If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(New Europe)   Kim Dotcom says his new file sharing website "MegaBox" is almost complete and it will be impossible for the US authorities to shut it down   (neurope.eu) divider line 97
    More: Unlikely, Kim Dotcom, New Zealand Prime Minister, file sharing, downloading music  
•       •       •

8648 clicks; posted to Main » on 11 Oct 2012 at 11:56 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



97 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-10-11 12:58:51 PM

someguy945: Because in conventional theft, you are taking a physical item that is property of the store


The definition of theft doesn't actually require a physical item. Consider theft of services. Copyright infringement is a subset of the colloquial, non-legal term "theft".
 
2012-10-11 01:01:50 PM

here to help: 90% of the revenue will go to the artists

If true... good. The guy may be a sleaze but compared to buckets of porcine anal slime that run the entertainment industry he's a saint and a savior.


"porcine anal slime"

I love that term.
 
2012-10-11 01:04:33 PM

ShoeKing: He cant, Fark auto-censors that information.

SS: ###-##-####

That's a great idea.
my SS number is 457 55 5462


Todd?
 
2012-10-11 01:06:09 PM
Megabox will allow users to download music for free in exchange for accepting some advertisements and, 90% of the revenue will go to the artists. Besides, fans and artist will be able to do business without middlemen.

One month later...
The new Priatebox will allow users to download music for free, obtained from Megabox, with no advertisements. Kim Dotcom, CEO of Megabox, has stated he's outraged by this blatant theft.
 
2012-10-11 01:08:08 PM

scottydoesntknow: ShoeKing: He cant, Fark auto-censors that information.

SS: ###-##-####

That's a great idea.
my SS number is 457 55 5462

ShoeKing: DOH

You have to put the dashes! Otherwise FARK just reads it as numbers!


HAHAH!... Sorry man but that was a funny right there.

Apparently FARK's DLP app does not work all that well.
 
2012-10-11 01:14:51 PM

scottydoesntknow: Girion47: Bomb Head Mohammed: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Trying to control the flow of information is, and will always be a futile effort.

So tell us your social security number and bank information then.

He cant, Fark auto-censors that information.

SS: ###-##-####

and HSBC
Card Number: **** **** **** ****

It's amazing that FARK automatically censors SSNs and Credit-card #s


hunter2
 
2012-10-11 01:15:28 PM

someguy945: jfivealive: You are taking away potential revenues from the artist.

You countered this with the traditional "I wasn't going to buy it otherwise". I want to point out a much less common response.

If taking away potential revenue from the artist is stealing, then conventional theft (where you shoplift a CD or DVD off a shelf and walk out of the store with it) must be some sort of "double-stealing". Because in conventional theft, you are taking a physical item that is property of the store AND you are taking potential revenue away, too (the revenue the store would have gotten if you had paid for the item).

Either piracy is not stealing and conventional theft is stealing.
OR
Piracy is stealing and conventional theft is double-stealing.

Either way, piracy is not the same as theft.

tl;dr:
[i.imgur.com image 589x420]

This message is not intended to imply that I think piracy is morally acceptable.


Even the items in the stores are copies right?
 
2012-10-11 01:16:37 PM

ShoeKing: DOH


Don't worry, all I see is ***-**-****. Of course, you can see what you typed, you wrote it. Try it again with your bank account#.
 
2012-10-11 01:21:36 PM

Deucednuisance: jfivealive: Get a conscious.

Is there no-one on Fark conscious enough to know that the word is CONSCIENCE?

I don't think I've ever seen it used correctly, here.

Pet Peeve achieving "its/it's" and "tow/toe the line" levels....

Wish I had fewer. (Not "less", dammit!)


jfivealive: You don't farking get it, i'm not talking to you anymore. You can't understand the difference between two simple english words, so you obviously aren't smart enough to converse with. farking moran.

Whatever criminal. Get a conscious.


thatsthejoke.jpg

/well part of it
 
2012-10-11 01:22:57 PM

someguy945: jfivealive: You are taking away potential revenues from the artist.

You countered this with the traditional "I wasn't going to buy it otherwise". I want to point out a much less common response.

If taking away potential revenue from the artist is stealing, then conventional theft (where you shoplift a CD or DVD off a shelf and walk out of the store with it) must be some sort of "double-stealing". Because in conventional theft, you are taking a physical item that is property of the store AND you are taking potential revenue away, too (the revenue the store would have gotten if you had paid for the item).

Either piracy is not stealing and conventional theft is stealing.
OR
Piracy is stealing and conventional theft is double-stealing.

