QuebecTorrent ‘rootkit infection’ warning
p2pnet news view P2P | Freedom:- QuebecTorrent is down thanks to the efforts the Big 4 labels, Vivendi Universal, EMI, Warner Music and Sony BMG, p2pnet posted yesterday.
Now, “DO NOT VISIT” – warns a Reader’s Write, going on >>>
www.quebectorrent.com!
The site is infected with a rootkit!
It is the almost the same rootkit used by Sony! How strange!
It will try to infect you computer with a rootkit hiding any file or folder with name starting with css.
We don’t know the strength of this, but just in case. And meanwhile, Maelabe posts a Google transation of a letter sent to QuebecTorrent members by site president Sébastien Brûlotte.
Dated July 11, it reads >>>
Dear Members,
It is with regret that we decided to consent to an injunction aimed torrent our site, our company and myself as president of Québectorrent.com Inc.
I took the initiative in this release in order to thank you for your support and support since the opening of the site, as well as throughout the judicial proceedings. Without you, this whole adventure would not have been so rewarding. Together we have helped give visibility to our artists with our community by making available a platform for disseminating alternative cheaper and equally effective for a greater influence of their works.
I also want to explain my decision not to challenge the procedures for a permanent injunction had been served on us and against which we have always expressed our disagreement. The upheavals have caused sites such as “torrent” and “p2p” had a significant impact on trade and distribution of music, movies and any works protected by copyright.
At the time we had to take a decision about defending our interests before the courts, we found that both the recording industry and film, represented by ADISQ and APFTQ, that users and operators sites such as “torrent” and “p2p” were governed by laws outdated and patently non-adapted to current and modern technology.
We also urge our governments to intervene in this area and to legislate so as to reflect current realities and needs of its population. It goes without saying that this reality is not only the interests and needs of distribution companies, which will inevitably adjust to the market. It covers more than ever, consumers of music and movies, without which the industry would not be both affluent today. The legislature must listen to those consumers who are an important part of the population.
Besides, I must respond to how the ADISQ commented on the judgement of the Court.
The vice-president of public affairs and CEO of ADISQ, Mrs. Solange Drouin, commented that “it was a first major victory for the local industry against a torrent site and that other suits against such download sites could be considered. ”
At the time the procedures we were served, we hired a prosecutor who, for health reasons, had to stop representing us last March. Thereafter, in early May, we hired the law firm Fetch Legal Ltd.. to represent us. Our prosecutors have indicated then that the status of the dossier was limited, and that we should require a court delay to enable them to state the cause, and position us well in our defence. An expertise was needed to counter that of ADISQ and the APFTQ, and a defence should be filed on record. It remained only two months before the hearing. Our prosecutors have recommended to submit a request for surrender of the hearing. ADISQ and the APFTQ were opposed to this request. As a result, and following arguments ADISQ and the APFTQ, the court refused our request for surrender, and ordered the trial as planned in July 2008.
Given this state of affairs in the best interest of members who have supported us financially and cause sites such as “torrent” and “p2p” we preferred not to present defence rather than defend ourselves inappropriately. It goes without saying that our intention was to avoid a legal precedent detrimental to any litigation of the same nature. We believe we have made the right decision on this aspect, as pointed out aptly Tristan Péloquin in his blog on 10 July. We are surprised by the position of the ADISQ and the APFTQ to the effect that this ruling is a precedent, because in fact there has never been a substantive debate about the issues raised by the dispute.
Ultimately, it was never our intention, in connection with the operation of our site, to allow the violation of copyrights, as claimed the allegations contained in judicial proceedings. We are convinced that the Court could make an interesting decision in the case if she had to assess contradictory positions, which it did not have to…
We still intend to abide by the terms of the injunction issued against us, but wanted to correct certain statements made publicly in recent days.
Sébastien Brûlotte, president of Québectorrent.com
=================
UPDATE:- July 15, 5:41 AM Pacific
QuebecTorrent spyware alert may be wrong
Stay tuned.
JN
.
.Stumble It!
Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. It’s really easy!Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile – http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
Net access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for details. Download here.
July 12th, 2008 at 6:43 pm
I went there.
Annoying popup window , but no rootkit or infection of anykind.
Just another RIAA shill trying to frighten people with bullshit.
July 12th, 2008 at 7:11 pm
Can’t we get all the hackers out there to attack the big four and shut them down?
July 12th, 2008 at 8:44 pm
How would one know if a rootkit as infected the system?
July 12th, 2008 at 10:23 pm
Search for rootkit revealer for whatever OS you are running, or look in websites Nirsoft or systernals.
Why does everyone defend the torrent sites that rip off copyright material? If the original owners of the copyright wanted their material to be “public domain” they would grant that freedom, it should not just be stolen from them.
Torrent sights are usually run by immature morons who pout if they can’t “legally steal” stuff.
In case you torrent masters don’t get it, you cannot steal stuff, it is ILLEGAL!
July 12th, 2008 at 10:47 pm
Quick, go suck your boss’s balls, he’ll be happy you posted that.
Damned shill biatch.
July 12th, 2008 at 10:49 pm
Get a Mac and have a life.
July 12th, 2008 at 11:30 pm
If an artist wants his/her material available to the world for free, no strings attached, would that be so unusual? We’re not getting any money anyway. As an artist, I will never record anything on any label, ever! But I can use bit torrents to put out my music and not have the labels get rich from my work. So I wish that the labels admit that downloading bit torrents rips them off more than the artists! I can see a time when more artists will start suing their labels, one can only hope.
July 13th, 2008 at 7:08 am
If you don’t want labels to “get rich from your work”, don’t sell your work to labels. The RIAA doesn’t represent independent artists, they only represent member labels, and guess what? Those people DID sell their work to labels.
If you want to maintain complete control over your work and distribute it on torrent sites you have every right to and nobody can stop you, but you can’t sell the rights to someone else and then still maintain you have the right to do what you want with it.
July 13th, 2008 at 7:31 am
The reality is it’s about rich and poor. Those that have buy, Mac’s and all the software, music, movies etc. whatever the cost. They can afford it. Those that can’t say fuck you. You deny me the right to experience a full life because I’m not as affluent as you and you laugh in our faces as you brag about your self worth and how your not ripping us off enough. So we steal what we have to, to level the playing field. When we support an Artist or Software program, it must have incredible value personally in our lives to give up the hard earned dollars we don’t have.
Everything in life favours the wealthy. Wake up. Respect the poor……
July 13th, 2008 at 7:45 am
” In case you torrent masters don’t get it, you cannot steal stuff, it is ILLEGAL! ”
As we have explained many times to you shill fools …
1. Torrent sites do not have any copyrighted material on them,
nor do they host any copyrighted material.
2. Downloading is not stealing .. no one has lost anything, no object has been taken
from anyone. the owner ( the label, not the artist ) still has their property.
3. a download is NOT a lost sale .. this myth has been disproven time and time again
A downloader cannot be proven to have ever been a potential buyer.
Downloading has zero effect on sales.
4. the RIAA and MPAA are not attacking torrent sites because they are losing money,
they are attacking them because they are their future competition as more and
more artists discover that the labels are no longer necessary for recording OR
distributing.
“Why does everyone defend the torrent sites that rip off copyright material?”
Why do paid shills continue to spout false information …
Duh …
” If the original owners of the copyright wanted their material to be “public domain” they would grant that freedom ”
That is precisely what is happening now with Creative Commons Licensing.
Once again, the competition is rising, they must close down their access and fast.
THAT is wht it’s really about.
July 13th, 2008 at 7:46 am
It’s over Johnny! The massif piles of cash earned by these entertainment gangsters and their artists are drying up. What your selling now is just not worth as much anymore…It’s over! Desperate attempts to correct the present and go back to the over priced crappy entertainment products. The media has changed ..it’s over. The cash cow is drying up. If you don’t like it and can’t find the many new ways of making a living in this new media world, go get a real job. It’s over.. I love how this very very rich industry is feeling pains and will have to change or die. Next they will be demanding that the internet be banned. It’s time to say good by to the labels and artists take this new media on their own and make a good living without them. It’s over Johnny
July 13th, 2008 at 7:57 am
” Why does everyone defend the torrent sites that rip off copyright material? ”
Why do labels need to resort to lies and shady tricks ?
Could it be they have no leg to stand on ?
They are lying ?
Have no proof they are losing anything ?
All of the above .
July 13th, 2008 at 7:58 am
Ripose is just Sam I Am posting under an alt.
don’t feed the troll
July 13th, 2008 at 8:08 am
Speaking of false partiality of the Courts, and the Canadian federal government itself has left the internet unregulated.. at least in part only.. we know that child molesters, child pornography on internet in Canada can be and are often rightfully prosecuted, and that some internet bullies are now being rightfully prosecuted by some provincial human rights commissions, even by some of the courts for slander, abuse now too.. But not all of the the human rights, verbal abusers even now are being adequately dealt with too, nor the internet service providers who lie, are clearly now guilty of being abusive, falsely restrictive, censorship, privacy invasions, guilty false misleading advertising, restrictive business practices, bait and switch approach are not and this is unacceptable, a falsely discriminatory practice that now still always too and needs to be fully dealt with too.
http://thenonconformer.wordpress.com
July 13th, 2008 at 8:57 am
@niteowl
Id love to help you HAHA
July 13th, 2008 at 3:33 pm
The real thieves here is the (many times) court proven criminal organisations: The MPAA & RIAA who steal money from both artists (they have been found guilty of not paying artists) and consumers (price fixing, low quality product, illegal DRM, Selling the same thing 5$ in one country and 25$ in another). The MPAA/RIAA commit crimes on a daily basis and never get punish for it, because they practicly OWN the US jutice system. They buy any law(s) that favor them and manipulate judges and goverments offcials like puppets. The MPAA and RIAA is the most dangerous criminal organisations in the world today and reponcible for destroying more lifes then any terrorist organisaion ever did. The MPAA/RIAA must be shutdown at once and the Major studios need to be fined a couple of billions each for participatiion in organise crime. it is not downloading a movie from p2p that is illegal, it is buying a DVD. because in most country arround the world, supporting organise crime is illegal.
Instant near zero piracy rate:
1 Sale movie for the real value, 5$
2. remove all illegal DRM
3. Shutdown the MPAA/RIAA and prevent studios from forming another Digital Mafia
4. Change laws so you can get a refund for a DVP movie is a flop
5 here you go high Qiuality movie at 5$ a pop…. who need to d/L when product is better and not sold at inflated price?
July 13th, 2008 at 10:48 pm
The last time I looked at a CD the price was an unbelievable $37 ($US35). The last time WAS the last time. And that was an old compilation. 99% of new stuff is such garbage, I honestly would need to be paid to take it, then I’d throw it straight into the rubbish bin. I certainly wouldn’t waste time and bandwidth in downloading it.
