Newsgroups usage up 42%

iirc the main reason they don't bother is they can sue for the full price of the product for every copy they share (for bittorent that could be hundreds or thousands of copies) + a large punitive fine.


with newsgroups you only download a single copy and don;t upload so in the uk without punitive fines they can only sue for reasonable court costs + the price of the game/film


THis is all fuziley remembered so sorry if i'm wrong :p


Not to mention there'd probably be large legal repercussions for them hacking/cracking/what ever the correct term is for accessing people encrypted data without permission. (which banks shops etc would strongly defend as it could open them up to attack, and their muscle is bigger than the riaa's)
 
Burnsy2023 said:
How have newsgroups not been shutdown already then? Or at least had the same hassle as torrent engines?
Click to expand...

Because newsgroups were used for text discussions.

The files are split into rars then encoded from binary to text and uploaded to a single news server.

It is then cascaded to all other news servers in the world.

Even Virgin provide their own servers with all the illegal stuff freely available on it.
 
Not surprising, however I do think we are seeing a change.. partly due to services now being the same as illegal groups DRM free etc and films being streamed. Then partly due to the cases and media that has scared the computer illiterate, that all could use things like torrent sites as they are so simple are getting scared as they don't know the ins and outs.
 
I cant see how they could ever police the groups? There are a massive ammount of them, all access services have different retentions, you have SSL and nobody in newspaper land has a clue how they work so we wont get the 'omg torrent send them to jail' crowd on it, why anyone ever used things like torrent anyway im still perplexed with.
 
Also, with torrents, anybody can view the IP addresses which are downloading a specific torrent.

With Newsgroups, only the news provider knows what IP is connected to them.
 
Getting into the "elite" private trackers like ****.cd is a lot harder than working out how to use Usenet. And with those you have to adhere to their strict rules, maintain a certain upload ratio, which is hard if your upload is **** and all the stuff you download has 563 seeds and 3 leechers.
 
Burnsy2023 said:
I think the not sharing part is the key to why they're not knee deep in litigation. Without the sharing they can't demand the huge damages in compensation.
Click to expand...

This is the main thing, as someone else went on to, as you aren't possibly sharing the file with thousands of people they can't sue you for massive damages.

As for newsgroups, the servers aren't in Russia, theres no need as the RIAA has no interest in sueing 100million people for £10 each at a cost of £1000's per case in lawyer fee's and time, its not worth it. The servers would be ridiculously slow if based in Russia. Likewise Piratebay being in Russia wouldn't really change much, at the end of the day they don't care about the guys who host the sites, they just want to sue to get access to more records which helps them sue loads of users who can be done for sharing the actual files, not the link to the files. Due to how public torrenting is its not hard for them to track down whose using, but its hard to get legally useable tracking data that proves it.

They can log into a private server and log every single person who shares everything, but that data is useless to them, or largely useless as they won't have a legal reason to have searched for that data.

As for newsgroups hosting legal files, they can and do, lots of them, some people still use them for talking to each other. But 99.999999999999999999% of the data stored on newsgroup servers is tv/film/games/music that is being shared illegally.

Who cares, if the music/film/tv industry had their own "newsgroup" style servers all over the world ready to stream content to anyone that paid a monthy fee they'd be raking in billions. But again as someone said, these industries are stuck in the past.

Personally I'd much prefer to pay for the content directly, than indirectly pay for the content through buying products with advertising fee's added on, which pays for ad's on tv, which I don't want to watch.

I prefer watching a show without interuptions, irritating ad's and being easier to watch when and how I want and while doing other things on the computer when I want to.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom