Aug 23rd 2008 3:16PM He had us in his power.
And then he started monologing.
Almost expected to hear:"I'll get you next time , Gadget"
Jul 7th 2008 1:23PM I didn't intent to compare drugtrafficing with p2p filesharing. Wat i meant was the fact that a lot of people here claim that this measure is impossible to fullfill because it is so hard to make the difference between legal and illigal software being downloaded by people. The same happens with drugtrafficing where customs have a almost impossible task of finding the illegal stuff between all the legal merchandise. But they still try to stop as much as possible.
When customs see a cargo that is questionable( point of origin, point of delivery, a manifest that doesnt check out), these people from the goverment have the right to open said cargo. So why shouldn't the same logic apply to the internet.
The argument of "its impossible to make the difference" was the same argument Yahoo made when they had nazi memorabilia being sold on their auctions.
They claimed they couldn't traffic their own auctions, until some people threathened with legal action and suddenly Yahoo made a change in policy. the same applies with youtube that is making it harder these days for people to make whole episodes of series available.
At no point do want to say that illegal downloading is as bad as drugtrafficing. and I do believe there should be legal checks and balances about opening e-mail and digital posts.
Jul 6th 2008 3:26PM And that sofar is the best argument that this law needs improvements,eternalpayn. But lets not kidd ourselves. A lot of the filesharing on the internet these days is about the distribution of illegal software and or pirated information.
And it will be extremely difficult to make a distiction between the 2. But claiming that its impossible to make this distiction is a flawed argument to just let all the stuff go through. If we followed that logic with other illigal traffic like drugs, it would be pointless to attelpt to stop these goods getting into the country
Jul 6th 2008 2:59PM Grafh, i do find it extremely amusing that you ask me to be polite and at the same time you call me a both a fascist and Stalin( i won't explain the irony of this).
I won't insult you. Hell i don't even know you.
My country had some reall problems with real fascists during WO2. I find you calling me a fascist a bit insulting. Its easy to call somebody a fascist and be done with him, that way you won't have to discuss with him.
so lets see: you admit that most people you came into contact with told you that they made illigal downloads.
But everytime i read a topic about piracy in PC-magazines they always downgrade the problem as either minor or too difficult to hold back.
And it is true that it shouldn't be the ISP who should look after their own property. But when for example EA tried this with their last game Mass Effect people were screaming outrage and EA dropped it.
The same happened with other attempts(starforce)
We, the users claim it shouldn't be the goverment, neither should it be the compagnies themselves, and neither should it be the ISP, it should be the users themselves who from the goodness of their hearts stop downloading illigal files. And look where it got us now.
I am asking you who think this law is bad, who should regulate the internet, because as if we should follow the people against this law, nobody shoud.
I do believe this is a extreme measure. And i do suspect this bill will have a lot of problems with things like the European court of justice.
And Juneau, you prove my point exacly. It is copyright infringement. You take something you don't pay for, while you should pay for it. So explain to me how this is not theft. The compagnies do add to this illigal use by being ignorant of possible new technologies(like the old music industrie), but that still doesn't change the fact that you take something without paying for it. So you can call it copyright infringement, i call it theft.
Because in your world nobody suffers from illigal downloading,right.
The commercials were humurous and stupid, but they did have that basic core of truth to them.
shkss, while you do make good point, i feel the opposite about points 1 and 2.
I have been keylogged on WOW, and in the end i felt responsible for my own stupidity. We ask our people to be carefull wat to leave in their cars. We ask them to pay a little attention to leave their houses locked when they leave it, but when you ask the same thing for the gaming or internetcommunity about their internet connections, people call you "fascist" and "stalin".
It is your responsablity to make shure that your connection is diffucult to be hacked or used.
How difficult is it for a WIFI connection to set up a simple password?
And anti-virusses can't keep up, but how many people who get hacked don't use protection at all, or don't update their virussoftware daily.