July 13th, 2008 at 10:55 pm
I should add that since it appears that music is now officially dead, I can stop downloading anytime. I don’t care. I already have much more than I ever wanted, and though I’m sure there must be some good music I’ve missed, I feel I have enough now, and there are just some TV shows I’d still like, but don’t care really if I don’t get them. I doubt I’ll ever be buying them either at their exorbitant prices for incomplete low quality series.
July 13th, 2008 at 11:28 pm
” In case you torrent masters don’t get it, you cannot steal stuff, it is ILLEGAL! ”
And spraying pest killer on RIAA parasites is it illegal?
July 14th, 2008 at 12:13 am
I am the same person having reporting the first warning and I want to give more details of what I experienced.
The system infected was running window 2K Sp3 ans security update with IE6 sp1 running under defaut security.
I tried to visit what I thing was http://www.quebectorrent.com after the anoucement of the shutdown and this particular system got infected. (By the way I never visited this site before.) How did I know? I have a deteciton software that give me a warning and also the firewall show up with a warning and started blocking all the in/out traffic to the network. Two exe files got copied on the C drive root directory and these two file was detected by my security software. After unpluging the system from the networkand removing the memory stick containing my personal files I proceeded to study the issue. Addware and my antivirus software failed to detect anything wrong but “rootkitrevealer” show up with an hiden css folder that I know was legitimate plus one new executable file in the window sys32 folder called something like css$$$.exe probably the payload.
I don’t believe that the administrators of these site have anything to do with this. It could be a hacker internal or external it could be a bug infecting this site and now trying to infect client machine.
We also know that the entairtainement industry has been infiltrating web site operation they don’t like for planting evidences, bugs and also conducting others totally illegal actiivities to get their ways.
There is a small chance that I might have reach a different physing site accidentaly (I doubt it) or that the bug is comming via a server from my ISP instead ( Never hear of it though.)
To know if you are infected with this rootkit creat a file called something like “csssomething.txt” and see if you can still see it. You could also try to creat a folder named CSS.
I would like to know if I am the only one to had this problem.
July 14th, 2008 at 12:21 am
If I use a middle-man to kill someone, than it’s the person who got killed fault?
So me and the middle man are not guilty of anything?
For you dense people: I=end-user, middle-man=torrent sites, person killed=copyright holder.
Oh sorry, an analogy is probably beyond your limited torrent-mentality.
Ooooohh, now you’re going to call me a “shill” & “troll” because that’s what you torrent-idiots call everybody who disagrees with you.
Maybe you do have SOME valid points, but I am talking from the perspective of having had some of my material stolen by torrent minded people!
SO LONG! And thanks for all the fish!
July 14th, 2008 at 12:31 am
“Oh sorry, an analogy is probably beyond your limited torrent-mentality.”\
RIAA troll Hum?
Go tell your master to start running because we don’t like parasites in this country and we are comming with the pest killer.
Tell them also that WE ARE the customers and we decided to send our money elswhere and not to feed the parasites exept with pest killers! GOOD NIGHT PARASITE!
July 14th, 2008 at 12:50 am
WOW! You called me a troll AND a parasite, you must be very intelligent!
Resorting to name calling when someone disagrees with you only strengthens my points of view and reduces yours to “worthless”.
Thank You Very Much for helping me out!
July 14th, 2008 at 5:54 am
STOP!! For those that use torrents – and I do (linux software downloading – legal) and for those that don’t, STOP the name calling. Sorry to the artists that are “losing” money, although you would have to prove you are losing anything to me. It is against the law to steal. Stop doing it. Don’t blame the software for it though. There are legal (again – I download linux software this way) reasons to use P2P software. The users are at fault if they are getting material illegally. So please stop making the net a hostile place. Stop stealing, and stop namecalling…
July 14th, 2008 at 6:34 am
This is directed at the parasitic troll.
I can understand your perspective on copyrights, but i sympathize with you. I cant blame you for having grow up in a degenerative capitalistic society driven by greed and wants. Copyright is essentially a restriction to knowledge. Once upon a time things like literacy, you know reading and writing, were not provided to the lower classes because the ruling classes needed slaves. ok ill cut to the chase and come out with it. Intellectual material, all intellectual material aught to be free and available for distribution. Anything less would restrict those less privileged from ever learning and becoming their full potential as human beings. this world is becoming more and more divided. the only thing that has brought together in the last hundred years has been the Internet. and now forces are trying to destroy its essence. Its time we grow up and realize that we would all greatly benefit if all intellectual information was released into the public domain. We need to stop letting our governments listen to big business as they are intended to server the people and not the bottom line of Corporate profits. world peace and our climate depend on all of this. this consumer tug of war is pulling our precious earth apart and i cant stand to think of how much further things will deteriorate for the future generations. sometimes i wish for the next world war to start to jump start people to realize what path we have been on and to get back onto the right one.
getting back to artists having their work stolen. oh big whoop. wow they must of worked a whole 5 minutes on those crappy lyrics for which they will get paid millions for cause of the vast distribution abilities “monopoly” the recording companies hold. Im more concerned with the people who end up working for corporations 8 hours a day in a small cubical their entire lives to feed, clothe and shelter their families while they get raped by the elitists who control access to natural resources, food, trade, health, migration, intellectual materials. i could go on. I just thing we are at the point where the world governments should provide their civilizations with free power and free intellectual access and control the consolidation of power by the few for the benefit of the whole. because after all humanity is a single organism, individuality is only an illusion. we need to treat others as we treat ourselves. anywho i give up my seat now to the trolls and parasites if they still exist. LOL.
