TorrentFreak

The place where breaking news, BitTorrent and copyright collide

Bombing BitTorrent and File-Sharing Websites Back to the Stone Age

In the last decade file-sharing has turned from a hobbyist activity into something with mass market appeal. From just a handful of sites there are now many thousands, many of them in the rat-race to become the biggest, fastest, most exclusive location, or a combination of all three. The problem is that for many options are narrowing, particularly when it comes to financing their operations. Is it time for file-sharing to go back to its roots?

While more people than ever before are sharing files online, one would be hard pressed (SOPA aside) to find a balance of positive and inspiring news stories in the file-sharing space last year.

Sure, many of the bigger public sites (Pirate Bay, Torrentz, KickAss, isoHunt, ExtraTorrent etc) continue to do well, but 2012 was awash with stories of web blockades, site shutdowns, arrests, copyright trolls and, perhaps most importantly, developing financial restrictions that limit sites’ abilities to operate.

Last year hundreds of sites lost their ability to do business with PayPal and other payment processors and this year it looks like that trend will continue.

Just yesterday we published an article on research from Boston’s Northeastern University that recommended going after sites’ opportunities to process payments through PayPal or credit card processors.

And just a few hours later we published another which explained the plight of some private trackers that are being subjected to PayPal demands for invites so the company can snoop around the site to decide whether to carry on doing business with it.

A site mentioned in the article, the 37,000 member TorrentBytes (TBy), is facing closure after its options for processing donations ran out. Founded in late 2004, TorrentBytes has its next server bill due at the end of January but thanks to a PayPal withdrawal has no way to collect money from users to pay it. Not even Bitcoins will work according to an admin.

“Bitcoin is not an option. We can pay next to nothing with it and there seems to be no ‘certain’ way to convert it to something we can use,” he says.

Additionally, a suggestion on how to bypass PayPal’s verification system by using a third party site is also rejected by the TorrentBytes admin.

“Using another site/community/forum/whatever as a ghost site to funnel funds to this one is also a no-go. If you people can find the link from this page, so can PayPal,” he explains.

So how do you fund a file-sharing site if donations are wiped out? Well there is advertising, but apparently that is also a problem when applied to the largely tech-savvy private site community.

“Advertisements would work if 99% of the userbase did not run Adblock. And even then the funds that come from somewhere would have to get passed through. And they are something that has been on the no-no list for this site since before day 1,” the TBy admin concludes.

Of course, advertising is being cracked down on too.

As reported earlier this month, the University of Southern California has just published its first Advertising Transparency Report in which it criticized the use of ads on ‘pirate’ sites. The report received widespread coverage and seems to be having an effect. According to Digital Music News, several advertisers including Levis are ordering their ads to be removed from file-sharing related sites.

However, at least for the immediate future and despite the rhetoric, public sites will still be able to finance their operations from advertising and affiliate programs. There are apparently enough companies prepared to place ads on the big sites at the moment but the drawback is that they don’t want to pay good rates to put them there, at least not when compared to those placed on a ‘normal’ website.

The future for some private communities is not so rosy. Despite being able to run on a $200 per month server many have taken on many extra costs, not least seedboxes and other servers to ensure that their sites are competitive in the torrent racing scene. Many are also investing in VPN tunnels to ensure their true locations aren’t discovered. These costs are continually adding up, just as sites’ abilities to receive funds are being throttled.

But it’s not all bad news, far from it.

There are still hundreds of sites to choose from and more content than ever before, but things will probably have to change if things get worse. Just like any other entity going through financial issues, belts will have to be tightened, compromises will have to be made. Do sites really need ten seedboxes and an expensive pay account on some scene topsite to exist?

The beauty of P2P and BitTorrent is that it’s a distributed system. Indeed, as far as sites are concerned bandwidth between users (and of course content) are both available for free and running in basic mode requires only a few dollars a month on top to pay for a server. Trading in the big gas guzzler for a something a little more frugal should be a survival option.

Of course, in many cases this could potentially mean file-sharing backing up in sophistication to 2004, to what may as well be the stone age to many of today’s younger enthusiasts. That said, ask anyone who was around at the time if it was so bad. Yes, at times Suprnova required 30 refreshes until a page actually loaded and yes, initial seeders uploaded at a snail’s pace, but the scene was buzzing and people were having fun. And if it’s not about having fun anymore, something has gone wrong along the way.

Maybe a fresh start and a resurgence of some old fashioned non-monetary gain values is what is needed. The money can’t be targeted if there isn’t any.

Related Posts

Previous Post | Next Post

  • OneEyedWillie

    Why not go back to the real old fashioned way and have people send a check in the mail?

    • Anon

      Can I make copies of tapes for all my neighbours like I used to as well? Man, growing up poor we had 1 friend with a tape recorder so we would divvy up who would buy what movie so that way we could all watch it with our siblings. Those were the days!

      • OneEyedWillie

        Check in the mail for donation purposes. :)

      • guest

        Luxury. We had to copy tape with pencil and paper.

        • rockadayberry

          i used to walk by the rich folks´ restaurants to pick up the newest tunes coming out of their speakers.stuff like golden earrings,bobejan and rocko granata.
          then i went back home,where everybody assembled at the entrance of their caves to listen to me whistling the tunes i just learned.
          man,i know primitive and poor.

        • Anonymous

          You lucky dog, We had to copy stone tablets with a hammer and chisel.

      • Me

        That’s what I used to do back in the late 90s in high school. I worked for a video rental company and took movies home all the time and had a tv with 2 VCRs and made copies of movies for people. I never charged a single cent either.

      • Bananas

        i lived those days…also music tape trading all day, fuck, nothing has changed, i don’t have more pirate music than i used to have!

      • enzofloc

        The public library had it all and shared VHS and video disk movies with the entire community for free. I used to borrow 16mm film copies of the Godfather, Easy Rider, etc. along with a 16mm projector to watch on my 150″ wall on the weekends.

    • http://profile.yahoo.com/RRAPX3W2QRAVI7PAZ2H2SMUSPI No Chance Without Derp

      What I was thinking. Money order in the mail. I guess the problem would be international acceptability of locally purchased MO’s? You’d probably shed a % of users, but would, maybe, still stay afloat.

      • brudda

        If all these sites are paying for VPN tunnels to hide their location, where would you mail a check to? I seriously doubt they will have their address publicly listed. Maybe we could just mail all the checks to Prick Falvidge, and he could forward them…

        • jthenerd

          P.O. box maybe

      • OneEyedWillie

        Cashier’s check made out to cash lol.

    • GoodNight

      Why not back to the real old fashioned way of bombing the head quarters of the corporate parasites?

      • Think about it!

        Why haven’t you done it already if you’re so tough?

        Or that is just a dream you’re having after staying 12 hours in front of the pc?

        Go to bed and have a bottle of milk , tomorrow will be a tough day at kindergarten.

        • http://profile.yahoo.com/RRAPX3W2QRAVI7PAZ2H2SMUSPI No Chance Without Derp

          :=(

    • brudda

      Paypal is Satan.

      http://www.paypalsucks.com

      • Chuck Norris

        Satan is a word, death is an emotion.
        Whatever brings peace or corruption.

      • chris_p_bacon(R.O.L.L)

        then you must PaySatan pal, for all your misdeeds

    • Bananas

      the only difference, is that in the old days nobody was profiting out of our caring share…that’s the truth.

      • Anyone

        sure some people did
        or did you manufacture those blank tapes yourself? ;)

        • Bananas

          i meant in the old days of the interwebz

    • Anonymous

      a better option would be to go back all the way to before the movie camera, perhaps even the camera itself, were invented. in fact, why not go back to the time when there was nothing invented? i wonder how you could get a copyright and/or patent on fuck all?

    • Colin Carr

      Because internet card payments work quickly and cheaply internationally. Would your bank clear a check from a bank in, say, Ghana or Vietnam. If so, what would they charge you for the privilege.

    • Guest

      Or use Flattr.

