Stop Microsoft
Miscellaneous => The Lounge => Topic started by: Refalm on 29 November 2005, 16:46
-
Just another example that our copyright laws fucking rule!
A Dutch company is introducing the Lamabox, a mediabox that you can connect to your television and hook up with the internet to download stuff thru popular P2P networks.
The LamaBox is an intelligent mediaplayer, connectable to the internet. The player is special because it's fully integrated with the internet, including connection to the big Peer-to-Peer networks*. Choose from an impressive collection of audio and video. The latest movies en televisionshows, playable on your television at the press of a button.
Watch live video- and audiostreams (with time-shifting), top-10 previews of movies in the theatre, the latest weather forecast or watch photo images from your digital camera and share these with friends and family.
Searching for a good movie? Make the search-spider work for you, or choose from a popular preselection. The LamaBox is simple to control and easy to use.
first player with connection to P2P-networks* via internet
find everything with the P2P-spider and download directly to harddisk
automatically add subtitles to movies
watch live internet-TV on your television (with time-shifting)
listen to hundreds of radiostations worldwide
burn downloads to DVD
simple to control and easy to use
(* including Edonkey, Bittorrent, Fasttrack (Kazaa), Gnutella en Overnet.
The LamaBox is on sale for 279 euro including 19% sales tax.
Shipment outside EU-countries won't include this sales tax. Shipment to companies within the EU without sales tax only with valid VAT-number. Prepayment through Paypal. Worldwide shipping costs: 15 euro (paypal-fee included).
Due to the large demand we kindly as for some patience, at this moment there's a long delay of approximately 5 weeks. We're working very hard to reduce this waiting time to less then a week. Please order in time.
-
Does this use your existing internet connection?
Can you send me one?
-
Does this use your existing internet connection?
Can you send me one?
1. Yes
2. After payment :rolleyes:
-
So because your government supports the mass-ripping-off of musicians its good?
Your governments pretty retarded by the sound of it. Allowing bittorrent trackers and search sites like piratebay is one thing, allowing mass piracy devices is just retarded. Go see the thread Alun started on Open Source Games to see what I am talking about. Sure, maybe art should be public domain and free and musicians should be happy with that. Unfortunatly, recording equipment, video cameras, and things COST MONEY.
Some people need to wake up and smell the real world.
-
Some people need to wake up and smell what the real world could be like.
That is all.
-
So because your government supports the mass-ripping-off of musicians its good?
We have a right to create a back-up of our multimedia and trade them with other people.
-
We have a right to create a back-up of our multimedia and trade them with other people.
Thats what piracy, hence STEALING is numbnuts.
-
Some people need to wake up and smell what the real world could be like.
That is all.
Stealing will not get us there.
Change will get us there, but stealing from what is almost always the little guy, will not get us there.
-
Thats what piracy, hence STEALING is numbnuts.
I don't think it's stealing if you trade a song for another song for free.
-
it is kinda as the people that traded songs will only have paid for one
-
Well, since we're on the topic, let's talk about Nirvana.
their first album "Bleach" cost $600 to record.
their second album "Nevermind" cost probably $60,000 to record.
Why are the cds of these albums both the same price? Because the record company makes enough profit off of smashes like "Nevermind" to pay themselves back for the loss they take on "Alanis Morrisette sings the hits of the 40s". But that's really their problem, right?
All I'm saying is that, economically speaking, the music industry is fucked up. The way things are currently done is wrong, and total piracy is wrong too. Somewhere in the middle is common ground where everyone wins, but both sides are too stubborn to give anything up. And it seems like nobody is talking about how things could be improved - all they are concerned with is fighting. Let's be smarter than that and discuss a better solution.
-
It's a fucking shame that ordering this thing in the US will be good for a prison term longer than most murderers get.
-
piracy forevaaaaa
:p :p ;p :p ;P
ahem just kidding
i must have one of those
interesting ... where did the "lama" came from
could it be related to wina* ups
it is (C) now ... sh*t
-
Thats what piracy, hence STEALING is numbnuts.
I disagree ... Stealing is depriving someone of their property. P2P networks involve sharing files amongst neighbors, much like if your neighbor would ask to borrow a movie or game or music CD from you. Piracy isn't all that appropriate either ... what is a pirate ... someone who comendeers a vessel or vehicle by force ... there is no force involved in internet piracy. These words are used incorrectly by large companies in order to make it seems as if these activities are wrong.
