trial you ignorant criminal

lol

soooooo can anyone summarize? im too lazy/busy to watch it

For me too, this shit happens so often it's gotten boring to me but I wouldn't mind reading a quick summary.

preferably written ascending on the top of a sandwich so you can read as you continuously chew

Star wars meets subway? Interesting.../me goes off to register a trademark

charges dropped faster than bombs

ahaha

wait, how the hell are they going to prove assisting?

isn't that impossible if there is no copyright infringement?

" remaining charges are simply ‘assisting making available' "

i thought thats one of those things that never gets to court? cos you can easily argue that a pc/mac etc "assist" in making available absolutely anything (music videos porn etc) then theres the OS, browsers, etc

trial over on the 2nd day?

yeah I imagine it's like suing BT because people are using landlines for drug trafficking

and countless other metaphors which would be laughed out of court xD

Google would be a co-defendant so they'll have a difficult time making it stick.

aye although i doubt that any copyright owner would even think about involving the behemoth google?

and i dont see the prosecution lawyer getting a bonus this year.. thanks to his rudimentary mistake xD

They wouldn't accuse Google but it wouldn't surprise me if Google were to include themselves if the argument is made too strongly.

itd be thrown out of court long before that ever happened though?

and sidenote: hurry up with pmx! and doubles xD

"balls of the year" award for him

That's what they sue for in the US (making available theory), but more and more courts think it's incorrect. (remember that 222.000$ verdict which was overturned?)

^^

the whole trial was a joke before it started. i read that the prosecutions "it attourney" (as in THE it attourney) tried to start a power point presentation for like fifteen minutes before he was told to quit wasting the court's time.

The worst part about each failure they bring in court is that they only strengthen the defense that torrent sites get to use the next time around.

The defense was happy to see that already half of the charges were dropped during the morning session of the second day. “This is a sensation. It is very rare to win half the target in just one and a half days and it is clear that the prosecutor took strong note of what we said yesterday,” said defense lawyer Per E Samuelson.

Peter Althin, representing Peter Sunde said, “It is clear that this is an advantage for the accused.”

“EPIC WINNING LOL,” Peter himself later commented on Twitter.

HAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAH GO INTERNET

EPIC WINNING LOL

\o/

The prosecutor have a problem distingushing from megabits and megabytes. All live from inside the #spectrial

My god.

what network is this on

Their twitter.

http://twitter.com/brokep

ty ty

The IRC channel is on efnet. The defendants are on IRC during the proceedings :)

To bad they speak some ancient nordic language :(

Probably not the best thing to say to a swede:)

Consider your village on the pillage-and-rape list.

You won't even penetrate the Zulu front lines!

D: is mine on there?

Ancient???

He was using runic characters

Thought it was on ircnet. Maybe both?

ty ty!

following the live twitter updates was hilarious, especially when things like, 'the judge just told him (the prosecutor) to hurry up', came down.

trial, comes from "try"

I think there's a strong chance the capitalist big dogs will win in the first instance. however, in the higher instances I think the tpb guys will win.

Hi, my name is KingKong and I live in Cambodia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_kong_defense

If they use the Chewbecca defense next everything will be ok.

The glove doesn't fit!

they would need to bring c3po in court aswell for that..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=67rjxHe5DA0 <- dead funny if you know swedish, which you should.

"which you should"?

Is that like a secret warning that sweden will take over the world someday? :D

I, for one, welcome our new swedish overlords

if it means a lan like connection for the conquered nations, where do I sign for turkey? :D

stay away from europe cunt

:D

MEH! :D

don't worry.. Romanians are super specialized in keeping them out of Europe with 500 years of training at hand

if we ever got something right in our nation's history, this is it.. :D

we don't need use of force anyway, we'll just have Hagi tell them to chill.. :D

ahaha ... is that guy still playing?

no, but he's respected like a king in Turkey for what he did with Galatasaray

we already have mate..

That clip isnt funny :(

yes it is

The Mel Gibson defense is unbeatable though.

never heard of that one. Got any info?

From an SP episode "I was an alcoholic!".

http://cristgaming.com/pirate.swf

BUMPED!

Don't think these guys are cut out for life in prison. Crazy verdict

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8003799.stm

rappad

I don't know what is worse, the greedy exces charging too much for software/music/games or the leechers expecting everything for free.