  • Mtsqbqbg

    Nah, filesharing will just evolve to the next level(s).
    There’s just no stoping it anymore, any fool can see that ;)

    And no money? What about the cashwhores?
    How will they flood the internet with spam links of staff that can be found all over, but suckers are too lazy to look for?

    Plz think of the cashwhores!

    • Guest

      yea man.. I don’t remember the last time I used Google (or whatever) to illegally download something – I go straight to TPB (rutracker if for music)

      • Mtsqbqbg

        Google lets you download stuff illegally?! o_O

        That’s bad, I’ll stick with filesharing thank you very much.

        • Guest

          I though instead of “used Google to look up something and then illegally download it” I just say “I used Google to illegally download something”, too bad you didn’t understand me :(

  • Js

    As it was in the beginning so shall it be in the end.

    • chris_p_bacon(R.O.L.L)

      and as it will end, so a new beginning

  • Jklljk

    Encrypted darknets are the next level, since they are impossible to stop on a large scale. However, P2P darknets have issues with bandwidth and content availability. Smart caching can theoretically make darknet bandwidth usage competitive, so the next step is to get lots of users and content available.

    • The Ghost In The Wire

      *cough*Freenet*cough*

      If you don’t mind Freak- I mean, freenet’s questionable content, it’s a very viable method. The other choice is to do keysharing and build a RetroShare network. caveat executor.

  • Fantastic

    I’ve heard that a couple of companies are coming out with dedicated “Coin Mining” devices sometime early this year. So while it might not seem doable right now for Bitcoin it might not in the near future. I see Bitcoin itself to be the first step to a independent monetary system that has its base not in the welfare of countries who’s status falls with the passage of time but in the existence of the network that has no economic interest in any country. Its a step in the right direction and freeing the nations from the wealth of a few.

  • Anon00

    Time for Paypal to have an anti-trust investigation against them for their monopoly on online payments.

  • Think about it!

    Yeah , yeah , I can hear the cashwhore crying…

    GET REAL!

    Sharing is caring , not making money.
    99% out of the websites out there are made for revenue , not for sharing.

    Check out the pr0n section on tpb or extratorrent.
    Every damn uploader has his own “preview: image host full of ads. Nobody uses an ads free host? Why? $$$$

    Check the ware forums: rapidgator deposi files extabit letibit etc
    NO bayfiles , why?

    Because bayfiles doesn’t pay per download or per sale.

    Indeed , filesharing HAS to go back to the stone age.
    Because this is not filesharing

    This is paysharing all over.

    • Anon

      Well said, but there’s more.

      File “sharing” was ALWAYS about the money. If it isn’t the money you are making it’s about the money you are saving. And if you disagree with that, then tell us why people don’t share empty torrents with no content, or pass around harddrives that hold no files. Or collect cd’s with no data. If it’s not about the value of the files then what is it? The MONEY.

      It’s the price point of the CONTENT that pirates are evading.

      Piracy is now and has always been about the money, making it or saving it. Free speech? What bullshit. Don’t kid or flatter yourselves.

      • Anyone

        what’s wrong with saving money?

        if I cut my own hair did I steal from the barbershop?
        if I cook my own dinner did I steal from the restaurant?
        if I make my own furniture did I steal from IKEA?

        content has no price, it has no value, it’s just information and information is free

        • Anon

          > if I cut my own hair did I steal from the barbershop?

          Yes, and you should be shaved roughly.

          > if I cook my own dinner did I steal from the restaurant?

          Yes, and you should be smeared with mustard and tenderized

          > if I make my own furniture did I steal from IKEA?

          Yes, and you should be tied to a chair and sandpapered.

          Remember, if you have a chair and I make, with my own time and equipment, a different chair, despite the fact you still have youir chair and haven’t lost anything, I’m a dirty thief who must be punished.

          Punish me. Hrnnnngh.

        • Guest

          What you do with your own hair, dinner or furniture is up to you. What you might choose to do with something you have no right to do anything with or that belongs to someone else is a completely different matter.

        • Anyone

          @Guest
          I use MY computer, MY internet connection, MY hard drive to make MY copy of a song or movie

          someone else’s property never enters the picture

        • Guest

          If “someone else’s property never enters the picture” then what is it you are copying? If content has “….no value” then why copy it?

        • Anyone

          content cannot be owned, so it is not property
          digital files also cannot be owned

          but digital files can be copied for no cost whatsoever, so that’s what I’m doing
          because I enjoy that

        • Guest

          Clearly you think “content cannot be owned, so it is not property
          digital files also cannot be owned”
          but unfortunately real world laws disagree with that opinion, that is why they seek to enforce the rights of those involved.

          I appreciate your right to have an opinon but please, don’t keep shifting position each time you are asked to explain a soundbite which you post as some sort of fact.

          “digital files can be copied for no cost whatsoever, so that’s what I’m doing
          because I enjoy that”
          . Fine, now we’ve established that you like to copy digital files for free (ie. as no perceived cost to you) and that’s why you do it.

          There’s really no point in you trying to justify why you do it when in reality, as far as any illegal copying you may participate in is concerned, you are aware that what you are doing may be illegal but you would continue to do it any way.

          Man up, you copy some stuff for nothing which you really are required to pay to own a copy of. It’s not legal, people are taking successful steps to prevent this occurring and those facilitating such behaviours and participating in such actions who are caught and proven guilty are now receiving and and serving real time prison sentences. It’s as simple as that.

        • Scary_Devil_Monastery

          @Guest

          “Clearly you think “content cannot be owned, so it is not property
          digital files also cannot be owned” but unfortunately real world laws disagree with that opinion, that is why they seek to enforce the rights of those involved.”

          Aside from Anyone’s unfortunate misnomer of “information” as “digital files” he is quite correct. See the textbook definition of “Intellectual Property” for that. It’s not property, and it’s not owned.

          What you do own in “Intellectual Property” is the privilege to tell other people what they can and can not do with their own property. This in itself is insane.

          Hence no, “content” in the form of “information of any kind” can not be “owned”. It can be controlled only by keeping said information a secret.

          “”digital files can be copied for no cost whatsoever, so that’s what I’m doing
          because I enjoy that”. Fine, now we’ve established that you like to copy digital files for free (ie. as no perceived cost to you) and that’s why you do it.”

          The same way people have distributed information since well before we came down from the trees. Sharing information and entertainment is a biological survival mechanism. It’s even more fundamental than greed or ambition. What actually makes no sense at all is that person C should EVER receive payment or be able to control what person A communicates to person B unless person C was actually the one carrying the message for person A’s and B’s behalf.

          “There’s really no point in you trying to justify why you do it…”

          It’s the other way around, actually. Anyone has no need at all to justify anything. You are the one who has to justify why Anyone shouldn’t do this. Something you seem either desperate not to mention or have managed to talk yourself into forgetting.

          “…when in reality, as far as any illegal copying you may participate in is concerned, you are aware that what you are doing may be illegal but you would continue to do it any way.”

          Of course. Rosa Parks knew that sitting at the front of the bus was illegal and decided to remain seated. Filesharers will keep sharing copies of what they found entertaining with anyone who wants to see and hear irrespective of what you personally think about it or what the law has to say about it. And they do so in full knowledge that what they do is morally proper and lawfully wrong.

          “Man up, you copy some stuff for nothing which you really are required to pay to own a copy of…”

          HE should man up because you propose he needs to pay to own a copy? That’s blistering insanity. And the law, unfortunately, recognizes that insanity as a privilege granted a private interest rights over everyone else’s property in that way.

          “Manning up” in that context would mean to aim to put the law back on track. And circumventing that insanity while doing so.

          “…people are taking successful steps to prevent this occurring…”

          In what particular fantasy land of yours is this happening? Every attempt at legislating the “problem” of filesharing away is a study in dismal and obvious failure.

          “…and those facilitating such behaviours and participating in such actions who are caught and proven guilty are now receiving and and serving real time prison sentences.”

