“Actually I see it as the complete opposite. Copying and sharing has been in society since its very cradle. History is full of examples of copied ideas which succeeded thanks to somebody, but were in fact from somebody else.”

Yes, copying and sharing that which is yours to copy or to share. Not the property of someone else. At no time in history has the fundamental covenant of barter or exchange ever been broken like this until now. There is no precedent in business history, not in food, clothing, shelter or any other product or commodity, where the public simply stole it because there was a technical way to achieve possession without paying, then justifying it because “it’s all crap” or “artists don’t deserve to be paid” or “this is a freedom of speech issue” (which is a howler.). The most fundamental agreement of all in an organized culture is always “one party works and creates things we need, another person pays for the things they wish to take from the first party.”
The simple notion of a fair business exchange.

This is not going to change anytime soon. Government and industry will do whatever they need to do to maintain this one-to-one correspondence. Piracy is a momentary online lunacy that will fade with the privacy priviliges that it needs to survive.

And anyone who cannot or chooses not to make the obvious distinction between things you can and should copy and distribute and things that belong to someone else and you may not, is kidding themselves and harming the image of “sharing” and doing irreversible damage to privacy on the internet in the process. Piracy as an attempt to chance the general order of civilization and the quid pro quo of business will inevitably fail, and is remarkably stupid.

Cool does that mean its ok to hack the bank accounts of Logistep to keep our privacy.

The quickest and easiest way to make money is real estate.

An example of something that succeeded only because it was pirated – Windows.

Stealing means taking something that belong to someone else :) Do 0 and 1 belong to Hollywood? So just because some people call this “piracy” and “theft” doesn’t mean it’s just that.

Ohh yeah Hollywood people work hard for the content they release. Ofc someone who really works in a factory to produce things others need to live make 1% or less of what a so called star actor makes for a few weeks of making a movie. Yes it’s indeed hard work, harder than the fuckers that work to fields so ignorants like can read the internet and get sucked up by propaganda.

You buy something you own it. Ok I understand we don’t sell copies of it (that i can understand) but let’s face it you pay for it you can give it to anyone. Or they should only rent things, but let’s see who’ll pay k’s of dollars for something they’ll never have actually.

Music and movie making isn’t even an art these days. It’s all for money, it’s only normal that free sharing of real art work take place, even if in this process this crap hollywood is shared worldwide. If there would really be quality control for movies and music then things would be different. But seen many movies with a great trailer but nothing really to see at the actual movie or so called artists releasing one decent song in one album and rest make your ear drums blow up :(

This isn’t about what they talk at all. They just scared that with the file sharing now documentaries and real art can be easily downloaded by almost anyone. That what scares them, not so called losses than no independent study ever quantified.

F*cked up world we live in. Same people who invade others so they defend freedom and justice now tells the world we all criminals and our freedom is less important then their profits. Way to go forward … to the dark ages :)

LOLOLOLOLOLOL

you. are. an. idiot.

Actually I see it as the complete opposite. Copying and sharing has been in society since its very cradle. History is full of examples of copied ideas which succeeded thanks to somebody, but were in fact from somebody else.

…Which is probably why ideas aren’t copyrighted, but the way they can be presented can and almost always is.

In order to make this look like an example where copying was beneficial, you might want to give more information about this alleged time when it was..

Just stop paying for music and movies, don’t go to the theather, buy a ball and go play in the park and wait those thiefs from the industry die of starvation.
Piracy never ceases to amuse, that’s for sure. It has this incredibly ironic tendency to reverse roles.

You call hollywood thieves when YOU are the one taking what’s theirs without paying. Just because you are expected to give something back to them (ever heard of paying for things? Probabaly not), you act all incensed, like they are trying to wrong you. Pirates are the ones who anxiously grab everything in site and yet they call hollywood greedy. Pirates are the ones who think that they are the only thing that matters are thus robbing hollywood of billions of dollars every year, yet THEY call hollywood evil.