Personally, I don't think there is anything wrong with making a copy of and storing a movie or game or anything that can be downloaded from a peer ... a 'neighbor' ... yes neighbors are often assholes, but not if they give you free stuff. Of course mass distribution of copywrited material is illegal, but why is sharing this copywrited material with 'peers' illegal ? I think they are going too far. So what, the artists loose a couple thousand dollars ... they were gonna blow it on drugs and alcohol anyway, possibly overdosing and dieing ... I'd say you did them a service ... they should be paying you :D
And yes everything and everyone is corrupt ... they steal from you, you steal from them, they lie to you, you lie back, everything and everyone is full of shit ... so what can you do ? Keep the cycle going, hey if they don't stop I sure as hell won't :D
-
I disagree ... Stealing is depriving someone of their property. P2P networks involve sharing files amongst neighbors, much like if your neighbor would ask to borrow a movie or game or music CD from you. Piracy isn't all that appropriate either ... what is a pirate ... someone who comendeers a vessel or vehicle by force ... there is no force involved in internet piracy. These words are used incorrectly by large companies in order to make it seems as if these activities are wrong.
You are correct about the term pirate, that is a phrase used for fear-mongering. Even though stealing is depriving someone of their property, it still applies to warez. The licensing agreements for software and music specifically state that they are just loaning you the songs, and you don't in any way or form "own them". Therefore, giving them to your neighbors is illegal, putting them on the web is illegal, and making backup copies for your own use is also illegal. Actually, it is different than stealing, it is more like vandalism, since you are deliberately misusing someone else's property.
Personally, I don't think there is anything wrong with making a copy of and storing a movie or game or anything that can be downloaded from a peer ... a 'neighbor'
Well, neither do I. And I also think it is pretty sad that we have this whole huge system in place for people to sell and resell all this crap, even though you never truly own it. But hey, it isn't up to you or me. It's these huge media corporations, with bigger bankrolls than Norway, pissing and moaning about everything. Do you know that the audio cassette tape was delayed by a number of years, because it could allow a person to make a copy of an LP? And the VCR was delayed too, because it was feared that people would use it to tape TV shows, and fast-forward thru the commercials. Those things seem like the most natural and useful applications, yet they were once considered theft and/or piracy. Point being that the giant media companies will always have some whine about what they need, and they have the money to make it so.
And yes everything and everyone is corrupt ... they steal from you, you steal from them, they lie to you, you lie back, everything and everyone is full of shit ... so what can you do ? Keep the cycle going, hey if they don't stop I sure as hell won't :D
That's the shittiest attitude I have heard in a long time.
-
And yes everything and everyone is corrupt ... they steal from you, you steal from them, they lie to you, you lie back, everything and everyone is full of shit ... so what can you do ? Keep the cycle going, hey if they don't stop I sure as hell won't
yup that IS the Bulgarian attitude/way
to things which is why
we first thought of using air planes
for military actions :! :)
care to make it suck for the others more then care to make it better for you !
wich is also why we are so fucked up !
-
It may be a shitty attitude, but what do you suggest ? That I go along with everything they force upon me ? That I give up and let them run me into the ground ? You know that there is no (plausible) way to stop the cycle, even if I stop they won't. They want everything from me, and I won't give it to them. That just isn't me.
-
I don't think it's stealing if you trade a song for another song for free.
Your an idiot then.
-
Your an idiot then.
So the next time you "borrow" a friend's CD, remind me to send the Gestapo your way.
What's that? You didn't rip it? How do we know that? Show us the proof that you didn't copy it.
Given, that'd be proving a negative, but when has *that* stopped police-states?
-
So the next time you "borrow" a friend's CD, remind me to send the Gestapo your way.
What's that? You didn't rip it? How do we know that? Show us the proof that you didn't copy it.
Given, that'd be proving a negative, but when has *that* stopped police-states?
Sharing songs between friends is one thing, mass distributing them on networks designed for it is another.
You have no sense of proportion at all. In other words, your also an idiot.
-
Sharing songs between friends is one thing, mass distributing them on networks designed for it is another.
You have no sense of proportion at all. In other words, your also an idiot.
Proportion doesn't matter, it still trading songs for free, wether if it's with my nextdoor neighbour or on Gnutella.
-
Then it is still stealing.
-
Then it is still stealing.
I don't think it's stealing, and apparantly, the Dutch law doesn't think either.
-
I don't think it's stealing, and apparantly, the Dutch law doesn't think either.
Yet you fail to argue why you don't feel it is stealing. I think it is stealing because it costs a lot of money to record music. People like you are taking the money out of already broke sound engineers pockets (not to mention electronics technitians on assembley lines who build mixers and a range of other electronic equipment that DOES NOT DIGITALLY EXIST FOR FREE DISTRIBUTION ON THE INTERNET). It is as simple as that my friend, its stealing, its amoral. Sure you might hold left wing pinko ideals like me about big recording companies, but you still completely neglect to even think of the little guy getting screwed in the middle. You and your country are just selfish.
