1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Why release groups should not go to Jail!

Discussion in 'Windows - P2P software' started by Dela, Jun 12, 2004.

  1. Dela

    Dela Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2002
    Messages:
    8,949
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    118
    For those who don't know what release groups are, I will explain.

    A release group is a group of people who release games/software/movies/bookware etc over the internet. They might have to circumvent copy protection mechanisms to do this, or distribute cracks with their releases. Some other groups who release movies, may take a DVCAM to a theatre and record the movie from the screen, they might also use dts theatre discs for the audio or use some other form of direct audio, so that the people in the theatre cannot be heard + there wont be an echo or just a very slight echo. Some release groups that exist are razor1911(have had trouble with feds, release Games usually), Fairlight (Subject to raid a few months ago, also release games on all platforms since the 1980's) TDA(Software releasing group), Centropy(Also had legal troubles a couple of years back, movie release group, usually DVDRip's these days), VideoCD(Rocking the Telesync movie scene and also providing regular Screener copies of movies), RNS (mp3), MEDiSO and CFE (Both of these groups are direct proof that it's not just about the usual games movies and software, MEDiSO are dedicated to releasing Material that could be useful to health students and CFE for bookware used to learn how to use certain PC Apps). Now for those of you who are reading this and are thinking, bolatent piracy, think again!!

    These release groups do not release so that the entire world will be able to get a copy of their release. In fact, it is more like a massive family that each one brings something to the table and they simply share around with each other. Yes they often fight with each other over releases and all, but hey what family doesnt fight? This is their intent. Therefore you have to remember the following things...

    1. If a release of something spreads through IRC and Newsgroups to P2P and maybe to the streets, this is NOT the release groups fault! In some nfo's release groups feel very strongly about their release spreading accross peer to peer networks, and also the re-encoders who take their release and distribute it as either their own release on P2P OR distribute it as a smaller filesize by compressing it using a codec like MPEG-4 so it can be downloaded easier. If you can blame Fairlight for their releases on the street being sold or on P2P websites, then you can blame the game company for distributing the game aswell. You cant sue the makers of Guns for the damage done with them. This should be the same way when it comes to prosecuting release groups for making scene releases.

    2. Imagine in your home that you buy a CD that everyone likes. Now you make copies of that CD for your DAD and your brothers and sister and for some cousins, uncles aunts etc etc.. Is that really wrong? You bought the CD yourself, you own it, you can share it with your family if you want right? what about your friends?? sure why not they will share their CD's with you! Its the same thing as if I borrowed a CD from you, the record label is not seeing any money from me, but come on, how many times have you borrowed a CD? is borrowing a CD and listening to it really copyright infringement? Hell no its not. Sharing things is not wrong, we are brought up to share. I mean, the owners of the major 5 labels, would you teach your kids to be mean and greedy with what they have all their life (ok, that wouldnt surprise me at all now would it?). I think this is kinda the EU's opinion, and definately the opinion in Finland about sharing copyrighted works. So whats wrong with RAZOR1911 sharing a game it has with Fairlight? or Centropy sharing a DVD Rip with VideoCD?? Its the same damn thing, they are friends, they work together in their community (or their scene). If its illegal for RAZOR1911 to circumvent copy protection then the cracker should be fined for it if caught, not jailed, if i got a game a copied it, I would be fined, they are no different!

    3. You might think now that I am picking on P2P and actually I'm not! The point I made just there also applies to filesharing! If I own something, and want to share it with the world then I can. Its just like letting my CD be borrowed by everybody, the label is seeing no money from it but its not a wrong thing to do. So even if a Fairlight game appears online, it has been share d out by fairlight to a site, then to probably an IRC channel where it is shared with the users of that channel, and one of them decides he wants to share it with the people on his favourite P2P network! Just like if I buy a CD and rip my songs to MP3, this is apparently illegal, just to rip the songs but it is fair use! Now I want to share my music with somebody else because he is sharing his with me. Its like a big swapping market, like 60 million people walking around handing CD's to each other in return for something else. I dont care what the law states, this sharing act is not illegal, it is morally right!

