ZNAK SAGITE — više od fantastike — edicija, časopis, knjižara...

Koeljo  e to ce nam pomoci .......
ja ne mogu da verujem da socijalne mreze nisu regivale

a svako ce se o svom jadu zabaviti ,pre ili kasnije 

Jesu reagovale, polako samo dok stigne talas i do tebe

Bre, skidah Kung Fu pandu 2 preko torenta i kad je došao na 100% Avast mi ga obrisa, kao "kukavičje jaje"!

To se dešava samo kad stvarno i skineš neki fejk.

vratili se rusi 

In his recordings in the early 1940s Woody Guthrie included the following "Copyright Warning":

"This song is Copyrighted in U.S., under Seal of Copyright # 154085, for a period of 28 years, and anybody caught singin it without our permission, will be mighty good friends of ourn, cause we don't give a dern. Publish it. Write it. Sing it. Swing to it. Yodel it. We wrote it, that's all we wanted to do."[94] Currently the copyright in much of Woody's songs is claimed by a number of different organizations.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woody_Guthrie#Copyright_controversy

Evo odgovora na pitanje kako je zatvaranje megaaplouda uticalo na količinu fajlšeringa:

  File Sharing in the Post MegaUpload Era 

Quote
Posted on February 7, 2012 by labovit   On January 18, 2012 global file sharing traffic collapsed. In a series of coordinate raids, US and New Zealand authorities seized thousands of MegaUpload servers and arrested its founder (at his own birthday party, no less).
As the largest file sharing service on the Internet, MegaUpload downloads represented 30-40% of all file sharing. In the space of an hour, Internet traffic globally plummeted by an astounding 2-3%. Press releases heralded a major blow to the theft of intellectual property.
So what happened to Internet file sharing traffic after the MegaUpload arrests?
Today we're publishing the results of three month research effort that provides some of the clues. More details are available in our NANOG presentation and earlier academic paper.
First, some definitions. As the New York Times observed, "file sharing sites" (particularly those focused on distribution of copyright infringing content) can be difficult to distinguish from the dozens of legitimate sites helping enterprises and consumers share internal documents, homework, and the like.
The web sites for copyright protected and legal file sharing look nearly identical with similar graphics, sales messaging, and perhaps ironically (or cynically), DMCA policies and warnings against illegal file sharing. The only exception was MegaUpload which made little effort to disguise its true business focus (in retrospect, possibly a mistake).

But if you spend a few minutes searching to download the latest Hollywood movie release (or movies not even released yet), patterns quickly emerge. File sharing search sites like FilesTube, RapidManiac, and Filesbay link to many dozens of file sharing providers, but generally not, say, DropBox nor Box.net. (In the above example, I searched for "Man on a Ledge" — which you should not download from FilesTube if for no other reason than it's a terrible movie).
In our study, we were particularly interested in the infrastructure behind file sharing, i.e. the hosting / colo facilities, payment partners, etc. The conventional wisdom is that file sharing is distributed across huge swaths of the Internet — basically everywhere.
No.
In fact, though there are hundreds of file sharing sites, an extremely small number of colo-location providers (six of them) provide infrastructure to these sites that generate more than 80% of all Internet file sharing traffic. Like other niche industries, file sharing has evolved with a specialized ecosystem / cyber supply chain.
The below graph shows the Internet's file sharing topology in the early hours of January 18, 2012. The links represent North America Internet file sharing traffic where the width of each link is proportional to the traffic volume. Green indicates traffic to the file sharing sites and red is traffic to the hosting or colo-location provider. Note that the different file sharing sites share much of the same Internet infrastructure and hosting companies (namely LeaseWeb, NForce, Carpathia, Choopa, and Softlayer).