I do agree that this law contradicts both the misuse of computers act and the data protection act, and i do believe that it can use changes. It probably will be changed by people who will challenge it at the EU courts. But i am tired of seeing everything that the industry tries being booed down by us. Because you know who is winning from this: the pirates who continue to offer services. PC-gaming is suffering from this and if we the gaming community continue to tell that neither the people who make the games or movies, nor the goverments nor the ISP has the right to attempt to stop pirates, it will continue to get worse and worse. And then we get laws like this that are harsh on everybody.
But in the end that is life, the majority has to pay for the malice of the minority.
Jul 6th 2008 1:26PM You know wat? I think this is a good thing. For the last years us pc-gamers and pc-users have stuck our heads in the sand and claimed that piracy, copyright-infringements and filesharing is fiction.
Well guess wat, boys and girls, these things are a major problem to both gaming and legal use of the internet.
I am sick to death of people coming up with lame excuses to in some way try to justify theft. Because that is wat you do when you "share a few mp3s or watch Dr Who via torrent instead of iPlayer or PVR". It's theft, plain and simple.
Lets see wat other excuses the website comes up with, because i have heard all of these before:
-It was someone else in your household, maybe your flatmate, your kids, or a mate and you never knew about it.
Well, let me see. I have a car. I am not so stupid to lend my keys to anybody i know, because i know if that person has an accident with my car, my inschurance writes me a nice little letter about why they won't be paying the damages.
It is your computer, people, please pay attention to who you give access.
-your PC was hit by malware, or someone hacked your wi-fi.
Again, it is mostly your responsibility to watch out where you go on the web. I can almost garantee you that most of the people who got hit by malware didn't get said malware by visiting the website of their local library. And there are such wonderfull things as viruschecks.
The hacking of the wifi is also a classic. Protecting of your connection is a good thing.
Sorry if this thing comes over as brutal or unfriendly. I assume some of us have had expirience with this thing, but if feel a bit passionate about this.
On one hand we tell people that our goverment has no right to intervene in our daily gaming, and on the other hand we offer little responsiblity for our communities actions.
For years we have claimed that these things are little things and we only take from the "big evil coorparations", but we are only kidding ourselves here.
It is theft, and the chickens are coming home to roost.
It seems that we will see a restriction of places to go to on the internet.
Looks like we wont be able to see episodes of TV-shows or listen to music we haven't payed for. Wat a tragedy.
And also portaiting the EU as something wrong, touches a old hurt with me. The EU has done more things right than most of our national goverments.
Jun 26th 2008 6:50PM Yes, lets trust the words from somebody who work for a firm that had a first time quartely loss of 131 million euros after having to write off 2.7 billion euros of crappy loans
Jun 25th 2008 5:03PM Blessed is he who expects nothing, for he shall never be disappointed
Jun 21st 2008 4:24AM Just read the comic.
Seems our king has a spot of wolverinitis:
-Extremely well at melee
-everytime he walks into a bar, people lose their lives/teeth/limbs
Jun 19th 2008 12:34PM Looks like the changed most of the art-team; The only guy they kept is simonson, the writer.
Kind of ironic since most of the complaints of the comics is the godawfull writing.
It is amusing to see Metzen as a simple "consultant", where is you read the comic you can see Metzen being extremely carefull not to upset current canon. A plus in my opinion.
The bloodelf is still showing a lot of skin, but at least its not"Liefield" idiotic.
I hope they won't make Varian a cardboard cut-out of an unstoppable killing machine that we had in the eighties movies.
I can almost hear the trailers:
They killed his wife, they took him from his child. They thought they could control him. They were wrong.
One man against a dragonflight. They didn't stand a chance.
Jun 18th 2008 5:22PM Still, Matthew, it will be intresting to see how activision and blizzard will handle the merger. Mergers of 2 partners of equal size but different working atmosphere have a change to backfire in the long run.
And this is a change for Blizzard.
Although blizzard used to be part of Vivendi, Vivendi had too much on his hands cleaning up the mess of Messier to take intrest in Blizzard.
They just welcomed the nice income, but they left blizzard alone.
Now blizzard/activision is publicly owned, it could happen that the blizzard-people will have to pay attention to the price of the share.
It could be that the rise of the share is due to the expected revenue from both SC2 and WotlK.
But in the end we should all welcome our Activision overlords
sorry for dubble post but i think i did last post wrong.