Jack - I focused on one point.
The person claimed his computer was hacked into.
It wasn't.
If I stand on a street corner screaming that I have WinXP for free to anyone who wants it. I don't get to complain about it when people find out.
Broadcast file sharing networks are not private.
People need to understand that - them maybe we can work on securing them.
Phone networks are point to point connections.
The nature of the file sharing networks are not.
If we were doing VPN tunnels to share files yes I'd agree with you. But the current state of p2p is nothing like a phone call.
* I just keep editting this as I think of stuff.
Back to the street corner - closer to the method we use in p2p. If people walk up to me and ask if I have drugs/nukes/small children and I say yes.... only to then find out that they are a cop I can't claim it wasn't fair.
If you don't know who you're trading with you assume a level of risk. If you are comfortable with that level, trade away. If not, come up with something better.
Quote:
Originally posted by JackSpratts
i disagree. points of law are rarely so simple. for instance it's "great" that record companies can claim digital networks are somehow so fundamentally different from what came before them that they require whole new laws to regulate them. but are they really? i don't think so. consider telephone conversations, occurring on huge global digital networks. they are considered so private and untouchable even the government can't access them without court ordered warrants, even ones broadcast over the air on cell-nets, even advertised ones like 800 and 900 numbers.
just because a copyright holder sees a potential land grab doesn’t make it legal, or even moral. warner bros. is acting in neither capacity in this instance. just temporarily powerful perhaps, like a bully.
- js.
|