          True enough, and every time people go to prison or receive hefty fines they can never pay more people join up with pirates in politics.
          Every time you try to push for political “solutions” granting even more power to copyright enforcement, as SOPA/PIPA and ACTA proved, you bring nothing more than empowerment to activists and more general awareness for how screwed-up a concept “copyright” enforced non-commercially truly is to the general public.

          Do you really think, for one second, that the people who try to eke a quick buck out of filesharing are a hub, spoke or center, of how the filesharing community works? That they are important?

          Those companies which try to make a buck out of individuals sharing information and media with one another freely are a flea on our backs. Squash it please. But when you do, don’t make the mistake of gloating that you’ve finally slain the lernean hydra.

          It only makes you look damn silly.

        • Anyone

          @Guest
          if digital files have value and can be owned please tell me how I can sell my itunes collection
          after all they are digital files, I bought them, so now they are mine to sell, right?

        • AgathaPenis

          If you made a chair EXACTLY to Ikea’s specification, including the exact fixing method, finish, material, dimensions and the big IKEA stamp on the seat. Then made unlimited identical chairs available to other people…

          Then yes… it would be a counterfeit product.

          But Ikea is a bad example because it’s all imitation designer stuff already.

        • SoundnuoS

          @Scary_Devil_Monastery

          Missed this one:

          >And they do so in full knowledge that what they do is morally proper and lawfully wrong.

          If we agree with the line of thought that leads to clause 2 in the debated UN article 27, then it isn’t morally proper.

          The only way a creator can have protection of his material rights when it comes to (intangible) art is by deciding who can copy and distribute it.
          If that decision is removed from them, then so is the protection.

        • SoundnuoS

          >content has no price, it has no value, it’s just information and information is free

          I’m sorry, but you can’t be serious. I’d rather not repost, but read some of the debates. If you feel you have some arguments to back this up with, please state them.

        • Scary_Devil_Monastery

          @SoundnuoS

          “If we agree with the line of thought that leads to clause 2 in the debated UN article 27, then it isn’t morally proper.

          The only way a creator can have protection of his material rights when it comes to (intangible) art is by deciding who can copy and distribute it.
          If that decision is removed from them, then so is the protection.”

          Still not good with the english language, I see?
          If clause 2′s reference to “moral right” would mean direct control over the property of third parties then article 27, clause 2 would be in direct violation to numerous other articles in the UN human rights declaration, which it is not allowed to be. Not to mention in flagrant contradiction with clause 1.

          What is more to the point, Clause 1 of article 27 actually DOES grant the right to partake of culture, freely and uninhibited. So your line of thought doesn’t lead anywhere but to the point that Article 27 both as a whole and in parts expressly contradicts modern copyright.

          “Moral right” has only ever meant one thing – the right to stand as Author, and the right to determine representation.

          Meaning that as a creator you are allowed to deny your work being publicly represented in order to support a cause for which you do not stand, for instance. And very properly, there are laws pertaining to this which have nothing to do with “copyright”.

          You know, SoundnuoS, if you want to convince us you are worthy of an intelligent debate, then trying to rewrite, misquote, or redefine the UN articles is the wrong approach. Or for that matter redefining the context and meaning of the english language.

          Copyright is fundamentally in opposition with the UN articles, not in accordance with them.

        • SoundnuoS

          @Scary_Devil_Monastery

          Re: property rights, see my posts about 9.99 not being enough to grant you property rights to the content.

          Well, what about the point in clause 2 stating that the author has the right to the material interests?

          Here are some more points arguing that “freely” is not the same as “for free” as it seems the source of the confusion is indeed the english language.
          The problem is that english doesn’t have a commonly used separate word for “without paying”, so we can take a look at the same passage in some other languages that do have a word for it.

          The passage we’re debating is “Everyone has the right freely to participate [..]” .
          In swedish the same passage is “Var och en har rätt att fritt delta [..]“. There’s still some ambiguity there with the word “fritt”, but the swedish word “gratis” which stands for “without paying”, and is commonly used in such context, is nowhere to be found.
          In finnish the passage goes “Jokaisella on oikeus vapaasti osallistua[..]“. “Vapaasti” being the operational word here. Once again the word “ilmaiseksi” which would be an unambiguos way of saying “for free”, is nowhere to be found.
          In french it becomes “Toute personne a le droit de prendre part librement [..]“. “Librement” is the word here. The word “gratuit” which would mean “for free” is nowhere to be seen.

          In all, this supports my reading of the declaration. The purpose and meaning of clause 2 is to clearly state that the creators right to compensation supersedes anyone’s right to take part, in cases where payment is asked for.

      • Ray

        What about the content that you can’t find anywhere else but on a torrent site. Content that’s years old. I’ve uploaded Audiobooks on Demonoid that I’ve ripped from cassette and records that you can’t buy anymore.. anywhere. Comic books or educational content and even movies that you’ll never find if you dedicated your life to it, so old you’ll never find them. You are partially right, but don’t flatter yourself into thinking its all about money and that you have all the answers.

        • MrGeek

          Amen that! because MPAA/RIAA dont have no idea why ppl still sharing so number one reason is DISCONTINUED TITLES/BOOKS/ALBUMS/etc…

        • Qua

          I couldn’t agree more. 90% of it for me is because of that exact kind of content. It’s hard to find even still. The good news is that most of that stuff isn’t being watched….the bad news is the ISP’s still know torrents are being downloaded when we do it and since they’re a bunch of dicks who decided to start working with the assholes trying to keep us from it, they’ll still be trying to shut us down and take away our access, or throttling us etc. It makes me sick.

      • Robert Manley

        People share files because not everyone has 50.00 to spend on a blu-ray movie or 100.00 on a blu-ray player. The people that file-share wouldn’t have bought the content anyway because they don’t have the money to spend on the content.

    • Guest Who

      True that and if its not $$$ they’re after, it’s spam for their own bloody site.

      About time these scumbags go away and stay away. It has nothing to do with sharing anymore, no wonder we see all this attention from the RIAA and the like lately.

  • Anon

    “Advertisements would work if 99% of the userbase did not run Adblock.”

    lol

    • djnforce9

      People wouldn’t have to use Adblock if ads where simplistic and non-intrusive but instead we get gigantic distracting images, CPU hungry flash animation banners, ads that play loud and awful music, ads that attempt malware installations, ads with “not safe for work” content out of nowhere, and ads that make you wait half a minute before allowing you to view a video (even if the commercial is longer than the video itself). Sorry to say but adblock stays ON for me as the above isn’t going away anytime soon.

      • Scary_Devil_Monastery

        Yeah, ads that play an annoying commercial jingle – or worse, run through your speakers at twice the volume of the video you’re trying to watch – seem designed as an advertisement for adblock more than anything else.

    • Truec

      This is what makes me wonder how Dotcom thinks Megakey is going to do anything. It will take days, maybe weeks, for a version of Adblock that circumvents Megakey to be released, then his whole plan falls apart.

      • Anon

        DotCom is a meglomaniac with a criminal past and delusions of grandeur.

        ANYone here who thinks any government anywhere will allow him to run a site that offers copyrighted content (that the rightsholders will not negotiate distribution rights to) is foolish. Poorly informed. And probably a pirate. I’d be surprised if mega even launches. And Truec, you are insightful. Pirates will code and use a version of AdBlock that works to block his revenue stream and fuck him too. With not a single fuck given. Of course they will.

        They’re pirates.

        • Anyone

          why should we care about the revenue stream of anyone other than our own?
          he is a businessman, so he should run his business so that it makes money, that’s his job, not mine

          I run adblock except on select sites because ads are annoying
          no need to feel bad about that, ads are using MY bandwidth without my consent, so of course I’ll block them

        • Anon

          @ Anyone.
          “why should we care about the revenue stream of anyone other than our own?”

          Because it is human, because it is socially responsible, because single minded selfish fucks are the problem, not any reasonable solution.