-
I don't think it's stealing, and apparantly, the Dutch law doesn't think either.
You're talking about bittorrents, right? The reason they are legal is not because the government does not see it as stealing but because the sites themselves do not contain copyrighted material.
-
You're talking about bittorrents, right? The reason they are legal is not because the government does not see it as stealing but because the sites themselves do not contain copyrighted material.
Exactly, I would be really pissed off if bittorrents were made illegal along with any P2P because they also provide a great medium to find legal material. For example I know a lot of musicans like myself who use soulseek to share their own demos freely.
-
You're talking about bittorrents, right? The reason they are legal is not because the government does not see it as stealing but because the sites themselves do not contain copyrighted material.
Things are a little different in the US... the "made available" clause of the DMCA makes torrent file providers liable as though they'd provided the actual copyright material.
-
Things are a little different in the US... the "made available" clause of the DMCA makes torrent file providers liable as though they'd provided the actual copyright material.
Same here in Australia, we follow the DMCA and personally I feel it is quite stupid. Especially when people try to carry out DMCA action on search engines like google, which has been done in the past.
-
I use LimeWire and BitTorrent to download songs and albums but after i am done listing to them and decide that yes i do or do not like this artist/album i head out to FYE and buy me the album or single and delete the mp3's. So is P2P relly that evil if used responsbly and not taken for granted?
-
You're talking about bittorrents, right? The reason they are legal is not because the government does not see it as stealing but because the sites themselves do not contain copyrighted material.
No, I'm talking about that it's legal here to download off all P2P networks. It's however illegal to upload.
I don't think it's stealing because the money from CD sells does not go to the artist directly anyway, they still need record companies to get famous or to distribute CD's.
I believe it works in the intrests of music artists if they found ways to distribute their music independantly from record companies.
-
No, I'm talking about that it's legal here to download off all P2P networks. It's however illegal to upload.
Whats the reasoning behind this?
-
Whats the reasoning behind this?
It's legal to trade piece of music with someone else, if that person gives something in return.
P2P is basically the same, only on a larger scale. By keeping that 70's trading law, the Dutch government wants to force record companies to make it impossible to copy their music.
-
I don't think it's stealing because the money from CD sells does not go to the artist directly anyway, they still need record companies to get famous or to distribute CD's.
As far as drm goes, what you think of stealing means fuck-all. The record company thinks it is stealing, and they would try to prosecute you if they could. The system might not be fair, but as mere citizens, we are not allowed to attempt to set things right by redefining what is legal and what isn't.
Personally, I think that we need to stand up for our rights and musician's rights and filmmaker's rights. Show the corporate swine that P2P, file-sharing, and etc are good for society in general, and that we will no longer support their destructive and fascistic search for more and more consumer dollars.
Again, I have to return to Chuck D and Public Enemy. Chuck D has started his own record label to release his music, as he does not want to give up creative or marketing freedom to anyone but himself. Thus, you can go buy songs for 99 cents (years before iTunes), download remixes, and even upload your own remixes. Controlling the message is one thing, but controlling how that message is conveyed is something else entirely.
As another example, consider the band NoFX. They have been releasing their own albums for years on their own label, Fat Wreck Chords. They then use profits from sales to produce albums for up-and-coming artists, musicians who would never get the chance with a major label. Fat Wreck Chords was another early pioneer in downloadable music - they would choose a track from an album and give it away for free, which promoted album sales, a common practice now. Of course they maintain total creative control over their music, their artwork, and their business.
So here's 2 examples of how it should be done. Companies whose primary goal is to get their music out there. Yes, it is possible to keep your artistic freedom, have a large fan base, and make plenty of money. Without sueing people for downloading your music. So why do Sony and Electra and Columbia need to sue people, use agressive DRM, and control every little aspect of the music they put out for maximum profitability?
Think when you're at the record store. Then you won't have to be worried about who's watching you when you get home.
-
So here's 2 examples of how it should be done. Companies whose primary goal is to get their music out there. Yes, it is possible to keep your artistic freedom, have a large fan base, and make plenty of money. Without sueing people for downloading your music. So why do Sony and Electra and Columbia need to sue people, use agressive DRM, and control every little aspect of the music they put out for maximum profitability?
Think when you're at the record store. Then you won't have to be worried about who's watching you when you get home.
I completely agree ... it's the excessive greed of these companies that causes their oppressive behavior ... we should boycott them ... I'm in ... is there a full list of oppressive corporations somewhere ... or would we be better off with a list of good companies (since it would be much shorter) ... and we should try to spread the word, a handful of people boycotting a major company won't do much good ... but a whole lot of people boycotting would put enough pressure for change to occur :D
-
kintario has ilegal software on his computer, does that count???
-
DRM is almost mainstream now...