On January 18, MegaVideo was clearly the king with 34% of all file sharing traffic. In turn, most MegaVideo servers leveraged US based servers in Carpathia Hosting with some traffic going to Leaseweb servers in the Netherlands and other European providers / facilities. According to the indictment, the gigantic MegaUpload sprawled over more than 1000 servers and 25 petabytes of data in Carpathia facilities (with another 700 MegaUpload servers in Leaseweb hosting centers).
The next graphic shows Internet file sharing traffic topology several hours later on January 19, 2012. Overall, a significant re-allocation of Internet file sharing traffic. MegaVideo is gone. Sites like PutLocker have gained significant marketshare.

The main impact of the MegaUpload takedown?
Well, file sharing has not gone away. It did not even decrease much in North America.
Mainly, file sharing became staggeringly less efficient. Instead of terabytes of North America MegaUpload traffic going to US servers, most file sharing traffic now comes from Europe over far more expensive transatlantic links.
- Craig
labovit@deepfield.net
   

A inače:

Patent Troll Claims Ownership of Interactive Web – And Might Win

Quote
       

   
   
   
• 219
  inShare 

   
• By Joe Mullin
• Email Author
• February 8, 2012 | 
• 9:50 am | 
• Categories: Copyrights and Patents
•   | Edit

The mother of all patent troll trials unfolds in Texas where Google, Amazon and Adobe are fighting a patent claiming ownership over online video, image rotation and search auto-complete. We explain and start a series. TYLER, Texas — The city of Tyler, Texas, is better known as the nation's "rose capital" than as a hotspot of the technology industry. It's a quiet, conservative city of about 100,000, full of wide streets and big trucks.
This week, though, Tyler is the site of a remarkable battle over the history of the World Wide Web — a trial that could affect the future of e-commerce. The federal courthouse downtown is packed to the brim with dozens of lawyers, representing the world's biggest internet companies, including Yahoo, Amazon, Google and YouTube.
A succession of pioneers of the early web — including the web's father, Tim Berners-Lee himself — have flown in from around the world to denounce two software patents they believe threaten the future of web innovation. East Texas has transformed itself into something of a haven for patent suits over the past several years, but by any standard, the trial now underway is an extraordinary circus of dark suits.
How did all the trouble start?
Michael Doyle, a low-profile Chicago biologist, claims that it was actually he and two co-inventors who invented — and patented — the "interactive web" before anyone else, while they were employed by the University of California back in 1993. Doyle argues that a program he created at the UC's San Francisco campus, which allowed doctors to view embryos over the nascent World Wide Web, was the first program that allowed users to interact with images inside of a web browser window. The defendants hotly contest that, saying that it was programs like Pei-Yuan Wei's pioneering Viola that first offered this functionality.