Either way, piracy is not the same as theft.

tl;dr:
[i.imgur.com image 589x420]

This message is not intended to imply that I think piracy is morally acceptable.


The definition of theft is not "removing the original."
 
2012-10-11 01:39:46 PM

Theaetetus: someguy945: Because in conventional theft, you are taking a physical item that is property of the store

The definition of theft doesn't actually require a physical item. Consider theft of services. Copyright infringement is a subset of the colloquial, non-legal term "theft".


Services? It's not remotely the same, services involve labor and resources.
 
2012-10-11 01:40:00 PM

jfivealive: thatsthejoke.jpg

/well part of it


Sigh...

If I ever meet that Poe fellow, I'm going to give him a piece of my mind!

What little is left of it....
 
2012-10-11 01:40:50 PM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Theaetetus: someguy945: Because in conventional theft, you are taking a physical item that is property of the store

The definition of theft doesn't actually require a physical item. Consider theft of services. Copyright infringement is a subset of the colloquial, non-legal term "theft".

Services? It's not remotely the same, services involve labor and resources.


[notsureifserious.jpg]

I'm not saying that "services" is the same as "physical item". I'm saying that the word "theft" doesn't specifically require a physical item.
 
2012-10-11 01:41:26 PM
How many of you sign "Happy Birthday" Congrats, according to the "lawyers" in this thread, you are thieves.
 
2012-10-11 01:45:12 PM

Girion47: How many of you sing "Happy Birthday?" Congrats, according to the "lawyers" in this thread, you are thieves.


FTFM
 
2012-10-11 01:51:30 PM

Theaetetus: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Theaetetus: someguy945: Because in conventional theft, you are taking a physical item that is property of the store

The definition of theft doesn't actually require a physical item. Consider theft of services. Copyright infringement is a subset of the colloquial, non-legal term "theft".

Services? It's not remotely the same, services involve labor and resources.

[notsureifserious.jpg]

I'm not saying that "services" is the same as "physical item". I'm saying that the word "theft" doesn't specifically require a physical item.


They tried to prosecute me with theft of services for running an extension cord from my neighbors house to power my robotic eff machines, but I got the charges dropped after I explained that it's not theft since i didn't actually "remove" original electricity.
 
2012-10-11 01:54:02 PM

Girion47: Girion47: How many of you sing "Happy Birthday?" Congrats, according to the "lawyers" in this thread, you are thieves.

FTFM


What have you got against the Deaf?

It was fine as it was, ya bigot!
 
2012-10-11 01:54:08 PM

jfivealive: They tried to prosecute me with theft of services for running an extension cord from my neighbors house to power my robotic eff machines, but I got the charges dropped after I explained that it's not theft since i didn't actually "remove" original electricity.


Analogy fail.
 
2012-10-11 01:59:00 PM

scottydoesntknow: Holy hell that's what he looks like?! When I saw that I thought it was a spoof of the Gangnam Style video


If Gangnam Style weren't already so last month, and if anybody outside the Geek tab knew who Kim Dotcom was, I'd consider making a "Dotcom Style" video.
 
2012-10-11 01:59:12 PM
FTFA: Despite he didn't revealed more details about the launch...

Wow. That's some nice copy there, Lou. English much?

Anyway, back to the subject at hand... I believe musicians, songwriters, publishers, producers, recording engineers, talent scouts, A&R staff, etc. deserve at least some compensation for the work they do.

And while "illegally acquiring something of value from someone else, something which you were supposed to pay for, without actually paying for it" may not meet your own personal definition of "stealing"... it's still ripping off people who deserve compensation for their efforts. And that's just wrong, even if it wasn't illegal (which it is).

Rationalize it any way you want. You know I'm right.
 
2012-10-11 02:01:01 PM
What I think he meant to say was "The feds have my balls in a vice, please sign up for my free new ultra-secure file sharing service so I have tons of evidence to give to them in exchange for them not sending RIAA assassins into my bedroom again"
 
2012-10-11 02:07:44 PM
I find it amusing that no one seems to care his house was raided by paramilitary forces at the behest of the U.S. government on New Zealand soil. A guy that ran a file sharing site was treated like a terrorist that killed hundreds of people. Absolutely astounding.

Fascism: This is what it looks like.
 
2012-10-11 02:09:05 PM

here to help: jfivealive: They tried to prosecute me with theft of services for running an extension cord from my neighbors house to power my robotic eff machines, but I got the charges dropped after I explained that it's not theft since i didn't actually "remove" original electricity.

Analogy fail.


