Internet Censorship begins in America; 70 websites seized

[golandmark@gmail.com]

Agreed

This is what I have been telling people. You have to use your freedom/rights responsibly and ethically or the government will find a way to take them away. These people who host these sights facilitate theft of intellectual property protected by federal and international law.

This is not censorship, this is law enforcement shutting down sites that sell pirated goods. Doesn't matter what your views on downloading music is, if you do it, you know it is illegal...same with movies and clothing products. If the Gov. was closing down sites for stating opinions about the piracy industry then that would be censorship.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

People keep using the words theft and stealing. I'm not sure your use of the words is correct. What is going on in most of these "illegal" instances, is sharing. Not stealing. Someone, somewhere took their legally owned property, converted said property to a .torrent file ans put it out there to be shared with like minded individuals. Might be a music file or a book. But it was theirs, unless someone else owns what you've paid for. Either it's yours or it's not. We've heard this same tired argument before back when cassettes and video recorders were introduced. The main difference here is that companies are using government to protect themselves from a changing market. No "theft" is involved, unless you'd like to try and make the argument that you can't purchase things, only rent them.

People keep using the word sharing. Sharing is the word you use when you try to rationalize stealing. What is going on in most of these cases is someone, somewhere, purchases a license to intellectual property created by another, converts someone else's property to a .torrent file and puts it out to be stolen by like minded thieves. Might be a music file or a book. But it was their license, which BTW incorporates federal law and prohibits sharing. We've heard this same tired argument before back when cassettes and video recorders were introduced. The main difference here is that thieves are able to steal more property quicker via the Internet. No "sharing" is involved, unless you'd like to try and make the argument that intellectual property owners aren't entitled to compensation for their works.

 

[Expat]

Looks like most of this is counterfeit goods. So the world is safe from $50 Romex watches.
U.S. Government Seizes BitTorrent Search Engine Domain and More | TorrentFreak
See the updates.

 

[mrjarrell]

So-called "intellectual property" owners were compensated for their work when someone bought the original CD or whatever. Using some peoples logic you shouldn't let someone borrow your gun at the range, or your car, or your pizza. They should pay for their own or your violating someones rights by sharing. Lawyers in favour of government getting into bed with companies are driving this country down a bad road towards even more oligarchy-like behaviour. If the so-called "owners" of these shared items can't press their case on its own merits then they should drop it entirely. Government has no business interfering in this arena.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

So-called "intellectual property" owners were compensated for their work when someone bought the original CD or whatever. Using some peoples logic you shouldn't let someone borrow your gun at the range, or your car, or your pizza. They should pay for their own or your violating someones rights by sharing. Lawyers in favour of government getting into bed with companies are driving this country down a bad road towards even more oligarchy-like behaviour. If the so-called "owners" of these shared items can't press their case on its own merits then they should drop it entirely. Government has no business interfering in this arena.

Add sharing, stealing, intellectual, and property to the list of words you don't understand.

 

[rjstew317]

So-called "intellectual property" owners were compensated for their work when someone bought the original CD or whatever. Using some peoples logic you shouldn't let someone borrow your gun at the range, or your car, or your pizza. They should pay for their own or your violating someones rights by sharing. Lawyers in favour of government getting into bed with companies are driving this country down a bad road towards even more oligarchy-like behaviour. If the so-called "owners" of these shared items can't press their case on its own merits then they should drop it entirely. Government has no business interfering in this arena.

so what you're saying is if you have a product to sell you should only be compensated one time, and everyone else who wants it should have access to it for an unlimited number of times without paying?

 

[rjstew317]

if you buy a pizza from me and you want to share that's fine, it only has eight slices. if you want more to share you have to buy more

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

so what you're saying is if you have a product to sell you should only be compensated one time, and everyone else who wants it should have access to it for an unlimited number of times without paying?

Libtards don't have to make sense. It's just another in a long string of goofiness culminating in the upsurd.

 

[rjstew317]

Libtards don't have to make sense. It's just another in a long string of goofiness culminating in the upsurd.

lmao

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

WTH is a torrent?