Oh my gawsh! We steal their things and they aren’t letting it slide??! They R soooo evvilll :(

“You break moral and ethical covenants in place through civilization LONG before the concept of corporation ever came into view.”

Actually I see it as the complete opposite. Copying and sharing has been in society since its very cradle. History is full of examples of copied ideas which succeeded thanks to somebody, but were in fact from somebody else.

It has always happened, and never before has the mess been so big. Of course, if means of communication grow and prosper, it is only logical to think that these things will increase. And personally I don’t see a problem there. Both things come hand in hand. If there was no Internet, but there was a way to connect and communicate from people around the world fast, effectively and cheaply, the same thing would happen.

Either you accept both of them, or accept neither of them.

Remember every time you buy something from them you are selling your freedoms.

Using privacy privilege to mask digital piracy you now possess and enjoy a perfect copy of the work illegally, while the creator is deprived of the compensation he (or she) depends upon, and is morally, ethically and legally entitled to. You break moral and ethical covenants in place through civilization LONG before the concept of corporation ever came into view. And you know and understand this and just don’t care so you dissemble and contort this to be about “freedom of speech” lol or “corporate domination” as long as you can keep finding ways to get their stuff for free.

It’s a pleasure watching the governments and the industries of the world methodically dismantle any real vestige of entitlement to privacy online, and history will lay this extraordinary loss at the feet of those who would trade their freedom and their privacy for a harddrive full of pilfered entertainment. Piracy, at the end of the day, is sophomoric and remarkably stupid. And the consequences serve you right.

Taking away privacy privilege was never an action. It’s a REaction. And the internet loses in the process.

Nicely done.
Idiots.
:-)

It has always been like this. Unlike in america, you cannot win agenst a big company in Switzerland. The company is always right :/

In america you see cases where people sue McDonalds or Publix but that is just not possible here :(

Couldn’t have said it better myself.

You have selectively ignored 90% of my previous post, which leads me to the conclussion that you have no arguments whatsoever against it, ergo you agree with it, thanks :). So, since you agree with the rest of my post, please avoid using the term piracy, or we’ll just have to start calling anti-piracy people “biased pigs”.
So, let’s talk about what you seem to disagree with.

Intellectual property is not an actual term, nor even is it considered by law. Law, correctly, takes into account copyright, trademarks and patents separately, and each has its own law. It doesn’t matter how many organizations exist which have that term in their name, it is completely subjective and intended to be imposed on the public to change the way they think.

But since you probably don’t understand this, I’ll just explain it to you:

The correct term to use would be, in this case, copyright. This term identifies more or less quite accurately the subject in question (although this is arguable in many cases, but for the sake of conversation I will ignore them). The idea it gives to people is, more or less, the idea at stake here.
By using the term intellectual property, you are trying to impose on the public two (three) things:

1. The fact that EVERYTHING related to it (including musical works) comes from the intellect, aka the mind, brain, whatever. This is simply not true, as most works of arts come originally/mainly from “the heart” (if you would understand such a thing). A musician is an artists, and artists compose a song or write a poem based on what they feel.

2. The fact that such things can be owned Hmmm, interesting. US Constitution doesn’t consider this fact, but instead (as I marked earlier and suppose that you agree with) considers copyright as a temporal artifficial concession (which will someday end), put in place only to generate more works so that the public benefits. It never states that ownership is natural to these things (actually, that was proposed when the constutition was first enacted, but that idea was thrown away).

3. The fact that you can steal them (since they are “property”. If you steal, you deprive an owner of something he has. But if you copy a song or album (something you have admitted to do, at least in the past), you are not actually depriving the “original owner” of that which he had. The original owner still has its work. So, where’s the deprivation?

