But of course suing torrent downloaders will never work

Gideon is scanning torrent freak articles for his irrelevant response.

Damian will be in any minute now to tell us this is all a waste of time and wrong. LOL

suing torrent downloaders is a waste of time.

It isn't that you can't win. There have been thousands of cases where companies have sued and won or settled out of court. The problem is all of those cases have done nothing to curb overall piracy.

I guess if you have a company and you sue copyright violators, win and it is profitable that can help you replace some of the lost revenue from piracy, but it doesn't seem to be deterring other people from downloading the content illegally.

Well so far yes, it hasn't affected much the overall piracy numbers, but the ball keeps rolling. And helping companies to make up for the lost income is the big deal of itself, because it may help alot of people to sit through the hard times until piracy problem is sorted out worldwide.

And btw it appears that those efforts did affect piracy numbers in the US. With all those downloaders lawsuits, and also court orders such as in hotfile case to reveal uploaders' identities, it seems that there are a lot less uploaders from the US now then it was 2 years ago. Of course they were easily replaced by uploaders from other countries, but sooner or later other countries will follow suit too.

I happen to believe that the wave of the future will be that there will be legal changes made to the DMCA laws that make hiding behind it more difficult and I also think we will see a trend where companies will be going after the sites that provide access to the content as opposed to the downloaders themselves.

I wouldn't be shocked to eventually see laws in place that could allow a company to go after a torrent site and if they win they can just take control of the domain and shut the site down. Of course the site owner can just move it to a new domain, but for the site to be successful they would need to get the word out what that domain is and you could just seize that one as well. Eventually they would just get sick of all the running and not making any money and give it up.

I am all for suing those who violate a copyright, I just think there might be a more effective way of doing it, but like a lot of things we need to wait for the laws to catch up with the technology.

I agree going after the whole site is way more effective, but for now it seems to be largely a shot in the dark. Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't. More clear guidelines should be put in place as to where the responsibility of a site is to prevent large scale infringments - such as using DFP, banning repeat offenders, not offering rewards to uploaders etc.

Currently what seems to be working bullet proof is suing individual infringers (when done right of course), because in that case infringment is clear and well covered by current laws. And with SOPA coming more responsibility will shift towards sites' operators rather than "blame it all on user" which seems to be dominant approach nowadays. So this catching up you're talking about is taking place, but of course it's happening too darn slow.

Who has been saying that?

People have been saying that suing downloaders will have no impact on piracy. The MPAA and RIAA tried it, spent billions, failed, gave up.

What do you know that the MPAA and RIAA don't?

Also, ask the lawyer how much the kid settled for. I think it was 1 cent per dollar.

Citation?

True. As the laws catch up with the technology I think we will see more and more cases against sites. Especially once there are a few big victories against sites so there is more established case law to work from.

Show me evidence that in the last 10 years of the MPAA doing this piracy has decreased?

God you just don't get it at all.

How about this:

Last week the MPAA[1] released their “Theatrical Market Statistics” for 2010. The report shows the disturbing effect that piracy is having on the film production and distribution industries. According to the official figures, global box office takings in 2010 were a mere $31.8 billion (around £19.7bn). While this figure may look impressive, it was a mere 6% increase on 2009 (25% increase since 2006). This compares with estimated growth of around 1.7% in the UK and 2.9% in the US for 2010.[2]



It would seem that despite the ongoing financial crisis and the ever-increasing levels of piracy, the film industry (as a whole) is still doing remarkably well. Of course, it could be that what we are seeing here are the fruits of the MPAA’s aggressive anti-piracy campaigns in the US and Europe (encouraged by their colleagues in the RIAA, IFPI and so on). Unfortunately, the data would seem to disagree on this; the US/Canada box office remained constant in 2010 (at $10.6bn, compared with a 10% increase in 2009, but no change in 2008), and the figures for EMEA[3] increased by merely 5%. However, the picture is far better elsewhere; with a 21% increase in the “Asia Pacific” region, and 25% in Latin America. As far as I know, these regions are not bastions of respect for copyright. Could it be that piracy is not having a significant effect on box office sales after all?

continues http://legalpiracy.wordpress.com/201...film-industry/

pornbb.org
saff.cc
porn-w.org

Go and find US uploaders who were the overwhelming majority not even 2 years ago.