It's what you use to steal programs, songs, and movies from the Interznet. But wait, there's more. You can also download porn ranging from the very mild amateur show off stuff to hot midget babes to women with donkeys and of course every Libtard's dream, kiddie porn. Right there in the veritable safety of your own living room. No need to shop! No need to purchase! Your's free for the stealing.

Note: Most good torrent sites have a Z somewhere in the name. Or end in -ster. Or fire off multiple windows offering free porn. Or all the above. The really good ones even have virus protection to protect you from the virus that was just downloaded to your PC when you clicked Yes on the "Are you sure you don't need any Viagra" button.

They are most often run by underachieving pimple-faced 15 year script kiddies with nothing to do except try to crash the Interznet. From time to time one of those 15 year old will skip the I like girls phase and keep running their site into their late teens or 30s. At that point it's called a business, and the evil government hates business so they get shut down or have to move to New Zealand.

 

[Love the 1911]

This thread is a polarizing as oc vs cc or .45 vs 9mm. I must say that I agree that downloading someone's music or movies without the owner's permission is stealing. Buying a copy of a song does not give you rights to the copyright. Also, copying someone's trademark and placing it on an inferior product is just as dishonest. Market yourself and make a product that worth $50 and you wouldn't have to steal another company's identity.

The real point that I was responding was to say that the government should have included a warning with their message that included something like, "Your internet domain address has been copied and you will be contacted shortly by the FBI to determine your compliance with copyright laws of the United States." Watch people unload all this stolen merchandise in a hurry.

 

[kingnereli]

I suppose that at some point I will stop being astonished at how big a deal libertarians will make out of silly issues and how degraded their ethics are.* Not yet though. The bottom line is stealing is bad and stopping not only the act of stealing but the facilitation of stealing is good. The fact there some people are rationalizing thievery in this thread would be comical if it wasn't so serious.

All I can say is get over it. For now this country does its best to enforce right and wrong. There is certainly room for debate as to what that means but to be so confused about the morality of stealing is nonsensical and unacceptable.




* Sorry to lump everyone who considers themselves libertarian in with the brand represented in this thread. I know there are reasonable libertarians out there.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Conceding that this is a legit law enforcement function . . . but why is Homeland Security doing this? Enforcing IP laws is now a DHS function?

Why isn't this in the wheelhouse of the FBI? Are not they the those created to enforce laws impacting interstate commerce?

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

Conceding that this is a legit law enforcement function . . . but why is Homeland Security doing this? Enforcing IP laws is now a DHS function?

Why isn't this in the wheelhouse of the FBI? Are not they the those created to enforce laws impacting interstate commerce?

Just going out on a limb here, but I have two thoughts. I'm not sure which might be correct.

1. Since ICE isn't deporting anyone, they are looking for stuff to do.
2. Since ICE isn't deporting anyone, they are looking for stuff to do.

 

[rjstew317]

Just going out on a limb here, but I have two thoughts. I'm not sure which might be correct.

1. Since ICE isn't deporting anyone, they are looking for stuff to do.
2. Since ICE isn't deporting anyone, they are looking for stuff to do.

i think they should open a car wash, then maybe we would have a profitable government agency

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

i think they should open a car wash, then maybe we would have a profitable government agency

They'd screw it up. These are the same morons that ran the Bunny Ranch out of business.

You think they could run a car wash with all those moving parts when they couldn't run a whorehouse with just one?

 

[Security122]

So-called "intellectual property" owners were compensated for their work when someone bought the original CD or whatever...

A songwriter may make about from the sale of a music CD. They make their living from the song being played on radio, tv, movies, etc, all of whom pay about the same fee for the use of the songwriter/publisher's property. You can legally play your copy of the CD all day long without paying any fee for as big a crowd of friends as you can gather, as long as you are not using it in a business. This is the ONLY "sharing" I can think of which would be legal, except loaning someone your CD to listen to.

...Using some peoples logic you shouldn't let someone borrow your gun at the range, or your car, or your pizza. They should pay for their own or your violating someones rights by sharing. Lawyers in favour of government getting into bed with companies are driving this country down a bad road towards even more oligarchy-like behaviour. If the so-called "owners" of these shared items can't press their case on its own merits then they should drop it entirely. Government has no business interfering in this arena.