I have personally looked at the ways in which copyright organizations do statistics, and as somebody who has studied statistics, can say that the ways they do it is biased, which leaves them with no effect. And since you are so intent on reaffirming the “losses” the industry has had, I urge you to point us in the right direction by providing us with serious, unbiased statistical studies which show this trend. Thank you :)

Oh, and by the way, who do you think experiences those losses? The artist? The “industry”? The industry is a compendium of companies dedicated to the distribution of music, something quite obsolete today with the availability of digital technology to the regular person (such distribution was needed back in the days where we didn’t have the digital technology level we have today). If you are a businessman, and your business becomes obsolete, the ethical thing to do is to accept it and move on, and not to try to bring everybody down with you.

Oh right, you meant that the artist is the one who experiences the losses. Well, I assure you, for less than 5% their share in record sales in most cases (which, if you had read Courtney Love’s article that I posted earlier, you would know that most times that revenue goes to cover other costs), artists rather prefer that you go to their concerts (which is a completely different experience that I personally enjoy much more than listening to a record).

Thanx!!!

P2P creates connections, it broadens local limitations. It is not inherent only in the US and UK but worldwide.

Piracy pursues International Recognition.

Entertainment industry gains supporters through P2P.

Piracy segregates the excellent from the average productions. (A little bit harsh but that’s how you it technically works.)

Piracy creates awareness. Movie and Music Ideas are improved through many comments and suggestions, how is that possible? Because Piracy reaches millions of people whose majority decides what is popular and what is not. What Qualities decide what is the best music. Sort of Like an MTV Top 10 but with more participants.

The Entertainment Industry has obviously benefited from Piracy.

Guess not through Money but Quality.

It is therefore their chance to innovate.

I will dictate to the entertaiment industry how much their work will cost and I will do so in an honest way too.

I hereby never will buy a CD, DVD or Blu ray in my life nor will I sign a contract to receive their products in any form, from this day on I will search and acquire only music that is in the public domain, opensourced or with a license that says it will never deter me from broadcasting it in public or in private, sharing it, copying it or using it in my personal projects, the same I will do with any other media. You see I don’t need to “buy” which is a misnomer because you don’t buy property apparently when you talk about imaginary property.

Stop me if you can now LoL

The fact is thing’s come and go, music and art have been around long before copyright and will continue after. These snake oil lies spread about by the extremist church of imaginary property. There are now much better meathead for distributing content on a scale which is relativity cost free.

Copyright no longer stands for what its meant for, rather a despicable act used to protected the extremist who would rather see no progress at all, all in the name of the business model.

And for that reason (abuse) it dose not deserve our respect. Humans copy each other it’s a basic right and a key part to life. Copyrighting free culture is wrong ifpi bpi riaa did not invent free culture neither music they have no right to it.

The death bell has been stuck for distribution business. What these guys are doing is violating humanrights and must be punished for it.

Another interesting to do would be to stop using the term “intellectual property” because, as Stallman put it, it lumps together copyright, trademarks and patents

Not neccesarily. It simply refers to ownership. This is something which piracey niether understands, recognizes, or respects.

If that music industry is doing so terrible, show me your figures of profit loss(actual profit loss not estimated figures of what would of been made by pirated material

The evidence of losses is abundant. A simple google search would give the results you’re looking for.

piracy losses

Also just so you know, I Pirate material all the time but when I do and find something I love I buy it, there is millions of people who do this, and the fact of the matter is there has been studies showing people who pirate buy more movies.

Great, and what exactly was this supposed to prove? Do you have some way of keeping tabs on the purchasing habbits of said millions of people? As evidenced, by enormous losses, people aren’t have as ethically minded as you suggest.

Do you think the average person has deep pockets? Do you expect us to buy everything?

Do you realize how absurd this sounds? So just because you don’t have the money for something you want, that means you can just go steal it? Where does this sense of entitlement come from?

This isn’t about piracy, its not even about privacy to me, I could really care less about the two..

Well, like it or not, it actually is. You admit to pirating, and as such you’ve forfitted your privacy rights.

