![]() ![]() ![]() One is Mininova, which doesn't deal in material that infringes copyright and hasn't for a year and a half. The only source of data for their study are two sites. ![]() Unless I’m missing something, this whole article comes across as another one of these ridiculous studies where after 3 years of research and a few million dollars they reveal that fire is hot and scissors can be sharp. I can’t imagine that big media hasn’t been trying unsuccessfully to shut this group down for quite a while. I think it’s already recognized by most people that the bulk of pirated content originates from a small number of sources. If the media industry had any way of actually doing this, it would have been done a long time ago. It almost seems like these guys asked themselves “why do they do it”, looked at a torrent site, saw the ads, and just said “ah, that’s why” and wrote a paper.Īlso, the suggestion in this article to provide “disincentives” to the people uploading the bulk of pirated content is kind of obvious and silly. Are they saying that the people who post the bulk of the infringing torrents on various networks receive ad-revenue from the indexing sites (where the ads would be displayed)? I don’t understand how ad revenue flows from the indexing sites to the users who upload the content. I don’t really get (and the article didn’t really seem to explain) how these elite uploaders of the pirated content receive this ad-revenue. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |