Presumptious bastards!

[aneeshm]

I was looking up different file sharing protocols, and edonkey being one of them, I wanted to see what they had on their site. I went this link, which was the first Google result. Guess what I found?

The eDonkey2000 Network is no longer available.

If you steal music or movies, you are breaking the law.

Courts around the world -- including the United States Supreme Court --
have ruled that businesses and individuals can be prosecuted for illegal
downloading.

You are not anonymous when you illegally download copyrighted material.

Your IP address is ???.??.??.??? and has been logged.

Respect the music, download legally.

I've blanked out my IP, by the way.

The arrogance of that thing astounds me.

First, you assume that the only thing people can do with a file-sharing network is to download your crap? And you think that on top of that, you can moralise to us about it?

Second, you think that some decision by the Supreme Court of America holds any weight in the rest of the world? Or is it that you think that only Americans are copyright infringers? Or, more likely, you care only about America, where you can buy out a tech-ignorant government and get sh*t like the DMCA passed?

Thirdly, the implied threat that "Your IP had been logged". You're implicitly threatening me for visiting a website? If anything can be called attempted intimidation, this is it.

I've made a decision today - I'm not going to buy any American music anymore, I'm going to download it. Not one paisa of my money goes to such scumbags. You attempt to control all channels of distribution by twisting the laws your way, and I won't have that. You just lost one customer.

File sharing was the basis of the internet, and you seek to stifle it. Bullsh*t, I say. Go fvck yourself.

[Flip McWho]

First, you assume that the only thing people can do with a file-sharing network is to download your crap? And you think that on top of that, you can moralise to us about it?

Because downloading the creative/intellectual/visual property of others isn't stealing.

Second, you think that some decision by the Supreme Court of America holds any weight in the rest of the world? Or is it that you think that only Americans are copyright infringers? Or, more likely, you care only about America, where you can buy out a tech-ignorant government and get sh*t like the DMCA passed?

My guess is either
A) the writer is assuming most visitors would be american
B) edonkey is an american based server
C) the writer is american

Thirdly, the implied threat that "Your IP had been logged". You're implicitly threatening me for visiting a website? If anything can be called attempted intimidation, this is it.

I've made a decision today - I'm not going to buy any American music anymore, I'm going to download it. Not one paisa of my money goes to such scumbags. You attempt to control all channels of distribution by twisting the laws your way, and I won't have that. You just lost one customer.

Stealing

[Tattila the Hun]

Eh, I'm tempted to download some crap hiphop they spew out today, just because.

[aneeshm]

Originally posted by Flip McWho

Because downloading the creative/intellectual/visual property of others isn't stealing.

Talk about not getting the point. I'm saying that file sharing networks exist to share files. If those files are copyrighted, then sharing them amounts to copyright infringement. But the answer to people sharing files they shouldn't is not to shut down the means of sharing files.

This is like banning knives because they can be used to kill people. Might as well ban the internet, because it is possible to do illegal things using it.

And you're wrong when you say that copyright infringement is theft. Theft involves physical objects, the stealing of which deprives the victim of that object. Somehow, I doubt that some copyright infringer's downloading of a file causes that file to cease to exist on the other person's computer .

Originally posted by Flip McWho

My guess is either
A) the writer is assuming most visitors would be american
B) edonkey is an american based server
C) the writer is american

It's still arrogant, you know.

Originally posted by Flip McWho

That's to me or to the site?

Originally posted by Flip McWho

Stealing

Incorrect nomenclature .

Till now, I have never bought, or downloaded, or listened to American music, because I never felt like listening to it. Had I not come across this site, I would have purchased whatever music I felt like listening to. But after seeing this nonsense, I'm not going to let my money go to such people.

They are shutting down legitimate things because they may be used for illegitimate ends, and they are doing this by getting the laws twisted their way - which is completely unacceptable to me. This goes against everything capitalism stood for.

[Cort Haus]

It's wrong to assume that using a file-share protocol is for illegal purposes, but have I understood this correctly, Aneeshm? You take out your annoyance at this ... on musicians, with a policy to steal their music at every available opportunity? You call it not stealing, yet you think that musicians should work without pay? Yeah, Slavery

Oh, and calling musicians scumbags - most charming.

[aneeshm]

Nope. I'm not going into music stores and stealing CDs. I repeat, I haven't listened to American music, and I probably will not, but if ever I find it mandatory to obtain that music, I'm not buying it.

And who called musicians scumbags? I'm just calling people who want to control legitimate distribution channels scumbags. I'm calling people who have a tax levied on blank media scumbags. I'm calling people who try to buy out the law scumbags.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Flip McWho
Stealing

[Cort Haus]

Originally posted by aneeshm
And who called musicians scumbags? I'm just calling people who want to control legitimate distribution channels scumbags. I'm calling people who have a tax levied on blank media scumbags. I'm calling people who try to buy out the law scumbags.

My apologies for thinking that you did, but I agree that people who want to tax blank media are scumbags, if that's where your ire is directed.

Meanwhile, please feel free to download my band's album Eight Pound Guitar, and then feel at liberty to buy the CD if you like it.

[SlowwHand]

If you want to try WinMx, let me know.

