Warez, and Direct Download

I am no way trying to advocate the distribution of pirated information.


Im sure most people on this board, and most people on the internet, or just average joe people have at one time or another used pirated software. This has been a problem for alot of businesses, the one i can relate to is the video store i work at. Video stores are making half of what they use to, simply because most customers has seen the movies pirated befor we get them in our store.

I myself believe that the people who cause this problem are not the encoders, and warez groups. But the people who distrubute the pirated information to the general public, the people you see at markets selling piles of pirated information. If they did not distribute the information they would not have the problem. The warez groups provide the information, they do not "steal" the information, but copy the information. I'm not really here to defend warez groups.


The point to this thread is that when we move into the new age of direct downloading all of our media from the internet, what will happen to these warez groups? And the people who download warez? They will have to make tighter regulations and laws to make sure people are dodging the pay for direct download market.

I can see warez groups demonized in the comming years, and will be made out to be "terroists"

Anyone have any thoughts on this?

I used to download warez. Until I ran adaware and found 200 critical objects on my hard drive.

The companys selling software still make money from selling their software to other companies,
If you look at microsoft they sell their Office product for say £200, now no way is an indivdual going to pay that much for a piece of software, that's crazy, but a company will. So it kind of balances it self out i believe lol For everyone one person who is pirating software a company somewhere is paying for it.

Obviously this doesn't work 100% but that's my theory

Originally posted by wang
I can see warez groups demonized in the comming years, and will be made out to be "terroists"

That is an interesting theory! I can see your thinking behind it and I agree with you. The hacker is already seen as a public menace, especially those that mess with people's email. Spammers are hated, pirates could be next. At the moment though, pirates are loved because they give us movies and games at a fraction of the price of legal versions, and normally way before the offical release. People are fickle though, and are swayed by the media and newspapers like sheep into the pen. They could be seen as terrorists in a certain light, especially if a large hollywood studio goes out of business because of them.

Zaphod im not talking about warez websites or p2p, im talking about proper warez. As to say i got a dvd rip of the movie sryiana last week that was for award consideration prupose only.

My worry is that things like this will be demonized, and outlawed to a great extent over the next 10 years due to direct download. The corporations will have to find some way to control their market.

I think within the next 5 years we're gonna see it go away. They'll find a way and reason to shut it down. You'll see something like what happened with music happen with this as well within the next couple of years. There's already been talk of shutting it down, but it's never gone farther than that yet.

One thing that might be of interest is the fact that only commercial use of pirated software is illegal. If you are just using the software on your own computer and are not getting any financial benefit it is very hard to prosecute. This is why you see organizations like the BSA designed to target businesses only because it is an easier case to win. I do 3-D CAD for a living. The job that I have had for the last 4 years I obtained only because I knew the software that the company was changing to. I have downloaded several pirated versions of CAD software in order to become proficient at using them or to keep current on changes to programs that I already know. I do outside design work for customers for which I am paid, but I only use software to which I have a license for this. I have been in a position to recommend the purchase of software to several companies because I knew the capabilities of the programs from having used the pirated versions.

Jim, what you are saying about pirated software/information being used for personaly use being hard to prosecute, is my reason for this thread.
When internet companies have the solid infastructure, and home users have the which hardware/equipment for direct downloading to become the "norm". Internet direct download companies which im sure will be back by major corporations, will push governments to updated legislation on how to deal with private piracy. Can you imaging the laws they will need to prosecute a person with some warez on their computer.

It will be like literaly stealing from your local dvd store, and the police finding the stolen goods in your house. The laws will be harsh with people with massive amount of warez.

Also what you stated on how you reccomend the purchase of software to other businesses, can i not claim working at a video store that i need to know movies and game to reccomend them to customers? I have promoted the lost season 2, prison break, and rome to australian people, shouldnt i really be on the movie/tv makers marketing payroll?

Originally posted by JIMC5499
One thing that might be of interest is the fact that only commercial use of pirated software is illegal. If you are just using the software on your own computer and are not getting any financial benefit it is very hard to prosecute.

