a perhaps stupid question
-
@luckow said in a perhaps stupid question:
What is today's use case for Bittorrent?
Still mostly for downloading pirated content, I guess. For things that are on other streaming services, or no longer on any of them.
e.g. I recently downloaded a TV show that was streamed and broadcast on terrestrial UK TV but was no longer available on the official channel steam.
I sometimes also download music (e.g. if I can't just grab it off bandcamp or youtube)
But yeah, also downloading latest versions of Ubuntu etc.
And for sharing loads of files. At one point I think I had a torrent for everything I've got over at https://library.ud.coop - in fact I'd like to do that again now I think of it...
-
If you don't care for tracking, commercials, ads, paid/streaming services, DRM hassle, incompetence, censorship, accounts/walled gardens, sloppy commercial offerings, etc.
Once any thing "airs" and is broadcast, it is freed in the public domain.
Efficiency and convenience in other words. It just works.
-
@robi said in a perhaps stupid question:
Efficiency and convenience in other words. It just works.
Yeah, we've got Netflix and Disney+ accounts, but I sometimes still just download whole seasons of shows that are on there anyway to be able to watch them offline on trains etc.
-
I use it to download Ubuntu iso's primarily. This is just by habit I guess since I do have a fiber connection at home
Back in the day, I used lime<something> for pirated stuff. I forget what it was called.
-
It was LimeWire - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LimeWire
"A trial investigating the damages necessary to compensate the affected record labels was scheduled to begin in January 2011.[10] As a result of the injunction, the RIAA initially suggested that LimeWire was responsible for $72 trillion in damages, before eventually settling for $105 million.[11][12] Thereafter, the company stopped distributing the LimeWire software, and versions 5.5.11 and newer have been disabled using a backdoor installed by the company. "
Holy cow!
-
@robi said in a perhaps stupid question:
Once any thing "airs" and is broadcast, it is freed in the public domain.
Errrr…. no. Not the case in almost all jurisdictions I know of (US, EU). The so called „exhaustion doctrine“ allows for re-sale of legally obtained copies, not for broadcast / making accessible (illegally obtained) copies.
-
@necrevistonnezr I guess @robi meant de facto not de jure.
Whether legal or not the fact is most things are publicly available after they've been "aired"
-
@girish said in a perhaps stupid question:
the RIAA initially suggested that LimeWire was responsible for $72 trillion in damages, before eventually settling for $105 million.
Absurd. They are responsible for $0 damages.
Are hammer makers responsible for people who use them to damage other things?
Imagine a bully suing you for not giving him your lunch money as it impacts his business of extorsion and weekly revenue.
It's all about greed, hence they settled for less.
If you want mindshare, respect and paying customers make a better product and be of service like Cloudron devs have, not extorsion for crap that damages humanity.
-
Well, the Limewire guy was able to shell out $105 million since Limewire generated $26 million in revenue in 2006 with distributing music (and sales climbed after that) - without paying ANY musician, song writer, or other rights holder.
He kept his $ 4 million (in 2010!) house in NYC and all his other holdings and funds.
So, who is the greedy one? -
@necrevistonnezr The guy yes, the software no.