Citation means you post evidence of what you said.

HTH.

Look, I will open the kimono on this scam because you don't get it.

There is fuck all traffic on torrent sites. It's all moved to file lockers as you know.

However, torrents have this weakness because of public trackers. So people can get the IP address of people sharing the file.

They can also get the IP address of the person who uploaded it.

There is 1 of them, and 1000000 of downloaders.

They COULD have gone after the uploader if they wanted to try and help reduce piracy. But no, they went for the downloaders. Why? Because there were thousands of them and thus more bank to be made.

No one sues people on usenet, on file lockers, on private FTP, on IRC. Because they can't get teh IPs.

They can make money suing downloaders, so they do.

These cases are nothing to do with stopping piracy. Why would a lawyer want to do that? He'd cut off his income supply. Why would the content removal business want to succeed in stopping piracy? They would have no business left. This is all about making bank whilst preying on producers fears.

It's pretty clever.

Did you know that actually winning a lawsuit and getting your money are two different things, sometimes one doesn't lead to the next.

I have big hopes of such victories too. Especially promising in that regard is the hotfile case in the US which will help to put filehosters back into place where they belong. And thepiratebay case which will help to futher fight torrent sites that are hosted in Europe, where the majority of prominent torrent sites is hosted after they've been chased off US soil a few years ago.

It seems like many are waiting for thepiratebay outcome to wage futher action on torrents, because them resilient fucks so called "founders" promised to drag that case through the entire slow and clumsy European judicial system. That has a dowside of thepiratebay and lots of other torrent sites still working, but it'll also set all necessary precedents in place which will allow to take them all offline quickly using thepiratebay ruling. Not a lot of new major anti-piracy lawsuits are filed in Europe because of that currently, but I'm pretty sure European courts will explode will new cases once those scamming bloodsucking "founders" are behind bars finally.

Or could it simply be that theatrical experience cannot be stolen and people still visit movie theaters because it is an event for them such as day off that goes beyond just watching a movie? In Asia and Latin America many economies are still growing which could be the reason why more people are going to see new movies in theaters.

Unlike Hollywood, porn cannot boast the luxury of having solid and steady movie ticket sales revenue that allows them to entrench and fight internet piracy for decades if need be. We'll be all toast long before that because we do not have any fat to trim. Internet sales are pretty much the only income that we have.

That's why we need to fight piracy tooth and nail NOW. Yes new laws that will catch up with the advance in technology are not in place yet, but even exisiting laws still give us a wealth of instruments and authority to combat piracy. We need to MAX out of them, not simply sit and wait until Hollywood/SOPA whatever/whoever else will sort our problems out for us.

Do you also think the war on drugs is worth fighting and in the end that drugs will be removed from society?

One indicator that tells me the box office is hurting at least a little bit is that if you go back to say 1995ish and you compare it to now. Today they are making more money then they did back then, but they are still selling about the same number of movie tickets and they are making 10-15% more movies each year. The only reason that the profits are up is because in that same time period the average price of a ticket as gone up 46%.

So their costs are up since they are making more movies and the new theaters that they are building are not cheap and the mass marketing that the movies get these days is also expensive, yet they aren't selling any more tickets then they did 15 years ago.

More users, more content, easier distribution - of course it hasn't decreased, but you cannot say it has had no effect on piracy, you can only guess, as I can only guess that that the numbers would be even larger than they currently are if nothing was ever done. Well, I know the number would be larger, by at least 1.

Yes.
No.

Do you think piracy has zero effect on porn producers & porn affiliates income? Do you think if nothing is done, rather than something, that's the way forward?