I know this much. If everyone copied nothing would ever get made, so copyright is actually the worse of the two evils whichever way you look at it.

Which is fine, you could say ok, 15% of the market is going to rip this game/music/film off, but the problem is torrents are just getting bigger and if its allowed to get to the point where it does not become worthwhile for people to release new digital media then that is a major problem.

No street fighter 10!

NIN released an album, and a live album for absolutley no charge.

You can argue that NIN (and Radiohead) have the ability to do that given the fact they have years of revenue to call upon. Then again the flip side to that is that NIN especially made a stand against the recording industry bodies and told them to gtfo.

Personally I think it's bullshit how much movies/albums even books cost. Some of the philosophy text I buy for uni are rediculously priced and I know for a fucking fact that the great majority of that money is going to the publishers so they can continue to reprint works, some of which are over a century old.

There a many prominent figures in the industrial arts industry that are all for a move away from professionalism and a made-for-profit approach, a filmmaker who shares this opinion is Francis Coppola.

I also think that you are naive if you think that copying will bring an end to creativity. You should go to a local pub and check out a local band, and ask them how much they care about the money they're making from their gigs.

Artist should all represent themselves and any and all third party 'extra expense' marketing should be abolished.

The big production companies need to quit spending money on pointless lawsuits and torrent chasing and start concentrating on finding more "fitting to the time" ways of selling their product.

REPLY TO BOTH OF YOU...

I agree that greed is a big problem but it works both ways.

Even IF software/films/games/ were more affordable you would still have people downloading.

Most people who pirate hang on to that that argument, IF THEY DID THIS THEN I WOULD DO THAT, but something tells me their goal posts would always keep moving because they've become used to a culture of not paying for anything.

And that's the danger, every kid is growing up with file sharing, they are tomorrows people.

I do agree that pricing and distribution methods need changing, but I'm not convinced the problem with piracy will go away.

If you lower the costs of distribution via digital delivery (as I guess hnns was referring to) then a product loses its identity.

Its just becomes a file which is xxx MB and is stored on a server.
What seperates that from a pirated file, morals?

Most given a chance will take the the copied version no matter what the price so its not as easy as dumping everything online.

I think the fundamental problem is greed at the top, but the problem is that greed has given birth to a culture who thinks its ok, so even if they DID change their ways, you might find its already too late to stop the problem and it will turn into a problem because it won't be worth developing anything.

If you lower the costs of distribution via digital delivery (as I guess hnns was referring to) then a product loses its identity.

I'm sorry, but for me, a cd in a case, or a dvd for that matter doesn't constitute the identity of that product, the work within it does.

I would wager a very large ammount of people rip their disc to digital straight after buying them, I know I do, what then becomes of the jewel case I payed an extra $15 on? Nothing, it sits on my shelf to collect dust. I will perhaps look inside the jacket, once, perhaps more if there are lyrics - even those I can find online.

I am quite a prolithic downloader off music, but I also buy a considerable ammount of Beatport, I guess thats how I settle my conscious. It's a sly thing to do, I understand that, and I don't like hearing artist talk about how it 'hurts' the industry but hey, I like their music and I want to be able to listen to it as soon as possible.

I suppose as a fan thats all I care about, and were I ever to become a producer I must admit I would do my best to deliver content to my 'fans' at the lowest, if any cost. I know that is incredibly naive but its what I would like to do. It is how I appreciate art, it should be there to enjoy, not to pay for.

Just thought I would demonstrate an example of something I come into contact with a fair bit.

Beatport is an online music store catering to electronic music producers and artist. For a fan of the genres that fall under that huge umbrella the website is honey in the virgins cooch.

It's a fucking solid website with an unbelievable range of songs. When you join you have to put in the same details you would of any site that deals with money transaction, location being most prominent. This is where shit gets wack.

A very small fraction of releases are territory restricted, for whatever fuck nut reasons the record companies can think of. Now, if I really want a track that is restricted (and oddly enough they are always rather rare, or quality tracks) I would have one of two options to choose from.

1) Find another outlet, either domestically or online, either one I would have to fork out for shipping and posting.

2) Find a torrent for it.

Why should I be denied access to content because I live in Australia? Why should I be forced be fork out additional money for something when people living in the US or EU do not.

The simple answer is that I shouldn't, there is no good reason why I should be forced to pay more because I live in the southern hemisphere, this is a DIGITAL COPY OF A SONG. it is not tangible in any way, yet it cost more for me.

