Remind me again of why it's good that any website that has commenters link to potentially infringing content be liable to be shutdown completely by the government?
Maybe if the SOPA/PIPA hadn't had a massive amount of overreach, it wouldn't have been such an issue.
I looked at his logic on how the encryption key works with sharing, and frankly, the way Dotcom has this system setup is no different than how you're able to download music through a magent torrent, or files from Google drive.
However, I am wondering if Mega will make the encryption key for the file/folder random with each share. For example, if you wanted to share a file with 5 of your friend, you would have to generate and send them 5 different keys.
If that's the case, then I don't see people choosing Mega as a way to share to millions of people.
Mmm, the hardy, robust smell of someone getting asshurt.
It's amazing that reporting can make you so angry.
Kind of hard to rip off their stuff when they allow free streaming of South Park.
Also this little gem:
" I don't care about piracy for our stuff. I find it a fascinating thing to talk about, how the world is changing and all. But we're not like Lars over here. Its going to be interesting to see what happens over the next few years though."
http://treyparker.info/archives_transcripts_spstudios_05apr05.htm
I think social media content is a huge victim of terrible non-engaging content.
For example, a company I've worked with in the past was always trying to sell themselves via Youtube and Facebook. Whenever I suggested creating relevant material for status updates, videos or blog content instead of material highlighting the company, they would ask me "Well..will that attract clients?".
I never gave them a response, but that's because they wouldn't want to hear that nobody wants to spend the time watching a video about a company they've never heard of.
This is good, it'll put the investors off of Hollywood.
On a side-topic, Matt Stone and Trey Parker started their own production studios called "Important Studios" because they too hate Hollywood and its practices.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2013/jan/15/trey-parker-matt-stone-important-studios
You're forgetting that people utilize VPNs, which would create a bit of confusion in trying to locate a valid IP address. Also IP addresses do not equal a person.
So what if a company had free wifi and someone consistently came in to suck up the bandwidth and download free media via torrents? How would they catch that person? What if the company's IP address was blocked because of that?
"Everyone is aware that Mke Masnick is an intellectually dishonest piracy apologist, but this is some weak sauce right here."
Who's "everyone"?
He must be pretty dim if he thinks people won't check up on his "facts."
You're an idiot man. You go around spamming copy/paste sermons with discredited facts to reputable blogs.
Funnily enough, I doubt doing so helps bring anybody to your site, especially when the commenters rip into your sad little house of cards.
Man, this post needs to be issued in a newsletter to David Lowery, and just so we can watch him make another blog whining about the loss o fhis "easy money" streams.
It was kind of a hassle, but a while back a video I made for the company I work for was issued a takedown notice over a public domain copy of Richard Wagner's "Ride of the Valkyries."
Luckily, I won the appeal, but it's still ridiculous that there's people out there with a large level of ignorance when it comes down to the public domain and fair use.
It was a bit of an embittered statement. I didn't mean to imply Google was to blame for the current situation, just that it's aggravating that these companies can use the justice system to intimidate each other, and as collateral damage, screw over the public.
It sounds like Hollywood is just half-assing it, then again I can't blame them for at least trying different business models.
Just a typical situation where Lionsgate says "jump" and Google says "How high?"
I'd say they need to grow a backbone, but I bet they tried and then lost it after the threat of lawsuits from Hollywood.
There is only one difference...one knows how to spend their money wisely.
It's related to the scripture in Revelation that refers to those having the mark of the beast would be the only ones able to buy and sell.
Some religious-minded folks see this as a prelude to RFID technology embedded in your skin that allows for card-less transactions.
Sad but true.
It's unfortunate too that they instead of boosting attendance through more practical means, they've chosen to go with the easy way out.
It's a simple case of perception.
After working so many days around menageries of man-meat, Malibu Media thinks they have the big dicks.
Re: Hold it
"The government has state secrets privileges that run counter to democratic principles. Corporations have bureaucracy that prevents the workers from understanding the workings at the top. And the public isn't given all information. Instead, we punish the ones that print it or muckrake to find out."
The needs of the few over the needs of the many.
A sad, sad situation.