Today, Doyle and his lawyers say he's owed royalty payments for the use of a stunning array of modern web technologies. Watching online video, having a "search suggestion" pop up in a search bar, or even rotating an image of a sweater you might want to buy on an online shopping site — all are said to infringe on the idea-space of Doyle and his company, Eolas Technologies.
To those who follow high-profile tech litigation, the name Eolas may sound familiar. The company sued Microsoft back in 1999, winning a $521 million jury verdict in 2003 that shook the tech world. While that verdict was overturned on appeal, Microsoft ultimately settled rather than re-try the case. The full settlement amount wasn't disclosed, but the University of California revealed that its cut was $30.4 million; since an Eolas lawyer at one point described UC's take as 25 percent, minus expenses, it suggests the company got well over $100 million from that case.
The Microsoft verdict got the attention of tech community in a big way. Eolas was denounced in some quarters as a "patent troll" — the company has never launched its own web browser, or any commercially successful technology that's well known, for that matter.
Groups that felt the impact of the patent started to take action. The W3C, the global web standards group, contacted the patent office directly, sending a letter signed by Berners-Lee warning that unless the Eolas patent was invalidated it would cause the "disruption of global web standards" and cause "substantial economic and technical damage to the operation of the World Wide Web."
But while the PTO initially rejected the Eolas patent claims in reexams, Doyle and his lawyers were dogged in insisting they had the right to some kind of patent claim. The office ultimately reversed course — a fact now being trumpeted to an East Texas jury by Eolas' lawyers.
Eolas' lawyers have actually used the struggle against the patent to bolster their claim that it's an important invention. Mike McKool, the lead lawyer for Eolas, told the jury during opening statements that tech companies have been attacking the patent ever since 1995 — when it was still three years away from issuing.
Eolas Becomes Texan to Pursue a New Suit By the time Eolas settled its case against Microsoft in 2007, the business of "patent trolling" had begun to coalesce around a few popular venues, most notably the small towns of East Texas.
While the Microsoft suit was underway, the company applied for a second patent, which it received on Oct. 6, 2009. The same day, Eolas filed suit — in East Texas — against more than 20 big companies, including Apple, Playboy, Perot Systems, Blockbuster, Citigroup, eBay, and Frito-Lay — all for using the "interactive web."
Most of those companies settled; eight remain as defendants. In addition to the internet companies mentioned above, GoDaddy, JC Penney, Staples, and CDW Corp are in the case. In documents filed last month, Eolas lawyers said they will seek damages of more than $600 million against those eight companies, with more than half of it coming from Google and Yahoo.
By 2009, although Doyle continued to live in Chicago, Eolas had transformed itself into a Texan company, at least on paper. It incorporated in the state, and moved its headquarters — just two rooms in a small office building — to Tyler. The company moved one full-time employee, its licensing officer, to Tyler as well, and hired some part-time nursing students at the University of Texas' Tyler campus to work on a product it was beta-testing.
The tech companies in the case asked to transfer the case to California, but Judge Leonard Davis, who is overseeing the case, refused to allow it. After all, Davis reasoned (.PDF), Eolas picked six defendant companies that were based in Texas, including four — Perot Systems, Frito-Lay, JC Penney, and Rent-A-Center — that were headquartered in Plano, a Dallas suburb which is within the Eastern District of Texas. Davis also declined to let the case be divided up, saying it wouldn't promote "judicial economy."
And that's how Berners-Lee ended up testifying to an eight-person jury in East Texas on Tuesday morning, restating to some degree an argument he made in Scientific American in 2010 — that patents could be a serious threat to the future of the Web. In the Eolas case, it looks like Berners-Lee's nightmare may be about to come true.
The new Eolas suit has also put the University of California in an unprecedented and awkward situation, as a not-so-silent partner to Eolas' increasingly widespread, and controversial, business. While the UC could reap many millions from an Eolas win, it is suing the world's biggest internet companies — the same companies that recruit its students, and are enmeshed with the UC in many other ways. The plaintiff's lawyers have been referring to the patents as the "university patents" and make reference to the innovative history of the UC to make their case to the jury.
What Happens Next The Eolas trial is actually scheduled to be four back-to-back trials in Tyler. In the first, a jury will determine whether the patents are valid or not; if Eolas survives that stage, it will get to go on to sue the eight remaining defendants in three successive infringement and damages trials. The jury may get the first case by Thursday, and could have a decision before the weekend.
And if Eolas and the UC are successful, the companies gathered in Tyler this week will likely be just the beginning of a long list of targets who will end up paying Eolas millions of dollars to use the web.
 

Džim Sterling je obično sasvim kul lik, pa čak i ovaj njegov video o pirateriji koja napada male proizvođače igara ima dobru nameru, ali on toliko nije u pravu da je to strašno

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/jimquisition/5342-When-Piracy-Becomes-Theft

Ne znam da li je neko ovo već kačio:

The whole Pirate Bay magnet archive
And wow, ALL the pirate bay magnets are just 164 MB unzipped, 90 MB zipped. That is really, really small!


Više o ovome:
Download a Copy of The Pirate Bay, It's Only 90 MB
What's perhaps even more striking is that the greatest arch rival of a billion dollar entertainment industry is nothing more than 164 megabytes of text. Something to think about.   

Takođe i 17 million torrents from Bitsnoop.com!

