Poll: Do users prefer a network with warez or chat?

disting · none Joined: 08 Oct 2003 Posts: 43

umm Warez..its legal or illegal..is it..if any one think like that..
why kazza , imesh,napsrat..still exoist with their own proud......its also simillar like kazza,imesh,napstar, simply.. user-user connection sharing pc..if any one got a remote desktop conntection or remote access..every one will try to get some from that end...Kazza.imesh..is the same...just sharing file.......like that....

zeke · Idler Joined: 04 Oct 2003 Posts: 321

File sharing is not illegal. File sharing protocols are not illegal. Sharing copyrighted files without "ownership" of those copyrights (if you really want me to I can explain basically what ownership means in that sentence) is illegal. The problem is not the ability to share, its what people use the ability for. Guns are good tools. They can be used for killing animals, which are then cooked and eaten. They are also bad tools. They can be used for killing people. Some people would also cook and eat them. Warez, by its nature, is the sharing of illegal files. Porn, illegal mp3's (mp3 itself isn't illegal), cracked software, etc.
File-sharing == Legal
Warez == Illegal
Why? Simply because Warez is the file sharing of illegal files....shooting animals is legal, shooting people is not. Go figure...

If that made sense the first time you read it - well done..

angelic · Lurker Joined: 01 Aug 2003 Posts: 148

lol zeke *gets coffee before she reads it again*

This is a topic i recenly spent a lot of time thinking about. I'm lucky in that i manage a small (200+) chat network that doesn't have any warez channels.

But recently a couple of my opers openly shared some copyrighted files, and this made me think. I'm guilty of this too, i love my mp3 script that splays my songs to channels, i'd happily send a song to anyone to asks, though i didn't use warez channels, i did use p2p software to find and download songs. Even my Dad asked me to download Christmas songs for him (my dad like almost 60 and has never used the internet!).

Okay, i want to run a "chat" network, i want it to be professional, so the puplic file sharing between opers was discussed and stopped.

And me personally? If i get a song i like, i tend to buy the album, so in my head it didn't seem as bad, but it is illegal, and just because it's common place, and everyone does it, and it's now a part of online life for most people doesn't make it *right*. Being a supporter of opensource and it's philosophies "stealing" music started to make me feel uneasy.

So i deleted all my songs... all 5000+ of them, got rid of my ftp server and stopped sharing.

I'm not saying warez and file sharing is wrong, or passing judgement, but if you really think about what you're doing, and how easy it is, and how we do it without thought now, it's quite scary.

I wouldn't walk into a music store every night and just help myself to 10 cd's.

zeke · Idler Joined: 04 Oct 2003 Posts: 321

I know although I have nearly (maybe more) than 1000 mp3's on my comp...a lot are legal, those that aren't I'll make legal as I can afford to. The legal with mp3 goes something like "24-hour trial period" - 24 months? *shrugz* Warez has its place...a place which needs to be clearly defined with rules to stick to....coz when people with $$ could just as easily drive to the mall and buy the CD...they deserve to get caught...

*even if you get my posts the second time thru..its still good going =P*

zeke · Idler Joined: 04 Oct 2003 Posts: 321

is it just me or did that make it look like i totally changed my point of view on the subject? I didn't intend to...

angelic · Lurker Joined: 01 Aug 2003 Posts: 148

no you didn't... did you? lala

I love apples idea, being able to download tracks for really really reasonable prices i think is the way to go, just waiting for it to be available in the UK, i just wish there was an easy cross over with money online for kids.

Also.. somewhere in the back of my mind i keep thinking... if these people were really in it for the music.. and not just the money.. their "music" would be available freely online, it wouldn't stop me buying it.. lala

Toni / angelic

U · Eleet Joined: 18 Jun 2003 Posts: 521 Location: IRC

I don't think its a matter of confusion, its simply the fact the larger networks have had warez on them for so long, its not something to be easily rid of. Dalnet took the steps to do it and look what happened to them-they got hammered for it.

I think the only way you can have a pure non-warez network now is to start it that way-and hope you're never approached to host a channel. If you are, hope its a friendly group who will just move to the next network if you say no, and hopefully they will be, but if you have them already, displacing them will probably result in attacks.

