Irma has identified Pirate Bay, the world’s biggest file swapping website, as the first site that it will seek to have blocked. It will then move on to ‘‘similar websites’’.
Mathiasb wrote: » You have to be kidding right? 10 euro for a DRM crippled album? It should be half of that, MAXIMUM. Why? Because there are no other costs like CD production, album art printing, booklet, shipping the CDs etc.
jor el wrote: » No, but they do have the costs that Apple charge for using iTunes, which is actually quite a lot. If music on iTunes is to get cheaper, Apple need to reduce their cut. It has been said, that the proper price for downloadable music should be approx 20c per song, and not the 89 or 99c currently charged. Apple have a big say in the price of music on iTunes though, and they don't seem to want to reduce this. Vastly reducing the cost may spur growth in that market, and even reduce the instance of pirating, but then again maybe it wouldn't.
Cabaal wrote: » If your downloading something it means you want it and if you want it you should pay for it, for example...I want a new TV so I should pay for it
Mathiasb wrote: » You have to be kidding right? 10 euro for a DRM crippled album? It should be half of that, MAXIMUM. Why? Because there are no other costs like CD production, album art printing, booklet, shipping the CDs etc. But yeah, until prices come down on DRM free content, we have no option. I buy music on CD or DVD I consider worth buying, IMO I pay my fair share. I also attend to concerts whenever my bands are nearby, that probably generates more money than CD sales, but I dunno.
PaddyTheNth wrote: » 3mb(it) - the minimum speed that I want - not 3G;) Thanks for the info though.
Mmcd wrote: » Maybe Ive misinterpreted peoples arguing of the DRMS but iTunes allows for the use to get rid of the DRM legally if not with a bit of hassle by just burning an album to a disk and ripping it to iTunes. Also out of interest what exactly does the law here say about those who buy music from say Russian sites where its DRM free and $1 approx an album.
Mathiasb wrote: » Y But yeah, until prices come down on DRM free content, we have no option. .
towel401 wrote: » not really. i got around 20gb of music sitting around I downloaded with wget -r on the off chance there might be something good in there. most of it will end up deleted because it's crap. bandwidth is cheap, might as well use it.
Cabaal wrote: » Price is not justification for breaking the law though, again you can't twist things just to justify it to yourself
Mathiasb wrote: » Are you deliberatly being ignorant? Have you read anything at all of what I've written in this thread? I have never said that price is a justification for breaking the law, and I don't twist anything to justify it for myself. It's up to the record labels, people are going to CONTINUE to copy music until they come up with something that they can sell. OBVIOUSLY they CANNOT sell CDs, so, ditch that. With what? I don't know, it's not my problem.
Capt'n Midnight wrote: » ADSL which means money to eircom regardless of which ISP you use Changing from Eircom to another ADSL ISP is not hurting eircom, changing to 3G is painful
The Pirate Bay trial is the collision of 'can I?' and 'should I?'Andrew Brown The Guardian, Thursday 26 February 2009 People who don't speak Swedish are missing almost all the interest of the Pirate Bay trial, which is supplied by the frankly unsavoury nature of the defendants. The money man, Carl Lundström, on whose servers The Pirate Bay was housed, is straight out of the crime novels of Stieg Larsson. He inherited a fortune built on crispbread, and has a long history of involvement with extreme rightwing politics. In the 1980s, he was a member of "Keep Sweden Swedish", an anti-immigrant fringe group; he has financially backed the Sweden Democrats, a would-be populist and anti-immigrant party; and only this month the managing director of one of his companies was charged with a robbery in a small west-coast town, part of a feud within a neo-Nazi group. Lundström told the Metro news*paper (http://bit.ly/metro) after he sacked the man that he had known he was a party member, but not that he had gone to collect another member's computer with a submachine gun. Gottfrid Svartholm Varg and Frederik Neij, the nerds who run The Pirate Bay itself, have also been accused by the prosecutor of tax evasion, but deny that they were making any money from their business. Their attitude of sneering entitlement towards the government is all of a piece with their attitude towards the big content companies. But I can't see The Pirate Bay as morally superior to the Disney corporation. Both are out to grab everything they can get away with, and so, of course, are the majority of their users. Yes, there are legitimate uses for the Bit*Torrent protocol, but the demand for free as in beer far outstrips that for free as in speech. What's odd in