What this is about is the music industry getting more money then it already deserves.

Who are you to dictate how much money the music industry deserves? You act like they are your slaves. You’re they’re master and they’re sole purpose is to make you happy.

So get off your stupid high horse and realise there is no REAL LOSSES.

You are deluding yourself if you think millions of people stealing has no effect on an industry.

A pirated movie may have a low quality.

As far as I can tell, most are XVID DVD rips. So, no.

A pirated game- may not offer all features the purchased game would offer(online play, updates ect ect)

Most people don’t care. If you knew anything about the statistics, you would know that game piracy is just as rampant as music piracy and is causing all sorts of things.
»Developers are moving away from the PC or abandoning it all together. Just because a bunch of self absorbed idiots think they are entitled, the PC is getting less and less games, because developers want to stay away from it.
»Worse Support
»The necessitated inclusion of DRM/copy protection.

The only reason why people like you and RIAA have there panties in a bunch is now, you can make profits from people getting ripped off. which isn’t an issue of stealing, its an issue of realising shit material.

This is another lie that pirates use to justify themselves. They use this all the time to exonerate themselves while shifting the blame towards those they steal from.

REALITY CHECK. Some of the most pirated things are the good games, movies, etc. Unless, you are an impulse shopper, who just goes out and blindly purchases anything on a whim, you don’t have to worry about spending your money on bad things. It’s not hard to find out what is bad and what is good these days, thanks to something called the internet. So, stop trying to push the whole “it’s their fault, because they’re stuff is bad” load of bullshit.

You have yet to give me one reason why you think you can take what is not yours.

So what you’re actually saying is that the mindset of the pirate, who wants nothing else then to experience culture, is an egotist for wanting to experience culture.

Here you go again, repackaging things. It’s not just “culture” or “freedom.” It’s SOMEONE ELSE’S WORK. It’s INTELLECTUAL PROPETY.

But 99% of the time, the people who originally upload the music pay for it. They have paid for it, therefore it belongs to them.

I got a few words for you on this one here (you might remember them) : multi milllion dollar losses. You’re assuming you’re conclusion is correct by removing a critical piece of information from the picture.

Most downloaders do not use p2p networks to profit. They don’t sell what they download. Those that DO sell what they download ARE criminals and DO deserve prosecution, but your average p2p user does not because he’s not in it for financial gain.

You can still be persecuted even if you aren’t making money off of it. It’s called a civil offense. Just because you don’t make money off it, doesn’t mean it makes it okay. You are still taking whats not you’s without paying for it. Answer this : “Can you really not see the moral problem with that?” What.. just tell me what.. Makes you think you are entitled to steal other people’s things?

As such, piracy is still not a crime.

Wow, that had to be the most clueless thing I have ever read. Yeah, piracy is okay. Copyright is there to just tell people that “hey I made this!”

…..

WRONG. Copyright violation is a crime. People take other people to court over it all the time. Do you know what the Berne Convention is? Hundreds of countries (including those that house people like the pirate bay who claim that their locations renders them immune to the law) signed an agreement in which they pledged to uphold copyright. Everyone country who is part of the World Trade Organisation is part of it and bound by that agreeement.

Honestly, I dont think you have any understanding of the underlying legal framework regarding copyright violation. You know what I think? I think you just don’t like people telling you that you have to pay for things.

Sorry, but I don’t find this study to be trustworthy. One, it’s sponsored by a commercial organization that has a commercial interest in getting people to buy software. Two, the article won’t let me read past the intro, and not even the page source reveals anything further. Three, I bet you that this study uses the “one download is one lost sale” assumption, which is fallacious.

…………

Except that they are in no way connected to the software industry or their interests….

Actually, it isn’t. When people download, they cause the company to loose profits. If downloading wasn’t a major problem, why do you think major industries would be making so much of a fuss over it? Because they think it’s fun? Do you honestly think that the music industry and hollywood are putting so much of a commitment into their legal campaign against piracy because they think it’s fun? Or maybe gets them a free vacation?

