamped to match the current ills of the day. The simple fact is, information has a much greater value than it ever did in history and government will seek new ways to protect it. And these laws will be welcomed by the court system, which view the current system as inept and out of date.
And who do we have to blame... us... whom were naive enough to believe the current practices could go on. - Iceman21, on 11/05/2009, -0/+5Seed Seed and Seed, Seed everything you have downloaded.
- Vaiper, on 11/05/2009, -1/+6Eh, let them have what they want. I sure as hell don't have the funds to buy congress. Sounds pretty impossible to fight. We can all take pride in the fact that we lived in a world where the internet was for the common good before the evil men came and destroyed it.
- homer524, on 11/05/2009, -5/+10We wouldn't have this damn pirating problem if Somalia had a stronger central government.
- zbeast, on 11/05/2009, -0/+5But didn't you hear, its because of the pirates that we can't afford to turn out anything but crap.
we use the constant stream of crap movies to finance the movie you want to see.
Feel sorry for us, it's all the pirates fault. - equanimist, on 11/05/2009, -0/+5I'm not convinced that piracy drives tax revenue down -- though down it may be. I think people buy just as much as they can and get taxed for it; if they don't spend money on movies then they have more money for clothes or dining out...
So, I'm not sure that pandering to the MPAA will generate greater tax revenue. Moreover, I don't think that the MPAA can possibly put this genie back in the jar: even if they manage to scare people out of downloading movies they can't hope to stop people from renting them and copying them...
And, in the meantime, pursuing these crazy machinations only alienates loyal customers. Personally, I never even considered downloading or even copying a CD recoded by a living artist until RIAA started suing kids and their moms!
Really, it would be better for the MPAA if they could adjust their business model to stop the bleeding and just get over the fact that the pendulum is swinging back the other way on the entertainment industry (which, I seem to recall, was, once upon a time, no way to make money). - venom8599, on 11/05/2009, -0/+5The first part of your post is taking into account the ISPs doing this of their own accord. If the ISPs are required to do it by law or by regulation, then that raises all kinds of issues--right to due process under the law, and possible cruel and unusual punishment and free speech concerns.
- Purplekat, on 11/05/2009, -1/+6Part of me really hopes that the studio and record companies get -everything- they want and wipe "piracy" from the face of the earth. That way, when their businesses crash and burn they'll have nobody left to blame it on.
- bshock, on 11/05/2009, -0/+4Yeah, and let's get rid of that whole "innocent until proven guilty" thing, and dump the nonsense about "due process." Isn't someone going to think of the poor, starving movie studio executives?
- Suricou, on 11/05/2009, -0/+4I sense a Randroid.
- 1234brandon, on 11/05/2009, -0/+4Hacked modem. http://cablehack.net/index.html
Dear MPAA,
That link is just for educational purposes only. I would never dream of tarnishing such a wonder entity such as yourself. Please do not send your secret police to abduct me in the middle of the night. - active1x0, on 11/05/2009, -0/+4Well unfortunately, the law does not agree with you (although I might tend to). The Supreme Court ruled a long time ago that businesses "affected with a public interest" can be regulated heavily, and can even deprive a private business of revenue via legislation alone - and that's not even when criminality is involved (copyright infringement, for example). See Munn v. Illinois (1877).
The 14th wouldn't really apply to consumers in the manner you've described, since a customer is not being forced to pay for the service deprived, has no vested interest in it, and it's not a public utility. There is no "due process" when it's not your own personal property being taken from you, and the customer would essentially have no right to force a company to provide broadband. The legality is purely at the business level.
This case would be one of a corporation being forced to deny customers based upon Federal law (presumably) outside of any judicial involvement. I believe this would be a pretty new idea, and I just don't know what rights (if any) a corporation would be able to flex in defense of these laws.
One other way to attack this as a consumer would be to say you were being denied your right to Pursue Happiness, but that doesn't exactly sound like a strong legal argument... - Ghostwo, on 11/05/2009, -0/+4Seeders would be the first to go. Always on, IP right out in the open. And you sound like an 8 year old (or a crackhead).
- ElSnuggles, on 11/05/2009, -1/+5Or you don't understand what a crime is. I'm going to be polite today, and help you out:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime
Civil offenses or infractions (copyright infringement) are not "crimes". They are like libel or slander - something you can get your pants sued off for, but not thrown in prison or have non-monetary punishment from.
What is not constitutional about these proposed concepts (3 strikes laws) is the lacks due process, which is guaranteed to us in the 5th Amendment (in your defense, the only part of the constitution you probably understand is the one about assualt rifles and uzi's). Should I explain what "due process" is for you?
I could be a delusional ***** (as you say) but you obviously have not a clue what you are posting here about. I guess Glenn Beck hasn't done an educational session on copyright for you to learn from yet, eh? - zer0mass, on 11/05/2009, -0/+4Yet due to piracy, sales of blank media (which many companies part of the MPAA and RIAA produce) go up as well as hard drive sales for storing all of this content.
- linagee, on 11/05/2009, -0/+3IPv6 ftw.
See the last paragraph on this web page: http://ipv6.com/articles/security/IPsec.htm
"IPsec is a mandatory component for IPv6" - acidtonic, on 11/05/2009, -1/+4You understand people used to sell ice right? Yes ICE right to your home because we didnt have freezers.
Did you know they tried to sue people using freezers when they first came out. Claimed it was ruining their business and how could someone get for FREE what they paid to make and deliver to someone's home?
They were dinosaurs and vanished when their business model became obsolete with any adaption to a new market.
This time the internet and computers are the new freezer.... Time to evolve.
(Since it sounds like I'm being sarcastic I'll clear it up.... this is a true story. They fought ice machines and freezers once they came out go check) -
Show 51 - 100 of 125 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is