Massive wave of ebook piracy?

[Sil_liS]

Actually this is the longest thread that I have seen since I joined the forum. The replies had started to slow down, and I wasn't sure if it was going to make to o 500. And then I looked and the last post was #499.
So I posted a quick reply, hoping that nobody got a reply just before mine.

[JaneD]

Originally Posted by eGeezer

Uh. I believe he meant the thread is 500 posts long. You are just giving him karma for reading a number.

Not saying, of course, that the karma isn't deserved. Sent some myself, just to show I,too, appreciate someone on the board who can read. lol.

I was giving him karma for being #500. But I do agree it made no sense to do so - wasn't he lucky enough to be #500? I suppose my reasoning was that by "touching" him with karma, I'd get some lucky karma myself (as when attendees at a horse race reach out to touch the owner/jockey/horse that just won the last race).

[eGeezer]

Originally Posted by JaneD

I was giving him karma for being #500. But I do agree it made no sense to do so - wasn't he lucky enough to be #500? I suppose my reasoning was that by "touching" him with karma, I'd get some lucky karma myself (as when attendees at a horse race reach out to touch the owner/jockey/horse that just won the last race).

Good idea. Glad I was a smartaleck and popped him with a little Karma, too, so you don't get to hog all the reflective karma. lol.

[Jaime_Astorga]

Originally Posted by Krystian Galaj

That's the point - how would they learn what to enter in the address bar? If you enter anything but proper URL, it's used as the search term and goes through the same search as if you entered it into Google, so results with rapidshare in them would be filetered out as well.

It's called "word of mouth". A lot of new sites are first heard of by people through recommendations and links in websites, forums, blogs, e-mails, IMs, or real life as opposed to search engine results. Not to mention the possibility of backlash... I know for a fact that if Google removed every piracy website I would compile a list of all the good such websites I was aware of and post them in every public forum I participated in that was discussing the issue and did not have a policy against such links. I imagine others would do something similar; I can already imagine the protest videos being uploaded to video hosts with website names scrolling by. The internet does not take kindly to censorship.

Also, rapidshare is not a torrent site. It is an online storage site which hosts content other people download, and is often used to distribute copyrighted material without authorization. Torrents operate on completely different principles.

[Krystian Galaj]

I'm amazed how many people point out that rapidshare, megaupload etc. are not torrent sites, even though I never said they are. The only similarity is that, just like with torrent, one Google search gets you a downloadable file every time, with no need to go through any specific forums, or other sources of information.

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by Krystian Galaj

I'm amazed how many people point out that rapidshare, megaupload etc. are not torrent sites, even though I never said they are.

You implied:

Originally Posted by Grimm

Other torrent sites like Demonoid or ThePirateBay do not operate off portal software like Limewire nor do they have central servers that can be shutdown (and ThePirateBay is not US based, therefore the US courts really can't touch them). All you need for them is a torrent client such as uTorrent. Everything is spread out amongst the peers/seeders without going through any centralized servers. Turn on PeerBlock, load up uTorrent, and good luck to anyone trying to stop you.

Originally Posted by Krystian Galaj

How do people find the torrents though? Through Google. What would happen with sites like rapishare or megaupload, if Google started removing pages containing links to them from search results? What would happen with torrent downloading?

Originally Posted by Sil_liS

People would start using the address bar.

Originally Posted by Krystian Galaj

That's the point - how would they learn what to enter in the address bar? If you enter anything but proper URL, it's used as the search term and goes through the same search as if you entered it into Google, so results with rapidshare in them would be filetered out as well.

Even if that isn't what you meant, it is what everybody thought you meant.

[Xanthe]

Originally Posted by Krystian Galaj

How do people find the torrents though? Through Google. What would happen with sites like rapishare or megaupload, if Google started removing pages containing links to them from search results? What would happen with torrent downloading?

Your post tied torrents to a Google search, and then implied that Rapidshare and Megaupload would somehow diminish if Google removed the search links to torrents.