          For 40 years the record labels returned profits from their top selling artists to create a financial cushion under music that has never self supported. Bluegrass. Opera. Early Jazz. None of these were ever profitable but the labels kept them alive, recorded, published. Part of our collective musical legacy. There was no law they had to do this, they took an uncompelled responsibility in their stewardship of music in general, not just their own bottom line. You probably do not know this, you probably don’t even care.

          People pay in museums on the “Free” day, why? For the same sense of social responsibility. To make sure the museums are still there for those who can not pay. People put money in a church plate for the same reason, there’s no law that says they have to. The list goes on and on and on.

          The selfish pirate mentality is a relatively new form of self-interested greed spawned from digital capability that is unprecedented in the world of the fine arts. You’ll die out over time (and already are if the stats are to be believed) because it’s Darwinian: you are too selfish and ultimately too fucking blind-ass-stupid to even willfully support those like DotCom who are your own. Your own greedy statement makes that clear.

          You are the problem. Your kind of narrow self interest was never part of any equitable solution. That’s why you are the hunted. Because it’s right to hunt you.

        • Anyone

          the labels steal 90% of the profits from the artists, I wouldn’t really call that “returning”

          anyway, you still haven’t answered me why I should care if Kim Dotcom makes a profit
          if he offers a service worth paying for he will make a profit, that’s a given, but if I don’t think it is worth paying for why should I care?

          I’m not selfish, I share culture with my fellow humans, all for free, without any profit in mind
          I distribute it with torrents over the internet, with USB sticks and harddrives to “physical” friends, I even pay for a seedbox to improve my sharing capabilities (again a service worth paying for, so it is profitable)

          art will continue to exist once the “industry” dies a well deserved death
          more music than ever is produced today, because the RIAA labels are shrinking
          the MPAA studios will be harder to get to their knees since they have more resources, but in time they too will bite the dust and the movie scene will be better for it

          we have a bright future ahead of us

        • icec0ld

          @Anon

          “Because it is human, because it is socially responsible, because single minded selfish fucks are the problem, not any reasonable solution.”

          Actually it’s capitalist to not care about anyone’s revenue but your own. While I agree there is a social responsibility of the human race to ensure the well being and wages of all I do not believe corporations or business that do not contribute meaningfully, totally and selflessly to the human race are under any obligation to ensure their survival.

          “For 40 years the record labels returned profits from their top selling artists to create a financial cushion under music that has never self supported. Bluegrass. Opera. Early Jazz. None of these were ever profitable but the labels kept them alive, recorded, published. Part of our collective musical legacy. There was no law they had to do this, they took an uncompelled responsibility in their stewardship of music in general, not just their own bottom line. You probably do not know this, you probably don’t even care.”

          Hahaha… No. Just no.

          As far as I see the last 40 years has seen the most unbridled theft of art and culture we have ever seen with publishers, who have created exactly nothing holding complete ownership over someone else’s creation. This is wrong on so many levels and a perversion of human culture. Piracy is a response and return to the normal and the just.

          To think, you laughably think that this collected music agency is of any benefit to the artists is just plain wrong and just proof of your ignorance.

          “People pay in museums on the “Free” day, why? For the same sense of social responsibility. To make sure the museums are still there for those who can not pay. People put money in a church plate for the same reason, there’s no law that says they have to. The list goes on and on and on.”

          Not too dissimilar to pirates? You are aware, especially in music that the biggest sharers of music are also it’s most loyal and high spending customers?

          “The selfish pirate mentality is a relatively new form of self-interested greed spawned from digital capability that is unprecedented in the world of the fine arts. You’ll die out over time (and already are if the stats are to be believed) because it’s Darwinian: you are too selfish and ultimately too fucking blind-ass-stupid to even willfully support those like DotCom who are your own. Your own greedy statement makes that clear.”

          What a sad manipulation of Darwinism. It’s actually about survival of the fittest. Capitalism and new ventures has allot of routes in the idea. The strong live on. The weak die out. If Dotcom fails or succeeds it wont be on the backs of your idea of obligation that the net or anyone else should have to support him.

          Fine arts, btw is about art for arts sake. Not the blatant seeking of profit and so called attempts to protect it.

          Online sharing is a triumph of modern civilization. Never will a book be out of print, a music track unattainable nor a game or movie forgotten. Future generations will look back and thank us for our “greed” while laughing thankful the attempts to stamp out the real evolution of culture failed and failed miserably.

          I
          ‘d like to know where you got this idea that piracy is dying? Everything I’ve seen has shown it growing. In fact it seems only recently you’ve decided it’s dying out instead of growing like a plague.

          Make up your tiny mind Anon and stick to it, You’ll seem more credible that way.

        • Crislis

          @Anon File-sharers are not as greedy as the @#$ks that run RIAA and MPAA screwing over artist and customers alike with their greed.

        • WWW

          @Anon Can how you talk about selfishness when there are so many people sharing, in the end, helping everyone?

          So who cares if they are making money? You will still earn more money than you could ever use in your life, because of the social component that will lead individuals forever to buy just to socialize.

          But in the other hand, there is selfishness in attempting to block the information, specially the one that has already been used to earn more than the production value.

          Things like BitTorrent, eMule, and Tor Library, are more about sharing than earning money, since that is their main effect in the world.

          In this day and age, the only ones who can truly earn, without unfair tactics, are the ones who sell physical products, and teach others, others who aren’t capable of doing those things for themselves, for any reason (any reason not bases in egoistic secrecy of keeping the world in the darkness and in its ignorance).

        • Guest

          @ Anyone (Jay).

          Take a good look at yourself son.

          In one instance you post that you copy things for free using your computer, your internet connection and your harddrive insisting that there is no cost and a few breaths later you are on bitching “I run adblock except on select sites because ads are annoying no need to feel bad about that, ads are using MY bandwidth without my consent, so of course I’ll block them”.

          Whatever happened to your sharing utopia?

          Why would ads sharing your bandwith (apparently free and bearing in mind, according to you, you can’t own digital files or content) bother you in anyway at all?

        • markh

          Criminal past? Where is his criminal record, Oh forgot he wasn’t convicted of anything, stupid ass you are

        • Scary_Devil_Monastery

          “Because it is human, because it is socially responsible, because single minded selfish fucks are the problem, not any reasonable solution.”

          Ah, and there we have the communist emerging from his shell at last. What you are in essence saying is that we should similarly from a humanitarian perspective all pay horse-and-cart drivers so they won’t have to shift their business into a model which works?

          Or were you trying to say that we ought to pay Dotcom? Well, he does, at least, sound like a far more worthy cause to provide money to than, for instance, the CRIA which spent the last twenty years ripping off artists and consumers alike. NOT exactly the stalwart defenders of roghts in shining armor your words try to conjure.

          “For 40 years the record labels returned profits from their top selling artists to create a financial cushion under music that has never self supported. Bluegrass. Opera. Early Jazz. None of these were ever profitable but the labels kept them alive, recorded, published. Part of our collective musical legacy.”

          All of which was redundant 20 years ago. Why should anyone pay to maintain a redundant and unneccessary support structure? At all?

          Are you telling me any label will “support” an artist today who does not sell? Of course not. If the artist is good enough, he can get paid. And today he can market himself so your support structure has no validity at all anymore.

          “There was no law they had to do this, they took an uncompelled responsibility in their stewardship of music in general, not just their own bottom line. You probably do not know this, you probably don’t even care.”

          That’s a very novel way of describing a bunch of monopolistic highway robbers whose main contribution to the news in the last decades has been that they shamelessly and ruthlessly gouged the artists in their stables. Should we here insert the leaked slave contracts, the actual terms, or the way confused artists were made to realize they didn’t even own their own public image anymore?
          How come the labels decided spotify had to pay 70% to the labels directly and literally nothing to the artist? Let me guess, the labels are voluntarily and at great personal expense liberating the artist of the burden of wealth?

          “People pay in museums on the “Free” day, why? For the same sense of social responsibility. To make sure the museums are still there for those who can not pay. People put money in a church plate for the same reason, there’s no law that says they have to. The list goes on and on and on.”

