isoHunt tells court why Hollywood is wrong

Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2008 11:06 pm

a long list of arguements, if they win it goes against all previous laws it could possibly change the internet for ever and allow a kind of "fashism" to take control. The truth is they dont have the time and resources to get every end user who MAY be downloading copyright material. This really looks like an obvious way of "creating" a case to make a scapegoat. Not just a scapegoat an unfair chance to make an example of bittorrent and to censor the net..which is to censor every single one of us. They are lossing money so they say, thats why this is happening. But it just looks like they are picking the easiest target, rather than the most lawful...imho

Posted: Tue Jun 10, 2008 8:01 am

You should print it a bit larger, maybe that would make it true.

[Edit: this is a reply to a deleted post]

Posted: Tue Jun 10, 2008 8:12 am

orly1 wrote:

I'am glad this place is being sued and I hope they shut you down for being the leeching criminals that you all are.

I hope your next shit is a hedgehog Razz

Posted: Tue Jun 10, 2008 8:25 am

jenangless@hotmail.com wrote:

How much software did this website help you steal this month?

None - seriously Exclamation

I have a question for you, but unfortunately you will be unable to answer it.

How much spam do you expect to receive in your inbox by using your e-mail address as a user name ? I'm with stupid

Posted: Thu Jun 19, 2008 3:43 am

you did great work in the court and you always do great work in this site guys, thanx!!

Posted: Fri Jul 04, 2008 7:50 am

Just sat and read the whole lot end to end, in any reasonable uninfluenced by $$$ country the outcome would be obvious and probably the case thrown out of court by now.
My favourite line in the whole thing is;

Quote:

"Sensible" rules call for careful application, not the easy elasticity Plaintiffs are seeking here.

There we have in one line the total concept upon which most MPAA actions are based, they think they can manipulate everything to suit their own goals, be it by blurring facts or frightening people with low income, they will stoop to any level to achieve their own ends. Exclamation

Posted: Fri Jul 04, 2008 9:39 pm

maybe if hollywood would stop releasing such gay shit, i would actually go see it in the theater, instead of torrenting it, i just wathced jumper, so glad i downloaded it rather than wasting hard earned money on it. oh hold on a sec while i delete that piece of shit...ok im back anyway you guys get my point.

Posted: Fri Aug 01, 2008 6:46 pm

so pretty much, they're calling you, "Robin Hood!" or even "Peter Pan?" Can be a compliment ... or if they're referring you to being a theif on your own, aren't there also laws of protection against, "Slander" or there's another legal term for that too... Smile

for your protection as well, that is.

And did any of these people stop and think about their ancestor's or their own wrong doings in aiming for the top to get to where they're at in life (stealing of land -- etc, although, that's long settled... or is it?)

Posted: Sat Aug 09, 2008 12:15 am

but we also download open source stuff to so to sue for that is wrong it's like me giving a dvd to a friend and also giving him a idea i have it's free but the dvd is not but as soon as i give it to them online it is wrong

Posted: Sat Nov 22, 2008 4:02 pm

The best night of my life was September 2nd, 2006. I saw Armin Van Buuren play a show in Windsor, Ontario, Canada. Without file sharing I probably wouldn't even know who he is.

Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 4:12 am

Personally I wish the movie industry would have a subscription service to download their content similar to what services such as Netflix, MegaUpload, ect. provide except knocking out the middle man.
Most of what I think their case is based on from what I've read is lost sales, at least that is how I understand it. Well when a movie costs $10 a person to watch at the theater and right at $20 to buy, who can afford to buy them all the time to watch what they want to see.
Yet I am surprised that they have nothing to say about companies such as Blockbuster or Redbox where you are basically borrowing a copy of a movie.
Is that no the same thing as P2P sharing just without the downloading of the content? They sell a single copy of the movie then well over 100+ people borrow it for $6 a pop. Are they not also getting screwed out of a sale every time someone rents that single movie? Because if that is their arguement they would have all of us only buying their movies.
If they want to get with what customers want let them create their own service as I explained above where when a movie is released you pay a few dollars to buy a downloadable copy of it or "rent" is for a few days then itis deleted. Then everyone will be happy and they will no longer have to go through all this silly buisness of trying to screw everyone because they feel they are loosing income.
And i'm sorry if this seems long and drawn out, But I'm simply trying to explain my point of view.
Also to be in a economic recesson and their profits are rising over the previous year's shows they can not be losing much of sales to any P2P content shared anywhere.

Posted: Sun Mar 08, 2009 9:36 pm

hollywood = bad
isohunt = good

Posted: Sun Mar 08, 2009 11:13 pm

BlueReign wrote:

Personally I wish the movie industry would have a subscription service to download their content similar to what services such as Netflix, MegaUpload, ect. provide except knocking out the middle man.
Most of what I think their case is based on from what I've read is lost sales, at least that is how I understand it. Well when a movie costs $10 a person to watch at the theater and right at $20 to buy, who can afford to buy them all the time to watch what they want to see.
Yet I am surprised that they have nothing to say about companies such as Blockbuster or Redbox where you are basically borrowing a copy of a movie.
Is that no the same thing as P2P sharing just without the downloading of the content? They sell a single copy of the movie then well over 100+ people borrow it for $6 a pop. Are they not also getting screwed out of a sale every time someone rents that single movie? Because if that is their arguement they would have all of us only buying their movies.
If they want to get with what customers want let them create their own service as I explained above where when a movie is released you pay a few dollars to buy a downloadable copy of it or "rent" is for a few days then itis deleted. Then everyone will be happy and they will no longer have to go through all this silly buisness of trying to screw everyone because they feel they are loosing income.
And i'm sorry if this seems long and drawn out, But I'm simply trying to explain my point of view.
Also to be in a economic recesson and their profits are rising over the previous year's shows they can not be losing much of sales to any P2P content shared anywhere.

Well put. I agree.

Posted: Tue May 19, 2009 8:15 pm

I read your briefs quite thoroughly before deciding to comment in this thread, and I must say that you have a very good case prepared, IH.

To use an analogy of my own, The case the MPAA has against you would be like me going to the library, researching how to make home-made explosives, then going to Wal-mart and buying ammonia and fertilizer. Then I build a bomb and blow up a building. Should the owners of the building I blew up be able to sue wal-mart and the library?

Posted: Wed May 20, 2009 1:29 am

If everyone of us just put in $100 I reckon we could kick their lilly livered asses back into history..

We ALL know its about money. Its got nothing to do with the poor artist who only see 2% of the revenue, who sell their talents for a pittance (proportionally). Its about the greedy film and music labels milking everyone of us for an unreasonable amount. 98% for the artists adn the rest from us..

Hey. if the labels are sooooo concerned about the poor artist, then give them 60% of the profits. I reckon the artists won't complain..!! or is it more about the fact that they've been 'living large' on the rest of us and we are breaking a Jewish monopoly or cartel.. these cartels are falling everywhere and its making these very powerful people very nervous..

Like I said.. a petition is cool and a 'nice thought' but get one together where all of us put in real money, not in dribs and drabs, but for a specific case and issue and topple these monsters off their perch..

P.s. ..and please don't give the anti-Semitic crap. its not about that. Its about powerful people, and powerful companies having a lend....