Pirate Act - re Doom's news

[windtrader]

The comments by Hatch and others really focus on P2P as the primary problem source. It clearly is the most easily usable network infrastructure for moving files around the internet and surely the most used and available, so I see the rationale for targeting P2P.

What about Usenet? Is it fundamentally different somehow and is not addressed by the Pirate Act or DMCA? Or is it so much smaller a problem they've decided not to complicate these initiative's understanding and passage by adding more technical complexity or paths for the bills to get derailed?

Usenet is great, I use it a lot, and hope to continue to do so. It is just that I've never really hear this discussed in the context of stealing IP.

[Neo Neko]

I seem to remember a piece of wisdom about hating the message and not the messanger. And in this case Hatch and henchmen have it backwards. P2P is simply the messenger and not the message or even the one sending the message. Sure killing the messenger can provide superficial short term satisfaction. But it does not even address the problem/message. And there are "always" other messengers. Even if it is sneakernet. Hatch and crew are just taking a hyper hypocritical stance. We don't ban all guns because they can be used to kill. We don't ban all drugs because they could be used to kill. And we dont ban them for the same reason we don't ban cars, Tvs, VCRs, computers, cameras, tape decks, cd players/recorders, and books. Because in one way or another they are all messengers conveying a message be it good or bad. It is not the fault of the messenger.

With that in mind I suppose we should not hate Hatch and friends. Since all they are, are paid messengers of the anti-consumer message of corporate society. We can however take issue with them or any representative for doing so and deserting their responsibility to those they serve and those who elceted them. Those which many including Hatch seem to have unfortunatly forgotten completely.

As to usenet the reason they don't target it is that (A)It is actually a bit harder to track those that are sharing. (B) Data retention times are super short. (C) Message corruption is so common that it is pitiful. (D) It is a super outdated technology that all but the oldest internet denesins have almost completely forgot. When was the last time you Gophered for Warez? Usenet is just hoplessly out of date and has poor visibility. There is no search function that will bring you tons of results from all sorts of decentralzed sources with near constant avalibility, very low corruption, and good transfer rates all in a simple point and click interface. Not for usenet.

[windtrader]

@Neo - I love your answer to usenet. Your view of usenet, as a tech savvy person, suprises me a lot, and makes me very happy. If the general view is Usenet is that cluggy, antiquated, error-prone, etc., then it will never be targeted in all this piracy hoopla.

Not to pick a fight but I'd have to say every point you make is incorrect about usenet. Maybe the grizzled old-time techno-geeks who have it all figured out keep it's true value a secret, hush-hush, and a secret society. Maybe the only way to gain entry is for one to alone make the difficult climb to the summitt to join the club and that is why so few see the unique view from the top.

[Neo Neko]

Originally posted by windtrader
@Neo - I love your answer to usenet. Your view of usenet, as a tech savvy person, suprises me a lot, and makes me very happy. If the general view is Usenet is that cluggy, antiquated, error-prone, etc., then it will never be targeted in all this piracy hoopla.

Even with all that I do browse it several times a week with BNR2. The fact remains that Usenet has a severe visibility problem. Only long time internet users or their odd friends are even likely to know it exists. It's not like Edonkey or Kazaa which are invoked in mainstream news every other day or so.

Originally posted by windtrader
Not to pick a fight but I'd have to say every point you make is incorrect about usenet.

I don't mind if you point out how I am incorrect. I know I am not mistaken. Most servers don't have message retention much over a week. That is pitifull. There is little or no error correction or checking for errors from server to server transfers. Need I mention the lack on client server transfers? Single files have to be spilt up across multiple messages. And missing even one message can make all the other parts downloaded useless. There are things like PAR files which many posters still don't use which help reduce the dammage from corruption. But that involves transferring alot more redundant data than any of the popular P2P systems. The selection on usenet at any one time is miniscule compared to a common P2P service. And there is very little use in searching or performing searches. Further usenet has what I find as much more offensive spam. Incest and child porn messages are rife even in the non-sex related groups. Disgusting.

Originally posted by windtrader
Maybe the grizzled old-time techno-geeks who have it all figured out keep it's true value a secret, hush-hush, and a secret society. Maybe the only way to gain entry is for one to alone make the difficult climb to the summitt to join the club and that is why so few see the unique view from the top.

No it is all about ROI. Return on investiment. I get a much better ROI on your average P2P service that I would ever get on usenet. I have never seen any "Harumi Nemoto" pictures or movies posted to usenet. But over Emule and bittorrent I have found complete videos and even whole magazine scans that would never be avalible to me here. I don't search for common stuff or the latest theater screener or cam shots. Same goes for Music videos by the UK band "Fluke" whom I have been a fan of since the early 90's. I have some very rare stuff never distributed in my country that has never been on usenet. I have spiders passively scanning usenet on almost a daily basis. But I still have alot of work to do getting rid of fake or misleading content.