July 14th, 2008 at 9:21 am
” Maybe you do have SOME valid points, but I am talking from the perspective of having had some of my material stolen by torrent minded people! ”
I’m batman.
Exactly what ‘materal’ are you responsible for ?
I doubt you’ll say.
You will say .. if I tell you, then people will just steal it .
That’s a good excuse, but not true.
The truth …
If you ARE telling the truth ( doubtful ) and you tell us what ‘material’ is
yours, we may discover that it is, in fact, crap to most of us.
This would bear out the REAL reason you are ‘losing’
As has been shown .. many times .. people pay for it if they like it.
More likely..
Another RIAA alt using the ‘I am a poor starving artist that is broke cause of theeeeeeeves’ ploy,
and really have no ‘material’ at all.
” Ooooohh, now you’re going to call me a “shill” & “troll” because that’s what you torrent-idiots call everybody who disagrees with you. ”
Not at all.
This is waht we call those who disagree with us without presenting any facts to back up their opinions,
and pepper it with ad-hominem.
there have been plenty who have disagreed, and presented ACTUAL facts and solid argument .. without
throwing one single name around.
Those we debate and take seriously.
I call you shill and troll because thats what you are.
As long as you pop in with no facts .. thats what you will
continue to be.
So, once again .. what ‘material’ have you had ’stolen’ ?
July 14th, 2008 at 9:57 am
“WOW! You called me a troll AND a parasite, you must be very intelligent!
Resorting to name calling when someone disagrees with you only strengthens my points of view and reduces yours to “worthless”.
Thank You Very Much for helping me out!”
WOW! you must be very stupid! I did not called you a troll and a parasite. This is what you are a Troll and a parasite.
Evolution make the brain of parasites shrink and sometime even dissapear.
You are a parasite like the people you work for. name of your specy is “Homo-parasiticus”
Fortunatly there is a cure for that and we are aplying it right now as we speak.
So you guys you are going going going. . . .
Good!
July 14th, 2008 at 10:15 am
Wow they shut down one site. Now there’s 100s more going to be opening up each day. How are they going to stop that? This is going to be a never ending battle.
July 14th, 2008 at 10:34 am
Considering the tax (levy) on CD’s that goes to the entertainment industry music should be free !
I usually listen to radio any way and use CD’s for backups and I am getting ripped off my the RIAA !!!!
July 14th, 2008 at 10:35 am
“Copyright is essentially a restriction to knowledge. Once upon a time things like literacy, you know reading and writing, were not provided to the lower classes because the ruling classes needed slaves.”
So you’re saying that by denying you from freely downloading the latest pop song, the elites of society are attempting to make you a slave?
“Intellectual material, all intellectual material aught to be free and available for distribution. Anything less would restrict those less privileged from ever learning and becoming their full potential as human beings.”
And here, you’re trying to insinuate that everything that doesn’t require a physical package should simply be free?
Why stop there? I think all cars and oil should be free. Transportation should be a right as limiting an individuals ability to travel based solely upon their wealth will limit said individual from “becoming their full potential as human beings.”
The “information wants to be free” line doesn’t work here.
The latest Hollywood blockbuster was not the sort of information being referenced when people claim that knowledge should be shared.
All sorts of people work on the entertainment products you people seem to think should be free just because you can make a copy of it and the original is still sitting in a store. The lack of physical theft argument is ancient and not applicable. If I make something, and intend to sell it to people for their enjoyment, and you enjoy said product without purchasing it, you HAVE stolen from me.
Make no mistake. I do NOT support the RIAA or the MPAA, but the way you guys write off artists as working “a whole 5 minutes on those crappy lyrics for which they will get paid millions” is so completely ridiculous that you deserve as much of my contempt as the industry itself.
perhaps your bosses should simply not pay you for all the time you spend working away in your cubicles. They’re not taking anything from you. You probably only spent a whole 5 minutes on those TPS reports and you even forgot the cover-page.
Have fun on Digg or whatever other pre-teen sheep-factory you get your “news” and opinions from. You are all a disgrace to the culture you thoughtlessly abuse as it is the legacy of humankind’s creative community.
July 14th, 2008 at 10:46 am
ain’t it intereting how these ^^^ people never say who they are?
July 14th, 2008 at 11:03 am
I bought a Sony mp3 player and a Sony produced CD for my daughter for Christmas. When I tried to put the CD onto the player I couldn’t do it. The sony software wouldn’t convert it due to securty on the CD. Why would Sony sell a player when there is no legal way to put the music on them??? The complainers are who are profiting the most.
I own LP’s many of which I have replaced with cd’s. Now I have mp3 players.. I will be damned if I will pay a third time for an electronic file… An Album can’t be purchased in any event in Sony match format needed for the players… SO the only way I can play the music on an mp3 player is to download it using torrent with the security removed .. I don’t understand why the regulators are spending so much time trying to cripple this. I already own the albums why the heck can’t I listen to them on whatever player I want? Whats next?
July 14th, 2008 at 11:18 am
[New Copyright Laws?] QuebecTorrent ‘rootkit infection’ warning…
QuebecTorrent is down thanks to the efforts the Big 4 labels, Vivendi Universal, EMI, Warner Music and Sony BMG, p2pnet posted yesterday….