          And pirates, by all market studies that exist, do the same. Your problem is what, exactly? Simply because the people who voluntarily share information with others are also people who share other things as well.

          “You’ll die out over time (and already are if the stats are to be believed) because it’s Darwinian: you are too selfish and ultimately too fucking blind-ass-stupid to even willfully support those like DotCom who are your own. Your own greedy statement makes that clear.”

          Oh, pirates by and large aren’t selfish. If we were we couldn’t be “pirates” at all and filesharing would be dead. Your problem is simply that we are not selfish.

          Dotcom, however, is a business man. He thinks he has an idea for a business. great. If the business succeeds then all the good to him. However, we do not own any responsibility for “making him succeed” – that’s just your own inner communist speaking. His business must fly or sink according to his own devices and on how he’s guessed the market.

          That is how capitalism works.
          I realize the concept is foreign to you.

          “…That’s why you are the hunted. Because it’s right to hunt you.”

          Along with your self-avowed fascism, your ghoulish relish of filesharers being raped in prison, your ofteen expressed contempt for human rights and your utter ignorance of the basic reason of law, this puts a nice closer to your little diatribe.

          You know, this is why it’s difficult to tell you from the little “Anon”-troll trying to emulate you. After your entire diatribe his little statement of:
          “Punishment! Because I like it. Hnnnnngrl!”
          is a very precise, though shorter analogy to what you’ve said.

          You only have one argument and that is your own personal opinion. The rest is smoke and mirrors – or as demonstrated above – a thoroughly concussed and confused misconception on what actually makes filesharers tick.

          “People share freely because they are selfish”. Right.

          Your best work yet, Baghdad Bob.

          Is the republican guard implementing Islam as a state religion yet? If so I need to get a copy of the Quran off TPB post-haste.

        • Scary_Devil_Monastery

          @Guest

          “Why would ads sharing your bandwith (apparently free and bearing in mind, according to you, you can’t own digital files or content) bother you in anyway at all?”

          That’s so irrelevant it doesn’t even pass as a straw man.

          Because there is a world of difference between Anyone not giving a damn whether someone copies the files on his hard drive – and him caring a great deal about the ad which is blaring a commercial jingle straight through the music he’s trying to listen to?

          Now, if the ad is unintrusive, what you actually donate to it is “eyeball time”.

          Fair enough. An ad which actually stops you from loading the actual page or costs you money on a capped connection because it tries to ram 5 MB worth of eye-melting sound, bling and fury through your link is something completely different.

          You would no doubt see it the same way if when you stopped your car to fill up gas, someone started nailing half a ton worth of billboards to your hood right in front of your windshield. Somewhat different from glancing at them as you pass.

        • Anyone

          @Guest
          if I want to give my bandwidth away to share files, that is my decision
          if I don’t want ads to use my bandwidth that is also my decision

        • Guest

          @ Anyone.

          “if I want to give my bandwidth away to share files, that is my decision
          if I don’t want ads to use my bandwidth that is also my decision”

          Yes, that’s right Jay, it is your decision – in much the same way that a rights owner or artist has the right to decide whether or not they want to allow you to copy their material for free or to pay for it.

          Now that we’ve established the premise of rights of determination perhaps you’d afford the rights of others the respect you expect in relation to your rights?

        • Anyone

          @Guest
          correct, the artist has a right to decide if his work is shared or not: he can release it to the public or keep it to himself

          but once it is released to the public he has given up control over it, it will be shared

          since “intellectual property” cannot be owned this doesn’t contradict anything I said

          also, why do you keep calling me Jay?

        • Guest

          @ Anyone. OK Jay, so now we’ve established that it’s only your rights that you think should be respected and that you think you can dictate how others assert their rights and carry out their business.

          Somewhat of a contradictory position on rights there – I’m sure you’ll agree.

          Tell me, what do you work at? Do you produce anything? Assuming you do work are you paid for anything that you work at? Do you receive repeat payment for repetitive duties? Have you yourself ever created anything (from the point of concept / inception) which was original to you which you subsequently gave away for free or shared online for free where the rights of others were not affected?

        • Guest

          Oh, while we’re at it.

          You are mistaken in thinking “intellectual property cannot be owned”.

          http://tinyurl.com/ayql2g7

          It’s a common misconception.

        • Anyone

          since only my property is involved, of course my rights should be respected
          if I buy something I want to do with it what I want, why do you want to take away that right?

          if I ever steal a CD from an artist then you can complain about me not respecting other people’s property, but when I am using only my property that I bought and paid for, shut up.

          I do get paid for the same work if I do it again, yes
          I do not get paid if my script does something automated during the night while I sleep and don’t work

          if an artist plays the same song again and again (say, during a tour), of course he should be paid for each and every performance
          but why should he be paid if unrelated third parties create a copy of that song for free?

          you still haven’t explained the “Jay” thing

        • Guest

          @ Anyone.

          Jay, your property is not in dispute – get that into your head. We are not discussing property, we are discussing “rights” both yours and the artists.

          You clearly are not mature enough to understand that the rights of others are as important as yours. Unless an artist or rights holder expressly permits you to copy their material free of charge you are affecting & infringing on their rights.

          Leave aside these childish “my computer”, “my hard drive” arguments.

          “I do get paid for the same work if I do it again, yes”. So you expect to be paid for each repetition of your work.

          Yet in relation to an artist you need to ask…

          why should he be paid if unrelated third parties create a copy of that song for free.

          The answer is, clearly, like yourself he has a right to be paid for each use (copy) of his work.

          I appreciate that you have a difficulty with people explaining the factual reality of intellectual property but the fact is it, and associated rights, are enshrined in law.

          If you want to continue copying peoples work without their permission and without paying them that’s your call but please at least be man enough to admit it rather than trying to justify it with ill informed childish arguments bordering on ignorance of the facts.

        • Anyone

          if someone else does my work instead of me, why should I be paid?

          if an artist performs a song, he should be paid
          if I copy a file that happens to be a recording of that artist he should not be paid, because he had no part in the process

          if I buy a dinner in a restaurant, the chef should be paid
          if I cook a dinner at home that happens to follow the same recipe the chef should not be paid

          it’s really simple, you get paid if you work for someone or if you sell something
          if you do neither, why should you be paid?

        • SoundnuoS

          Paying 10-20 $/€ for a record / movie goes nowhere even near to cover even the cost of production. It is silly to expect having the right to redistribute them at that price.
          No one can claim property rights to the content for such a low sum, they remain with the creator.

          What no one ever seems to think about is that the sale of records, movies and books is a remarkably democratic way of selling art.
          It spreads the cost out among everyone buying. Something very popular will automatically be of higher value than something less popular, with more people buying.

          It is crowd funding after the fact, with the publisher assuming all the risks.

  • Hornyrob2317

    Tribler!

  • http://gear-mentation.myopenid.com/ Gear Mentation

    A free world needs a free monetary system. It’s time to invent one that works.

    • Guest

      Bitcoin will work as soon as enough people use it

      • Guest

        please explain how it works , if their value increase based on demand ,someday the price will be 1 bitcoin = 10000 $ ,does not make any sense to me

        • Scary_Devil_Monastery

          Actually it does.

          Take one long look at the current fiscal system and how money is in it. Now check the growth rate per year. That dollar in your pocket is NOT the same value today as it was in 1950. Why do you think that is so?

          All currency fluctuates with supply and demand.

    • Glib

      Bitcoin absolutely works, the problem is turning bitcoins into real money, THAT is the problem. Sure, some people accept bitcoins, but nobody that really MATTERS does. The Bitcoin exchange is the only reasonable way to convert them to real-people money, and it’s a pretty lossy process. Still, Bitcoin is an excellent option, especially if someone came up with a website that accepts Paypal and converts that to Bitcoin; THAT would be good.

      • Giggaflop

        Paypal are also very strictly anti-bitcoin sadly :(

        • Anyone

          because one day it will take them out of business ;)
          no need to support your competition

      • Skywalker

        Bitcoins are more real than real money.

