Auckland internet cafe nailed for movie piracy

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/technology/news/article.cfm?c_id=5&objectid=10546362

Interesting.. wonder if they blamed patrons??

Altho, the comment from the New Zealand Federation against Copyright Theft (NZFACT) re: Wall-E. "The illegal distribution of movies, particularly movies like Wall-E which had not yet been released in New Zealand cinemas..."

It's been out here for ages hasn't it?

From the same article:

I get the impression that like many anti piracy crowds NZFACT are bascially clueless (just doing my job sonny....)

I am not disputing their right to enforce the law via our legal system but sometimes as a deterrent this may stop some but its not about to stop piracy by any means (just doing my job sonny....)


Re Wall E - this was 2 months before NZ release (sept 18 according to the herald)

Those guys are the same crew who tracked down a couple of DVD pirates in Howick who had something like 100,000 DVDs in their garage... and also the guys who bootlegged "Sione's Wedding" (sp?)

would like to know which cafe

http://www.stuff.co.nz/4788574a12855.html

Htc internet cafe



http://www.nzherald.co.nz/internet/news/article.cfm?c_id=137&objectid=10452390

Sentenced to 300 hours of community service

unrelated but a good read regarding movie pirating

www.nzherald.co.nz/technology/news/article.cfm?c_id=5&objectid=10550551&pnum=0

The definition of irony:

"An angry aXXo got into a dispute with both axxotorrents.com and the torrent portals that chose to host his imitators. The pirate was infuriated by the appropriation of his work - in spite of appropriation being his own stock-in-trade - and ceased uploading altogether until axxotorrents.com agreed to close down its domain name."

Cock.

might very well be a cock (or cunt) but also a reflection on the very human nature of pirating and the people behind it - ie ego and pride in ones work (perhaps)

I personally am fascinated by the sharing ideals of torrent sites

Its all based on self serving justification to get shit for free because you can.

The pride in it is no different to a tagger getting his tag on a freshly painted wall.
Case closed.

I think its a lot more complex than that

I dont believe there is GENUINELY more to it than that.

You could probably apply some liberal anti capitalist mantra "Robin Hood" angle to it but does anyone really believe that they are pirating movies for the good of the human race?
Because if you take that argument to the extreme and everyone pirates everything always then all the movie companies go bust and no more movies (no more good ones anyway). I doubt they can make Transformers 3 off revenue generated from tower ad's on torrent sites.

nah I am not of the robin hood camp

I appreciate the legalities, the notion of ownership and the right for business to prtect itself and the need for companies to turn a profit to be able to create the works that are being pirated

I also believe that businesses have not enabled people to get media in a format nor manner they desire - rather sticking to their dying business models in the vein hope that people will stop doing what is so blindingly easy (and also happens to be free) -yes hindsight is a wonderful thing

its not a simplisitc issue except on the very surface

so are you saying - from an anthropological angle - that humans are revolting due to a psychological evolution that means their need for stimulation has progressed passed the ability to access the fix when needed? Hence you can buy Siones Wedding for $2 at Otara markets?

...cause if you are then I agree this deserves deeper thought...

not quite my angle but along those sorts of lines- as in a black and white sense the whole deabte is very simple, stealing is wrong

human behaviour (past, present and future)
the entire concept of copywrite
captialism / big business / cartels / exploitation of artists / crooked dealings..
etc etc

as I said the entire topic fascinates me

lol. Oversimplification much?

Sure, there is a lot of self-serving justification that goes on in the pirating world, and there's plenty more people who simply don't care enough to bother justifying their behaviours at all. But there are others still who have genuine qualms with the concept of copyright law, or at least in the way that it's enforced. For them, the ideals that dictate their behaviours online are a form of protest.

Some may call it oversimplification - I call it cutting the crap. Im pretty most reasonable people would agree with me in principle

If you dont like dealing with copyright, don't watch licensed/copyrighted product. If you dont like having to pay a registration, don't drive a car.

Easily solved.

Unless the argument is for chaos. I can understand this point of view. Heck it might even be fun.

prior to copywrite somehow the world's artists managed

post copywrite they will to

the businesses that exist only to exploit other peoples copywrite won't

You mean prior to the Statute of Queen Anne in 1709?

You've got me, Im not familiar with this period in history so can no longer proficiently partake in this debate. Good day sir.

Being a conscientious objector is lazy, and some would consider it being merely a passive part of the problem. Look it's exactly the same reason people take illegal drugs, why people drive 58km/hr, why people run through traffic lights at 2am. People know the law, they understand the reason for the law, and they might even agree with the law by principle. But that doesn't stop intelligent people from making decisions for when a by-the-book breach of the law DOESN'T breach the underlying principles the law tries to protect.

We run red-lights because we understand the law is there to promote safety; but when you're the only one on the road at 3am, it's irrelevant. Driving 58k on a big road on a fine day where you're the only one around same thing. And it's the same thing with a lot of piracy.

I've downloaded big expensive graphics programs before like CS3/CS4 because I thought it would be fun to muck around in. But do my actions represent any loss for the copyright owner? NO. Because I NEVER would've bought it anyway. That is one rational reason for piracy. Another is that acts as sort of 'preview' for good movies that I will later buy. I have an extensive DVD collection. Nearly all of them are movies I've downloaded first, loved, and so decided to buy (or go watch at the cinema with friends). Did my actions represent a loss for the industry there? NO.

So yes, your argument is very much an oversimplification. The argument against piracy is an extremely complex one, and "cutting the crap" as you call it just doesn't cut it

1709 - well yes and no