Of course I do not think so. Fighting drug dealers is useless and not even half assed attempt such as the so called "the war on drugs" should be made to stop them. They should be allowed to walk freely and sell dough wherever they please even at schools. All is useless and hopeless, just give up and hope that maybe some of them will choke one day from sniffing too much coke.

I'm not sure were do you see the effect of piracy there, please clarify your point.

Those facts you cited sound to me like a normal evolution of a mature market. US population hasn't exploded in the recent couple of decades so where the new movie goers that they can sell more movie tickets to should be coming from? When about the same amount of tickets is sold, that sounds like a norm to me. As well as the rest of the facts, which could be explained by competition forcing them to spend more on production and advertising and also to produce more movies to reach more market segmets.

About the same happened in adult too when people started to produce more niche sites when mainstream content market hit saturation. And when niches reached saturation too, and no more reserves for explosive growth were available, market remained stable for a couple of years with about the same amount of subscriptions being sold, but companies had to keep spending more to produce more of that niche content to keep their market share. I'm talking of pre-piracy times now. Then the piracy hit and everything went to hell. But in pre-piracy era, from my observations, what was happening pretty much mimics what you just described happened in mainstream movie tickets sales market.

"In 1986, the US Defense Department funded a two-year study by the RAND Corporation, which found that the use of the armed forces to interdict drugs coming into the United States would have little or no effect on cocaine traffic and might, in fact, raise the profits of cocaine cartels and manufacturers."

"A 2008 study by Harvard economist Jeffrey A. Miron has estimated that legalizing drugs would inject $76.8 billion a year into the U.S. economy ? $44.1 billion from law enforcement savings, and at least $32.7 billion in tax revenue ($6.7 billion from marijuana, $22.5 billion from cocaine and heroin, remainder from other drugs)."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_on_...s_to_taxpayers

It's been a war that has been lost. It costs billions. It is a total fuck up. Drugs are more widely available and at a better purity than ever before.

I don't understand how you can support something that has failed utterly?

I am saying, and I think this is the 2398293 time I've said this, that the money wasted on fighting piracy would generate more revenue if it was spent on marketing and making a better product. I've seen no proof that spending money on fighting piracy has any impact at all. In fact, the opposite, as more people are pirating now than ever. The PR that the cases get has been shown to increase traffic to piracy sites with the case of TPB and Jamy wasshername.

Oh lawd!

To me it seems like if you improve the movie-going experience with nicer theaters, better screens and better sound you would think more people would want to go. Also the increase in the the number of movies released should increase the overall number of ticket sales. But that is not happening. The studios are making more movies, spending more on marking and spending more on the theaters themselves just to tread water.

When you look at the numbers to me it seems like it is one of two reasons. A. People would rather just wait and buy/rent it on DVD or B. they are downloading it and getting it for free.

So to me it appears piracy has had an effect. It can't be proven, but when you are making more product just to sell the same amount something is wrong down the pipeline.

i.p address is not a person...

big difference between torrent downloading and running a protfitiable adult site using stolen content.

Well I cannot speak for everybody of course, but for me personally, I do not even remember when it was the last time that I visited a movie theater because I was actually interested to see some particular new release. To me it is simply an event, a day off, it doesn't matter much what they're showing.

I'm still going to see movies about as often as I did 15 years ago, which is pretty rarely but this isn't the point. What matters is that they sell about the same amount of tickets to me that they did 15 years ago.

As to the new experience from better tech that should attract more people, that also doesn't sound too convincing to me. People usually do not know any better and cannot fathom there's the room for improvement technology wise. The main reasons why they're going to see movies must be the same that were decades ago - to have a day off, to vent, to spend quality time with family and friends. New tech might bring some short time gain in the amounts of movie goers (such as the Avatar did with their 3D thingy), but overall I think it doesn't affect movie going much. The same way HD didn't bring any increase in selling of porn memberships or downloads of clips.

