Mininova.

[naledge]

I'm honestly heartbroken.

I would hate to violate Rule 15 again so I will try to watch what I say.

Recently they (basically) shut down one of the greatest torrent sites that ever graced our screens.

Mininova was involved in a court battle that forced it to remove all illegal content from the website, all of that delicious illegal content - just gone.

For anyone that doesn't know, Mininova provided torrents hosted by other people to download games, videos, music etc.

My vision for the world is to have the internet like international waters - anything goes.

The internet should be out of everyone's jurisdiction, that's just the way I think it should be. The internet is global so I don't think it should be policed.

I'm starting to get worried, all these court battles against great websites, The Pirate Bay, Mininova... when will it end?

Next they'll start targeting warez sites.

And if Stephen Conroy gets his way - so many legitimate websites, legitimate businesses and every pornography site will be blocked. All of these legal websites gone.

The internet should be free. Information should be free. Forcing people to take down websites or setting up a filter that blocks legitimate, legal websites is as bad as burning books.

The filter planned for Australia (if it ever gets through, I doubt it will be allowed... yet. It will happen eventually though) will raise internet prices and lower speed dramatically. It will also block so much legal content, legal information.

That, I fear, is the first step towards Australia becoming a police state.

I seem to have gotten a bit off topic, but hopefully my point has been made clearly.

Again, I am in no way Promoting Illegal Activity. - Just saying that I wish it was legal xD

 

[craig.a.c]

I used Mininova for years.
As far as it getting shut down, so be it. It does promote illegal activities.

 

[Shonfield]

just move on to the next site... pirate bay and packetfind it is for me for now.
they will never destroy them faster than they are put up.

 

[craig.a.c]

Mininova is still running, just downloaded a few torrents.

 

[Cabotinage]

torrentz is what i have "heard" is a good site "apperntly" you just type in what you want and then a number of torrent sites come up even piratebay you can link off haha just dont use monova. bitjunkie i use if i cant find the others

edit: arnt they trying to put optic wire to make our internet faster? oh and also where ranked around 32 in the world for average internet speed with i think ubeckastan (spelling?) with around 64mb/p/s and there fastest is around 80mb/p/s

Edit: heres the site http://www.zdnet.com.au/broadband/results.htm?result=1285

my internet speed was liek 1285kb/p/s whats yours
http://www.zdnet.com.au/broadband/speedtest.htm

 

[DonkeyKong]

Torrents are crap. Warez sites are the way to go.

P.S Heaps of warez sites have been taken down!!

 

[cris]

Im agaisnt the filter idea, but if you are going to run an illegal website it should be done in a country that wont prosecute or its only a matter of time until the someone comes after them.

Remember napster,kazaa? Whatever happens somehow ppl still manage to illegally share info, so i wouldnt worry too much.

 

[Asharee133]

aah, thats why i couldn't get kazaa, and pirate bay all the way!

 

[naledge]

Torrents are crap. Warez sites are the way to go.

P.S Heaps of warez sites have been taken down!!

Here here!

The laws are getting tighter, people are starting to fight against internet piracy, I think we will be seeing more and more sites dropping soon.

 

[Steman]

i just got an infringement notice today for downloading a movie. so it is being tracked

 

[naledge]

i just got an infringement notice today for downloading a movie. so it is being tracked

Infringement notice? From who?

 

[Vixen]

Edit: Wrong account - Method here..

 

[wiz-fiz]

are lime/frost wire torrents? and some of there stuff has viruses does pirate bay or whatever its called have viruses?


Will

 

[method]

Alot of the major companies are putting out torrents themselves these days to track people, that way they can see every ip that connects through to them and attempts to leach the movie. They will then contact your internet provider reporting you've been using there service to access copyright material which is against the contract you signed when you sign up with your net. They'll then send you an infringement notice and usually a warning, 2nd time and they'll cut your connection and contract.

More common then you think and I know people who have had their service cut after just one infringement notice.

 

[naledge]

Alot of the major companies are putting out torrents themselves these days to track people, that way they can see every ip that connects through to them and attempts to leach the movie. They will then contact your internet provider reporting you've been using there service to access copyright material which is against the contract you signed when you sign up with your net. They'll then send you an infringement notice and usually a warning, 2nd time and they'll cut your connection and contract.

More common then you think and I know people who have had their service cut after just one infringement notice.

Damn.
Back to warez I go.

 

[SyKeD]

Alot of the major companies are putting out torrents themselves these days to track people, that way they can see every ip that connects through to them and attempts to leach the movie. They will then contact your internet provider reporting you've been using there service to access copyright material which is against the contract you signed when you sign up with your net. They'll then send you an infringement notice and usually a warning, 2nd time and they'll cut your connection and contract.

More common then you think and I know people who have had their service cut after just one infringement notice.

Do you know how many people would lose there net because of that???... The internet is built on piracy.. If they cut people off there services for downloading copyright material the internet, optus telstra iinet and many more names would lose millions if not billions..... I do find it really hard to find that they are tracking people..there is not one person out there that uses the internet for its proper uses...

 

[=bECS=]

Best way to go is straight off of a FTP

 

[=bECS=]

Alot of the major companies are putting out torrents themselves these days to track people, that way they can see every ip that connects through to them and attempts to leach the movie. They will then contact your internet provider reporting you've been using there service to access copyright material which is against the contract you signed when you sign up with your net. They'll then send you an infringement notice and usually a warning, 2nd time and they'll cut your connection and contract.

More common then you think and I know people who have had their service cut after just one infringement notice.

Heres an article that may interest some, granted it is in the UK but it looks like it is whats to come:

For regular readers of TorrentFreak, this fresh news can hardly come as a surprise. The supposed anti-piracy scheme originally pioneered in the UK in conjunction with lawyers Davenport Lyons rolls on, but now in the hands of ACS:Law and their partners DigiProtect.


