Comments on: Open Source Torrents Forced Offline by Anti-Piracy Outfit

By: Malcolm Bastien

Malcolm Bastien — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 07:39:07 +0000

Pretty crazy that the fear of legal action is so intense, understandably, that the default action is to shoot first ask questions later.

I'm a bit confused by the update because you're saying the host made the right decision by shutting them down, but it sounds like the host apologized for it and that it was a misunderstanding that Akash uploaded C&C.

Either way, good news that the problem was resolved and the torrents are continuing to flow.

By: Amonymus

Amonymus — Fri, 26 Dec 2008 11:50:35 +0000

Well, that's the problem, they were tracking "open source" software. With free software it wouldn't happen.

Just my two seeds ;)

By: » Blog Archiv » Open Source Torrents Forced Offline by Anti-Piracy Outfit

Tue, 23 Dec 2008 21:42:19 +0000

[...] the rest of the articlehere December 24, 2008 at 2:33 am by admin Category: [...]

By: Roze

Roze — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 11:50:51 +0000

Indeed, the true purpose of copyright has nothing to do with monetary incentive, because it is not necessary. Rather, it is idea that people can own abstract ideas or thoughts, and can control what other people do with them. It is to "protect" their ideas or thoughts from usages that they do not approve of, and to control other people's usages of these ideas or thoughts. This, of course, is tantamount to thought police, and the taking away of freedom of speech and freedom of thought. Of course, you are an industry advocate, so you do advocate the taking away of freedom of speech and freedom of thought.

By: OpenPortal.co.za

OpenPortal.co.za — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 11:13:49 +0000

This is rather sad, I saw their site is under a lot of development now.

Well, we actually have an Open Source torrent tracker too, feel free to stop by…

http://www.openportal.co.za/tracker

By: Boycott Novell » Links 22/12/2008: Linux Videos and Red Hat Results Coming

Boycott Novell » Links 22/12/2008: Linux Videos and Red Hat Results Coming — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 08:39:42 +0000

[...] Open Source Torrents Forced Offline by Anti-Piracy Outfit The Internet can prove complex to some, especially copyright holders. Recently, the Entertainment Software Association (ESA) notified the webhosting company of a BitTorrent tracker dedicated to Open Source Software, that it was infringing copyright of one of their clients. Without any notice, the webhosting company pulled the tracker offline, not realizing that the tracker had done nothing wrong. [...]

By: zarathustra

zarathustra — Sat, 20 Dec 2008 20:49:52 +0000

It’s like the late, great Bill Hicks once said (& I paraphrase):

You shill for Doritos & you’re off the ‘Artistic Roll Call’.

The creative drive isn’t regulated by the dollar bill, you mammon-tards. Stopp putting a facking dollar bill on everything that exists, you worthless dog-waste.

P.S. Marketing People: Kill yourselves (just planting seeds here…)

By: Roze

Roze — Sat, 20 Dec 2008 18:50:08 +0000

Also, I don’t find The Great Gatsby or Harry Potter much greater than some fan-fiction I have seen.

Roze

By: Roze

Roze — Sat, 20 Dec 2008 18:48:39 +0000

And a third example:

the-moon (dot) whitesnow (dot) jp (slash) gallery (dot) htm

Roze

By: Roze

Roze — Sat, 20 Dec 2008 18:46:36 +0000

Also, if you have a different example, there is somnambuling (dot) livejournal (dot) com.

Also, I don’t get what you mean by “could be published.” Certainly publishers select what is published, but what is ultimately of value does not depend on what “could be published.” So your point is moot.

Roze

By: Roze

Roze — Sat, 20 Dec 2008 18:44:00 +0000

My example was of fan-art. Click on the first red link on the top.

Roze

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sat, 20 Dec 2008 15:25:10 +0000

“That merely means that you have seen little.”
————————————

i have read quite a bit of fan fiction. definitely more than most. some of it was okay, the majority of it was terrible. none of it was at a level that it could be published in any of the respective professional markets that cater to the particular genres or the series themselves from which the fan fiction was derived.

“Perhaps you might as well say that all original copyrighted fiction is also bad”
————————————

you could. if you were retarded and wore diapers and enjoyed laughing at your own hallucinations…

that website you cited is unreadable to me.

my challenge stands, show me an example of fan fiction being better than the original work it’s based off.

i dare you to prove me wrong.

until you can, i will continue to say that there exists a gulf of quality between fan fiction and the professional work it’s based off.

By: Roze

Roze — Sat, 20 Dec 2008 10:55:24 +0000

“i don’t think you’ll find very many people that agree with this. ”
Wrong – try again. Fact of the matter is that you think wrong. The only reason you have not found good ones is because you have not tried to.

Roze

By: Roze

Roze — Sat, 20 Dec 2008 10:53:00 +0000

@52 Dec 20, 2008 at 04:48 by Anonymous
That merely means that you have seen little. Perhaps you might as well say that all original copyrighted fiction is also bad – since there are also a ton of those that are also bad. In all, it merely means that you are close-minded, and base your judgment of the whole based on unrepresentative parts. You must have been looking in the wrong places. For example, you should have been looking at LiveJournal instead. Moreover, you are really vague when you say “professional level” – what exactly is that? Is “professional level” anything good in the first place? I highly suspect that “professional level” is nothing good in the first place – especially since art is not about professionalism.