Until uttter shite like that is removed I will continue to have no problem with piracy.

One problem is that when i buy CD, most of my cash dont go to the artist. It goes to some asshole in a boardroom of the record company.

I think people actually support BUYING music, movies etc, even though they pirate. Its just that nobody wants to give their hard earned cash to middle men.
Also with the way music, movies and games work nowadays, 75% of it (or more) is literally SHIT and not worth paying for.

And how do you think the record company acquired their work? I mean what did they go with lead pipes and nunchuks to tolchock him and nick his demo cd?

This might be shocking news to you, but not everyone in the world wants to work as a sole properiator.

Yes but once upon a time the singer had nothing.

All he had is potetnial. Who pumped 1000's into him? marketed him? Had faith in him when no one else did? Brought him to retail, you have absolutely no idea the cost of bringing something to market [from nothing] and the risks and failures that are involved in such a venture.

You ask any venture capitalist about how much stake they take in a company and when you realise that they make dozens of investments and most fail, you'll realise that one successful investment HAS to cover the failed investments. that is why most want a high percentage, not to con the individual, but to cover the collective investments of their business, so when they sign people like Victoria Beckham and she bombs out, they don't go bust from the hundreds of thousands they invested. 9even though they did with her!)

Its kinda awkward to see such a strong opinion on something to be totally destroyed by basic and factual logic.

I'm not on anyones side, but so far pirates all share one thing in common. They all put up half assed arguments, mostly from having no idea how much things actually cost to produce in the real world.

so instead of directly supporting artists people like
people should support the record companies, who invest too much time and money marketing mediocre artists and bands and use whatever influence they have left in this internet age to persuade the public into buying that crap?

You don't seem to get it.

Half the losers who are famous today in the world of music WOULD NOT be where they are if it were not for the initial investment that was put into them. That risk investment is an ongoing thing.

Do you realise how many shitty bands get in contact with record companies everyday?

Everyone of them thinks they're the next Oasis and most of them are not. Record companies take huge risks and many of their bands amount to nothing but a bad investment.

There are tons of talented bands out there and they'll never get anywhere because no one will give them that break, or they can't find someone to market them . You cna be the best band in the world, if no one knows you exist beyond a few local gigs you won't get shit nigga.

So considering many of the bands that you enjoy today are directly there because of what the record label did witih them then yes, you need to recognise the significance of the record labels because if I had a dollar for every douche bag who was in a band and thought they would good I would be very rich!

So by thinking that you're hurting the publishers and not the muscians you're kidding yourself. If there is less money for publishers to invest then it means they are less likely to take a risk in someone who they might have given a shot if the 10% they lost from pirate sales had been turned into raw cash.

ive been reading through some of the comments here and.....some are interesting, most are not. The end all argument here is that no matter what the technology is, and no matter what the industry, there will always be reverse engineers and people willing to get stuff for free or for a cheap buck.

Its simply the way the world works, there will always be crime and there will always be people that don't see it as a crime, and there will always be institutions trying to control everyone of us. This topic can be expanded on all day long, but from my own opinion I think the pirate bay owners should be released as they are providing a tool for file sharing, not trying to make people moral. it is nothing to do with them with what people use the software for and is just another way of showing the greatness of the internet, which is freedom of speech and expression!


P.S. And I also agree with jamerio, its simply portfolio planning, reducing variance and increasing + EV.

TBH I don't care about the sentence they got because the legal system is bollocks anyway, as i originally said.

You're then going into a discussion about the legal system which is such a can of worms.

I'm just saying, they are doing damage by making the tool/site to do so. Just as Oppenheimer said he's become a destroyer of worlds when he designed something which was only designed to cause damage. Just as I would be for hosting a site on kiddie porn. I am fundamentally responsible.

You can't design and maintain a tool which allows %99.9 of its user base to steal or abuse without taking some blame.

And you can't use the argument that peopel are resposible for their own actions because they're not. Most people are idiots and society would collapse if the CONTROLS that so many protest against were taken away.

the people involved in pirate bay are making it widely accessible for people who know no better to do potentially damaging things.

The fact that they posted cocky twitters and replies from solicitors make me think they actually got what was coming.