        “Real” money is produced 97% only as bankloans from private owned banks and is only a virtual currency.

        They press a button when someone wants a loan and create a promise of money on that persons account. Since they are allowed to create promises of money they dont have to have all the money they lend out.

        This leads to the banks creating new money when someone takes a loan. And for this new money they charge an interest. The only small risc they take is that you do not pay them interest on the money they created out of nothing.

        However if you do not pay them back these money they created out of nothing you will lose your house.

        Banks only have about around 1% of the money they promise to people.
        You can not lend out a Bitcoin unless you have that Bitcoin. This makes the Bitcoin system more real than the our FIAT money system.

        Though what is real?

        When you have the money in a bank, the bank borrowed that money from you.
        Thats why they give you an interest on that money. What you see on your bank account is how much money you have borrowed to them. Not how much you acctually have. Since you have borrowed the money to the bank they can use it to speculate and create the next global recession or go broke in which case you have to bail out the bank with your own money paid as taxes so that you can have your money.

        When you have a Bitcoin, its 100% yours. Only you control that Bitcoin if you keep it on your computer.

        Its the first digital system in the world in which people can own their own digital money.

        As more people use Bitcoin their value increase, if 1% of the parallel economy (the black market) used Bitcoins the value of one Bitcoin could go up to $10,000.

      • Scary_Devil_Monastery

        As of yet.

        The scary part is that very few people actually realize how very little of “real” money ever existed in “real” form. Or ever will.

        For all intents and purposes both the euro and the dollar are electronic fiat currencies.

        Given that you can fill your phone with bitcoins from your account as well, I’m guessing it’s a matter of time before it starts becoming your default electronic wallet.

        So it’s really only one hurdle – enough people have to use it. And assuming it becomes a currency of choice for microtransactions, that already fulfills those criteria.

  • dondilly

    What makes even transaction blocks futile is that it wont stop sharing. The net is merely a convenience.

    Go back to the mid 80s, how many people were in informal ‘CD clubs ‘ ( for want of a better name), where many of your work/school/college mates bought different CDs and shared with all in the group to record or friends recording from each others collection.

    Even without the net, now you would be passing round 3TB drives.

    Again, in the early 90s the games industry was complaining about 16bit piracy. Few people could afford a modem to download pirated games , most transatlantic piracy was postal, yet it only took one copy to get into the country anyone looking had a cracked copy in a couple of weeks.

    Before P2P on the net, files jumped vast geographic distances via home ftp servers, then shared locally.

    Filesharing/piracy is here to stay. In fact, were all means of P2P were to disappear tomorrow, while it might slow distribution , it might act as a quality filter where people hoard and distribute the best quality rips of games,films and music.

    • http://profiles.google.com/orfetheo Orfeas Theofanis

      Plus, how simple is it to share a magnet link of a file on facebook and have everyone shared it with their friends?
      Do we really need trackers ?

      • ScrewEwe2

        We really do need trackers.
        We really don’t want farcebook.
        Friends are optional.

      • Anyone

        trackers accelerate the download process in the beginning, you find more peers faster
        they are no longer needed as such, but they make things easier

        and facebook censors stuff related to “piracy”, so they are not an alternative
        we need a site that takes free speech seriously, such as The Pirate Bay

        • Scary_Devil_Monastery

          Actually…how do you stop someone from posting a twenty-digit string (which just happens to also be a magnet link)?

          You don’t. Or FB starts employing tens of thousands of moderators.

      • Scary_Devil_Monastery

        Yep. Now que the copyright trolls insisting that Facebook has to patroll every page and remove any lines of texts looking suspicious.

    • Wallace

      “Filesharing/piracy is here to stay. In fact, were all means of P2P were to disappear tomorrow, while it might slow distribution , it might act as a quality filter where people hoard and distribute the best quality rips of games,films and music.”

      It would be even more accurate to say that filesharing/piracy predates selling copies of music.

      People shared music before some players decided to treat copies of recorded music as commodities.

      Selling music is the fad. Sharing is the norm and the constant.

      Of course, the industry will always try to cut down on rogue SELLERS, which is only logical and what much of this post is actually about.

      I still don’t understand why RIAA members don’t offer $1 album torrents from their own sites and sell their own ads, but what do I know.

      • Guest

        I wish you’ve worked in some recording company as some top management phony – then you could talk some sense into these idiots there

      • Scary_Devil_Monastery

        “I still don’t understand why RIAA members don’t offer $1 album torrents from their own sites and sell their own ads, but what do I know.”

        1: It means abandoning a 900% profit margin in favor of a more reasonable one. [EDIT: Oops typo now fixed]

        2: The RIAA members wish for nothing more in their grubby little hearts than for the competirors to all die. This is why it took six years to hammer out the intra-label treaties running spotify. Meaning that being represented there is the worst career choice an actor can do – the labels eat all the profit.

        3: The problem isn’t that the labels can’t, in the end, do it. The problem is the technology itself allows far more reasonable competition to arise. With no need for a label to promote them, why should any sane artist sign away their rights for the next four years?

        • Guest

          “1: It means abandoning a 900% profit margin in favor of a more reasonable one.”

          Do you have an actual, independant, varifiable source for that 900% figure you’ve quoted?

        • Anyone

          @Guest
          since digital copies can be created at almost no cost, if you sell those digital copies at $1 (for singles) or $10 (for albums) a piece the profit margin must be astronomical

        • Guest

          @ Anyone. Jay, you saying “…must be” is not an “actual, independant, varifiable source”.

        • Anyone

          how much % is “almost 0″ to “$10″? not sure where the 900% comes from, but it should be in that ballpark

          sure, Apple takes a 30% cut, but there is still plenty for the MAFIAA
          and from those $10 about $1 actually reach the artist, if he’s lucky
          those $1 then still have to be split with bandmates and the manager

          and the MAFIAA accuses filesharers of stealing

        • Scary_Devil_Monastery

          @Guest

          “”1: It means abandoning a 900% profit margin in favor of a more reasonable one.”

          Do you have an actual, independant, varifiable source for that 900% figure you’ve quoted?”

          Actually, that’s a typo. Now fixed. 90% margin is the proper approximation of a mid-sized sales run. Mea Culpa.
          However, that margin does go up the more units get shipped, as no more cost, save manufacture and shipping will ever be associated with it. Where that limit stops is anyone’s guess. Any album still selling five years after recording is almost pure profit.

          The artist, in reality, gets, on average, 2% of the sales price. Depending on how much numbers shuffling has been done. Advance, packaging charge, reserves, free goods, distribution, manager, business managers, etc.

          http://www.theroot.com/views/how-much-do-you-musicians-really-make?page=0,1

  • Past Tense

    There are all kinds of online payment processors. I don’t see the emphasis on Paypal.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_on-line_payment_service_providers

  • Simpson Fan

    Quoting Helen Lovejoy:

    “What about the cashwhores?! Won’t somebody please think of the cashwhores!?”

  • http://twitter.com/MidoThePirate Ahmed Omar

    this is pessimistic but there is always hope ..we won’t give up :)

  • icec0ld

    Sucks they can’t get the money to keep running the site.

    What makes me wonder is why the owner can’t afford the bill himself.

    • Say What?

      “what makes me wonder is why the owner can’t afford the bill himself”

      Well maybe because the part of the globe that these owners live in is hard to get any money. You do realize that this is 2013 and the economy is fucked right? Especially since most country’s depend on the U.S money/economy.

      • icec0ld

        I could run a private torrent server off the unemployment benefit.

        “The economy is fucked” has been an excuse the chronically lazy since 2008 ffs. If your country can host a website, I’m fairly sure it has the economic prowess to provide a minimum wage job.

        • Anyone

          then please do

        • icec0ld

          @Anyone

          Neither the time or the inclination.

          Beat my current jobs wage in pay and I’ll consider it.

        • immigrant

          “Neither the time or the inclination.