Shut up oxymoron
 
2012-10-11 02:11:32 PM

NeonBlack53: What I think he meant to say was "The feds have my balls in a vice, please sign up for my free new ultra-secure file sharing service so I have tons of evidence to give to them in exchange for them not sending RIAA assassins into my bedroom again"


Good point.
 
2012-10-11 02:20:40 PM

Mr_Fabulous: I believe musicians, songwriters, publishers, producers, recording engineers, talent scouts, A&R staff, etc. deserve at least some compensation for the work they do.


I agree, but let's not kid ourselves and say that musicians and songwriters were actually getting the compensation they deserved, or even were contractually promised, when the major labels were calling all the shots.
 
2012-10-11 02:21:50 PM
I agree with what others have stated about not knowing who to cheer for. Seriously though, this wannabe continues to grow tiresome. And being confrontational is not going to win him any friends or favours, even with the amount of money he has. At some point, he's going to overstep his bounds, not have a way to buy his way out of it, and end up taking it up his MegaBox for a few years.
 
2012-10-11 02:23:05 PM

Theaetetus: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Theaetetus: someguy945: Because in conventional theft, you are taking a physical item that is property of the store

The definition of theft doesn't actually require a physical item. Consider theft of services. Copyright infringement is a subset of the colloquial, non-legal term "theft".

Services? It's not remotely the same, services involve labor and resources.

[notsureifserious.jpg]

I'm not saying that "services" is the same as "physical item". I'm saying that the word "theft" doesn't specifically require a physical item.


Yes, it does. Someone does your taxes and you don't pay, it's still theft because they labored to assemble data in a specific manner, for example. A physical item is always required in some form or another, it might not be a physical item you buy, but in some form or another, it will always be physical material that is manipulated.
 
2012-10-11 02:24:13 PM
Hey there slick (Kim Dotcom),

When you operate an illegal enterprise it doesn't matter where the servers running the data are. Computers aren't criminals, the people that operate them are. If you are in a country (like a nice place like NZ where they agree to uphold things like copy writes of other friendly countries doing the same for them) they will extradite your dumbass to the worlds largest prison system in a heartbeat.

Sincerely,

Anyone that knows a little about law enforcement.
 
2012-10-11 02:25:28 PM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Theaetetus: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Theaetetus: someguy945: Because in conventional theft, you are taking a physical item that is property of the store

The definition of theft doesn't actually require a physical item. Consider theft of services. Copyright infringement is a subset of the colloquial, non-legal term "theft".

Services? It's not remotely the same, services involve labor and resources.

[notsureifserious.jpg]

I'm not saying that "services" is the same as "physical item". I'm saying that the word "theft" doesn't specifically require a physical item.

Yes, it does. Someone does your taxes and you don't pay, it's still theft because they labored to assemble data in a specific manner, for example. A physical item is always required in some form or another, it might not be a physical item you buy, but in some form or another, it will always be physical material that is manipulated.


But telling your computer to record a string of 1's and 0's being transmitted by someone else, is not theft.
 
2012-10-11 02:26:48 PM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Theaetetus: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Theaetetus: someguy945: Because in conventional theft, you are taking a physical item that is property of the store

The definition of theft doesn't actually require a physical item. Consider theft of services. Copyright infringement is a subset of the colloquial, non-legal term "theft".

Services? It's not remotely the same, services involve labor and resources.

[notsureifserious.jpg]

I'm not saying that "services" is the same as "physical item". I'm saying that the word "theft" doesn't specifically require a physical item.

Yes, it does. Someone does your taxes and you don't pay, it's still theft because they labored to assemble data in a specific manner, for example. A physical item is always required in some form or another, it might not be a physical item you buy, but in some form or another, it will always be physical material that is manipulated.


If you don't pay for the services you ordered, it's not theft. You go to collections, it becomes civil. However if you rig the telephone pole outside to give you free HBO, that's theft, and there's nothing tangible involved.
 
2012-10-11 02:35:31 PM
art.penny-arcade.com
 
2012-10-11 02:40:17 PM

Subtle_Canary: [art.penny-arcade.com image 800x401]


That totally sums up my feelings about Kickstarter.
 
2012-10-11 02:45:00 PM

Girion47: But telling your computer to record a string of 1's and 0's being transmitted by someone else, is not theft.


Yes, I agree fully.

jfivealive: If you don't pay for the services you ordered, it's not theft.


If you order something, then you have give the service provider a burden of processing your order at the very least, yes it would then be theft. Link

jfivealive: However if you rig the telephone pole outside to give you free HBO, that's theft, and there's nothing tangible involved.


That would be theft because it still takes energy to send the signals. However, if you receive HBO, record a show, then send it to a friend, it is not theft.
 