And one more factor, could it be that home theaters that are becoming increasingly common nowadays also affected movie ticket sales, probably even more than piracy did? Unlike old fashioned sd tv which couldn't come even close to real cinema experience and viewing it couldn't match going to a cinema as real family event, home theaters in theory are alsmost as good and could be a replacement at least sometimes. What do you think?

http://business.avn.com/articles/leg...er-453331.html

Usenet Provider ‘News-Service’ Closes Following Court Order
The ‘take-down’ of such a large service shows the slow but steady success of court-focused strategies being used by some anti-piracy groups


by Tom Hymes

THE NETHERLANDS—Chalk one up for the anti-piracy brigade. Following a court order issued late last week by the District Court of Amsterdam rejecting a request from Europe’s largest Usenet provider, News-Service.com, to allow them to continue with business as usual during an appeal of the court’s earlier verdict ordering the service to “cease recording and offering material protected by copyright and neighboring rights on pain of period penalty payment,” the company has ceased operations.



The court battle pitted News-Service against BREIN, a Dutch anti-piracy group that demanded the court force the Usenet provider to delete all infringing content from its servers, an all-but-impossible task that essentially forces a service under such an order to close up shop. According to TorrentFreak.com, BREIN has used the courts to “pull hundreds of (small) torrent sites offline in the Netherlands.”

News-Service.com is perhaps BREIN’s latest score to date, though, and TorrentFreak theorized whether the group will use this seminal win to convince other Usenet providers that resistance is finally all but futile. It is perhaps to mitigate against that result that the operators of News-Service, Patrick Schreurs and Wierd Bonthuis, said in their Nov. 4 post to the site that, despite their decision to cease operations immediately, “For reasons of principle, News-Service.com will not accept the verdict and has lodged an appeal.”

According to TorrentFreak, “The verdict of the Amsterdam Court is very similar to the one that decimated BitTorrent site Mininova two years ago. It requires NSE to finding a way to identify and delete all copyrighted files from its servers, which is practically impossible.

“Aside from threatening many other Usenet providers,” the article continued, “a similar judgment would also mean the end of file-hosting sites such as Megaupload, and other cloud storage services including Dropbox. All these services remove copyrighted files when they are asked to, but policing their own servers proactively may prove to be impossible.”

Needless to say, the prospect of such services no longer being in business is music to the ears of BREIN director Tim Kuik, who referred to the court verdict as “a breakthrough step to further dismantle the availability of illegal content on Usenet.”

The determined campaign by BREIN to use the courts to both take down and intimidate such services—which everyone agrees harbor a vast amount of copyrighted content acquired without permission or payment—highlights the slow but steady success of court-focused strategies being honed and perfected by anti-piracy groups.

In the United States, both houses of Congress have put forth pieces of legislation that target the exact same sorts of services, but in addition to the slower, more certain tactics utilizing the oversight of the courts, the U.S. government, prodded by powerful media and entertainment industry lobbies, is also entertaining direct “market-based” solutions that essentially gut the “safe harbor” provision of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) by allowing individual copyright holders the fast-track ability to take sites they contend harbor stolen content offline through direct demands to ISPs, or by prohibiting advertising services, billing companies and search engines from providing services to them or linking to them, before a court has ever becomes involved.

Critics of the bills before Congress argue that such tactics could, among other problems, lead to a less stable internet, but it could be that the success of court battles such as this one—which seem to be actually gaining traction against piracy rather than just playing the old “whack a mole” game—provide a more direct example of the best way forward in the ongoing and escalating battle against out-of-control global digital piracy.

While similar court wins (i.e. the 2009 victory by the Recording Industry Association of America against Usenet.com) have occurred in the States, it remains to be seen whether the copyright protection-oriented regions of the world will become more (or less) strategically coordinated as attempts to rein in "rogue" websites around the world gains steam.

