Kazaa

[JackDaniels]

[s]Zombie Sheep wrote on 22:49, 14th Oct 2004:
[s]Unregisted User hm wrote on 15:01, 13th Oct 2004:[i]
Besides everyone know kazaa is no longer the way.


So what is the way forward then?

[/i]

torrents of bits.

[Zombie Sheep]

Tried it, doesn't work.

[hr]IMAGE:www.johnkerry.com/feeds/media/120x80.gif

[Tyler Fincher]

Most of the time, I would agree. But once on a blue moon... I've said too much, they're coming for meniubsdf

[hr]IMAGE:www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~adgc/avatar.JPG

[JackDaniels]

you can definitely get it to work.

[The_Farwall]

[s]Atangaladhion wrote on 13:37, 14th Oct 2004:
Uploading (i.e. sharing) music online is illegal; downloading it is not.


Oh dear. Oh dear, oh dear.
Copyright theft is illegal. Uploading copyrighted material is illegal. Downloading copyrighted material is illegal (ever heard of 'recieving stolen goods'). The idea that because one thing is currently being prosecuted over another makes the other thing legal is completely nonsensical. It might mean you'll get away with it (for now at least) but it's still quite definitely illegal.

I think maybe you should start discussing what you could practically get away with rather than what you can come up with a 'legal' defence for, 'cause so far I've yet to see a convincing argument on this thread.

[Tweedle-Dum]

[s]The_Farwall wrote on 12:24, 15th Oct 2004:
[s]Atangaladhion wrote on 13:37, 14th Oct 2004:[i]
Uploading (i.e. sharing) music online is illegal; downloading it is not.


Oh dear. Oh dear, oh dear.
Copyright theft is illegal. Uploading copyrighted material is illegal. Downloading copyrighted material is illegal (ever heard of 'recieving stolen goods'). The idea that because one thing is currently being prosecuted over another makes the other thing legal is completely nonsensical. It might mean you'll get away with it (for now at least) but it's still quite definitely illegal.

I think maybe you should start discussing what you could practically get away with rather than what you can come up with a 'legal' defence for, 'cause so far I've yet to see a convincing argument on this thread.
[/i]

There is no way current British copyright laws will stand up in court, they're far too outdated. Legally you can't copy a CD on to a tape or your PC.
The first channlenger of the law will win, but most people will settle

[hr]
Live by the sword, die by the arrow.

[Prophet Tenebrae]

Farwall has of course forgotten that some music is available for free distribution.

And while there are those old laws may not stand up, the EU got pressured into bringing some in.

[Atangaladhion]

[s]The_Farwall wrote on 12:24, 15th Oct 2004:
[s]Atangaladhion wrote on 13:37, 14th Oct 2004:[i]
Uploading (i.e. sharing) music online is illegal; downloading it is not.


Oh dear. Oh dear, oh dear.
Copyright theft is illegal. Uploading copyrighted material is illegal. Downloading copyrighted material is illegal (ever heard of 'recieving stolen goods'). The idea that because one thing is currently being prosecuted over another makes the other thing legal is completely nonsensical. It might mean you'll get away with it (for now at least) but it's still quite definitely illegal.

I think maybe you should start discussing what you could practically get away with rather than what you can come up with a 'legal' defence for, 'cause so far I've yet to see a convincing argument on this thread.
[/i]

Oh dear indeed, I guess you just glossed over the point about Fair Dealings and Private Study? The reason there have been no court cases in regard to downloading music is that the law is too ambiguous (i.e. doesn't define Fair Dealings or Private Study well enough) for any charge brought against someone to stick. This is why they're going after people who upload music instead.

[Lord Overlointment Von Gerthard III]

if the university specifically states that use of kazaa is forbidden then even if you have the non spyware non virus de bugged kazaa lite you should not be using it, but i am unsure as to how exactly this rule applies to other programs that use the same sharing network, like morpheus, or to file sharing apps like bit torrent which use a completely different (and infinately superior) system.

[Guest]

[s]Zombie Sheep wrote on 22:49, 14th Oct 2004:
So what is the way forward then?


Being resourceful enough to find out the better ways of doing it. And also not being daft enough to not talk of such things where the wrong people will read it.

[yawn]

[s]Zombie Sheep wrote on 23:19, 14th Oct 2004:
Tried it, doesn't work.


Lol, all the more for people who can make it work then.

PS, try not to shout these things on forums read by ITS unless you want everything but port 80 blocked of course.

Deary me, students today...

[Guest]

[s]Tweedle-Dum wrote on 12:33, 15th Oct 2004:
There is no way current British copyright laws will stand up in court, they're far too outdated. Legally you can't copy a CD on to a tape or your PC.
The first channlenger of the law will win, but most people will settle



Absolutely, and in the UK at least they seem to realise that the thing most affecting sales is distributers of pirate cds and uploaders. Downloads of music have not been shown to affect cd sales so there is no good justification for going after those people - the old thing: no money, no effort etc. And it's not like the artists involved should care, unless of course they're in it for the money rather than wanting to spread their music to whoever can listen - not something many of them would admit to I'd wager. Apart from Metallica.

Also it is "illegal" to video tape a tv programme and keep it for more than 6 weeks. I imagine this makes around 80% of the population of this country criminals were it not for the fact that even the police realise that some laws are more important or enforcable than others.

[Zombie Sheep]

[s]Unregisted User wrote on 23:09, 14th Oct 2004:
Being resourceful enough to find out the better ways of doing it. And also not being daft enough to not talk of such things where the wrong people will read it.


Resourceful enough to try and find out these ways by posting on the internet about it.
(oh, and of course, ban all unregistered users, especially those who question my posts)

[hr]
IMAGE:www.johnkerry.com/feeds/media/120x80.gif

[Prophet Tenebrae]

There can be no denying the idiocy of discussing this kind of thing in this forum.

I believe another avenue of approach has been suggested.

[Zombie Sheep]

How about a co-ordinated meeting in 'some' venue?

[hr]IMAGE:www.johnkerry.com/feeds/media/120x80.gif

[mottthehoople]

The special password will be fridgemagnet

[Guest]

[s]Zombie Sheep wrote on 19:15, 15th Oct 2004:
How about a co-ordinated meeting in 'some' venue?



Again, absolutely no resourcefulness.

I am fully behind letting those who can figure it out for themselves go ahead and reap the better bandwidth as a result. And those who can't (or think it a wise idea to try and discuss iton the sinner) should hang their heads in shame for being so dumb - especially if they are rude people who think they are better than others for the obscure reason of having a pseudonym themselves. It's called karma, ain't it marvelous.