Illegal file sharing on the Internet, what should we do?

my personal idea would be to let ISP's charge you for downloads of individual media files larger than say 100mb. Because we all know the only files large enough for that are series videos like lost or actual movies or applications.
 
codec said:
my personal idea would be to let ISP's charge you for downloads of individual media files larger than say 100mb. Because we all know the only files large enough for that are series videos like lost or actual movies or applications.
Click to expand...

And what about movie editors, will they have to pay for their own work?
 
codec said:
my personal idea would be to let ISP's charge you for downloads of individual media files larger than say 100mb. Because we all know the only files large enough for that are series videos like lost or actual movies or applications.
Click to expand...

What about people who download from iplayer? Or people legitmatley downloading apps from sites?
 
yantorsen said:
What about people who download from iplayer? Or people legitmatley downloading apps from sites?
Click to expand...

I dont know about I tunes and the web players, but I guess its an oppertunity for bbc to cash in that way instead of tv licencing :p because we'll all be using online streaming eventually anyway

mr white - I've never seen a good quality movie thats 20mb in size..... props to the makers of the codecs that allow such compression though lol
 
Surely some people acquire software etc. to just fool around a bit on it? I mean when I was about 15 or so, I did a course on photoshop (just because I was interested in it) and then wanted to fool around on it at home. I managed to 'acquire' a copy and used it to fool around a bit on and it just lay on my computer. Since then the computer's gone through many formats etc but never have I felt a need to get it again. Just that first time to see what it's like and fool around on it a bit etc. I fail to see how something like that would harm a company since I highly doubt that people (I can't possibly be the only one) who just want to fool around a bit on some software would pay the ridiculous price tag to do that. (no idea what it is now. I just remember it being about 1200 singapore $ when I saw it last about 7 years ago).
 
Sudden said:
Surely some people acquire software etc. to just fool around a bit on it? I mean when I was about 15 or so, I did a course on photoshop (just because I was interested in it) and then wanted to fool around on it at home. I managed to 'acquire' a copy and used it to fool around a bit on and it just lay on my computer. Since then the computer's gone through many formats etc but never have I felt a need to get it again. Just that first time to see what it's like and fool around on it a bit etc. I fail to see how something like that would harm a company since I highly doubt that people (I can't possibly be the only one) who just want to fool around a bit on some software would pay the ridiculous price tag to do that. (no idea what it is now. I just remember it being about 1200 singapore $ when I saw it last about 7 years ago).
Click to expand...

Well tbh, apps are different from media. I agree that for personal use, companies shouldnt be charging such ridiculous amounts for software especially in your case because you need to start learning the software as young as possible if you want to get an expert understanding in it when you are older. But then thats what the demo's *SHOULD* be for... but companies would much rather use them as a marketing tool than an educational.

I dunno what to make of it all but I reckon applications should be treated differently from media for obvious reasons.
 
http://www.youwouldnt.net/

All around us we see war and environmental destruction, eroding civil rights and obscene profits. No wonder media corporations and their lobbyists want to control what you can say and do with media. The MPAA's latest video against file-sharing could have been just another insult to our collective intelligence, but putting it at the beginning of hundreds of thousands of DVDs and making it impossible to skip was going too far!
Click to expand...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHHkfXLO44U&feature=related
 
yantorsen said:
I have no moral issues using someone else work, as long as I'm not then making money from there work.

End of the day, if they want me to buy there software, they have to make there prices more competitive. I actually buy all my own software, games and movies. I've don't download much music these days thanks to spotify, I only download what I want on my MP3 player.

If for example Photoshop was £30 like games are, I'd buy it. It's never worth the price it is, it is only that much because Abobe know that people need it and will buy it whatever the price.
Click to expand...

Of course that's all utter nonsense...

If what you are 'using' is in anyway costing/losing someone else money, then in effect you are stealing money from them.

As for justifying piracy due to pricing - You're justifying your theft by the fact you can't afford something? I suspect this is one of the most common reasons for theft there is - Why should you be different?
 
NeilFawcett said:
Of course that's all utter nonsense...

If what you are 'using' is in anyway costing/losing someone else money, then in effect you are stealing money from them.

As for justifying piracy due to pricing - You're justifying your theft by the fact you can't afford something? I suspect this is one of the most common reasons for theft there is - Why should you be different?
Click to expand...

It is a valid point though. No one here is going to have Photoshop installed legally on their PC unless they use it to make money. It's price is too high to justify it. They then release Photoshop Elements to try and tempt these people in with a cut down version for a cut down price. Why not release the full version on a EULA that states you can't use this product to make money or for any business/organisational purposes?
 
Trifid said:
It is a valid point though. No one here is going to have Photoshop installed legally on their PC unless they use it to make money. It's price is too high to justify it. They then release Photoshop Elements to try and tempt these people in with a cut down version for a cut down price. Why not release the full version on a EULA that states you can't use this product to make money or for any business/organisational purposes?
Click to expand...

It's an interesting point but most people who use software such as Photoshop are just messing around or trying to learn it - not neccessarily to make money from it. Same with most applications they're seeing if it fits a need for them with the ability to buy it if it does rather than buy it and find out it's rubbish.

If ISP's started to charge for large file downloads because they believe it is piracy, as mentioned by codec, this would be a massive fail on there behalf as we would have gone back a step rather than forward. You may as well just connect a 56k modem if you wanted to do that. There are thousands and thousands of legitimate applications over 1GB let alone 100MB. Linux distros, open office, NASA photos and even drivers (ATI's are now 61MB, HP's network drivers are over 100 MB) so you would constantly be charged. In all honesty it's a stupid idea and if only a select few ISP's did this then no-one would use them.

If you then want the ISP to check the traffic (i.e. spy on you) then this is against everything I believe the internet to be.

There is no easier solution other than making sofware more attractive for people to use and at a competitive price across the board no matter what country you are in. Release dates should be the same World wide as well (a particular pet hate especially for DVD's).


M.
 
codec said:
my personal idea would be to let ISP's charge you for downloads of individual media files larger than say 100mb. Because we all know the only files large enough for that are series videos like lost or actual movies or applications.
Click to expand...

But as far as I know, ISP's can't differentiate between actual download and data transfer? so a long video chat would register the same way?
 
codec said:
my personal idea would be to let ISP's charge you for downloads of individual media files larger than say 100mb. Because we all know the only files large enough for that are series videos like lost or actual movies or applications.
Click to expand...

So I would have to pay an additional charge to:

Download a game on steam or other legal direct download source.
Download a Linux Distribution/legal ISO of something.
Download a legal Game modification (e.g cinematic mod ~9gb).

I find it enough reason to change ISP if they have download limits or cap you, and I don't pirate. I wouldn't go on any ISP that charged me extra to download files. And even if they did charge for download big files, that's even worse. Now the ISPs are profiting for piracy, and the IP creating companies are still loosing out.

People that say photoshop is too expensive. Yes the latest full professional CS4 or whatever is expensive, because it's a professional product. You can get the latest elements for £30 if you look around, and the version before even cheaper.

I find it ridiculous that pirates can turn round and say that the companies are "greedy" to charge for a product that costs millions to develop a year, and then go a long and take what they want for free of charge, even when they blatantly don't need it. Whose greedy really?

Imo, that's all piracy is. Greed. There's no other excuse or justification to me.
 
Last edited:
No legal files over 100mb rofl. What you smoking. there are plenty of legit files well over 100mb and thousands in the multiple gbs. You might want to come out of the stone age.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom