OINK users...be VERY scared!

good thing i buy my music legally

My bottom line--there should be some level of fear, but the action is going to be from the RIAA (again), not the feds, unless a new US Attorney General (once confirmed) has a real passion for prosecuting IP violations.

Click to expand...

Which means it would be a civil suit. They would settle for some fairly reasonable price, like the rest of the cases. No jail time, etc. I wouldn't be that scared.

Wait...wasn't a thread for this JUST LOCKED?

Yeah, I thought about that. I decided that I would chance it since this is particularly interesting. If we steer this in the right direction I think it can go ok. Just to be on the safe side though, I reported my own post to the staff.

baggss said:

Yeah, I thought about that. I decided that I would chance it since this is particularly interesting. If we steer this in the right direction I think it can go ok. Just to be on the safe side though, I reported my own post to the staff.

Click to expand...

Hahaha

I honestly don't think this will be much different than most RIAA cases. They will pick a few unlucky people, make an example of them, and move on. I highly doubt mass civil cases will be filed over this.

Thanks for the article. The writer should have left off the last line, very distasteful.

Looks like people should have less to worry about if the bit about the RIAA needing to get info first and the fact that it's hard to trace the IPs without a court order is true. Unless the users donated, I guess then they're in real trouble it seems? It doesn't seem like they would bother going after that many people to me, but we'll see.

fleurya said:

Thanks for the article. The writer should have left off the last line, very distasteful.

Click to expand...

Yeah I agree, should have left out the last line, I didn't read that far until you mentioned it. That line wasn't really appropriate.

I think 99% of all OINK users will probably walk away from this with out ever hearing a thing, but it is possible for them to be procescuted according to this article..

(There was another thread on this subject that was locked already? Shows what happens when you are gone for a few hours)

PowerBookG4 said:

Yeah I agree, should have left out the last line, I didn't read that far until you mentioned it. That line wasn't really appropriate.

I think 99% of all OINK users will probably walk away from this with out ever hearing a thing, but it is possible for them to be procescuted according to this article..

(There was another thread on this subject that was locked already? Shows what happens when you are gone for a few hours)

Click to expand...

I closed the other thread as some users saw it fit to air their personal music-acquisition habits in a public forum.

Just a friendly reminder for everyone participating: Feel free to discuss this news article generally, but don't encourage, defend, link to, suggest, own up to or otherwise discuss any specific piracy or we will be forced to close the thread.

I think I may have been the offending poster in the other thread and that was not my intention when I made reference to another downloading site/software. My point was that since Oink was being targeted those who use the other site/software need to heed the same warning. Personally, I pay for all of my songs, always have and always will.

Update.

The man behind OiNK, an invite-only file-sharing site that provided illegal downloads of pre-release music and media to its more than 180,000 members before authorities shut it down Tuesday, has broken his silence in an interview with British tabloid the Daily Telegraph.

. . . Ellis said OiNK is "no different [than] something like Google — if Google directed someone to a site they can illegally download music [from], they are doing the same as what I have been accused of. I am not making any OiNK users break the law. People don't pay to use the site."

Click to expand...

Well, if you take the risks, you take the risks. I do find it incredible that people feel they can do some things without any consequence.

And as for Ellis saying it's just like Google, that's crap. That is like saying a Car is like a Gun, because they can both kill people.

Zoolook said:

Well, if you take the risks, you take the risks. I do find it incredible that people feel they can do some things without any consequence.

And as for Ellis saying it's just like Google, that's crap. That is like saying a Car is like a Gun, because they can both kill people.

Click to expand...

Really? Because when both are used responsibly, they're not danger.

Oink did not sell music.
Oink did not provide music.
It's a tracker and search site.
The users uploaded music.
The users downloaded music.

It's like all the other torrent sites out there, but like some is a private, invite only community. I could name 5 off the top of my head. You could search yahoo or google and come up with a ton of them. I think if this guy is held legally accountable for it, they need to go back and hold every single torrent site that was busted. There's been a ton of sites, torrent, warez, GNUtella, etc... that have been shut down, but this is the first arrest ever made.