          Beat my current jobs wage in pay and I’ll consider it.”

          I have the time and the minimum pays more than the unemployment benefits, …. they just don’t hire me because I am an “Immigrant”

        • icec0ld

          This will sound harsh but “Won’t” is in my books another word for “didn’t”.

          Blame your short comings on yourself, not your perceived status in the eyes of an employer. It’s a tough world out there.

  • Hiphop

    I’m not trying to be a troll, but isn’t it a little ironic that torrent sites aren’t able to make any money from their user base which is looking to spend no money, and their general audience is people looking to potentially break the law to avoid spending money?

    • Scary_Devil_Monastery

      Not really, no.

      See, for the vast majority of the filesharing community, Sharing is Caring.

      Any torrent site which has a financial model of profit is already going to be suspect in that sense, see? The ones who don’t – like TPB – are doing just fine.

      The main problem is that PayPal, Mastercard and Visa are blocking – on their own initiative, mainly – fully legal sites and operations also. Which means your bank is actually trying to control the way you spend your money, even if the spending is legal.

      And in PayPal’s case, they actually try to KEEP the money you tried to send.

    • PayPalSucks

      It’s not ironic at all. The admins have said there is not a problem with donations they’ve got plenty. The problem is in PayPal freezing that money. If PayPal were not the US governments lackey they would not be able to get away with such illegal activities.

  • Guest

    Visit the house of the entertainment company executives with a moving truck and Voila! Now you can pay for the hosting.

  • http://twitter.com/MidoThePirate Ahmed Omar

    why don’t people boycott PayPal ….and start using BitCoin …just try BitCoin it may be the only solution

    • Windlasher

      Because you cant pay your rent with bit coins.

      • http://twitter.com/cyphunk nathan andrew fain

        and you can with paypal?

        • Liam Jh

          Yes

        • chris_p_bacon(R.O.L.L)

          Piratepal

        • Windlasher

          The question was why dont they just switch to bit coins, not anything about paypal. Quit looking for shit to troll.

      • Scary_Devil_Monastery

        Yet.

    • Think about it!

      http://bitcoincharts.com/charts/mtgoxUSD#tgCzm1g10zm2g25zv

      Because when i look into my paypal account i know i have 200$. Tomorrow there will be 200 usd , the same thing next month.

      When i look in the bitcoin wallet i see 200 bitcoins , that tommorow could mean either 2000usd either shift.

      And having to buy bitcoins before using them is just a pain in my sensible area , and also a pain in my wallet because of % transfer charges.

      • Scary_Devil_Monastery

        Yup. Bitcoin will not achieve stability until it has a big enough user base.

        That will be sooner than you think though. Bitcoin will be by far the easiest way to hand out microtransactions – ten cents here and there – and at that scale, the user doesn’t really care whether what he “gave” was 10 cents or 15. Especially if it’s convenient enough that all he has to do is fill his local wallet once every few months and then one-click donate his way through the rest of the time.

  • Who

    there is a really easy solution to this payment issue but you all should be smart enough to figure it out.

    but as P2P is concerned as a whole…..IF it goes back to the stone age it will actually be more secure *providing the software is developed*. BBS’s was not as centralized so it was really hard to track users down. heavy encryption software used to connect to a system to download stuff. problem is the host would have to be able to store the files.

  • LovemesomeDMT

    There should be more push towards a NEW WORLD ORDER OF TORRENTING.

  • Whatever

    From the article: “Using another site/community/forum/whatever as a ghost site to funnel funds to this one is also a no-go. If you people can find the link from this page, so can PayPal,” he explains.

    I would argue that this statement is completely false. You don’t have to plaster the donations all over the main login page. As a private site it can be displayed it AFTER login.

    If Paypal DEMANDS a free invite then obviously they are not going to log in by themselves. Also the main page can state that anyone affiliated with any payment processor isn’t allowed to log in at all. When they freeze funds anyway they must have accessed the site illegally (although paypall will probably lie about the reason for the freezing of the funds).

    • Think about it!

      Also the main page can state that anyone affiliated with any payment processor isn’t allowed to log in at all. When they freeze funds anyway they must have accessed the site illegally.

      Very bright , good and …I am speechless at reading your idea.

      Next time , a pedo community will have this warning on their website: “If you’re from FBI you can’t enter!!!!”.
      So the FBI won’t do anything.

      And we could all safely enjoy some 8 y.o. dp and tp.

      • Whatever

        You didn’t think about it.

        FBI != person/private company (like Paypal)
        FBI != non US laws
        law != person/private company (like Paypal)

        There wasn’t even a hint at a suggestion that it will protect you from actual illegal acts like murder, stealing beer from a supermarket, causing a plane crash or anything else like that.

        So you are 1 completely wrong and 2. didn’t have any good arguments if you need pedo for your arguments.

        The site owner may have a reasonable counter argument why he wouldn’t be able to do this but you certainly don’t.

      • Christopher Kidwell

        Argument already lost if you have to use the current (yes, C U R R E N T) social pariah in your argument.

    • Anyone

      the problem is that you assume paypal follows the laws or banking regulations

      they don’t, they will close your account for any reason, most likely because you have a lot of money in it
      they have people looking into accounts with large sums of money and finding a reason to close it, so they can effectively steal the money

      • Whatever

        I did add this to the end:
        “(although paypall will probably lie about the reason for the freezing of the funds)”

        But you are right about that but that can happen to anyone at any time at random. However this is different from targeting them for being a torrent site. The chances are better without being targeted. And besided the admin was complaining their funds being frozen for their “non Paypal compliant” activities and not as a random event like so many Paypal complaint pages state.

        The question is, if Paypal works so badly and everyone knows it by now why do a lot of people still use it ? I think it might happen todo with the poem of a certain German priest. The “it probably won’t happen to me” idea.

        • Whatever

          Sorry, too much shuffling around, sentence corrected below.

          “But you are right about that it can happen to anyone at any time at random.”

        • Anyone

          people still use paypal because in most disputes they will take the side of the buyer

          sellers hate paypal, but if they don’t offer paypal most people simply won’t buy, because it is too entrenched by now

    • Jorge_C

      Worked close with a unimportant torrent site a few years ago when they had this kind of problem with paypal, donations frozen. The donate button was only shown to members who have logged in so it was obviously reported by someone already a member.

      In the end we set up a “special” account for paypal when they demanded a login. This special account took them to a different site entirely that looked completely legit and by the rules. As long as they log in with that account they will never see the real site. This worked well enough since the account was unfrozen.

      Just wanted to give an active example of how this is done. Its trivial to get around paypal as long as your site isn’t some media craze (like TPB). Keeping a low profile is key to torrent site longevity :) .

  • Tiredofthisshit

    Just open a f****g store and tell your members to buy overpriced shit to help your site, legal enough???

    • Anyone

      they rejected that idea in the article

      the problem is that paypal doesn’t follow laws or banking regulations, they will close your account for no reason whatsoever

  • TheOiulkj

    Paypal sucks, I’m glad they’re not allowing any filesharing sites to use their service. This forces them to use a better payment processor.

  • Cevnak

    A pirate site could take some 30% of the advertisement space to copy legitimate ads from legitimate companies (without the consent of the company and without any payments). If this is commonly done, a company can’t be sued for having their advertisements appearing on these sites because they can’t even prevent it. The remaining 70% of the advertisement space could then be confidentially sold to legitimate companies. These companies can then plausibly deny that they are paying for the ads and nobody can prove them wrong.

    • Techanon

      >”because they can’t even prevent it”

      because referrers don’t exist and therefore nobody uses them to block unauthorized hotlinks….

  • steve

    It is possible to fund yourself by running your own advertising. Many people do this. These people at TBy sound extremely defeatist to me. You can also bypass blockers easily this way too by not using flash as your advert platform and just using basic text adverts. I’d also be willing to pay for access to torrents and I can do so with basic banking transfers (which isn’t under attack) which I have used for various sites recently and it worked well if not a little slow. There are ways around this. I know people who use html “Iframes” from legal sites and then placing the adverts on the illegitimate site. The advertising hit goes strait to the legit site and if you own both you get your share of ad revenue. Also not everyone blocks adverts unless they are harassed with intrusive popups or any other forms of intrusive advertising.