I understand what your saying but as people have said before, isn't pirate bay just another google? no pirate bay no google! I mean you can even bring facebook and youtube into this, they can potentially provide copyright/privacy infringement, its never ending.

No, because the sole focus of pirate bay is to do illegal activity.

Google is just like a giant encyclopedia, you choose what information you want to read.

Less than .1% of google's content is to do with illegal torrents.
More than 99.9% of Pirate bay's content is to do witih illegal torrents.

If I remember, it's only like 25% of the torrents on piratebay are illegal.

Google is more like a library assitant who will help you find the books you're looking for.

TPB is like a back entrance/exit with no security into the library with a map telling you where all the stuff you want is.

Youtube/Facebook seek to remove all copyrighted content that they aren't allowed to have on there.

do they? or are they forced by people into doing it?

fair difference :p

that is true and I think that was down to the music industry with music videos, but the owners (google) only did so because they were forced to.

Doesn't matter why they do it.

the tape recorder will destroy the music industry

8 Track 4 Life.

Its different, the tape recorder was clearly a limited medium.
Even at the time.

The quality was not very good.
You needed a certain device to play it.

Digital media/music can be installed onto phones/pc/ and many more devices. It can be copied in seconds.

UNlike the tape which had so many limiting factors, mp3's/iso'sexe's etc are as good as most people will ever need.

so u want to see the end of bittorrent technology because it facilitates illegal (and legal) file sharing? Additionally, do u agree with either the verdict or sentence handed down by the court?

I did not say I wan't to see an end to it as I believe if there is a problem with something then natural solutions will arise.

What I am saying is its in no mans land, you have two baddies pointing the blame at the other.
The greedy fat cats and the freeloaders who expect something for nothing. They're both the same as each other, just at opposite ends of the spectrum. And yes they both create little co-depedant groups for one another where they're collectively right.

My point is, even if the arguments that leechers put forward were met, I'm not convicned the majority of them would pay for things anyway.

Is a years sentence justified?
Well the legal system is bollocks anyway, but unless you punish people enough to make it worth them stop doing it then its pointless. If these guys go to jail I promise you neither of them will want nothing to do with pirate bay when they come out.

Perhaps if they had not acted like untouchable kids for so many years (posting letters from solicitors etc) then the law might have held them with less contempt.

If these guys go to jail I promise you neither of them will want nothing to do with pirate bay when they come out

Great, lets incarcerate anyone putting up a torrent site. Some violent criminals escape a prison sentence with community service, yet we want to imprison ppl for putting up torrent sites?

Greedy fat cats (as u put it) exacerbate the situation by overpricing & imposing regional controls. It's well documented how for example their attitude to the UK is punitive. Cars used to cost as many pounds as they did dollars. Often the case with games consoles I remember, and a host of other goods. It's just that ppl can circumvent this shit with digital media, and the execs don't feel like they have control so they influence the legal system. Either that or the judges of this don't understand that TPB guys neither rip nor host the content. Look at how Steam is taking in more profits for PC devs and publishers than the retailers have been able to do for years. People ARE willing to pay, but they want fair pricing and convenience

There is no proof people are willing to pay at all.

Its a half assed argument many will put up to justify what they do at a time when they know there is little or no chance that their plight will be implemented.

When it comes to crunch, these people will still leech.
Look how many MP3's people have on their PC's that are copied, yet these cost as little as 50 cents from somewhere like amazon.

Now tell me why that something that costs less than a cheeseburger at McDonalds is STILL being downloaded illegally in huge numbers?

Itunes and many other vendors have made it very easy to download LEGAL music, even going as far as selling pay as you go credit vounchers. I see them all the time.

Yet music copyright is still rife.
The MP3 industry is a model for everything else, if these people are not going to pay a dollar a song then they're certainly not going to pay for anything EVEN IF of fat cats reduced the prices, it will never be enough for them. Films/software/games will never cost that little, so why should it change?

They have a free for all mindset because they have no moral obligation to pay money for something they could get for free.
you will never be able to get around that temptation.

I've never pirated a game, but I've never bought any music!

I've pirated a lot of games, instead of testing the demos, but I've also bought quite a few, and all those I've played a lot I've bought, except two, but they will be bought later :P

Also, I have lots of CD's, but they're safely stored away as I've made MP3s of them all. I also download music on top of that, but the stuff I listen to the most, I buy.

