Digital Britain Report: Free Broadband/File sharing clampdown

290Gb/month is the equivalent of 61 DVDs or 484 CDs a month.

Look, I'm not against filesharing, I torrent at times for stuff. I just don't accept 99% of the excuses that the freetards use to come up to justify their actions. (A film you want to watch has not released in Russia? 61 of them? Every month?) People pleading poverty about Blu-Ray being overpriced, then download a Blu-Ray disc and to play on their $500 Blu-Ray player, through their $1000 stereo and their $2000 plasma. Come on - don't piss on my back and tell me it is raining.

Similar, I don't accept 99% of the excuses the RIAA et al come up with to excuse their actions either, but they've been done to death.

It is a bit like speeding. We all do it. 80mph in a 70 zone. 45 in a 40. But this is like doing 90 in a 30.

Or to use a less rubbish analogy, walking into the CD section of a supermarket and shoplifting the entire stock.

I agree entirely - I have 1 or 2 shows I watch online, becuase they are either not available to me - e.g. only shown on Sky (which I cannot get in my rented house) or to catch myself up with what is on the TV. I also am not always entirely honest with the rental disks - but at least I pay for them once before I take a copy.
 
My own torrenting has pretty much stopped since the launch of the iPlayer.

Who'd have thought making this stuff easily and conveniently available would actually help stop people getting it via other means?
</sarcasm>
 
Cds, DVDs, i forgot what it is already. For me it's mostly BD-Remux (up to 30GB each), DVD-Audio (rarely), foreign TV-Shows and Sports in 720p (1.2GB per 40min) and so on, it's just not available here at all.

So if you add general traffic to that, adds up to maybe 4-5 movies a month (at best), 99% of which get deleted immediately after viewing, the same with TV-Shows, i don't really store anything unless i am editing it for sharing purposes.

Also if you want to make a HQ BD rip, not only you have to download the uncompressed source (40GB), also the existing rips, usually 2-3 (up to 20gb each) to see what's right or wrong with them, then additional russian audio (up to 2gb if DTS), so to make a good one you need to download 100gb of stuff (i.e. 120 hours of downloading).

And no, i don't have a BD player or a 1000$ Audio, all i have is a 3.000$ 52' Samsung TV (bought several months ago), my PC (2y/o), second 450$ mATX pc designated to play HD stuff, connected to TV only and a basic 300$ Creative 5:1 audio system, that's it.

I would gladly buy a BD player if there was a decent selection of discs, but there isn't.

Stuff that i actualy store i always buy, if available, like a set of LOTR movies, Matrix and a few others.
 
Last edited:
But thats the point isn't it? You don't have to have HD rips, but you've spent the money on the big fancy telly. Why not just rent them? Or go to the cinema? Your life isn't any poorer for not seeing X film three seconds after release in the US or in old, fashuioned honest to goodness DVD quality. Heck, even justin.tv suffices, because that last minute equaliser isn't any sweeter because you can see the blades of grass on the ball.

(Please believe me, I don't mean that to sound personal BTW, I'm arguing with the abstract "you", not the personal "you"!)

I just get annoyed at people who say "well, I want to see X telly show" when it is broadcast three days later on a local channel. Where did the concept of patience disappear to?

290Gb isn't file sharing, it is file hogging. Me, me, me, must have data, om nom nom, take it all, give nothing back.
 
Let's end this, as it's getting long and quite boring.

Final though: i never "stole" a movie or a show to save money on it, i only "stole" to get the actual original product i wanted, either there was the time factor or the availability factor and i am using all the means available to overcome those.

As to traffic consumtion, at this day in 2009 Gigabyte is practically nothing, 100GB is 4 HQ movies at best, and that 100 Gigabytes you downloaded cost your ISP not more than 1$. Not to forget that modern networks can transfer exobytes so there isn't a question of clogging up the gateways either, so what we are talking about here?

It's not because i download BD sources and make rips the RIAA and similar companies started cooperating with ISPs, sharing of large files is the least popular sharing group in the world, it's the small easy stuff, the music, the tv-shows and software that gets to them, and as long as they keep treating their clients like idiots, by offering low quality product, by not letting try something out, by creating certain distribution boundaries, ppl will keep using the means to get round that. And as i can see where file sharing is headed, the fight is gonna continue at about the same rate.
 
Last edited:
Difference is, the proper way means all the writers and actors get paid. Even if the end product is shitty.
 
290Gb isn't file sharing, it is file hogging. Me, me, me, must have data, om nom nom, take it all, give nothing back.

Of cource it is, but what you are forgetting is I am not downloading P2P I have no desire to get into the fileshareing. I am paying for access to a server for download capability, the legality of paying for this service I am not getting into but file shareing ain't part and parcel of the deal. Eveything I obtain remembeing that I don't watch networked TV on any level is for my own personal use and not giving out to any Tom, Dick or Harry with an IP from anywhere around the globe.
 
Top