    4. Now, to the label owners who might have read this and thought, well we OWN the copyright, we have the right to keep it, you dont own it when you buy the CD. If this is true, then really everybody is renting their CD's from you, but thats not the case. We are buying them! They are [bold]OUR PROPERTY[/bold]. You SOLD them to us remember? You cant sell something and say, now dont you dare share it!! If I bought a car and wanted to sell it to someone else, or fusk it, give it to them or share it with them, Im not breaking the law!I own the damn car just like I own the CD and every damn sector on the CD! I'm not renting my CD's from you. And if I am, then guess what I will charge you rent for every month I have had the CD in my house since I bought it, lets say $1,000,000 a month for storing your copyright in my house! Now with the amount of CD's I have bought in the past, that is a LOT of money you have to pay me! If its your prorerty then I have the right to charge you to keep it on my premises! And you know this! And dont say thats morally wrong, its not, telling people not to share is morally wrong. No.5 is for the religious groups of you :)

    5. I'm not religious but if you follow many religions, the RIAA and many other organisations are evil. Why? because they are attempting to tell people to be mean and not share anything with each other! In fact, they are dictating, saying YOU DO NOT fusking SHARE THAT CD!!! like a big massive bunch of Saddam Husseins, your message is morally wrong! Just like turning a music industry into a monopoly is morally wrong! Copyrighting words is morally wrong (and thats all that lyrics are!!)

    So anyway! I just decided to put into words what everybody was thinking because somebody had to do it :) And I support P2P, so dont think by saying release groups dont want their releases on P2P (cause some do) is bashing P2P because I dont see a problem with those releases on P2P and dont understand why someone would have a problem with it! So reading over that, all release groups are doing is sharing what they have with their friends. If they are to be prosecuted for what they do, then at least treat them like everybody else, the way they really should be treated! You are locking up the people you choose to and fining others, its crazy!
    _X_X_X_X_X_[small]http://www.BillLonero.com - Check out a true artists music!

    aD channel on IRC: irc.addictz.net #ad_buddies
    Newbie IRC Guide- http://forums.afterdawn.com/thread_view.cfm/47221[/small]
     
    Last edited: Jun 12, 2004
  2. Cyprien

    Cyprien Active member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2003
    Messages:
    2,050
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    68
    i agree to this.... we do things that we think are right even tho for some people they are bad.... sharing is bad as everyone say... bad eh?.. well tell THAT BS to blockbuster when they RENT movies and games that ARE only for sale... some movies i saw said on the dvd "NOT FOR RENTAL"... they let them do this shit cuz they pay money to other people to shut them up... we cant do that we dont have the money for this.... today everything runs on money... they will stop us sharing... we WILL STOP buying... its thyer losss not ours...
     
  3. Toiletman

    Toiletman Active member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2003
    Messages:
    1,477
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    66
    The RIAA and whatever bullshit companies that exist need to realise the battle is lost for them. You can't fight technology. You either move on with technology as it evolves, or you stay in the past and be a stubborn fusk.

    I don't get why the RIAA are even wasting so much resources on this shit (apart from that they want money) It is clearly apparent they're failing, and no one likes them.

    Plus one more little thing that I would like to add.... most people are not greedy fusks like the RIAA, if we really like the movie/game/album, we will buy it. After all, an original is always better than a "copy".

    P.S. That was my true opinion, respect it or not, I don't give a shit.
     
  4. jhartmp01

    jhartmp01 Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2004
    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    11
    Although I agree that the interpretation of copyright law is going down a slippery slope, I disagree with your analogies.

    For example, you said

    The record companies are allowing you to do this. You have every right to buy a CD then sell it to a Used CD store (or anyone else for that matter.) It would not be breaking the law.

    Selling copies of that work (hence copyright) would be illegal. For a great book, check out Larry Lessig's free-culture at http://www.free-culture.cc.
     
  5. HawkEyez

    HawkEyez Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2002
    Messages:
    41
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    All hail Dela's script !
     
  6. HawkEyez

    HawkEyez Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2002
    Messages:
    41
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Altough don't forget people

    >>>Dont abuse your privleges<<<
    _X_X_X_X_X_[small]>>>>>Don't Abuse Your Privileges<<<<<[/small]
     
    Last edited: Jul 1, 2004
  7. steve7059

    steve7059 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2003
    Messages:
    40
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Sorry, Dela, your line of reasoning just doesn't wash. Yes, when you buy a CD, you OWN the CD. Yes, you can share the CD with your family, friends, etc... as you see fit. I have no problem with that. But just because they sold you a CD, the recording label did not sell you the copyright that goes with that CD. That remains their INTELLECTUAL property, while the physical CD is your PERSONAL property. If you make a copy of the CD to distribute to someone else, you are violating copyright law - plain and simple.