There is no proof people are willing to pay at all

Steam and iTunes are proof. The ppl u refer to will always be there, but jailing TPB guys does nothing to stop the unconscionable leechers

no proof?

the countless amount of artists, producers, developers, authors and so on that state thanks to piracy and works leaked to the internet they have benefited from increased sales and interest?

fucking morons like U2 screaming about piracy hurting revenue yet they go and have their biggest selling album (and likely the latest one will top that) ever and managing one of the highest grossing tours ever?

radiohead? nin? countless amounts of low key artists and as said below, itunes and steam, amazon and everything else

in fact people do want to pay for music, single sales are on the constant up while album sales are low. thanks to digital distribution, these idiots should realise people are not willing to spend stupid amounts of money for a CD full of utter trash, they just want a song or two.

on top of all that, there are so many other factors as to why people are buying less music, and none of them are related to piracy. Combine them all together and add piracy to the mix, throw it at an industry that uses a business model that's somewhat 6 decades or more of age and you're going to have big problems. I mean, my sister has to be one of the most idiotic persons ever, so idiotic she could be German. Yet she knows how to (and can at that) legally use a combination of websites and the TV to have access to on demand chart music constantly, free of charge all day long every day of the year. I wonder why she isn't willing to dish out on a CD?

sadly, of all the social and technological advancements piracy is the easiest to blame and the only one they can go after

Funny enough I don't actually have a problem with them moaning about piracy and trying to prevent it because sure if some people wish to be paid for _their_ efforts then so be it, but what's annoying is the propaganda behind it and all the constant bullshit and obscured facts that comes with it.

something like that :(

"throw it at an industry that uses a business model that's somewhat 6 decades or more of age and you're going to have big problems."

That's just not true.

I can buy practically any song in the world in less than two minutes from a website like amazon and have it delivered to my desktop straight away for less than a £1.

The argument for the business model being out of date with regards to MP3 is false, and even when prices are less than £1 its still not enough.

So even if films/software were reduced, most who pirate will go on regardless. Lastly, giving away stuff for free was as much a PR stunt than anything else.

The positive PR they got from that is not a sustainable business model because once something becomes the norm it loses its appeal. If was then why isn't everyone doing it?

Because it has no long term future

If these guys go to jail I promise you neither of them will want nothing to do with pirate bay when they come out.

I wouldn't be so sure of that myself.

I'm pretty sure they will continue the fight at least as eagerly as before, and I doubt they'll stay away from TPB.

were they actually able to prove anything they claimed? ridiculous verdict.

Ridiculous in what way?

The industries were unable to prove their case, yet the judge decides TBP is guilty.
But with the Pirat Partiet gaining 9000 members in two days, it's a win anyway. It'll take time, but that's change I can actually believe in.

How can you know it hasn't been proven without reading the judgment?

I've followed the trial.

Followed as in being there or followed as in at time read some random articles about it?

detailed summaries

No wonder then. Read the judgment and you'll see that there are an overwhelming amount of evidence.

Show us this overwhelming evidence.

http://di.se/databas/2009/04/17/pix/Tingsrattensdom.pdf

1. Is it only available in swedish?
2. From the summaries it was more than apparent that the prosecution has absolutely no clue what they were talking about. Hence they got schooled in court and needed to drop their main charge after the second day. And that's just the way it went on.

Besides: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8014626.stm
Oops? When will he get a new job/house like Keyzer?

Aye, unfortunately it is most likely just available in Swedish.

The defendants are obviously better aware of the technical side of things than both the court and the prosecutor. However, the law itself is tech neutral, so there is no need to know the exact inner workings of it. Reading the verdict it's apparent that the court is well aware of how torrent works, at least as knowledgeable about it as you and me. They may not know exactly how for example DHT works but they fully understand the concept of tracker, seeder and leecher.

hah nice

Epic verdict full of win sums it up I guess.

not over by a long shot. im sure they'll appeal

they already said they would. so yes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=URsqTsMfNqY&am...ed#t=1m39s

filesharing summed up.

by the time it's all over torrent's is old and something new has taken over..

Instant data teleporters in 2020, fuck yeah!

oh yeah! can't wait

http://torrentfreak.com/pirate-bay-lawyer-is-...al-090423/

THE SAGA CONTINUES

That's pretty dodgy :)

didn't i say the execs had influenced the legal system? ;) I wonder if you'll change your mind if this thing goes to a re-trial and TPB guys get acquitted. MOAR

Not at all. (broken up for ease of reading!)