Here is an example of fan-art:
fi0 (dot) jp

Roze

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 22:48:29 +0000

“There is nothing whatsoever that indicates that fan-made art and fiction is in any way inferior. ”
————————————–

i don’t think you’ll find very many people that agree with this.

i’ve read some fan fiction in the past. none of it was at a professional level.

not a single, solitary story.

if you have an example where a piece of fan fiction is of a higher quality than the original i would love to see it.

By: www.10ch.org

www.10ch.org — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 22:34:33 +0000

“why is the VAST MAJORITY of ‘fan made’ art and fiction of a substantially lesser quality than the commercial art and fiction it’s based off?

if you aim to refute that view, please remember to cite sources instead of just making declarative statements devoid of any evidence or reason.”
Actually, it is you who have failed to cite sources. There is nothing whatsoever that indicates that fan-made art and fiction is in any way inferior. In fact, it is quite unreasonable that it be so. The only reason that this fan-made stuff is never heard of so much is that the commercial avaricious culture pushes it aside with their advertising, &c. – using copyright as their predominant means to suppress it.

Roze

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 22:07:36 +0000

#47, the majority of your replies to #28 fell under the “It’s a fact cause i said so!” category.

but let me, perhaps waste some more of my time and try to get a straight answer out of you…if getting paid for making art actually lowers the quality of the art then why is the VAST MAJORITY of “fan made” art and fiction of a substantially lesser quality than the commercial art and fiction it’s based off?

if you aim to refute that view, please remember to cite sources instead of just making declarative statements devoid of any evidence or reason.

By: www.10ch.org

www.10ch.org — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 21:07:04 +0000

@48 Late again
Well, I am quite aware of the fact. I was just pointing out that copyright was used with the ultimate motive of shutting down open source sites/trackers – even if they outwardly say that it is because of the open tracker. Going after open source sites/trackers, with copyright law as their excuse (like that open tracker) is very much their goal, in fact. Copyright law, is after all, there to retain control over everything, including what the public sees and hears.

Roze

By: Late again

Late again — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 20:42:08 +0000

It is scary just how high some companies, in this case the web host, will jump when told to by the copyright cops.

Now have we all managed to settle down and play nice?

As for Roze, good sir while I appreciate your enthusiasm for the cause you really should read more closely before posting. RE: “I suppose that they hate the idea of anyone doing anything for free…” In this case it wasn’t that it was an open source site/tracker, but the fact that someone may have used that same tracker to track things that where under copyright that got them shut down.

By: www.10ch.org

www.10ch.org — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 18:22:07 +0000

@28 stfu
“Copyright was never intended to be abused to the extent that is currently is and is not inherently evil”
Yes, it is inherently evil, and all usage of it to restrict what other people can do with it, is abuse. Copyright takes away the natural property rights, such as creating one’s own duplicates, or the transfer of ownership of such duplicates. Any legally sanctified right that is contrary to natural rights makes it inherently evil, the same way the legally sanctified right to own slaves is contrary to the natural right to be free, and thus is inherently evil.

“Its called common courtesy”
I do not think that shutting down a website and throwing the administrators in jail is called “common courtesy.”

“Yet you have failed to point actual cases where free works of art are considered popular”
Mozart, Bach, etc. Moreover, for more modern examples, there is the innumerable fan-works out there.

“they will be a tiny fraction of all art”
No, they won’t be.

“Hasn?t it occurred to you that since people must have money to live if all artists didn?t get paid for their work there would be a massive drop in total artistic production due to the simple fact that artists would have much less time because they are earning money in some other way.”
Incorrect. The artistic drive does not depend on money.

“is not supported by any artist or content producer that I?ve ever seen”
Try coming out of the box you have been living in, and then you will see.

“money DOESN?T ALTER THE QUALITY OF WHAT THEY PRODUCE”
Actually, it does.

“that artists getting paid for producing work lowers the quality of the work, is an abstract concept inside your own head that you thought up but it doesn?t hold in the real world in practice with what actually HAPPENS.”
Actually, it does happen.

“why the hell do you have the right to expect content producers to produce art for nothing anyway”
uhh…. freedom of thought? But the fact that the expectation is reasonable in the first place is that the artistic drive does not depend on money.

“your warped view of money coming through clothed in quasi-religious terms and meanings (ie. greed is bad) in order to demonstrate that it?s a ‘bad’ thing to want to profit and therefore improve one?s life materialistically.”
Yes, it is a bad thing. I did not think I would need to tell you this, but greed is actually a BAD thing.

@39 imposter
Nice impersonation attempt, but next time, do it right, and then you will be more believable. Besides, even if you did succeed, nothing I have said would have been disproven. If you were trying to prove any point, you have failed to do so. But, it is quite nice that you have been at least somewhat reasonable in your impersonation attempt.

@44 Fedup
Well, the idea is that I am not trying to persuade anyone here. I do not seriously believe that just by making comments on this article, that their minds would be changed. I am, however, posting the comments for the observers/lurkers, and it would do well to show the observers/lurkers how pathetically wrong they are. After all, it is worst to be incorrect (although, it is quite clear already that they are incorrect, but I was just making it more clear).

Roze