Sister Sledge Files Class Action Against Warner Music Over Digital Royalties (Exclusive)

Quote
Band members and actress-songwriter Ronee Blakley are lead plaintiffs in a suit alleging potentially hundreds of millions of dollars in lost revenue from digital download sales   
The members of the musical group Sister Sledge have banded together with an Oscar-nominated actress and songwriter to file a major class action lawsuit against Warner Music Group alleging they have been cheated out of millions of dollars based on improper calculations of revenue from digital music sales.
Debra Sledge, Joan Sledge, Kathy Sledge Lightfoot, Kim Sledge Allen and Ronee Blakely filed suit in federal court in San Francisco on Thursday claiming that the music giant's method for calcluating digital music purchases as "sales" rather than "licenses" on songs such as the band's chart-topping "We Are Family" cheats artists out of money due to them under recording contracts, many of them signed decades before music was sold digitally via iTunes, Amazon, ringtones and other outlets.
"Rather than paying its recording artists and producers the percentage of net receipts it received--and continues to receive--from digital content providers for 'licenses,' Warner wrongfully treats each digital download as a 'sale' of a physical phonorecord...which are governed by much lower royalty provisions than 'licenses' in Warner's standard recording agreements."
If that claim sounds familiar, it's one of the most hotly-disputed issues in the music business. Songwriters typically make much less money when an album is "sold" than they do when their music is "licensed" (the rationale derives from the costs that used to be associated with the physical production of records). But record labels have taken the position that music sold via such digital stores as iTunes should be counted as "sales" rather than licenses.
The difference in revenue can be significant. The Sister Sledge members claim their record deal promises 25 percent of revenue from licenses but much less from sales. Blakely, who is an Oscar nominated actress (Nashville) as well as songwriter and performer, alleges that her deal with WMG grants her 50 percent of licenses, much more than the rate WMG is paying based on its calculation of sales.
Eminem's publisher brought a nearly identical claim against Universal Music Group and won a fairly important decision at the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in 2010 (the Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal). The 9th Circuit ruled that iTunes' contract unambiguously provided that the music was licensed. At the time, UMG downplayed the ruling as specific to Eminem's contract, but music lawyers believe more of these cases are going to be filed by legacy artists (newer contracts have specific language precluding such suits).
And now we have a full-fledged, 35-page class action lawsuit seeking to bring together many artists in one proceeding, calling Warner Music's actions "wide-spread and calculated." Hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue is at stake, the complaint alleges. It should be interesting to see which artists come forward.
Sister Sledge also claims WMG has improperly kept revenue from "reserves," which is money withheld to offset losses related to unsold records. The plaintiffs point out there's no such thing as unsold inventory in a digital universe.
The suit was filed by four firms: Pearson Simon Warshaw & Penny in San Francisco, Hausfeld in Washington DC, and Kiesel Boucher Larson and Johnson & Johnson in Beverly Hills.
Email: Matthew.Belloni@thr.com
Twitter:@THRMattBelloni

ovo može biti zanimljivo

Pa, da, kada već distributeri vele da nam ne prodaju muziku (jer bismo onda mogli da je, jelte, posedujemo i preprodajemo), već da je licencirana onda zašto da se umetnici ne izbore za veći deo kolača?

http://torrentfreak.com/the-pirate-bay-says-goodbye-to-most-torrents-on-february-29-120213/

QuoteThe Pirate Bay has confirmed that all torrent files being shared by more than 10 people will be deleted on February 29. The decision is causing a small panic among the site's users, but in reality little will change as all files will remain available through magnet links. The Pirate Bay crew told TorrentFreak that this is merely a "step forward in technology" and confirmed that the site is here to stay.

http://www.news.com.au/technology/tribler-file-sharing-software-cannot-be-shut-down-says-developer/story-e6frfro0-1226267578432

QuoteRESEARCHERS have created invincible file-sharing software they say cannot be shut down by governments or anti-piracy organisations. Known as Tribler, its creators say the only way to take it down "is to take the internet down".

