Exclusive Uploads

[Disme]

0-day is always stolen so this is a pointless discussion.

[dunson]

If it is a collection of scene packs, sure pass it on without hesitation, but if a user has chosen to take time and put together something really nice to share with their favorite tracker, then I think you should ask. It isn't a copyright issue, but a matter of honor amongst pirates.

[Quylui]

Does anyone else find this practice repugnant? Someone reproduces and distributes someone else's product against their (and the laws) explicit wishes, then feels entitled to turn around and demand no one else on the site do the same. This is the definition of hypocrisy, not to mention a slap in the face of the entire idea behind filesharing.

And to everyone whose response will be "So what, get over it.", your cognitive surrender has been noted and filed.

Most people feel like the time they take to rip and transfer the information has intrinsic value, and should have the right to distribute their work as they please. More specifically, I would never be able to listen to vinyl records if it wasn't for people who took the time to meticulously transfer the data from the vinyl medium to digital. I guess can understand both perspectives.

[orfik]

Most people feel like the time they take to rip and transfer the information has intrinsic value, and should have the right to distribute their work as they please. More specifically, I would never be able to listen to vinyl records if it wasn't for people who took the time to meticulously transfer the data from the vinyl medium to digital. I guess can understand both perspectives.

That's just the point though, it isn't their work. Think about what you're saying. That, essentially, the artist who worked months in a recording studio or the programmer who spent hours in front of a monitor, and the companies who pay for their talent, have absolutely no say over the material they own as far as you're concerned. However, spending fifteen minutes ripping it and uploading it to a tracker ought to give you complete control over how it's distributed.

That's just selfish. Give me a good reason why trackers should cling to file exclusivity anyway. It's not a capitalistic environment as far as I know, so there's no point in monopolizing packs or movies or lossless music. I thought the idea behind all of this was free content for the masses. I stand behind the invitation system, but the sense of entitlement over someone else's work is pitiful.

[Grind$oFine]

On non-scene trackers, where it's left up to the community to share, the uploaders deserve some damn respect. They are what's bringing the whole tracker together. They are the ones providing files the scene doesn't release to fill a gap in the content, they are the ones filling requests so many other people can download.
These are the generous people who keep BT going.
So no they didn't write the music on the album, but they did something selfless for many other people, and I think if someone wants to take the files they didn't spend a while preparing and just upload it on another tracker so they can get a ratio boost, they should ask first.
Do I think the uploaders should allow it? Yes, but if someone wants to upload their rips to all Pedro's/Waffles/What themself, they should get that right - and then allow anyone else to upload to STMusic, Demonoid, etc.

If we're gonna get all technical about how people have no rights over their files since they didn't write the music, etc, then I don't think you appreciate the uploaders enough, and maybe you should just buy the album and properly rip it yourself.

People who just want to be a prick and keep their files on one tracker, and they don't even intend on uploading them anywhere else... now that's just selfish.

So I guess my full opinion on this comes down to:
It depends on the situation.

[Quylui]

Most people feel like the time they take to rip and transfer the information has intrinsic value, and should have the right to distribute their work as they please. More specifically, I would never be able to listen to vinyl records if it wasn't for people who took the time to meticulously transfer the data from the vinyl medium to digital. I guess can understand both perspectives.

That's just the point though, it isn't their work. Think about what you're saying. That, essentially, the artist who worked months in a recording studio or the programmer who spent hours in front of a monitor, and the companies who pay for their talent, have absolutely no say over the material they own as far as you're concerned. However, spending fifteen minutes ripping it and uploading it to a tracker ought to give you complete control over how it's distributed.

That's just selfish. Give me a good reason why trackers should cling to file exclusivity anyway. It's not a capitalistic environment as far as I know, so there's no point in monopolizing packs or movies or lossless music. I thought the idea behind all of this was free content for the masses. I stand behind the invitation system, but the sense of entitlement over someone else's work is pitiful.

Oh don't get me wrong -- I know exactly where you're coming from, but I could see why someone would want to keep their transfers exclusive, especially since some can take up to a few hours from beginning to finish. That being said, I still understand that this doesn't come close to comparing to what the artist had done to prepare the album to begin with.

The way I see it is as such: A certain someone spends his/her own time and money on the transfer process, in a sense providing a service for those who don't have the ability to do this to the same degree. This service has value, whether or not it is founded on someone else's work, like going to Kinko's to make a perfect replica of your favorite poster or artwork. The only "payment" the person receives is the ability to choose who he/she distributes the file to, and I can't say I'm entirely opposed to this.

Slightly off-topic: I usually donate to artists whose albums I enjoy.

[orfik]

Oh don't get me wrong -- I know exactly where you're coming from, but I could see why someone would want to keep their transfers exclusive, especially since some can take up to a few hours from beginning to finish. That being said, I still understand that this doesn't come close to comparing to what the artist had done to prepare the album to begin with.

The way I see it is as such: A certain someone spends his/her own time and money on the transfer process, in a sense providing a service for those who don't have the ability to do this to the same degree. This service has value, whether or not it is founded on someone else's work, like going to Kinko's to make a perfect replica of your favorite poster or artwork. The only "payment" the person receives is the ability to choose who he/she distributes the file to, and I can't say I'm entirely opposed to this.

Slightly off-topic: I usually donate to artists whose albums I enjoy.

Is that true, though? As far as I can see, inclusion into a private tracker connects you to a community of intelligent, like-minded individuals, insulates you from the inherent dangers of a public tracker's visibility, provides much better speed, and often gives you a dedicated source for otherwise unattainable material. As far as "payment", you're paid back in ratio, that's the idea behind the system. The argument about spending one's own money on this content as an excuse to claim control over it is a little silly.

Don't me wrong, I do appreciate and respect the uploaders. I know many, and they're generally awesome people. However, we don't own the material. Despite our intentions, the moment we start seeding, we're breaking the law (if you live in the U.S., Canada, U.K., etc). Are you saying that our rights as uploaders should be protected under the same principle that we breach when we upload? If so, do you understand what a ridiculous proposition that is? I suppose the uploader could be notified, but it should end there.