I mean the main guy doing all the talking is obviously slightly deluded, he says things like the law should be made for how society wants to behave.

I mean if his ideology was adopted then the world would be chaotic because everyone would think that what they want to do should be justifed.

Whichever way you look at it, he's promoting theft.
If I steal a DVD from a shop, I go to jail.
But what if I pay a crackhead to go in there and steal it?
or what if I buy it knowing its stolen?

I can still get busted.

All he's doing is providing a haven for people to take stuff without the social stigma which is attached to conventional theft.

its just a new form of stealing that is not clearly defined by law because the technology behind it is realtively new.

You have to be pretty deluded if you convince yourself you're not a thief if you download stuff. Fine, be like that, but don't convince yourself you're not a thief.

You are, you just don't have the mental aptitude to realise that you're not something until society tells you you are.

Its perfectly normal for the common man to think that why, that is why laws are made to address that very trait.

Your logic is deluded, piracy does not equal theft as you're describing it.

What you think of his ideoligy is irrelevant. You can search google by filetype torrent and get the same thing.

I mean the main guy doing all the talking is obviously slightly deluded, he says things like the law should be made for how society wants to behave

The law IS for us, by us. Laws reflect the opinion of society at the time; provided we're talking about a truly democratic society (which I don't think we are in, but that's an entirely different topic). It's not supposed to be a tool for dominant ppl to subjugate the rest of us.

I mean if his ideology was adopted then the world would be chaotic because everyone would think that what they want to do should be justifed

No it wouldn't, we'd have democracy. Majority rule? Ever heard of it? However the scenario you paint is one where you'd have a bunch of differing, contradictory laws with everyone pulling in a different direction. That's not what anyone is advocating! On to your other points, who in their right mind would advocate theft and expect to be listened to? A change in copyright law is what they're after. Personally, I download stuff, but I'm no thief. If I download a game, (and love it) I get online and purchase a copy. If there's an expansion pack available, I buy that too. If it's a POS that manages to cling to my HDD for a mere 2 days, it gets uninstalled and the devs responsible don't get a penny from me. Nor should they!

You are, you just don't have the mental aptitude to realise that you're not something until society tells you you are. Its perfectly normal for the common man to think that why, that is why laws are made to address that very trait

Somehow, I think being elitist and mentally deficient has something of an oxymoronic feel to it

Edit: The text has not been edited, I just forgot to hit the reply button

I don't believe for one second you buy everything you say you download.

What I do believe is people like you are part of an underclass who will lie and say anything to hide the fact they're just cheap skates or can't afford the stuff they want who don't even have the decency to admit that's what they are because you've been doing it for so long you think its the norm.

I belive you might pay for things if it requires a keycode for it work online, but I bet my ass you have a ton off stuff which you use everyday and have never and will never pay a dime for just because you can get away with it.

You'll never convince me otherwise, and beyond your lies, we both know you're in possession of a ton of shit which you would have otherwise paid for or never owned if it were not for torrents.
Despite you so called ethics.

That's the difference between us, you're writing arguments knowing that you're telling lies. I'm not.
But hey this is the internet and you can always say otherwise because there is no proof and that suits the way of liar just fine.

I have huge access to people like you, I know you're pretty similar when it comes to such issues.
I don't care if you copy shit or not, but don't pretend you're something you're not.

You are in your own socially acceptable way, a thief.
You can umm and arrr and harp on about the technicalities all you want, but it does not change what you are under the current laws. tell me what if everyone adopted that way?
Where do you draw the line, what one person thinks is acceptable another does not.

I downloaded a film last night, some POS called Minghags from Bam Margera, it was the biggest pile of dross I have ever seen, had it not been for torrents I would have bought that DVD. I just wanted it there and then before making a trip to the local skate store.

And you know what, even if it sucked I would have accepted it, because even though I saw the shitty reviews, I still would have got it becaue I would have belived that they might have been wrong, or being a fan might have made it ok for me.

The result of that torrent means I will not be buying that film.
I cannot buy that film now.

And is that right?

Well no, you can't have a business model where people get to try 100% before they buy because its open to abuse.
If you absord an expereince it does not mean you should not pay for it if you do not like it. Its a choice you make. Just as you with many other things.