But, with P2P going the way it is, its definetely not going away. Will I forbid it on my network? No. Will I disclaim everywhere that the persons in the channel are responsible first? Yes. Will this protect me? I'm not sure-depends on what the legal arena views it as, but as of right now I don't have alot of it anyway, so there are other 'major' networks out there that will be hit way before I am, hopefully.

Part of the problem too is where the definition of Warez has gone. Warez used to be the sharing of software that was allowed, ie shareware repositories. Now it encompasses everything from illegal software (which should be the responsibility of the person handing it out) to music files, to pornography, to well, just about anything thats DCC'd is sometimes defined as it, depending on who you ask.

If you're into pure chat, thats cool, and hey, if you want to run a network that way, thats definetely your business. My point however is, Warez isn't going away just yet on the IRC landscape. I'm not going to block it simply because I don't think its right to block out a major part of IRC users, doesn't mean I have an issue with it, though. I just won't be forbidding it and restricting what users can do on my network. They are responsible for thier own actions until the law proves me different, and so far, that has been effective. Some channels have shied away because of that policy, but, so to speak, if you're going to do the crime, you have to be willing to do the crime-don't expect my network to take the fall for your actions, you're welcome to do so-but don't think we're going to take the bullet for you either. You want to have a warez channel on my network, ok fine-but its your channel and thus your responsibility then. I don't think thats too much to ask Smile

Have a good holiday, Wiggle. (and everyone else)

Shareware not sharewarez · Guest

Far as I know, warez has never referred to anything other than illegal trading of copyrighted software.

I've heard a lot of things where people try to justify warez. I've heard stories ranging from "It's just shareware!", to "Warez is a type of Chinese food"

It's never been the trading of shareware, though no doubt shareware has been found in the warez traders line of sight -- usually with cracks or serial numbers to fully activate the shareware or remove the nag screens.

Keep in mind the function of shareware is to make money for the author(s), same as regular commercial software. The only difference is the shareware author lets you try before you buy. Regardless, there is no reason for shareware to be traded in warez circles since it would no doubt be available on websites, mirrors and in the hundreds of websites that list shareware products (download.com, tucows, etc). So sitting around in irc channels looking for a robot to dcc the shareware files from would be *more* than stupid.

In fact, saying that warez=shareware is insulting.

The Wikipedia has a really good description of warez.

http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warez

Wiggle · Newbie Joined: 01 Nov 2003 Posts: 81

Just an out of proportion question. Then why DO people akill when someone is asking for child porn (I agree they should be akilled), but don't they when downloading warez?

Both are illegal? Do you allow preteen porn channels then? Is it also the founder's repsonsibility or will you just not allow it right away.

The huge misunderstanding about DALnet is that people think it was better off with the warez. Well I can only say that, ever since the warez went, it has been a lot more enjoyable. I don't know if the warez channels are the reason for that, but it's just better now Smile

.

Assuming I would have an "all chat" network, and a channel would come to me, I don't think I would be attacked for not allowing warez. They'd just find another network, they most likely wouldn't even bother strating a warez channel Wink

.

And yes, maybe it has, unfortunately, become part of the IRC landscape, but that does not mean that it makes it better and that it should be accepted. The sad thing is, most people owning xdcc bots, "root" others, and provide warez without actually having access to that computer. Of course that's not everyone Wink

.

All I'm saying is that warez are not needed on IRC, there's KaZaa, etc like disting pointed out. So why don't people use that? Getting warez on IRC is more difficult... there's queues, you have to "find" them, etc.

IRC isn't the place for warez, whether you allow or don't allow it on your network is up to you, of course. It's just an opinion, and different people have different opinions Smile

.

Just like Khaled's opinion - For the people who thinks warez has always been the purpose of DCC;

angelic · Lurker Joined: 01 Aug 2003 Posts: 148

"Way back in the day there was a lot of talk about banning child pornography (which is something that everyone can actually agree is morally wrong, as well as illegal). It was decided not to, on what I think was good advice, because the second you become a moderator of content you open yourself up to legal trouble if you fail to properly moderate that content.