[Dinner]

Bit Torrent is better. Of the P2P networks eMule is the best.

[SlowwHand]

Stealing?

Contrary to what the RIAA wants you to believe, it appears that making a copy of an audio recording may be perfectly legal in the US, even if you don't own the original recording, as long as it is for noncommercial purposes. The reason for this is the Audio Home Recording Act (AHRA).
Since 1992, the U.S. Government has collected a tax on all digital audio recorders and blank digital audio media manufactured in or imported into the US, and gives the money directly to the RIAA companies, which is distributed as royalties to recording artists, copyright owners, music publishers, and music writers: http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/ch10.ht ml [cornell.edu]


In exchange for those royalties, a special exemption to the copyright law was made for the specific case of audio recordings, and as a result *ALL* noncommercial copying of musical recordings by consumers is now legal in the US, regardless of media: http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/1008.ht ml [cornell.edu]
"No action may be brought under this title alleging infringement of copyright based on the manufacture, importation, or distribution of a digital audio recording device, a digital audio recording medium, an analog recording device, or an analog recording medium, or based on the noncommercial use by a consumer of such a device or medium for making digital musical recordings or analog musical recordings." The intent of Congress was clear when this law was passed http://www.cni.org/Hforums/cni-copyright/1993 -01/0018.html [cni.org]
From House Report No. 102-873(I), September 17, 1992:


"In the case of home taping, the [Section 1008] exemption protects all noncommercial copying by consumers of digital and analog musical recordings." From House Report No. 102-780(I), August 4, 1992:


"In short, the reported legislation [Section 1008] would clearly establish that consumers cannot be sued for making analog or digital audio copies for private noncommercial use." Therefore, when you copy an MP3 the royalties have already been paid for with tax dollars in accordance with the law. If you are a musician whose recordings are publicly distributed, then you are entitled to your share of these royalties by filing a claim under Section 1006 http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/1006.ht ml [cornell.edu]


Napster tried to use this law to defend their case, and the court ruled this law did not apply to them because they are a commercial company. But as a consumer it seems to me you are perfectly within your rights when you make a copy for noncommercial private use. Source: http://www.boycott-riaa.com/article/6974
===========================

[LordShiva]

eMule uses the eDonkey network, IIUC. But it's the best, after newsgroups.

[Datajack Franit]

You ruined the thread You were supposed to entitle it

"Click the link and get your horoscope"

[aneeshm]

@ Cort Haus

Thanks for the offer, but I cannot, in good faith, download something which I know I cannot purchase legally, because I know that it will not be available in stores in India.

@ all

I've found a place where I can get free American music if I want: Jamendo. Read about it in the Red Hat newsletter. All CC licensed, so no issues of legality. More about the concept:

jamendo is a new model for artists to promote, publish, and be paid for their music.

On jamendo, the artists distribute their music under Creative Commons licenses. In a nutshell, they allow you to download, remix and share their music freely. It's a "Some rights reserved" agreement, perfectly suited for the new century.

These new rules make jamendo able to use the new powerful means of digital distribution like Peer-to-Peer networks such as BitTorrent or eMule to legally distribute albums at near-zero cost.

jamendo users can discover and share albums, but also review them or start a discussion on the forums. Albums are democratically rated based on the visitors’ reviews. If they fancy an artist they can support him by making a donation.

jamendo is the only platform that joins together :

* A legal framework protecting the artists (thanks to the Creative Commons licenses).
* Free, simple and quick access to the music, for everyone.
* The use of the lastest Peer-to-Peer technologies
* The possibility of making direct donations to the artists.
* An adaptive music recommendation system based on iRATE to help listeners discover new artists based on their tastes and on other criterias such as their location.

Some quick stats:

A few numbers quickly gathered about jamendo :

Available hours of music 1201
Number of album tracks 17510
Number of available albums 1906
Number of registered artists 3595
Number of registered members 49325
Number of known concert dates 1594
Total size of distributed files 763.75 GB
Number of distributed files 106396
Finished BitTorrent downloads 604459
Data transfered with BitTorrent 28.83 TB
Number of available languages 13
Number of reviews 26357
Lowfi streams listened to during the last hour 6683 (13.71 GB)
Lowfi streams listened to since 2005 15540662 (39.30 TB)
Total tracks listened to since 2005 (estimate) 39386254
Average listens by track since 2005 (estimate) 2249

[Proteus_MST]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Stealing?
[Lengthy quote about american copy protection laws]

We have the same thing in germany.
You can share your music as long as you personally know the people to which you give the copies (m,eaning that GEMA has an argument against P2P newtworks where you don´t know the recipients of your music).
GEMA also has (partially successful) tried toget around it for digital media.
It resulted in a change of the law which makes copying music legal as long as the CD has no copy protection.
This on the other hand resulted in many publiushers trying to sell a lot of "Non CDs" i.e. CDs which don´t fit into the Red Book Standard and often produce errors if you try to listen to them on PC (and even on some normal CD Players).
As many Customers are reluctant to buy CDs with this copy protection because of the problems mentioned above not many labels sell their music on CDs with copy protection, but if they do it can be illegal to make copies of the content of this CDs in germany.