I've been in the same situation as you where I only needed the software to learn how to use it and demos weren't always available.

Some companies have academic versions of their software at greatly reduced prices but are usually limited to persons studying at acredited educational institutions, not home users learning for future employment requirements.

I wish they'd open their software up more.

Microsoft has their Action Pack subscription for Microsoft Partners that sell for about $300 per year and contains almost all of their server software as well as the Operating Systems and Office programs. This is supposed to only be for businesses that resell MS products but a lot of people but it just to learn the software.

If this type of thing were made more widely available by more companies it would be a great benefit to those of us learning their products and would probably cut back on piracy.

How will this go away in 5 years ? Its just like the war on drugs : for every group that gets busted 2 new ones show up

Same goes for p2p its so big it wont die.
How about 300gb hdd or blank dvd/cds ? Who needs those ? Only if your into p2p/warez or what about 6mb dsl or even faster connections ? Who needs them ?

Question after question

There will be no magical overnight shutdown of the warez scene, it just is not possible. People 'think' the music downloading scene dropped off but that is just not true; its still going strong, just no longer getting the news coverage it once was. All the legislation in the world wont get around the fundamental problem of copy/rip protection, every time someone comes up with a new scheme to preven piracy it almost always gets sliced to pieces by the coders on the scene who specialize in the circumvention of stuff like this.

This may come off like I'm advocating it or saying it doesn't matter, and I don't mean it like that, but don't most companies take pirating into consideration for accounting purposes? I know most B&M retail stores like Walmart or JC Penny allow for X% of their stock being shoplifted, just kind of the nature of the beast.

It sure is intresting when looking at where all these films come from , the sources supplying them to the warez scene always come straight from the industry .

I remember getting a copy of kill bill 1 straight from the cutting room with the time code running up in the right corner, the best part being this was not a finished copy meaning i got to see scenes that were later deleted before being released to the cinema.

Now i ask how is this possible
edit: spelling

[edit on 26-1-2006 by Fett Pinkus]

Fett Pinkus, that is very true. I use to get rap albums straight from the recording studio pretty much, when it use to be good.....
What you saw of kill bill 1 was the uncensord version that was released in japan, it had the sceane of her torturing the girl cutting off her legs etc. Also the main fight sceance was still in colour. But mad # for getting it so early.
You are right, the warez sceance has got quite good. They have become more realiable, early released, and are releasing more stuff than ever.
I must admit the industry does have a problem. I believe they will correct it when they take direct downloading seriously.

Originally posted by wang
Also what you stated on how you reccomend the purchase of software to other businesses, can i not claim working at a video store that i need to know movies and game to reccomend them to customers? I have promoted the lost season 2, prison break, and rome to australian people, shouldnt i really be on the movie/tv makers marketing payroll?

My sister workes at a video store. She can "rent" up to 3 games or movies at a time at no cost to her as one of her benefits. The purpose of this is to be able to recommend titles or games to her customers. Once you have seen a movie or played a game you can make a recommendation. It isn't like software where you need to see how well it can do a task.

I can't help but wonder, at least to some extent, how much the music and movie industries are really losing here. I mean, how many people that download free movies and music are viable members of the market? If I were the type to do such a thing *cough*, it doesn't neccessarily mean the industry just lost money since I had no intention of ever buying it. Many people download simply because they can't afford to go out and buy the original. Sure, they do lose money to pirating but I find it hard to believe they lose as much as they claim.

You do have a point FreeThinking1, and that's generally the mindset I have as well. Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on your perspective), I also see it in a different light: what would happen if you used that same argument to steal something from the grocery store? Even if it's not something that's considered a luxury, something like a loaf of bread. It's still stealing, and you'll still get popped for it.