    I am glad that your parents brought you up to share. Share away with what you have legally purchased, but DON'T MAKE COPIES FOR DISTRIBUTION! Backups for personal use are O.K., (even though the RCIA is trying to squelch that too), but when you give someone a copy of something you own, you are assuming the rights of the work's creator to exclusive distribution. You are stealing from them! And I think that you know that is wrong, don't you. Look at it this way - If file sharing became universal, then only one person would have to buy a CD, upload it, then anyone else in the world could download it for free. If this happened, the music industry would go out of business, because nobody would BUY music anymore. Obviously, this won't happen, I'm simply using hyperbole to make a point. When you copy music and distribute it to others, you ARE taking money away from the rightful owners of that INTELLECTUAL property. Protection of intellectual property is what allows the music industry to be in the business of creating music.

    I'm sorry, I don't agree with your attempts to moralize theft.
     
  8. HawkEyez

    HawkEyez Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2002
    Messages:
    41
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Steve u seem to be aligning with the capitalist side of thinking, from which u say we are stealing ?!?! but in fact the capitalist way of increasing costs ie cd's to earn a self profit, so in fact i could easily say you and your capitalist way is just stealing from us !!!!!!!!! We're not backing the real pirates who sell the cd's they buy or download to because they are the ones who are ruining the whole scence for everyone else and are contributing to the selfish imperialist way!!!!

    In my view, this is just another thing tht boils down to the left or right wing of thinking.
    _X_X_X_X_X_[small]>>>>>Don't Abuse Your Privileges<<<<<[/small]
     
    Last edited: Jul 1, 2004
  9. zofz

    zofz Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2004
    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    11
    Dela, I totally agree with you. These people who releases stuff are putting in time and effort (often without any benefits) out of their own free will for the good of the whole community. Sharing of information should NOT be illegal. Otherwise, why would libraries be functioning? Why don't the editors/ publishers/ authors of books SUE the zillions of libraries all over the world? Why don't they make such a big deal out of it? If its possible to share information via books, then the same logic should apply to software as well. There should be nothing wrong with it.
     
  10. steve7059

    steve7059 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2003
    Messages:
    40
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    zofz, your library analogy is flawed. If the libraries were copying the books, then it would be illegal. They are sharing books that were at one time legally purchased and then either donated or sold to the library. The same goes for DVDs, CDs, etc... You are perfectly free to share the legal copy that you bought with whoever you want. There is nothing wrong with sharing. But when you make an illegal copy for distribution, you are no longer sharing, you are stealing. It's just that simple. All this talk about how P2P is just another way to share is just an attempt to moralize theft. Sorry, I still don't buy it.
     
  11. Dela

    Dela Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2002
    Messages:
    8,949
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    118
    @steve7059, I applaud our courage to make a reply like that, I was hoping somebody would come and give add fuel to a debate just waiting to happen!

    Now in your first post, you made it very clear that you think that music should be sold right? Well unfortunately for a lot of people in the world, including myself, making capitalism out of music is just evil man. These label owners probably have no idea how to play 1 instrument, they just buy the copyright from someone who did, treat them like shit if it does bad and treat them like their own family if it does good. Then they go ahead and pay radio stations to JUST play their copyrighted music so that they can brainwash the world into believing this is the only music that exists, when really, about 90% of music in the world is from independent bands and artists. They are brought to a belief that to be heard all around the world they need a major label to take the copyright of their music and distribute it for them! Then they cant get signed and they give up, its very sad and u have to agree with that at least!