Developed by a team of researchers at Delft University of Technology in the Netherlands, the BitTorrent network doesn't require torrent sites to find or download content. Instead it is based on pure peer-to-peer communication, TorrentFreak reports.

Read more: http://www.news.com.au/technology/tribler-file-sharing-software-cannot-be-shut-down-says-developer/story-e6frfro0-1226267578432#ixzz1mI8sY8ER

Bogme, torrenti baš zamiru...

Trackeri zatvorenog tipa rade normalno.

Ma ja gazim ovo što se lako nađe. Nisam neki "stručnjak", al do sad se naskidao svega da ladno mogu otvoriti domaći History+Discovery+NG+ šta ti ja sve znam. A sad, gomila sajtova ne radi, protok sve lošiji, nema više ni narodne sloge ni slobode...

Quote from: Steva Lazin Ljuštikin on 14-02-2012, 15:51:52
Bogme, torrenti baš zamiru...

koješta.

evo anđa se skida ko neda arnerić!

Quote from: Ghoul on 14-02-2012, 16:06:21

Quote from: Steva Lazin Ljuštikin on 14-02-2012, 15:51:52
Bogme, torrenti baš zamiru...

koješta.

evo anđa se skida ko neda arnerić!

A, to je samo specijal za Srbadiju, pa otključali ajnfort kapiju. Ja skidam benigne dokumentarce, eno ih desetak sa prosečnim protokom 15 kbs i za još toliko željenih-nađenih  porušeni sajtovi. Da priznam, juče skinuo "Kako su me ukrali Nemci" za 15-20min, znači naša bagra šljaka, one zapadne plačipičke se preventivno pogasili ili skoro zavrnuli slavinu.

Quote from: Ghoul on 14-02-2012, 16:06:21
koješta.

evo anđa se skida ko neda arnerić!

Наша багра шљака, ево и ја да бацим пријаву. Инспирисан овим гашењем свега и свачега, први пут у животу почео сам да се бавим аплоудингом, дигао сам ових дана преко три гига разног ретког и мање ретког панка, хардкора и сличне музике. Све хостујем код браће Руса и делим по њиховим порталима који раде пуном паром и миц-по-миц може да се нађе свашта, а ускоро и све. Још сам опрезан с филмовима пошто их они нахују, па ако не пише на ком је језику (а често не пише), (још) не скидам.

Не знам да ли таква музика овде занима више од једног човека, али могу и да остављам линкове.

Quote from: Ghoul on 14-02-2012, 16:06:21

Quote from: Steva Lazin Ljuštikin on 14-02-2012, 15:51:52
Bogme, torrenti baš zamiru...

koješta.

evo anđa se skida ko neda arnerić!

to zato što je ona aminovala skidanje njenog filma, kako bi se širila kritika upućena međunarodnoj zajednici.

jeste, al traži ti pare da bi dobio pasvord i to raspakovao! 

ih, bre. ja očekiv'o kritiku oko ponoći.

Quote from: Ghoul on 14-02-2012, 20:17:23
jeste, al traži ti pare da bi dobio pasvord i to raspakovao! 

Dal je neko ocekivo nesto mufte od Andje, maaaaajke vam, eeeeej???

Quote from: SVAROG on 14-02-2012, 20:56:38

Quote from: Ghoul on 14-02-2012, 20:17:23
jeste, al traži ti pare da bi dobio pasvord i to raspakovao! 

Dal je neko ocekivo nesto mufte od Andje, maaaaajke vam, eeeeej???

zinulo joj dupe za pare, majke joj ga drčne! 

Онај клип као да каже да фајл није фејк, мада 99% рарованих јесте. Покушао сам да га крекујем, али сам се после неког времена сморио и прекинуо. Ако постоји скринер, појавиће се ових дана.

Quote from: Джон Рейнольдс on 14-02-2012, 22:38:09
Ако постоји скринер, појавиће се ових дана.

to je i moja impresija.

procuriće anđa, milom ili silom.

a onda, zna se: potpuno četničko čišćenje ghoul style!

Кој је ту четник  ?

