Policy on Warez, Serialz, and P2P Discussions

Status
Not open for further replies.
I can't personally recall a time when I've needed or wanted to discuss P2P software here, but it always saddens me to see a "zero tolerance" policy applied. They can lead to bizarre situations, like the elementary school which suspended a boy for biting a chicken nugget into a crude gun shape and saying "bang".

Of course, I assume the motivation here is similar to the schools': reducing liability. A site that is used for illegal activities can be held liable, and naturally we don't want that.

Even so, I would hope a certain level of intelligence will factor in; I can see banning someone fishing for illegal software, but surely, a post that (for instance) simply discussed the impact of P2P on the software industry would be acceptable.
 
How would such a discussion hold with The Mods™? Would this be an acceptable subject for a debate? (Not that I want to run off and start one.) I presume a 'close eye' would be kept upon the threads? ;)
 
Anyone starting a discussion of P2P Apps/warez, takes the chance of being Banned. Not open for discussion. No need for a 'close eye', the thread would be wasted.

This subject isn't open for discussion here. Everyone that has been coming to this forum for any length of time, knows this.
 
There have been related threads. The recent one on Mac gaming dealt with piracy. I think someone discussed a forbidden topic and the post was edited but not deleted. I would think (hope) if someone had a serious, legal p2p-related question, one of supermods or admins would be contacted via e-mail first, in order to discuss such merits of a topic.
 
It's sounding to me like some power-that-be must have put the fear-o-god into our moderators here recently. The rationale for the policy is clear enough - keep away from anything that even smells vaguely illegal - but I have to say I'm very curious about why NOW. What has recently happened to precipitate this shift?

I suppose we will just have to see how this goes. I have no wish to stir up the muck here, but there are bound to be problems. For instance: it's illegal to plan to blow up a bridge, but it's NOT illegal to talk about the CNN coverage about people who did blow up a bridge. Clearly, around here it's strictly verboten to offer or request "how to" advice on P2P sharing - but would it be verboten to talk about someone who got busted for P2P sharing? Or about a lawsuit raised over P2P sharing? So far, sounds like it would be.

Meanwhile, I'm being very careful how I eat my nuggets.
 
As I said to uoba:
we're getting some nazi conditions here. "The person typing down P2P will be executed".
If P2P software was illegal, then noone could get his hands on those that easily. You can get them anywhere! So, why should it be forbidden to download such tools and use them? This is not the bad and illegal part of it. The illegal part is sharing software or files that are protected by a licence. Maybe 99% of the users of such tools take this illegal way, but still this doesn't allow us to ban a person asking for it. It's like we would ban ppl asking how they can send one email to multiple contacts. That could be spam as well. But here we act more liberal. However, I don't support warez and any other illegal activity, but what ppl do with their software should not be our business. One might use his photoshop to manipulate some certifications. Should we forbid talking about photoshop and any other painting app?
If one directly asks for warez, he/she should definitely be banned. But a guess is not enough!
As Bob said: I might have wasted my time on this post, but I think we should distinguish between illegal downloads and p2p. If it was the same, things would be much different in these days. And the harder we act on such things, the more we show we can't deal with it and simply fear it.
 
My opinion is much like briansleahy's.
I think if we allow talk on the P2P applications themselves, then things will quickly degenerate around here. Currently this is an excellent forum, not the least because everything is kept under control, and there AREN'T any discussions on things like warez. So while I don't think anyone should be allowed to ask about P2P apps/wares directly, I also don't think 'P2P' should be treated like a swear word. Therefore I think threads about P2P applications should be allowed, but not on their uses/using them.
 
The problem is basically this. There were quite decent threads in the past about piracy and/or certain applications and their (good) uses. However: ANY such thread is somehow bound to become worse very, very soon.

Someone will - out of sheer happiness - say something like: "I like Application A better than Application B because it finds more moviez." And from there, the mods have to edit posts on an hourly basis, removing app names, network names, server IPs and then _quotes_ of those statements that contain the same information - just to keep the thread on the original subject which might be just okay with the rules (and the feelings of the mods about whether the thread is still okay or not)... It turns out it's just a massive waste of time that could be well used elsewhere.

The consequence of all of this was this zero-tolerance attitude. The advice here is: If you ARE a user of Application A (even if you don't do ANYthing illegal with it) that has a problem with the app, ask the maker or use their support mailing list or their support forum. The chance of finding a good answer there is usually higher, anyway. (A matter of focus, I guess.)

