The Nick Dan Dyke Show, 2/12/12

Dina, Nick and Danny reconnect for a show about torrents. The TRO Web Guy also joins in to legitimize what normally is a lot a BS from the cast about all things tech.

www.youhavedownloaded.com

6 comments to The Nick Dan Dyke Show, 2/12/12

  • rmsrmsrms1

    .
    .
    There is one aspect of Bit Torrenting which you did not mention. It is considered good etiquette to re-seed anything you download so as to achieve a 1 to 1 ratio. Which is why in bit torrent programs, there is a column showing the download to upload ratio. There is a term in the bit torrenting community for those who don’t. They are called “leeches”.

    Re-seeding just means to keep your bit torrent program running until you have re-seeded as much as you have downloaded.

  • Curveball

    There is a term for people who “share” copyrighted content like BBC programs like “Top Gear” of which Marc has a liking. That term is “PIRATE”. It is a crime against the global corporatocracy. In some countries this law is taken seriously. In most is it not. There are two types of BitTorrent file sharers: a: foreign individuals living in countries where they are immune from media coronations’ lawyers; or b: Americans too dumb to know they are sharing or too naive to know the danger they are putting themselves in by sharing copyrighted content. I am not in the former due to my location. I do not intend to be in the former for reasons that do not require an explanation if you have sense to understand the aforementioned. If you share non-copyrighted content, you probably spend a very long time finding anything on the torrent tracking sites that fits your bill.

  • CW

    It is being taken seriously. PIPA and SOPA are not dead, they are just being written in as amendments to other laws and will become rule of land soon enough. This is why I stated to use the torrent at your own risk.

  • rmsrmsrms1

    There is another aspect! While the purest might say ANY downloading of any copy-righted material is illegal, others may ague that there is always a scale of right or wrong. Instead of being black and whit, that there is some grayness. For example:

    * I am already a cable subscriber so supposedly AMC is getting a (very) small chunk of my cable bill payment. I missed the newest episode of The Walking Dead. So I download it via bit torrent, watch it and then delete it. Was that a crime? By bit torrenting I skipped the commercials – but had I recorded it from AMC on my DVR I would have fast-forward through the commercials too.

    * I am watching Tuner Classic Movies and they have “How the West was Won” on. I record it on my DVR. I want to watch it with my friend when I visit him in Salt Lake City. Now I could play the movie back in real time – feeding it into my computer video capture card and saving it that way in order to view later in Salt Lake City or to save time I could simply bit torrent it. In my mind I had a legal right to view the movie since I am paying the cable company in order to receive Tuner Classic Movies. I am not boot-legging it, just wanting to time-delay my viewing of it.

    * If I wanted to watch The Wizard of OZ which has been on free tv hundred of times now and I bit torrent it instead – how much of a crime is that?

    * Even if I did torrent a 2 year old movie who am I hurting? I am not costing the film company anything. Because my other choice would have been a video store / Redbox / or Netflicks. I have looked this up in the past and when one rent a movie, the studio DOES NOT get a cut per say (as in a royalty). They sell the DVDs in bulk for say $20 to the video store / Redbox / or Netflicks and then they rent it. So if anyone got “cheated”, it would have been the video store / Redbox / or Netflicks owner who lost out on the profits of a rental charge.

    I could go on but the longer a post the less likely it gets read.

  • rmsrmsrms1

    .
    .
    As for a solution, here is one.

    Instead of say Sony Pictures, selling their dvd’s to video store / Redbox / or Netflicks. Why don’t they open their own online rental downloading service and keep ALL the profits for themselves. They could sell the films for say $9.95 or use one of those systems that for $1 you get to view the films for a one-week period.

  • CW

    Rmsrmsrms1, Your talking logic. Hollywood and Politicians don’t understand this type of language. :)

Leave a Reply