This is an opinionated site. If it were sponsored or hosted by an organization (specifically, a neutral one), it would say so on the site. But all I see are uses of the word “I” which means that this is administered by one person, or a few people, who believe that sharing is wrong. As such it’s not credible.

Also, you still haven’t given proof about TPB’s supposed fortunes gained from advertising..

Opinionated just because it disagrees with you? Everything and everyone is opinionated. The pirate bay is opinionated too because they think that “OOOhhh I dont care, makes it okay to steal things.” What do you know about that site?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_piracy

Do you really think that the movie and music industry would place their faith in the copyright system if it had no legal support? Piracy IS a crime, and you CAN be prosecuted for it.
“Amendments to the 1976 Copyright Act
With the passage of the No Electronic Theft Act (NET Act), US copyright law was changed to allow for the civil and criminal prosecution of persons allegedly engaged in copying of copyrighted works without permission that did not result in personal financial gain; historically, the criminal copyright law required infringement to be for financial gain. Among other things, the NET Act altered the definition of financial gain to include bartering and trading. In addition, under this US law, members of software piracy groups could also be prosecuted for participation in a criminal enterprise.”

some of the employees might have shady activities that might otherwise go unnoticed because of their right to privacy.

yes, stalk them, violate their precious right, all in retaliation for violating the rights of others

Another interesting to do would be to stop using the term “intellectual property” because, as Stallman put it, it lumps together copyright, trademarks and patents, which are three completely different things that have almost nothing in common. Also, it serves to put in people’s minds the idea that you can own (“property”) ideas and things that are not material. Really strange when we take into account the fact that copyright is not natural, but an artificial concession made on behalf of the public’s freedom for the future common good.
That means it is not meant to last a long time (certainly it is not meant to last forever). It is only meant to motivate authors (not “creators”, because, as far as my uttermost flexible logic says, only God can create something out of thin air) to come up with more works, so that the public benefits from them (culturally). And with more than 90% of a record’s sales’ profit going into the pockets of the distributors, producers, advertisers, etc (AKA, the industry), I don’t quite see how an author is supposed to feel motivated to keep making songs with such a tiny income.

Another good article to read about this: http://archive.salon.com/tech/feature/2000/06/14/love/print.html

Here in South America things are not that different. I don’t have solid figures (I doubt that such figures would ever show up in a mainstream newspaper over here), but urban knowledge says that from a $20 record sale, the artist only sees $1 (we nowadays have a 3.7->1 parity with the US dollar, so you do the math). It is also urban knowledge that an artist sees much more income from a concert than from record sales.
As such, many bands benefit from “mouth-to-mouth” (it’s an expression we use here to denote that information gets passed from one person to another, generally avoiding any mainstream newspaper/tv/radio station/etc). Actually I remember going to see a rock band a few years ago who managed to completely fill a rather big football stadium (40.000+ people) with only mouth-to-mouth. They never put an ad on any newspaper, nor did they advertise the concert through tv or radio.

And finally, another great thing to do would be to stop using the term piracy, as it was coined originally for people who attacked ships and stole MATERIAL THINGS and killed other people. And yet again, my uttermost flexible logic fails to see how can somebody who shares something that is not material attacks ships, steals material things and kills other people. You can use the term “copyright infringement” if you like, but please, stop using the term piracy/pirate. It is confusing, biased, and is the same thing as calling names and insulting the other party.

And we don’t do that in a democracy don’t we? ;)

If that music industry is doing so terrible, show me your figures of profit loss(actual profit loss not estimated figures of what would of been made by pirated material)

Oviously you are sharing the same bed with RIAA I sure hope the sex is good.

Also just so you know, I Pirate material all the time but when I do and find something I love I buy it, there is millions of people who do this, and the fact of the matter is there has been studies showing people who pirate buy more movies.

