Anesthesia

Now we know he's lying.

Not mean; lazy. If you can't be bothered to put in an ounce of effort, why should anyone else?

Don't know if this has already been mentioned, but MS do generally do 'upgrade' version of the operating systems (also don't know if they'll do it for Vista, I doubt they will). This isn't an upgrade really, it is just a cheaper version which requires that you enter your original product key during installation to show you bought it. Somewhat of a discount for having a previous version.

What a helpful reply. Stereotypical fanboy post. Suggesting something which clearly won't help the topic starter then voicing opinions about how something is great without backing them up.

Do you really think you deserve people's help with that attitude?

The problem is that not everyone does buy an album after downloading though, especially if they don't like it. The RIAA likes the way CDs work because if you don't like the album it's already too late - you've bought the CD and they have your money. I think that the RIAA don't like you being able to suss out which bands you do and don't like before you buy the records. Primarily though they don't like the fact that not everyone will do this. As for buying things you like - I'm all for it. Whilst it's true that I pirate most of the contents of my hard disk I'm eager to have what little money I do have (yes, VERY little because I have to eat too) go towards developing more good stuff. That's why I paid hard cash for Oblivion - I want to see more like it, I see it not as buying software (which in theory one could have pirated) but as an investment towards a future of even better software. The same goes for donations; I want wikipedia to keep going and improve so I donate.

Being a sony fan is pretty stupid in itself really, the ultimate fanboyism because sony clearly isn't the best for everything.

What makes you think they won't just move to another peer to peer program?

It isn't whether they'll bother or not; they just can't. They have the list of IPs that were using it - not the logs of transfers that took place. Therefore they can't assert that any of the users were transferring RIAA music.

Did you bother reading the topic? It is Limewire that is getting sued, not its users.

I've used them and they are AWFUL. Terribly hard to type with as there's no sensory way to tell if the keystrike has registered. You can't feel it and you can't hear it if you have the sound turned off (there's an optional clicking noise). Plus they are really uncomfortable.

Yeah here's my opinion: You must be pretty stupid to want it if YOU REALISE that it is just what you posted.

Metallica.

Not just Mancs, but scallies. However, we try to keep away from the lower people as much as possible. Fortunately where we all live is in a secure compound with guards, scallies are sprayed with a mixture of ammonia and hydrochloric acid if they come too near.

Heading down to Manchestoh for the 16th September. How far are you from London? I HATE moving in and moving out. Hate hate hate it, such an effort because I have so much stuff.

I think that contention issues affect DSL too Cruiser... I know people on a 50:1 home account who get problems with speed & reliability at peak times, whereas I'm on a 10:1 business account which hasn't suffered from it yet.

That is a different thing altogether. What your friend was doing was profiting off the work of another, selling copyrighted material is a crime just about everywhere. This distinguishes it from downloading/sharing songs for free because they are not turning a profit.

Whilst it is true that this may act as a deterrent, it is kind of stupid/wrong for the RIAA to be suing people in the name of the artists they represent but keeping the money for themselves, not passing it on to the people they are suing in the name of. I'll bet the money just goes towards funding more lawsuits.

I know there was a game called Dink Smallwood, but I never played it. The second game is Rise of the Triad. An excellent game for its time. Finally, it is id software, not iD, Id or ID - it is id as in the id, the ego and the superego. It was occasionally referred to by them as one of the others but in the vast majority of times it is id and they themselves on their site say that it is id.

As far as I know there's no evidence that the RIAA are giving any of this money to artists. ^^ And that's from a recording industry source. There was a slump in the period between then and 2004 which has ended: None of this shows that piracy is okay, however it does show that this isn't the death of the recording industry as the RIAA would like you to think.

Read my post, nincompoop. What we have encountered is an area where it is so easy to do something like this with no immediate consequences that millions of people are choosing to do it, ignoring the moral side. This could have a few outcomes, it could (unlikely seeing as digital music sales are prospering long after this influx of piracy) destroy the music industry and we'll live in a world without music, or it could force the music industry to rely on other sources for their income such as performances.

Got any proof for that? Or for that matter, any evidence to even suggest it? Or is it just a futile attempt to try and justify piracy. I don't have a problem with people who realise piracy can harm people but decide to do it anyway (myself included, 20,000 tracks), but to try and weasel out of any moral responsibility by pretending to yourself that it is justified is just pathetic. As a big bad scurvy pirate the reason I have got plenty of music is not 'because I wouldn't have paid for it anyway', 'because it doesn't harm artists' or 'because my money would only go to the RIAA'. It is because I can't afford to buy ~ÃÆââ¬Å¡Ãâã20,000 worth of music, the method to get hold of it illicitly is sat right in front of me and it is 99.9% certain I won't face any consequences ever. Insane says 'do without if you can't afford it', I say 'if I can't afford it but the means to get it for free are there and a cost:benefit analysis shows that the cost of being mildly immoral is far outweighed by the benefit of having free music then I'm willing to make that trade'. If I think a band/artist/game designer deserves my money I make sure they get it. NB: It may seem like I'm a hipocrite but the fact is I don't like the propagation of false information. Much in the same way I will attempt to dispell the myths that anti-drug posters regurgitate on drugs-related topics - I don't like drugs but I don't like lies either.

Yes, it is illegal in Australia. In fact, in Australian companies can be held liable for people misusing their software, such as in the Kazaa case.

I think you'll struggle to find any MS OS on ebay as I believe MS actively seeks out unlicensed resellers and gets their listings ended.