July 14th, 2008 at 11:26 am
Why would I pay $30 for an old electronic CD like “Scooter” (look his stuff up on Amazon (as of writing this it’s $26.99 for a single CD)) or otherwise that I would have to order and wait for, when I can download it and have it right now? These artist (not all but anyone remotely popular) are rich, why do labels choose to rape the consumer when they could easily make their media available for download for pennies? Or better yet put advertisements on the download site and make the music free!
It is not our fault the industries have made no attempted to amend the problem by adapting and using the internet as a tool rather then condemning it. Quite frankly I am sick of being treated unfairly by the music industry so I choose to download. Any artist (like Digitalism) that is new and worthwhile I will support by buying their CD, but it will be a cold day in hell when I shell out hundreds of dollars for the Beatles albums, they are multi millionaires, give back to the community like Radiohead did (the FREE album they released last year) and make the music free or at very least cheap and easily accessible.
Agree or disagree I’m still going to download music and millions more like me will too, it is the music industries own fault that they cannot adapt to a changing marketplace.
The Consumer has spoken.
July 14th, 2008 at 12:01 pm
“Fetch Legal Ltd” bahahaha if anyone thinks this is a real lawfirm…. I rest my case.
July 14th, 2008 at 12:20 pm
Jeevan,
Their goal is to shut down the Internet as we know it and replace it with something like AOL internet. something controlled and scripted. something they can use to control our thoughts with as is the case with all advertising and really all the shit the corporate world throws at us. if anyone does not understand what i mean go take a entry university psychology course. something introductionary it will open your eyes to how easily it is to steal peoples ability to make their own choices by the power of suggestion, conditioning, and positive reinforcement. they have the power to take away our conscious self, they are using it and have been for a long time. this is also another reason why drugs are illegal. they open peoples minds by pulling them out of what they are familiar with causing them to reevaluate everything. the majority of us are slaves and we dont even know it. if your not able to be totally self dependent for some basic things like food, shelter, water your a slave. most are slaves to banks and corporations that manage to bend our will into buying things we dont need, we dont like, things that are a waste of resources.
July 14th, 2008 at 12:41 pm
” The latest Hollywood blockbuster was not the sort of information being referenced when people claim that knowledge should be shared. ”
As pointed out,
The latest hollywood blockbuster .. Indiana Jones and the Crystal Skulls … Broke box office records for
revenues.
Once again .. just what exactly did downloading do ?
Nothing.
An effect statistically equal to zero.
” So you’re saying that by denying you from freely downloading the latest pop song, the elites of society are attempting to make you a slave? ”
No,
But since the effect of downloading is actulally zero, and the industry knows this to be a fact, it is a
reasonable possibility that the constant screaming of ‘theft’ is being used as a smokescreen to
create what corporate america is really after.
Internet censorship and control.
Just look at how many times the internet has shined light on corporate and political
cockroaches this year alone.
Using ‘Stealing from artists’ and kiddie porn scares enable them to create ways of
shutting down the last true place of totally free information flow.
Guess what, it appears that you are part of it.
” And here, you’re trying to insinuate that everything that doesn’t require a physical package should simply be free?
Why stop there? I think all cars and oil should be free. Transportation should be a right as limiting an individuals ability to travel based solely upon their wealth will limit said individual from “becoming their full potential as human beings.”
Once again the same fallacy.
Taking an object from someone deprives the owner the use of that.
Comparing this to physical objects is, as usual baloney.
Once again, it has been repeatedly shown statistically that downloading has ZERO effect.
No one has lost anything, no one has stolen anything, and it can never bee proven
that a download equals a lost sale .. ever.
This is just a differently worded trip down that same tired old road, and is still meaningless.
” Make no mistake. I do NOT support the RIAA or the MPAA, ”
Stop lying.
” perhaps your bosses should simply not pay you for all the time you spend working away in your cubicles. They’re not taking anything from you. You probably only spent a whole 5 minutes on those TPS reports and you even forgot the cover-page. ”
Funny you should mention that.
With an RIAA contract, that 5 minutes of work that the artist spends on those lyrics ?
Well that belongs to the label.
The labels actually DO take ownership of your work.
Then, as you have seen, the artist simply can’t be found so they can be paid .. funny eh ?
I believe THAT is stealing .. actually.
Other than that, your argument once again does not really compare to the situation and is simply
more fallacy.
Someone IS blindly following someone allright.
I DON’T think it’s me.
July 14th, 2008 at 1:17 pm
———-
# Reader’s Write Says:
July 14th, 2008 at 10:46 am
ain’t it intereting how these ^^^ people never say who they are?
———-
Says the guy posting under the oh so specific “Reader” screen name.
How thick is the irony where you come from?
At the person actually responding to my comments, your example of the stuff on sale from Amazon by Scooter is well taken. I’ll point out now that I’m completely aware of stuff like that as a spent a lot of time working in the retail end of the music business while in school. Some stuff is disproportionately priced. But, the retail music industry has a weird sort of supply and demand issue. New stuff is cheap. Old stuff is expensive. Because new product is easy to order and there is a lot of it. Older stock, isn’t held in-store or even in warehouses in some cases, as such it costs much more.
Using bands like the Beatles as your example of how the music industry works is more than a little false. Yes, THEY have gotten rich. Most musicians, even extremely successful ones generally don’t. Many people who support piracy will argue that the artists get very little from record sales. This is definitely true. If you really want to support an artist, then go to their shows. See them live. That’s where they get the most return for their effort.