Do you think the average person has deep pockets? Do you expect us to buy everything?

This isn’t about piracy, its not even about privacy to me, I could really care less about the two.

What this is about is the music industry getting more money then it already deserves.

You ask any professional business man whats the easiest and best way to make a good amount of money, they will say music.

So get off your stupid high horse and realise there is no REAL LOSSES.

and like I said, if somethings good people will buy it, nothing beats the quality,

A pirated movie may have a low quality.

A pirated game- may not offer all features the purchased game would offer(online play, updates ect ect)

Pirated music- is the same MP3 format music is not as good as .wav format so once again this is a quality thing.

People do not want to waste there time with crap. People do not want to buy crap.

The only reason why people like you and RIAA have there panties in a bunch is now, you can make profits from people getting ripped off. which isn’t an issue of stealing, its an issue of realising shit material.

‘That’s the fundamental flaw of the pirate mindset. It’s based on the idea that everything revolves around you.’

Aw, really?

So what you’re actually saying is that the mindset of the pirate, who wants nothing else then to experience culture, is an egotist for wanting to experience culture.

Oh, did ya figure that one out for ye self?

But 99% of the time, the people who originally upload the music pay for it. They have paid for it, therefore it belongs to them.

If it belongs to them, why should it be illegal for them to pass it around?

And if it doesn’t belong to them, then what did they pay for when they bought the CDs? They bought them, yet they don’t own them?

They paid for the music, so it is now their property. They should be free to share it with whoever they want.

“Creators will always feel a proprietary attachment and will always strive for a natural control of everything they create.”

And when they sell their creations, they are losing control over it. No sacrifice, no gain. They are sacrificing their control, gaining the money others pay for it.

Or are you telling me that people shouldn’t be allowed to have control of CDs they have bought from the creators? If you bought a car you’d expect to have control over that, yes? You’d expect to be able to sell/lend/give that car to whoever you pleased. Why not with music too?

I clicked your link and started reading…

“We have the right to license our works and control the ways in which they are used.”

I stopped reading right there.

It’s clear that this organization believes in the concept of intellectual property. IP is fallacious. You can’t own ideas. The intellectual products of our civilization are the “property” of all people in the world, to use and benefit from (and when I say benefit, try to imagine it being used in a context that is not financial). No one has the right to use any talents they may have to exploit others.

I urge everyone on here to visit http://www.gnu.org/philosophy and read the articles listed there, especially those in the Copyright section.

Real quick before I post anything else, I’ma respond to your links. In regards to this:

http://stason.org/TULARC/business/copyright/3-3-Is-copyright-infringement-a-crime-or-a-civil-matter.html

“A copyright infringement is subject to criminal prosecution if infringement is willful and for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain.”

Most downloaders do not use p2p networks to profit. They don’t sell what they download. Those that DO sell what they download ARE criminals and DO deserve prosecution, but your average p2p user does not because he’s not in it for financial gain.

As such, piracy is still not a crime.

In regards to:

http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20090512-715192.html

“…according to an annual study sponsored by the Business Software Alliance.”

Sorry, but I don’t find this study to be trustworthy. One, it’s sponsored by a commercial organization that has a commercial interest in getting people to buy software. Two, the article won’t let me read past the intro, and not even the page source reveals anything further. Three, I bet you that this study uses the “one download is one lost sale” assumption, which is fallacious.

http://www.piracyisacrime.org/

This is an opinionated site. If it were sponsored or hosted by an organization (specifically, a neutral one), it would say so on the site. But all I see are uses of the word “I” which means that this is administered by one person, or a few people, who believe that sharing is wrong. As such it’s not credible.

Also, you still haven’t given proof about TPB’s supposed fortunes gained from advertising.