Megaupload Co-Founder Released On Bail

http://torrentfreak.com/megaupload-co-founder-released-on-bail-120215/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Torrentfreak+%28Torrentfreak%29

Publishers Score Win in International Piracy Battle 
By Jim Milliot
Feb 15, 2012

An international alliance of publishers and publishing associations has succeeded in getting a Munich court to serve cease and desist orders to the operators of two Web sites that have been illegally offering more than 400,000 copyrighted books for free. The operators, currently based in Galway, Ireland, are estimated to have earned over $10 million annually from advertising sales, donations and premium subscriptions.   

According to the Association of American Publishers, the investigation took over seven months to complete and spanned seven countries. A total of 17 publishing companies filed requests for injunctions involving 170 titles. The Landgericht, a regional Munich court hearing the case, issued its order in December, but was only able to serve the injunctions on the operators of the Web site www.library.nu and www.ifile.it on Tuesday.   

AAP president Tom Allen said the case is "a clear example of the complexities in dealing with international Web sites." Not only was it difficult to find the identities of the operators of the sites, but the top level domain names led as far as Italy and the Pacific island of Niue. Servers were also moved from Germany to the Ukraine. The legal action was coordinated by the Börsenverein des Deutschen Buchhandels, the International Publishers Association and the law firm Lausen Rechtsanwälte. "It's very difficult to find solutions to piracy when [pirates] hide their identities and jurisdiction is in question," said Maria Danzilo, legal director at Wiley Global Education (a division of John Wiley, which is one of seven AAP members who participated in the action).   

Coming shortly after the defeat of SOPA (Stop Online Piracy Act), Allen said the difficulty in pursuing action in this case highlights the need to find an easier, and more efficient, way to deal with international pirates trading in U.S. intellectual property. Allen told PW that while he hopes the action deters others from pirating U.S. content, he is under no illusions that one court ruling will eliminate the issue. "There is an underlying problem that can only be constrained by legislation," Allen said. "We want to protect jobs in the creative industries by pursuing people who are scatter all over the world."   

Danzilo noted that publishers are in contact with Dr. Ursula Feinder-Schmidt, the lead lawyer on the case at Lausen Rechtsanwälte, to ensure that the injunctions are enforced. Publishers are also in touch with Feinder-Schmidt about coming up with ways to combat massive copyright infringement. As Danzilo put it, the library.nu case "is not the end of the story--it's just the first round."

jebemtisuncedatijebem

kad odem na gigapedia.info kaže

Quoterip lnu

ima li ko kakvu alternativu ovome, pomagajte!

A sta si skidao odatle? Ja sam se svojevremeno registrovao ali nisam makao dalje posto sam sve nalazio sto preko torenta sto shareova ili cak mirca. U svakom slucaju, potrazi clanak koji sam postovao (nisam kod kuce a ne secam se gde sam ga nasao), mislim da su ljudi u komentarima davali alternativu.

pa dokle više?
rapidshare ograničio brzinu za free users na 30kb/s

Quote from: Melkor on 16-02-2012, 18:21:22
A sta si skidao odatle? Ja sam se svojevremeno registrovao ali nisam makao dalje posto sam sve nalazio sto preko torenta sto shareova ili cak mirca. U svakom slucaju, potrazi clanak koji sam postovao (nisam kod kuce a ne secam se gde sam ga nasao), mislim da su ljudi u komentarima davali alternativu.

uglavnom stručne knjige. imali su stvari koje nisam uspeo da pronađem nigde više. što se stručnih knjiga tiče (izdavači tipa Springer, Productivity Press, CRC Press, LEI, Pearson, Willey and Sons, ...) imali su ubedljivo najveću arhivu.

Quote from: niko on 16-02-2012, 18:37:19
pa dokle više?
rapidshare ograničio brzinu za free users na 30kb/s

Покренеш успут и ФилеСерве и на коњу си.

