The end of File Sharing ?!
 

So I noticed on Monday night when I went to the Piratebay to download Mad Men, Weeds, and several other shows that something was up. Now it seems that all torrents are dead, and there are lots of stories about the demise of the site which was the main portal for file sharing:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10316895-93.html?tag=mncol;mlt_related

For me this sucks, because I really enjoyed the convenience of torrents.

Anybody else thinks this will be a longterm setback to filesharing? or do I just need to download some new software...;)

It was nice while it lasted, but we all knew this day was coming. :(

gee, not able to steal content? What a shame...

anchor a ship in Int'l waters and stick a big sat. dish on it.

bingo - free stealing again (except for the cost of the ship/hulk)

I agree. It's a shame. :)

'The Swedish court ordered Black Internet ISP to remove the Pirate Bay. It went down for about three hours until it was re-located and put live again outside the U.S. It returned stateside Tuesday morning.'

Just wondering, would you consider it "stealing" if you subscribe to HBO but missed an episode of say True Blood and went to download it to catch up with what is on your Tivo. (S/0 deleted an episode.)

Probably not, as you have paid HBO and hence the content creators have been compensated.

My guess is that most file sharing doesn't fit that description.

Come up with a distribution model where the consumer doesn't feel like he's getting ass-raped and a good part of the problem will go away ala iTunes. I'm not paying $20 for a CD with 1 decent song and 19 filler tracks. In my mind, you're stealing from me.

I loved CD singles back in the day, but the labels got greedy and killed the format.

You can't legislate-away file sharing; the only chance you have is to come up with a competitive model.

Usenet

alt.binaries

HD content

No problem

well put Thom

piratebay still works for me.
something is up, as many of the torrents are listed with 0 seeders, but they still work, does take some time before they start ticking though..
They are probably moving some gear around, or rebooted something , so the tracker now lists 0 for most of the torrents..

I don't see how they can shutdown bittorrent completely, it can run on any port, and the trackers can be switched over in no time... put one down, 5 others take their place... Big effing deal.
All they need is a backup of the DB... and some other hardware in another location via another uplink...

I expect that in the very near future, somebody will bring out a way to have a site like TPD run distributed as well... A bit like Seti at home..
Then all that's remaining would be a DNS record with a low TTL, with a simple http page pointing to the distributed parts...

The only thing they can really do to stop it, is to block the DNS name at the end user's ISP. Which is a commercial problem, since for many , if blocked, they will change ISP.
And it only work for now, with the distributed model, a user would still be able to snatch the current IP's or http page from a mirror...
(and with the current model, torrents are quite often found on multiple trackers at the same time anyway)

If all that doesn't float yer boat... then encryption can be brought in as a core functionalty ( it's there now in the BTclient , but optional , and not used for the trackers yet).

That's the internet for you, a product of the cold war, designed to work when a hot war came about...
It's designed with redundancy in mind, designed to workaround blockages, crashes and sabotage...

People in my business (film, TV shows, commercials) are really suffering. A lot of people I know that use to make a decent living working in these fields have lost their jobs or have left because they can no longer support their life styles off the industry.
Rates are plummeting, work is evaporating and the industry is struggling to find a way to produce content without relying on the traditional income sources.
Not all the money goes to "greedy corporations".
I've been in the camera department thirty years. I spent a long time learning my craft and honing my skills to become a Director of Photography.
The amount of competition for jobs that don't pay anything close to what they did a few years ago is scary, and a lot of us are wondering how things are going to work out when the public expects what we do for a living to be provided for "free" to them. In a way it has been for years because TV and MOW's where paid by the Networks or Cable providers and recouped by advertisers, but by downloading that source of revenue is eliminated.
So who is going to make these shows in the future if you can just get what you want when you want, bypassing any ROI on the product. It makes for a pretty tough business model!
I don't expect my lawyer, Doctor or the guy flying the plane to my shoot in Vancouver to work for free. I'm just curious why what I do should be?!
Most of you would be as completely lost stepping onto a sound stage or arriving on location and lighting a set and running a crew as I would be in your job, yet most people have no problem at all with me not being paid for what I do.
Not all shows make money and most shows that enter development ( spending money on them) never get made or reach the screen or tube, just like a CD. Everyone thinks the public is going to love their work, but they don't always, and unfortunately you still have to develop them and produce them to find out. That usually means a lot of people working and we would like to be paid so we can continue to provide you entertainment.
I know someone will always want to do my job and people (myself included) are doing it for a lot less than we use to charge, but there may be a day when you just get someone who can take a picture not craft a series of images enhancing the escapism you are trying to enjoy. Then wait till you hear the complaints about the "crap Hollywood puts out".
Stealing is still stealing and if the people who paid for the production wanted to give it away that should be their choice not yours.
That's why it's illegal, they paid for it, they own it, not you.
Steve Vernon csc

I don't want to pay for cable and get all the crappy channels along with the few shows that are actually decent. Eventually there will be a business model where for a small fee I can legally download the show I want to see without commercials and watch it whenever I want. For now downloading online happens to be free and I can watch what I want when I want. If the networks can't figure out a way to adapt that's their fault. Apple seems to have worked out a good solution with itunes, no?

I doubt file sharing is hurting the film/TV industry as much as they like to say it is.

Of the hundred or so folks in my social circle, only 1 or 2 have any clue about torrents, much less have the inclination to download and watch tv on their computer. Without a multi media device to view the .avi's on a real tv, torrents are almost useless, unless you have a very comfortable computer chair and a huge screen.

Searching out a reliable source, downloading the show for an hour or two, transferring it to a multi media device (or streaming it for those in the know) and then ultimately watching it takes dedication and a strong desire not to pay for premium tv. A vast minority of tv watchers will put up with that much effort. Actually goes against what most people watch tv for - relaxation.

Most of the network shows are available for free on sites owned by the networks.

If the industry is struggling. I am betting that it is because of the crappy content causing viewers to find other things to occupy their free time. I, for one, rarely watch network TV since every show is the same crap. Its either cops, docs, sports or fake reality shows.

The premium tv shows are much better. 95-99% of the folks I know all pay for premium tv.

That is exactly what I'm talking about. No one sets out to produce things no one wants to watch. But even with all the testing and focus groups in the world some people are going to hate it, but what you may hate someone else is loving.
There will eventually be be a model where you can do exactly what you are describing but in the mean time you are stealing.
It's only free to you because you are stealing it, they are not offering it to you for free

Steve

Many, MANY artists lost me as a customer due to their (or their proxy's) draconian stance on file sharing.

Before, they actually made money off me as I would "try before I buy". Now I do neither.

This is why I gave up on my rock star ambitions. ;)

When I produced the Simpleflower album, I put tracks out for free. But that was my choice and supported by the rest of the band.

What things in life do you get to "try before you buy"? That's what radio is for or your friends. While you can argue that digital networks have created a huge group of "friends", the original business models were not made with that in mind. Certainly things need to change and iTunes has gotten a fair amount right. But evidently a significant people would rather steal content rather than paying for it. I will bet money that people are downloading content from sharing sites that is available for a reasonable price at iTunes.

Free usually wins, especially when people don't fear repercussions. I think it is a combination of lack of knowledge (evidently some people think that downloading doesn't hurt anyone) and just moral relativism. People would be pretty pissed off if someone walked into their house and took some of their stuff, but it is ok to download "free" music because it either is just hurting "the man" or there isn't a "fair" model.

To many people, far more than you would expect, I am afraid the level of morality is proportional to the risk of getting caught.