I do pay for what I deem appropriate, but a lot of times, you’re right I don’t. Why should I pay to see something on the big screen when it’ll probably end up crap? Sure, we have sneak peaks and what not where we can view a minute or two of the movie, but a lot of times I have seen only the good parts in the review and others where the sneak peak was junk so I paid to see 1 movie but ended up seeing 2 and still enjoyed it (yes I currently pay 2 for 1 movies – not that hard to setup either)! I got sick of the repetitive nature of this so I keep my own green.

The same goes for music, just because a song is released on the radio doesn’t mean the entire album is good. There’s been plenty of CD’s that I purchased that when I listened to the entire disc overall it was garbage. Now you tell me why I should pay for garbage when I can download as I wish and delete just as fast without wasting a penny?

I don’t mind paying for quality entertainment, not at all. It’s a lot of bands that are out there released crap and I got sick of it. I’d rather have what I purchase go DIRECTLY to the artist, not the industry that thrives off others people work and claim it as their own for “copyright.” If anyone is to sue anyone for infringement, it’s the artist. As of late, none are and when the industry does it for the musicians, are these musicians seeing a dime in return? No, as previous articles showed with various artists stating they didn’t. It’s probably bad PR for the artists to sue their fans anyway, such as Metallica way back during Napster times. When I want a musician to continue to make quality music, I’ll give to them my dough directly at concerts where they make the most. They do sell their own CDs too!

How am I supposed to know if a CD is good or not without purchasing it? Long ago before we could download and share entertainment the way we do now. We could not and therefore we had to buy an artists album to listen to it. Waste of cash back then and I refuse to do it now. But, hey, Neostyles, if you by all means enjoy purchasing a CD that you have never heard and find it a waste after you did listen to it, then by all means continue to throw away your cash, or how about you spread it to me? You don’t seem to mind purchasing (wasting imo) your money on distasteful entertainment.

If you honestly, wholeheartedly, believe that piracy has had a “fairly substantial part of the current economic hole” that the world is is, then please do your own research without reading anything related to copyrights, piracy, and the internet, or just remove yourself from the gene pool. :)

Have you ever been to switzerland – i doubt it. Ok i mean i shouldn’t feed the troll but to you I have a message: How in the hell does anything about the banks have to do with the normal citizen of my country. I you had read the books (not only THE one) you would know that most people didn’t even know that the banks make money with the nazis. Besides: Think of one thing: Switzerland is a very small country. How in the hell would we have been able to fight back the germans. We did what we had to do to stay away from the nazis. AND a big thing: I live in Basel and there are a lot of jews here – a lot of my friends are jews – so please, we didn’t send them all back – that is a foolish lie!
For the foreigners, you said that they are treated badly here: I have to say that it is not true. I have a lot of friends coming from different countries and even my girlfriend comes from eastern europe (swiss now).
So I think to say that all people of a country are nazis is the most “naziest” thing anyone can say. And by the way – the word nazi has been used too much in this world – it’s just a ridicoulous thing to say that to someone.

Oh yes about the main topic: Its really going on now here. Rules getting more stricktly than ever – but not only for downloaders. Our parlament just made all laws more strickt. Hmmm… But in some cases it is really necessary – but not in P2P :-(

why not creating an ANTI-anti-piracy group who spy on peoples working in anti-piracy groups and breach theirs privacy.

the ends justified the means….

lol

Swiss have ZERO morals, and are corrupt as a people….

http://www.ascap.com/rights/

Creators will always feel a proprietary attachment and will always strive for a natural control of everything they create. That’s just in human nature, and this Bill of Rights reflects that.

It’s not in our human nature to pass around what doesn’t belong to us in the first place, or to steal or infringe, or illegally distribute or to ransack the catalog of others, and law and law enforcement will always reflect this, too. The Swiss are correct in this respect and piracy is wrong.

Only pirates work to maintain this “confusion” of natural rights because it gets them free stuff. Pirates with an interest in the truth acknowledge this.

Majority is telling : RESPECT OUR PRIVACY

whats even more cool is that yer can play it back on a xbox 360 with no transcodeing.

Cheers