Naked Science Forum
Non Life Sciences => Geek Speak => Topic started by: Simulated on 27/01/2008 23:50:30
-
I'm thining about getting it. I hear stories of people's computers getting completely fried because of the program. Does anyone know anything about it? Overall do you think its a safe program to use?
-
I use Frostwire (it's the same as Limewire but better).
I've been using it for quite some time & I've not had a problem. Mind you, my PC is locked down tighter than Fort Knox. I do, though, only download full-length feature films or music/music videos and, in general, they're pretty safe. I don't download the gunky stuff that you normally get the problems with.
Whatever you do, STAY AWAY from any vids with a .rm extension. You've got a much higher risk of getting nasty things with those.
-
Alternatively, run OS 10.
Limewire is still very machine hungry, though.
-
isnt limewire and frostwire illegal
-
Thanks Doc. Exactly what I was thinking. Say I looked up the word Hott girl. THey'd have so much junk, say virus stuff right? But if you look up say Carry on my Wayword Son it'dbe safer?
Is Frostware safer?
-
I have lime wire on this computer and on the last two because that is what the builder put on it. I used it a couple times about a year ago, but I haven't evened opened it this time.. and I will have to learn all over again!
-
isnt limewire and frostwire illegal
Why should it be illegal?
How you use it may be illegal, but why should the software itself be illegal?
-
Thanks Doc. Exactly what I was thinking. Say I looked up the word Hott girl. THey'd have so much junk, say virus stuff right? But if you look up say Carry on my Wayword Son it'dbe safer?
In general, yes; but you can never be 100% certain.
Is Frostware safer?
It's exactly the same as Limewire Premium (or whatever the 1 you have to pay for is called) but I think it looks nicer - and it's freeware!
Most of the time, though, I use Ares Galaxy. There seems to be more sources for downloads.
-
So its got all the same songs and all that good stuff?
I might have to check that out.
-
So its got all the same songs and all that good stuff?
I might have to check that out.
Yes. It's basically Limewire Premium with nicer colours bundled as freeware.
-
I like it Doc. I think I"m gonna keep it.
And I keep trying to get crazy train by ozzy osburn. And it would download, on both programs, and then it woudln't play. No matter what file i chose to get.
Any idea why>?
-
What file type? MP3? Wma? Ogg?
-
mp3 just like all of them i have been downloading
-
I don't know why it won't play. It's possible that a corrupt file has been propagated so that the same original file appears many times. But I would have thought there would still be more clean versions available.
-
I'll keep trying. If i cna't get it i'll go borrow it from a friend
-
isnt limewire and frostwire illegal
Why should it be illegal?
How you use it may be illegal, but why should the software itself be illegal?
well its stealing music if you get caught you may have to bay thousands in fines
-
isnt limewire and frostwire illegal
Why should it be illegal?
How you use it may be illegal, but why should the software itself be illegal?
well its stealing music if you get caught you may have to bay thousands in fines
That's the way the software is used, not the software itself.
-
That's the way the software is used, not the software itself.
Depends on what the goons at RIAA and the MPA can get a judge to rule...
RIAA Sues LimeWire
August 10, 2006
By Bill Rosenblatt
The music industry last Friday filed suit against file-sharing operator LimeWire, charging large-scale copyright infringement. The RIAA, which facilitated the suit, took this action a year after having sent several P2P operators cease-and-desist letters in the wake of the US Supreme Court's Grokster decision, which rendered technologies and services culpable for copyright infringement if their business models depend on it.
This RIAA lawsuit offers an important insight into the kinds of technologies that the major music companies will accept as controls on peer-to-peer file sharing. After Grokster, some P2P operators that received letters from the RIAA (like eDonkey, BearShare, and WinMX) elected to shut down. Others, notably iMesh, engaged with the music industry and found a way to control content usage on their networks that the major labels found acceptable: acoustic fingerprinting. iMesh currently holds licenses to major-label music while it tests its copyright-respecting P2P service; the same is true for Mashboxx, which grew out of the ashes of Grokster.
LimeWire, on the other hand, proposed a file filtering solution based on computing hash values of music files. The scheme, which it announced back in March, is similar to one that AltNet -- a company affiliated with Kazaa -- had been proposing for some time. To say that the music industry did not take this hashing scheme seriously would be an understatement; it is trivial to hack. We view LimeWire's offer of file hashing to solve infringement problems as disingenuous, a view that the major music companies apparently share.
This development also sheds some light on the currently dark issue of the music industry's recent settlement with Sharman Networks, owners of Kazaa, to the tune of over US $100 Million. Apparently Sharman intends to work with the music industry to change Kazaa into a copyright-respecting service, as iMesh is doing. But details of how Kazaa will do this have been nonexistent. The Australian Federal Court had discussed the possibility of Kazaa implementing a keyword-based file filtering scheme to remedy its infringement. Sharman did not do this, yet the court did not hold the company in contempt, which implies that the scheme was a suggestion, not an injunction. A keyword-based scheme is not the same thing as hashing, but it is equally trivial to hack. Therefore it is likely that Kazaa will need to come up with something better in order to get into the music industry's good graces; it may be that the music industry will ask for acoustic fingerprinting.