We were just clarifying the difference between P2P sharing that uses the torrents method and how RS and MU actually work. They are two separate methods for shariing files. The removal of torrents by Google wouldn't affect RS or MU filesharing. That was the point

[Krystian Galaj]

Ok
If Google chose to not index filessharings sites like rapidshare/megaupload at all though, I believe that might reduce their availability considerably. I know there are other crawlers/search engines, but seeing as most of the links show up in random blog entries, and forum threads, I'm sure there wouldn't be as many results available as there is with Google search.

[mr ploppy]

I think Rapidshare and Megaupload would have something to say about Google crippling their business like that.

[TGS]

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

I think Rapidshare and Megaupload would have something to say about Google crippling their business like that.

Does anybody actually use Google to find anything on Rapidshare or Megaupload? There are for more effective search methods.

[Dr. Drib]

Originally Posted by Sil_liS

Actually this is the longest thread that I have seen since I joined the forum. The replies had started to slow down, and I wasn't sure if it was going to make to o 500. And then I looked and the last post was #499.
So I posted a quick reply, hoping that nobody got a reply just before mine.

Try this one, my good man:

https://www.mobileread.com/forums/sho...10108&page=467





Don

[Sil_liS]

Originally Posted by Dr. Drib

Try this one, my good man:

I had decided to avoid such threads until I actually get my ereader, because I would be too tempted to get the books and read them on my laptop. It's nice to see that I will have plenty of things to read, but the number of posts looks a little overwhelming, and I have a tendency to take the methodical approach.

Thanks for the information, I'll take it as a warning.
Sil

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by Dr. Drib

Try this one, my good man:

https://www.mobileread.com/forums/sho...10108&page=467





Don

Ah, but if this was a sticky or you combined all the other piracy threads, which would win then?

[Grimm]

That's not how the torrent works. Most of the modern clients provide a current upload/download indication and you can easily verify what I am about to say.

Go for it.

The protocol is optimized to create and then use as many sources/copies as it is possible. In other words, the shared file is divided into chunks. As soon as you download a single chunk, you are offering it to other nodes, and you get "credit" for any chunk that is served from your machine. If you completely disable upload from your machine, the protocol/network will recognize you as passive downloader and will penalize you. The transfer will take forever. Try it.

Yes, you will get penalized as a leecher if you don't seed in return if the site keeps ratios. I never said otherwise. One thing to add, by modifying the private trackers you CAN leech without having your ratio affected at all.

"Seeder" is the node that has finished it's download (100% of the file was downloaded) and now only serves the chunks to the p2p network.

That is pretty much what I said when I said except I used the word "bits" of the file and you said "chunks."

You are actively participating in copyright violation (if the content is copyright protected), the moment you have finished download of the first chunk.

I never said you weren't, just that I was unclear on it. I don't doubt you are correct but I'd like to see the actual law so I can read it.

PeerBlock filters out known IP addresses used by legal/monitoring bodies. The folks in business of catching/prosecuting piracy know how the technology works, and are trying to adapt. They change IP's, use proxies, etc.

Try using PeerBlock and take a look at these legal/monitoring bodies. I personally leave PeerBlock running all the time because while these "bodies" may be legally moitoring me I have every right to block them from watching me. There is no unspoken agreement with them. To me, they are no better than spam emails. The pirates have been, and likely will remain one step ahead of these other groups.

There is no such thing as an absolute security for a machine connected to the Net (every security measure just "raises the bar" for hacker/malware). Similarly, there is no safe way of practising digital piracy.

Of course there is no such thing as absolute security, all I said was "good luck" because that is true. Right, wrong, or indifferent it's true. If you're smart about using torrents (i.e. not going for brand new movies or music as they are watched like crazy, using PeerBlock and minimizing seed times) you can easily get away with piracy. I'm not saying anyone should, just that it is VERY easy to fly under the radar. To say otherwise is just plain false.

[Ankh]

Originally Posted by Grimm

"Seeder" is the node that has finished it's download (100% of the file was downloaded) and now only serves the chunks to the p2p network.

That is pretty much what I said when I said except I used the word "bits" of the file and you said "chunks."

I am sorry for misunderstanding. From your sentence:

Seeder status is what distribution of file packets is. If you're a seeder, you're sharing the bits of the file.

I understood that you are claiming that "bits of the file" are shared only when you achieve seeder status, which is not the case.

My apologies, I misread your words.