And make no mistake, I’m not above downloading a track here or there. But to me the arguments of “make it cheap”, and “make it legal” is already being accomplished. $1 per track on iTunes is extremely fair. If you download music, and get ANY sort of enjoyment out of it at all, yet still do not feel the need to reward the person that put effort into creating that piece of work, then you are stealing. Plain and simple.
Don’t give me that “Oh I didn’t really like it so it’s not worth it” crap. All art is a qualitative experience. That doesn’t mean you get to decide after consuming it if you should have to pay. Imagine if your boss got to decide whether to pay you after accepting the paperwork you’ve been doing all day and he got to keep the rewards of your effort whether he paid you or not.
Whether you agree with the cost or not, is largely irrelevant. Downloading music is piracy, and piracy is theft.
Claiming that by illegally downloading someone else’s work for free is somehow forcing the industry to change is delusional.
Software, music, and movie pirates have only earned the ire of regular citizens. They think you’re as self-serving and arrogant as the executives running the RIAA and MPAA. Have no illusions. The RIAA and MPAA are terrible organizations, but promoting piracy is wrong.
July 14th, 2008 at 1:50 pm
dreddsnik,
relying on the “it’s not a physical object” argument firmly places you in the “I don’t know what he hell I’m talking about” camp.
Clearly you have no concept about the creative process or the work that comes out of it. When purchasing music, or a ticket to the theatre you are not paying for a physical object. You are paying for the EXPERIENCE. So, there is no way to STEAL a physical experience from someone that is selling it to you. But you are suggesting it is fair that as a consumer you GAIN the EXPERIENCE without paying for it.
Do you also consider it acceptable to sneak into the opera without paying so long as there may be a seat available, even a crappy one way at the back?
“Using ‘Stealing from artists’ and kiddie porn scares enable them to create ways of
shutting down the last true place of totally free information flow.”
Did your pirated copy of Hackers just finish downloading? Do not attempt to say that your piracy of entertainment goods has any correlation to an idealistic desire for ‘information to be free’. Unless of course, you believe the aforementioned Indiana Jones film is a work of influential academic discourse.
Finally, I will again point out that am simply an informed individual with a combination of real world experience working with artists as well as an actual academic background in Intellectual Property and Copyright. I know you only made a cursory attempt at illustrating “statistics”, and I think the RIAA is certainly hardpressed to prove that piracy has led to the destruction of the industry, as the rise of Napster in the late 90’s corresponded to several great years for the Record Industry. That being said, you’re running around trying to find logical fallacies in my part time rantings like someone that just finished grade eleven english class. But I am curious as to whether you can point me in the direction of ACTUAL statistics that demonstrate how many lost sales occur due to piracy. I have a feeling you haven’t even read any such statistics, because the following statement demonstrates you don’t know what statistics are:
” The latest hollywood blockbuster .. Indiana Jones and the Crystal Skulls … Broke box office records for
revenues.
Once again .. just what exactly did downloading do ?
Nothing.
An effect statistically equal to zero.”
The fact that it was able to do well at the box office does not mean that piracy had no detrimental effect. It simply means that the movie was successful in the face of any and all obstacles. YOUR statement, is the logical fallacy here.
July 14th, 2008 at 2:10 pm
” Whether you agree with the cost or not, is largely irrelevant. Downloading music is piracy, and piracy is theft. ”
No matter how often this lie is repated it is still no true.
This is Piracy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piracy
It refers to theft of actual physical property, commoted on the ‘High Seas’
Piracy IS theft.
Downloading music under a creative Commons license is perfectly legal.
Downloading Copyrighted music without the owners permission ‘MAY’ be copyright infringement,
and copyright infringement is not Theft.
This is not sophistry.
If it was, the RIAA lawyers would be calling it theft directly .. IN A COURT OF LAW.
They are not.
They were specifically prohibited from calling if theft during the Grokster debacle.
Theft can only take place when someone is deprived of physical property.
Interestingly .. even in court .. the RIAA is still avoiding the issue of downloading as infringement,
going after students with shared folders and claiming that the mere existence of those files in
a shared folder is infringing, even though no downloading can be proven.
They had admitted, in court briefs that they CANNOT DEFINITIVELY PROVE downloading.
That is the manifest erro of law discussed right no in the Jammie Thomas trial.
Calling downloading ‘piracy’ and ‘theft’ is merely your opinion, and so far, that opinion has NOT
been validated in any court of law.
” Claiming that by illegally downloading someone else’s work for free is somehow forcing the industry to change is delusional. ”
That’s why so many of us support boycotting.
Don’t download, don’t buy it.
If you must have it, buy it second hand.
If that someone WANTS it to be downloaded and licenses it as CC, that’s perfectly legal.
If the RIAA thinks that they will eliminate the copying of their stuff comepletely, it is
THEY that are delusional.
Even if they somehow manage to wipe P2P entirely off the face of the net, there will always
be a way to copy it.
Always.
Someone will ALWAYS find a way to get it passed around for free.
Always.
” And make no mistake, I’m not above downloading a track here or there. But to me the arguments of “make it cheap”, and “make it legal” is already being accomplished. ”
It certainly is.
AllofMP3 ( now under a different name ) is STILL making money, selling RIAA stuff for much cheaper than 1.00 a track,
competing EASILY with free, and STILL, as it always did, paying royalties to the russian versions of the label
collective society.
Why the RIAA hates them so ??
They are competition.
They won’t bow to an outdated 1 dollar or more per track model.