Bhahaha so true lol

IP address is not a person, but mr. Mancera most certainly IS a person who just got his ass fried in court for stealing other people's work and seeding it at his goddamn motherfucking torrent.

I would actually say they sell me fewer tickets now than they did 20 years ago. When I was a kid and lived at home or had roommates I went to the movies almost every weekend. Part of it was just to get away from everyone and get out of the house and part of it was that I was young and it was something to do with my friends. Now I am like you. I rarely go to the theater. I really have to want to see a movie otherwise I wait for DVD and watch it at home especially if it is a heavy drama. I don't want to sit in a theater with a group of people chewing on food and sounding like a heard of cattle while I'm trying to listen to the movie. If it is a big action flix, it is cool because it is loud enough you can't hear the other people.

I think there are likely many reasons that ticket sales are stagnant and home theaters as well as how quickly movies are released on DVD are likely part of it. I was just going off a few people I know. For example I know a guy who never goes to the theater and downloads anything he wants. He doesn't think there is anything wrong with it. This is a guy I have known my whole life and back when we were kids we all went to the movies a lot together. Now he still sees a lot of movies, he just downloads them all illegally and no matter what argument you make he has some kind of rational for what he is doing. I'm sure he is not the only one doing that. When you see a list like this that shows the top ten most pirated movies this week there are a few movies on there that are still only in theaters. I would think that is having some affect on the box office sales.

"might" "estimated"

If I could be bothered, which I can't, I might be able to find an estimate as well saying the opposite. So with my apathy on googling irrelevant shit to add to a debate on a porn board about adult piracy out of the way, are you saying we can apply the same logic, and legalize piracy, which would make us all more money?

2398293 times you've said that, but you still didn't just give yes/no answers to my questions. Fuck me, you are as bad as wankham.

And again you cannot say there is proof that the more money spent on fighting piracy, the bigger the increase in piracy. You can state it as opinion, but since there is no way to compare, ie publish figures with zero piracy, you can't state it as fact.

I'm sure this won't affect revenue at all for The Rum Diary, which isn't released here in the UK until 3 days time tubeplus.me/player/1679778/The_Rum_Diary/

Get every movie on there, spread the word, and Hollywood will soon be making more than ever before, as long as they package it differently

Wasn't that guy pirating their content for use on his tube sites?

I don't think that this is a case of suing someone who was just downloading content from the torrents. This person was using their content to make money.

There is a bit of a difference between the two.

Not sure of your point. I said they weren't going after usenet end users.

They aren't.

Excellent cut and paste skills though. DVTimes watch out!

The drugs would make more money if legalised through taxation. Currently there is no tax collected on illegal drugs. The additional revenue would come from saving the tax payer the billions being wasted on a war that has been lost. This is fairly basic obvious stuff. So no, legalising piracy would not increase porn revenues. I didn't suggest it would. The point, and I am sorry I am not making this clear enough, is that the government has spent BILLIONS on fighting drugs and they HAVE LOST. Similarly, the MPAA, RIAA etc have spent BILLIONS fighting piracy. And have lost. There comes a time when you have to realise you've lost.

Sorry, I shall try and use monosyllabic answers in the future.

Where did I say that? I said the PR generated through the fighting increased traffic to tpb because it did. More people because aware of it.

I understand what you're saying, but are you sure they're loosing ticket sales because of your buddy downloading illegally? Maybe they're loosing DVD/digital sales, if he has simply lost interest in visiting theaters, the same way you did. DVD and digital sales are nowhere near the amounts they should be because of piracy, there's no argument about it. It's ticket sales where I'm not so sure.

We're all changing habits as the time goes by, that's natural, do you think that wouldn't have happened with both you and your buddy if not for piracy?

With those piracy charts, I'm also not so sure if they're directly connected to the box office. People have limited amount of time and can only visit movie theaters so much times/month or year. No matter what they're showing there and how interesting it is, I cannot go to see 10 new releases when I only have time for 5 because I have other things in life to do too. But I may wait for a DVD release and buy it when it comes. So those charts may once again reflect lost DVD/digital sales rather than ticket sales.