The RIAA's lawsuit against LimeWire is understandable, given what we percieve to be the company's attitude. LimeWire is now forced to choose among cooperation, capitulation, or a courtroom.
Updated The Recording Industry Ass. of America (RIAA) has began a legal spat with a man who copied CDs he had bought onto his computer.
Jeffery Howell of Scottsdale, Arizon has taken his case to court after he received a letter from the RIAA, reports the Washington Post.
The RIAA, which lobbies on behalf of a music industry hammered by tumbling sales as fans increasingly turn to free downloads and file sharing for their listening pleasure, insists that it is illegal for someone who has legally bought a CD to transfer that music into his computer.
And, it seems that Howell is the latest individual the RIAA has singled out for special treatment in its legal pantomime.
RIAA lawyer Ira Schwartz argued in a lawsuit brief filed earlier this month that the 2,000 or so MP3 files Howell created were "unauthorised copies" of copyrighted music.
So far it is unclear as to how and why Howell was targeted by the RIAA. There doesn't seem to be any suggestion that the MP3s were made available to all comers.
On its website the RIAA states: "If you make unauthorised copies of copyrighted music recordings, you're stealing. You're breaking the law and you could be held legally liable for thousands of dollars in damages."
Indeed, underlining its uncompromising stance over what it sees as online music theft the RIAA has already sued Jammie Thomas, a single mother living in Brainerd, Minnesota who ended up in civil court for copyright infringement.
She was stung with a $222,000 fine after the jury returned the verdict that Thomas was liable for wilfully infringing the copyrights on 24 songs.
The RIAA said that it will continue its legal battle against customers that it believes are breaking the law by copying CDs onto their computers.
According to the Washington Post a RIAA spokesman said: "It's not our first choice, but it's a necessary part of the equation. There are consequences for breaking the law."
Of course it remains to be seen whether the industry's inflexible attitude toward a rapidly changing landscape in which fans consume music will hold water in the long game. But this latest move by the big record companies to hold individuals personally responsible perhaps signals how weak at the knees they have truly become. ®
Update
The RIAA has since rubbished the Washington Post story as "wrong".
In a statement, the organisation said:"As numerous commentators have since discovered after taking the time to read our brief, the record companies did not allege that ripping a lawfully acquired CD to a computer or transferring a copy to an mp3 player is infringement.
"This case is about the illegal distribution of copyrighted songs on a peer-to-peer network, not making copies of legally acquired music for personal use."
I listened to a RIAA spokesman being interviewed last month, he refused to say wheather copying cd's you had legally bought could or could not be copied on to your computer...or ipod! Only that, at this stage they were not going to persure people for doing so.
-
If I buy a CD then, as far as I'm concerned, I'm entitled to listen to the music on it in any way that I choose. I may not like all the tracks on a CD so I wouldn't want to listen to them. Rather than keep pressing the Next Track button on a CD player, I just don't include them in my playlist on PC.
I may want to listen to a selection of music by different artists (which is usually the case with me) so I don't want to be continually changing CDs after every track.
Making tracks on your PC available to others on a P2P network is entirely a different matter. If record companies and artists don't receive their royalties then the music industry will disappear. All that will be left is amateurs making their own recordings on their home PC and, without wishing to sound harsh, 99.99% of that is absolute crap. Even good musicians may be, and most usually are, lacking in production skills. Professionally produced songs will become a thing of the past.
I don't expect to make money out of most of my compositions, so I make them freely available. But for some people it is an ambition to be a professional musician or singer. How could they if there was no professional music industry left?
-
The guy in the second article i quoted, never uploaded or made the music available through a shared folder. The were just in his "my music" folder. How this came to the attention of RIAA was never said - that i can remember.
The RIAA guy was asked if it was legal to put cd's in to your my music folder or on to your ipod, he refused to confirm or deny, just that at this point RIAA was not going to actively persure those that did.
I can pm a link to the audio of the interview if anyone wants it.
-
How I see it I really ain't doing nothing that bad. I've downloaded a few songs (less then a cd) that i always wanted. But lost them for some stupid reason. Maybe cuz i switched programs..
-
The guy in the second article i quoted, never uploaded or made the music available through a shared folder. The were just in his "my music" folder. How this came to the attention of RIAA was never said - that i can remember.
I noted that. As for how they knew... not a clue.
I've got a 160Gb external drive that is full of music tracks. I dread to think how many tracks that is. Most of them, though, are legal.
But here's a question for you to ponder...
I've got a lot of old tapes and vinyl records. Some are playable, some not. I have downloaded new copies of them via P2P so that I can still listen to the tracks I bought, although not on the original medium. How would the RIAA view that?