    Now, I sympathise with a lot of companies and artists worldwide because their stuff has slipped onto P2P networks, but I can no longer sympatise with the RIAA. They took the very wrong approach dealing with it. And look at Metallica, werent they majorly involved in illegal tape trading about 20 years ago? isnt that how they helped themselves to get a big name? Oh but that trading is only good for Lars for a short time till he gets where he wants to go, then fusk us all? Thats BS man! If you read over his cry for help at congress, he doesnt even understand how P2P works! People who have decided to share their music collection over P2P in my opinion, are doing nothing wrong! They bought it, fusk this copyright shit, its gone to a rediculous level, in a few years if it isnt stopped, we will get to the point where someone can sue us for using certain words.... oh wait, they can already, if the lyrics are even just similar to a song u never heard u could lose all you own to a greedy money hungry capitalist label. Look at Michael Moore and Quentin Tarantino for a second. Why would Moore tell people that he has no problem with his stuff being traded online? Why did Tarantino tell people that if they cant get copies of Kill Bill because their country or whatever wont allow it, to get a bootleg of it? when apparently they dont even own the copyright to their works? who distributed would right? If it was really hurting them, do you think they would stand up for it? Hell no!! Lets not forget the long list of artists who have no problem with P2P but of course you'll never find a list of em at riaa.com will you?

    Anyways, enuff waffle, back to the point! Music and Capitalism should never have met! It was MTV that sealed that. Also, you made a coimment about sellig your CD's to a store and that being ok, WOW, HANG ON A SEC!!! werent the RIAA bitching that they wanted royalties for the re-selling of music CD's? Its rediculous man, I'm 100% against the road copyright law is going down. And its all about the money! If you have the money u can push the laws, block facts, fix global cd sale fall figures by distributing CD's a little differently, completely ignore the fact that in Asia 90% of CD's sold are pirated and rising etc... The list goes on man. The industry is afraid of P2P, why? Because its the new music industry whether they like it or not. Their stone age distribution of music will soon be dead and they just dont want people to be able to use P2P networks to get music worldwide, they want to make money off every talented artist on the planet. If thats not greed, i dont know what is.

    However, I do agree with you that P2P can do damage. Especially to small software companies and game companies but i STILL dont agree with the rediculous roads copyright law is going down OR the action being used by the RIAA/IFPI to tackle P2P technology! How can you even think that suing your own customers will help? Personal note to RIAA/IFPI: Get with new technology or Lose!
     
  12. steve7059

    steve7059 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2003
    Messages:
    40
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Dela,
    I love playing Devil's Advocate with you! It's interesting that you mention how the music industries promote music on the airwaves. Guess what, that's their job! They find artists that they think show promise (yes, it's THEIR judgement) and promote them to generate interest in their music (same things goes for motion pictures, but in a different way). All of this takes a monetary investment. The way they recoup their investment is in music sales. That is why intellectual property rights exist, to protect their investment and enable them earn their money back. In cases where their judgement is bad - they lose money on a product that never really becomes popular. And when their judgement is good, they do make a decent profit and are villianized for it. Anyway, the whole idea of copyright law is to encourage companies like this to make the sort of up-front investment it takes to get the ball rolling, so to speak.

    So, what would happen if you took them out of the equation? The only bands that would ever get on the radio would be the ones that have enough of their own money to promote themselves. How many bands starting off, do you think, have that kind of cash? Not many. So, if you stop and think about it, it is a good system. I like the idea of artists posting their stuff for free on the internet, but let's face it, the quality probably isn't as good as those that have signed with a label.

    I'll give you one point, though. You mentioned how the RIAA is trying to get a royalty on the sales of second-hand music in used stores. Can't blame 'em for trying, but that's just wrong in my book too. They got paid the first time it was sold - that should be enough.
     
  13. dillin

    dillin Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2004
    Messages:
    27
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    11
    I love file sharing and of course I don't think it is wrong in itself, but don't delude yourself most release groups make money off what they do you probably live in the states or canada like me so chances are you'll have no concept of what happens in countries with expensive internet access its un fusking believable how much money revolves around the piracy industry, we have it good here we won't pay for stuff we can get in an hour with highspeed everywhere else though they don't have that option so they pay and all those names like Razor etc are involved in one way or another. Don't just read the NFO and assume they do it for the fun of it, LE isn't so stupid and neither should the rest of us

    as far as music is involved I could care less, the music industry is the biggest crock of shit, I can't believe people are stupid enough to believe RIAA is doing anything honorable and believe that sharing is "bad" and "evil"
     

Share This Page