There needs to be an element of chance in there or it will get abused, as is happening with torrents.

You'll never convince me otherwise, and beyond your lies, we both know you're in possession of a ton of shit which you would have otherwise paid for or never owned if it were not for torrents.

What? Just to give u an example, I played oblivion for like 100 hours before buying it; like a lot of the shit I have, I try before I buy. You are plainly fucking neurotic. At first I thought your reply odd, (especially with u calling me a thief, (you know nothing about me) but I remember what an idiot you've been in prior arguments, and continue to be. Regarding your little fillm experience, if you genuinely thought the film was shit, l think it is right and proper that they're not rewarded (monetarily or otherwise) for their efforts in your particular case. If someone else enjoys it, they can pay for it. The point is, work has to be appreciated to warrant it's acceptance, and not because they went into marketing overdrive and managed to sell a product to millions, the majority of which might be ambivalent or plain dislike it, but they've paid their money anyway and everyone's been duped

Films and media are subjective, just because someone does not like it, it does not mean it is a good or bad film.

I don't like Starwars, yet plenty of people do.

If I care enough to watch a certain bit of media then there are plenty of reviews, there are film trailers, there is a cast list, there are directors and a lot more for me to make that choice on whether I take a chance or not.

If I go into a place to eat and I order something that I don't like, I don't act like spoilt kid and say that was a shit, I simply don't order it again.

Its a lot easier to convince yourself that something is not quite worth buying once you've enjoyed the expereince from it.

Do you realise how many people would adopt that "I don't like it" mentality and that's before you talk about teenagers with no money, or people from poor parts of the world that would need to work a day or so just for that latest DVD release.

And that is why your idiotic and deeply flawed idealfalls flat on its face. If you can't realise that then I doubt you get any better on more subtle issues.

If I care enough to watch a certain bit of media then there are plenty of reviews, there are film trailers, there is a cast list, there are directors and a lot more for me to make that choice on whether I take a chance or not

I've watched films which had good reviews that I didn't enjoy, and I've watched films with average reviews that I did. 300 had an awesome trailer, and I queued up opening night to see that and came away disappointed. Like Robert De Niro? Go to see all his films? He doesn't deliver in everything he does, especially when the material's not right (and it shows).

If I go into a place to eat and I order something that I don't like, I don't act like spoilt kid and say that was a shit, I simply don't order it again

Bad analogy. You return to certain foods again and again, not films. You're arguing that one should pay for an unknown quantity before they can even know if it's something they'll appreciate. By your rationale, no business should ever adopt a returns policy.

"By your rationale, no business should ever adopt a returns policy. "

Most return policies are subject to fairly strict guidelines.
None more so than digital media which is what we are talking about.

It goes to say that due to how most forms of media can be copied or divuldged in a short period of time without little or no wear to the original item then its actually very difficult to return the sorts of media I am referring to UNLESS you can prove that it has not been opened.

You try returning an opened PC game to a store that you have physically opened. Most will tell you where to go because so many people were playing them for a week and then returning them, which is exactly what I am referring to.

Stores have tried your rule of thumb and it was abused for obvious reasons and always will be.

Look at the most popular forms of media.

Software
Games
Mp3's
Movies.

If I purchased any of those items from a store, I could return it within the hour and have an identical copy AND an official passkey or whatever AND get my money back. Potentially rendering the game USELESS for the next customer.

So using conventional return methods which are not applicable to little or any of the media we are referring to only looks bad on you.

If you don't belive me, go into pcworld, order a copy of XP, take it home and open it, regardless of whether you used it or not, you will NOT get a refund on that product.

Like i said, sellers are well aware of all the scams, a few years ago I would have agreed, but these days its very difficult to return digital media which has been opened and rightly so.

Digital media has no real world existence.
The only thing that defines it over a copy is usually box/manual.
For a lot of people that is too much of a temptation when they can have exactly what they want AND get a refund.

your entire post addressed only the final sentence in mine. Businesses are likely to resist a return since they want your money, irrespective of your level of dissatisfaction. It doesn't negate any of the points I've given, nor have you even addressed any of them. There are major inconsistencies in policy; for example, in GAME if you want to return a console game, you're in luck; if u want to return a PC game they will not under any circumstances. The reason they'll give is piracy, except piracy has been rife with consoles ever since they moved to CD/DVD