In fact, Oink worked like many other websites regarding financial status. You join for free. Member ship is not dependant on a cost. You donate what you want too.

Anyone that runs a large forum or site with high traffic volume that is not sponsored or paid for by a business and is out of pocket knows that it's not cheap to pay for bandwith with you start getting a ton of users.

I have about 1.5gb of bandwith used for this month on my local area photography forum with 18 registered memembers and 5-8 that actively participate. I'm sure Schweb can attest to the fact that it's not cheap. People who enjoy the sites and want to keep them going will willingly donate. It's not dues and it's not required.

Village Idiot said:

Really? Because when both are used responsibly, they're not danger.

Click to expand...

Lets not get into a gun debate - guns are made for killing, which could be responsible or not. Cars are made for transport, whether responsible or not. It's the design purpose I was referrring to, so the analogy is fair.

Oink did not sell music.
Oink did not provide music.
It's a tracker and search site.
The users uploaded music.
The users downloaded music.

<snip>

Click to expand...

Sure... and ISOHunt is used for backing up your own precious media and Handbrake is for converting you own personal movies to MP4, right?

I don't mean to be facetious (ok, maybe a little) be these sites exist to facilitate file sharing, which is largely the sharing of copyright material. I honestly think the sooner people are open about this and admit it, the sooner we can have a mature debate about it.

But not here of course...

Zoolook said:

Lets not get into a gun debate - guns are made for killing, which could be responsible or not. Cars are made for transport, whether responsible or not. It's the design purpose I was referrring to, so the analogy is fair.



Sure... and ISOHunt is used for backing up your own precious media and Handbrake is for converting you own personal movies to MP4, right?

I don't mean to be facetious (ok, maybe a little) be these sites exist to facilitate file sharing, which is largely the sharing of copyright material. I honestly think the sooner people are open about this and admit it, the sooner we can have a mature debate about it.

But not here of course...

Click to expand...

But legally, according to the news story, they're saying the Oink admin charged people for invite, sold music, and provided pre-releases. He provided a site that let people do that but did not necessarily do that himself. I doubt he was in a position to be the first to get the leaked music to provide. He worked in an IT field.

It's almost exactly like myspace, but social netoworking is not illegal. Tom created myspace. People sign up for myspace. A little boy or girl gets molested/raped because they hooked up with a person from myspace. Let's hang Tom.

So unless the media changes the story or we get the facts, they're going after the wrong person. The guy created the site and facilitated file sharing, but he didn't charge people, he didn't necessarily provide the leaks, and he didn't sell music.

Village Idiot said:

But legally, according to the news story, they're saying the Oink admin charged people for invite, sold music, and provided pre-releases. He provided a site that let people do that but did not necessarily do that himself. I doubt he was in a position to be the first to get the leaked music to provide. He worked in an IT field.

It's almost exactly like myspace, but social netoworking is not illegal. Tom created myspace. People sign up for myspace. A little boy or girl gets molested/raped because they hooked up with a person from myspace. Let's hang Tom.

So unless the media changes the story or we get the facts, they're going after the wrong person. The guy created the site and facilitated file sharing, but he didn't charge people, he didn't necessarily provide the leaks, and he didn't sell music.

Click to expand...

I do get it, but I think the key point is the motivation behind a site. I am sure Myspace wasn't created with the intention of attracting perverts - in fact, there are safeguards to prevent adult users seeing child profiles, even if there are always going to be some freaks who get around it.

When a site actually requires its users to upload as much as they download, that can only mean one thing. People are not likely to be uploading their holiday snaps, are they?

I'll drop it there, I think your points are valid, but I do think it's naive to believe the site creators didn't know, or even want, the service to be used in this manner.

Zoolook said:

[...] I am sure Myspace wasn't created with the intention of attracting perverts - [...]

Click to expand...

I'm not sure... I mean - have you seen Tom?

Aptmunich said:

I'm not sure... I mean - have you seen Tom?

Click to expand...

So true...

ah well my ratio was rediculously low anyway
i was bound to be banned sooner or later

no more oink for me