There are so many things wrong with usenet which is part of the whole reason very few people use it. But you always have a few people that miss the whole issue and claim that usenet is teh best. Just be glad that no IRC traders have chimed in. :D It is an equaly outmoded transport with equally zealotous supporters and an equally high barrier to entry. But at this point we have left the general topic of the forum behind. ;)

[Joe Fenton]

IRC and USENET are lousy as far as searching for specific items go. That is the ONLY negative. A little browsing using a bit of guesswork leads to many hidden treasures. Once you learn how to use USENET and IRC, you'll just smile and wink when people badmouth it. It's good that people say these things - it keeps the RIAA and MPAA at arms length. They can amuse themselves suing P2P users while IRC and USENET keeps chugging along merrily.

[Doobie]

The news feeds of many major ISPs are worthless as a P2P substitute. It's not just short retention and missing parts, it's that some simply don't carry many of the binary groups.

You'd think in the day of dirt cheap hard drives, gigs for nickles and dimes, that there would be good retention. But, I guess usenet is in low demand by users so it's not a priority.

[Joe Fenton]

ISP newsservers, maybe. All commercial servers are different. You normally see two weeks to two months retention, ALL binary newsgroups, and 99%+ completion ratio. Prices on commercial servers has also dropped quite a bit due to competition.

[windtrader]

Hi Joe,
Clearly you have a clue about where and how to get around usenet. I totally agree that as long as the masses, even the majority of the technically inclined, remain misinformed and clueless about it, the better the chances it will live on for the enlightened.

Yes, competition is good as it has kept prices down and very reasonable. I now get 10 gigs for 10 bucks, up from 6 gigs; more than enough for my needs. I also get daily, custom usenet upload and auto search reports for 50 CENTS a week. Can't beat that to keep on top of the uploads.


@Neo - Harumi is there, along with Kobe Tai, Kaila Yu, Kaede Hino, Akria Nishmura, CHiteki Jokyoushi, Askka Sawaguchi, Senna Kurosaki, and hundreds others - All uncensored versions. DVD, SVCD, DIVX, jpgs

[Neo Neko]

We are getting way off the topic of the board and on the verge of rule violations here. I entertained the topic at first but I am afraid I can no longer if this is the way in which it is headded. It is one thing to discuss these services in grey areas or generalities. But yet another thing when we clearly outline and even advocate to an extent using them for pattently illegal purposes.

Since the only thing saving much of usenet is it's obscurity one might think an "enlightened" person would take that into account and not make a scene exposing it potentially threatening what they think is a good thing. So far that has not been the case here.

Quite honestly if any network operator should be at the scrutiny of the RIAA/MPAA it should be the non-ISP paid usenet providers. The reason many usenet groups are filtered or blocked by ISP is because they are clearly intended for only illegal purposes. Usenet providers hold a greater responsibility for what is on their networks than other network providers. That is since they can block and filter some of the content easily. By purposefully hosting clearly illegal groups and taking payment for it they are providing illegal services and profiting from it. The very thing the RIAA/MPAA accuse the innocent P2P network operators of doing. Aiding and abeting in software theft and copyright violation. And getting paid for it no less. At best a highly unscroupulous business benefiting from hiding in obscurity.

[windtrader]

Quite honestly if any network operator should be at the scrutiny of the RIAA/MPAA it should be the non-ISP paid usenet providers. The reason many usenet groups are filtered or blocked by ISP is because they are clearly intended for only illegal purposes. Usenet providers hold a greater responsibility for what is on their networks than other network providers. That is since they can block and filter some of the content easily. By purposefully hosting clearly illegal groups and taking payment for it they are providing illegal services and profiting from it. The very thing the RIAA/MPAA accuse the innocent P2P network operators of doing. Aiding and abeting in software theft and copyright violation. And getting paid for it no less. At best a highly unscroupulous business benefiting from hiding in obscurity.

This has gone full circle, so I agree we should close this off. My whole point, why does the MPAA not go after these obvious offenders?

6) No warez, cracks, serials or illegally obtained copyrighted content! Links to content of a questionable nature, asking for, offering, or asking for help/helping to process such content in any way or form is not tolerated.

As to getting warned, I think it is a cheap shot. I've been here quite awhile and do not see how any of this violates #6. There were no illegal content posted, or linked to. No mention of any specific tools, "Paid_Usenet_ISPs", no specific techniques. Nor was there any offer or asking for information about the specifics to get such content. Only specific mention was in response to your specific mention of particular content, not mine.

[Neo Neko]

Originally posted by windtrader
As to getting warned, I think it is a cheap shot. I've been here quite awhile and do not see how any of this violates #6.

I did not say anyone violated any rules. Just that we were headed that way. Notice when I said "we". That included more than you. Like me for example. Discussing the services is one thing. But discussing specific contents is another. I made a comment in passing about the many things that still even after all you have said can not be found at any given time on usenet. Which is alot. But still it started to lead to other specifics. Which could then easily lead to rule violations. I have been guilty of being more than lax on that front recently. :o So it was as much a shot at myself as it was at you. I had a completely different post typed up previously. But after seeing where it went I said nope not good. Maybe another time and another place. But not here. And with recent history and the direction it looked as if it were going it would have simply been unwise for me to participate further. For any of us really. But it looks as if it were averted. ;)