Džon Čiz po običaju pametno:

http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-common-anti-internet-arguments-that-are-statistically-bs/

Quote from: niko on 16-02-2012, 18:37:19
pa dokle više?
rapidshare ograničio brzinu za free users na 30kb/s

Meni za sad skida bez ograničenja, iako sam dobio sledeću poruku:

QuoteRapidshare disabled the ability to resume downloads that were stopped for free users and also limited the average download speed to 30 kb/s.
Because of the way they are doing this, it may look like the download is frozen!

Don't worry - it's not. It's just waiting for the next piece of the file to be transferred.

The pauses in between are added by Rapidshare in order to make the overall average speed slower for free-users.

RIAA kaže The Pirate Bay je najgori:

http://torrentfreak.com/riaa-the-pirate-bay-is-the-worst-of-the-worst-120217

...ali Pirati im ne ostaju dužni:

http://torrentfreak.com/pirate-bay-the-riaa-is-delusional-and-must-be-stopped-120217

U RIAA radi gomila konzervativnih morona koji odbijaju da prihvate da je svet otišao dalje - u digitalnu eru, u kojoj su stara pravila obesmišljena, ili su skinute gaće sa suštine tih pravila. Pa kad ne idu pretnje, onda ide siledžijstvo uz pokušaje da se celom svetu nametne orvelovski model zaštite zastarelog viđenja kopirajta koji odgovara, uglavnom, samo njima. Čak je i Velika Britanija počela da preispituje svoje zakonodavstvo iz oblasti autorskih prava kako bi ga prilagodila modernim vremenima. Britanija ima zakon o borbi protiv pirateriji koji je veoma sličan za sada deaktiviranoj američkoj Sopi, i u njegovoj primeni ima dosta problema. Što se Pirate Bay tiče, oni su okorele gusarčine koje su naučile da se prilagođavaju izazovima vremena i tehnološkim promenama. Ne brinem se za njih uopšte. I za razliku od Megauploada, koji je debelo profitirao na omogućavanju (i podsticanju!) razmene fajlova, čini se da se Pirate Bay u takve stvari nije upuštao (zgrtanje para)...

ovo sa rapidšerom je zaista težak udarac - u ravni onog sranja sa megaaploudom!

ČEMER & CRNILO!!! 

mukki.org RIP.

EU Court Bans Anti-Piracy Filters On Hosting Services
     

In a legal battle between music rights group SABAM and social networking site Netlog, the European Court of Justice delivered an unprecedented ruling today. The Court ruled that hosting sites can't filter copyrighted content as that would violate the privacy of users and hinder freedom of information. The case at the highest European court has far-reaching consequences for many online services including cyberlockers and BitTorrent sites.Source: EU Court Bans Anti-Piracy Filters On Hosting Services


http://feed.torrentfreak.com/~r/Torrentfreak/~3/I2epDMvuqf4/

Прави ли још неком Рапидшер проблеме? Мени више ниједан фајл не може да се даунлоудује 

Quote from: Харвестер on 18-02-2012, 13:47:37
Прави ли још неком Рапидшер проблеме? Мени више ниједан фајл не може да се даунлоудује 

Meni stucaa, jedva!
Skida ali to je mucenjeeeeeee...

Wupload dere od brzine, torrenti se drze i dalje, zivio Isohunt!
Demonoid je tu, to je sve ok!

Па да као ја користите Ифолдер, проблеме не бисте имали.

Quote from: Джон Рейнольдс on 18-02-2012, 14:05:10
Па да као ја користите Ифолдер, проблеме не бисте имали.

keskse?

Poceo sam da koristim Tribler. Nisam ga još potpuno provalio, ali radi. Javite kakva su vaša iskustva.

Što se Rapisharea tiče, oni razumeju samo bojkot. Ovo što rade je samo zato što smatraju da su ostali sami i najjači.

Quote from: taurus-jor on 18-02-2012, 15:34:53
Što se Rapisharea tiče, oni razumeju samo bojkot. Ovo što rade je samo zato što smatraju da su ostali sami i najjači.

и то им није први пут...говна.