a historical perspective is that all this should be going on in Sweden, which was within living memory a social democratic country with a genuinely leftwing orthodoxy. I know that a little bit of the rhetoric around The Pirate Bay sounds leftwing – the idea that it is wrong for "international capital" to push Sweden around – but that's just populist, and could be found in the rhetoric of the kind of parties that Carl Lundström has supported too. The overwhelming impression is of a clash between two rightwing views, one that says it is all right to steal from the state, and one which says it is sinful to steal from corporations. You don't find people arguing that there might be such a thing as soc*iety that is larger than both the owners and the consumers of copyrighted material. On the contrary, it is a more or less explicit assumption that in a borderless digital world there isn't any legitimate global authority. Yet the overwhelming fact about Swedish society, when I lived there, was exactly this belief that authority was, and had to be, legitimate. Perhaps this goes back to the country's Lutheran past as a militaristic superpower: "Fear God and honour the King" says the inscription on one of the churches in Stockholm Old Town. But wherever it came from, the conformism, and the stifling respect for authority that it produced, were the characteristics that most distinguished Sweden from most of the rest of Europe. That may have been a bad thing – I certainly thought so when I lived there – but looking at the modern country you realise that it's possible to have too little of a bad thing. The Pirate Bay trial is part of a global problem in which we all are implicated. One of the reasons we got into this mess was the absence of any kind of government that could stand above the immediate economic interests of the players involved. In the US the copyright laws were repeatedly extended not because any benevolent ruler sat down and asked what arrangement was best for society, but because it is easy to rent politicians in the US. Hardly anyone who pirates material asks themselves whether they are plundering the system that ensures that some people at least are paid for their creative labours. The pressing question, when you sit at a keyboard, is hardly ever "should I?", but "can I?" But you can't build a society – you can't even build a market – unless almost everyone in it asks themselves "should I?" In its clumsy way, that's what the Pirate Bay trial is trying to remind us.
You have to be kidding right? 10 euro for a DRM crippled album? It should be half of that, MAXIMUM. Why? Because there are no other costs like CD production, album art printing, booklet, shipping the CDs etc. But yeah, until prices come down on DRM free content, we have no option.
Donald-Duck wrote: » Bolding half your post sort of removes the emphasis that bolded font provides. And your whole post ignores the fact that nothing will be blocked without a court order. But then again, I'm not suprised considering how much **** has been posted in this already, most of it being sensationalist drivel. And you'd see people whinging to no end if they did spend a huge amount on making ripping cds etc harder, because it in turn would raise the costs.
Nody wrote: » TL/DR for Bubba's post though I skimmed it. No protection in any form for media can work for one simple reason. No matter what you need to be able to access (view/listen) the material which means it has to have an exist point. That exist point means I can rip it as it is sent through it by pretending to be a TV/Decoder/Security chip/Speakers etc. DRM will simply never work and any attempt to implement it will make it less likely that people buy it. I know gamers who're pissed that as legal, buying, customers they get a worse piece of software then the hacked version (no cd required, no security questions, no bugs around the DRM or rootkits). Buy it legal and get a worse product OR download it for free and get a better playing experience? Talk about dropping the ball...
Bubba HoTep wrote: » everything bolded needed to be bolded, and no they dont need a court order, eircom have stated they will comply with any request IRMA makes of them people need to be angry bout this
Bubba HoTep wrote: » @donald duck, from what ive read, (looking for the page now...) eircom initially said that they would fight for their customers in court, but then did a 360 and will now block any site at irmas request no court involved
Bubba HoTep wrote: » @donald duck granted it seems eircom changed their mind again according to your arstechnica link "This might sound like a contradiction of previous reports that the blocking would start soon, and without a court order, but it's a bit less than it seems." and the torrent freak link is where i got my info to begin with... im still bemused as how you seem to be cool with the fact that it is even being entertained at all...