Yes thats right JIM, but also ask your sister how much of a tightass video store owners are. We cant have a new release for the first 2 weeks of its release at my store, when most customers ask about it.
Also once you gain repour with customers they ask all sorts of questions about tv-shows, games, and movies. I would be no where as near knowledgeable as i am on all of those if it wasnt for warez.
In the end JIM your type of piracy, and mine will both be demonized and vigourously outlawed in the comming years.


Also Mcory, it is not like stealing and apple from a grocery store. When you steal from a store, you are depriving that person of that item. Piracy is me walking into a gocery store, having a device to be able to duplicate the apple. I have the exact same apple, but i have not deprived the previous owner of its ownership. That isnt stealing.

[edit on 113131p://upThursday by wang]

Originally posted by MCory1
You do have a point FreeThinking1, and that's generally the mindset I have as well. Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on your perspective), I also see it in a different light: what would happen if you used that same argument to steal something from the grocery store? Even if it's not something that's considered a luxury, something like a loaf of bread. It's still stealing, and you'll still get popped for it.

True, but stealing a physical object is far different from duplicating code. Steal bread, and the store is out of the profit plus the expense of buying/making the bread and putting it on the shelf. Theft of movies and music are at no additional expense to the corporation being violated, only the loss of potention profit. My arguement is that there is no loss of potention profit from someone who wasn't a part of the buyer's market.

I never, ever thought I'd find myself in a position to defend record companies and movie studios, but I unwittingly started off the devil's advocate stuff with the last post, so here it goes

Also, I wrote all of this before seeing your response FreeThinking1; I'm still going to post it though because I spent a fair amount of time on it and it might even make more sense in light of your reply.

Originally posted by wang
Also Mcory, it is not like stealing and apple from a grocery store. When you steal from a store, you are depriving that person of that item. Piracy is me walking into a gocery store, having a device to be able to duplicate the apple. I have the exact same apple, but i have not deprived the previous owner of its ownership. That isnt stealing.

You are correct in that, and that's one thing that makes it a kind of difficult situation to argue. Who honestly and directly loses anything when I spend my time copying 1's and 0's to my computer?

There isn't a direct loss, not like in the instance with stealing something from a store. I release a song onto the internet, it generally costs me the same for making it available to 1 person as to 1 million people (not counting bandwidth issues which, although can be pricey in some instances, I'll ignore here.)

The problem lies in the potential, and that's what the record companies and movie studios are complaining about. If I steal an apple from the store, I'm depriving that company of two potential customers: one person who could afford the apple and was willing to pay for it, and myself who, even though I most likely wouldn't have paid a dime for it, potentially could have. If I had better ethics and stealing that apple just wasn't for me regardless of how hungry and poor I was, I would've tried to change my situation (or ensured I was in a better situation) to where I could afford to buy it. Now the store owner has his income from the sale instead of a loss from a theft.

Same goes with pirating--movies, music, or software. Instead of making sure I could afford what ever it is I'm stealing, I'm depriving the company of the potential revenue. They don't get a direct loss--they don't have an inventory they need to replenish or anything--but their earnings are down from where they would've been if it was strictly a store release.

If they would've earned say $1 profit off each copy of a single in a store, and would've sold 100,000 copies, that's $100K profit. If 20K of those were pirated, you can look at it as still $80K profit (the easy way to look at it when you're not running the company) or a $20K loss from what the company was expecting.

You can also look at it like this. You work your job, you're told by your employer you're going to make $100 for performing at a certain level--whether it's number of hours, sales, whatever the measuring stick is set to. You plan your budget around that $100, ration out bills, rent, groceries, etc. You start working, and find that--for some strange reason--other people are doing the work that you were supposed to do, and they've done 20% of it. Payday comes and your boss tells you "You only did 80% of the job, so I'm only giving you $80."

I know, that's kind of a screwy example, but it's really hard to look at stuff like this objectively when you're talking about companies that make more in a month than most people make in a year. It's much easier to say "they've got plenty of cash, what are they worried about?" Believe me, I say that too when there's a song out and I don't want to shell out $15 for a single song on a CD, or a software program that costs more than 2 months salary that I'm wanting to use.