Although there is an insistence that the project is aimed at reducing piracy, in reality piracy is the scheme’s lifeblood, providing healthy profits for all concerned, except the original rightsholders that is.


On November 19th at the Royal Courts of Justice in London, ACS:Law made NPO (Norwich Pharmacal Order) applications in order to force ISPs to hand over the names and addresses of subscribers the company claims infringed their client’s rights.


The NPO’s related to approximately 25,000 IP addresses harvested from UK ISP BT’s subscriber base and a further 5,000 from various other ISPs, covering approximately 291 movie titles.


Present at the hearing before Chief Master Winegarten (CMW) were Andrew Crossley and Terence Tsang from ACS:Law, representatives from UK ISP BT and three representatives from consumer outfit Which?, who previously made official complaints regarding the conduct of Davenport Lyons. Also present were two individuals previously wrongly accused, who are regulars at the support site BeingThreatened.com.


Before the hearing began, CMW noted that he had received letters of complaint from the public about the scheme. As reported to TorrentFreak by those present, during the hearing Andrew Crossley made some interesting comments.


After CMW expressed interest in what happens to an accused infringer after the court order is granted and a letter sent, Crossley said that his company was not suggesting that the recipient is definitely guilty in all cases, but the Internet account holder who receives the letter could perhaps help them to identify the person who had actually carried out the infringement.


It is worth noting that ISP account holders are not liable for copyright infringement carried out on his/her connection if a) they did not carry it out themselves or cool.gif did not authorize any infringement. If they did neither they can simply write back to ACS:Law explaining that the accusation against them has been made in error.


Furthermore, if the account holder does not know who did carry out the infringement, they should state in their reply that is the case. It is then up to ACS:Law to find the real infringer based on their evidence they hold. This is impossible for them without the account holder pointing the finger.


In justifying his application for the court order, Crossley said that they do it because “businesses are failing, jobs are being lost,” while citing dubious IFPI statistics (95% of all music is pirated) to justify his case.


CMW asked Crossley how long the scheme would continue for, who replied “…for as long as P2P file-sharing continues Master.”


Another NPO was applied for by ACS:Law on behalf of a new-comer to the scheme, a company called Media C.A.T. Ltd.


Little is known about them and their website is currently suspended, but searches reveal that the company is involved in the premium SMS market – one page states “Premium Rate Telephone Riches – How To Make £500 A Week” – quite what they have to do copyright holders and anti-piracy is unclear. It does appear, however, that their Managing Director Lee Bowden has previous links to Andrew Crossley and, just like him, will be in this for the money.


When CMW asked why rightsholders were dealing with Media C.A.T and not directly with DigiProtect, Crossley said that “[Media C.A.T] happen to operate in the UK…dealing with UK companies…”


In referring to the scheme ACS:Law and DigiProtect operate in respect of these hardcore porn titles, Crossley tried to suggest that they were doing a public service by helping to prevent the sharing of restricted movies on P2P.


CMW responded by noting that “[this is] not a moral crusade” and that in his opinion, ACS:Law and DigiProtect were doing this “…because you want the money.”


Recipients of past and future letters are invited to view the excellent BeingThreatened website, whose users provided invaluable help in compiling this report.


Article from: TorrentFreak,

30,000 Internet Users to Receive File-Sharing Cash Demands | TorrentFreak

and heres another interesting one:
http://torrentfreak.com/anti-piracy-outfits-demand-cash-without-proof-091129/

 

[Pythonking]

Internet service provider iiNet is being sued by seven Hollywood movie studios for failing to disconnect users who allegedly swapped pirated movies via BitTorrent.



Internet service provider iiNet is being sued by seven Hollywood movie studios for failing to disconnect users who allegedly swapped pirated movies via BitTorrent, potentially paving the way for Australia's biggest legal case yet on Internet copyright.
A press release from the Australian Federation Against Copyright Theft issued today revealed that seven big-name studios had filed suit against iiNet, which is said to have ignored repeated requests to disconnect users said to be involved in illegal content swapping.
Village Roadshow, Universal, Warner Bros, Paramount, Sony, Twentieth Century Fox and Disney are the studios involved. Channel Seven (which has distribution deals with several of the named studios) is also a party to the suit.
“iiNet refused to address this illegal behaviour and did nothing to prevent the continuation of the infringements by the same customers," AFACT executive director Adrianne Pecotic said in a statement. "iiNet has an obligation under the law to take steps to prevent further known copyright infringement via its network."
iiNet chief operating officer Mark White told APC that iiNet would be consulting with the Internet Industry Association to formulate a response.
"Our view is pretty straightforward. We don't condone or support piracy in any form, and people who choose to pirate content should face the force of the law," he said. "This is an industry issue, and we've been talking with the IIA, and we'll work with them in terms of handling it."
It appears no individuals have been singled out as part of the lawsuit "They don't write to us with a person, they write to us with an IP address," White said.
The selection of iiNet as a target seems somewhat ironic, given that the ISP is one of the most active promoters of legal access to copyrighted content. iiNet subscribers can access paid-for content on the iTunes store and the ABC's iView service without it being counted against their download cap.
"We believe that people want access to content, and we're very keen for people to get access to it at the lowest price possible on a legal basis," White said.
The action was filed in the Federal Court today (November 20), and will return to the court on December 17.

 

[JungleRob]

This site has such double standards, and I'll probably get another infringement for this, but I don't give a rats backside.

I get blasted by the mods on here for next to nothing, yet clearly illegal activity is being discussed/encouraged in this thread and NOTHING gets done about it.

Here comes a forced 2 week holiday from APS.... LOL!!!!