Again, the "so-called owners" make their living from the royalties they receive from use of their intellectual property. You obviously do not own any intellectual property or you would understand the "sharing" in question is STEALING. BTW - the Government is involved because copyright infringement is a FEDERAL crime.

Mrjarrell, most of your post reflect a lot more intellect than the one quoted above.

 

[mrjarrell]

WTH is a torrent?

A file type and technology. Nothing more, nothing less. Some people would have you believe that it's only for stealing. They're wrong. It's for transferring files. These same people use the same logic as anti-gunners and even admit to their lack of knowledge on things technical. Many mainstream recording artists use torrenting to distribute their music to fans. Radiohead, comes instantly to mind. Many software creators and firms use them to distribute their wares.
What is torrent, how to download with torrents?

 

[mrjarrell]

A songwriter may make about from the sale of a music CD. They make their living from the song being played on radio, tv, movies, etc, all of whom pay about the same fee for the use of the songwriter/publisher's property. You can legally play your copy of the CD all day long without paying any fee for as big a crowd of friends as you can gather, as long as you are not using it in a business. This is the ONLY "sharing" I can think of which would be legal, except loaning someone your CD to listen to.



Again, the "so-called owners" make their living from the royalties they receive from use of their intellectual property. You obviously do not own any intellectual property or you would understand the "sharing" in question is STEALING. BTW - the Government is involved because copyright infringement is a FEDERAL crime.

Mrjarrell, most of your post reflect a lot more intellect than the one quoted above.

Most artists make vastly more money from concerts than they do from recorded music. That's why many have gone the route of giving their music away, lately. Even Prince has given his latest album away, free. The artists realise that they are making nothing substantive off of recorded music, only the labels are raking anything in. The problem is that there's been a paradigm shift and the labels can't adjust to the new digital medium. They've had to buy off politicians to pass new laws to protect the interests of the labels, while ignoring the interests of the artists. That's resulted in going after people who are literally sharing music, (just like many here did in their youth with LP's and cassettes), instead of making the necessary changes to insure a sound future. Sharing has dropped off in many areas where the market has been allowed to make adjustments, (such as Apple and Amazon's digital music stores and Steam for games). Sharing isn't going to go away anytime, soon. Just as it didn't when cassettes, VCR's, etc., hit the market. It's not the end users who are going to have to adapt and change. It's the labels and their puppets in government.

There's quite a debate going on right now about "intellectual property" and it's a rather interesting one with well thought out arguments both for and against. Take a look at it and let it percolate. Both sides have decent arguments.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

A file type and technology. Nothing more, nothing less. Some people would have you believe that it's only for stealing. They're wrong. It's for transferring files. These same people use the same logic as anti-gunners and even admit to their lack of knowledge on things technical. Many mainstream recording artists use torrenting to distribute their music to fans. Radiohead, comes instantly to mind. Many software creators and firms use them to distribute their wares.
What is torrent, how to download with torrents?

Not only for stealing. Pimarily for stealing. Sometimes used for other stuff, but primarily for stealing. That's why thet get shut down summarily. If you put makeup on a pig you still got a pig. Just with makeup on it.

Now the Libtards in the room (you know who you are) attempt to raise the red herring flag. It doesn't work because people recognize the difference between lawful exercise of rights and stealing. I asked my 4 year old grand daughter if it's ok to take things that aren't yours. She said no you'll get a spanking. The things some of us could learn simply by listening to children.

Now I don't know about anyone else on the forum here. I know a few things technical. I would almost venture to guess (not blowing my own horn or anything) that having written commercial compilers, been an IBM mainframe assembler programmer working on operating systems, having developed database software, been on development team of one of the first BI products and multideminsional databases and worked with a number of people to define ETL tools, having written and submitted RFCs, a Masters degree in Information Technology from a little school in Boston, and having more than a few patents issued that I might know a little bit more about technology than most folks here. In fact I've probably forgotten more than most people know, especially those that don't know the difference between sharing and stealing