Now some might say that DALnet isn't actually moderating any content, because it's worded in such a way that it simply disallows the channels. However, to disallow these channels DALnet must explicitly moderate content. It must find this 'abusive' content and put an end to it, thereby making it a moderator."

and

"Ok, so now they are moderating content. That means they aren't a common carrier. Now joeblow transers a metalica song. The RIAA now sues joeblow *and* DALnet. DALnet, by moderating content, is now legally responsible for content that slips by. Its not a question of legal problems from the people being banned. Its now a question of legal responsibility for the actions of people you didn't ban because you didn't catch."

i don't feel i *can* moderate on these issues because of the above, no matter what my personal view point is, i have to think net. I've not (touch wood) been put in a position where i have had to act yet, i'm guessing it will happen at some point, my instinct tells me i'd find some other (veiled) reason for banning them from the network which wasn't distrubuting porn or warez, some other breach of network rules/aup so i couldn't been seen as actively moderating content.

(from http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/02/04/055250&mode=thread&tid=95 )

Dead Wrong · Guest

Dead Wrong · Guest

I wanted to add that unlike a store, IRC is worldwide in many cases.

Be it as it may, if your server is on US soil, and you are a US citizen, you are indeed under US law.

The fallacy of thinking that "I haven't been caught yet, means I'm not doing something illegal" is laughable.

If you want to be sure, consult with a knowledgeable lawyer who is involved with and know about Internet laws. You'll be surprised at what you find. Not only is the server admins liable, the biggest liable lands in the hands of those providing the bandwidth to these irc servers.

Dead Wrong · Guest

PS: I am using the word "Liable" to mean:

At risk of or subject to experiencing or suffering something unpleasant. Used with to: liable to criminal charges.

Bound or obliged in law or equity; responsible; answerable

Syn: Accountable; responsible; answerable

angelic · Lurker Joined: 01 Aug 2003 Posts: 148

Hi Guest,

I'd REALLY love to debate this with you in real time if you'd be willing.

I did take legal advice, i'm based in the UK and though i fully understand who common carrier applies, or not in the case of irc, i think it's hasty to say it never will, and the advice i was given was to assume common carrier status. Which i do.

It isn't only me who has been given this advice, i number of admins from other (all sized) networks were given this advice also.

Bad advice? perhaps, but it seems to make sense to me, and until there is a test case, i don't think anyone can say one way or the other.

Toni // angelic

Dead Wrong · Guest

angelic, you're not in the united states, so you're best bet is to check your local laws - but as others have said, breaking the laws of the US when you're not in the US doesn't nessarally mean you're safe.

Much of the misconception springs from the Prodigy lawsuit in which posts to a messageboard that Prodigy claimed to moderate (and indeed had administrative review over posts before they were publically viewable) failed to do so. Prodigy was liable BECAUSE they claimed to moderate, they had a pay service that users paid for and also because Prodigy had to approve each message before it was posted. No way Prodigy could be held anything other than liable in that situation.

IRC is quite different. No one can claim to moderate IRC to the extent that Prodigy was able to -- in order to actually moderate content, you'd have to approve each user's msgs before they were sent.

Look up things like "Good Samaritan provision". Taking steps to removing what you know to be illegal is not a bad thing. Turning a blind eye and claiming you cannot do anything about it IS. And you know why? Because removing illegal content from IRC has been done before - You can remove illegal activities from IRC when you are made aware of it. Just like websites who offer free hosting -- sure anyone could put up anything, but the moment they are notified of illegal activity, they MUST remove it. Why? Because they're liable for if they do not -- e.g; they'd condone and help the illegal activity by allowing it to continue.

The reason why I say IRC can never be listed as common carrier is because it is reserved for regulated carriers.

The immunity due a telephone or telegraph company is one based on its status as a common carrier that affects interstate or foreign commerce to the extent that Congress has chosen to regulate it for the public good under the Commerce Clause

PS: IANAL, so as always, do your own research, rather than taking what others say on the "interweb" at face value.