2012-10-11 02:45:23 PM

jfivealive: They tried to prosecute me with theft of services for running an extension cord from my neighbors house to power my robotic eff machines, but I got the charges dropped after I explained that it's not theft since i didn't actually "remove" original electricity.


I had that happen, courtesy of some contractors working on a neighbor's house. I just kept the extension cord and called it square.
 
2012-10-11 03:21:34 PM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: jfivealive: If you don't pay for the services you ordered, it's not theft.

If you order something, then you have give the service provider a burden of processing your order at the very least, yes it would then be theft. Link

So if i don't pay my cell phone bill Verizon can have me arrested? I guess if you setup cell phone service with the intent to not pay, its theft, near impossible to prove that intent, but yeah, still theft.

jfivealive: However if you rig the telephone pole outside to give you free HBO, that's theft, and there's nothing tangible involved.

That would be theft because it still takes energy to send the signals. However, if you receive HBO, record a show, then send it to a friend, it is not theft.


I agree
 
2012-10-11 03:25:19 PM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Theaetetus: BraveNewCheneyWorld: Theaetetus: someguy945: Because in conventional theft, you are taking a physical item that is property of the store

The definition of theft doesn't actually require a physical item. Consider theft of services. Copyright infringement is a subset of the colloquial, non-legal term "theft".

Services? It's not remotely the same, services involve labor and resources.

[notsureifserious.jpg]

I'm not saying that "services" is the same as "physical item". I'm saying that the word "theft" doesn't specifically require a physical item.

Yes, it does. Someone does your taxes and you don't pay, it's still theft because they labored to assemble data in a specific manner, for example. A physical item is always required in some form or another, it might not be a physical item you buy, but in some form or another, it will always be physical material that is manipulated.


... you may want to ask for your money back for your GED in Law. Claim it's theft, because you got a physical certificate to hang on your wall.
 
2012-10-11 03:30:12 PM
I predict this will be about as useful as the legal version of napster.
 
2012-10-11 03:33:55 PM
So will he collect money from people in order to keep illegally uploaded files like he did with megaupload?
 
2012-10-11 05:10:20 PM

jfivealive:
Only by semantics, you are getting something for free, that you would normally have to pay for, that's stealing.



You cannot get it for free. You have to buy a product (Computer) or have someone buy them and give to you (or steal them) including services (internet) before you can make copies. They were not for free so that argument is invalid.

The city charges you for running water. Is drinking water out of a river or stream stealing water?
 
2012-10-11 05:11:36 PM

Kazrath: jfivealive:
Only by semantics, you are getting something for free, that you would normally have to pay for, that's stealing.



You cannot get it for free. You have to buy a product (Computer) or have someone buy them and give to you (or steal them) including services (internet) before you can make copies. They were not for free so that argument is invalid.

The city charges you for running water. Is drinking water out of a river or stream stealing water?


In the U.S. Western region, yes.
 
2012-10-11 07:21:48 PM

UNAUTHORIZED FINGER: ShoeKing: DOH

Don't worry, all I see is ***-**-****. Of course, you can see what you typed, you wrote it. Try it again with your bank account#.


of course drew saves all the real #'s in a MySQL table
 
2012-10-11 08:46:54 PM

Theaetetus: ... you may want to ask for your money back for your GED in Law. Claim it's theft, because you got a physical certificate to hang on your wall.


Ad hominem the very last weapon pulled out by the weak, when they have no rational argument or response left. You've already lost, and you know it.
 
2012-10-11 09:11:38 PM

BraveNewCheneyWorld: Theaetetus: ... you may want to ask for your money back for your GED in Law. Claim it's theft, because you got a physical certificate to hang on your wall.

Ad hominem the very last weapon pulled out by the weak, when they have no rational argument or response left. You've already lost, and you know it.


Please note: Not at all jumping into this quagmire of an argument.

Statements like those above always make me think of a hulking supervillain (Thanos or Darkseid or something), fists clenched, dark energy crackling around him, standing over a bruised and battered hero at the end of issue five of a six-issue storyline. "You've already lost," followed by maniacal laughter.
 
2012-10-11 11:27:04 PM

JT_Goalie: 123-45-6789 

turns into ###-##-####


iseewhatyoudidthere.jpg
 
2012-10-12 01:20:18 AM
Is "MegaBox" German for "big vagina"?
 
Skr
2012-10-12 06:19:49 AM
Kim may not the champion we want, but he is the one we have.
 
2012-10-12 08:10:36 AM

Skr: Kim may not the champion we want, but he is the one we have.


The Dark Dotcom?
 
Displayed 47 of 97 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report