I refuse to give the bastards the honor of raising my blood pressure

[lagilman]

Another rant (this one about the tone and 'tude of pirate sites being snarky about how they will deign to honor a legal takedown notice, threatening legitimate copyright holders, and disclaiming Oh No WE don't host anything illegal HERE!) written up, stared at, and deleted.


Y'know, as I've said before, if you're going to do something illegal, then do it. Don't pretend to honor the law or give a fuck about other peoples' rights when clearly you don't. If you upload/host illegally-procured files, then you're a selfish bastard who enjoys stealing and enabling other people to steal. Own your selfishness, already.




[if you download illegal files, all legalities aside, beware of viruses that might be embedded in those files because come on, you're trusting someone who has already proven they hack to show off/screw with other people...)

Comments

[ex-fashioni.livejournal.com]

I was being lectured on my site about how ranting and name calling aren't going to do anything and why didn't I come up with a useable solution instead of, you know, ranting and name calling?

Because it's entirely up to me, dontcha know?

Fuck piss wank bugger it all.

[lagilman]

A usable solution? How about "pay for what you take?" How's that for a solution?

I've yet to hear any defense of piracy that doesn't boil down to "I want it and I don't want to pay for it."

As an adult living in the real world, my sympathy for that is strained.

[ex-fashioni.livejournal.com]

The bitch of it was, this response was allegedly from another writer-- they cheered my ranting on the one hand, but on the other, professed disappointment that that's all it was-- a rant. And that while it might be cathartic, it didn't do anything to solve the problem.

Dude-- my website, my rant.

Although I was an adult about it and gently mentioned that it was such a multilayered issue, that no one easy solution was possible.

I know, I know... I tried reason. I couldn't help myself.

[jslinder.livejournal.com]

Unfortunately, there's a legal aspect to it as well. Not in the US, but in several other countries (Sweden comes to mind), the act of assisting in the transmission of copyright material is not technically illegal as long as you don't handle the material yourself (the analogy given me was that if I operate a bar where Bob meets Dave, and Bob and Dave commit a crime, I was not liable under the law unless I saw the elements of the crime occur, even if I know that the main reason people visit my bar is to arrange crimes).

Bear in mind I think this is CRAPPY law, but it is the law there and isn't being changed right now. That's what the disclaimer they use is for, basically it means if they are being hosted in one of those countries, they are not breaking criminal law as long as the actual copyrighted material does not touch their servers...

Civil law is another matter and that's the method both the authorities and copyright owners have been trying to use.

[lagilman]

*takes a deep breath, reminds self that you're not assuming I'm jumping off half-cocked or don't know the background of the problem, it just -sounds- that way....*


I know and understand the legal implications of the laws, and the reasons why they were put into place - to protect otherwise innocent ISP providers from the repercussions of what (porn, etc) their clients might get up to before they could get the material pulled. While it might be satisfying to sue an ISP with their deep pockets, it's also bad for the long-term health of the Internet.

However, using that law as a "not our fault we're not touching the files" when the sole purpose of the site you've created is to host those files? Is not only bullshit, it's insulting. It's also a red flag in the face of other corporations to have the law changed, killing viable protections for legitimate (creative/activist/political) users. IOW, piracy ain't just bad for copyright holders.

[jslinder.livejournal.com]

I assumed you probably were aware of at least some of it, but not everyone reading is (I recall another thread, not sure if it was yours where a respondent asked how that was a defense).

It was intended more in the matter of getting additional information out there, namely that the phrasing in question, while obnoxious as heck, does also offer some legal protection.

I was going to write that there are legitimate file sharing sites that might need that protection, but I thought about it and could not come up with one offhand.

[lagilman]

I assumed you probably were aware of at least some of it, but not everyone reading is

And starting off your original post with that would have had me nodding along, not leaning back and saying "um, excuse me, yes, not an idiot, here." It's always difficult, in threaded conversations, to remember that although you think you're entering a general discussion, I'm reading it as a direct response to my post.

[this also drives me crazy on Facebook, when people don't specify why they're responding to, and threads get tangled/missed/misunderstood. Argggh!]

[jslinder.livejournal.com]

Sorry :( Yeah, that gets me too, I should know better...