But those are all theories of course based mostly on personal perception. My main assumption is that people go to movie theaters ONLY because it is an event, which isn't based on anything but speculations. If there's a substantial amount of movie goers that are actually interested to see some particular movie, then of course piracy would have at least some effect on ticket sales too.

funny how the same people always come out in threads revolving around theft...does anyone know why that is?

Mininova mentioned in that article that was merely a second most visited torrent site in the world at the time it was sued by BREIN is of course nothing to talk about. It's all about downloaders only. Such as the "founders" of the piratebay that are getting sued in Sweden, they're just regular downloaders too, probably because they downloaded shit ton of other people's money off of their piece of crap motherfucking thieving torrent.

Funny how some people are cowards and insinuate shit they don't have the balls to actually say. Does anyone know why that is?

When something is not working, just give up. Do not try to regroup, to try a different approach, to think out of the box. Just give up, all is lost. Criminals are invincible and unstoppable. Just throw the white flag and try to adapt.

Content is the modern "gold".

Pirates are just thieves that want to steal the "gold".

The "gold" and the technologies involved change; but,
the thieving pirates have the same motives they have always had.

Just my opinion.

ARGHHHH! (where's Chio?)

Or, carry on wasting billions of dollars on something that has been proven ineffective?

Why not try spending that money on education? Why not treat addicts instead of put them in prison? Why not just fucking LOOK at the BILLIONS being pissed away and think "we lost, game over, time to try something else".

Same with piracy, except we haven't been wasting money on that for quite as long as we've been wasting money on the war on drugs.

If I told you that if you give me 50k a month I will make your sites 1 million, and after 40 years of doing this I have not once made you a million would you keep paying me? If so, where can I send the invoice?

--

"The Global Commission on Drug Policy reported that between 1998 and 2008, global use of opiates increased 34.5 percent, cocaine 27 percent, and cannabis 8.5 percent.

Carter said when he left the presidential office in 1980, 500,000 people were incarcerated in America. At the end of 2009, the number jumped to 2.3 million. If the number of people on probation and parole are included, the figure totals 7.2 million people, or more than 3 percent of all US adults."
http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/1647...cs-failure.htm

Do Jesus how can you say such a horrible thing. Sharing is caring, ya know. And pirates are also freedom fighters against "corporate parasites" and "copyright trolls". They're carrying the banner of freedom and high moral values at the times when the dark forces of oppression and totalitarism are threatening the entire human race by demanding things that are unheard of in human history, such as actually paying for shit other people make for you.

HAVE LOST? In what way, purely monetary? We are getting waaaaaay off topic here, but money isn't the be all and end all - let's legalise something that brings misery to fucking millions, so we can make a profit? If that's your view then I guess that's your view, but tell that to a bunch of parents who have seen kids destroyed or killed thanks to drugs "yeah sorry, we lost money, nowadays we want to make a profit, and make all drugs legal, so tough shit, but the good news is your taxes will go down. Maybe. Probably not actually."


So the fighting explicitly increased it's popularity, not the give-me-it-for-free culture, the huge rise in social networking, the amount of new internet users? Got a citation for that?

In every and any way you care to mention:

Drug use is up, way up
Quality is up
Availability is up
Revenue is up

How many other ways are there to count how many ways the war on drugs has failed?

Can you name me one way you think it has worked? Just one.

No, let's just stop the war on drugs. Keep it controlled, like alcohol and tobacco.

Try and quote what I say and make a counterpoint instead of just putting up straw men. It makes you seem less mental.


See above. Where did I say that it increased drug use popularity?

You're worse than Markham.

If I'm not making enough money, I'll fire my marketing consultant. But I'll surely keep searching for ways to make money from my sites, and I'll be finding them every now and then.

= Please don't sue me.