They won’t be ‘controlled’
The labels HATE competition that they can’t control.
So whether someone ‘ agrees with the cost or not ‘ is not ‘irrelevant’ .
It’s the only relevant thing here.
” Software, music, and movie pirates have only earned the ire of regular citizens. ”
Not really, in fact, not at all.
If RIAA sales are to be noted, it appears the RIAA labels are the ones that have earned the ire of citizens,
and their sales show it.
and NOT because of downloading, which , again, has been proven to have ZERO effect on sales.
Because ANY business that sues those that cannot fight back as an enforcement tool, or business model
can EXPECT dire consumer backlash.
No RIAA propoganda can whitewash that away without outright lying.
Promoting a criminal act on the high seas IS wrong.
Most of us here don’t ‘promote’ copyright infringement either.
We promote a boycott.
One more thing …
” That doesn’t mean you get to decide after consuming it if you should have to pay. ”
This is a proper expectation for ANYTHING ELSE on the consumre market that we buy.
If we don’t like it, we have a right to return ANYTHING ELSE for a full refund within a
certain reasonable period of time.
In most areas, this is NOT GRANTED when it comes to DVD’s and CD’s.
You can only return a CD or DVD due to physical defect, and not for a refund,
but an undamaged copy of the same thing.
So if you buy a CD , find it really only has one good song, and the rest are crap,
you’re stuck.
In this respect downloading has been a consumer equalizer.
It is no more right or wrong than taking away your right to return something
that did not live up to your expectations.
Want infringement to diminish ?
Charge what people want to pay ( allofmp3 )
Eliminate DRM
Give us BACK our right to return garbage.
That’s a start.
It’s working.
July 14th, 2008 at 2:12 pm
” The fact that it was able to do well at the box office does not mean that piracy had no detrimental effect. It simply means that the movie was successful in the face of any and all obstacles. YOUR statement, is the logical fallacy here. ”
The lie oft repeated will never be true.
July 14th, 2008 at 2:15 pm
” I have a feeling you haven’t even read any such statistics, because the following statement demonstrates you don’t know what statistics are: ”
http://www.hno.harvard.edu/gazette/2004/04.15/09-filesharing.html
http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:XNnTSaCFn4sJ:www.unc.edu/~cigar/papers/FileSharing_March2004.pdf+oberholzer+strumpf&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us&lr=lang_en
A good start.
July 14th, 2008 at 2:17 pm
Just coincidently, I am sure …
These studies came from Harvard and Yale …
2 universities, oddly enough, completely avoided by the RIAA lawyers.
They certainly have students.
I am just as certain that they share files ( copyrighted and not ).
Why the RIAA avoids them is .. strange.
July 14th, 2008 at 2:19 pm
Now ..
Lets see some sources , from you,
statistically supporting your contention of grievous loss.
July 14th, 2008 at 2:43 pm
What terrible translation! You should have posted the French letter and let us do our own translation!
July 14th, 2008 at 2:45 pm
Dreddsnik,
Never cite Wikipedia if you ever wish to maintain the high ground in a debate requiring definitions. The english language evolves over time. Deal with the fact that definitions change. I could track down a bunch of outdated references as well if you really insist.
“Not really, in fact, not at all.
If RIAA sales are to be noted, it appears the RIAA labels are the ones that have earned the ire of citizens,
and their sales show it.”
Visit a site that doesn’t exclusively cater to people highly involved in p2p networks.
As I said before, music and movies are consumed immediately. You EXPERIENCE them. You can not return such a product. Why is it you’re willing to argue that it’s not theft because it’s not a physical item, and in your world theft can only involve physical objects, yet you want to be able to return said non-existent item something for a refund?
You hilariously say that the old definitions of theft are no longer relevant, yet then assume that the ability to return a product (which is directly related to your physical purchase) should still work.
Both of these needs can not be met and you’re selfishly arguing for change only on the side that benefits you.
I am not surprized.
You’ve only gained hours of enjoyment over the course of your life through digesting entertainment products people worked hard for. Why should you have to pay for that?
Next you’ll tell me that you have a ‘right’ to free information (read:music).
Alas, I’m leaving work for the day, and wont visit this site ever again. I’m glad that you’re civil. My only ONLY wish here is to make sure you have no illusions. You are consuming a good that is not paid for. Someone is losing out, and it wouldn’t appear to be you.
I agree, record execs are crooks. But the art of our culture deserves financial support and recognition.
End. Of. Story.
July 14th, 2008 at 3:15 pm
“Once again, it has been repeatedly shown statistically that downloading has ZERO effect.
No one has lost anything, no one has stolen anything, and it can never bee proven that a download equals a lost sale .. ever.”
I can prove it! If I see a ripped-off movie on someone’s PC/TV than I DO NOT go see it a theater, rent it, or buy it!
But I don’t feel guilty because you have told us that theft through torrents is legal. COOL!
Don’t ever say “ever”.
July 14th, 2008 at 3:16 pm
Interesting how you leave, and not address the oberholz/Strumpf studies.
It’s most fascinating what you WON’T adress.
As for the translation,
It was a quick link to the google translation of the .pdf file.
I generally won’t link directly to large .PDF files, that’s sort of rude to the unsuspecting.
As for ‘evolving’ language .. the terms ‘piracy’ and ‘theft’ have not evolved so much
that they are interchangeable in a court of law. To use them interchangeably with
copyright infringement is deliberately misleading and intellectually dishonest, very
close to propogandizing.