Philosophical questions of whether it's "bl**dy _right_" to do illegal things because of [fill in your personal favourite ideology] only leads to flamewars that don't go anywhere. We've had these discussions in the past, and while they're certainly fun for some, they're not for many others and usually just don't bring out anything positive.

So, if your question is clearly against the law (where can I download pay-software, pay-movies, pay-music etc. for free), it doesn't belong on macosx.com.

If your question is about the use of or a problem with an application that is used for such things, it doesn't belong on macosx.com, you might ask the maker or other users of the application in an application-specific forum or mailing list.

If your question is more common in nature, say, something like "Would piracy decrease if Adobe sold their apps for 99 cents instead of 999 dollars..." it _could_ fit the Opinions or Café forum, but I'd advise you to think about it yourself, come to a conclusion and let the subject rest or use Slashdot's flamewars.
 
I figured it had to be something like that. It's a shame that the board could actually be liable for such discussions. It seems to me not unlike holding the phone company liable for gangsters' phone calls. Ah well.
 
all that really needs to be said about P2P is that there are a few out there for mac. some are better then others. Some cost money some don't. and they can be useful for finding rare and uncommon things. really isn't anymore to say other than where to find them
 
Basically i think the zero tolerance approach is fine. It wouldn't be fine if this were the only place people could talk about mac related stuff, or if users lost out on something more than the good company of the mods and users here by not being able to discuss P2P or by being banned.

The beauty of the internet is its breadth. People can talk about different things in different places (and even take on different personas see Sherry Turkle here and here for academic discussion of this). If i want to talk about the merits of ethernet vs usb ADSl modems, i would ask a question here (and would likely get a speedy and helpful answer). If i wanted to talk about whether Kirk really was in love with that alien girl i, episode whatever of Star Trek, the net provides endless places i could do so. There is hardly any lack of places to talk about legally dubious P2P services, and I'm sure for those interested, google will (as ever) provide.

Like others said, slashdot for flamewars, bash.org for silliness, here for legal mac stuff.
 
brianleahy said:
I figured it had to be something like that. It's a shame that the board could actually be liable for such discussions. It seems to me not unlike holding the phone company liable for gangsters' phone calls. Ah well.
Click to expand...

I would be very curious to learn just exactly how the "board" could be held liable for any discussion on any topic that was not specifically against the law - has pres. bush actually managed to remove freedom of speech from the constitution?

(Did he and asscleft manage to sneak it
past the whole world when no one was looking?)
 
Well, when you sign up to use this message board, you agree to abide by the rules set out by the founders of the site (the directors/owners). It's not a constitutional rights thing as much as it is a private entity.

People are free to use this site as long as they follow the rules which I think aren't hardly draconian in the least.

People think freedom means "doing whatever you want". It's not. Freedom + Responsibility = Democracy.
 
Yes, but then that's _democracy_ and not _freedom_. Which is quite definitely not the same thing. ;-)

Freedom, in fact, DOES mean you can do whatever you want. Democracy doesn't. However, this has not much to do with this _board_, which is, as you rightfully stated, a private entity, and not a democracy or ANY form of political entity.

So basically: You're right, but you should've stopped after the second paragraph. ;-)
 
This could be the topic of a whole new discussion...

Are freedom and responsibility two different sets of values that have to be combined for a desired result (democracy)?

Or is freedom a subset of responsibility, a necessary concession that makes responsibilty (or the ability to respond) possible? That would mean that action (one part of freedom, the other being free will) that is not responsible is no longer freedom.

So you are not free in order to do what you want, you are free to respond in a beneficial way to the circumstances around you (beneficial to the self and to the whole). To act in a destructive way is to become a criminal, liable to sanction.

The founder of community sets the standard - the rules that members are able to respond to. Action outside those rules will get you banned. Rightly so.
 
Yes, perfectly so, even. Just that's not freedom, that's freedom under rules, which _is_ kind of a paradoxon. There's been tons of books about man's freedom and I'm sure that everyone's got more or less of an idea of what freedom means and is. But I _did_ stray a bit there, and your last paragraph is certainly quite on-topic.
 
I believe freedom without responsibility equals anarchy/chaos. Freedom by itself is easy to define and difficult to do because if followed consistently it breeds disorganization. There's a balance between laws/rules and freedom and the goal is to end up with people not getting hurt. :)

So I think if you enjoy the benefits of this board, you must also follow its rules. Otherwise it won't work.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top