It seems that Cogeco, a Canadian ISP has begun sending its users warnings about their activities on P2P networks. The strange fact is, the warnings appear to be under DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act) laws, which are U.S. laws, not Canadian laws. The BT tracker that seems to be gaining attention is the Swedish .org tracker. The emails also encourage the ISP's to limit users from accessing .org.
These actions can be compared to those taken in European countries for about the past year. Basically, someone affiliated with the MPAA or other anti-piracy organizations would begin a download on a P2P network, then record all the IP's it downloads from. After recording all the data it needs, it would continue to send the information the ISP, hoping that they will deal with the issue. However, there are some complications too. For example, some networks like the donkey network, trade files in small parts and in no particular order. In other words, you may be downloading the end of the file first. Whether you have the full file or not, as long as you have just one part, your client will be able to upload to other users. So would the MPAA ever take you to court for sharing a part of a movie, that is only a couple of MB's and pretty much completely useless without all the other parts?
Read entire story here-http://www.afterdawn.com/news/archive/5537.cfm .
I myself recieved an E-mail from my ISP, but I live in Canada where supposedly file sharing is legal as stated here: Judge: File sharing legal in Canada - CNET News and the file I was downloading didn't come from the states either. I wasn't uploading and the file was a unlicensed fansub.
EDIT: My bad! My source, ttp://www.afterdawn.com/news/archive/5537.cfm . was from 2004. (The date was stamped today in the google search results) But I am basically in the same situation. The CNET link is up to date though I believe.
I hate piracy.
"I'd shush her zephyr." ~ Zephyr.
computernerd;4956554I hate piracy.
Ever stop to think that there are LEGITIMATE uses for torrents? I've used them for sharing videos I've recorded on my computer. It saves you the hassle of uploading a file to a host only to have it interrupted.
Just because you torrent doesn't mean you're a pirate. Maybe you like linux distros.
Zach;4956559Ever stop to think that there are LEGITIMATE uses for torrents? I've used them for sharing videos I've recorded on my computer. It saves you the hassle of uploading a file to a host only to have it interrupted.
Just because you torrent doesn't mean you're a pirate. Maybe you like linux distros.
Seriously :wtf: man, I know what torrents are, I'm simply stating that I hate piracy.
"I'd shush her zephyr." ~ Zephyr.
computernerd;4956564Seriously :wtf: man, I know what torrents are, I'm simply stating that I hate piracy.
Why don't you just post +1 and get it over with? Simply stating "I hate piracy" could be interpreted to say you hate the original poster based on a false assumption that torrenting in and of itself is piracy.
Aaand on topic:
So would the MPAA ever take you to court for sharing a part of a movie, that is only a couple of MB's and pretty much completely useless without all the other parts?
Seeing all the exorbitant fees they're charging in file sharing cases, I wouldn't be surprised.
I suppose, that with the increase in piracy over the past few years, laws come into place, but aren't really enforced for a while. This clampdown was inevitable, and my feelings are mixed.
We Americans are losing our freedom!!!:eek:
This is not going to do any good unless they somehow regulate the sites selling Seed Boxes, which many dowloading torrents often use, as they boost your speed to 100MB/s up and down and act as a proxy screen, virtually hiding their users from detection. All this is going to do is put Seed Box sites into overdrive, which are already growing at an exponential rate.
[COLOR=black]A surgeon at the Washington University School of Medicine, in St Louis, MO, says she and her colleagues have no good explanation for what they term "alarmingly early stenosis" seen in patients treated with the Medtronic Mosaic bioprosthetic valve in the aortic position. According to a brief communication they've published in the June 2009 issue of the Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Dr Jennifer S Lawton and her coauthors, prompted by an initial case of early stenosis, followed all 122 patients in whom they'd used the device, ultimately turning up four cases of severe stenosis requiring valve replacement within just three to 44 months after implantation.[/COLOR]