Google Oberholzer Strumpf for the link to the .pdf of their statistical study of the effects of
P2P .. the study my opponent won’t address.
” Alas, I’m leaving work for the day, and wont visit this site ever again. ”
buh bye.
” My only ONLY wish here is to make sure you have no illusions. ”
your .. concern .. is noted.
” Someone is losing out, and it wouldn’t appear to be you. ”
That might be if you assume that I am a downloader, and not a boycotter.
An incorrect assumption.
You make a lot of them about me, and other folks who come here.
” But the art of our culture deserves financial support and recognition. ”
on THAT we at least agree.
The labels are not the only way anymore, it’s time they deal
with that fairly instead of using the piracy smokescreen to close
off all of the doors the non-affiliated could potentially use to compete
with them … that’s really what this is about.
and no .. its not the end at all.
July 14th, 2008 at 3:19 pm
” But I don’t feel guilty because you have told us that theft through torrents is legal. ”
Riiiight I said exactly that. cool
Try reading the studies.
If you can read.
July 14th, 2008 at 3:21 pm
Thanks for acknowledging my argument about Scooter because before I started downloading music I literally couldn’t get his CD’s in Canada, HMV wouldn’t ship them because there were so few in stock they would have to order them from Europe and that would bring the cost up above $60 which is completely unreasonable.
As for the Beatles I was not arguing that they were a success story but rather that they were so popular and the music industry had reaped their benefits for so long that their music should become public domain. Why continue charging for music in new formats, when a savvy consumer could simply upgrade their already legally purchased music to a digital format. It is unfair that music is the only thing that is policed in this manner. I am aloud to use my broom to sweep inside my house as well as my driveway, why can’t I listen to my music in my CD player and on my iPod?
As for iTunes being reasonable I respectfully disagree. To have music in a digital format has a a negligible maintenance cost so essentially 100% of the amount paid can be used to pay employees and artists. I have roughly 12000 songs and if I were to pay $1 for each one of those…..well I wouldn’t have been able too. Am I really expected to make the choice between eating and paying rent and being able to listen to the music I enjoy. Not to mention iTunes may have a reasonable library but it falls far short of being comprehensive when it comes down to Electronic music, only having the most popular icons. Where as torrent sites are done by the average user who will dig out these songs and artists and make them available for everyone to listen too.
A perfect example of this are the Prodigy who have countless hundreds of bootlegged concerts that are downloadable but unbuyable other then in sleazy record shops. The only person who benefits from these bootlegs are the fans AKA the consumer. Is downloading bootlegged concerts piracy? I don’t know but I’m interested in your opinion on that one.
Granted I haven’t listened to all of those songs but then I haven’t gained the “experience” of them either so I shouldn’t have to pay for them, unfortunately when I buy a CD I still don’t listen to all of the songs yet I have to pay for all of them (and yes I know you can download individual songs on iTunes but I’m referring specifically to CD’s). When you go and buy a album to support a band and there is only one or two good songs on there as a consumer you feel like your being ripped off, so downloading it seems almost to obvious a solution.
July 14th, 2008 at 3:34 pm
” When you go and buy a album to support a band and there is only one or two good songs on there as a consumer you feel like your being ripped off, so downloading it seems almost to obvious a solution. ”
And with any othe product, if you feel ripped off, you can get your money back … except from the movie and music industry.
Give us back our ability to return cd’s and dvd’s
Get rid of DRM
Bring digital download pricing into reality.
Then yes, you will be able to compete with free, as AllofMp3 does.
July 14th, 2008 at 3:37 pm
I download stuff instead of buying for these simple reasons:
-It costs nothing, so I don’t need a credit card (I’m too young to be given one anyway) or worry about identity theft or scam artists stealing my shit with online transactions.
-It is fast – I can download what I want in a matter of minutes or hours (better than going to a store or ordering a CD through mail)
-It has an amazing selection and is incredibly convenient – I can get literally anything I can think of (even if it isn’t available for purchase) while sitting at my desk at home at any hour of the night.
If downloading is a big problem to big media, then it’s because the big media are shitty businessmen. It’s their own fault if their business isn’t as cost-effective, secure, fast, nor convenient as downloading. They had a monopoly and they blew it. Even if their business became competitive with downloading, their selection would still be far more limited (you couldn’t even get Beatles or Metallica on iTunes until recently – good job, guys!).
Sorry big media, but I get infinitely better service through unauthorized means than through your old “traditional” services. If you don’t like that, then improve your service or fuck off. It’s actually far easier to get free pirated shit than to buy your legitimate media, and that isn’t my fault.
July 14th, 2008 at 4:55 pm
Another aspect to this topic is the fact that a lot of artists do not have a clause in their contracts that addresses downloaded material.
I read this in an issue of Guitar World a few months back. The mag was interviewing a band who said that they don’t see any revenue from the legitimate download sites like itunes.
July 14th, 2008 at 8:28 pm
My great-great…grandfather wrote the BIBLE!
The way I figure it someone owes me about a google-plex dollars!
The media giant, GOD, will SHUT-YOU-DOWN if you don’t quit spreading “The Word”!
Anyways, Freedom of information YES. Theft NO.
July 14th, 2008 at 8:35 pm
Gene Simmons is that you?
July 17th, 2008 at 1:24 pm
” Interesting how you leave, and not address the oberholz/Strumpf studies. ”
They will always leave rather than show any proof of their claims.
Turn tail.
Run away.