Does the use of P2P technology mean that consumers will lose out on content – or that the total quantity and quality of such intellectual material will decline?

No – it means that the creation and distribution of such content will be democratized – thus more variety and more choice for consumers.

The only losers are existing institutions with outdated business models – and artists who choose to distribute their material through these channels.

This looks like the PGP/certificate issue – by trying to shut down torrent indexing sites in the US – the courts will open the way for such sites outside the US.

Do the US courts wish to bring about a repetition of the Thawte scenario?

^^ From somewhere in the beginning comments.

By that logic, earth if flat if enough people think it’s flat. Just beacuse majority of the people who use it for illegal purposes doensn’t make the whole thing illegal.

“It also has helped in distributing linux and independent films and songs.”
I’ll give them a pat on the back…….

“Just because you look for movies does not mean the sole existence of a site is to find them for you.”
Did you bother to read everything i had said or just part of it then make the rest up?

I said, when it was first created that is what it was made for. Even if the owner says “no it wasn’t” he is wrong. No site could get big by solely distributing non-copyrighted material unless they are the manufacturer of it and then it is not a site for the sole purpose of seeing the content. They are the content source too. There is not the demand for it like there is for copyrighted material.

I have never yet failed to find anything i have wanted from ISOHUNT. Sometimes the seeds and peers are crap and ill use piratebay but both of the sites are basically interchangeable.

If one hasn’t got it the other one has.

“I think your got mixed up with the pirategays.”
They were made for doing copyrighted material too, they just haven’t tried to bluff everyone into thinking their sole intention was not to distribute copyrighted work. At least they are upfront about it.

Like i said though, any judgement in favour of the RIAA or MPAA in any cases is wrong. isohunt is NOT a manufacturer, distributor or worker in the process of copyrighted material.

They are more like a library that has no books but only information on how to get the books you want. They started off with records of where to find books such as “how to grow cannabis” and “the jolly roger cookbook” and loads of people went there because they knew that is where they would be able to find how to get their hands on the books of that nature. Now the library has got its fame it has decided to start stocking references and sometimes the books themselves to such things as the bible and the dictionary to make themselves look legit.

There is nothing illegal about what ISOHUNT is or does, even though its initial intention was for facilitating illegal activity, even if that is not the case now.

Good point, another analogy

you can’t sue the owner of a gun shop if the guns are used for violence.

the user who USED the gun for violence should be liable, not the owner of the gunshop, he is only distributing a variety of guns.

thus saying this

Gary Fung (ISOHunt Owner) should not be liable for such an action taken upon him by the MPAA.

He is only giving us (the users) a search engine to look up sources.
It is OUR choice whether to use this for legal or illegal purposes. It isn’t his fault we use it for illegal purposes.