    All in all, once again innovators have to create fundraising platforms that bypasses idiot lobby groups pushed legislation. I actually love that we, the general public (much to the copyright cartels disapproval) are much more innovative than any governing body. It keeps everyone on their toes and forces the much needed innovators to come out of the closet. It’s a great time to be alive.

  • Andrew me

    I am sure there are ways to do it keep it simple is the best thing, maybe just ask people to pay directly to the site hoster for costs and every few months take out the extras for other costs.

  • anonymous

    The hypothetical walls are slowly closing around those who participate in the Scene and related activities, the time to design a new system for both monetarily sustaining these sites as well as providing the best possible solution to those who use it is a dire need now a days.

    honestly its starting to really look like the only way for private top sites to continue existing is to have a private beneficiary like TPB did in less things change.

  • Forsaken

    Still think I got a copy of DC++ somewhere I can install. Time to startup a hub.

  • mjbor

    We could learn a little bit from the corporations. They avoid paying taxes on most of their assets by hiding them offshore… really nice places like Aruba. And precious little effort has been expended to get them to bring back the money here to the States, or to make the banks in Aruba cough up the info necessary to tax them properly.

    So, why not start up a competitor to Paypal in Aruba or some other suitable location? It would seem there are more than enough people looking for an alternative to Paypal. There seems to be no shortage of demand.

    Or if Aruba doesn’t grab you, there are places like Venezuela… In which case, it would be good to get it in place before Hugo Chavez gets any sicker.

    • ScrewEwe2

      Or before Hugo Chavez nationalizes it.

  • Cindywilliams25

    Paypal is not reliable for any business, they freeze/steal funds at will; they steal funds if a customer claims he did not receive an item (even if there is proof of delivery)

    there are alternatives. not as well known but they are out there.

    • chris_p_bacon(R.O.L.L)

      yes, well, when us customers get no rights from you businesses and our purchases are either faulty or have gone missing, we rely on the likes of PayPal to put you in your place, so there are two sides you see, and to damn an efficient system just because you have not insured yourself is plain dumb thinking.
      rule no 1 always post with insurance

  • chris_p_bacon(R.O.L.L)

    Putting the bank account number up on the sites is the way to go, i know this as i receive enough Nigerian naughties that ask me to supply my bank account number so they can pay me millions when a dictator has been toppled. seems quite logical to me, just means some people may have to get up off their arses, although you can transfer directly from online accounts as well. it is a no brainer

  • http://theupwind.blogspot.com HostFat

    “Bitcoin is not an option. We can pay next to nothing with it and there seems to be no ‘certain’ way to convert it to something we can use,” he says.

    https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Trade#Dedicated.2FVirtual_Server_Hosting

  • pirate.since.99

    lol 16000 users, lol let this petty little money making site die… it means nothing :D

    • Bla Bla Bla

      It doesn’t have anything to do with TBy so why even say this? It has to do with the principals of the core issues. Open your mind, dolt.

    • Pirate Since 86

      It’s closer to 40k users, but probably minor detail if I ask you. TBy, money making? Allow me to laugh, ha ha.

  • xpmule

    Good story / editorial !
    i liked the part where it said,
    ” the scene was buzzing and people were having fun”
    i was round in ’04 and it was fun :)

    i honestly do next to no downloading or uploading anymore. Back then i was all over getting damn near every game that came out and TONS of software but now a days.. its unusual for me to get anything except tv shows.. that is probably my one file sharing vice / addiction.

    i would like to be there for the fight for the next generation to have fun too which is why i speak up.. the industry pays people to go online and spread disinformation about file sharing and its my personal responsibility to be there when they open their mouth. Its all they have.. they know they can’t stop us !

    Wouldn’t mean much if i didn’t download anything anymore.. i cancelled my isp for a year or two a few years back and it wasn’t a big deal.. i got used to having no internet pretty fast.

    File sharing is my right and future generations right and will fight for it for as long as people are being victimized over it.

    • xpmule

      Forgot to mention i think we should all find every opportunity to speak up and get the truth told.. for example there was a dick head at IMDB who had a forum signature that said basicly that anyone that pirates is not allowed to have an opinion on movies / tv etc and not only that but the guy had created a topic simply to demand everyone go and buy some dvd. so i couldn’t help myself i had to say something, even if his signature said i wasn’t allowed to have an opinion i made sure to give em mine whether he liked it or not lol

      wanna see the imdb “Tosh.0″ topic ?
      http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1430587/board/thread/208538395
      feel free to throw your 2 cents in people lol

      I think we should look for any opportunity to educate people that have not yet been drawn in the controversy and arm them with knowledge such as you don’t have to give in to extortion demands..

  • EricPost

    The best way is to change the copyright laws. 25 years of copyright is long enough for anyone to profit off a work. There’s no reason for anyone to profit longer or once an author is dead. They have life insurance to cover families.

  • Freja

    While researchers at the universities in Europe try to help torrent sites, like the Humboldt university etc, look what American universities are doing. Pathetic students who help them.

  • bobmail

    The biggest problems for the filesharing world is that people like Kim Dotcom exist. This guy isn’t here to share files, he is here to make money. He is turning your “f–k the MAFIAA!” into money by making you feel you are screwing them when you pay him. His intentions aren’t to do good or to make your life better, it’s to make tons of money so he can have a fun lifestyle.

    Until the “pirates” distance themselves from guys like that, you will always be in trouble. They are there for profit, not for the concept.

    TPB is really the same – if the original operators were really into the cause, they would be there. But as soon as the law started to look closely at where the money was going, they folded up their tents and took off.

    These people aren’t your friends. They are antagonizing people, they are causing legal problems, they are in it for themselves.

    • Scary_Devil_Monastery

      “Until the “pirates” distance themselves from guys like that, you will always be in trouble. They are there for profit, not for the concept.”

      And we should take the word of a copyright maximalist for that, I’m sure. Independent observation points the other way.

      Namely that Dotcom is the current victim of a DoJ blunder without any basis in evidence.

      So why should we distance ourselves from a businessman who appears to have been unjustly framed?

  • http://twitter.com/ErikNyquist Erik Nyquist

    I think at some point you’ll see a viable payment processor who doesn’t care about pressure from the US Government. I mean Hollywood. Ehh…what’s the difference…

  • Matías Guzmán

    Tribler.

  • Kinsei

    Bitcoins would work fine if the admins would take the time and research methods of converting to cash currency. There are many methods of doing this.

  • BTGuard - BitTorrent Anonymously

NewsBits

Even more news...

  • Pirate Bay Founder Gottfrid Svartholm on Freedom of Speech

    Freedom of speech is a highly valued commodity, but should people be allowed to say whatever...

  • Blu-ray Anti-Piracy Tech Stops Discs and Promotes Purchases

    An anti-piracy system present in all official Blu-ray players since 2012 has received a fresh update...

  • Foxtel Breeds Pirates by Locking Up Game of Thrones

    One of the main reasons why people turn to piracy is the lack of legal alternatives....

  • UK Student Admits Breaching Sony Copyrights With Leak of PS3 SDK

    Last year an Internet user known as El Nomeo leaked version 3.70 of Sony’s Playstation3 SDK...

  • Pirates Can Be Identified Despite Sharing IP Addresses, ISP Claims

    Carrier-Grade Network Address Translation is a network mechanism through which many Internet subscribers can share the...

MostDiscussed

Below are TorrentFreak's most discussed articles of the past month. Join the discussion if you like.

CopyQuote

Left Quote

“The Pirate Bay has been one of the most important movements in Sweden for freedom of speech, working against corruption and censorship.

Peter Sunde Left Quote

PopularArticles

A selection of some TorrentFreak's classics dug up from our archives.